text stringlengths 292 49.2k |
|---|
The US college protests and the crackdown on campuses
This article is more than 1 year old The US college protests and the crackdown on campuses This article is more than 1 year old 00:00:00 00:00:00 Police have arrested dozens of students across US universities this week after a crackdown on pro-Palestine protests on campuses. Erum Salam and Margaret Sullivan report from New York As the Israel-Gaza war grinds on amid a worsening humanitarian crisis, the world’s attention this week was captured by a battle on the campuses of elite US universities. Pro-Palestine student protesters were arrested en masse by New York City police at the prestigious Columbia University, prompting outrage that spread across other college sites. Guardian US reporter Erum Salam tells Michael Safi that the scene on Columbia’s campus was one of orderly drum circles and organised anti-war demonstrations, not the all-out violent chaos that might have been imagined. The columnist Margaret Sullivan teaches at Columbia’s journalism school. She explains how the issue has exploded this week into national and international news and why it’s not going away any time soon. Photograph: Andrea Renault/ZUMA Press Wire/REX/Shutterstock Explore more on these topics US news Today in Focus Universities Israel-Gaza war New York Higher education US campus protests This article is more than 1 year old The US college protests and the crackdown on campuses This article is more than 1 year old 00:00:00 00:00:00 Police have arrested dozens of students across US universities this week after a crackdown on pro-Palestine protests on campuses. Erum Salam and Margaret Sullivan report from New York As the Israel-Gaza war grinds on amid a worsening humanitarian crisis, the world’s attention this week was captured by a battle on the campuses of elite US universities. Pro-Palestine student protesters were arrested en masse by New York City police at the prestigious Columbia University, prompting outrage that spread across other college sites. Guardian US reporter Erum Salam tells Michael Safi that the scene on Columbia’s campus was one of orderly drum circles and organised anti-war demonstrations, not the all-out violent chaos that might have been imagined. The columnist Margaret Sullivan teaches at Columbia’s journalism school. She explains how the issue has exploded this week into national and international news and why it’s not going away any time soon. Photograph: Andrea Renault/ZUMA Press Wire/REX/Shutterstock Explore more on these topics US news Today in Focus Universities Israel-Gaza war New York Higher education US campus protests This article is more than 1 year old The US college protests and the crackdown on campuses This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old The US college protests and the crackdown on campuses This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old The US college protests and the crackdown on campuses This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Police have arrested dozens of students across US universities this week after a crackdown on pro-Palestine protests on campuses. Erum Salam and Margaret Sullivan report from New York Police have arrested dozens of students across US universities this week after a crackdown on pro-Palestine protests on campuses. Erum Salam and Margaret Sullivan report from New York Police have arrested dozens of students across US universities this week after a crackdown on pro-Palestine protests on campuses. Erum Salam and Margaret Sullivan report from New York As the Israel-Gaza war grinds on amid a worsening humanitarian crisis, the world’s attention this week was captured by a battle on the campuses of elite US universities. Pro-Palestine student protesters were arrested en masse by New York City police at the prestigious Columbia University, prompting outrage that spread across other college sites. Guardian US reporter Erum Salam tells Michael Safi that the scene on Columbia’s campus was one of orderly drum circles and organised anti-war demonstrations, not the all-out violent chaos that might have been imagined. The columnist Margaret Sullivan teaches at Columbia’s journalism school. She explains how the issue has exploded this week into national and international news and why it’s not going away any time soon. Photograph: Andrea Renault/ZUMA Press Wire/REX/Shutterstock Explore more on these topics US news Today in Focus Universities Israel-Gaza war New York Higher education US campus protests As the Israel-Gaza war grinds on amid a worsening humanitarian crisis, the world’s attention this week was captured by a battle on the campuses of elite US universities. Pro-Palestine student protesters were arrested en masse by New York City police at the prestigious Columbia University, prompting outrage that spread across other college sites. Guardian US reporter Erum Salam tells Michael Safi that the scene on Columbia’s campus was one of orderly drum circles and organised anti-war demonstrations, not the all-out violent chaos that might have been imagined. The columnist Margaret Sullivan teaches at Columbia’s journalism school. She explains how the issue has exploded this week into national and international news and why it’s not going away any time soon. Photograph: Andrea Renault/ZUMA Press Wire/REX/Shutterstock Explore more on these topics US news Today in Focus Universities Israel-Gaza war New York Higher education US campus protests As the Israel-Gaza war grinds on amid a worsening humanitarian crisis, the world’s attention this week was captured by a battle on the campuses of elite US universities. Pro-Palestine student protesters were arrested en masse by New York City police at the prestigious Columbia University, prompting outrage that spread across other college sites. Guardian US reporter Erum Salam tells Michael Safi that the scene on Columbia’s campus was one of orderly drum circles and organised anti-war demonstrations, not the all-out violent chaos that might have been imagined. The columnist Margaret Sullivan teaches at Columbia’s journalism school. She explains how the issue has exploded this week into national and international news and why it’s not going away any time soon. Photograph: Andrea Renault/ZUMA Press Wire/REX/Shutterstock As the Israel-Gaza war grinds on amid a worsening humanitarian crisis, the world’s attention this week was captured by a battle on the campuses of elite US universities. Pro-Palestine student protesters were arrested en masse by New York City police at the prestigious Columbia University, prompting outrage that spread across other college sites. Guardian US reporter Erum Salam tells Michael Safi that the scene on Columbia’s campus was one of orderly drum circles and organised anti-war demonstrations, not the all-out violent chaos that might have been imagined. The columnist Margaret Sullivan teaches at Columbia’s journalism school. She explains how the issue has exploded this week into national and international news and why it’s not going away any time soon. Photograph: Andrea Renault/ZUMA Press Wire/REX/Shutterstock As the Israel-Gaza war grinds on amid a worsening humanitarian crisis, the world’s attention this week was captured by a battle on the campuses of elite US universities. Pro-Palestine student protesters were arrested en masse by New York City police at the prestigious Columbia University, prompting outrage that spread across other college sites. Guardian US reporter Erum Salam tells Michael Safi that the scene on Columbia’s campus was one of orderly drum circles and organised anti-war demonstrations, not the all-out violent chaos that might have been imagined. The columnist Margaret Sullivan teaches at Columbia’s journalism school. She explains how the issue has exploded this week into national and international news and why it’s not going away any time soon. Explore more on these topics US news Today in Focus Universities Israel-Gaza war New York Higher education US campus protests US news Today in Focus Universities Israel-Gaza war New York Higher education US campus protests |
Alphabet hails ‘once-in-a-generation’ AI opportunity as revenue rises
Sundar Pichai, Google CEO, speaks at El Centro College in Dallas, Texas, in 2019. Photograph: Brandon Wade/Reuters View image in fullscreen Sundar Pichai, Google CEO, speaks at El Centro College in Dallas, Texas, in 2019. Photograph: Brandon Wade/Reuters This article is more than 1 year old Alphabet hails ‘once-in-a-generation’ AI opportunity as revenue rises This article is more than 1 year old Shares surge after tech giant issues first ever dividend and posts revenue of $80.5bn, up 15% since last year, despite staff turmoil Shares in Alphabet , the owner of Google and YouTube, surged after it issued its first ever dividend and revealed that profits had surged in the last quarter. Sundar Pichai, CEO, hailed the transition to artificial intelligence as a “once-in-a-generation opportunity” as his company races to integrate the technology across its business. Investors cheered the firm’s earnings, and news of a $70bn stock buyback. Google posted $80.5bn in revenue for the first quarter of 2024 , up 15% on the same period last year, and reported $1.89 in earnings per share, up from $1.17 – surpassing analysts’ expectations on both counts. Shares in Alphabet were up roughly 15% in after-hours trading. The company also announced its first dividend, of $0.20 per share, and said the payout would become quarterly. Google fires 28 staff after protest against firm’s contract with Israeli government Read more “Our results in the first quarter reflect strong performance from Search, YouTube and Cloud. We are well under way with our Gemini era and there’s great momentum across the company,” Pichai said in a press release. Ruth Porat, Alphabet CFO, said revenue from ads on Google Search as well as revenue from Google Cloud fuelled overall positive growth. Revenue from YouTube and Google Cloud exceeded Wall Street’s expectations, with Cloud’s operating income quadrupling to $900m. Traffic acquisition costs – one of Alphabet’s main expenses – rose as well, increasing by 10%. Like Google, Meta issued its first-ever dividend in February. “Alphabet’s better-than-expected quarter was buoyed by strong search and YouTube ad revenue, signaling that uncertainty about how to monetise conversational search and brand media’s measurement challenges aren’t yet impacting Alphabet’s bottom line,” said Nikhil Lai, a senior analyst at Forrester Research. Internal and external turmoil have rocked Google in recent weeks. The earnings report comes amid protests by employees over Google Cloud’s contract with the Israeli government that led to 48 workers being fired. An antitrust decision over its business practices and role in the digital ad market also looms large. The company botched the rollout of its new Gemini AI tools in February, leading to a steep loss in stock value, which the tech giant seems to have shaken off. Long regarded as a workplace full of jobs that paid well and were difficult to lose, Google laid off 1,000 workers in January as it continues to shift its resources to generative artificial intelligence projects. Alphabet’s stock has continued to rise during this period, however, and reached all-time highs this year. The company’s stock price has continued to rise even as it awaits judgment in a landmark antitrust trial that began last year, in which the Department of Justice accused Google of illegally monopolizing internet search and the digital ad market. During a weeks-long trial, Google defended its business practices and argued that its search platform was simply a superior product to its competitors. The verdict is expected at some point this year and it is unclear what punitive measures Google may incur if it is found guilty. Google is facing a number of other legal challenges, including a $2.3bn lawsuit from European media companies over its digital advertising practices. The European Commission levied a $2.7bn antitrust fine against Google that the company is appealing after a court upheld the penalty in January. The company’s stock dipped earlier this year due to investor fears over a haphazard and hasty rollout of its Gemini AI tools, leading to a multibillion-dollar sell off and widespread criticism. Pichai was put on the defensive in February after Gemini’s image generator created ahistorical images that included people of color as German second world war soldiers, resulting in the company suspending public access to the tool. In recent weeks, Google has also faced scrutiny and protests over its $1.2bn contract with the Israeli government to provide cloud computing services. Google fired four dozen workers for protesting the program, with demonstrators accusing Google of being complicit in Israel’s war on Gaza. Employees held a sit-in at Google’s offices in Sunnyvale and New York offices in protest of the program, resulting in arrests and the terminations. Pichai addressed the firings in an email last week, stating that Google was not the place to “fight over disruptive issues or debate politics”. He also announced that some of Google’s divisions would go through a restructuring. Google announced additional cuts to its workforce around the same time, laying off an unspecified number of people. Explore more on these topics Technology Google Alphabet Artificial intelligence (AI) Quarterly results news Share Reuse this content Sundar Pichai, Google CEO, speaks at El Centro College in Dallas, Texas, in 2019. Photograph: Brandon Wade/Reuters View image in fullscreen Sundar Pichai, Google CEO, speaks at El Centro College in Dallas, Texas, in 2019. Photograph: Brandon Wade/Reuters This article is more than 1 year old Alphabet hails ‘once-in-a-generation’ AI opportunity as revenue rises This article is more than 1 year old Shares surge after tech giant issues first ever dividend and posts revenue of $80.5bn, up 15% since last year, despite staff turmoil Shares in Alphabet , the owner of Google and YouTube, surged after it issued its first ever dividend and revealed that profits had surged in the last quarter. Sundar Pichai, CEO, hailed the transition to artificial intelligence as a “once-in-a-generation opportunity” as his company races to integrate the technology across its business. Investors cheered the firm’s earnings, and news of a $70bn stock buyback. Google posted $80.5bn in revenue for the first quarter of 2024 , up 15% on the same period last year, and reported $1.89 in earnings per share, up from $1.17 – surpassing analysts’ expectations on both counts. Shares in Alphabet were up roughly 15% in after-hours trading. The company also announced its first dividend, of $0.20 per share, and said the payout would become quarterly. Google fires 28 staff after protest against firm’s contract with Israeli government Read more “Our results in the first quarter reflect strong performance from Search, YouTube and Cloud. We are well under way with our Gemini era and there’s great momentum across the company,” Pichai said in a press release. Ruth Porat, Alphabet CFO, said revenue from ads on Google Search as well as revenue from Google Cloud fuelled overall positive growth. Revenue from YouTube and Google Cloud exceeded Wall Street’s expectations, with Cloud’s operating income quadrupling to $900m. Traffic acquisition costs – one of Alphabet’s main expenses – rose as well, increasing by 10%. Like Google, Meta issued its first-ever dividend in February. “Alphabet’s better-than-expected quarter was buoyed by strong search and YouTube ad revenue, signaling that uncertainty about how to monetise conversational search and brand media’s measurement challenges aren’t yet impacting Alphabet’s bottom line,” said Nikhil Lai, a senior analyst at Forrester Research. Internal and external turmoil have rocked Google in recent weeks. The earnings report comes amid protests by employees over Google Cloud’s contract with the Israeli government that led to 48 workers being fired. An antitrust decision over its business practices and role in the digital ad market also looms large. The company botched the rollout of its new Gemini AI tools in February, leading to a steep loss in stock value, which the tech giant seems to have shaken off. Long regarded as a workplace full of jobs that paid well and were difficult to lose, Google laid off 1,000 workers in January as it continues to shift its resources to generative artificial intelligence projects. Alphabet’s stock has continued to rise during this period, however, and reached all-time highs this year. The company’s stock price has continued to rise even as it awaits judgment in a landmark antitrust trial that began last year, in which the Department of Justice accused Google of illegally monopolizing internet search and the digital ad market. During a weeks-long trial, Google defended its business practices and argued that its search platform was simply a superior product to its competitors. The verdict is expected at some point this year and it is unclear what punitive measures Google may incur if it is found guilty. Google is facing a number of other legal challenges, including a $2.3bn lawsuit from European media companies over its digital advertising practices. The European Commission levied a $2.7bn antitrust fine against Google that the company is appealing after a court upheld the penalty in January. The company’s stock dipped earlier this year due to investor fears over a haphazard and hasty rollout of its Gemini AI tools, leading to a multibillion-dollar sell off and widespread criticism. Pichai was put on the defensive in February after Gemini’s image generator created ahistorical images that included people of color as German second world war soldiers, resulting in the company suspending public access to the tool. In recent weeks, Google has also faced scrutiny and protests over its $1.2bn contract with the Israeli government to provide cloud computing services. Google fired four dozen workers for protesting the program, with demonstrators accusing Google of being complicit in Israel’s war on Gaza. Employees held a sit-in at Google’s offices in Sunnyvale and New York offices in protest of the program, resulting in arrests and the terminations. Pichai addressed the firings in an email last week, stating that Google was not the place to “fight over disruptive issues or debate politics”. He also announced that some of Google’s divisions would go through a restructuring. Google announced additional cuts to its workforce around the same time, laying off an unspecified number of people. Explore more on these topics Technology Google Alphabet Artificial intelligence (AI) Quarterly results news Share Reuse this content Sundar Pichai, Google CEO, speaks at El Centro College in Dallas, Texas, in 2019. Photograph: Brandon Wade/Reuters View image in fullscreen Sundar Pichai, Google CEO, speaks at El Centro College in Dallas, Texas, in 2019. Photograph: Brandon Wade/Reuters Sundar Pichai, Google CEO, speaks at El Centro College in Dallas, Texas, in 2019. Photograph: Brandon Wade/Reuters View image in fullscreen Sundar Pichai, Google CEO, speaks at El Centro College in Dallas, Texas, in 2019. Photograph: Brandon Wade/Reuters Sundar Pichai, Google CEO, speaks at El Centro College in Dallas, Texas, in 2019. Photograph: Brandon Wade/Reuters View image in fullscreen Sundar Pichai, Google CEO, speaks at El Centro College in Dallas, Texas, in 2019. Photograph: Brandon Wade/Reuters Sundar Pichai, Google CEO, speaks at El Centro College in Dallas, Texas, in 2019. Photograph: Brandon Wade/Reuters View image in fullscreen Sundar Pichai, Google CEO, speaks at El Centro College in Dallas, Texas, in 2019. Photograph: Brandon Wade/Reuters Sundar Pichai, Google CEO, speaks at El Centro College in Dallas, Texas, in 2019. Photograph: Brandon Wade/Reuters Sundar Pichai, Google CEO, speaks at El Centro College in Dallas, Texas, in 2019. Photograph: Brandon Wade/Reuters This article is more than 1 year old Alphabet hails ‘once-in-a-generation’ AI opportunity as revenue rises This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Alphabet hails ‘once-in-a-generation’ AI opportunity as revenue rises This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Alphabet hails ‘once-in-a-generation’ AI opportunity as revenue rises This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Shares surge after tech giant issues first ever dividend and posts revenue of $80.5bn, up 15% since last year, despite staff turmoil Shares surge after tech giant issues first ever dividend and posts revenue of $80.5bn, up 15% since last year, despite staff turmoil Shares surge after tech giant issues first ever dividend and posts revenue of $80.5bn, up 15% since last year, despite staff turmoil Shares in Alphabet , the owner of Google and YouTube, surged after it issued its first ever dividend and revealed that profits had surged in the last quarter. Sundar Pichai, CEO, hailed the transition to artificial intelligence as a “once-in-a-generation opportunity” as his company races to integrate the technology across its business. Investors cheered the firm’s earnings, and news of a $70bn stock buyback. Google posted $80.5bn in revenue for the first quarter of 2024 , up 15% on the same period last year, and reported $1.89 in earnings per share, up from $1.17 – surpassing analysts’ expectations on both counts. Shares in Alphabet were up roughly 15% in after-hours trading. The company also announced its first dividend, of $0.20 per share, and said the payout would become quarterly. Google fires 28 staff after protest against firm’s contract with Israeli government Read more “Our results in the first quarter reflect strong performance from Search, YouTube and Cloud. We are well under way with our Gemini era and there’s great momentum across the company,” Pichai said in a press release. Ruth Porat, Alphabet CFO, said revenue from ads on Google Search as well as revenue from Google Cloud fuelled overall positive growth. Revenue from YouTube and Google Cloud exceeded Wall Street’s expectations, with Cloud’s operating income quadrupling to $900m. Traffic acquisition costs – one of Alphabet’s main expenses – rose as well, increasing by 10%. Like Google, Meta issued its first-ever dividend in February. “Alphabet’s better-than-expected quarter was buoyed by strong search and YouTube ad revenue, signaling that uncertainty about how to monetise conversational search and brand media’s measurement challenges aren’t yet impacting Alphabet’s bottom line,” said Nikhil Lai, a senior analyst at Forrester Research. Internal and external turmoil have rocked Google in recent weeks. The earnings report comes amid protests by employees over Google Cloud’s contract with the Israeli government that led to 48 workers being fired. An antitrust decision over its business practices and role in the digital ad market also looms large. The company botched the rollout of its new Gemini AI tools in February, leading to a steep loss in stock value, which the tech giant seems to have shaken off. Long regarded as a workplace full of jobs that paid well and were difficult to lose, Google laid off 1,000 workers in January as it continues to shift its resources to generative artificial intelligence projects. Alphabet’s stock has continued to rise during this period, however, and reached all-time highs this year. The company’s stock price has continued to rise even as it awaits judgment in a landmark antitrust trial that began last year, in which the Department of Justice accused Google of illegally monopolizing internet search and the digital ad market. During a weeks-long trial, Google defended its business practices and argued that its search platform was simply a superior product to its competitors. The verdict is expected at some point this year and it is unclear what punitive measures Google may incur if it is found guilty. Google is facing a number of other legal challenges, including a $2.3bn lawsuit from European media companies over its digital advertising practices. The European Commission levied a $2.7bn antitrust fine against Google that the company is appealing after a court upheld the penalty in January. The company’s stock dipped earlier this year due to investor fears over a haphazard and hasty rollout of its Gemini AI tools, leading to a multibillion-dollar sell off and widespread criticism. Pichai was put on the defensive in February after Gemini’s image generator created ahistorical images that included people of color as German second world war soldiers, resulting in the company suspending public access to the tool. In recent weeks, Google has also faced scrutiny and protests over its $1.2bn contract with the Israeli government to provide cloud computing services. Google fired four dozen workers for protesting the program, with demonstrators accusing Google of being complicit in Israel’s war on Gaza. Employees held a sit-in at Google’s offices in Sunnyvale and New York offices in protest of the program, resulting in arrests and the terminations. Pichai addressed the firings in an email last week, stating that Google was not the place to “fight over disruptive issues or debate politics”. He also announced that some of Google’s divisions would go through a restructuring. Google announced additional cuts to its workforce around the same time, laying off an unspecified number of people. Explore more on these topics Technology Google Alphabet Artificial intelligence (AI) Quarterly results news Share Reuse this content Shares in Alphabet , the owner of Google and YouTube, surged after it issued its first ever dividend and revealed that profits had surged in the last quarter. Sundar Pichai, CEO, hailed the transition to artificial intelligence as a “once-in-a-generation opportunity” as his company races to integrate the technology across its business. Investors cheered the firm’s earnings, and news of a $70bn stock buyback. Google posted $80.5bn in revenue for the first quarter of 2024 , up 15% on the same period last year, and reported $1.89 in earnings per share, up from $1.17 – surpassing analysts’ expectations on both counts. Shares in Alphabet were up roughly 15% in after-hours trading. The company also announced its first dividend, of $0.20 per share, and said the payout would become quarterly. Google fires 28 staff after protest against firm’s contract with Israeli government Read more “Our results in the first quarter reflect strong performance from Search, YouTube and Cloud. We are well under way with our Gemini era and there’s great momentum across the company,” Pichai said in a press release. Ruth Porat, Alphabet CFO, said revenue from ads on Google Search as well as revenue from Google Cloud fuelled overall positive growth. Revenue from YouTube and Google Cloud exceeded Wall Street’s expectations, with Cloud’s operating income quadrupling to $900m. Traffic acquisition costs – one of Alphabet’s main expenses – rose as well, increasing by 10%. Like Google, Meta issued its first-ever dividend in February. “Alphabet’s better-than-expected quarter was buoyed by strong search and YouTube ad revenue, signaling that uncertainty about how to monetise conversational search and brand media’s measurement challenges aren’t yet impacting Alphabet’s bottom line,” said Nikhil Lai, a senior analyst at Forrester Research. Internal and external turmoil have rocked Google in recent weeks. The earnings report comes amid protests by employees over Google Cloud’s contract with the Israeli government that led to 48 workers being fired. An antitrust decision over its business practices and role in the digital ad market also looms large. The company botched the rollout of its new Gemini AI tools in February, leading to a steep loss in stock value, which the tech giant seems to have shaken off. Long regarded as a workplace full of jobs that paid well and were difficult to lose, Google laid off 1,000 workers in January as it continues to shift its resources to generative artificial intelligence projects. Alphabet’s stock has continued to rise during this period, however, and reached all-time highs this year. The company’s stock price has continued to rise even as it awaits judgment in a landmark antitrust trial that began last year, in which the Department of Justice accused Google of illegally monopolizing internet search and the digital ad market. During a weeks-long trial, Google defended its business practices and argued that its search platform was simply a superior product to its competitors. The verdict is expected at some point this year and it is unclear what punitive measures Google may incur if it is found guilty. Google is facing a number of other legal challenges, including a $2.3bn lawsuit from European media companies over its digital advertising practices. The European Commission levied a $2.7bn antitrust fine against Google that the company is appealing after a court upheld the penalty in January. The company’s stock dipped earlier this year due to investor fears over a haphazard and hasty rollout of its Gemini AI tools, leading to a multibillion-dollar sell off and widespread criticism. Pichai was put on the defensive in February after Gemini’s image generator created ahistorical images that included people of color as German second world war soldiers, resulting in the company suspending public access to the tool. In recent weeks, Google has also faced scrutiny and protests over its $1.2bn contract with the Israeli government to provide cloud computing services. Google fired four dozen workers for protesting the program, with demonstrators accusing Google of being complicit in Israel’s war on Gaza. Employees held a sit-in at Google’s offices in Sunnyvale and New York offices in protest of the program, resulting in arrests and the terminations. Pichai addressed the firings in an email last week, stating that Google was not the place to “fight over disruptive issues or debate politics”. He also announced that some of Google’s divisions would go through a restructuring. Google announced additional cuts to its workforce around the same time, laying off an unspecified number of people. Explore more on these topics Technology Google Alphabet Artificial intelligence (AI) Quarterly results news Share Reuse this content Shares in Alphabet , the owner of Google and YouTube, surged after it issued its first ever dividend and revealed that profits had surged in the last quarter. Sundar Pichai, CEO, hailed the transition to artificial intelligence as a “once-in-a-generation opportunity” as his company races to integrate the technology across its business. Investors cheered the firm’s earnings, and news of a $70bn stock buyback. Google posted $80.5bn in revenue for the first quarter of 2024 , up 15% on the same period last year, and reported $1.89 in earnings per share, up from $1.17 – surpassing analysts’ expectations on both counts. Shares in Alphabet were up roughly 15% in after-hours trading. The company also announced its first dividend, of $0.20 per share, and said the payout would become quarterly. Google fires 28 staff after protest against firm’s contract with Israeli government Read more “Our results in the first quarter reflect strong performance from Search, YouTube and Cloud. We are well under way with our Gemini era and there’s great momentum across the company,” Pichai said in a press release. Ruth Porat, Alphabet CFO, said revenue from ads on Google Search as well as revenue from Google Cloud fuelled overall positive growth. Revenue from YouTube and Google Cloud exceeded Wall Street’s expectations, with Cloud’s operating income quadrupling to $900m. Traffic acquisition costs – one of Alphabet’s main expenses – rose as well, increasing by 10%. Like Google, Meta issued its first-ever dividend in February. “Alphabet’s better-than-expected quarter was buoyed by strong search and YouTube ad revenue, signaling that uncertainty about how to monetise conversational search and brand media’s measurement challenges aren’t yet impacting Alphabet’s bottom line,” said Nikhil Lai, a senior analyst at Forrester Research. Internal and external turmoil have rocked Google in recent weeks. The earnings report comes amid protests by employees over Google Cloud’s contract with the Israeli government that led to 48 workers being fired. An antitrust decision over its business practices and role in the digital ad market also looms large. The company botched the rollout of its new Gemini AI tools in February, leading to a steep loss in stock value, which the tech giant seems to have shaken off. Long regarded as a workplace full of jobs that paid well and were difficult to lose, Google laid off 1,000 workers in January as it continues to shift its resources to generative artificial intelligence projects. Alphabet’s stock has continued to rise during this period, however, and reached all-time highs this year. The company’s stock price has continued to rise even as it awaits judgment in a landmark antitrust trial that began last year, in which the Department of Justice accused Google of illegally monopolizing internet search and the digital ad market. During a weeks-long trial, Google defended its business practices and argued that its search platform was simply a superior product to its competitors. The verdict is expected at some point this year and it is unclear what punitive measures Google may incur if it is found guilty. Google is facing a number of other legal challenges, including a $2.3bn lawsuit from European media companies over its digital advertising practices. The European Commission levied a $2.7bn antitrust fine against Google that the company is appealing after a court upheld the penalty in January. The company’s stock dipped earlier this year due to investor fears over a haphazard and hasty rollout of its Gemini AI tools, leading to a multibillion-dollar sell off and widespread criticism. Pichai was put on the defensive in February after Gemini’s image generator created ahistorical images that included people of color as German second world war soldiers, resulting in the company suspending public access to the tool. In recent weeks, Google has also faced scrutiny and protests over its $1.2bn contract with the Israeli government to provide cloud computing services. Google fired four dozen workers for protesting the program, with demonstrators accusing Google of being complicit in Israel’s war on Gaza. Employees held a sit-in at Google’s offices in Sunnyvale and New York offices in protest of the program, resulting in arrests and the terminations. Pichai addressed the firings in an email last week, stating that Google was not the place to “fight over disruptive issues or debate politics”. He also announced that some of Google’s divisions would go through a restructuring. Google announced additional cuts to its workforce around the same time, laying off an unspecified number of people. Shares in Alphabet , the owner of Google and YouTube, surged after it issued its first ever dividend and revealed that profits had surged in the last quarter. Sundar Pichai, CEO, hailed the transition to artificial intelligence as a “once-in-a-generation opportunity” as his company races to integrate the technology across its business. Investors cheered the firm’s earnings, and news of a $70bn stock buyback. Google posted $80.5bn in revenue for the first quarter of 2024 , up 15% on the same period last year, and reported $1.89 in earnings per share, up from $1.17 – surpassing analysts’ expectations on both counts. Shares in Alphabet were up roughly 15% in after-hours trading. The company also announced its first dividend, of $0.20 per share, and said the payout would become quarterly. Google fires 28 staff after protest against firm’s contract with Israeli government Read more “Our results in the first quarter reflect strong performance from Search, YouTube and Cloud. We are well under way with our Gemini era and there’s great momentum across the company,” Pichai said in a press release. Ruth Porat, Alphabet CFO, said revenue from ads on Google Search as well as revenue from Google Cloud fuelled overall positive growth. Revenue from YouTube and Google Cloud exceeded Wall Street’s expectations, with Cloud’s operating income quadrupling to $900m. Traffic acquisition costs – one of Alphabet’s main expenses – rose as well, increasing by 10%. Like Google, Meta issued its first-ever dividend in February. “Alphabet’s better-than-expected quarter was buoyed by strong search and YouTube ad revenue, signaling that uncertainty about how to monetise conversational search and brand media’s measurement challenges aren’t yet impacting Alphabet’s bottom line,” said Nikhil Lai, a senior analyst at Forrester Research. Internal and external turmoil have rocked Google in recent weeks. The earnings report comes amid protests by employees over Google Cloud’s contract with the Israeli government that led to 48 workers being fired. An antitrust decision over its business practices and role in the digital ad market also looms large. The company botched the rollout of its new Gemini AI tools in February, leading to a steep loss in stock value, which the tech giant seems to have shaken off. Long regarded as a workplace full of jobs that paid well and were difficult to lose, Google laid off 1,000 workers in January as it continues to shift its resources to generative artificial intelligence projects. Alphabet’s stock has continued to rise during this period, however, and reached all-time highs this year. The company’s stock price has continued to rise even as it awaits judgment in a landmark antitrust trial that began last year, in which the Department of Justice accused Google of illegally monopolizing internet search and the digital ad market. During a weeks-long trial, Google defended its business practices and argued that its search platform was simply a superior product to its competitors. The verdict is expected at some point this year and it is unclear what punitive measures Google may incur if it is found guilty. Google is facing a number of other legal challenges, including a $2.3bn lawsuit from European media companies over its digital advertising practices. The European Commission levied a $2.7bn antitrust fine against Google that the company is appealing after a court upheld the penalty in January. The company’s stock dipped earlier this year due to investor fears over a haphazard and hasty rollout of its Gemini AI tools, leading to a multibillion-dollar sell off and widespread criticism. Pichai was put on the defensive in February after Gemini’s image generator created ahistorical images that included people of color as German second world war soldiers, resulting in the company suspending public access to the tool. In recent weeks, Google has also faced scrutiny and protests over its $1.2bn contract with the Israeli government to provide cloud computing services. Google fired four dozen workers for protesting the program, with demonstrators accusing Google of being complicit in Israel’s war on Gaza. Employees held a sit-in at Google’s offices in Sunnyvale and New York offices in protest of the program, resulting in arrests and the terminations. Pichai addressed the firings in an email last week, stating that Google was not the place to “fight over disruptive issues or debate politics”. He also announced that some of Google’s divisions would go through a restructuring. Google announced additional cuts to its workforce around the same time, laying off an unspecified number of people. Shares in Alphabet , the owner of Google and YouTube, surged after it issued its first ever dividend and revealed that profits had surged in the last quarter. Sundar Pichai, CEO, hailed the transition to artificial intelligence as a “once-in-a-generation opportunity” as his company races to integrate the technology across its business. Investors cheered the firm’s earnings, and news of a $70bn stock buyback. Google posted $80.5bn in revenue for the first quarter of 2024 , up 15% on the same period last year, and reported $1.89 in earnings per share, up from $1.17 – surpassing analysts’ expectations on both counts. Shares in Alphabet were up roughly 15% in after-hours trading. The company also announced its first dividend, of $0.20 per share, and said the payout would become quarterly. Google fires 28 staff after protest against firm’s contract with Israeli government Read more Google fires 28 staff after protest against firm’s contract with Israeli government Read more Google fires 28 staff after protest against firm’s contract with Israeli government Read more Google fires 28 staff after protest against firm’s contract with Israeli government Google fires 28 staff after protest against firm’s contract with Israeli government “Our results in the first quarter reflect strong performance from Search, YouTube and Cloud. We are well under way with our Gemini era and there’s great momentum across the company,” Pichai said in a press release. Ruth Porat, Alphabet CFO, said revenue from ads on Google Search as well as revenue from Google Cloud fuelled overall positive growth. Revenue from YouTube and Google Cloud exceeded Wall Street’s expectations, with Cloud’s operating income quadrupling to $900m. Traffic acquisition costs – one of Alphabet’s main expenses – rose as well, increasing by 10%. Like Google, Meta issued its first-ever dividend in February. “Alphabet’s better-than-expected quarter was buoyed by strong search and YouTube ad revenue, signaling that uncertainty about how to monetise conversational search and brand media’s measurement challenges aren’t yet impacting Alphabet’s bottom line,” said Nikhil Lai, a senior analyst at Forrester Research. Internal and external turmoil have rocked Google in recent weeks. The earnings report comes amid protests by employees over Google Cloud’s contract with the Israeli government that led to 48 workers being fired. An antitrust decision over its business practices and role in the digital ad market also looms large. The company botched the rollout of its new Gemini AI tools in February, leading to a steep loss in stock value, which the tech giant seems to have shaken off. Long regarded as a workplace full of jobs that paid well and were difficult to lose, Google laid off 1,000 workers in January as it continues to shift its resources to generative artificial intelligence projects. Alphabet’s stock has continued to rise during this period, however, and reached all-time highs this year. The company’s stock price has continued to rise even as it awaits judgment in a landmark antitrust trial that began last year, in which the Department of Justice accused Google of illegally monopolizing internet search and the digital ad market. During a weeks-long trial, Google defended its business practices and argued that its search platform was simply a superior product to its competitors. The verdict is expected at some point this year and it is unclear what punitive measures Google may incur if it is found guilty. Google is facing a number of other legal challenges, including a $2.3bn lawsuit from European media companies over its digital advertising practices. The European Commission levied a $2.7bn antitrust fine against Google that the company is appealing after a court upheld the penalty in January. The company’s stock dipped earlier this year due to investor fears over a haphazard and hasty rollout of its Gemini AI tools, leading to a multibillion-dollar sell off and widespread criticism. Pichai was put on the defensive in February after Gemini’s image generator created ahistorical images that included people of color as German second world war soldiers, resulting in the company suspending public access to the tool. In recent weeks, Google has also faced scrutiny and protests over its $1.2bn contract with the Israeli government to provide cloud computing services. Google fired four dozen workers for protesting the program, with demonstrators accusing Google of being complicit in Israel’s war on Gaza. Employees held a sit-in at Google’s offices in Sunnyvale and New York offices in protest of the program, resulting in arrests and the terminations. Pichai addressed the firings in an email last week, stating that Google was not the place to “fight over disruptive issues or debate politics”. He also announced that some of Google’s divisions would go through a restructuring. Google announced additional cuts to its workforce around the same time, laying off an unspecified number of people. Explore more on these topics Technology Google Alphabet Artificial intelligence (AI) Quarterly results news Share Reuse this content Technology Google Alphabet Artificial intelligence (AI) Quarterly results news |
‘Outrageous’ climate activists get in the faces of politicians and oil bosses – will it work?
Members of Climate Defiance protest against Joe Manchin outside an event in Manchester, New Hampshire, on 12 January 2024. Photograph: Scott Eisen/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Members of Climate Defiance protest against Joe Manchin outside an event in Manchester, New Hampshire, on 12 January 2024. Photograph: Scott Eisen/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old ‘Outrageous’ climate activists get in the faces of politicians and oil bosses – will it work? This article is more than 1 year old As the climate crisis has deepened, protesters have become more confrontational – and their ambitions have grown T he head of ExxonMobil told to “eat shit” as he was about to receive an award. A US senator and coal boss called a “sick fuck”, almost sparking a brawl. Theatre shows interrupted. As the climate crisis has deepened, protests aimed at those deemed responsible are becoming starkly personal, and often confrontational. At the vanguard of this new style of in-your-face activism is Climate Defiance , a group of just a handful of core staffers now marking its first birthday following a year of disrupting, often crudely, the usually mundane procession of talks, speeches and panels that feature Joe Biden administration officials , oil company bosses and financiers . “They are seen as the hot climate group right now, which is amazing given how small they are,” said Dana Fisher, a sociologist and author who is an expert in climate activism at American University. “They are obnoxious, but they are having some success in being outrageous enough to get attention, and in an election year that is important. They are certainly pushing the Biden administration.” Climate Defiance’s tactics are usually clandestine, signing up to or slipping into events before storming the stage and denouncing their targets, who are often referred to as “monsters” or “fiends”, in a sort of public shaming spread via social media. But as the group’s influence has grown, having been granted a meeting they requested at the White House to share their calls for stronger action on global heating, so has the scale of their ambitions. Climate Defiance is organizing a mass protest involving hundreds of people aimed at shutting down the congressional baseball game , a longstanding bipartisan tradition in Washington, this summer, calling on “every good person to join us” . “It’s really going to trigger a nerve,” said Michael Greenberg, the 30-year-old founder of Climate Defiance. “People love the tradition of the baseball game, because it’s bipartisan, and we’re going to say, ‘No, we’re shutting it down.’ We really need to shake people awake and make climate a top three issue for this election.” 1:43 How Climate Defiance activists confront business leaders and politicians – video Greenberg is disparaging of what he sees as the placid, desk-bound conformity of mainstream climate groups, as well as the litany of events that feature those he considers responsible for the climate crisis. “They’re literally risking billions of lives and they’re getting honored at galas,” he said of his targets. The confrontations themselves are very much fashioned for an era of TikTok and Instagram, where a new visual edge needs to be found each time. “Another soup toss at a painting isn’t going to get attention now, and so cursing is something new they are doing,” said Fisher. “It’s designed to be provocative, but is very performative. It’s designed for younger people who are scrolling through videos.” Sometimes the swearing is in visual form – Darren Woods, the chief executive of Exxon, stood haplessly alongside a banner reading “eat shit, Darren” as he was denounced as a “climate criminal” by protesters – while sometimes it is uttered by target and activist. “Just close the fucking door,” muttered Jerome Powell, the chair of the Federal Reserve, as his speech in December was interrupted by activists who stormed the stage, causing him to flee. Occasionally the confrontations can provoke flashes of anger, like recently when a Climate Defiance volunteer accosted Joe Manchin, the conservative Democratic senator and coal baron , and called him a “sick fuck”, causing the incensed West Virginia lawmaker to square up to the protester, who was then pushed away by an aide. Such interactions will not persuade people such as Manchin to suddenly oppose fossil fuels and may even dismay casual viewers of the video, Greenberg admits, but the founder insists such stunts help push climate up the agenda with an easily distracted public. “For your average suburban soccer mom, they probably don’t love it, but a lot of our supporters were excited to see it,” Greenberg said of the repeated tangles with Manchin. “I guess there’s a tension in some of these actions. The stuff that gets the most attention is often the stuff that’s a little bit less popular. So yeah, I consider it a trade-off.” He added: “What we’re aiming to do is much more ambitious than just get some anger off of our chest. We’re really trying to make climate change a top-tier issue in the American political system. Otherwise, it’ll just get ignored.” For these efforts, Climate Defiance is increasingly feted by political figures and donors. Fundraising parties have been held by the likes of Abigail Disney, the heiress and climate campaigner , and attended by appreciative progressive Democrats. “You have gotten the country’s attention,” Ro Khanna, a Democratic congressman from California, told one of the fundraisers . “People in Congress are talking about you. Senators are talking about you. The president is talking about you. And remember this, the future is with you.” Even John Podesta, Biden’s top climate envoy, who has had several events interrupted by Climate Defiance, has engaged with the group, agreeing to meet them at the White House for talks last year. Podesta called the group a “pain in the ass” and complained that it did not protest against enough Republicans, Greenberg said. Podesta was contacted about the comments. But will any of this make a difference? Being hounded by climate activists may have helped nudge the Biden administration to pause new gas exports , but the influence is more opaque when it comes to the broader American public, who are increasingly worried about the ravages of heatwaves, wildfires and flooding but still mostly consider the climate crisis as a background issue when it comes to voting. “We know historically that radical action can inspire other people to join more moderate components of the movement, but most research on this was done before social media,” said Fisher. “We don’t know how well videos saying ‘eat shit’ will work out yet. It’s frustrating.” ‘Ecocidal pyromaniac’ The protests may even backfire with some voters who consider them to be counter-productive or even violent, as evidenced in some of the negative reactions to a brawl that erupted last week after Climate Defiance activists rushed a stage where Lisa Murkowski, a Republican senator, was speaking. Murkowski is a “murderer” and an “ecocidal pyromaniac”, according to the group, which in its confrontations connects politicians who have supported fossil fuel interests to the harms of the climate crisis. For now, the currency of success is measured in video views and in how normalized protest interruptions are becoming from a range groups, such as Sunrise or Extinction Rebellion, who have shouted down speeches by Donald Trump or halted performances at the opera or theater to decry the lack of action on the climate crisis. “Climate Defiance changed the format,” said Nate Smith, a climate activist and theater producer who stood up to interrupt a press preview of An Enemy of the People, the Henrik Ibsen play currently showing on Broadway , in a protest by Extinction Rebellion NY. “I’ve been in front of unmarked security forces with machine guns and felt way more calm than interrupting my own love, my own business, but there is no Broadway on a dead planet,” said Smith about the action. Smith’s warning about sea-level rise during the show was responded to in character by Jeremy Strong, the Succession actor who plays the protagonist in the production. Strong, ironically, is on the board of the Climate Emergency Fund, which funds groups such as Climate Defiance. “Listen, I didn’t want it to happen, you know, on my stage but at the same time … I’d feel like a hypocrite if I didn’t, in a way, support what they were saying,” Strong has said . Film studio from Oscar-winning director aims to stir up ‘populist anger’ over climate crisis Read more Acting in an unperturbed way has now become a required skill for politicians and others who risk interruption. At a boosterish breakfast meeting in Manhattan last week, Eric Adams, the mayor of New York, was delivering a self-laudatory speech to several hundred supporters when a group of young people involved in Planet Over Profit, another activist group, clambered on stage to shout “Landlord Adams, burning NYC” and unfurled a banner, before being bundled away. Four arrests were made outside. Adams plowed on with his speech throughout the intervention, remarking afterwards that the protesters were trying to “hijack the narrative” and that they “mean nothing to me”. If this new era of confrontation becomes commonplace to the point of being ignored, what tactics will climate activists come up with next? The climate crisis won’t wait to find out. The last 10 months have, globally, smashed all previous temperature records and, just in the past week, new studies have come out showing that the planet’s coral reefs are facing their most serious risk of heat death yet, while the world’s economy is set to lose 19% of its income in the next 26 years , an eye-watering $38tn, because of the impacts of climate change. “These activists are going to annoy some people, but scientists are screaming at the top of their lungs about the climate crisis, and no one is listening,” said Fisher. “Not everyone will like it but a range of tactics is necessary right now. The destruction we are seeing is far worse than calling Joe Manchin a nasty name.” Explore more on these topics Climate crisis Protest features Share Reuse this content Members of Climate Defiance protest against Joe Manchin outside an event in Manchester, New Hampshire, on 12 January 2024. Photograph: Scott Eisen/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Members of Climate Defiance protest against Joe Manchin outside an event in Manchester, New Hampshire, on 12 January 2024. Photograph: Scott Eisen/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old ‘Outrageous’ climate activists get in the faces of politicians and oil bosses – will it work? This article is more than 1 year old As the climate crisis has deepened, protesters have become more confrontational – and their ambitions have grown T he head of ExxonMobil told to “eat shit” as he was about to receive an award. A US senator and coal boss called a “sick fuck”, almost sparking a brawl. Theatre shows interrupted. As the climate crisis has deepened, protests aimed at those deemed responsible are becoming starkly personal, and often confrontational. At the vanguard of this new style of in-your-face activism is Climate Defiance , a group of just a handful of core staffers now marking its first birthday following a year of disrupting, often crudely, the usually mundane procession of talks, speeches and panels that feature Joe Biden administration officials , oil company bosses and financiers . “They are seen as the hot climate group right now, which is amazing given how small they are,” said Dana Fisher, a sociologist and author who is an expert in climate activism at American University. “They are obnoxious, but they are having some success in being outrageous enough to get attention, and in an election year that is important. They are certainly pushing the Biden administration.” Climate Defiance’s tactics are usually clandestine, signing up to or slipping into events before storming the stage and denouncing their targets, who are often referred to as “monsters” or “fiends”, in a sort of public shaming spread via social media. But as the group’s influence has grown, having been granted a meeting they requested at the White House to share their calls for stronger action on global heating, so has the scale of their ambitions. Climate Defiance is organizing a mass protest involving hundreds of people aimed at shutting down the congressional baseball game , a longstanding bipartisan tradition in Washington, this summer, calling on “every good person to join us” . “It’s really going to trigger a nerve,” said Michael Greenberg, the 30-year-old founder of Climate Defiance. “People love the tradition of the baseball game, because it’s bipartisan, and we’re going to say, ‘No, we’re shutting it down.’ We really need to shake people awake and make climate a top three issue for this election.” 1:43 How Climate Defiance activists confront business leaders and politicians – video Greenberg is disparaging of what he sees as the placid, desk-bound conformity of mainstream climate groups, as well as the litany of events that feature those he considers responsible for the climate crisis. “They’re literally risking billions of lives and they’re getting honored at galas,” he said of his targets. The confrontations themselves are very much fashioned for an era of TikTok and Instagram, where a new visual edge needs to be found each time. “Another soup toss at a painting isn’t going to get attention now, and so cursing is something new they are doing,” said Fisher. “It’s designed to be provocative, but is very performative. It’s designed for younger people who are scrolling through videos.” Sometimes the swearing is in visual form – Darren Woods, the chief executive of Exxon, stood haplessly alongside a banner reading “eat shit, Darren” as he was denounced as a “climate criminal” by protesters – while sometimes it is uttered by target and activist. “Just close the fucking door,” muttered Jerome Powell, the chair of the Federal Reserve, as his speech in December was interrupted by activists who stormed the stage, causing him to flee. Occasionally the confrontations can provoke flashes of anger, like recently when a Climate Defiance volunteer accosted Joe Manchin, the conservative Democratic senator and coal baron , and called him a “sick fuck”, causing the incensed West Virginia lawmaker to square up to the protester, who was then pushed away by an aide. Such interactions will not persuade people such as Manchin to suddenly oppose fossil fuels and may even dismay casual viewers of the video, Greenberg admits, but the founder insists such stunts help push climate up the agenda with an easily distracted public. “For your average suburban soccer mom, they probably don’t love it, but a lot of our supporters were excited to see it,” Greenberg said of the repeated tangles with Manchin. “I guess there’s a tension in some of these actions. The stuff that gets the most attention is often the stuff that’s a little bit less popular. So yeah, I consider it a trade-off.” He added: “What we’re aiming to do is much more ambitious than just get some anger off of our chest. We’re really trying to make climate change a top-tier issue in the American political system. Otherwise, it’ll just get ignored.” For these efforts, Climate Defiance is increasingly feted by political figures and donors. Fundraising parties have been held by the likes of Abigail Disney, the heiress and climate campaigner , and attended by appreciative progressive Democrats. “You have gotten the country’s attention,” Ro Khanna, a Democratic congressman from California, told one of the fundraisers . “People in Congress are talking about you. Senators are talking about you. The president is talking about you. And remember this, the future is with you.” Even John Podesta, Biden’s top climate envoy, who has had several events interrupted by Climate Defiance, has engaged with the group, agreeing to meet them at the White House for talks last year. Podesta called the group a “pain in the ass” and complained that it did not protest against enough Republicans, Greenberg said. Podesta was contacted about the comments. But will any of this make a difference? Being hounded by climate activists may have helped nudge the Biden administration to pause new gas exports , but the influence is more opaque when it comes to the broader American public, who are increasingly worried about the ravages of heatwaves, wildfires and flooding but still mostly consider the climate crisis as a background issue when it comes to voting. “We know historically that radical action can inspire other people to join more moderate components of the movement, but most research on this was done before social media,” said Fisher. “We don’t know how well videos saying ‘eat shit’ will work out yet. It’s frustrating.” ‘Ecocidal pyromaniac’ The protests may even backfire with some voters who consider them to be counter-productive or even violent, as evidenced in some of the negative reactions to a brawl that erupted last week after Climate Defiance activists rushed a stage where Lisa Murkowski, a Republican senator, was speaking. Murkowski is a “murderer” and an “ecocidal pyromaniac”, according to the group, which in its confrontations connects politicians who have supported fossil fuel interests to the harms of the climate crisis. For now, the currency of success is measured in video views and in how normalized protest interruptions are becoming from a range groups, such as Sunrise or Extinction Rebellion, who have shouted down speeches by Donald Trump or halted performances at the opera or theater to decry the lack of action on the climate crisis. “Climate Defiance changed the format,” said Nate Smith, a climate activist and theater producer who stood up to interrupt a press preview of An Enemy of the People, the Henrik Ibsen play currently showing on Broadway , in a protest by Extinction Rebellion NY. “I’ve been in front of unmarked security forces with machine guns and felt way more calm than interrupting my own love, my own business, but there is no Broadway on a dead planet,” said Smith about the action. Smith’s warning about sea-level rise during the show was responded to in character by Jeremy Strong, the Succession actor who plays the protagonist in the production. Strong, ironically, is on the board of the Climate Emergency Fund, which funds groups such as Climate Defiance. “Listen, I didn’t want it to happen, you know, on my stage but at the same time … I’d feel like a hypocrite if I didn’t, in a way, support what they were saying,” Strong has said . Film studio from Oscar-winning director aims to stir up ‘populist anger’ over climate crisis Read more Acting in an unperturbed way has now become a required skill for politicians and others who risk interruption. At a boosterish breakfast meeting in Manhattan last week, Eric Adams, the mayor of New York, was delivering a self-laudatory speech to several hundred supporters when a group of young people involved in Planet Over Profit, another activist group, clambered on stage to shout “Landlord Adams, burning NYC” and unfurled a banner, before being bundled away. Four arrests were made outside. Adams plowed on with his speech throughout the intervention, remarking afterwards that the protesters were trying to “hijack the narrative” and that they “mean nothing to me”. If this new era of confrontation becomes commonplace to the point of being ignored, what tactics will climate activists come up with next? The climate crisis won’t wait to find out. The last 10 months have, globally, smashed all previous temperature records and, just in the past week, new studies have come out showing that the planet’s coral reefs are facing their most serious risk of heat death yet, while the world’s economy is set to lose 19% of its income in the next 26 years , an eye-watering $38tn, because of the impacts of climate change. “These activists are going to annoy some people, but scientists are screaming at the top of their lungs about the climate crisis, and no one is listening,” said Fisher. “Not everyone will like it but a range of tactics is necessary right now. The destruction we are seeing is far worse than calling Joe Manchin a nasty name.” Explore more on these topics Climate crisis Protest features Share Reuse this content Members of Climate Defiance protest against Joe Manchin outside an event in Manchester, New Hampshire, on 12 January 2024. Photograph: Scott Eisen/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Members of Climate Defiance protest against Joe Manchin outside an event in Manchester, New Hampshire, on 12 January 2024. Photograph: Scott Eisen/Getty Images Members of Climate Defiance protest against Joe Manchin outside an event in Manchester, New Hampshire, on 12 January 2024. Photograph: Scott Eisen/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Members of Climate Defiance protest against Joe Manchin outside an event in Manchester, New Hampshire, on 12 January 2024. Photograph: Scott Eisen/Getty Images Members of Climate Defiance protest against Joe Manchin outside an event in Manchester, New Hampshire, on 12 January 2024. Photograph: Scott Eisen/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Members of Climate Defiance protest against Joe Manchin outside an event in Manchester, New Hampshire, on 12 January 2024. Photograph: Scott Eisen/Getty Images Members of Climate Defiance protest against Joe Manchin outside an event in Manchester, New Hampshire, on 12 January 2024. Photograph: Scott Eisen/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Members of Climate Defiance protest against Joe Manchin outside an event in Manchester, New Hampshire, on 12 January 2024. Photograph: Scott Eisen/Getty Images Members of Climate Defiance protest against Joe Manchin outside an event in Manchester, New Hampshire, on 12 January 2024. Photograph: Scott Eisen/Getty Images Members of Climate Defiance protest against Joe Manchin outside an event in Manchester, New Hampshire, on 12 January 2024. Photograph: Scott Eisen/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old ‘Outrageous’ climate activists get in the faces of politicians and oil bosses – will it work? This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Outrageous’ climate activists get in the faces of politicians and oil bosses – will it work? This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Outrageous’ climate activists get in the faces of politicians and oil bosses – will it work? This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old As the climate crisis has deepened, protesters have become more confrontational – and their ambitions have grown As the climate crisis has deepened, protesters have become more confrontational – and their ambitions have grown As the climate crisis has deepened, protesters have become more confrontational – and their ambitions have grown T he head of ExxonMobil told to “eat shit” as he was about to receive an award. A US senator and coal boss called a “sick fuck”, almost sparking a brawl. Theatre shows interrupted. As the climate crisis has deepened, protests aimed at those deemed responsible are becoming starkly personal, and often confrontational. At the vanguard of this new style of in-your-face activism is Climate Defiance , a group of just a handful of core staffers now marking its first birthday following a year of disrupting, often crudely, the usually mundane procession of talks, speeches and panels that feature Joe Biden administration officials , oil company bosses and financiers . “They are seen as the hot climate group right now, which is amazing given how small they are,” said Dana Fisher, a sociologist and author who is an expert in climate activism at American University. “They are obnoxious, but they are having some success in being outrageous enough to get attention, and in an election year that is important. They are certainly pushing the Biden administration.” Climate Defiance’s tactics are usually clandestine, signing up to or slipping into events before storming the stage and denouncing their targets, who are often referred to as “monsters” or “fiends”, in a sort of public shaming spread via social media. But as the group’s influence has grown, having been granted a meeting they requested at the White House to share their calls for stronger action on global heating, so has the scale of their ambitions. Climate Defiance is organizing a mass protest involving hundreds of people aimed at shutting down the congressional baseball game , a longstanding bipartisan tradition in Washington, this summer, calling on “every good person to join us” . “It’s really going to trigger a nerve,” said Michael Greenberg, the 30-year-old founder of Climate Defiance. “People love the tradition of the baseball game, because it’s bipartisan, and we’re going to say, ‘No, we’re shutting it down.’ We really need to shake people awake and make climate a top three issue for this election.” 1:43 How Climate Defiance activists confront business leaders and politicians – video Greenberg is disparaging of what he sees as the placid, desk-bound conformity of mainstream climate groups, as well as the litany of events that feature those he considers responsible for the climate crisis. “They’re literally risking billions of lives and they’re getting honored at galas,” he said of his targets. The confrontations themselves are very much fashioned for an era of TikTok and Instagram, where a new visual edge needs to be found each time. “Another soup toss at a painting isn’t going to get attention now, and so cursing is something new they are doing,” said Fisher. “It’s designed to be provocative, but is very performative. It’s designed for younger people who are scrolling through videos.” Sometimes the swearing is in visual form – Darren Woods, the chief executive of Exxon, stood haplessly alongside a banner reading “eat shit, Darren” as he was denounced as a “climate criminal” by protesters – while sometimes it is uttered by target and activist. “Just close the fucking door,” muttered Jerome Powell, the chair of the Federal Reserve, as his speech in December was interrupted by activists who stormed the stage, causing him to flee. Occasionally the confrontations can provoke flashes of anger, like recently when a Climate Defiance volunteer accosted Joe Manchin, the conservative Democratic senator and coal baron , and called him a “sick fuck”, causing the incensed West Virginia lawmaker to square up to the protester, who was then pushed away by an aide. Such interactions will not persuade people such as Manchin to suddenly oppose fossil fuels and may even dismay casual viewers of the video, Greenberg admits, but the founder insists such stunts help push climate up the agenda with an easily distracted public. “For your average suburban soccer mom, they probably don’t love it, but a lot of our supporters were excited to see it,” Greenberg said of the repeated tangles with Manchin. “I guess there’s a tension in some of these actions. The stuff that gets the most attention is often the stuff that’s a little bit less popular. So yeah, I consider it a trade-off.” He added: “What we’re aiming to do is much more ambitious than just get some anger off of our chest. We’re really trying to make climate change a top-tier issue in the American political system. Otherwise, it’ll just get ignored.” For these efforts, Climate Defiance is increasingly feted by political figures and donors. Fundraising parties have been held by the likes of Abigail Disney, the heiress and climate campaigner , and attended by appreciative progressive Democrats. “You have gotten the country’s attention,” Ro Khanna, a Democratic congressman from California, told one of the fundraisers . “People in Congress are talking about you. Senators are talking about you. The president is talking about you. And remember this, the future is with you.” Even John Podesta, Biden’s top climate envoy, who has had several events interrupted by Climate Defiance, has engaged with the group, agreeing to meet them at the White House for talks last year. Podesta called the group a “pain in the ass” and complained that it did not protest against enough Republicans, Greenberg said. Podesta was contacted about the comments. But will any of this make a difference? Being hounded by climate activists may have helped nudge the Biden administration to pause new gas exports , but the influence is more opaque when it comes to the broader American public, who are increasingly worried about the ravages of heatwaves, wildfires and flooding but still mostly consider the climate crisis as a background issue when it comes to voting. “We know historically that radical action can inspire other people to join more moderate components of the movement, but most research on this was done before social media,” said Fisher. “We don’t know how well videos saying ‘eat shit’ will work out yet. It’s frustrating.” ‘Ecocidal pyromaniac’ The protests may even backfire with some voters who consider them to be counter-productive or even violent, as evidenced in some of the negative reactions to a brawl that erupted last week after Climate Defiance activists rushed a stage where Lisa Murkowski, a Republican senator, was speaking. Murkowski is a “murderer” and an “ecocidal pyromaniac”, according to the group, which in its confrontations connects politicians who have supported fossil fuel interests to the harms of the climate crisis. For now, the currency of success is measured in video views and in how normalized protest interruptions are becoming from a range groups, such as Sunrise or Extinction Rebellion, who have shouted down speeches by Donald Trump or halted performances at the opera or theater to decry the lack of action on the climate crisis. “Climate Defiance changed the format,” said Nate Smith, a climate activist and theater producer who stood up to interrupt a press preview of An Enemy of the People, the Henrik Ibsen play currently showing on Broadway , in a protest by Extinction Rebellion NY. “I’ve been in front of unmarked security forces with machine guns and felt way more calm than interrupting my own love, my own business, but there is no Broadway on a dead planet,” said Smith about the action. Smith’s warning about sea-level rise during the show was responded to in character by Jeremy Strong, the Succession actor who plays the protagonist in the production. Strong, ironically, is on the board of the Climate Emergency Fund, which funds groups such as Climate Defiance. “Listen, I didn’t want it to happen, you know, on my stage but at the same time … I’d feel like a hypocrite if I didn’t, in a way, support what they were saying,” Strong has said . Film studio from Oscar-winning director aims to stir up ‘populist anger’ over climate crisis Read more Acting in an unperturbed way has now become a required skill for politicians and others who risk interruption. At a boosterish breakfast meeting in Manhattan last week, Eric Adams, the mayor of New York, was delivering a self-laudatory speech to several hundred supporters when a group of young people involved in Planet Over Profit, another activist group, clambered on stage to shout “Landlord Adams, burning NYC” and unfurled a banner, before being bundled away. Four arrests were made outside. Adams plowed on with his speech throughout the intervention, remarking afterwards that the protesters were trying to “hijack the narrative” and that they “mean nothing to me”. If this new era of confrontation becomes commonplace to the point of being ignored, what tactics will climate activists come up with next? The climate crisis won’t wait to find out. The last 10 months have, globally, smashed all previous temperature records and, just in the past week, new studies have come out showing that the planet’s coral reefs are facing their most serious risk of heat death yet, while the world’s economy is set to lose 19% of its income in the next 26 years , an eye-watering $38tn, because of the impacts of climate change. “These activists are going to annoy some people, but scientists are screaming at the top of their lungs about the climate crisis, and no one is listening,” said Fisher. “Not everyone will like it but a range of tactics is necessary right now. The destruction we are seeing is far worse than calling Joe Manchin a nasty name.” Explore more on these topics Climate crisis Protest features Share Reuse this content T he head of ExxonMobil told to “eat shit” as he was about to receive an award. A US senator and coal boss called a “sick fuck”, almost sparking a brawl. Theatre shows interrupted. As the climate crisis has deepened, protests aimed at those deemed responsible are becoming starkly personal, and often confrontational. At the vanguard of this new style of in-your-face activism is Climate Defiance , a group of just a handful of core staffers now marking its first birthday following a year of disrupting, often crudely, the usually mundane procession of talks, speeches and panels that feature Joe Biden administration officials , oil company bosses and financiers . “They are seen as the hot climate group right now, which is amazing given how small they are,” said Dana Fisher, a sociologist and author who is an expert in climate activism at American University. “They are obnoxious, but they are having some success in being outrageous enough to get attention, and in an election year that is important. They are certainly pushing the Biden administration.” Climate Defiance’s tactics are usually clandestine, signing up to or slipping into events before storming the stage and denouncing their targets, who are often referred to as “monsters” or “fiends”, in a sort of public shaming spread via social media. But as the group’s influence has grown, having been granted a meeting they requested at the White House to share their calls for stronger action on global heating, so has the scale of their ambitions. Climate Defiance is organizing a mass protest involving hundreds of people aimed at shutting down the congressional baseball game , a longstanding bipartisan tradition in Washington, this summer, calling on “every good person to join us” . “It’s really going to trigger a nerve,” said Michael Greenberg, the 30-year-old founder of Climate Defiance. “People love the tradition of the baseball game, because it’s bipartisan, and we’re going to say, ‘No, we’re shutting it down.’ We really need to shake people awake and make climate a top three issue for this election.” 1:43 How Climate Defiance activists confront business leaders and politicians – video Greenberg is disparaging of what he sees as the placid, desk-bound conformity of mainstream climate groups, as well as the litany of events that feature those he considers responsible for the climate crisis. “They’re literally risking billions of lives and they’re getting honored at galas,” he said of his targets. The confrontations themselves are very much fashioned for an era of TikTok and Instagram, where a new visual edge needs to be found each time. “Another soup toss at a painting isn’t going to get attention now, and so cursing is something new they are doing,” said Fisher. “It’s designed to be provocative, but is very performative. It’s designed for younger people who are scrolling through videos.” Sometimes the swearing is in visual form – Darren Woods, the chief executive of Exxon, stood haplessly alongside a banner reading “eat shit, Darren” as he was denounced as a “climate criminal” by protesters – while sometimes it is uttered by target and activist. “Just close the fucking door,” muttered Jerome Powell, the chair of the Federal Reserve, as his speech in December was interrupted by activists who stormed the stage, causing him to flee. Occasionally the confrontations can provoke flashes of anger, like recently when a Climate Defiance volunteer accosted Joe Manchin, the conservative Democratic senator and coal baron , and called him a “sick fuck”, causing the incensed West Virginia lawmaker to square up to the protester, who was then pushed away by an aide. Such interactions will not persuade people such as Manchin to suddenly oppose fossil fuels and may even dismay casual viewers of the video, Greenberg admits, but the founder insists such stunts help push climate up the agenda with an easily distracted public. “For your average suburban soccer mom, they probably don’t love it, but a lot of our supporters were excited to see it,” Greenberg said of the repeated tangles with Manchin. “I guess there’s a tension in some of these actions. The stuff that gets the most attention is often the stuff that’s a little bit less popular. So yeah, I consider it a trade-off.” He added: “What we’re aiming to do is much more ambitious than just get some anger off of our chest. We’re really trying to make climate change a top-tier issue in the American political system. Otherwise, it’ll just get ignored.” For these efforts, Climate Defiance is increasingly feted by political figures and donors. Fundraising parties have been held by the likes of Abigail Disney, the heiress and climate campaigner , and attended by appreciative progressive Democrats. “You have gotten the country’s attention,” Ro Khanna, a Democratic congressman from California, told one of the fundraisers . “People in Congress are talking about you. Senators are talking about you. The president is talking about you. And remember this, the future is with you.” Even John Podesta, Biden’s top climate envoy, who has had several events interrupted by Climate Defiance, has engaged with the group, agreeing to meet them at the White House for talks last year. Podesta called the group a “pain in the ass” and complained that it did not protest against enough Republicans, Greenberg said. Podesta was contacted about the comments. But will any of this make a difference? Being hounded by climate activists may have helped nudge the Biden administration to pause new gas exports , but the influence is more opaque when it comes to the broader American public, who are increasingly worried about the ravages of heatwaves, wildfires and flooding but still mostly consider the climate crisis as a background issue when it comes to voting. “We know historically that radical action can inspire other people to join more moderate components of the movement, but most research on this was done before social media,” said Fisher. “We don’t know how well videos saying ‘eat shit’ will work out yet. It’s frustrating.” ‘Ecocidal pyromaniac’ The protests may even backfire with some voters who consider them to be counter-productive or even violent, as evidenced in some of the negative reactions to a brawl that erupted last week after Climate Defiance activists rushed a stage where Lisa Murkowski, a Republican senator, was speaking. Murkowski is a “murderer” and an “ecocidal pyromaniac”, according to the group, which in its confrontations connects politicians who have supported fossil fuel interests to the harms of the climate crisis. For now, the currency of success is measured in video views and in how normalized protest interruptions are becoming from a range groups, such as Sunrise or Extinction Rebellion, who have shouted down speeches by Donald Trump or halted performances at the opera or theater to decry the lack of action on the climate crisis. “Climate Defiance changed the format,” said Nate Smith, a climate activist and theater producer who stood up to interrupt a press preview of An Enemy of the People, the Henrik Ibsen play currently showing on Broadway , in a protest by Extinction Rebellion NY. “I’ve been in front of unmarked security forces with machine guns and felt way more calm than interrupting my own love, my own business, but there is no Broadway on a dead planet,” said Smith about the action. Smith’s warning about sea-level rise during the show was responded to in character by Jeremy Strong, the Succession actor who plays the protagonist in the production. Strong, ironically, is on the board of the Climate Emergency Fund, which funds groups such as Climate Defiance. “Listen, I didn’t want it to happen, you know, on my stage but at the same time … I’d feel like a hypocrite if I didn’t, in a way, support what they were saying,” Strong has said . Film studio from Oscar-winning director aims to stir up ‘populist anger’ over climate crisis Read more Acting in an unperturbed way has now become a required skill for politicians and others who risk interruption. At a boosterish breakfast meeting in Manhattan last week, Eric Adams, the mayor of New York, was delivering a self-laudatory speech to several hundred supporters when a group of young people involved in Planet Over Profit, another activist group, clambered on stage to shout “Landlord Adams, burning NYC” and unfurled a banner, before being bundled away. Four arrests were made outside. Adams plowed on with his speech throughout the intervention, remarking afterwards that the protesters were trying to “hijack the narrative” and that they “mean nothing to me”. If this new era of confrontation becomes commonplace to the point of being ignored, what tactics will climate activists come up with next? The climate crisis won’t wait to find out. The last 10 months have, globally, smashed all previous temperature records and, just in the past week, new studies have come out showing that the planet’s coral reefs are facing their most serious risk of heat death yet, while the world’s economy is set to lose 19% of its income in the next 26 years , an eye-watering $38tn, because of the impacts of climate change. “These activists are going to annoy some people, but scientists are screaming at the top of their lungs about the climate crisis, and no one is listening,” said Fisher. “Not everyone will like it but a range of tactics is necessary right now. The destruction we are seeing is far worse than calling Joe Manchin a nasty name.” Explore more on these topics Climate crisis Protest features Share Reuse this content T he head of ExxonMobil told to “eat shit” as he was about to receive an award. A US senator and coal boss called a “sick fuck”, almost sparking a brawl. Theatre shows interrupted. As the climate crisis has deepened, protests aimed at those deemed responsible are becoming starkly personal, and often confrontational. At the vanguard of this new style of in-your-face activism is Climate Defiance , a group of just a handful of core staffers now marking its first birthday following a year of disrupting, often crudely, the usually mundane procession of talks, speeches and panels that feature Joe Biden administration officials , oil company bosses and financiers . “They are seen as the hot climate group right now, which is amazing given how small they are,” said Dana Fisher, a sociologist and author who is an expert in climate activism at American University. “They are obnoxious, but they are having some success in being outrageous enough to get attention, and in an election year that is important. They are certainly pushing the Biden administration.” Climate Defiance’s tactics are usually clandestine, signing up to or slipping into events before storming the stage and denouncing their targets, who are often referred to as “monsters” or “fiends”, in a sort of public shaming spread via social media. But as the group’s influence has grown, having been granted a meeting they requested at the White House to share their calls for stronger action on global heating, so has the scale of their ambitions. Climate Defiance is organizing a mass protest involving hundreds of people aimed at shutting down the congressional baseball game , a longstanding bipartisan tradition in Washington, this summer, calling on “every good person to join us” . “It’s really going to trigger a nerve,” said Michael Greenberg, the 30-year-old founder of Climate Defiance. “People love the tradition of the baseball game, because it’s bipartisan, and we’re going to say, ‘No, we’re shutting it down.’ We really need to shake people awake and make climate a top three issue for this election.” 1:43 How Climate Defiance activists confront business leaders and politicians – video Greenberg is disparaging of what he sees as the placid, desk-bound conformity of mainstream climate groups, as well as the litany of events that feature those he considers responsible for the climate crisis. “They’re literally risking billions of lives and they’re getting honored at galas,” he said of his targets. The confrontations themselves are very much fashioned for an era of TikTok and Instagram, where a new visual edge needs to be found each time. “Another soup toss at a painting isn’t going to get attention now, and so cursing is something new they are doing,” said Fisher. “It’s designed to be provocative, but is very performative. It’s designed for younger people who are scrolling through videos.” Sometimes the swearing is in visual form – Darren Woods, the chief executive of Exxon, stood haplessly alongside a banner reading “eat shit, Darren” as he was denounced as a “climate criminal” by protesters – while sometimes it is uttered by target and activist. “Just close the fucking door,” muttered Jerome Powell, the chair of the Federal Reserve, as his speech in December was interrupted by activists who stormed the stage, causing him to flee. Occasionally the confrontations can provoke flashes of anger, like recently when a Climate Defiance volunteer accosted Joe Manchin, the conservative Democratic senator and coal baron , and called him a “sick fuck”, causing the incensed West Virginia lawmaker to square up to the protester, who was then pushed away by an aide. Such interactions will not persuade people such as Manchin to suddenly oppose fossil fuels and may even dismay casual viewers of the video, Greenberg admits, but the founder insists such stunts help push climate up the agenda with an easily distracted public. “For your average suburban soccer mom, they probably don’t love it, but a lot of our supporters were excited to see it,” Greenberg said of the repeated tangles with Manchin. “I guess there’s a tension in some of these actions. The stuff that gets the most attention is often the stuff that’s a little bit less popular. So yeah, I consider it a trade-off.” He added: “What we’re aiming to do is much more ambitious than just get some anger off of our chest. We’re really trying to make climate change a top-tier issue in the American political system. Otherwise, it’ll just get ignored.” For these efforts, Climate Defiance is increasingly feted by political figures and donors. Fundraising parties have been held by the likes of Abigail Disney, the heiress and climate campaigner , and attended by appreciative progressive Democrats. “You have gotten the country’s attention,” Ro Khanna, a Democratic congressman from California, told one of the fundraisers . “People in Congress are talking about you. Senators are talking about you. The president is talking about you. And remember this, the future is with you.” Even John Podesta, Biden’s top climate envoy, who has had several events interrupted by Climate Defiance, has engaged with the group, agreeing to meet them at the White House for talks last year. Podesta called the group a “pain in the ass” and complained that it did not protest against enough Republicans, Greenberg said. Podesta was contacted about the comments. But will any of this make a difference? Being hounded by climate activists may have helped nudge the Biden administration to pause new gas exports , but the influence is more opaque when it comes to the broader American public, who are increasingly worried about the ravages of heatwaves, wildfires and flooding but still mostly consider the climate crisis as a background issue when it comes to voting. “We know historically that radical action can inspire other people to join more moderate components of the movement, but most research on this was done before social media,” said Fisher. “We don’t know how well videos saying ‘eat shit’ will work out yet. It’s frustrating.” ‘Ecocidal pyromaniac’ The protests may even backfire with some voters who consider them to be counter-productive or even violent, as evidenced in some of the negative reactions to a brawl that erupted last week after Climate Defiance activists rushed a stage where Lisa Murkowski, a Republican senator, was speaking. Murkowski is a “murderer” and an “ecocidal pyromaniac”, according to the group, which in its confrontations connects politicians who have supported fossil fuel interests to the harms of the climate crisis. For now, the currency of success is measured in video views and in how normalized protes
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
Humza Yousaf in peril as Greens say they will back no confidence motion
Humza Yousaf will now be forced into a series of deals with his internal critics. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/PA View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf will now be forced into a series of deals with his internal critics. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/PA This article is more than 1 year old Humza Yousaf in peril as Greens say they will back no confidence motion This article is more than 1 year old Former coalition partners’ decision brings Scottish first minister to brink of losing vote, which could make his position untenable Explainer: what was the SNP and Greens’ deal? Humza Yousaf could be forced to quit as Scotland’s first minister after the Scottish Greens announced they would back a motion of no confidence against him at Holyrood. The Scottish National party’s former coalition partners declared they would vote next week against the man who had “betrayed” them, hours after he unilaterally ended their power-sharing deal. Yousaf stunned allies and opponents on Thursday morning by announcing he was suddenly axing the arrangement with the Greens signed by Nicola Sturgeon in 2021, hailed then as a new era in consensus politics. He called in Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater – the Scottish Greens’ co-leaders and junior ministers in his government – early in the morning to tell them they had been sacked and that he was ripping up the agreement. The move – quickly denounced by Harvie and Slater as “cowardly” and “weak” – followed mounting anger within the SNP about a host of electorally unpopular policies that Yousaf’s internal critics believe have been forced on the party by the Bute House coalition agreement. His decision was then rubber-stamped by an emergency cabinet meeting, with Harvie and Slater absent, at 8.30am, triggering a dramatic series of events that culminated in the Greens announcing they would support a Conservative no confidence motion scheduled for next week. “It is very clear that Humza Yousaf has decided to burn his bridges with a progressive pro-independence majority that was established by the Bute House agreement,” Harvie told BBC Radio Scotland . View image in fullscreen Lorna Slater and Patrick Harvie, co-leaders of the Scottish Green party, speaking to the media after the dissolution of the Bute House agreement. Photograph: Lesley Martin/PA That brings Yousaf, who only became first minister in April 2023 , to the brink of defeat, forcing him into a series of deals with his internal critics, seven of whom rebelled in a parliamentary vote earlier this week, and his nationalist rivals in the centre-right Alba party set up by Yousaf’s fiercest critic, the former SNP first minister Alex Salmond. The SNP is two votes short of a majority at Holyrood. Yousaf now has to rally every vote from his deeply split party and secure the backing of a former SNP minister, Ash Regan, who defected to Alba last October in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender reform and its soft-pedalling on independence. If the result is tied, Holyrood’s presiding officer, Alison Johnstone, a former Green MSP, will have to make a casting vote in favour of Yousaf, under a protocol that presiding officers vote for the status quo. Holyrood officials made clear that as the vote is not binding, under the Scottish parliament’s rules it would be up to the first minister to decide how to respond. However, losing a vote of no confidence so close to a general election in which the SNP could lose dozens of seats to Labour could make his position untenable. Harvie and Slater later told reporters at Holyrood they could not envisage working with Yousaf on new policies or legislation after his earlier betrayal. Harvie said the full Scottish Greens parliamentary group had decided unanimously to support the no confidence motion, albeit with a “heavy heart”, adding that Yousaf had chosen to “capitulate” to socially and economically conservative voices in the SNP. He added that the Bute House agreement had been a confidence and supply arrangement with very clear processes for sorting out policy disagreements. However, he said Yousaf “chose to rip it up, and that can’t be consequence-free”. Slater said: “When we voted for Humza Yousaf’s appointment last year, it was on the basis that we would continue to work together to deliver the progressive policy programme as laid out in the Bute House agreement. “[His] decision today to end that agreement has without doubt called into question the delivery of that programme. It came with no reassurance that his minority government would continue with these objectives. And it abruptly ends the pro-independence majority government which the public voted for, and which members of both parties supported.” The catalyst for the crisis had been his government’s decision last week to abandon its “world-leading” target to cut Scotland’s carbon emissions by 75% by 2030, a move that provoked an open rebellion by Scottish Green party members. That rebellion in turn forced Harvie and Slater to agree to an emergency vote by the Scottish Green party on staying in government – a concession that rattled Yousaf and immediately raised questions about the coalition’s viability. The first minister, who is facing the loss of dozens of seats to Labour in the general election, said after the cabinet meeting on Thursday that the Bute House agreement had “served its purpose”. It had come to “its natural conclusion” and no longer gave his government the stability it needed, he said. He made clear the SNP would soon abandon or water down some policies it had previously championed, now that government policy was no longer framed by the agreement. “We will of course have to be very wise and careful around the battles that we choose to fight, and we will be absolutely and entirely focused on the people of Scotland’s priorities,” he said. The first minister insisted he was proud of what the coalition with the Greens had achieved, including nationalising rail services, taking 100,000 children out of poverty, bolstering green energy production and cutting taxes for the poorest. View image in fullscreen Douglas Ross, the Scottish Conservative leader, during Thursday’s first minister’s questions. Photograph: Ken Jack/Getty Images However, later, during a fractious and rowdy session of first minister’s questions at Holyrood, it became clear Yousaf’s government faced much greater instability. Labour used the session to call for a snap Holyrood election. Douglas Ross, the Scottish Conservative leader, then announced that the Tories would be tabling the vote of no confidence. Yousaf was “not fit for office”, Ross said. “We said at the beginning this was a coalition of chaos and it has ended in chaos.” Speaking as a backbench MSP for the first time in nearly three years, Harvie accused the first minister of caving in to rightwing forces in Scottish nationalism and in parliament. He named Salmond, who is widely believed to be orchestrating attacks on Yousaf’s leadership; Fergus Ewing, the most vociferous SNP critic of the Greens deal; and Ross. “Who does the first minister think he has pleased most today – Douglas Ross, Fergus Ewing or Alex Salmond? And which of them does he think he can rely on for a majority in parliament now?” Harvie asked. He dismissed Yousaf’s assurances earlier in the day that he still wanted to collaborate with the Greens on climate policy, fair taxation and anti-poverty measures. “That has significant consequences for how the Scottish Greens position ourselves in parliament, and the first minister cannot rely on Green support while being dictated to by forces on the right,” Harvie said. Explore more on these topics Humza Yousaf Scottish National party (SNP) Green party Scottish politics Scotland news Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf will now be forced into a series of deals with his internal critics. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/PA View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf will now be forced into a series of deals with his internal critics. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/PA This article is more than 1 year old Humza Yousaf in peril as Greens say they will back no confidence motion This article is more than 1 year old Former coalition partners’ decision brings Scottish first minister to brink of losing vote, which could make his position untenable Explainer: what was the SNP and Greens’ deal? Humza Yousaf could be forced to quit as Scotland’s first minister after the Scottish Greens announced they would back a motion of no confidence against him at Holyrood. The Scottish National party’s former coalition partners declared they would vote next week against the man who had “betrayed” them, hours after he unilaterally ended their power-sharing deal. Yousaf stunned allies and opponents on Thursday morning by announcing he was suddenly axing the arrangement with the Greens signed by Nicola Sturgeon in 2021, hailed then as a new era in consensus politics. He called in Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater – the Scottish Greens’ co-leaders and junior ministers in his government – early in the morning to tell them they had been sacked and that he was ripping up the agreement. The move – quickly denounced by Harvie and Slater as “cowardly” and “weak” – followed mounting anger within the SNP about a host of electorally unpopular policies that Yousaf’s internal critics believe have been forced on the party by the Bute House coalition agreement. His decision was then rubber-stamped by an emergency cabinet meeting, with Harvie and Slater absent, at 8.30am, triggering a dramatic series of events that culminated in the Greens announcing they would support a Conservative no confidence motion scheduled for next week. “It is very clear that Humza Yousaf has decided to burn his bridges with a progressive pro-independence majority that was established by the Bute House agreement,” Harvie told BBC Radio Scotland . View image in fullscreen Lorna Slater and Patrick Harvie, co-leaders of the Scottish Green party, speaking to the media after the dissolution of the Bute House agreement. Photograph: Lesley Martin/PA That brings Yousaf, who only became first minister in April 2023 , to the brink of defeat, forcing him into a series of deals with his internal critics, seven of whom rebelled in a parliamentary vote earlier this week, and his nationalist rivals in the centre-right Alba party set up by Yousaf’s fiercest critic, the former SNP first minister Alex Salmond. The SNP is two votes short of a majority at Holyrood. Yousaf now has to rally every vote from his deeply split party and secure the backing of a former SNP minister, Ash Regan, who defected to Alba last October in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender reform and its soft-pedalling on independence. If the result is tied, Holyrood’s presiding officer, Alison Johnstone, a former Green MSP, will have to make a casting vote in favour of Yousaf, under a protocol that presiding officers vote for the status quo. Holyrood officials made clear that as the vote is not binding, under the Scottish parliament’s rules it would be up to the first minister to decide how to respond. However, losing a vote of no confidence so close to a general election in which the SNP could lose dozens of seats to Labour could make his position untenable. Harvie and Slater later told reporters at Holyrood they could not envisage working with Yousaf on new policies or legislation after his earlier betrayal. Harvie said the full Scottish Greens parliamentary group had decided unanimously to support the no confidence motion, albeit with a “heavy heart”, adding that Yousaf had chosen to “capitulate” to socially and economically conservative voices in the SNP. He added that the Bute House agreement had been a confidence and supply arrangement with very clear processes for sorting out policy disagreements. However, he said Yousaf “chose to rip it up, and that can’t be consequence-free”. Slater said: “When we voted for Humza Yousaf’s appointment last year, it was on the basis that we would continue to work together to deliver the progressive policy programme as laid out in the Bute House agreement. “[His] decision today to end that agreement has without doubt called into question the delivery of that programme. It came with no reassurance that his minority government would continue with these objectives. And it abruptly ends the pro-independence majority government which the public voted for, and which members of both parties supported.” The catalyst for the crisis had been his government’s decision last week to abandon its “world-leading” target to cut Scotland’s carbon emissions by 75% by 2030, a move that provoked an open rebellion by Scottish Green party members. That rebellion in turn forced Harvie and Slater to agree to an emergency vote by the Scottish Green party on staying in government – a concession that rattled Yousaf and immediately raised questions about the coalition’s viability. The first minister, who is facing the loss of dozens of seats to Labour in the general election, said after the cabinet meeting on Thursday that the Bute House agreement had “served its purpose”. It had come to “its natural conclusion” and no longer gave his government the stability it needed, he said. He made clear the SNP would soon abandon or water down some policies it had previously championed, now that government policy was no longer framed by the agreement. “We will of course have to be very wise and careful around the battles that we choose to fight, and we will be absolutely and entirely focused on the people of Scotland’s priorities,” he said. The first minister insisted he was proud of what the coalition with the Greens had achieved, including nationalising rail services, taking 100,000 children out of poverty, bolstering green energy production and cutting taxes for the poorest. View image in fullscreen Douglas Ross, the Scottish Conservative leader, during Thursday’s first minister’s questions. Photograph: Ken Jack/Getty Images However, later, during a fractious and rowdy session of first minister’s questions at Holyrood, it became clear Yousaf’s government faced much greater instability. Labour used the session to call for a snap Holyrood election. Douglas Ross, the Scottish Conservative leader, then announced that the Tories would be tabling the vote of no confidence. Yousaf was “not fit for office”, Ross said. “We said at the beginning this was a coalition of chaos and it has ended in chaos.” Speaking as a backbench MSP for the first time in nearly three years, Harvie accused the first minister of caving in to rightwing forces in Scottish nationalism and in parliament. He named Salmond, who is widely believed to be orchestrating attacks on Yousaf’s leadership; Fergus Ewing, the most vociferous SNP critic of the Greens deal; and Ross. “Who does the first minister think he has pleased most today – Douglas Ross, Fergus Ewing or Alex Salmond? And which of them does he think he can rely on for a majority in parliament now?” Harvie asked. He dismissed Yousaf’s assurances earlier in the day that he still wanted to collaborate with the Greens on climate policy, fair taxation and anti-poverty measures. “That has significant consequences for how the Scottish Greens position ourselves in parliament, and the first minister cannot rely on Green support while being dictated to by forces on the right,” Harvie said. Explore more on these topics Humza Yousaf Scottish National party (SNP) Green party Scottish politics Scotland news Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf will now be forced into a series of deals with his internal critics. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/PA View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf will now be forced into a series of deals with his internal critics. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/PA Humza Yousaf will now be forced into a series of deals with his internal critics. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/PA View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf will now be forced into a series of deals with his internal critics. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/PA Humza Yousaf will now be forced into a series of deals with his internal critics. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/PA View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf will now be forced into a series of deals with his internal critics. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/PA Humza Yousaf will now be forced into a series of deals with his internal critics. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/PA View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf will now be forced into a series of deals with his internal critics. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/PA Humza Yousaf will now be forced into a series of deals with his internal critics. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/PA Humza Yousaf will now be forced into a series of deals with his internal critics. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/PA This article is more than 1 year old Humza Yousaf in peril as Greens say they will back no confidence motion This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Humza Yousaf in peril as Greens say they will back no confidence motion This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Humza Yousaf in peril as Greens say they will back no confidence motion This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Former coalition partners’ decision brings Scottish first minister to brink of losing vote, which could make his position untenable Explainer: what was the SNP and Greens’ deal? Former coalition partners’ decision brings Scottish first minister to brink of losing vote, which could make his position untenable Explainer: what was the SNP and Greens’ deal? Former coalition partners’ decision brings Scottish first minister to brink of losing vote, which could make his position untenable Humza Yousaf could be forced to quit as Scotland’s first minister after the Scottish Greens announced they would back a motion of no confidence against him at Holyrood. The Scottish National party’s former coalition partners declared they would vote next week against the man who had “betrayed” them, hours after he unilaterally ended their power-sharing deal. Yousaf stunned allies and opponents on Thursday morning by announcing he was suddenly axing the arrangement with the Greens signed by Nicola Sturgeon in 2021, hailed then as a new era in consensus politics. He called in Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater – the Scottish Greens’ co-leaders and junior ministers in his government – early in the morning to tell them they had been sacked and that he was ripping up the agreement. The move – quickly denounced by Harvie and Slater as “cowardly” and “weak” – followed mounting anger within the SNP about a host of electorally unpopular policies that Yousaf’s internal critics believe have been forced on the party by the Bute House coalition agreement. His decision was then rubber-stamped by an emergency cabinet meeting, with Harvie and Slater absent, at 8.30am, triggering a dramatic series of events that culminated in the Greens announcing they would support a Conservative no confidence motion scheduled for next week. “It is very clear that Humza Yousaf has decided to burn his bridges with a progressive pro-independence majority that was established by the Bute House agreement,” Harvie told BBC Radio Scotland . View image in fullscreen Lorna Slater and Patrick Harvie, co-leaders of the Scottish Green party, speaking to the media after the dissolution of the Bute House agreement. Photograph: Lesley Martin/PA That brings Yousaf, who only became first minister in April 2023 , to the brink of defeat, forcing him into a series of deals with his internal critics, seven of whom rebelled in a parliamentary vote earlier this week, and his nationalist rivals in the centre-right Alba party set up by Yousaf’s fiercest critic, the former SNP first minister Alex Salmond. The SNP is two votes short of a majority at Holyrood. Yousaf now has to rally every vote from his deeply split party and secure the backing of a former SNP minister, Ash Regan, who defected to Alba last October in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender reform and its soft-pedalling on independence. If the result is tied, Holyrood’s presiding officer, Alison Johnstone, a former Green MSP, will have to make a casting vote in favour of Yousaf, under a protocol that presiding officers vote for the status quo. Holyrood officials made clear that as the vote is not binding, under the Scottish parliament’s rules it would be up to the first minister to decide how to respond. However, losing a vote of no confidence so close to a general election in which the SNP could lose dozens of seats to Labour could make his position untenable. Harvie and Slater later told reporters at Holyrood they could not envisage working with Yousaf on new policies or legislation after his earlier betrayal. Harvie said the full Scottish Greens parliamentary group had decided unanimously to support the no confidence motion, albeit with a “heavy heart”, adding that Yousaf had chosen to “capitulate” to socially and economically conservative voices in the SNP. He added that the Bute House agreement had been a confidence and supply arrangement with very clear processes for sorting out policy disagreements. However, he said Yousaf “chose to rip it up, and that can’t be consequence-free”. Slater said: “When we voted for Humza Yousaf’s appointment last year, it was on the basis that we would continue to work together to deliver the progressive policy programme as laid out in the Bute House agreement. “[His] decision today to end that agreement has without doubt called into question the delivery of that programme. It came with no reassurance that his minority government would continue with these objectives. And it abruptly ends the pro-independence majority government which the public voted for, and which members of both parties supported.” The catalyst for the crisis had been his government’s decision last week to abandon its “world-leading” target to cut Scotland’s carbon emissions by 75% by 2030, a move that provoked an open rebellion by Scottish Green party members. That rebellion in turn forced Harvie and Slater to agree to an emergency vote by the Scottish Green party on staying in government – a concession that rattled Yousaf and immediately raised questions about the coalition’s viability. The first minister, who is facing the loss of dozens of seats to Labour in the general election, said after the cabinet meeting on Thursday that the Bute House agreement had “served its purpose”. It had come to “its natural conclusion” and no longer gave his government the stability it needed, he said. He made clear the SNP would soon abandon or water down some policies it had previously championed, now that government policy was no longer framed by the agreement. “We will of course have to be very wise and careful around the battles that we choose to fight, and we will be absolutely and entirely focused on the people of Scotland’s priorities,” he said. The first minister insisted he was proud of what the coalition with the Greens had achieved, including nationalising rail services, taking 100,000 children out of poverty, bolstering green energy production and cutting taxes for the poorest. View image in fullscreen Douglas Ross, the Scottish Conservative leader, during Thursday’s first minister’s questions. Photograph: Ken Jack/Getty Images However, later, during a fractious and rowdy session of first minister’s questions at Holyrood, it became clear Yousaf’s government faced much greater instability. Labour used the session to call for a snap Holyrood election. Douglas Ross, the Scottish Conservative leader, then announced that the Tories would be tabling the vote of no confidence. Yousaf was “not fit for office”, Ross said. “We said at the beginning this was a coalition of chaos and it has ended in chaos.” Speaking as a backbench MSP for the first time in nearly three years, Harvie accused the first minister of caving in to rightwing forces in Scottish nationalism and in parliament. He named Salmond, who is widely believed to be orchestrating attacks on Yousaf’s leadership; Fergus Ewing, the most vociferous SNP critic of the Greens deal; and Ross. “Who does the first minister think he has pleased most today – Douglas Ross, Fergus Ewing or Alex Salmond? And which of them does he think he can rely on for a majority in parliament now?” Harvie asked. He dismissed Yousaf’s assurances earlier in the day that he still wanted to collaborate with the Greens on climate policy, fair taxation and anti-poverty measures. “That has significant consequences for how the Scottish Greens position ourselves in parliament, and the first minister cannot rely on Green support while being dictated to by forces on the right,” Harvie said. Explore more on these topics Humza Yousaf Scottish National party (SNP) Green party Scottish politics Scotland news Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf could be forced to quit as Scotland’s first minister after the Scottish Greens announced they would back a motion of no confidence against him at Holyrood. The Scottish National party’s former coalition partners declared they would vote next week against the man who had “betrayed” them, hours after he unilaterally ended their power-sharing deal. Yousaf stunned allies and opponents on Thursday morning by announcing he was suddenly axing the arrangement with the Greens signed by Nicola Sturgeon in 2021, hailed then as a new era in consensus politics. He called in Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater – the Scottish Greens’ co-leaders and junior ministers in his government – early in the morning to tell them they had been sacked and that he was ripping up the agreement. The move – quickly denounced by Harvie and Slater as “cowardly” and “weak” – followed mounting anger within the SNP about a host of electorally unpopular policies that Yousaf’s internal critics believe have been forced on the party by the Bute House coalition agreement. His decision was then rubber-stamped by an emergency cabinet meeting, with Harvie and Slater absent, at 8.30am, triggering a dramatic series of events that culminated in the Greens announcing they would support a Conservative no confidence motion scheduled for next week. “It is very clear that Humza Yousaf has decided to burn his bridges with a progressive pro-independence majority that was established by the Bute House agreement,” Harvie told BBC Radio Scotland . View image in fullscreen Lorna Slater and Patrick Harvie, co-leaders of the Scottish Green party, speaking to the media after the dissolution of the Bute House agreement. Photograph: Lesley Martin/PA That brings Yousaf, who only became first minister in April 2023 , to the brink of defeat, forcing him into a series of deals with his internal critics, seven of whom rebelled in a parliamentary vote earlier this week, and his nationalist rivals in the centre-right Alba party set up by Yousaf’s fiercest critic, the former SNP first minister Alex Salmond. The SNP is two votes short of a majority at Holyrood. Yousaf now has to rally every vote from his deeply split party and secure the backing of a former SNP minister, Ash Regan, who defected to Alba last October in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender reform and its soft-pedalling on independence. If the result is tied, Holyrood’s presiding officer, Alison Johnstone, a former Green MSP, will have to make a casting vote in favour of Yousaf, under a protocol that presiding officers vote for the status quo. Holyrood officials made clear that as the vote is not binding, under the Scottish parliament’s rules it would be up to the first minister to decide how to respond. However, losing a vote of no confidence so close to a general election in which the SNP could lose dozens of seats to Labour could make his position untenable. Harvie and Slater later told reporters at Holyrood they could not envisage working with Yousaf on new policies or legislation after his earlier betrayal. Harvie said the full Scottish Greens parliamentary group had decided unanimously to support the no confidence motion, albeit with a “heavy heart”, adding that Yousaf had chosen to “capitulate” to socially and economically conservative voices in the SNP. He added that the Bute House agreement had been a confidence and supply arrangement with very clear processes for sorting out policy disagreements. However, he said Yousaf “chose to rip it up, and that can’t be consequence-free”. Slater said: “When we voted for Humza Yousaf’s appointment last year, it was on the basis that we would continue to work together to deliver the progressive policy programme as laid out in the Bute House agreement. “[His] decision today to end that agreement has without doubt called into question the delivery of that programme. It came with no reassurance that his minority government would continue with these objectives. And it abruptly ends the pro-independence majority government which the public voted for, and which members of both parties supported.” The catalyst for the crisis had been his government’s decision last week to abandon its “world-leading” target to cut Scotland’s carbon emissions by 75% by 2030, a move that provoked an open rebellion by Scottish Green party members. That rebellion in turn forced Harvie and Slater to agree to an emergency vote by the Scottish Green party on staying in government – a concession that rattled Yousaf and immediately raised questions about the coalition’s viability. The first minister, who is facing the loss of dozens of seats to Labour in the general election, said after the cabinet meeting on Thursday that the Bute House agreement had “served its purpose”. It had come to “its natural conclusion” and no longer gave his government the stability it needed, he said. He made clear the SNP would soon abandon or water down some policies it had previously championed, now that government policy was no longer framed by the agreement. “We will of course have to be very wise and careful around the battles that we choose to fight, and we will be absolutely and entirely focused on the people of Scotland’s priorities,” he said. The first minister insisted he was proud of what the coalition with the Greens had achieved, including nationalising rail services, taking 100,000 children out of poverty, bolstering green energy production and cutting taxes for the poorest. View image in fullscreen Douglas Ross, the Scottish Conservative leader, during Thursday’s first minister’s questions. Photograph: Ken Jack/Getty Images However, later, during a fractious and rowdy session of first minister’s questions at Holyrood, it became clear Yousaf’s government faced much greater instability. Labour used the session to call for a snap Holyrood election. Douglas Ross, the Scottish Conservative leader, then announced that the Tories would be tabling the vote of no confidence. Yousaf was “not fit for office”, Ross said. “We said at the beginning this was a coalition of chaos and it has ended in chaos.” Speaking as a backbench MSP for the first time in nearly three years, Harvie accused the first minister of caving in to rightwing forces in Scottish nationalism and in parliament. He named Salmond, who is widely believed to be orchestrating attacks on Yousaf’s leadership; Fergus Ewing, the most vociferous SNP critic of the Greens deal; and Ross. “Who does the first minister think he has pleased most today – Douglas Ross, Fergus Ewing or Alex Salmond? And which of them does he think he can rely on for a majority in parliament now?” Harvie asked. He dismissed Yousaf’s assurances earlier in the day that he still wanted to collaborate with the Greens on climate policy, fair taxation and anti-poverty measures. “That has significant consequences for how the Scottish Greens position ourselves in parliament, and the first minister cannot rely on Green support while being dictated to by forces on the right,” Harvie said. Explore more on these topics Humza Yousaf Scottish National party (SNP) Green party Scottish politics Scotland news Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf could be forced to quit as Scotland’s first minister after the Scottish Greens announced they would back a motion of no confidence against him at Holyrood. The Scottish National party’s former coalition partners declared they would vote next week against the man who had “betrayed” them, hours after he unilaterally ended their power-sharing deal. Yousaf stunned allies and opponents on Thursday morning by announcing he was suddenly axing the arrangement with the Greens signed by Nicola Sturgeon in 2021, hailed then as a new era in consensus politics. He called in Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater – the Scottish Greens’ co-leaders and junior ministers in his government – early in the morning to tell them they had been sacked and that he was ripping up the agreement. The move – quickly denounced by Harvie and Slater as “cowardly” and “weak” – followed mounting anger within the SNP about a host of electorally unpopular policies that Yousaf’s internal critics believe have been forced on the party by the Bute House coalition agreement. His decision was then rubber-stamped by an emergency cabinet meeting, with Harvie and Slater absent, at 8.30am, triggering a dramatic series of events that culminated in the Greens announcing they would support a Conservative no confidence motion scheduled for next week. “It is very clear that Humza Yousaf has decided to burn his bridges with a progressive pro-independence majority that was established by the Bute House agreement,” Harvie told BBC Radio Scotland . View image in fullscreen Lorna Slater and Patrick Harvie, co-leaders of the Scottish Green party, speaking to the media after the dissolution of the Bute House agreement. Photograph: Lesley Martin/PA That brings Yousaf, who only became first minister in April 2023 , to the brink of defeat, forcing him into a series of deals with his internal critics, seven of whom rebelled in a parliamentary vote earlier this week, and his nationalist rivals in the centre-right Alba party set up by Yousaf’s fiercest critic, the former SNP first minister Alex Salmond. The SNP is two votes short of a majority at Holyrood. Yousaf now has to rally every vote from his deeply split party and secure the backing of a former SNP minister, Ash Regan, who defected to Alba last October in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender reform and its soft-pedalling on independence. If the result is tied, Holyrood’s presiding officer, Alison Johnstone, a former Green MSP, will have to make a casting vote in favour of Yousaf, under a protocol that presiding officers vote for the status quo. Holyrood officials made clear that as the vote is not binding, under the Scottish parliament’s rules it would be up to the first minister to decide how to respond. However, losing a vote of no confidence so close to a general election in which the SNP could lose dozens of seats to Labour could make his position untenable. Harvie and Slater later told reporters at Holyrood they could not envisage working with Yousaf on new policies or legislation after his earlier betrayal. Harvie said the full Scottish Greens parliamentary group had decided unanimously to support the no confidence motion, albeit with a “heavy heart”, adding that Yousaf had chosen to “capitulate” to socially and economically conservative voices in the SNP. He added that the Bute House agreement had been a confidence and supply arrangement with very clear processes for sorting out policy disagreements. However, he said Yousaf “chose to rip it up, and that can’t be consequence-free”. Slater said: “When we voted for Humza Yousaf’s appointment last year, it was on the basis that we would continue to work together to deliver the progressive policy programme as laid out in the Bute House agreement. “[His] decision today to end that agreement has without doubt called into question the delivery of that programme. It came with no reassurance that his minority government would continue with these objectives. And it abruptly ends the pro-independence majority government which the public voted for, and which members of both parties supported.” The catalyst for the crisis had been his government’s decision last week to abandon its “world-leading” target to cut Scotland’s carbon emissions by 75% by 2030, a move that provoked an open rebellion by Scottish Green party members. That rebellion in turn forced Harvie and Slater to agree to an emergency vote by the Scottish Green party on staying in government – a concession that rattled Yousaf and immediately raised questions about the coalition’s viability. The first minister, who is facing the loss of dozens of seats to Labour in the general election, said after the cabinet meeting on Thursday that the Bute House agreement had “served its purpose”. It had come to “its natural conclusion” and no longer gave his government the stability it needed, he said. He made clear the SNP would soon abandon or water down some policies it had previously championed, now that government policy was no longer framed by the agreement. “We will of course have to be very wise and careful around the battles that we choose to fight, and we will be absolutely and entirely focused on the people of Scotland’s priorities,” he said. The first minister insisted he was proud of what the coalition with the Greens had achieved, including nationalising rail services, taking 100,000 children out of poverty, bolstering green energy production and cutting taxes for the poorest. View image in fullscreen Douglas Ross, the Scottish Conservative leader, during Thursday’s first minister’s questions. Photograph: Ken Jack/Getty Images However, later, during a fractious and rowdy session of first minister’s questions at Holyrood, it became clear Yousaf’s government faced much greater instability. Labour used the session to call for a snap Holyrood election. Douglas Ross, the Scottish Conservative leader, then announced that the Tories would be tabling the vote of no confidence. Yousaf was “not fit for office”, Ross said. “We said at the beginning this was a coalition of chaos and it has ended in chaos.” Speaking as a backbench MSP for the first time in nearly three years, Harvie accused the first minister of caving in to rightwing forces in Scottish nationalism and in parliament. He named Salmond, who is widely believed to be orchestrating attacks on Yousaf’s leadership; Fergus Ewing, the most vociferous SNP critic of the Greens deal; and Ross. “Who does the first minister think he has pleased most today – Douglas Ross, Fergus Ewing or Alex Salmond? And which of them does he think he can rely on for a majority in parliament now?” Harvie asked. He dismissed Yousaf’s assurances earlier in the day that he still wanted to collaborate with the Greens on climate policy, fair taxation and anti-poverty measures. “That has significant consequences for how the Scottish Greens position ourselves in parliament, and the first minister cannot rely on Green support while being dictated to by forces on the right,” Harvie said. Humza Yousaf could be forced to quit as Scotland’s first minister after the Scottish Greens announced they would back a motion of no confidence against him at Holyrood. The Scottish National party’s former coalition partners declared they would vote next week against the man who had “betrayed” them, hours after he unilaterally ended their power-sharing deal. Yousaf stunned allies and opponents on Thursday morning by announcing he was suddenly axing the arrangement with the Greens signed by Nicola Sturgeon in 2021, hailed then as a new era in consensus politics. He called in Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater – the Scottish Greens’ co-leaders and junior ministers in his government – early in the morning to tell them they had been sacked and that he was ripping up the agreement. The move – quickly denounced by Harvie and Slater as “cowardly” and “weak” – followed mounting anger within the SNP about a host of electorally unpopular policies that Yousaf’s internal critics believe have been forced on the party by the Bute House coalition agreement. His decision was then rubber-stamped by an emergency cabinet meeting, with Harvie and Slater absent, at 8.30am, triggering a dramatic series of events that culminated in the Greens announcing they would support a Conservative no confidence motion scheduled for next week. “It is very clear that Humza Yousaf has decided to burn his bridges with a progressive pro-independence majority that was established by the Bute House agreement,” Harvie told BBC Radio Scotland . View image in fullscreen Lorna Slater and Patrick Harvie, co-leaders of the Scottish Green party, speaking to the media after the dissolution of the Bute House agreement. Photograph: Lesley Martin/PA That brings Yousaf, who only became first minister in April 2023 , to the brink of defeat, forcing him into a series of deals with his internal critics, seven of whom rebelled in a parliamentary vote earlier this week, and his nationalist rivals in the centre-right Alba party set up by Yousaf’s fiercest critic, the former SNP first minister Alex Salmond. The SNP is two votes short of a majority at Holyrood. Yousaf now has to rally every vote from his deeply split party and secure the backing of a former SNP minister, Ash Regan, who defected to Alba last October in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender reform and its soft-pedalling on independence. If the result is tied, Holyrood’s presiding officer, Alison Johnstone, a former Green MSP, will have to make a casting vote in favour of Yousaf, under a protocol that presiding officers vote for the status quo. Holyrood officials made clear that as the vote is not binding, under the Scottish parliament’s rules it would be up to the first minister to decide how to respond. However, losing a vote of no confidence so close to a general election in which the SNP could lose dozens of seats to Labour could make his position untenable. Harvie and Slater later told reporters at Holyrood they could not envisage working with Yousaf on new policies or legislation after his earlier betrayal. Harvie said the full Scottish Greens parliamentary group had decided unanimously to support the no confidence motion, albeit with a “heavy heart”, adding that Yousaf had chosen to “capitulate” to socially and economically conservative voices in the SNP. He added that the Bute House agreement had been a confidence and supply arrangement with very clear processes for sorting out policy disagreements. However, he said Yousaf “chose to rip it up, and that can’t be consequence-free”. Slater said: “When we voted for Humza Yousaf’s appointment last year, it was on the basis that we would continue to work together to deliver the progressive policy programme as laid out in the Bute House agreement. “[His] decision today to end that agreement has without doubt called into question the delivery of that programme. It came with no reassurance that his minority government would continue with these objectives. And it abruptly ends the pro-independence majority government which the public voted for, and which members of both parties supported.” The catalyst for the crisis had been his government’s decision last week to abandon its “world-leading” target to cut Scotland’s carbon emissions by 75% by 2030, a move that provoked an open rebellion by Scottish Green party members. That rebellion in turn forced Harvie and Slater to agree to an emergency vote by the Scottish Green party on staying in government – a concession that rattled Yousaf and immediately raised questions about the coalition’s viability. The first minister, who is facing the loss of dozens of seats to Labour in the general election, said after the cabinet meeting on Thursday that the Bute House agreement had “served its purpose”. It had come to “its natural conclusion” and no longer gave his government the stability it needed, he said. He made clear the SNP would soon abandon or water down some policies it had previously championed, now that government policy was no longer framed by the agreement. “We will of course have to be very wise and careful around the battles that we choose to fight, and we will be absolutely and entirely focused on the people of Scotland’s priorities,” he said. The first minister insisted he was proud of what the coalition with the Greens had achieved, including nationalising rail services, taking 100,000 children out of poverty, bolstering green energy production and cutting taxes for the poorest. View image in fullscreen Douglas Ross, the Scottish Conservative leader, during Thursday’s first minister’s questions. Photograph: Ken Jack/Getty Images However, later, during a fractious and rowdy session of first minister’s questions at Holyrood, it became clear Yousaf’s government faced much greater instability. Labour used the session to call for a snap Holyrood election. Douglas Ross, the Scottish Conservative leader, then announced that the Tories would be tabling the vote of no confidence. Yousaf was “not fit for office”, Ross said. “We said at the beginning this was a coalition of chaos and it has ended in chaos.” Speaking as a backbench MSP for the first time in nearly three years, Harvie accused the first minister of caving in to rightwing forces in Scottish nationalism and in parliament. He named Salmond, who is widely believed to be orchestrating attacks on Yousaf’s leadership; Fergus Ewing, the most vociferous SNP critic of the Greens deal; and Ross. “Who does the first minister think he has pleased most today – Douglas Ross, Fergus Ewing or Alex Salmond? And which of them does he think he can rely on for a majority in parliament now?” Harvie asked. He dismissed Yousaf’s assurances earlier in the day that he still wanted to collaborate with the Greens on climate policy, fair taxation and anti-poverty measures. “That has significant consequences for how the Scottish Greens position ourselves in parliament, and the first minister cannot rely on Green support while being dictated to by forces on the right,” Harvie said. Humza Yousaf could be forced to quit as Scotland’s first minister after the Scottish Greens announced they would back a motion of no confidence against him at Holyrood. The Scottish National party’s former coalition partners declared they would vote next week against the man who had “betrayed” them, hours after he unilaterally ended their power-sharing deal. Yousaf stunned allies and opponents on Thursday morning by announcing he was suddenly axing the arrangement with the Greens signed by Nicola Sturgeon in 2021, hailed then as a new era in consensus politics. He called in Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater – the Scottish Greens’ co-leaders and junior ministers in his government – early in the morning to tell them they had been sacked and that he was ripping up the agreement. The move – quickly denounced by Harvie and Slater as “cowardly” and “weak” – followed mounting anger within the SNP about a host of electorally unpopular policies that Yousaf’s internal critics believe have been forced on the party by the Bute House coalition agreement. His decision was then rubber-stamped by an emergency cabinet meeting, with Harvie and Slater absent, at 8.30am, triggering a dramatic series of events that culminated in the Greens announcing they would support a Conservative no confidence motion scheduled for next week. “It is very clear that Humza Yousaf has decided to burn his bridges with a progressive pro-independence majority that was established by the Bute House agreement,” Harvie told BBC Radio Scotland . That brings Yousaf, who only became first minister in April 2023 , to the brink of defeat, forcing him into a series of deals with his internal critics, seven of whom rebelled in a parliamentary vote earlier this week, and his nationalist rivals in the centre-right Alba party set up by Yousaf’s fiercest critic, the former SNP first minister Alex Salmond. The SNP is two votes short of a majority at Holyrood. Yousaf now has to rally every vote from his deeply split party and secure the backing of a former SNP minister, Ash Regan, who defected to Alba last October in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender reform and its soft-pedalling on independence. If the result is tied, Holyrood’s presiding officer, Alison Johnstone, a former Green MSP, will have to make a casting vote in favour of Yousaf, under a protocol that presiding officers vote for the status quo. Holyrood officials made clear that as the vote is not binding, under the Scottish parliament’s rules it would be up to the first minister to decide how to respond. However, losing a vote of no confidence so close to a general election in which the SNP could lose dozens of seats to Labour could make his position untenable. Harvie and Slater later told reporters at Holyrood they c
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
‘I’ll stay an MP for as long as I can’: Diane Abbott’s tumultuous political journey
Composite: Guardian Design/PA/In Pictures/Getty Britain’s first black female MP faced hostility from the media and political establishment from the start. Nearly 40 years on, she is still not giving up By Andy Beckett S ix weeks ago, the Conservatives’ biggest donor, Frank Hester, was revealed by the Guardian to have spoken at a meeting of his healthcare company, the Phoenix Partnership, about one of Britain’s longest-serving and most pioneering MPs. “You see Diane Abbott on the TV and … you just want to hate all black women,” Hester said. “I think she should be shot.” The meeting had taken place in 2019, when Abbott was Labour’s shadow home secretary. As a lifelong defender of civil liberties, a radical leftwinger and a close ally of the then party leader, Jeremy Corbyn , Abbott was notably different from previous holders of the role. But there was an anger and viciousness to Hester’s remarks, which are being investigated by the police, and also a limit to the Labour support for her that they prompted, which was very striking. On the one hand, Abbott was widely defended against the obvious racism and misogyny – including by many in the party who usually differ with her. The Labour leader, Keir Starmer, said: “Those comments about Diane Abbott are just abhorrent.” He went on to remind the media and voters of her importance: “ Diane has been a trailblazer. She has paved the way for others.” Yet despite such expressions of sympathy and respect, she was not readmitted to the parliamentary Labour party, from which she had been suspended last year, after writing a letter to the Observer seen by many as antisemitic. In divisive times, she is still one of our most loathed and admired politicians. Abbott was Britain’s first black female MP. Yet despite being elected 37 years ago, and steadily increasing her majority until it has become one of the largest in the country, her local and national status remains in some ways unresolved. I’ve lived in her constituency, Hackney North and Stoke Newington, in north-east London, on and off since 1994, and even here I am often told by Labour voters and sometimes members of the local party that she is prickly, self-absorbed, unreliable and difficult to work with. Like Corbyn, and like one of his and her Labour heroes, the late Tony Benn , she inspires and she enrages. In a party that is often cautious, she is part of a bolder, more heretical Labour tradition – a tradition that is often misunderstood or misrepresented, and needs to be better examined. A bbott began to make a political name for herself in the early 1980s, as a prominent member of the new Labour Black Sections campaign . In a white-dominated party, the campaign tried to persuade a highly resistant leadership to let black members set up their own organisations inside Labour, and also to select black parliamentary candidates. Despite postwar immigration, between 1929 and 1983 no British party had had a black or Asian MP. Hackney North seemed an obvious place for a black Labour candidate: almost 40% of its voters were non-white, and it had been held by the party since its creation in 1950. In 1985, after failing to be selected for other, similar seats, Abbott was persuaded to try one more time. For months, Black Sections campaigners and sympathetic white activists worked through the constituency, ward by ward, persuading Labour members to put down and pass motions saying the party needed a black candidate. View image in fullscreen Bernie Grant and Abbott (standing) at the Labour party annual conference in 1988. Photograph: PA/PA Archive/PA Images The problem was, Labour already had a feasible candidate: the sitting MP, Ernie Roberts, a former communist in his early 70s – 40 years older than Abbott – who was widely respected for campaigning against racism and nuclear weapons. Abbott also saw another, more fundamental obstacle. In the eyes of many white leftists, she told me, “black women are never left enough. The big leftwing figures in Britain in the 80s were all white men: Benn, [Ken] Livingstone, [Arthur] Scargill.” It was difficult for many Labour activists to imagine a black woman joining this socialist elite, and that had become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Abbott campaigned hard for the candidacy, but she did not expect to win. More than 100 people, an unusually large number, came to the decisive selection meeting in the art deco council chamber of Hackney town hall. In her speech to the gathering, Abbott shrewdly made both a practical and philosophical argument. She promised to live in the seat if she became its MP, and to open a constituency office. Roberts had done neither. She also argued that choosing her would be a vote for Hackney’s multicultural reality, rather than its past as a partly industrial inner suburb arranged primarily for white men. “I could see people listening, agonising,” she remembered, “because they had been mandated to vote for Roberts, but now knew they had to vote for me.” Roberts got 35 votes: a solid result. But Abbott got 42. “The [local] Labour officials there looked gutted,” she told me. Yet she was elated, and so were people far beyond Hackney. The headline in the Caribbean diaspora newspaper West Indian World was: “Di does it”. For months afterwards Roberts claimed that Abbott’s win was illegitimate because party members mandated to vote for him had acted otherwise. The claim was baseless: Labour rules allowed members to decide for themselves in selection contests. But for rightwing newspapers, the chance to allege a leftwing plot, while also weaponising her blackness, was irresistible. “Black Diane ‘won after vote swap’,” said the Sun. Abbott found the abrupt changes in how she was seen by the media and some in her own party simultaneously ridiculous, dizzying, frustrating and intimidating. “Until I became a parliamentary candidate, I wasn’t leftwing enough,” she told me. “Once I won the selection, I was an extremist.” Her monstering had begun, before she had even stood for parliament. When she did so, at the 1987 general election, the process was as bruising and exhilarating as the selection battle, but on a bigger scale. Her Conservative opponent was Oliver Letwin, then a young Thatcherite. Despite having been educated at Eton, he presented himself as a charming underdog to the many journalists who visited the constituency, while accusing Abbott of being, the Times reported, “a revolutionary with no genuine allegiance to British parliamentary democracy”. View image in fullscreen Abbott in 1986. Photograph: Keith Bernstein/Rex The Hackney campaign was unusually confrontational. On 3 June, eight days before the election, the Conservative campaign office was firebombed. The Tory chairman, Norman Tebbit, rushed to Hackney and insinuated that the arson might have been the doing of “the extreme left”. Abbott’s own campaign office had its glass front smashed. The constituency was full of far-right, far-left and anarchist groups that might have been responsible for these attacks, yet no one was arrested. The racist National Front protested in the constituency against Abbott’s candidacy. Senior Labour figures stayed away from her campaign, while some local white activists would not canvass for her. Abbott’s response was to emphasise rather than play down her identity. She had campaign posters and leaflets designed that were dominated by her photo rather than the Labour logo. Shortly before polling day, she agreed to be interviewed by the New York Times, even though its readership was irrelevant to the contest. She met the reporter not in Hackney but miles away, in the River room of the Savoy hotel, one of the swankiest dining spaces in London, which she had never been to before. Dressed in bright, socialist red, she ordered the biggest breakfast on the menu. She talked about her admiration for black American iconoclasts such as Angela Davis and Malcolm X, and said that, after “a time lag”, black British politics was about to undergo a similar upsurge. Continuing in a very confident future tense, she added: “I’ll be representing a strong anti-racist, anti-fascist district, an old immigrant stronghold.” On election day, she was nervous. The result was declared at 3am. By then it was becoming clear that Margaret Thatcher was going to win her third consecutive election, and by another landslide. But in the packed room where Abbott made her victory speech, that was all momentarily forgotten. She wore bright red again, with pearls, and her hair in long braids. She was not going to fit in with previous notions about how an MP should dress. After a big intake of breath, she spoke in a very loud voice. “I have come a long way to stand here before you tonight,” she said. “And I am aware that a lot of hope, not just in Hackney, but across the country, rides on our victory tonight. I hope and believe that I can fulfil those hopes.” A s an MP, however, Abbott would spend more than a quarter of a century struggling to access power in the Labour party. Like others on the left, she found parliament a difficult place to convert her public profile into political gains. But the inhospitality she faced there was deeper, as she discovered from the start. For months after arriving in the Commons, she was not given a parliamentary office. Many Palace of Westminster staff simply refused to believe that she and the three other black or Asian MPs elected in 1987 – Bernie Grant, Paul Boateng and Keith Vaz – were MPs at all. They had hardly arrived in the Commons as unknown figures: their election campaigns and victories had got plenty of media attention. Still in her early 30s, Abbott was suddenly one of the most famous young women in the country. Yet in parliament, she and the other three non-white MPs were often stopped by security staff and other attendants, asked what they were doing in the building, and told to identify themselves. Sometimes, they were manhandled. Black and Asian constituents whom the MPs invited to visit them in the Commons often got the same treatment. View image in fullscreen A Conservative advert attacking Labour figures including Abbott and Ken Livingstone during the 1987 general election campaign. Photograph: The Conservative Party Archive/Getty Images “In those days, all the Commons staff were white,” Abbott told me. “Even the catering staff were white. Black MPs provoked fear and hostility.” Her gender singled her out further: “I was the only black woman in parliament for 10 years.” Even MPs from her own party often treated her as an alien. “I was in the queue in the Commons tea room behind another Labour MP. Trying to chat to him, I said: ‘Where are you going for Christmas?’ He said somewhere in the north of England. When he asked where I was going, I said: ‘Jamaica.’ “And he said: ‘Do they celebrate Christmas in Jamaica?’” She was used to operating in white environments, but in the Commons the scrutiny was even more intense than usual. She tried to tune it out: “Life had taught me, you just had to get on with things. If you allow yourself to be derailed by racism, you won’t do anything.” At times, she turned the long history of prejudice in the Commons back against the racists. At the official opening of parliament after the 1987 election, she deliberately sat in the spot on the opposition benches that had once been habitually occupied by Enoch Powell. A few white MPs tried to make her feel she belonged. “Jeremy [Corbyn] was very supportive,” she recalled. While others kept their distance, he sat with Abbott, Grant, Boateng and Vaz in the Commons. Tony Banks , a more flamboyant leftwing MP, took her to the Smoking Room, a Commons bar long associated with Conservative MPs and boozy machismo, on her very first day. Pointedly, he bought her a bottle of champagne. Support also came from outside parliament, from black people and others not just in her constituency but all over the country. As she had acknowledged on election night, “a lot of hope” had been invested in her. With this hope came demands. There were thousands of letters, telephone calls, requests for meetings, requests for her to intervene in people’s troubles, to take a stand on race-related issues. She and the three other black and Asian MPs were expected to act as role models and to clear the way for others to follow. At times, the burden of all these roles was too much. Often during the first few months after being elected, Abbott said later, she was in a kind of daze. “She used to ring me up all the time,” an old ally of hers from the Labour Black Sections movement told me. “She was quite needy.” The media continued to regard Abbott with a mixture of fascination and hostility. For women’s magazines, softer television interview programmes and newspapers read by the Jamaican diaspora such as the Gleaner, she was a pioneer to be praised and defended. Meanwhile, for some Tory journalists she was either an exotic novelty or an extremist, rather than just a modern Londoner. In November 1987, Colin Welch wrote leeringly and mock-seriously: “It’s illegal to call her dusky or alluring.” The day after she won Hackney North, a leading article in the Times warned that “the far left” had “chalked up considerable gains” in the election, citing wins by Bernie Grant, Ken Livingstone and Diane Abbott – “all extremists [who] stand between the Labour party and any prospect of a Labour government”. The next day, another Times leader described the Labour MPs as “ambitious demagogues claiming to represent blacks, homosexuals, women and so on”. The newspaper declared that Neil Kinnock, the Labour leader, “must … expel them”. A week after being elected, Abbott appeared on BBC One’s Question Time. One of the other panellists was Cyril Smith, a Liberal MP then generally seen as a jolly, harmless figure, though after his death revealed to be a prolific child abuser. Smith argued that one of the reasons for Labour’s unpopularity was “Diane Abbott and people like her”. When the applause from the studio audience had died down, Abbott responded. “If Mr Smith believes that having black people in parliament for the first time is in some sense a backward step,” she said, “thousands of people that voted for me in Hackney North would disagree.” As she was speaking, an angry murmur rose from the audience, almost loud enough to drown her out. Whether the anger was at her accusation of racism, or was an expression of racism, or a combination of the two, it was impossible to tell. But the whiteness of the audience and the nasty atmosphere that had suddenly filled the studio were undeniable. For some people, from the very start of her parliamentary career, Abbott’s presence was seemingly intolerable. I n her constituency there were other perils. As well as racists, she received threats from black separatists who believed she should not work with white MPs. More mildly, the establishment image of the Commons meant that “a lot of people in the black community said to me: ‘You’ve sold out.’” Others expected her to help solve poisonous local problems such as the culture of Stoke Newington police station, which had become notorious for deaths in custody, usually of young black men. The constituency’s mazy streets and hidden yards also housed black, white and Turkish gangs; IRA cells planning London attacks; and many leftwing purists who continued to see her as insufficiently socialist – the usurper of, and inadequate replacement for, the still revered Ernie Roberts. Some of these disgruntled activists wanted to deselect her. As a new MP with a decent but not huge majority, she quickly became aware of these dangerous currents and of her position’s general precariousness. “If you live in Hackney,” she said in 1997, “the question is: ‘Are you paranoid or are they out to get you?’” Reducing local violent crime became one of her preoccupations. “Sometimes, it took a lot of courage,” said Keith Veness, who worked with her in the constituency for decades as a Labour activist and general fixer. “We had one meeting with predominantly older black women. Diane said to them, ‘If your son comes home with a gun, report it.’ None of the women said anything. They all just looked round the room.” View image in fullscreen Abbott in her Hackney constituency during the 2010 general election campaign. Photograph: David Levene/The Guardian During the 1990s, parts of her constituency became more gentrified. Abbott’s local status gradually changed as well. At the 1992 election, she increased her majority by more than a third, to more than 10,000, and at the 1997 election she increased it again, to more than 15,000. She could lack tact and patience with constituents, but she was admired for her path-breaking, for her resilience against racists and other enemies, and for speaking her mind. She showed little deference towards Labour’s leaders. In 1996, when Tony Blair was at the peak of his prestige as prime minister-in-waiting, Labour backbenchers were summoned in groups to see him. Abbott was supposed to be in a group with Chris Mullin, another leftwinger who, unlike her, was becoming more respectful towards New Labour. Mullin recorded in his diaries that Abbott “waltzed in” to the meeting with Blair “20 minutes late”. She then told him that New Labour made people feel “talked at rather than listened to”. As a result, she went on, the party was “losing sight of those who traditionally voted for us”, leftwing people and the working class. When Labour won power the following year with a crushing majority, Abbott’s warning, like similar ones from Livingstone, Benn and Corbyn during the mid-1990s, seemed hopelessly off the mark. Yet Abbott was not totally wrong about New Labour, just premature. Over the next three general elections, under Blair and then Gordon Brown, the party shed almost 5 million voters – more than a third of its 1997 total – and ended up almost back where it had been in the early 80s, at least in electoral terms. At the 2010 election, as in 1983, Labour would spend much of the campaign trying to avoid coming third. During New Labour’s long decline, Abbott’s own majority, despite her distance from Blair and Brown, also fell. Hackney voters were meant to admire dissenters; but they did not give her much credit, it appeared, for being one of parliament’s most frequent rebels. What credit she did receive did not outweigh the apathy and alienation that many voters came to feel about New Labour. The same forces eroded Corbyn’s majority too, in his next-door constituency, Islington North. Under a Labour government, as under a Conservative one, the wilderness in which the left was trapped seemed to go on and on. D iane Abbott’s reputation remains unsettled. During her almost four decades in parliament, she has received more hate mail than any other female MP. In the six weeks leading up to the 2017 election, a period in which she was particularly prominent as a Corbyn ally and shadow minister, she received almost half of all abusive tweets directed at female MPs , according to research commissioned by Amnesty International. A week after the election, she revealed that she had recently been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes , symptoms of which include blurred vision and constant tiredness – debilitating for anyone, but particularly so for a politician, with their need to absorb information quickly and get through days of public engagements. More often than most MPs, she has regularly been accused of not knowing essential facts and of being lazy. After losing her chance to be a radically different kind of home secretary, thanks to Labour’s defeat at the 2019 election, she has just carried on: calling out racism and threats to civil liberties, making lawyerly interventions in the Commons and blunter ones on social media, criticising Starmer much as she used to criticise Blair, for being too intolerant of dissent and not paying enough attention, as she piously but accurately puts it, “to ordinary Labour supporters and ordinary trade unionists”. View image in fullscreen Abbott with (from left) Richard Burgon, Jeremy Corbyn, Emily Thornberry, John McDonnell, Rebecca Long-Bailey and Keir Starmer at the Labour party conference in 2018. Photograph: David Gadd/Allstar In Hackney, she is still a distinctive presence, nearly always dressed up, a little remote, walking along some streets that have gentrified almost beyond recognition since 1987, and others that are as full as ever of desperate situations awaiting her intervention. Despite all the threats and abuse against her, she rarely uses a security escort. As well as her value as a role model, her political survival alone is a kind of success, as all the rage from racists at her continued high profile unintentionally acknowledges. After the 2019 election, there were 66 MPs from minority ethnic backgrounds – still a disproportionately low number, but a 16-fold increase on when she was first elected. Last year she made her political life that much harder. In April, research was published about the experience of racism in Britain during the pandemic. The Observer newspaper highlighted a finding that a greater or similar proportion of Britons who identified as Jewish, Traveller or Irish said they had experienced racism compared to most groups of black or Asian heritage, among them people identifying as black Caribbean. Soon afterwards, the paper published a letter from Abbott. “Irish, Jewish and Traveller people … undoubtedly experience prejudice,” she said . “This is similar to racism and the two words are often used as if they are interchangeable. It is true that many types of white people with points of difference, such as redheads, can experience this prejudice. But they are not all their lives subject to racism. In pre-civil rights America, Irish people, Jewish people and Travellers were not required to sit at the back of the bus. In apartheid South Africa, these groups were allowed to vote. And at the height of slavery, there were no white-seeming people manacled on the slave ships.” The letter attempted to raise important questions, but did so insensitively and clumsily. Her comments were widely seen as offensive, particularly after Corbyn’s leadership had been overshadowed for years by complaints of antisemitism within the Labour party. Abbott apologised, saying the letter contained “errors [which] arose in an initial draft being sent”. She was suspended from the parliamentary Labour party , and an inquiry was launched into the episode. S ix months later, in October 2023, we met at her Westminster office. Officially, the inquiry was ongoing – which remains the situation now – despite her letter being only two paragraphs long. “I’m under no illusions about what’s going to happen to me,” Abbott said, with a level voice and a neutral expression. She was sitting at her small desk in one of the more remote corners of the parliamentary annexe Portcullis House, far from the offices of Starmer and his entourage. With the coolness she often shows in public, at first Abbott kept her chair facing the desk, and turned to look at me slightly side on. “Even before the letter,” she continued, “there were rumours going round my constituency that I wasn’t going to be allowed to stand again.” She believed that Starmer had “pre-judged” the investigation. The day after the letter’s publication, and the day after the party had announced its inquiry, he had publicly commented : “In my view what she said was to be condemned, it was antisemitic.” View image in fullscreen Abbott in 2022. Photograph: SOPA Images/LightRocket/Getty Images From that moment, Abbott told me, she had doubted that the investigation would recommend anything other than the most severe punishment: “No one’s readmitting me, or Jeremy, to the party.” And then, “They” – she meant the party – “will wait until the very last moment before the election, and then impose somebody as their candidate in Hackney.” Did she have any regrets about the letter? “Maybe I could have worded it better.” She said her Jewish constituents were still “fine” with her being their MP. “I’ve spent 36 years fighting antisemitism,” she said. Her modest office was crammed with papers and files in purposeful piles. It did not look like the office of a politician who had given up. “People are saying, ‘You should run as an independent,’” she said. But then she quickly added: “I wouldn’t want to do that. And I’m not sure that Jeremy wants to do that, either. He’s torn … He’s a Labour person. He’s always been a Labour person … I’m a bit like that.” As for Tony Benn before them, the party was both a vehicle and an obstacle, hostile environment and home. The mass protest decade: why did the street movements of the 2010s fail? Read more I asked what her plans were. “I’ll stay an MP for as long as I possibly can.” She was sitting facing me properly now, and her manner was warmer, more expansive. Through a window behind her, the autumn sun flared and faded over Westminster rooftops, and we talked for a while about how all political careers were finite; and about how conventional politicians and political journalists underestimated the importance of dissidents simply being there, in parliament, representing and inspiring people that conventional politics usually did not care much about – and sometimes also changing society itself. Then she went quiet, and nodded at a faded set of photos on a windowsill across the room. “Look, there’s the four of us,” she said. The pictures were from a few weeks after the 1987 election: small portraits of her, Bernie Grant, Keith Vaz and Paul Boateng, the quartet of pioneering black and Asian MPs. Grant died in 2000. Vaz stood down as an MP in 2019, after a sex and drugs scandal. Boateng became a lord in 2010, after moving rightwards and enjoying a substantial ministerial career in the Blair government, including becoming the first black cabinet minister. Yet Abbott gave me no sense that she envied Boateng. Instead she said with satisfaction: “I’m the last one left standing.” This is an edited and updated extract from The Searchers: Five Rebels, Their Dream of a Different Britain and Their Many Enemies , published by Allen Lane on 2 May Explore more on these topics The long read Diane Abbott Labour Jeremy Corbyn Keir Starmer Tony Benn Race features Share Reuse this content Composite: Guardian Design/PA/In Pictures/Getty Britain’s first black female MP faced hostility from the media and political establishment from the start. Nearly 40 years on, she is still not giving up By Andy Beckett S ix weeks ago, the Conservatives’ biggest donor, Frank Hester, was revealed by the Guardian to have spoken at a meeting of his healthcare company, the Phoenix Partnership, about one of Britain’s longest-serving and most pioneering MPs. “You see Diane Abbott on the TV and … you just want to hate all black women,” Hester said. “I think she should be shot.” The meeting had taken place in 2019, when Abbott was Labour’s shadow home secretary. As a lifelong defender of civil liberties, a radical leftwinger and a close ally of the then party leader, Jeremy Corbyn , Abbott was notably different from previous holders of the role. But there was an anger and viciousness to Hester’s remarks, which are being investigated by the police, and also a limit to the Labour support for her that they prompted, which was very striking. On the one hand, Abbott was widely defended against the obvious racism and misogyny – including by many in the party who usually differ with her. The Labour leader, Keir Starmer, said: “Those comments about Diane Abbott are just abhorrent.” He went on to remind the media and voters of her importance: “ Diane has been a trailblazer. She has paved the way for others.” Yet despite such expressions of sympathy and respect, she was not readmitted to the parliamentary Labour party, from which she had been suspended last year, after writing a letter to the Observer seen by many as antisemitic. In divisive times, she is still one of our most loathed and admired politicians. Abbott was Britain’s first black female MP. Yet despite being elected 37 years ago, and steadily increasing her majority until it has become one of the largest in the country, her local and national status remains in some ways unresolved. I’ve lived in her constituency, Hackney North and Stoke Newington, in north-east London, on and off since 1994, and even here I am often told by Labour voters and sometimes members of the local party that she is prickly, self-absorbed, unreliable and difficult to work with. Like Corbyn, and like one of his and her Labour heroes, the late Tony Benn , she inspires and she enrages. In a party that is often cautious, she is part of a bolder, more heretical Labour tradition – a tradition that is often misunderstood or misrepresented, and needs to be better examined. A bbott began to make a political name for herself in the early 1980s, as a prominent member of the new Labour Black Sections campaign . In a white-dominated party, the campaign tried to persuade a highly resistant leadership to let black members set up their own organisations inside Labour, and also to select black parliamentary candidates. Despite postwar immigration, between 1929 and 1983 no British party had had a black or Asian MP. Hackney North seemed an obvious place for a black Labour candidate: almost 40% of its voters were non-white, and it had been held by the party since its creation in 1950. In 1985, after failing to be selected for other, similar seats, Abbott was persuaded to try one more time. For months, Black Sections campaigners and sympathetic white activists worked through the constituency, ward by ward, persuading Labour members to put down and pass motions saying the party needed a black candidate. View image in fullscreen Bernie Grant and Abbott (standing) at the Labour party annual conference in 1988. Photograph: PA/PA Archive/PA Images The problem was, Labour already had a feasible candidate: the sitting MP, Ernie Roberts, a former communist in his early 70s – 40 years older than Abbott – who was widely respected for campaigning against racism and nuclear weapons. Abbott also saw another, more fundamental obstacle. In the eyes of many white leftists, she told me, “black women are never left enough. The big leftwing figures in Britain in the 80s were all white men: Benn, [Ken] Livingstone, [Arthur] Scargill.” It was difficult for many Labour activists to imagine a black woman joining this socialist elite, and that had become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Abbott campaigned hard for the candidacy, but she did not expect to win. More than 100 people, an unusually large number, came to the decisive selection meeting in the art deco council chamber of Hackney town hall. In her speech to the gathering, Abbott shrewdly made both a practical and philosophical argument. She promised to live in the seat if she became its MP, and to open a constituency office. Roberts had done neither. She also argued that choosing her would be a vote for Hackney’s multicultural reality, rather than its past as a partly industrial inner suburb arranged primarily for white men. “I could see people listening, agonising,” she remembered, “because they had been mandated to vote for Roberts, but now knew they had to vote for me.” Roberts got 35 votes: a solid result. But Abbott got 42. “The [local] Labour officials there looked gutted,” she told me. Yet she was elated, and so were people far beyond Hackney. The headline in the Caribbean diaspora newspaper West Indian World was: “Di does it”. For months afterwards Roberts claimed that Abbott’s win was illegitimate because party members mandated to vote for him had acted otherwise. The claim was baseless: Labour rules allowed members to decide for themselves in selection contests. But for rightwing newspapers, the chance to allege a leftwing plot, while also weaponising her blackness, was irresistible. “Black Diane ‘won after vote swap’,” said the Sun. Abbott found the abrupt changes in how she was seen by the media and some in her own party simultaneously ridiculous, dizzying, frustrating and intimidating. “Until I became a parliamentary candidate, I wasn’t leftwing enough,” she told me. “Once I won the selection, I was an extremist.” Her monstering had begun, before she had even stood for parliament. When she did so, at the 1987 general election, the process was as bruising and exhilarating as the selection battle, but on a bigger scale. Her Conservative opponent was Oliver Letwin, then a young Thatcherite. Despite having been educated at Eton, he presented himself as a charming underdog to the many journalists who visited the constituency, while accusing Abbott of being, the Times reported, “a revolutionary with no genuine allegiance to British parliamentary democracy”. View image in fullscreen Abbott in 1986. Photograph: Keith Bernstein/Rex The Hackney campaign was unusually confrontational. On 3 June, eight days before the election, the Conservative campaign office was firebombed. The Tory chairman, Norman Tebbit, rushed to Hackney and insinuated that the arson might have been the doing of “the extreme left”. Abbott’s own campaign office had its glass front smashed. The constituency was full of far-right, far-left and anarchist groups that might have been responsible for these attacks, yet no one was arrested. The racist National Front protested in the constituency against Abbott’s candidacy. Senior Labour figures stayed away from her campaign, while some local white activists would not canvass for her. Abbott’s response was to emphasise rather than play down her identity. She had campaign posters and leaflets designed that were dominated by her photo rather than the Labour logo. Shortly before polling day, she agreed to be interviewed by the New York Times, even though its readership was irrelevant to the contest. She met the reporter not in Hackney but miles away, in the River room of the Savoy hotel, one of the swankiest dining spaces in London, which she had never been to before. Dressed in bright, socialist red, she ordered the biggest breakfast on the menu. She talked about her admiration for black American iconoclasts such as Angela Davis and Malcolm X, and said that, after “a time lag”, black British politics was about to undergo a similar upsurge. Continuing in a very confident future tense, she added: “I’ll be representing a strong anti-racist, anti-fascist district, an old immigrant stronghold.” On election day, she was nervous. The result was declared at 3am. By then it was becoming clear that Margaret Thatcher was going to win her third consecutive election, and by another landslide. But in the packed room where Abbott made her victory speech, that was all momentarily forgotten. She wore bright red again, with pearls, and her hair in long braids. She was not going to fit in with previous notions about how an MP should dress. After a big intake of breath, she spoke in a very loud voice. “I have come a long way to stand here before you tonight,” she said. “And I am aware that a lot of hope, not just in Hackney, but across the country, rides on our victory tonight. I hope and believe that I can fulfil those hopes.” A s an MP, however, Abbott would spend more than a quarter of a century struggling to access power in the Labour party. Like others on the left, she found parliament a difficult place to convert her public profile into political gains. But the inhospitality she faced there was deeper, as she discovered from the start. For months after arriving in the Commons, she was not given a parliamentary office. Many Palace of Westminster staff simply refused to believe that she and the three other black or Asian MPs elected in 1987 – Bernie Grant, Paul Boateng and Keith Vaz – were MPs at all. They had hardly arrived in the Commons as unknown figures: their election campaigns and victories had got plenty of media attention. Still in her early 30s, Abbott was suddenly one of the most famous young women in the country. Yet in parliament, she and the other three non-white MPs were often stopped by security staff and other attendants, asked what they were doing in the building, and told to identify themselves. Sometimes, they were manhandled. Black and Asian constituents whom the MPs invited to visit them in the Commons often got the same treatment. View image in fullscreen A Conservative advert attacking Labour figures including Abbott and Ken Livingstone during the 1987 general election campaign. Photograph: The Conservative Party Archive/Getty Images “In those days, all the Commons staff were white,” Abbott told me. “Even the catering staff were white. Black MPs provoked fear and hostility.” Her gender singled her out further: “I was the only black woman in parliament for 10 years.” Even MPs from her own party often treated her as an alien. “I was in the queue in the Commons tea room behind another Labour MP. Trying to chat to him, I said: ‘Where are you going for Christmas?’ He said somewhere in the north of England. When he asked where I was going, I said: ‘Jamaica.’ “And he said: ‘Do they celebrate Christmas in Jamaica?’” She was used to operating in white environments, but in the Commons the scrutiny was even more intense than usual. She tried to tune it out: “Life had taught me, you just had to get on with things. If you allow yourself to be derailed by racism, you won’t do anything.” At times, she turned the long history of prejudice in the Commons back against the racists. At the official opening of parliament after the 1987 election, she deliberately sat in the spot on the opposition benches that had once been habitually occupied by Enoch Powell. A few white MPs tried to make her feel she belonged. “Jeremy [Corbyn] was very supportive,” she recalled. While others kept their distance, he sat with Abbott, Grant, Boateng and Vaz in the Commons. Tony Banks , a more flamboyant leftwing MP, took her to the Smoking Room, a Commons bar long associated with Conservative MPs and boozy machismo, on her very first day. Pointedly, he bought her a bottle of champagne. Support also came from outside parliament, from black people and others not just in her constituency but all over the country. As she had acknowledged on election night, “a lot of hope” had been invested in her. With this hope came demands. There were thousands of letters, telephone calls, requests for meetings, requests for her to intervene in people’s troubles, to take a stand on race-related issues. She and the three other black and Asian MPs were expected to act as role models and to clear the way for others to follow. At times, the burden of all these roles was too much. Often during the first few months after being elected, Abbott said later, she was in a kind of daze. “She used to ring me up all the time,” an old ally of hers from the Labour Black Sections movement told me. “She was quite needy.” The media continued to regard Abbott with a mixture of fascination and hostility. For women’s magazines, softer television interview programmes and newspapers read by the Jamaican diaspora such as the Gleaner, she was a pioneer to be praised and defended. Meanwhile, for some Tory journalists she was either an exotic novelty or an extremist, rather than just a modern Londoner. In November 1987, Colin Welch wrote leeringly and mock-seriously: “It’s illegal to call her dusky or alluring.” The day after she won Hackney North, a leading article in the Times warned that “the far left” had “chalked up considerable gains” in the election, citing wins by Bernie Grant, Ken Livingstone and Diane Abbott – “all extremists [who] stand between the Labour party and any prospect of a Labour government”. The next day, another Times leader described the Labour MPs as “ambitious demagogues claiming to represent blacks, homosexuals, women and so on”. The newspaper declared that Neil Kinnock, the Labour leader, “must … expel them”. A week after being elected, Abbott appeared on BBC One’s Question Time. One of the other panellists was Cyril Smith, a Liberal MP then generally seen as a jolly, harmless figure, though after his death revealed to be a prolific child abuser. Smith argued that one of the reasons for Labour’s unpopularity was “Diane Abbott and people like her”. When the applause from the studio audience had died down, Abbott responded. “If Mr Smith believes that having black people in parliament for the first time is in some sense a backward step,” she said, “thousands of people that voted for me in Hackney North would disagree.” As she was speaking, an angry murmur rose from the audience, almost loud enough to drown her out. Whether the anger was at her accusation of racism, or was an expression of racism, or a combination of the two, it was impossible to tell. But the whiteness of the audience and the nasty atmosphere that had suddenly filled the studio were undeniable. For some people, from the very start of her parliamentary career, Abbott’s presence was seemingly intolerable. I n her constituency there were other perils. As well as racists, she received threats from black separatists who believed she should not work with white MPs. More mildly, the establishment image of the Commons meant that “a lot of people in the black community said to me: ‘You’ve sold out.’” Others expected her to help solve poisonous local problems such as the culture of Stoke Newington police station, which had become notorious for deaths in custody, usually of young black men. The constituency’s mazy streets and hidden yards also housed black, white and Turkish gangs; IRA cells planning London attacks; and many leftwing purists who continued to see her as insufficiently socialist – the usurper of, and inadequate replacement for, the still revered Ernie Roberts. Some of these disgruntled activists wanted to deselect her. As a new MP with a decent but not huge majority, she quickly became aware of these dangerous currents and of her position’s general precariousness. “If you live in Hackney,” she said in 1997, “the question is: ‘Are you paranoid or are they out to get you?’” Reducing local violent crime became one of her preoccupations. “Sometimes, it took a lot of courage,” said Keith Veness, who worked with her in the constituency for decades as a Labour activist and general fixer. “We had one meeting with predominantly older black women. Diane said to them, ‘If your son comes home with a gun, report it.’ None of the women said anything. They all just looked round the room.” View image in fullscreen Abbott in her Hackney constituency during the 2010 general election campaign. Photograph: David Levene/The Guardian During the 1990s, parts of her constituency became more gentrified. Abbott’s local status gradually changed as well. At the 1992 election, she increased her majority by more than a third, to more than 10,000, and at the 1997 election she increased it again, to more than 15,000. She could lack tact and patience with constituents, but she was admired for her path-breaking, for her resilience against racists and other enemies, and for speaking her mind. She showed little deference towards Labour’s leaders. In 1996, when Tony Blair was at the peak of his prestige as prime minister-in-waiting, Labour backbenchers were summoned in groups to see him. Abbott was supposed to be in a group with Chris Mullin, another leftwinger who, unlike her, was becoming more respectful towards New Labour. Mullin recorded in his diaries that Abbott “waltzed in” to the meeting with Blair “20 minutes late”. She then told him that New Labour made people feel “talked at rather than listened to”. As a result, she went on, the party was “losing sight of those who traditionally voted for us”, leftwing people and the working class. When Labour won power the following year with a crushing majority, Abbott’s warning, like similar ones from Livingstone, Benn and Corbyn during the mid-1990s, seemed hopelessly off the mark. Yet Abbott was not totally wrong about New Labour, just premature. Over the next three general elections, under Blair and then Gordon Brown, the party shed almost 5 million voters – more than a third of its 1997 total – and ended up almost back where it had been in the early 80s, at least in electoral terms. At the 2010 election, as in 1983, Labour would spend much of the campaign trying to avoid coming third. During New Labour’s long decline, Abbott’s own majority, despite her distance from Blair and Brown, also fell. Hackney voters were meant to admire dissenters; but they did not give her much credit, it appeared, for being one of parliament’s most frequent rebels. What credit she did receive did not outweigh the apathy and alienation that many voters came to feel about New Labour. The same forces eroded Corbyn’s majority too, in his next-door constituency, Islington North. Under a Labour government, as under a Conservative one, the wilderness in which the left was trapped seemed to go on and on. D iane Abbott’s reputation remains unsettled. During her almost four decades in parliament, she has received more hate mail than any other female MP. In the six weeks leading up to the 2017 election, a period in which she was particularly prominent as a Corbyn ally and shadow minister, she received almost half of all abusive tweets directed at female MPs , according to research commissioned by Amnesty International. A week after the election, she revealed that she had recently been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes , symptoms of which include blurred vision and constant tiredness – debilitating for anyone, but particularly so for a politician, with their need to absorb information quickly and get through days of public engagements. More often than most MPs, she has regularly been accused of not knowing essential facts and of being lazy. After losing her chance to be a radically different kind of home secretary, thanks to Labour’s defeat at the 2019 election, she has just carried on: calling out racism and threats to civil liberties, making lawyerly interventions in the Commons and blunter ones on social media, criticising Starmer much as she used to criticise Blair, for being too intolerant of dissent and not paying enough attention, as she piously but accurately puts it, “to ordinary Labour supporters and ordinary trade unionists”. View image in fullscreen Abbott with (from left) Richard Burgon, Jeremy Corbyn, Emily Thornberry, John McDonnell, Rebecca Long-Bailey and Keir Starmer at the Labour party conference in 2018. Photograph: David Gadd/Allstar In Hackney, she is still a distinctive presence, nearly always dressed up, a little remote, walking along some streets that have gentrified almost beyond recognition since 1987, and others that are as full as ever of desperate situations awaiting her intervention. Despite all the threats and abuse against her, she rarely uses a security escort. As well as her value as a role model, her political survival alone is a kind of success, as all the rage from racists at her continued high profile unintentionally acknowledges. After the 2019 election, there were 66 MPs from minority ethnic backgrounds – still a disproportionately low number, but a 16-fold increase on when she was first elected. Last year she made her political life that much harder. In April, research was published about the experience of racism in Britain during the pandemic. The Observer newspaper highlighted a finding that a greater or similar proportion of Britons who identified as Jewish, Traveller or Irish said they had experienced racism compared to most groups of black or Asian heritage, among them people identifying as black Caribbean. Soon afterwards, the paper published a letter from Abbott. “Irish, Jewish and Traveller people … undoubtedly experience prejudice,” she said . “This is similar to racism and the two words are often used as if they are interchangeable. It is true that many types of white people with points of difference, such as redheads, can experience this prejudice. But they are not all their lives subject to racism. In pre-civil rights America, Irish people, Jewish people and Travellers were not required to sit at the back of the bus. In apartheid South Africa, these groups were allowed to vote. And at the height of slavery, there were no white-seeming people manacled on the slave ships.” The letter attempted to raise important questions, but did so insensitively and clumsily. Her comments were widely seen as offensive, particularly after Corbyn’s leadership had been overshadowed for years by complaints of antisemitism within the Labour party. Abbott apologised, saying the letter contained “errors [which] arose in an initial draft being sent”. She was suspended from the parliamentary Labour party , and an inquiry was launched into the episode. S ix months later, in October 2023, we met at her West
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
Home Office considered antisemitism campaigner for counter-extremism unit
Gideon Falter is the chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism. Photograph: Ken McKay/ITV/Rex/Shutterstock View image in fullscreen Gideon Falter is the chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism. Photograph: Ken McKay/ITV/Rex/Shutterstock This article is more than 1 year old Home Office considered antisemitism campaigner for counter-extremism unit This article is more than 1 year old Gideon Falter was in running to be adviser but government’s antisemitism tsar warned against appointment Who are CAA, the group headed by campaigner in Met police antisemitism row? The Home Office considered appointing campaigner against antisemitism Gideon Falter as an adviser to its counter extremism unit but was warned against the appointment by the government’s antisemitism tsar. The Guardian understands there were strong objections to Falter being offered the part-time civil service role advising the Commission for Countering Extremism (CCE) in 2022 and that John Mann told the then home secretary Suella Braverman he would quit if Falter was offered the post. Falter, chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA), said he was approached for the role by the unit’s commissioner but never applied or was formally offered it – and that he believes no similar role was ever created. Falter has been in the spotlight after being told by a police officer that he risked antagonising pro-Palestinian protesters because of his “openly Jewish” appearance. Braverman, now a backbencher, had called for the Metropolitan police commissioner Mark Rowley to resign over the incident. A longer version of the exchange showed the officer explaining he was concerned Falter was trying provoke a confrontation with marchers. Rowley has apologised for the language used, but defended the officer’s overall conduct. In a letter seen by the Guardian, Mann warned the Home Office that he feared that giving Falter the role would hinder cooperation with the main body responsible for monitoring antisemitism – the Community Security Trust (CST). The CCE is an arm’s-length body that says it makes independent appointments. Mann, a former Labour MP who is the government’s antisemitism tsar as a non-affiliated peer, wrote to the CCE chief, Robin Simcox, claiming that Falter was not an appropriate person for the role. The letter obtained under FoI from the office of the antisemitism tsar does not name Falter directly but makes it clear that he considers his appointment to be divisive within the Jewish community. Mann stated he spoke to the main Jewish communal bodies who did not know about the intention to appoint Falter. “None of them were consulted on this, nor knew of the role and its advertising. This is not good for the reputation of Government,” he wrote. Mann said it would be better for an adviser to come from within CST to have the necessary expertise and claimed Falter’s appointment risked alienating the body. He said he was “concerned that there may be potential conflicts of interest” with the preferred candidate, citing “referring current members of parliament for disciplinary action by their own party” – a reference to CAA’s action against a number of Labour MPs. “The CST has the expertise that you seek, it carries out this research already. It shares it recurrently with the operation leads dealing with these threats, it represents the United Kingdom at every significant academic forum and international political meeting on this and it is to them that you must turn to for this expertise,” Mann wrote. “To do anything else is, in my judgment, dangerous. You will hear my strength of feeling.” Falter told the Guardian: “These claims show a lack of understanding of how the Jewish community works. CAA works closely with CST, Shomrim [a volunteer-led security group that works with the strictly Orthodox Jewish community] and numerous other organisations. “As part of our work we make complaints against antisemites in all walks of life, and it would be strange if we did not call for disciplinary measures where we have concerns about MPs – it is our job to hold such people to account. Our concerns about the Labour party, for example, led us to refer them to the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which vindicated our complaint. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion “A couple of years ago, Robin Simcox was contemplating putting together a panel of advisers to the government on issues relating to extremism, and he asked me whether I would be interested in advising on antisemitism which, given my work fighting antisemitism, was not out of the ordinary. I did not apply for any role, and do not believe that the role relating to antisemitism was ever created and I did not pursue the matter. “There was no communication at any point with Suella Braverman, Michael Gove, or any other government minister or their teams about this role, nor was there any communication with the government’s outgoing antisemitism adviser.” CST, which was one of the bodies that met Rowley this week to discuss the Falter incident, issued a carefully worded statement in response that praised the overall police response to the protests while criticising the officer’s use of language. “Despite all the good work, there have also been mistakes which set everything backwards and stick in the public mind as further showing how bad things are right now. This latest case fits that profile, with the context and detail lost in the heat of controversy.” A spokesperson for the CCE said it was “a non-statutory expert committee of the Home Office which operates independently, at arm’s length from government. “The CCE retains a number of subject matter experts on extremism to complement the work of its secretariat. “The CCE is committed to tackling all forms of extremism and engages widely across Jewish communities as part of our ongoing efforts to combat modern manifestations of antisemitism. We will continue to do so.” Explore more on these topics Home Office Suella Braverman Antisemitism news Share Reuse this content Gideon Falter is the chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism. Photograph: Ken McKay/ITV/Rex/Shutterstock View image in fullscreen Gideon Falter is the chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism. Photograph: Ken McKay/ITV/Rex/Shutterstock This article is more than 1 year old Home Office considered antisemitism campaigner for counter-extremism unit This article is more than 1 year old Gideon Falter was in running to be adviser but government’s antisemitism tsar warned against appointment Who are CAA, the group headed by campaigner in Met police antisemitism row? The Home Office considered appointing campaigner against antisemitism Gideon Falter as an adviser to its counter extremism unit but was warned against the appointment by the government’s antisemitism tsar. The Guardian understands there were strong objections to Falter being offered the part-time civil service role advising the Commission for Countering Extremism (CCE) in 2022 and that John Mann told the then home secretary Suella Braverman he would quit if Falter was offered the post. Falter, chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA), said he was approached for the role by the unit’s commissioner but never applied or was formally offered it – and that he believes no similar role was ever created. Falter has been in the spotlight after being told by a police officer that he risked antagonising pro-Palestinian protesters because of his “openly Jewish” appearance. Braverman, now a backbencher, had called for the Metropolitan police commissioner Mark Rowley to resign over the incident. A longer version of the exchange showed the officer explaining he was concerned Falter was trying provoke a confrontation with marchers. Rowley has apologised for the language used, but defended the officer’s overall conduct. In a letter seen by the Guardian, Mann warned the Home Office that he feared that giving Falter the role would hinder cooperation with the main body responsible for monitoring antisemitism – the Community Security Trust (CST). The CCE is an arm’s-length body that says it makes independent appointments. Mann, a former Labour MP who is the government’s antisemitism tsar as a non-affiliated peer, wrote to the CCE chief, Robin Simcox, claiming that Falter was not an appropriate person for the role. The letter obtained under FoI from the office of the antisemitism tsar does not name Falter directly but makes it clear that he considers his appointment to be divisive within the Jewish community. Mann stated he spoke to the main Jewish communal bodies who did not know about the intention to appoint Falter. “None of them were consulted on this, nor knew of the role and its advertising. This is not good for the reputation of Government,” he wrote. Mann said it would be better for an adviser to come from within CST to have the necessary expertise and claimed Falter’s appointment risked alienating the body. He said he was “concerned that there may be potential conflicts of interest” with the preferred candidate, citing “referring current members of parliament for disciplinary action by their own party” – a reference to CAA’s action against a number of Labour MPs. “The CST has the expertise that you seek, it carries out this research already. It shares it recurrently with the operation leads dealing with these threats, it represents the United Kingdom at every significant academic forum and international political meeting on this and it is to them that you must turn to for this expertise,” Mann wrote. “To do anything else is, in my judgment, dangerous. You will hear my strength of feeling.” Falter told the Guardian: “These claims show a lack of understanding of how the Jewish community works. CAA works closely with CST, Shomrim [a volunteer-led security group that works with the strictly Orthodox Jewish community] and numerous other organisations. “As part of our work we make complaints against antisemites in all walks of life, and it would be strange if we did not call for disciplinary measures where we have concerns about MPs – it is our job to hold such people to account. Our concerns about the Labour party, for example, led us to refer them to the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which vindicated our complaint. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion “A couple of years ago, Robin Simcox was contemplating putting together a panel of advisers to the government on issues relating to extremism, and he asked me whether I would be interested in advising on antisemitism which, given my work fighting antisemitism, was not out of the ordinary. I did not apply for any role, and do not believe that the role relating to antisemitism was ever created and I did not pursue the matter. “There was no communication at any point with Suella Braverman, Michael Gove, or any other government minister or their teams about this role, nor was there any communication with the government’s outgoing antisemitism adviser.” CST, which was one of the bodies that met Rowley this week to discuss the Falter incident, issued a carefully worded statement in response that praised the overall police response to the protests while criticising the officer’s use of language. “Despite all the good work, there have also been mistakes which set everything backwards and stick in the public mind as further showing how bad things are right now. This latest case fits that profile, with the context and detail lost in the heat of controversy.” A spokesperson for the CCE said it was “a non-statutory expert committee of the Home Office which operates independently, at arm’s length from government. “The CCE retains a number of subject matter experts on extremism to complement the work of its secretariat. “The CCE is committed to tackling all forms of extremism and engages widely across Jewish communities as part of our ongoing efforts to combat modern manifestations of antisemitism. We will continue to do so.” Explore more on these topics Home Office Suella Braverman Antisemitism news Share Reuse this content Gideon Falter is the chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism. Photograph: Ken McKay/ITV/Rex/Shutterstock View image in fullscreen Gideon Falter is the chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism. Photograph: Ken McKay/ITV/Rex/Shutterstock Gideon Falter is the chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism. Photograph: Ken McKay/ITV/Rex/Shutterstock View image in fullscreen Gideon Falter is the chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism. Photograph: Ken McKay/ITV/Rex/Shutterstock Gideon Falter is the chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism. Photograph: Ken McKay/ITV/Rex/Shutterstock View image in fullscreen Gideon Falter is the chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism. Photograph: Ken McKay/ITV/Rex/Shutterstock Gideon Falter is the chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism. Photograph: Ken McKay/ITV/Rex/Shutterstock View image in fullscreen Gideon Falter is the chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism. Photograph: Ken McKay/ITV/Rex/Shutterstock Gideon Falter is the chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism. Photograph: Ken McKay/ITV/Rex/Shutterstock Gideon Falter is the chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism. Photograph: Ken McKay/ITV/Rex/Shutterstock This article is more than 1 year old Home Office considered antisemitism campaigner for counter-extremism unit This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Home Office considered antisemitism campaigner for counter-extremism unit This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Home Office considered antisemitism campaigner for counter-extremism unit This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Gideon Falter was in running to be adviser but government’s antisemitism tsar warned against appointment Who are CAA, the group headed by campaigner in Met police antisemitism row? Gideon Falter was in running to be adviser but government’s antisemitism tsar warned against appointment Who are CAA, the group headed by campaigner in Met police antisemitism row? Gideon Falter was in running to be adviser but government’s antisemitism tsar warned against appointment The Home Office considered appointing campaigner against antisemitism Gideon Falter as an adviser to its counter extremism unit but was warned against the appointment by the government’s antisemitism tsar. The Guardian understands there were strong objections to Falter being offered the part-time civil service role advising the Commission for Countering Extremism (CCE) in 2022 and that John Mann told the then home secretary Suella Braverman he would quit if Falter was offered the post. Falter, chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA), said he was approached for the role by the unit’s commissioner but never applied or was formally offered it – and that he believes no similar role was ever created. Falter has been in the spotlight after being told by a police officer that he risked antagonising pro-Palestinian protesters because of his “openly Jewish” appearance. Braverman, now a backbencher, had called for the Metropolitan police commissioner Mark Rowley to resign over the incident. A longer version of the exchange showed the officer explaining he was concerned Falter was trying provoke a confrontation with marchers. Rowley has apologised for the language used, but defended the officer’s overall conduct. In a letter seen by the Guardian, Mann warned the Home Office that he feared that giving Falter the role would hinder cooperation with the main body responsible for monitoring antisemitism – the Community Security Trust (CST). The CCE is an arm’s-length body that says it makes independent appointments. Mann, a former Labour MP who is the government’s antisemitism tsar as a non-affiliated peer, wrote to the CCE chief, Robin Simcox, claiming that Falter was not an appropriate person for the role. The letter obtained under FoI from the office of the antisemitism tsar does not name Falter directly but makes it clear that he considers his appointment to be divisive within the Jewish community. Mann stated he spoke to the main Jewish communal bodies who did not know about the intention to appoint Falter. “None of them were consulted on this, nor knew of the role and its advertising. This is not good for the reputation of Government,” he wrote. Mann said it would be better for an adviser to come from within CST to have the necessary expertise and claimed Falter’s appointment risked alienating the body. He said he was “concerned that there may be potential conflicts of interest” with the preferred candidate, citing “referring current members of parliament for disciplinary action by their own party” – a reference to CAA’s action against a number of Labour MPs. “The CST has the expertise that you seek, it carries out this research already. It shares it recurrently with the operation leads dealing with these threats, it represents the United Kingdom at every significant academic forum and international political meeting on this and it is to them that you must turn to for this expertise,” Mann wrote. “To do anything else is, in my judgment, dangerous. You will hear my strength of feeling.” Falter told the Guardian: “These claims show a lack of understanding of how the Jewish community works. CAA works closely with CST, Shomrim [a volunteer-led security group that works with the strictly Orthodox Jewish community] and numerous other organisations. “As part of our work we make complaints against antisemites in all walks of life, and it would be strange if we did not call for disciplinary measures where we have concerns about MPs – it is our job to hold such people to account. Our concerns about the Labour party, for example, led us to refer them to the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which vindicated our complaint. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion “A couple of years ago, Robin Simcox was contemplating putting together a panel of advisers to the government on issues relating to extremism, and he asked me whether I would be interested in advising on antisemitism which, given my work fighting antisemitism, was not out of the ordinary. I did not apply for any role, and do not believe that the role relating to antisemitism was ever created and I did not pursue the matter. “There was no communication at any point with Suella Braverman, Michael Gove, or any other government minister or their teams about this role, nor was there any communication with the government’s outgoing antisemitism adviser.” CST, which was one of the bodies that met Rowley this week to discuss the Falter incident, issued a carefully worded statement in response that praised the overall police response to the protests while criticising the officer’s use of language. “Despite all the good work, there have also been mistakes which set everything backwards and stick in the public mind as further showing how bad things are right now. This latest case fits that profile, with the context and detail lost in the heat of controversy.” A spokesperson for the CCE said it was “a non-statutory expert committee of the Home Office which operates independently, at arm’s length from government. “The CCE retains a number of subject matter experts on extremism to complement the work of its secretariat. “The CCE is committed to tackling all forms of extremism and engages widely across Jewish communities as part of our ongoing efforts to combat modern manifestations of antisemitism. We will continue to do so.” Explore more on these topics Home Office Suella Braverman Antisemitism news Share Reuse this content The Home Office considered appointing campaigner against antisemitism Gideon Falter as an adviser to its counter extremism unit but was warned against the appointment by the government’s antisemitism tsar. The Guardian understands there were strong objections to Falter being offered the part-time civil service role advising the Commission for Countering Extremism (CCE) in 2022 and that John Mann told the then home secretary Suella Braverman he would quit if Falter was offered the post. Falter, chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA), said he was approached for the role by the unit’s commissioner but never applied or was formally offered it – and that he believes no similar role was ever created. Falter has been in the spotlight after being told by a police officer that he risked antagonising pro-Palestinian protesters because of his “openly Jewish” appearance. Braverman, now a backbencher, had called for the Metropolitan police commissioner Mark Rowley to resign over the incident. A longer version of the exchange showed the officer explaining he was concerned Falter was trying provoke a confrontation with marchers. Rowley has apologised for the language used, but defended the officer’s overall conduct. In a letter seen by the Guardian, Mann warned the Home Office that he feared that giving Falter the role would hinder cooperation with the main body responsible for monitoring antisemitism – the Community Security Trust (CST). The CCE is an arm’s-length body that says it makes independent appointments. Mann, a former Labour MP who is the government’s antisemitism tsar as a non-affiliated peer, wrote to the CCE chief, Robin Simcox, claiming that Falter was not an appropriate person for the role. The letter obtained under FoI from the office of the antisemitism tsar does not name Falter directly but makes it clear that he considers his appointment to be divisive within the Jewish community. Mann stated he spoke to the main Jewish communal bodies who did not know about the intention to appoint Falter. “None of them were consulted on this, nor knew of the role and its advertising. This is not good for the reputation of Government,” he wrote. Mann said it would be better for an adviser to come from within CST to have the necessary expertise and claimed Falter’s appointment risked alienating the body. He said he was “concerned that there may be potential conflicts of interest” with the preferred candidate, citing “referring current members of parliament for disciplinary action by their own party” – a reference to CAA’s action against a number of Labour MPs. “The CST has the expertise that you seek, it carries out this research already. It shares it recurrently with the operation leads dealing with these threats, it represents the United Kingdom at every significant academic forum and international political meeting on this and it is to them that you must turn to for this expertise,” Mann wrote. “To do anything else is, in my judgment, dangerous. You will hear my strength of feeling.” Falter told the Guardian: “These claims show a lack of understanding of how the Jewish community works. CAA works closely with CST, Shomrim [a volunteer-led security group that works with the strictly Orthodox Jewish community] and numerous other organisations. “As part of our work we make complaints against antisemites in all walks of life, and it would be strange if we did not call for disciplinary measures where we have concerns about MPs – it is our job to hold such people to account. Our concerns about the Labour party, for example, led us to refer them to the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which vindicated our complaint. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion “A couple of years ago, Robin Simcox was contemplating putting together a panel of advisers to the government on issues relating to extremism, and he asked me whether I would be interested in advising on antisemitism which, given my work fighting antisemitism, was not out of the ordinary. I did not apply for any role, and do not believe that the role relating to antisemitism was ever created and I did not pursue the matter. “There was no communication at any point with Suella Braverman, Michael Gove, or any other government minister or their teams about this role, nor was there any communication with the government’s outgoing antisemitism adviser.” CST, which was one of the bodies that met Rowley this week to discuss the Falter incident, issued a carefully worded statement in response that praised the overall police response to the protests while criticising the officer’s use of language. “Despite all the good work, there have also been mistakes which set everything backwards and stick in the public mind as further showing how bad things are right now. This latest case fits that profile, with the context and detail lost in the heat of controversy.” A spokesperson for the CCE said it was “a non-statutory expert committee of the Home Office which operates independently, at arm’s length from government. “The CCE retains a number of subject matter experts on extremism to complement the work of its secretariat. “The CCE is committed to tackling all forms of extremism and engages widely across Jewish communities as part of our ongoing efforts to combat modern manifestations of antisemitism. We will continue to do so.” Explore more on these topics Home Office Suella Braverman Antisemitism news Share Reuse this content The Home Office considered appointing campaigner against antisemitism Gideon Falter as an adviser to its counter extremism unit but was warned against the appointment by the government’s antisemitism tsar. The Guardian understands there were strong objections to Falter being offered the part-time civil service role advising the Commission for Countering Extremism (CCE) in 2022 and that John Mann told the then home secretary Suella Braverman he would quit if Falter was offered the post. Falter, chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA), said he was approached for the role by the unit’s commissioner but never applied or was formally offered it – and that he believes no similar role was ever created. Falter has been in the spotlight after being told by a police officer that he risked antagonising pro-Palestinian protesters because of his “openly Jewish” appearance. Braverman, now a backbencher, had called for the Metropolitan police commissioner Mark Rowley to resign over the incident. A longer version of the exchange showed the officer explaining he was concerned Falter was trying provoke a confrontation with marchers. Rowley has apologised for the language used, but defended the officer’s overall conduct. In a letter seen by the Guardian, Mann warned the Home Office that he feared that giving Falter the role would hinder cooperation with the main body responsible for monitoring antisemitism – the Community Security Trust (CST). The CCE is an arm’s-length body that says it makes independent appointments. Mann, a former Labour MP who is the government’s antisemitism tsar as a non-affiliated peer, wrote to the CCE chief, Robin Simcox, claiming that Falter was not an appropriate person for the role. The letter obtained under FoI from the office of the antisemitism tsar does not name Falter directly but makes it clear that he considers his appointment to be divisive within the Jewish community. Mann stated he spoke to the main Jewish communal bodies who did not know about the intention to appoint Falter. “None of them were consulted on this, nor knew of the role and its advertising. This is not good for the reputation of Government,” he wrote. Mann said it would be better for an adviser to come from within CST to have the necessary expertise and claimed Falter’s appointment risked alienating the body. He said he was “concerned that there may be potential conflicts of interest” with the preferred candidate, citing “referring current members of parliament for disciplinary action by their own party” – a reference to CAA’s action against a number of Labour MPs. “The CST has the expertise that you seek, it carries out this research already. It shares it recurrently with the operation leads dealing with these threats, it represents the United Kingdom at every significant academic forum and international political meeting on this and it is to them that you must turn to for this expertise,” Mann wrote. “To do anything else is, in my judgment, dangerous. You will hear my strength of feeling.” Falter told the Guardian: “These claims show a lack of understanding of how the Jewish community works. CAA works closely with CST, Shomrim [a volunteer-led security group that works with the strictly Orthodox Jewish community] and numerous other organisations. “As part of our work we make complaints against antisemites in all walks of life, and it would be strange if we did not call for disciplinary measures where we have concerns about MPs – it is our job to hold such people to account. Our concerns about the Labour party, for example, led us to refer them to the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which vindicated our complaint. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion “A couple of years ago, Robin Simcox was contemplating putting together a panel of advisers to the government on issues relating to extremism, and he asked me whether I would be interested in advising on antisemitism which, given my work fighting antisemitism, was not out of the ordinary. I did not apply for any role, and do not believe that the role relating to antisemitism was ever created and I did not pursue the matter. “There was no communication at any point with Suella Braverman, Michael Gove, or any other government minister or their teams about this role, nor was there any communication with the government’s outgoing antisemitism adviser.” CST, which was one of the bodies that met Rowley this week to discuss the Falter incident, issued a carefully worded statement in response that praised the overall police response to the protests while criticising the officer’s use of language. “Despite all the good work, there have also been mistakes which set everything backwards and stick in the public mind as further showing how bad things are right now. This latest case fits that profile, with the context and detail lost in the heat of controversy.” A spokesperson for the CCE said it was “a non-statutory expert committee of the Home Office which operates independently, at arm’s length from government. “The CCE retains a number of subject matter experts on extremism to complement the work of its secretariat. “The CCE is committed to tackling all forms of extremism and engages widely across Jewish communities as part of our ongoing efforts to combat modern manifestations of antisemitism. We will continue to do so.” The Home Office considered appointing campaigner against antisemitism Gideon Falter as an adviser to its counter extremism unit but was warned against the appointment by the government’s antisemitism tsar. The Guardian understands there were strong objections to Falter being offered the part-time civil service role advising the Commission for Countering Extremism (CCE) in 2022 and that John Mann told the then home secretary Suella Braverman he would quit if Falter was offered the post. Falter, chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA), said he was approached for the role by the unit’s commissioner but never applied or was formally offered it – and that he believes no similar role was ever created. Falter has been in the spotlight after being told by a police officer that he risked antagonising pro-Palestinian protesters because of his “openly Jewish” appearance. Braverman, now a backbencher, had called for the Metropolitan police commissioner Mark Rowley to resign over the incident. A longer version of the exchange showed the officer explaining he was concerned Falter was trying provoke a confrontation with marchers. Rowley has apologised for the language used, but defended the officer’s overall conduct. In a letter seen by the Guardian, Mann warned the Home Office that he feared that giving Falter the role would hinder cooperation with the main body responsible for monitoring antisemitism – the Community Security Trust (CST). The CCE is an arm’s-length body that says it makes independent appointments. Mann, a former Labour MP who is the government’s antisemitism tsar as a non-affiliated peer, wrote to the CCE chief, Robin Simcox, claiming that Falter was not an appropriate person for the role. The letter obtained under FoI from the office of the antisemitism tsar does not name Falter directly but makes it clear that he considers his appointment to be divisive within the Jewish community. Mann stated he spoke to the main Jewish communal bodies who did not know about the intention to appoint Falter. “None of them were consulted on this, nor knew of the role and its advertising. This is not good for the reputation of Government,” he wrote. Mann said it would be better for an adviser to come from within CST to have the necessary expertise and claimed Falter’s appointment risked alienating the body. He said he was “concerned that there may be potential conflicts of interest” with the preferred candidate, citing “referring current members of parliament for disciplinary action by their own party” – a reference to CAA’s action against a number of Labour MPs. “The CST has the expertise that you seek, it carries out this research already. It shares it recurrently with the operation leads dealing with these threats, it represents the United Kingdom at every significant academic forum and international political meeting on this and it is to them that you must turn to for this expertise,” Mann wrote. “To do anything else is, in my judgment, dangerous. You will hear my strength of feeling.” Falter told the Guardian: “These claims show a lack of understanding of how the Jewish community works. CAA works closely with CST, Shomrim [a volunteer-led security group that works with the strictly Orthodox Jewish community] and numerous other organisations. “As part of our work we make complaints against antisemites in all walks of life, and it would be strange if we did not call for disciplinary measures where we have concerns about MPs – it is our job to hold such people to account. Our concerns about the Labour party, for example, led us to refer them to the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which vindicated our complaint. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion “A couple of years ago, Robin Simcox was contemplating putting together a panel of advisers to the government on issues relating to extremism, and he asked me whether I would be interested in advising on antisemitism which, given my work fighting antisemitism, was not out of the ordinary. I did not apply for any role, and do not believe that the role relating to antisemitism was ever created and I did not pursue the matter. “There was no communication at any point with Suella Braverman, Michael Gove, or any other government minister or their teams about this role, nor was there any communication with the government’s outgoing antisemitism adviser.” CST, which was one of the bodies that met Rowley this week to discuss the Falter incident, issued a carefully worded statement in response that praised the overall police response to the protests while criticising the officer’s use of language. “Despite all the good work, there have also been mistakes which set everything backwards and stick in the public mind as further showing how bad things are right now. This latest case fits that profile, with the context and detail lost in the heat of controversy.” A spokesperson for the CCE said it was “a non-statutory expert committee of the Home Office which operates independently, at arm’s length from government. “The CCE retains a number of subject matter experts on extremism to complement the work of its secretariat. “The CCE is committed to tackling all forms of extremism and engages widely across Jewish communities as part of our ongoing efforts to combat modern manifestations of antisemitism. We will continue to do so.” The Home Office considered appointing campaigner against antisemitism Gideon Falter as an adviser to its counter extremism unit but was warned against the appointment by the government’s antisemitism tsar. The Guardian understands there were strong objections to Falter being offered the part-time civil service role advising the Commission for Countering Extremism (CCE) in 2022 and that John Mann told the then home secretary Suella Braverman he would quit if Falter was offered the post. Falter, chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA), said he was approached for the role by the unit’s commissioner but never applied or was formally offered it – and that he believes no similar role was ever created. Falter has been in the spotlight after being told by a police officer that he risked antagonising pro-Palestinian protesters because of his “openly Jewish” appearance. Braverman, now a backbencher, had called for the Metropolitan police commissioner Mark Rowley to resign over the incident. A longer version of the exchange showed the officer explaining he was concerned Falter was trying provoke a confrontation with marchers. Rowley has apologised for the language used, but defended the officer’s overall conduct. In a letter seen by the Guardian, Mann warned the Home Office that he feared that giving Falter the role would hinder cooperation with the main body responsible for monitoring antisemitism – the Community Security Trust (CST). The CCE is an arm’s-length body that says it makes independent appointments. Mann, a former Labour MP who is the government’s antisemitism tsar as a non-affiliated peer, wrote to the CCE chief, Robin Simcox, claiming that Falter was not an appropriate person for the role. The letter obtained under FoI from the office of the antisemitism tsar does not name Falter directly but makes it clear that he considers his appointment to be divisive within the Jewish community. Mann stated he spoke to the main Jewish communal bodies who did not know about the intention to appoint Falter. “None of them were consulted on this, nor knew of the role and its advertising. This is not good for the reputation of Government,” he wrote. Mann said it would be better for an adviser to come from within CST to have the necessary expertise and claimed Falter’s appointment risked alienating the body. He said he was “concerned that there may be potential conflicts of interest” with the preferred candidate, citing “referring current members of parliament for disciplinary action by their own party” – a reference to CAA’s action against a number of Labour MPs. “The CST has the expertise that you seek, it carries out this research already. It shares it recurrently with the operation leads dealing with these threats, it represents the United Kingdom at every significant academic forum and international political meeting on this and it is to them that you must turn to for this expertise,” Mann wrote. “To do anything else is, in my judgment, dangerous. You will hear my strength of feeling.” Falter told the Guardian: “These claims show a lack of understanding of how the Jewish community works. CAA works closely with CST, Shomrim [a volunteer-led security group that works with the strictly Orthodox Jewish community] and numerous other organisations. “As part of our work we make complaints against antisemites in all walks of life, and it would be strange if we did not call for disciplinary measures where we have concerns about MPs – it is our job to hold such people to account. Our concerns about the Labour party, for example, led us to refer them to the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which vindicated our complaint. “A couple of years ago, Robin Simcox was contemplating putting together a panel of advisers to the government on issues relating to extremism, and he asked me whether I would be interested in advising on antisemitism which, given my work fighting antisemitism, was not out of the ordinary. I did not apply for any role, and do not believe that the role relating to antisemitism was ever created and I did not pursue the matter. “There was no communication at any point with Suella Braverman, Michael Gove, or any other government minister or their teams about this role, nor was there any communication with the government’s outgoing antisemitism adviser.” CST, which was one of the bodies that met Rowley this week to discuss the Falter incident, issued a carefully worded statement in response that praised the overall police response to the protests while criticising the officer’s use of language. “Despite all the good work, there have also been mistakes which set everything backwards and stick in the public mind as further showing how bad things are right now. This latest case fits that profile, with the context and detail lost in the heat of controversy.” A spokesperson for the CCE said it was “a non-statutory expert committee of the Home Office which operates independently, at arm’s length from government. “The CCE retains a number of subject matter experts on extremism to complement the work of its secretariat. “The CCE is committed to tackling all forms of extremism and engages widely across Jewish communities as part of our ongoing efforts to combat modern manifestations of antisemitism. We will continue to do so.” Explore more on these topics Home Office Suella Braverman Antisemitism news Share Reuse this content Home Office Suella Braverman Antisemitism news |
‘A deeply colonial backward step’: why are donors, staff and politicians up in arms about the South Australian Museum?
A planned radical restructure of the South Australian Museum has seriously undermined relations between the institution and Indigenous staff and stakeholders. Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian View image in fullscreen A planned radical restructure of the South Australian Museum has seriously undermined relations between the institution and Indigenous staff and stakeholders. Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old ‘A deeply colonial backward step’: why are donors, staff and politicians up in arms about the South Australian Museum? This article is more than 1 year old The South Australian government has just intervened to pause a restructure of the state’s biggest museum. Why? Get our morning and afternoon news emails , free app or daily news podcast F or the past seven years the South Australian Museum has undergone a thawing of its long-strained relations with Indigenous peoples, thousands of whose ancestral human remains and cultural objects the institution has hoarded since the 1850s. The museum has apologised to Indigenous Australians for the kleptocratic, inhuman practices by which it amassed a “collection’’ of Indigenous ancestral remains of about 4,600 people , patiently built previously nonexistent trust with South Australia’s Kaurna people, reburied hundreds of ancestors in Adelaide and repatriated remains to communities across Australia. It has consequently been globally acknowledged for re-building broken relations with First Nations people, affording them increased custodianship of Indigenous collections and, not least, for bringing overdue dignity to the culturally incendiary issue of how museums treat ancestral remains. Sign up for a weekly email featuring our best reads But over the last few months a planned radical museum restructure has seriously undermined relations between the institution and Indigenous staff and stakeholders. Protests broke out in the notoriously civilised city while staff, Indigenous stakeholders, global scientific experts, politicians and wealthy donors embarked on an intense and uncharacteristic public and private lobbying effort to achieve government intervention. Their fear? That the global reputation of the museum was in danger of compromise, and, more importantly, its hard-won progress with First Nations people jeopardised. And, so, on Thursday, South Australian Labor premier Peter Malinauskas intervened to put the planned changes on temporary hold. A three-person panel will now conduct a review Malinauskas insists will “ensure the museum continues to deliver quality outcomes for all South Australians’’. It will report as early as June. View image in fullscreen Ngarrindjeri/Kaurna elder Major ‘Moogy’ Sumner gives former South Australian premier Steven Marshall the first Kaurna remains from the state museum to be laid to rest. Photograph: Kelly Barnes Until then, profound cultural and historical sensitivities involving Indigenous collections, Aboriginal staff and stakeholders hang in fine balance. I n the end, after a century and a half of often hostile relations between the museum and Indigenous communities – too often characterised with fear and cultural theft – change came swiftly to the conservative, old Adelaide institution. It was only after anthropologist John Carty arrived at the museum as head of humanities in 2016 that human remains (from the South Pacific Galleries) were removed from public display and a new progressive policy on repatriation of Indigenous ancestral remains (the first in three decades) was formulated. The museum became a global leader on repatriation and reburial , and a culturally safer place for First Nations people. Indigenous experts began to work there in greater numbers and to collaborate on how to return more remains to country and to reconnect the largest collection of Australian First Nations cultural material in the world with the communities from which they were removed. The impact of progress was profound; since 2019, the remains of more than 700 ancestors have been returned to the country of Aboriginal communities across the country. Comparatively, in the decade before SAM’s 2018 repatriation strategy, the museum returned 49 ancestors to one community. Part protest, part rave: the Indigenous artists stunning the Venice Biennale Read more It was this improved relationship with Indigenous communities and the ongoing repatriation work on – and reburial of – the ancestral remains that many critics feared was being potentially threatened by the proposed restructure by director David Gaimster, who took over the museum in mid-2023. The now paused broad “reimagining” at SAM aimed to reduce and “reimagine’’ the roles of curatorial and research staff, and to make the institution more “sustainable, relevant, and accessible’’ for this century. The proposed changes would abolish 27 research and collections roles and replace them with 22 mostly more junior positions, many involving greater multi-tasking. They have provoked public protest , including from the Public Service Association of South Australia, put enormous pressure on Malinauskas to intervene, and raised concern from some of the world’s leading scientists about potential irreparable damage to the reputation of an institution considered the primary natural science museum for Australia’s continental interior. Globally celebrated mammalogist and former SAM director Tim Flannery has, for example, told InDaily the changes could spell “the death of the museum’’ . But it is the proposed abolition of the head of humanities and the Aboriginal heritage and repatriation roles held by Carty and Anna Russo respectively – as well as changes to the way Indigenous family research and secret/sacred collections would be managed under the proposed restructure – that have most angered and deeply concerned First Nations museum staff, South Australian elders and other Indigenous stakeholders. View image in fullscreen There is growing concern among Aboriginal and non-Indigenous stakeholders that having chosen a difficult path of decolonisation the proposed changes now threaten a ‘re-colonisation’ of the museum Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian Under the proposed restructure both Russo’s and Carty’s positions are replaced by a “repatriation curator’’. Neither Carty nor Russo – nor any other Aboriginal and non-Indigenous staff – would comment to Guardian Australia on the changes, consistent with their employment obligations as South Australian public servants. In an apparent message to senior museum management about the potential threat to reburial and repatriation, Kaurna/Ngarrindjeri elder Major ‘Moogy’ Sumner, told the ABC , “You’ve got people that’s been here from the start and you want to get rid of them? That’s dumb. You should be the one to go. Leave them people here. They’re more important than you will ever be.’’ The concerns of many are articulated in a recent letter from the South Australian State Aboriginal Heritage Committee to SAM board chair Kim Cheater, the state’s arts minister, Andrea Michaels, and Gaimster. “SAM has held some 4,600 Aboriginal remains over the past 165 years. Many of these Old People found their way to SAM because of what are now recognised as abhorrent and dehumanising practices, with which SAM was in many cases complicit,’’ the committee wrote on 27 March. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion They said the cross-cultural work of repatriation, especially given how many ancestral remains are held by SAM, was very complex and demanded “significant patience, empathy, cultural knowledge, and interpersonal skills’’. “The Committee has serious concerns that devolving Ms Russo’s repatriation role to a mid-level archaeologist will almost certainly hinder progress and damage the nascent trust that Ms Russo and her team have carefully built over recent years.’’ Committee members said that while the museum was entitled to reprioritise curation over research, the institution’s collection of First Nations human remains “can never be displayed in a curated event at SAM’’. They urged the museum to maintain the current level of resources for repatriation of ancestral remains. There is growing concern among Aboriginal and non-Indigenous stakeholders that having chosen a difficult path of decolonisation the proposed changes now threaten a “re-colonisation” of the museum, considered by some to be the most traditionally-conservative British-style collecting institution in Australia. In recent correspondence to the state Minister for Aboriginal Affairs Kyam Maher, eight current museum staff wrote, “Positioning ancestral remains in the restructure as a collection to be curated, returns the Ancestors to the equal of rocks and boomerangs. View image in fullscreen Major ‘Moogy’ Sumner says proposed changes would see the loss of experienced and essential staff. Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian “‘Restoring dignity’ is a term often used by Elders when reburying their ancestors. Rather than restoring dignity the restructure, in this way, represents a deeply colonial backward step.’’ Arrernte elder and former chair of SAM’s Aboriginal Advisory Committee David Rathman told Guardian Australia the proposed changes were “destructive’’ and he had conveyed his concerns about the future of the Aboriginal projects to Gaimster. In the “hostile” post-voice referendum environment, says Rathman, “this trust that is there [at the museum] needs to be preserved and fostered and developed because Aboriginal people have always built their trust on the respect and continuity of contact”. In the weeks leading up to the state government Anzac Day intervention, opposition to the restructure bubbled over; public and private letters from staff, the museum world, politicians and beyond put mounting pressure on the government and museum. ‘Very totemic and very Aboriginal’: Australia’s entry at Venice Biennale is a family tree going back 65,000 years Read more On 11 April Aboriginal staff wrote to Gaimster with concerns that the restructure was at odds with the museum’s most recent Reconciliation Action Plan, that Indigenous stakeholders had not been consulted, and that the restructure “devalues the work of staff members employed to carry out Aboriginal related business”. For one thing, the restructure overlooked the cultural considerations relating to the Secret Sacred collections that requires men and women to manage the roles separately. “How the Museum has handled ancestral remains prior to the appointment of an Aboriginal Heritage and Repatriation Manager is leading to strong concerns that through its current actions, the Museum could find itself at odds again with Aboriginal stakeholders far into the future,” they wrote. In a statement to Guardian Australia Gaimster said “the museum welcomes” the premier’s intervention “and we look forward to the Review recommendations’’. He said the museum “recognises and respects the expertise” of staff and “there are no plans to devolve or change the nature of the repatriation role”. “We are committed to maintaining our program of repatriation and the continued management of our significant First Nations Collections. We wrote to the [South Australian Heritage Council] earlier this month assuring them that the Museum would not be reducing its commitment or services for any of our First Nations communities and stakeholders,” he said. “We have actively consulted with staff and the Chair of the Museum’s Aboriginal Partnership Committee facilitated a dedicated meeting with our First Nations staff and has provided us with valuable feedback and suggestions. No decisions have been or will be made without consideration of that feedback.” Meanwhile as the museum and its stakeholders await the review findings, in a locked and darkened room on the outskirts of Adelaide, the remains of 3,500-plus ancestors remain packed in cardboard boxes on shelves awaiting return to country and reburial. For now the hope that this will happen any time soon is fast diminishing. Explore more on these topics Museums Indigenous Australians South Australia Peter Malinauskas South Australian politics features Share Reuse this content A planned radical restructure of the South Australian Museum has seriously undermined relations between the institution and Indigenous staff and stakeholders. Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian View image in fullscreen A planned radical restructure of the South Australian Museum has seriously undermined relations between the institution and Indigenous staff and stakeholders. Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old ‘A deeply colonial backward step’: why are donors, staff and politicians up in arms about the South Australian Museum? This article is more than 1 year old The South Australian government has just intervened to pause a restructure of the state’s biggest museum. Why? Get our morning and afternoon news emails , free app or daily news podcast F or the past seven years the South Australian Museum has undergone a thawing of its long-strained relations with Indigenous peoples, thousands of whose ancestral human remains and cultural objects the institution has hoarded since the 1850s. The museum has apologised to Indigenous Australians for the kleptocratic, inhuman practices by which it amassed a “collection’’ of Indigenous ancestral remains of about 4,600 people , patiently built previously nonexistent trust with South Australia’s Kaurna people, reburied hundreds of ancestors in Adelaide and repatriated remains to communities across Australia. It has consequently been globally acknowledged for re-building broken relations with First Nations people, affording them increased custodianship of Indigenous collections and, not least, for bringing overdue dignity to the culturally incendiary issue of how museums treat ancestral remains. Sign up for a weekly email featuring our best reads But over the last few months a planned radical museum restructure has seriously undermined relations between the institution and Indigenous staff and stakeholders. Protests broke out in the notoriously civilised city while staff, Indigenous stakeholders, global scientific experts, politicians and wealthy donors embarked on an intense and uncharacteristic public and private lobbying effort to achieve government intervention. Their fear? That the global reputation of the museum was in danger of compromise, and, more importantly, its hard-won progress with First Nations people jeopardised. And, so, on Thursday, South Australian Labor premier Peter Malinauskas intervened to put the planned changes on temporary hold. A three-person panel will now conduct a review Malinauskas insists will “ensure the museum continues to deliver quality outcomes for all South Australians’’. It will report as early as June. View image in fullscreen Ngarrindjeri/Kaurna elder Major ‘Moogy’ Sumner gives former South Australian premier Steven Marshall the first Kaurna remains from the state museum to be laid to rest. Photograph: Kelly Barnes Until then, profound cultural and historical sensitivities involving Indigenous collections, Aboriginal staff and stakeholders hang in fine balance. I n the end, after a century and a half of often hostile relations between the museum and Indigenous communities – too often characterised with fear and cultural theft – change came swiftly to the conservative, old Adelaide institution. It was only after anthropologist John Carty arrived at the museum as head of humanities in 2016 that human remains (from the South Pacific Galleries) were removed from public display and a new progressive policy on repatriation of Indigenous ancestral remains (the first in three decades) was formulated. The museum became a global leader on repatriation and reburial , and a culturally safer place for First Nations people. Indigenous experts began to work there in greater numbers and to collaborate on how to return more remains to country and to reconnect the largest collection of Australian First Nations cultural material in the world with the communities from which they were removed. The impact of progress was profound; since 2019, the remains of more than 700 ancestors have been returned to the country of Aboriginal communities across the country. Comparatively, in the decade before SAM’s 2018 repatriation strategy, the museum returned 49 ancestors to one community. Part protest, part rave: the Indigenous artists stunning the Venice Biennale Read more It was this improved relationship with Indigenous communities and the ongoing repatriation work on – and reburial of – the ancestral remains that many critics feared was being potentially threatened by the proposed restructure by director David Gaimster, who took over the museum in mid-2023. The now paused broad “reimagining” at SAM aimed to reduce and “reimagine’’ the roles of curatorial and research staff, and to make the institution more “sustainable, relevant, and accessible’’ for this century. The proposed changes would abolish 27 research and collections roles and replace them with 22 mostly more junior positions, many involving greater multi-tasking. They have provoked public protest , including from the Public Service Association of South Australia, put enormous pressure on Malinauskas to intervene, and raised concern from some of the world’s leading scientists about potential irreparable damage to the reputation of an institution considered the primary natural science museum for Australia’s continental interior. Globally celebrated mammalogist and former SAM director Tim Flannery has, for example, told InDaily the changes could spell “the death of the museum’’ . But it is the proposed abolition of the head of humanities and the Aboriginal heritage and repatriation roles held by Carty and Anna Russo respectively – as well as changes to the way Indigenous family research and secret/sacred collections would be managed under the proposed restructure – that have most angered and deeply concerned First Nations museum staff, South Australian elders and other Indigenous stakeholders. View image in fullscreen There is growing concern among Aboriginal and non-Indigenous stakeholders that having chosen a difficult path of decolonisation the proposed changes now threaten a ‘re-colonisation’ of the museum Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian Under the proposed restructure both Russo’s and Carty’s positions are replaced by a “repatriation curator’’. Neither Carty nor Russo – nor any other Aboriginal and non-Indigenous staff – would comment to Guardian Australia on the changes, consistent with their employment obligations as South Australian public servants. In an apparent message to senior museum management about the potential threat to reburial and repatriation, Kaurna/Ngarrindjeri elder Major ‘Moogy’ Sumner, told the ABC , “You’ve got people that’s been here from the start and you want to get rid of them? That’s dumb. You should be the one to go. Leave them people here. They’re more important than you will ever be.’’ The concerns of many are articulated in a recent letter from the South Australian State Aboriginal Heritage Committee to SAM board chair Kim Cheater, the state’s arts minister, Andrea Michaels, and Gaimster. “SAM has held some 4,600 Aboriginal remains over the past 165 years. Many of these Old People found their way to SAM because of what are now recognised as abhorrent and dehumanising practices, with which SAM was in many cases complicit,’’ the committee wrote on 27 March. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion They said the cross-cultural work of repatriation, especially given how many ancestral remains are held by SAM, was very complex and demanded “significant patience, empathy, cultural knowledge, and interpersonal skills’’. “The Committee has serious concerns that devolving Ms Russo’s repatriation role to a mid-level archaeologist will almost certainly hinder progress and damage the nascent trust that Ms Russo and her team have carefully built over recent years.’’ Committee members said that while the museum was entitled to reprioritise curation over research, the institution’s collection of First Nations human remains “can never be displayed in a curated event at SAM’’. They urged the museum to maintain the current level of resources for repatriation of ancestral remains. There is growing concern among Aboriginal and non-Indigenous stakeholders that having chosen a difficult path of decolonisation the proposed changes now threaten a “re-colonisation” of the museum, considered by some to be the most traditionally-conservative British-style collecting institution in Australia. In recent correspondence to the state Minister for Aboriginal Affairs Kyam Maher, eight current museum staff wrote, “Positioning ancestral remains in the restructure as a collection to be curated, returns the Ancestors to the equal of rocks and boomerangs. View image in fullscreen Major ‘Moogy’ Sumner says proposed changes would see the loss of experienced and essential staff. Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian “‘Restoring dignity’ is a term often used by Elders when reburying their ancestors. Rather than restoring dignity the restructure, in this way, represents a deeply colonial backward step.’’ Arrernte elder and former chair of SAM’s Aboriginal Advisory Committee David Rathman told Guardian Australia the proposed changes were “destructive’’ and he had conveyed his concerns about the future of the Aboriginal projects to Gaimster. In the “hostile” post-voice referendum environment, says Rathman, “this trust that is there [at the museum] needs to be preserved and fostered and developed because Aboriginal people have always built their trust on the respect and continuity of contact”. In the weeks leading up to the state government Anzac Day intervention, opposition to the restructure bubbled over; public and private letters from staff, the museum world, politicians and beyond put mounting pressure on the government and museum. ‘Very totemic and very Aboriginal’: Australia’s entry at Venice Biennale is a family tree going back 65,000 years Read more On 11 April Aboriginal staff wrote to Gaimster with concerns that the restructure was at odds with the museum’s most recent Reconciliation Action Plan, that Indigenous stakeholders had not been consulted, and that the restructure “devalues the work of staff members employed to carry out Aboriginal related business”. For one thing, the restructure overlooked the cultural considerations relating to the Secret Sacred collections that requires men and women to manage the roles separately. “How the Museum has handled ancestral remains prior to the appointment of an Aboriginal Heritage and Repatriation Manager is leading to strong concerns that through its current actions, the Museum could find itself at odds again with Aboriginal stakeholders far into the future,” they wrote. In a statement to Guardian Australia Gaimster said “the museum welcomes” the premier’s intervention “and we look forward to the Review recommendations’’. He said the museum “recognises and respects the expertise” of staff and “there are no plans to devolve or change the nature of the repatriation role”. “We are committed to maintaining our program of repatriation and the continued management of our significant First Nations Collections. We wrote to the [South Australian Heritage Council] earlier this month assuring them that the Museum would not be reducing its commitment or services for any of our First Nations communities and stakeholders,” he said. “We have actively consulted with staff and the Chair of the Museum’s Aboriginal Partnership Committee facilitated a dedicated meeting with our First Nations staff and has provided us with valuable feedback and suggestions. No decisions have been or will be made without consideration of that feedback.” Meanwhile as the museum and its stakeholders await the review findings, in a locked and darkened room on the outskirts of Adelaide, the remains of 3,500-plus ancestors remain packed in cardboard boxes on shelves awaiting return to country and reburial. For now the hope that this will happen any time soon is fast diminishing. Explore more on these topics Museums Indigenous Australians South Australia Peter Malinauskas South Australian politics features Share Reuse this content A planned radical restructure of the South Australian Museum has seriously undermined relations between the institution and Indigenous staff and stakeholders. Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian View image in fullscreen A planned radical restructure of the South Australian Museum has seriously undermined relations between the institution and Indigenous staff and stakeholders. Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian A planned radical restructure of the South Australian Museum has seriously undermined relations between the institution and Indigenous staff and stakeholders. Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian View image in fullscreen A planned radical restructure of the South Australian Museum has seriously undermined relations between the institution and Indigenous staff and stakeholders. Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian A planned radical restructure of the South Australian Museum has seriously undermined relations between the institution and Indigenous staff and stakeholders. Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian View image in fullscreen A planned radical restructure of the South Australian Museum has seriously undermined relations between the institution and Indigenous staff and stakeholders. Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian A planned radical restructure of the South Australian Museum has seriously undermined relations between the institution and Indigenous staff and stakeholders. Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian View image in fullscreen A planned radical restructure of the South Australian Museum has seriously undermined relations between the institution and Indigenous staff and stakeholders. Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian A planned radical restructure of the South Australian Museum has seriously undermined relations between the institution and Indigenous staff and stakeholders. Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian A planned radical restructure of the South Australian Museum has seriously undermined relations between the institution and Indigenous staff and stakeholders. Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old ‘A deeply colonial backward step’: why are donors, staff and politicians up in arms about the South Australian Museum? This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘A deeply colonial backward step’: why are donors, staff and politicians up in arms about the South Australian Museum? This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘A deeply colonial backward step’: why are donors, staff and politicians up in arms about the South Australian Museum? This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old The South Australian government has just intervened to pause a restructure of the state’s biggest museum. Why? Get our morning and afternoon news emails , free app or daily news podcast The South Australian government has just intervened to pause a restructure of the state’s biggest museum. Why? Get our morning and afternoon news emails , free app or daily news podcast The South Australian government has just intervened to pause a restructure of the state’s biggest museum. Why? F or the past seven years the South Australian Museum has undergone a thawing of its long-strained relations with Indigenous peoples, thousands of whose ancestral human remains and cultural objects the institution has hoarded since the 1850s. The museum has apologised to Indigenous Australians for the kleptocratic, inhuman practices by which it amassed a “collection’’ of Indigenous ancestral remains of about 4,600 people , patiently built previously nonexistent trust with South Australia’s Kaurna people, reburied hundreds of ancestors in Adelaide and repatriated remains to communities across Australia. It has consequently been globally acknowledged for re-building broken relations with First Nations people, affording them increased custodianship of Indigenous collections and, not least, for bringing overdue dignity to the culturally incendiary issue of how museums treat ancestral remains. Sign up for a weekly email featuring our best reads But over the last few months a planned radical museum restructure has seriously undermined relations between the institution and Indigenous staff and stakeholders. Protests broke out in the notoriously civilised city while staff, Indigenous stakeholders, global scientific experts, politicians and wealthy donors embarked on an intense and uncharacteristic public and private lobbying effort to achieve government intervention. Their fear? That the global reputation of the museum was in danger of compromise, and, more importantly, its hard-won progress with First Nations people jeopardised. And, so, on Thursday, South Australian Labor premier Peter Malinauskas intervened to put the planned changes on temporary hold. A three-person panel will now conduct a review Malinauskas insists will “ensure the museum continues to deliver quality outcomes for all South Australians’’. It will report as early as June. View image in fullscreen Ngarrindjeri/Kaurna elder Major ‘Moogy’ Sumner gives former South Australian premier Steven Marshall the first Kaurna remains from the state museum to be laid to rest. Photograph: Kelly Barnes Until then, profound cultural and historical sensitivities involving Indigenous collections, Aboriginal staff and stakeholders hang in fine balance. I n the end, after a century and a half of often hostile relations between the museum and Indigenous communities – too often characterised with fear and cultural theft – change came swiftly to the conservative, old Adelaide institution. It was only after anthropologist John Carty arrived at the museum as head of humanities in 2016 that human remains (from the South Pacific Galleries) were removed from public display and a new progressive policy on repatriation of Indigenous ancestral remains (the first in three decades) was formulated. The museum became a global leader on repatriation and reburial , and a culturally safer place for First Nations people. Indigenous experts began to work there in greater numbers and to collaborate on how to return more remains to country and to reconnect the largest collection of Australian First Nations cultural material in the world with the communities from which they were removed. The impact of progress was profound; since 2019, the remains of more than 700 ancestors have been returned to the country of Aboriginal communities across the country. Comparatively, in the decade before SAM’s 2018 repatriation strategy, the museum returned 49 ancestors to one community. Part protest, part rave: the Indigenous artists stunning the Venice Biennale Read more It was this improved relationship with Indigenous communities and the ongoing repatriation work on – and reburial of – the ancestral remains that many critics feared was being potentially threatened by the proposed restructure by director David Gaimster, who took over the museum in mid-2023. The now paused broad “reimagining” at SAM aimed to reduce and “reimagine’’ the roles of curatorial and research staff, and to make the institution more “sustainable, relevant, and accessible’’ for this century. The proposed changes would abolish 27 research and collections roles and replace them with 22 mostly more junior positions, many involving greater multi-tasking. They have provoked public protest , including from the Public Service Association of South Australia, put enormous pressure on Malinauskas to intervene, and raised concern from some of the world’s leading scientists about potential irreparable damage to the reputation of an institution considered the primary natural science museum for Australia’s continental interior. Globally celebrated mammalogist and former SAM director Tim Flannery has, for example, told InDaily the changes could spell “the death of the museum’’ . But it is the proposed abolition of the head of humanities and the Aboriginal heritage and repatriation roles held by Carty and Anna Russo respectively – as well as changes to the way Indigenous family research and secret/sacred collections would be managed under the proposed restructure – that have most angered and deeply concerned First Nations museum staff, South Australian elders and other Indigenous stakeholders. View image in fullscreen There is growing concern among Aboriginal and non-Indigenous stakeholders that having chosen a difficult path of decolonisation the proposed changes now threaten a ‘re-colonisation’ of the museum Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian Under the proposed restructure both Russo’s and Carty’s positions are replaced by a “repatriation curator’’. Neither Carty nor Russo – nor any other Aboriginal and non-Indigenous staff – would comment to Guardian Australia on the changes, consistent with their employment obligations as South Australian public servants. In an apparent message to senior museum management about the potential threat to reburial and repatriation, Kaurna/Ngarrindjeri elder Major ‘Moogy’ Sumner, told the ABC , “You’ve got people that’s been here from the start and you want to get rid of them? That’s dumb. You should be the one to go. Leave them people here. They’re more important than you will ever be.’’ The concerns of many are articulated in a recent letter from the South Australian State Aboriginal Heritage Committee to SAM board chair Kim Cheater, the state’s arts minister, Andrea Michaels, and Gaimster. “SAM has held some 4,600 Aboriginal remains over the past 165 years. Many of these Old People found their way to SAM because of what are now recognised as abhorrent and dehumanising practices, with which SAM was in many cases complicit,’’ the committee wrote on 27 March. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion They said the cross-cultural work of repatriation, especially given how many ancestral remains are held by SAM, was very complex and demanded “significant patience, empathy, cultural knowledge, and interpersonal skills’’. “The Committee has serious concerns that devolving Ms Russo’s repatriation role to a mid-level archaeologist will almost certainly hinder progress and damage the nascent trust that Ms Russo and her team have carefully built over recent years.’’ Committee members said that while the museum was entitled to reprioritise curation over research, the institution’s collection of First Nations human remains “can never be displayed in a curated event at SAM’’. They urged the museum to maintain the current level of resources for repatriation of ancestral remains. There is growing concern among Aboriginal and non-Indigenous stakeholders that having chosen a difficult path of decolonisation the proposed changes now threaten a “re-colonisation” of the museum, considered by some to be the most traditionally-conservative British-style collecting institution in Australia. In recent correspondence to the state Minister for Aboriginal Affairs Kyam Maher, eight current museum staff wrote, “Positioning ancestral remains in the restructure as a collection to be curated, returns the Ancestors to the equal of rocks and boomerangs. View image in fullscreen Major ‘Moogy’ Sumner says proposed changes would see the loss of experienced and essential staff. Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian “‘Restoring dignity’ is a term often used by Elders when reburying their ancestors. Rather than restoring dignity the restructure, in this way, represents a deeply colonial backward step.’’ Arrernte elder and former chair of SAM’s Aboriginal Advisory Committee David Rathman told Guardian Australia the proposed changes were “destructive’’ and he had conveyed his concerns about the future of the Aboriginal projects to Gaimster. In the “hostile” post-voice referendum environment, says Rathman, “this trust that is there [at the museum] needs to be preserved and fostered and developed because Aboriginal people have always built their trust on the respect and continuity of contact”. In the weeks leading up to the state government Anzac Day intervention, opposition to the restructure bubbled over; public and private letters from staff, the museum world, politicians and beyond put mounting pressure on the government and museum. ‘Very totemic and very Aboriginal’: Australia’s entry at Venice Biennale is a family tree going back 65,000 years Read more On 11 April Aboriginal staff wrote to Gaimster with concerns that the restructure was at odds with the museum’s most recent Reconciliation Action Plan, that Indigenous stakeholders had not been consulted, and that the restructure “devalues the work of staff members employed to carry out Aboriginal related business”. For one thing, the restructure overlooked the cultural considerations relating to the Secret Sacred collections that requires men and women to manage the roles separately. “How the Museum has handled ancestral remains prior to the appointment of an Aboriginal Heritage and Repatriation Manager is leading to strong concerns that through its current actions, the Museum could find itself at odds again with Aboriginal stakeholders far into the future,” they wrote. In a statement to Guardian Australia Gaimster said “the museum welcomes” the premier’s intervention “and we look forward to the Review recommendations’’. He said the museum “recognises and respects the expertise” of staff and “there are no plans to devolve or change the nature of the repatriation role”. “We are committed to maintaining our program of repatriation and the continued management of our significant First Nations Collections. We wrote to the [South Australian Heritage Council] earlier this month assuring them that the Museum would not be reducing its commitment or services for any of our First Nations communities and stakeholders,” he said. “We have actively consulted with staff and the Chair of the Museum’s Aboriginal Partnership Committee facilitated a dedicated meeting with our First Nations staff and has provided us with valuable feedback and suggestions. No decisions have been or will be made without consideration of that feedback.” Meanwhile as the museum and its stakeholders await the review findings, in a locked and darkened room on the outskirts of Adelaide, the remains of 3,500-plus ancestors remain packed in cardboard boxes on shelves awaiting return to country and reburial. For now the hope that this will happen any time soon is fast diminishing. Explore more on these topics Museums Indigenous Australians South Australia Peter Malinauskas South Australian politics features Share Reuse this content F or the past seven years the South Australian Museum has undergone a thawing of its long-strained relations with Indigenous peoples, thousands of whose ancestral human remains and cultural objects the institution has hoarded since the 1850s. The museum has apologised to Indigenous Australians for the kleptocratic, inhuman practices by which it amassed a “collection’’ of Indigenous ancestral remains of about 4,600 people , patiently built previously nonexistent trust with South Australia’s Kaurna people, reburied hundreds of ancestors in Adelaide and repatriated remains to communities across Australia. It has consequently been globally acknowledged for re-building broken relations with First Nations people, affording them increased custodianship of Indigenous collections and, not least, for bringing overdue dignity to the culturally incendiary issue of how museums treat ancestral remains. Sign up for a weekly email featuring our best reads But over the last few months a planned radical museum restructure has seriously undermined relations between the institution and Indigenous staff and stakeholders. Protests broke out in the notoriously civilised city while staff, Indigenous stakeholders, global scientific experts, politicians and wealthy donors embarked on an intense and uncharacteristic public and private lobbying effort to achieve government intervention. Their fear? That the global reputation of the museum was in danger of compromise, and, more importantly, its hard-won progress with First Nations people jeopardised. And, so, on Thursday, South Australian Labor premier Peter Malinauskas intervened to put the planned changes on temporary hold. A three-person panel will now conduct a review Malinauskas insists will “ensure the museum continues to deliver quality outcomes for all South Australians’’. It will report as early as June. View image in fullscreen Ngarrindjeri/Kaurna elder Major ‘Moogy’ Sumner gives former South Australian premier Steven Marshall the first Kaurna remains from the state museum to be laid to rest. Photograph: Kelly Barnes Until then, profound cultural and historical sensitivities involving Indigenous collections, Aboriginal staff and stakeholders hang in fine balance. I n the end, after a century and a half of often hostile relations between the museum and Indigenous communities – too often characterised with fear and cultural theft – change came swiftly to the conservative, old Adelaide institution. It was only after anthropologist John Carty arrived at the museum as head of humanities in 2016 that human remains (from the South Pacific Galleries) were removed from public display and a new progressive policy on repatriation of Indigenous ancestral remains (the first in three decades) was formulated. The museum became a global leader on repatriation and reburial , and a culturally safer place for First Nations people. Indigenous experts began to work there in greater numbers and to collaborate on how to return more remains to country and to reconnect the largest collection of Australian First Nations cultural material in the world with the communities from which they were removed. The impact of progress was profound; since 2019, the remains of more than 700 ancestors have been returned to the country of Aboriginal communities across the country. Comparatively, in the decade before SAM’s 2018 repatriation strategy, the museum returned 49 ancestors to one community. Part protest, part rave: the Indigenous artists stunning the Venice Biennale Read more It was this improved relationship with Indigenous communities and the ongoing repatriation work on – and reburial of – the ancestral remains that many critics feared was being potentially threatened by the proposed restructure by director David Gaimster, who took over the museum in mid-2023. The now paused broad “reimagining” at SAM aimed to reduce and “reimagine’’ the roles of curatorial and research staff, and to make the institution more “sustainable, relevant, and accessible’’ for this century. The proposed changes would abolish 27 research and collections roles and replace them with 22 mostly more junior positions, many involving greater multi-tasking. They have provoked public protest , including from the Public Service Association of South Australia, put enormous pressure on Malinauskas to intervene, and raised concern from some of the world’s leading scientists about potential irreparable damage to the reputation of an institution considered the primary natural science museum for Australia’s continental interior. Globally celebrated mammalogist and former SAM director Tim Flannery has, for example, told InDaily the changes could spell “the death of the museum’’ . But it is the proposed abolition of the head of humanities and the Aboriginal heritage and repatriation roles held by Carty and Anna Russo respectively – as well as changes to the way Indigenous family research and secret/sacred collections would be managed under the proposed restructure – that have most angered and deeply concerned First Nations museum staff, South Australian elders and other Indigenous stakeholders. View image in fullscreen There is growing concern among Aboriginal and non-Indigenous stakeholders that having chosen a difficult path of decolonisation the proposed changes now threaten a ‘re-colonisation’ of the museum Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian Under the proposed restructure both Russo’s and Carty’s positions are replaced by a “repatriation curator’’. Neither Carty nor Russo – nor any other Aboriginal and non-Indigenous staff – would comment to Guardian Australia on the changes, consistent with their employment obligations as South Australian public servants. In an apparent message to senior museum management about the potential threat to reburial and repatriation, Kaurna/Ngarrindjeri elder Major ‘Moogy’ Sumner, told the ABC , “You’ve got people that’s been here from the start and you want to get rid of them? That’s dumb. You should be the one to go. Leave them people here. They’re more important than you will ever be.’’ The concerns of many are articulated in a recent letter from the South Australian State Aboriginal Heritage Committee to SAM board chair Kim Cheater, the state’s arts minister, Andrea Michaels, and Gaimster. “SAM has held some 4,600 Aboriginal remains over the past 165 years. Many of these Old People found their way to SAM because of what are now recognised as abhorrent and dehumanising practices, with which SAM was in many cases complicit,’’ the committee wrote on 27 March. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion They said the cross-cultural work of repatriation, especially given how many ancestral remains are held by SAM, was very complex and demanded “significant patience, empathy, cultural knowledge, and interpersonal skills’’. “The Committee has serious concerns that devolving Ms Russo’s repatriation role to a mid-level archaeologist will almost certainly hinder progress and damage the nascent trust that Ms Russo and her team have carefully built over recent years.’’ Committee members said that while the museum was entitled to reprioritise curation over research, the institution’s collection of First Nations human remains “can never be displayed in a curated event at SAM’’. They urged the museum to maintain the current level of resources for repatriation of ancestral remains. There is growing concern among Aboriginal and non-Indigenous stakeholders that having chosen a difficult path of decolonisation the proposed changes now threaten a “re-colonisation” of the museum, considered by some to be the most traditionally-conservative British-style collecting institution in Australia. In recent correspondence to the state Minister for Aboriginal Affairs Kyam Maher, eight current museum staff wrote, “Positioning ancestral remains in the restructure as a collection to be curated, returns the Ancestors to the equal of rocks and boomerangs. View image in fullscreen Major ‘Moogy’ Sumner says proposed changes would see the loss of experienced and essential staff. Photograph: Kelly Barnes AllStar Photos/The Guardian “‘Restoring dignity’ is a term often used by Elders when reburying their ancestors. Rather than restoring dignity the restructure, in this way, represents a deeply colonial backward step.’’ Arrernte elder and former chair of SAM’s Aboriginal Advisory Committee David Rathman told Guardian Australia the proposed changes were “destructive’’ and he had conveyed his concerns about the future of the Aboriginal projects to Gaimster. In the “hostile” post-voice referendum environment, says Rathman, “this trust that is there [at the museum] needs to be preserved and fostered and developed because Aboriginal people have always built their trust on the respect and continuity of contact”. In the weeks leading up to the state government Anzac Day intervention, opposition to the restructure bubbled over; public and private letters from staff, the museum world, politicians and beyond put mounting pressure on the government and museum. ‘Very totemic and very Aboriginal’: Australia’s entry at Venice Biennale is a family tree going back 65,000 years Read more On 11 April Aboriginal staff wrote to Gaimster with concerns that the restructure was at odds with the museum’s most recent Reconciliation Action Plan, that Indigenous stakeholders had not been consulted, and that the restructure “devalues the work of staff members employed to carry out Aboriginal related business”. For one thi
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
Humza Yousaf fights to stay on as second no confidence motion tabled
Humza Yousaf speaking to the media in Dundee. He offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had ‘heard their anger’. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf speaking to the media in Dundee. He offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had ‘heard their anger’. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA This article is more than 1 year old Humza Yousaf fights to stay on as second no confidence motion tabled This article is more than 1 year old SNP leader says he will take party into general election, as Scottish Labour submits motion against his government Humza Yousaf is fighting for his political life as he faces two no confidence motions submitted against him and his government in the space of 24 hours. Yousaf insisted he would not resign as first minister and vowed to fight on, amid intense speculation about his leadership after he axed the SNP’s governing agreement with the Scottish Greens on Thursday morning, provoking a furious backlash that resulted in his former partners pledging to vote with the Tories against him. Holyrood arithmetic now leaves the deciding vote with one woman, Ash Regan, whom Yousaf beat to the SNP leadership last March and who has since defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party. After two days of high political drama, Yousaf was in bullish mood on Friday, telling reporters at an event in Dundee: “I will absolutely be taking us into a general election and 2026 Scottish parliament elections.” He told Sky News: “I intend absolutely to fight that vote of no confidence, I’ve got every intention of winning that vote of no confidence.” Yousaf offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had “heard their anger” after he tore up the Bute House agreement brokered by Nicola Sturgeon in 2021, blindsiding supporters and opponents. It is understood that the extent of the Greens’ fury took Yousaf by surprise, but he maintained on Friday that ending the agreement was the right thing to do. He had faced increasing frustration within his own party about a host of electorally unpopular policies championed by the Greens. He said he would be speaking to the Scottish Green co-leaders, Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater – who on Thursday denounced him as weak and accused him of caving in to the right of his party – about what had happened, saying: “I empathise with their position because I understand how they must be feeling.” But it remains the case that a motion of no confidence in his leadership brought against him by the Scottish Conservatives , which is likely to be debated next Wednesday or Thursday, will bring Yousaf to the brink of defeat. The SNP is two votes short of a majority at Holyrood, and while the presiding officer always votes with the status quo, Yousaf will need to secure the backing of Regan, who defected last October in protest at the party’s stance on gender reform and lack of progress on independence. Regan, who revealed she has not spoken to Yousaf since she lost out to him in last year’s leadership contest, said she would “relish the opportunity” to discuss a possible alignment of the centre-right Alba party with the SNP. Meanwhile the Greens, who reported a surge in membership over the past day, are “unequivocal” about voting against Yousaf, according to party sources, while Harvie said it was up to the SNP to find a suitable leader. “Very clearly, he [Yousaf] doesn’t have the confidence of parliament. We said very clearly the responsibility of the decision is on him. He needs to bear the consequences of that reckless and damaging decision,” Harvie said. Yousaf said he would urge the Greens to reconsider but he must also maintain the support of colleagues across the spectrum within the SNP who have praised him for “resetting priorities” as the general election approaches, with heavy losses already predicted for the SNP at the hands of a resurgent Scottish Labour . While the Greens have accused the SNP of moving to the right and away from Sturgeon’s progressive agenda that Yousaf pledged to stick to when he was first elected, there is also speculation that being seen to side with the Tories against the only other pro-independence party at Holyrood could damage the Greens at the ballot box. On Friday morning, Scottish Labour applied further pressure by tabling its own motion of no confidence in the Scottish government, which the Scottish Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have since pledged to support. Unlike the Conservative motion against Yousaf, if Labour’s were successful it would require the first minister and his ministers to resign. If the Scottish parliament cannot agree on another first minister within 28 days, this would trigger an election. Speaking to Channel 4 News on Friday evening, Yousaf said he “certainly wouldn’t rule out” a Holyrood election. “We’re on an election footing – we’re prepared if that’s required,” he said. Explore more on these topics Humza Yousaf Scottish National party (SNP) Scottish politics Scotland Green party Labour Conservatives news Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf speaking to the media in Dundee. He offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had ‘heard their anger’. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf speaking to the media in Dundee. He offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had ‘heard their anger’. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA This article is more than 1 year old Humza Yousaf fights to stay on as second no confidence motion tabled This article is more than 1 year old SNP leader says he will take party into general election, as Scottish Labour submits motion against his government Humza Yousaf is fighting for his political life as he faces two no confidence motions submitted against him and his government in the space of 24 hours. Yousaf insisted he would not resign as first minister and vowed to fight on, amid intense speculation about his leadership after he axed the SNP’s governing agreement with the Scottish Greens on Thursday morning, provoking a furious backlash that resulted in his former partners pledging to vote with the Tories against him. Holyrood arithmetic now leaves the deciding vote with one woman, Ash Regan, whom Yousaf beat to the SNP leadership last March and who has since defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party. After two days of high political drama, Yousaf was in bullish mood on Friday, telling reporters at an event in Dundee: “I will absolutely be taking us into a general election and 2026 Scottish parliament elections.” He told Sky News: “I intend absolutely to fight that vote of no confidence, I’ve got every intention of winning that vote of no confidence.” Yousaf offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had “heard their anger” after he tore up the Bute House agreement brokered by Nicola Sturgeon in 2021, blindsiding supporters and opponents. It is understood that the extent of the Greens’ fury took Yousaf by surprise, but he maintained on Friday that ending the agreement was the right thing to do. He had faced increasing frustration within his own party about a host of electorally unpopular policies championed by the Greens. He said he would be speaking to the Scottish Green co-leaders, Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater – who on Thursday denounced him as weak and accused him of caving in to the right of his party – about what had happened, saying: “I empathise with their position because I understand how they must be feeling.” But it remains the case that a motion of no confidence in his leadership brought against him by the Scottish Conservatives , which is likely to be debated next Wednesday or Thursday, will bring Yousaf to the brink of defeat. The SNP is two votes short of a majority at Holyrood, and while the presiding officer always votes with the status quo, Yousaf will need to secure the backing of Regan, who defected last October in protest at the party’s stance on gender reform and lack of progress on independence. Regan, who revealed she has not spoken to Yousaf since she lost out to him in last year’s leadership contest, said she would “relish the opportunity” to discuss a possible alignment of the centre-right Alba party with the SNP. Meanwhile the Greens, who reported a surge in membership over the past day, are “unequivocal” about voting against Yousaf, according to party sources, while Harvie said it was up to the SNP to find a suitable leader. “Very clearly, he [Yousaf] doesn’t have the confidence of parliament. We said very clearly the responsibility of the decision is on him. He needs to bear the consequences of that reckless and damaging decision,” Harvie said. Yousaf said he would urge the Greens to reconsider but he must also maintain the support of colleagues across the spectrum within the SNP who have praised him for “resetting priorities” as the general election approaches, with heavy losses already predicted for the SNP at the hands of a resurgent Scottish Labour . While the Greens have accused the SNP of moving to the right and away from Sturgeon’s progressive agenda that Yousaf pledged to stick to when he was first elected, there is also speculation that being seen to side with the Tories against the only other pro-independence party at Holyrood could damage the Greens at the ballot box. On Friday morning, Scottish Labour applied further pressure by tabling its own motion of no confidence in the Scottish government, which the Scottish Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have since pledged to support. Unlike the Conservative motion against Yousaf, if Labour’s were successful it would require the first minister and his ministers to resign. If the Scottish parliament cannot agree on another first minister within 28 days, this would trigger an election. Speaking to Channel 4 News on Friday evening, Yousaf said he “certainly wouldn’t rule out” a Holyrood election. “We’re on an election footing – we’re prepared if that’s required,” he said. Explore more on these topics Humza Yousaf Scottish National party (SNP) Scottish politics Scotland Green party Labour Conservatives news Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf speaking to the media in Dundee. He offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had ‘heard their anger’. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf speaking to the media in Dundee. He offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had ‘heard their anger’. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA Humza Yousaf speaking to the media in Dundee. He offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had ‘heard their anger’. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf speaking to the media in Dundee. He offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had ‘heard their anger’. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA Humza Yousaf speaking to the media in Dundee. He offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had ‘heard their anger’. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf speaking to the media in Dundee. He offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had ‘heard their anger’. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA Humza Yousaf speaking to the media in Dundee. He offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had ‘heard their anger’. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf speaking to the media in Dundee. He offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had ‘heard their anger’. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA Humza Yousaf speaking to the media in Dundee. He offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had ‘heard their anger’. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA Humza Yousaf speaking to the media in Dundee. He offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had ‘heard their anger’. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA This article is more than 1 year old Humza Yousaf fights to stay on as second no confidence motion tabled This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Humza Yousaf fights to stay on as second no confidence motion tabled This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Humza Yousaf fights to stay on as second no confidence motion tabled This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old SNP leader says he will take party into general election, as Scottish Labour submits motion against his government SNP leader says he will take party into general election, as Scottish Labour submits motion against his government SNP leader says he will take party into general election, as Scottish Labour submits motion against his government Humza Yousaf is fighting for his political life as he faces two no confidence motions submitted against him and his government in the space of 24 hours. Yousaf insisted he would not resign as first minister and vowed to fight on, amid intense speculation about his leadership after he axed the SNP’s governing agreement with the Scottish Greens on Thursday morning, provoking a furious backlash that resulted in his former partners pledging to vote with the Tories against him. Holyrood arithmetic now leaves the deciding vote with one woman, Ash Regan, whom Yousaf beat to the SNP leadership last March and who has since defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party. After two days of high political drama, Yousaf was in bullish mood on Friday, telling reporters at an event in Dundee: “I will absolutely be taking us into a general election and 2026 Scottish parliament elections.” He told Sky News: “I intend absolutely to fight that vote of no confidence, I’ve got every intention of winning that vote of no confidence.” Yousaf offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had “heard their anger” after he tore up the Bute House agreement brokered by Nicola Sturgeon in 2021, blindsiding supporters and opponents. It is understood that the extent of the Greens’ fury took Yousaf by surprise, but he maintained on Friday that ending the agreement was the right thing to do. He had faced increasing frustration within his own party about a host of electorally unpopular policies championed by the Greens. He said he would be speaking to the Scottish Green co-leaders, Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater – who on Thursday denounced him as weak and accused him of caving in to the right of his party – about what had happened, saying: “I empathise with their position because I understand how they must be feeling.” But it remains the case that a motion of no confidence in his leadership brought against him by the Scottish Conservatives , which is likely to be debated next Wednesday or Thursday, will bring Yousaf to the brink of defeat. The SNP is two votes short of a majority at Holyrood, and while the presiding officer always votes with the status quo, Yousaf will need to secure the backing of Regan, who defected last October in protest at the party’s stance on gender reform and lack of progress on independence. Regan, who revealed she has not spoken to Yousaf since she lost out to him in last year’s leadership contest, said she would “relish the opportunity” to discuss a possible alignment of the centre-right Alba party with the SNP. Meanwhile the Greens, who reported a surge in membership over the past day, are “unequivocal” about voting against Yousaf, according to party sources, while Harvie said it was up to the SNP to find a suitable leader. “Very clearly, he [Yousaf] doesn’t have the confidence of parliament. We said very clearly the responsibility of the decision is on him. He needs to bear the consequences of that reckless and damaging decision,” Harvie said. Yousaf said he would urge the Greens to reconsider but he must also maintain the support of colleagues across the spectrum within the SNP who have praised him for “resetting priorities” as the general election approaches, with heavy losses already predicted for the SNP at the hands of a resurgent Scottish Labour . While the Greens have accused the SNP of moving to the right and away from Sturgeon’s progressive agenda that Yousaf pledged to stick to when he was first elected, there is also speculation that being seen to side with the Tories against the only other pro-independence party at Holyrood could damage the Greens at the ballot box. On Friday morning, Scottish Labour applied further pressure by tabling its own motion of no confidence in the Scottish government, which the Scottish Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have since pledged to support. Unlike the Conservative motion against Yousaf, if Labour’s were successful it would require the first minister and his ministers to resign. If the Scottish parliament cannot agree on another first minister within 28 days, this would trigger an election. Speaking to Channel 4 News on Friday evening, Yousaf said he “certainly wouldn’t rule out” a Holyrood election. “We’re on an election footing – we’re prepared if that’s required,” he said. Explore more on these topics Humza Yousaf Scottish National party (SNP) Scottish politics Scotland Green party Labour Conservatives news Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf is fighting for his political life as he faces two no confidence motions submitted against him and his government in the space of 24 hours. Yousaf insisted he would not resign as first minister and vowed to fight on, amid intense speculation about his leadership after he axed the SNP’s governing agreement with the Scottish Greens on Thursday morning, provoking a furious backlash that resulted in his former partners pledging to vote with the Tories against him. Holyrood arithmetic now leaves the deciding vote with one woman, Ash Regan, whom Yousaf beat to the SNP leadership last March and who has since defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party. After two days of high political drama, Yousaf was in bullish mood on Friday, telling reporters at an event in Dundee: “I will absolutely be taking us into a general election and 2026 Scottish parliament elections.” He told Sky News: “I intend absolutely to fight that vote of no confidence, I’ve got every intention of winning that vote of no confidence.” Yousaf offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had “heard their anger” after he tore up the Bute House agreement brokered by Nicola Sturgeon in 2021, blindsiding supporters and opponents. It is understood that the extent of the Greens’ fury took Yousaf by surprise, but he maintained on Friday that ending the agreement was the right thing to do. He had faced increasing frustration within his own party about a host of electorally unpopular policies championed by the Greens. He said he would be speaking to the Scottish Green co-leaders, Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater – who on Thursday denounced him as weak and accused him of caving in to the right of his party – about what had happened, saying: “I empathise with their position because I understand how they must be feeling.” But it remains the case that a motion of no confidence in his leadership brought against him by the Scottish Conservatives , which is likely to be debated next Wednesday or Thursday, will bring Yousaf to the brink of defeat. The SNP is two votes short of a majority at Holyrood, and while the presiding officer always votes with the status quo, Yousaf will need to secure the backing of Regan, who defected last October in protest at the party’s stance on gender reform and lack of progress on independence. Regan, who revealed she has not spoken to Yousaf since she lost out to him in last year’s leadership contest, said she would “relish the opportunity” to discuss a possible alignment of the centre-right Alba party with the SNP. Meanwhile the Greens, who reported a surge in membership over the past day, are “unequivocal” about voting against Yousaf, according to party sources, while Harvie said it was up to the SNP to find a suitable leader. “Very clearly, he [Yousaf] doesn’t have the confidence of parliament. We said very clearly the responsibility of the decision is on him. He needs to bear the consequences of that reckless and damaging decision,” Harvie said. Yousaf said he would urge the Greens to reconsider but he must also maintain the support of colleagues across the spectrum within the SNP who have praised him for “resetting priorities” as the general election approaches, with heavy losses already predicted for the SNP at the hands of a resurgent Scottish Labour . While the Greens have accused the SNP of moving to the right and away from Sturgeon’s progressive agenda that Yousaf pledged to stick to when he was first elected, there is also speculation that being seen to side with the Tories against the only other pro-independence party at Holyrood could damage the Greens at the ballot box. On Friday morning, Scottish Labour applied further pressure by tabling its own motion of no confidence in the Scottish government, which the Scottish Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have since pledged to support. Unlike the Conservative motion against Yousaf, if Labour’s were successful it would require the first minister and his ministers to resign. If the Scottish parliament cannot agree on another first minister within 28 days, this would trigger an election. Speaking to Channel 4 News on Friday evening, Yousaf said he “certainly wouldn’t rule out” a Holyrood election. “We’re on an election footing – we’re prepared if that’s required,” he said. Explore more on these topics Humza Yousaf Scottish National party (SNP) Scottish politics Scotland Green party Labour Conservatives news Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf is fighting for his political life as he faces two no confidence motions submitted against him and his government in the space of 24 hours. Yousaf insisted he would not resign as first minister and vowed to fight on, amid intense speculation about his leadership after he axed the SNP’s governing agreement with the Scottish Greens on Thursday morning, provoking a furious backlash that resulted in his former partners pledging to vote with the Tories against him. Holyrood arithmetic now leaves the deciding vote with one woman, Ash Regan, whom Yousaf beat to the SNP leadership last March and who has since defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party. After two days of high political drama, Yousaf was in bullish mood on Friday, telling reporters at an event in Dundee: “I will absolutely be taking us into a general election and 2026 Scottish parliament elections.” He told Sky News: “I intend absolutely to fight that vote of no confidence, I’ve got every intention of winning that vote of no confidence.” Yousaf offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had “heard their anger” after he tore up the Bute House agreement brokered by Nicola Sturgeon in 2021, blindsiding supporters and opponents. It is understood that the extent of the Greens’ fury took Yousaf by surprise, but he maintained on Friday that ending the agreement was the right thing to do. He had faced increasing frustration within his own party about a host of electorally unpopular policies championed by the Greens. He said he would be speaking to the Scottish Green co-leaders, Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater – who on Thursday denounced him as weak and accused him of caving in to the right of his party – about what had happened, saying: “I empathise with their position because I understand how they must be feeling.” But it remains the case that a motion of no confidence in his leadership brought against him by the Scottish Conservatives , which is likely to be debated next Wednesday or Thursday, will bring Yousaf to the brink of defeat. The SNP is two votes short of a majority at Holyrood, and while the presiding officer always votes with the status quo, Yousaf will need to secure the backing of Regan, who defected last October in protest at the party’s stance on gender reform and lack of progress on independence. Regan, who revealed she has not spoken to Yousaf since she lost out to him in last year’s leadership contest, said she would “relish the opportunity” to discuss a possible alignment of the centre-right Alba party with the SNP. Meanwhile the Greens, who reported a surge in membership over the past day, are “unequivocal” about voting against Yousaf, according to party sources, while Harvie said it was up to the SNP to find a suitable leader. “Very clearly, he [Yousaf] doesn’t have the confidence of parliament. We said very clearly the responsibility of the decision is on him. He needs to bear the consequences of that reckless and damaging decision,” Harvie said. Yousaf said he would urge the Greens to reconsider but he must also maintain the support of colleagues across the spectrum within the SNP who have praised him for “resetting priorities” as the general election approaches, with heavy losses already predicted for the SNP at the hands of a resurgent Scottish Labour . While the Greens have accused the SNP of moving to the right and away from Sturgeon’s progressive agenda that Yousaf pledged to stick to when he was first elected, there is also speculation that being seen to side with the Tories against the only other pro-independence party at Holyrood could damage the Greens at the ballot box. On Friday morning, Scottish Labour applied further pressure by tabling its own motion of no confidence in the Scottish government, which the Scottish Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have since pledged to support. Unlike the Conservative motion against Yousaf, if Labour’s were successful it would require the first minister and his ministers to resign. If the Scottish parliament cannot agree on another first minister within 28 days, this would trigger an election. Speaking to Channel 4 News on Friday evening, Yousaf said he “certainly wouldn’t rule out” a Holyrood election. “We’re on an election footing – we’re prepared if that’s required,” he said. Humza Yousaf is fighting for his political life as he faces two no confidence motions submitted against him and his government in the space of 24 hours. Yousaf insisted he would not resign as first minister and vowed to fight on, amid intense speculation about his leadership after he axed the SNP’s governing agreement with the Scottish Greens on Thursday morning, provoking a furious backlash that resulted in his former partners pledging to vote with the Tories against him. Holyrood arithmetic now leaves the deciding vote with one woman, Ash Regan, whom Yousaf beat to the SNP leadership last March and who has since defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party. After two days of high political drama, Yousaf was in bullish mood on Friday, telling reporters at an event in Dundee: “I will absolutely be taking us into a general election and 2026 Scottish parliament elections.” He told Sky News: “I intend absolutely to fight that vote of no confidence, I’ve got every intention of winning that vote of no confidence.” Yousaf offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had “heard their anger” after he tore up the Bute House agreement brokered by Nicola Sturgeon in 2021, blindsiding supporters and opponents. It is understood that the extent of the Greens’ fury took Yousaf by surprise, but he maintained on Friday that ending the agreement was the right thing to do. He had faced increasing frustration within his own party about a host of electorally unpopular policies championed by the Greens. He said he would be speaking to the Scottish Green co-leaders, Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater – who on Thursday denounced him as weak and accused him of caving in to the right of his party – about what had happened, saying: “I empathise with their position because I understand how they must be feeling.” But it remains the case that a motion of no confidence in his leadership brought against him by the Scottish Conservatives , which is likely to be debated next Wednesday or Thursday, will bring Yousaf to the brink of defeat. The SNP is two votes short of a majority at Holyrood, and while the presiding officer always votes with the status quo, Yousaf will need to secure the backing of Regan, who defected last October in protest at the party’s stance on gender reform and lack of progress on independence. Regan, who revealed she has not spoken to Yousaf since she lost out to him in last year’s leadership contest, said she would “relish the opportunity” to discuss a possible alignment of the centre-right Alba party with the SNP. Meanwhile the Greens, who reported a surge in membership over the past day, are “unequivocal” about voting against Yousaf, according to party sources, while Harvie said it was up to the SNP to find a suitable leader. “Very clearly, he [Yousaf] doesn’t have the confidence of parliament. We said very clearly the responsibility of the decision is on him. He needs to bear the consequences of that reckless and damaging decision,” Harvie said. Yousaf said he would urge the Greens to reconsider but he must also maintain the support of colleagues across the spectrum within the SNP who have praised him for “resetting priorities” as the general election approaches, with heavy losses already predicted for the SNP at the hands of a resurgent Scottish Labour . While the Greens have accused the SNP of moving to the right and away from Sturgeon’s progressive agenda that Yousaf pledged to stick to when he was first elected, there is also speculation that being seen to side with the Tories against the only other pro-independence party at Holyrood could damage the Greens at the ballot box. On Friday morning, Scottish Labour applied further pressure by tabling its own motion of no confidence in the Scottish government, which the Scottish Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have since pledged to support. Unlike the Conservative motion against Yousaf, if Labour’s were successful it would require the first minister and his ministers to resign. If the Scottish parliament cannot agree on another first minister within 28 days, this would trigger an election. Speaking to Channel 4 News on Friday evening, Yousaf said he “certainly wouldn’t rule out” a Holyrood election. “We’re on an election footing – we’re prepared if that’s required,” he said. Humza Yousaf is fighting for his political life as he faces two no confidence motions submitted against him and his government in the space of 24 hours. Yousaf insisted he would not resign as first minister and vowed to fight on, amid intense speculation about his leadership after he axed the SNP’s governing agreement with the Scottish Greens on Thursday morning, provoking a furious backlash that resulted in his former partners pledging to vote with the Tories against him. Holyrood arithmetic now leaves the deciding vote with one woman, Ash Regan, whom Yousaf beat to the SNP leadership last March and who has since defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party. After two days of high political drama, Yousaf was in bullish mood on Friday, telling reporters at an event in Dundee: “I will absolutely be taking us into a general election and 2026 Scottish parliament elections.” He told Sky News: “I intend absolutely to fight that vote of no confidence, I’ve got every intention of winning that vote of no confidence.” Yousaf offered an olive branch to the Scottish Greens, saying he had “heard their anger” after he tore up the Bute House agreement brokered by Nicola Sturgeon in 2021, blindsiding supporters and opponents. It is understood that the extent of the Greens’ fury took Yousaf by surprise, but he maintained on Friday that ending the agreement was the right thing to do. He had faced increasing frustration within his own party about a host of electorally unpopular policies championed by the Greens. He said he would be speaking to the Scottish Green co-leaders, Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater – who on Thursday denounced him as weak and accused him of caving in to the right of his party – about what had happened, saying: “I empathise with their position because I understand how they must be feeling.” But it remains the case that a motion of no confidence in his leadership brought against him by the Scottish Conservatives , which is likely to be debated next Wednesday or Thursday, will bring Yousaf to the brink of defeat. The SNP is two votes short of a majority at Holyrood, and while the presiding officer always votes with the status quo, Yousaf will need to secure the backing of Regan, who defected last October in protest at the party’s stance on gender reform and lack of progress on independence. Regan, who revealed she has not spoken to Yousaf since she lost out to him in last year’s leadership contest, said she would “relish the opportunity” to discuss a possible alignment of the centre-right Alba party with the SNP. Meanwhile the Greens, who reported a surge in membership over the past day, are “unequivocal” about voting against Yousaf, according to party sources, while Harvie said it was up to the SNP to find a suitable leader. “Very clearly, he [Yousaf] doesn’t have the confidence of parliament. We said very clearly the responsibility of the decision is on him. He needs to bear the consequences of that reckless and damaging decision,” Harvie said. Yousaf said he would urge the Greens to reconsider but he must also maintain the support of colleagues across the spectrum within the SNP who have praised him for “resetting priorities” as the general election approaches, with heavy losses already predicted for the SNP at the hands of a resurgent Scottish Labour . While the Greens have accused the SNP of moving to the right and away from Sturgeon’s progressive agenda that Yousaf pledged to stick to when he was first elected, there is also speculation that being seen to side with the Tories against the only other pro-independence party at Holyrood could damage the Greens at the ballot box. On Friday morning, Scottish Labour applied further pressure by tabling its own motion of no confidence in the Scottish government, which the Scottish Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have since pledged to support. Unlike the Conservative motion against Yousaf, if Labour’s were successful it would require the first minister and his ministers to resign. If the Scottish parliament cannot agree on another first minister within 28 days, this would trigger an election. Speaking to Channel 4 News on Friday evening, Yousaf said he “certainly wouldn’t rule out” a Holyrood election. “We’re on an election footing – we’re prepared if that’s required,” he said. Explore more on these topics Humza Yousaf Scottish National party (SNP) Scottish politics Scotland Green party Labour Conservatives news Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf Scottish National party (SNP) Scottish politics Scotland Green party Labour Conservatives news |
CAA cancels counter-protest against London pro-Palestinian march
Gideon Falter speaking to a Met police officer during a pro-Palestinian march in London last weekend. Photograph: Campaign Against Antisemitism/PA View image in fullscreen Gideon Falter speaking to a Met police officer during a pro-Palestinian march in London last weekend. Photograph: Campaign Against Antisemitism/PA This article is more than 1 year old CAA cancels counter-protest against London pro-Palestinian march This article is more than 1 year old Campaign Against Antisemitism, led by Gideon Falter, cites safety fears and promises more protests to come Campaign Against Antisemitism has cancelled its planned counter-protest against a pro-Palestinian march through central London on Saturday. The group, led by Gideon Falter, had said it wanted to use the “walk together” initiative to support its view that the area around the planned pro-Palestinian march was not safe for Jewish people. But on Friday afternoon CAA announced that its event had been cancelled amid pressure from those within the Jewish community who feared it could backfire. In a statement, CAA promised future protests. A spokesperson said: “Due to the thousands of people now intending to join and then walk where they please – something that we used to take for granted in London as Jewish people without having to discuss with police ahead of time – we still do not have confidence that people would be safe. “Additionally, we have received numerous threats and our monitoring has identified hostile actors who seem to have intended to come to any meeting locations that we announced. The risk to the safety of those who wished to walk openly as Jews in London tomorrow as part of this initiative has therefore become too great.” A small static counter-protest of about 100 people is expected to still go ahead. What is CAA, the group headed by campaigner in Met police antisemitism row? Read more Last week CAA released a short video clip showing a Met sergeant telling Falter that because he appeared “openly Jewish”, he would not be allowed to walk across a pro-Palestinian protest march through central London. A 13-minute video of the exchange showed the officer offering to escort Falter away from the demonstration and saying he was being disingenuous about his motives for wanting to cross the road at that point. Falter demanded that the Met commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, resign, but Britain’s top officer told the Guardian that the sergeant had been right to act to prevent any trouble by stopping opposing sides coming together. The longer version of the video shows the officer explaining to Falter that his approach was informed by the knowledge he had already deliberately walked out into the middle of the march and was therefore “looking to try and antagonise this”, according to the former Scotland Yard chief superintendent Dal Babu. Rowley said: “The sergeant at the scene clearly assessed that there was a risk of confrontation and was trying to help Mr Falter find a different route. I completely understand why the sergeant made this assessment. A couple of turns of phrase were clumsy and offensive … and we’ve apologised for that.” Police said last Saturday’s pro-Palestinian march was the 12th large-scale protest since the 7 October attacks by Hamas on Israel, which led to a bitter and bloody conflict in the Middle East. The Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist said the cost of policing those and other linked protests was £38.5m. He said it was not for his force to call for any change in the law to further restrict demonstrations. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion He said while the protests had been largely peaceful, with up to 300,000 attending one demonstration, there had been 415 arrests, including 193 for alleged antisemitic offences such as offensive placards and chants, and 15 for alleged breaches of counter-terrorism laws, largely on suspicion of supporting Hamas. Meetings this week between the Met and key Jewish groups led the Community Security Trust and the Jewish Leadership Council to back the police’s right to keep opposing groups apart. Twist said that while the police’s primary tactic was engaging with both sides, counter-protesters trying to get at rival marchers could risk arrest. “Everybody has to obey the law,” he said. “If we saw that risk manifesting itself, there are a number of powers that we might be able to use under the Public Order Act or pursuant to prevent a breach of the peace, that would mean we would prevent that from taking place.” Amid talk of further clampdowns on protest, Ben Jamal, of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign , one of the march’s organisers, said: “The right to protest is absolutely vital to the effectiveness of our democracy. Public opinion is in favour of an immediate ceasefire, but we need to push our political establishment to take heed. “The right to protest is not a gift of politicians, it is a hard-won right. We cannot put a price on democracy. We will continue to march.” Explore more on these topics London Antisemitism Metropolitan police Police Protest England news Share Reuse this content Gideon Falter speaking to a Met police officer during a pro-Palestinian march in London last weekend. Photograph: Campaign Against Antisemitism/PA View image in fullscreen Gideon Falter speaking to a Met police officer during a pro-Palestinian march in London last weekend. Photograph: Campaign Against Antisemitism/PA This article is more than 1 year old CAA cancels counter-protest against London pro-Palestinian march This article is more than 1 year old Campaign Against Antisemitism, led by Gideon Falter, cites safety fears and promises more protests to come Campaign Against Antisemitism has cancelled its planned counter-protest against a pro-Palestinian march through central London on Saturday. The group, led by Gideon Falter, had said it wanted to use the “walk together” initiative to support its view that the area around the planned pro-Palestinian march was not safe for Jewish people. But on Friday afternoon CAA announced that its event had been cancelled amid pressure from those within the Jewish community who feared it could backfire. In a statement, CAA promised future protests. A spokesperson said: “Due to the thousands of people now intending to join and then walk where they please – something that we used to take for granted in London as Jewish people without having to discuss with police ahead of time – we still do not have confidence that people would be safe. “Additionally, we have received numerous threats and our monitoring has identified hostile actors who seem to have intended to come to any meeting locations that we announced. The risk to the safety of those who wished to walk openly as Jews in London tomorrow as part of this initiative has therefore become too great.” A small static counter-protest of about 100 people is expected to still go ahead. What is CAA, the group headed by campaigner in Met police antisemitism row? Read more Last week CAA released a short video clip showing a Met sergeant telling Falter that because he appeared “openly Jewish”, he would not be allowed to walk across a pro-Palestinian protest march through central London. A 13-minute video of the exchange showed the officer offering to escort Falter away from the demonstration and saying he was being disingenuous about his motives for wanting to cross the road at that point. Falter demanded that the Met commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, resign, but Britain’s top officer told the Guardian that the sergeant had been right to act to prevent any trouble by stopping opposing sides coming together. The longer version of the video shows the officer explaining to Falter that his approach was informed by the knowledge he had already deliberately walked out into the middle of the march and was therefore “looking to try and antagonise this”, according to the former Scotland Yard chief superintendent Dal Babu. Rowley said: “The sergeant at the scene clearly assessed that there was a risk of confrontation and was trying to help Mr Falter find a different route. I completely understand why the sergeant made this assessment. A couple of turns of phrase were clumsy and offensive … and we’ve apologised for that.” Police said last Saturday’s pro-Palestinian march was the 12th large-scale protest since the 7 October attacks by Hamas on Israel, which led to a bitter and bloody conflict in the Middle East. The Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist said the cost of policing those and other linked protests was £38.5m. He said it was not for his force to call for any change in the law to further restrict demonstrations. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion He said while the protests had been largely peaceful, with up to 300,000 attending one demonstration, there had been 415 arrests, including 193 for alleged antisemitic offences such as offensive placards and chants, and 15 for alleged breaches of counter-terrorism laws, largely on suspicion of supporting Hamas. Meetings this week between the Met and key Jewish groups led the Community Security Trust and the Jewish Leadership Council to back the police’s right to keep opposing groups apart. Twist said that while the police’s primary tactic was engaging with both sides, counter-protesters trying to get at rival marchers could risk arrest. “Everybody has to obey the law,” he said. “If we saw that risk manifesting itself, there are a number of powers that we might be able to use under the Public Order Act or pursuant to prevent a breach of the peace, that would mean we would prevent that from taking place.” Amid talk of further clampdowns on protest, Ben Jamal, of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign , one of the march’s organisers, said: “The right to protest is absolutely vital to the effectiveness of our democracy. Public opinion is in favour of an immediate ceasefire, but we need to push our political establishment to take heed. “The right to protest is not a gift of politicians, it is a hard-won right. We cannot put a price on democracy. We will continue to march.” Explore more on these topics London Antisemitism Metropolitan police Police Protest England news Share Reuse this content Gideon Falter speaking to a Met police officer during a pro-Palestinian march in London last weekend. Photograph: Campaign Against Antisemitism/PA View image in fullscreen Gideon Falter speaking to a Met police officer during a pro-Palestinian march in London last weekend. Photograph: Campaign Against Antisemitism/PA Gideon Falter speaking to a Met police officer during a pro-Palestinian march in London last weekend. Photograph: Campaign Against Antisemitism/PA View image in fullscreen Gideon Falter speaking to a Met police officer during a pro-Palestinian march in London last weekend. Photograph: Campaign Against Antisemitism/PA Gideon Falter speaking to a Met police officer during a pro-Palestinian march in London last weekend. Photograph: Campaign Against Antisemitism/PA View image in fullscreen Gideon Falter speaking to a Met police officer during a pro-Palestinian march in London last weekend. Photograph: Campaign Against Antisemitism/PA Gideon Falter speaking to a Met police officer during a pro-Palestinian march in London last weekend. Photograph: Campaign Against Antisemitism/PA View image in fullscreen Gideon Falter speaking to a Met police officer during a pro-Palestinian march in London last weekend. Photograph: Campaign Against Antisemitism/PA Gideon Falter speaking to a Met police officer during a pro-Palestinian march in London last weekend. Photograph: Campaign Against Antisemitism/PA Gideon Falter speaking to a Met police officer during a pro-Palestinian march in London last weekend. Photograph: Campaign Against Antisemitism/PA This article is more than 1 year old CAA cancels counter-protest against London pro-Palestinian march This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old CAA cancels counter-protest against London pro-Palestinian march This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old CAA cancels counter-protest against London pro-Palestinian march This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Campaign Against Antisemitism, led by Gideon Falter, cites safety fears and promises more protests to come Campaign Against Antisemitism, led by Gideon Falter, cites safety fears and promises more protests to come Campaign Against Antisemitism, led by Gideon Falter, cites safety fears and promises more protests to come Campaign Against Antisemitism has cancelled its planned counter-protest against a pro-Palestinian march through central London on Saturday. The group, led by Gideon Falter, had said it wanted to use the “walk together” initiative to support its view that the area around the planned pro-Palestinian march was not safe for Jewish people. But on Friday afternoon CAA announced that its event had been cancelled amid pressure from those within the Jewish community who feared it could backfire. In a statement, CAA promised future protests. A spokesperson said: “Due to the thousands of people now intending to join and then walk where they please – something that we used to take for granted in London as Jewish people without having to discuss with police ahead of time – we still do not have confidence that people would be safe. “Additionally, we have received numerous threats and our monitoring has identified hostile actors who seem to have intended to come to any meeting locations that we announced. The risk to the safety of those who wished to walk openly as Jews in London tomorrow as part of this initiative has therefore become too great.” A small static counter-protest of about 100 people is expected to still go ahead. What is CAA, the group headed by campaigner in Met police antisemitism row? Read more Last week CAA released a short video clip showing a Met sergeant telling Falter that because he appeared “openly Jewish”, he would not be allowed to walk across a pro-Palestinian protest march through central London. A 13-minute video of the exchange showed the officer offering to escort Falter away from the demonstration and saying he was being disingenuous about his motives for wanting to cross the road at that point. Falter demanded that the Met commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, resign, but Britain’s top officer told the Guardian that the sergeant had been right to act to prevent any trouble by stopping opposing sides coming together. The longer version of the video shows the officer explaining to Falter that his approach was informed by the knowledge he had already deliberately walked out into the middle of the march and was therefore “looking to try and antagonise this”, according to the former Scotland Yard chief superintendent Dal Babu. Rowley said: “The sergeant at the scene clearly assessed that there was a risk of confrontation and was trying to help Mr Falter find a different route. I completely understand why the sergeant made this assessment. A couple of turns of phrase were clumsy and offensive … and we’ve apologised for that.” Police said last Saturday’s pro-Palestinian march was the 12th large-scale protest since the 7 October attacks by Hamas on Israel, which led to a bitter and bloody conflict in the Middle East. The Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist said the cost of policing those and other linked protests was £38.5m. He said it was not for his force to call for any change in the law to further restrict demonstrations. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion He said while the protests had been largely peaceful, with up to 300,000 attending one demonstration, there had been 415 arrests, including 193 for alleged antisemitic offences such as offensive placards and chants, and 15 for alleged breaches of counter-terrorism laws, largely on suspicion of supporting Hamas. Meetings this week between the Met and key Jewish groups led the Community Security Trust and the Jewish Leadership Council to back the police’s right to keep opposing groups apart. Twist said that while the police’s primary tactic was engaging with both sides, counter-protesters trying to get at rival marchers could risk arrest. “Everybody has to obey the law,” he said. “If we saw that risk manifesting itself, there are a number of powers that we might be able to use under the Public Order Act or pursuant to prevent a breach of the peace, that would mean we would prevent that from taking place.” Amid talk of further clampdowns on protest, Ben Jamal, of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign , one of the march’s organisers, said: “The right to protest is absolutely vital to the effectiveness of our democracy. Public opinion is in favour of an immediate ceasefire, but we need to push our political establishment to take heed. “The right to protest is not a gift of politicians, it is a hard-won right. We cannot put a price on democracy. We will continue to march.” Explore more on these topics London Antisemitism Metropolitan police Police Protest England news Share Reuse this content Campaign Against Antisemitism has cancelled its planned counter-protest against a pro-Palestinian march through central London on Saturday. The group, led by Gideon Falter, had said it wanted to use the “walk together” initiative to support its view that the area around the planned pro-Palestinian march was not safe for Jewish people. But on Friday afternoon CAA announced that its event had been cancelled amid pressure from those within the Jewish community who feared it could backfire. In a statement, CAA promised future protests. A spokesperson said: “Due to the thousands of people now intending to join and then walk where they please – something that we used to take for granted in London as Jewish people without having to discuss with police ahead of time – we still do not have confidence that people would be safe. “Additionally, we have received numerous threats and our monitoring has identified hostile actors who seem to have intended to come to any meeting locations that we announced. The risk to the safety of those who wished to walk openly as Jews in London tomorrow as part of this initiative has therefore become too great.” A small static counter-protest of about 100 people is expected to still go ahead. What is CAA, the group headed by campaigner in Met police antisemitism row? Read more Last week CAA released a short video clip showing a Met sergeant telling Falter that because he appeared “openly Jewish”, he would not be allowed to walk across a pro-Palestinian protest march through central London. A 13-minute video of the exchange showed the officer offering to escort Falter away from the demonstration and saying he was being disingenuous about his motives for wanting to cross the road at that point. Falter demanded that the Met commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, resign, but Britain’s top officer told the Guardian that the sergeant had been right to act to prevent any trouble by stopping opposing sides coming together. The longer version of the video shows the officer explaining to Falter that his approach was informed by the knowledge he had already deliberately walked out into the middle of the march and was therefore “looking to try and antagonise this”, according to the former Scotland Yard chief superintendent Dal Babu. Rowley said: “The sergeant at the scene clearly assessed that there was a risk of confrontation and was trying to help Mr Falter find a different route. I completely understand why the sergeant made this assessment. A couple of turns of phrase were clumsy and offensive … and we’ve apologised for that.” Police said last Saturday’s pro-Palestinian march was the 12th large-scale protest since the 7 October attacks by Hamas on Israel, which led to a bitter and bloody conflict in the Middle East. The Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist said the cost of policing those and other linked protests was £38.5m. He said it was not for his force to call for any change in the law to further restrict demonstrations. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion He said while the protests had been largely peaceful, with up to 300,000 attending one demonstration, there had been 415 arrests, including 193 for alleged antisemitic offences such as offensive placards and chants, and 15 for alleged breaches of counter-terrorism laws, largely on suspicion of supporting Hamas. Meetings this week between the Met and key Jewish groups led the Community Security Trust and the Jewish Leadership Council to back the police’s right to keep opposing groups apart. Twist said that while the police’s primary tactic was engaging with both sides, counter-protesters trying to get at rival marchers could risk arrest. “Everybody has to obey the law,” he said. “If we saw that risk manifesting itself, there are a number of powers that we might be able to use under the Public Order Act or pursuant to prevent a breach of the peace, that would mean we would prevent that from taking place.” Amid talk of further clampdowns on protest, Ben Jamal, of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign , one of the march’s organisers, said: “The right to protest is absolutely vital to the effectiveness of our democracy. Public opinion is in favour of an immediate ceasefire, but we need to push our political establishment to take heed. “The right to protest is not a gift of politicians, it is a hard-won right. We cannot put a price on democracy. We will continue to march.” Explore more on these topics London Antisemitism Metropolitan police Police Protest England news Share Reuse this content Campaign Against Antisemitism has cancelled its planned counter-protest against a pro-Palestinian march through central London on Saturday. The group, led by Gideon Falter, had said it wanted to use the “walk together” initiative to support its view that the area around the planned pro-Palestinian march was not safe for Jewish people. But on Friday afternoon CAA announced that its event had been cancelled amid pressure from those within the Jewish community who feared it could backfire. In a statement, CAA promised future protests. A spokesperson said: “Due to the thousands of people now intending to join and then walk where they please – something that we used to take for granted in London as Jewish people without having to discuss with police ahead of time – we still do not have confidence that people would be safe. “Additionally, we have received numerous threats and our monitoring has identified hostile actors who seem to have intended to come to any meeting locations that we announced. The risk to the safety of those who wished to walk openly as Jews in London tomorrow as part of this initiative has therefore become too great.” A small static counter-protest of about 100 people is expected to still go ahead. What is CAA, the group headed by campaigner in Met police antisemitism row? Read more Last week CAA released a short video clip showing a Met sergeant telling Falter that because he appeared “openly Jewish”, he would not be allowed to walk across a pro-Palestinian protest march through central London. A 13-minute video of the exchange showed the officer offering to escort Falter away from the demonstration and saying he was being disingenuous about his motives for wanting to cross the road at that point. Falter demanded that the Met commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, resign, but Britain’s top officer told the Guardian that the sergeant had been right to act to prevent any trouble by stopping opposing sides coming together. The longer version of the video shows the officer explaining to Falter that his approach was informed by the knowledge he had already deliberately walked out into the middle of the march and was therefore “looking to try and antagonise this”, according to the former Scotland Yard chief superintendent Dal Babu. Rowley said: “The sergeant at the scene clearly assessed that there was a risk of confrontation and was trying to help Mr Falter find a different route. I completely understand why the sergeant made this assessment. A couple of turns of phrase were clumsy and offensive … and we’ve apologised for that.” Police said last Saturday’s pro-Palestinian march was the 12th large-scale protest since the 7 October attacks by Hamas on Israel, which led to a bitter and bloody conflict in the Middle East. The Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist said the cost of policing those and other linked protests was £38.5m. He said it was not for his force to call for any change in the law to further restrict demonstrations. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion He said while the protests had been largely peaceful, with up to 300,000 attending one demonstration, there had been 415 arrests, including 193 for alleged antisemitic offences such as offensive placards and chants, and 15 for alleged breaches of counter-terrorism laws, largely on suspicion of supporting Hamas. Meetings this week between the Met and key Jewish groups led the Community Security Trust and the Jewish Leadership Council to back the police’s right to keep opposing groups apart. Twist said that while the police’s primary tactic was engaging with both sides, counter-protesters trying to get at rival marchers could risk arrest. “Everybody has to obey the law,” he said. “If we saw that risk manifesting itself, there are a number of powers that we might be able to use under the Public Order Act or pursuant to prevent a breach of the peace, that would mean we would prevent that from taking place.” Amid talk of further clampdowns on protest, Ben Jamal, of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign , one of the march’s organisers, said: “The right to protest is absolutely vital to the effectiveness of our democracy. Public opinion is in favour of an immediate ceasefire, but we need to push our political establishment to take heed. “The right to protest is not a gift of politicians, it is a hard-won right. We cannot put a price on democracy. We will continue to march.” Campaign Against Antisemitism has cancelled its planned counter-protest against a pro-Palestinian march through central London on Saturday. The group, led by Gideon Falter, had said it wanted to use the “walk together” initiative to support its view that the area around the planned pro-Palestinian march was not safe for Jewish people. But on Friday afternoon CAA announced that its event had been cancelled amid pressure from those within the Jewish community who feared it could backfire. In a statement, CAA promised future protests. A spokesperson said: “Due to the thousands of people now intending to join and then walk where they please – something that we used to take for granted in London as Jewish people without having to discuss with police ahead of time – we still do not have confidence that people would be safe. “Additionally, we have received numerous threats and our monitoring has identified hostile actors who seem to have intended to come to any meeting locations that we announced. The risk to the safety of those who wished to walk openly as Jews in London tomorrow as part of this initiative has therefore become too great.” A small static counter-protest of about 100 people is expected to still go ahead. What is CAA, the group headed by campaigner in Met police antisemitism row? Read more Last week CAA released a short video clip showing a Met sergeant telling Falter that because he appeared “openly Jewish”, he would not be allowed to walk across a pro-Palestinian protest march through central London. A 13-minute video of the exchange showed the officer offering to escort Falter away from the demonstration and saying he was being disingenuous about his motives for wanting to cross the road at that point. Falter demanded that the Met commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, resign, but Britain’s top officer told the Guardian that the sergeant had been right to act to prevent any trouble by stopping opposing sides coming together. The longer version of the video shows the officer explaining to Falter that his approach was informed by the knowledge he had already deliberately walked out into the middle of the march and was therefore “looking to try and antagonise this”, according to the former Scotland Yard chief superintendent Dal Babu. Rowley said: “The sergeant at the scene clearly assessed that there was a risk of confrontation and was trying to help Mr Falter find a different route. I completely understand why the sergeant made this assessment. A couple of turns of phrase were clumsy and offensive … and we’ve apologised for that.” Police said last Saturday’s pro-Palestinian march was the 12th large-scale protest since the 7 October attacks by Hamas on Israel, which led to a bitter and bloody conflict in the Middle East. The Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist said the cost of policing those and other linked protests was £38.5m. He said it was not for his force to call for any change in the law to further restrict demonstrations. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion He said while the protests had been largely peaceful, with up to 300,000 attending one demonstration, there had been 415 arrests, including 193 for alleged antisemitic offences such as offensive placards and chants, and 15 for alleged breaches of counter-terrorism laws, largely on suspicion of supporting Hamas. Meetings this week between the Met and key Jewish groups led the Community Security Trust and the Jewish Leadership Council to back the police’s right to keep opposing groups apart. Twist said that while the police’s primary tactic was engaging with both sides, counter-protesters trying to get at rival marchers could risk arrest. “Everybody has to obey the law,” he said. “If we saw that risk manifesting itself, there are a number of powers that we might be able to use under the Public Order Act or pursuant to prevent a breach of the peace, that would mean we would prevent that from taking place.” Amid talk of further clampdowns on protest, Ben Jamal, of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign , one of the march’s organisers, said: “The right to protest is absolutely vital to the effectiveness of our democracy. Public opinion is in favour of an immediate ceasefire, but we need to push our political establishment to take heed. “The right to protest is not a gift of politicians, it is a hard-won right. We cannot put a price on democracy. We will continue to march.” Campaign Against Antisemitism has cancelled its planned counter-protest against a pro-Palestinian march through central London on Saturday. The group, led by Gideon Falter, had said it wanted to use the “walk together” initiative to support its view that the area around the planned pro-Palestinian march was not safe for Jewish people. But on Friday afternoon CAA announced that its event had been cancelled amid pressure from those within the Jewish community who feared it could backfire. In a statement, CAA promised future protests. A spokesperson said: “Due to the thousands of people now intending to join and then walk where they please – something that we used to take for granted in London as Jewish people without having to discuss with police ahead of time – we still do not have confidence that people would be safe. “Additionally, we have received numerous threats and our monitoring has identified hostile actors who seem to have intended to come to any meeting locations that we announced. The risk to the safety of those who wished to walk openly as Jews in London tomorrow as part of this initiative has therefore become too great.” A small static counter-protest of about 100 people is expected to still go ahead. What is CAA, the group headed by campaigner in Met police antisemitism row? Read more What is CAA, the group headed by campaigner in Met police antisemitism row? Read more What is CAA, the group headed by campaigner in Met police antisemitism row? Read more What is CAA, the group headed by campaigner in Met police antisemitism row? What is CAA, the group headed by campaigner in Met police antisemitism row? Last week CAA released a short video clip showing a Met sergeant telling Falter that because he appeared “openly Jewish”, he would not be allowed to walk across a pro-Palestinian protest march through central London. A 13-minute video of the exchange showed the officer offering to escort Falter away from the demonstration and saying he was being disingenuous about his motives for wanting to cross the road at that point. Falter demanded that the Met commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, resign, but Britain’s top officer told the Guardian that the sergeant had been right to act to prevent any trouble by stopping opposing sides coming together. The longer version of the video shows the officer explaining to Falter that his approach was informed by the knowledge he had already deliberately walked out into the middle of the march and was therefore “looking to try and antagonise this”, according to the former Scotland Yard chief superintendent Dal Babu. Rowley said: “The sergeant at the scene clearly assessed that there was a risk of confrontation and was trying to help Mr Falter find a different route. I completely understand why the sergeant made this assessment. A couple of turns of phrase were clumsy and offensive … and we’ve apologised for that.” Police said last Saturday’s pro-Palestinian march was the 12th large-scale protest since the 7 October attacks by Hamas on Israel, which led to a bitter and bloody conflict in the Middle East. The Met assistant commissioner Matt Twist said the cost of policing those and other linked protests was £38.5m. He said it was not for his force to call for any change in the law to further restrict demonstrations. He said while the protests had been largely peaceful, with up to 300,000 attending one demonstration, there had been 415 arrests, including 193 for alleged antisemitic offences such as offensive placards and chants, and 15 for alleged breaches of counter-terrorism laws, largely on suspicion of supporting Hamas. Meetings this week between the Met and key Jewish groups led the Community Security Trust and the Jewish Leadership Council to back the police’s right to keep opposing groups apart. Twist said that while the police’s primary tactic was engaging with both sides, counter-protesters trying to get at rival marchers could risk arrest. “Everybody has to obey the law,” he said. “If we saw that risk manifesting itself, there are a number of powers that we might be able to use under the Public Order Act or pursuant to prevent a breach of the peace, that would mean we would prevent that from taking place.” Amid talk of further clampdowns on protest, Ben Jamal, of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign , one of the march’s organisers, said: “The right to protest is absolutely vital to the effectiveness of our democracy. Public opinion is in favour of an immediate ceasefire, but we need to push our political establishment to take heed. “The right to protest is not a gift of politicians, it is a hard-won right. We cannot put a price on democracy. We will continue to march.” Explore more on these topics London Antisemitism Metropolitan police Police Protest England news Share Reuse this content London Antisemitism Metropolitan police Police Protest England news |
Solidarity and strategy: the forgotten lessons of truly effective protest – podcast
This article is more than 1 year old Solidarity and strategy: the forgotten lessons of truly effective protest – podcast This article is more than 1 year old 00:00:00 00:00:00 Organising is a kind of alchemy: it turns alienation into connection, despair into dedication, and oppression into strength. By Astra Taylor and Leah Hunt-Hendrix Read the text version here Photograph: Universal History Archive/Universal Images Group/Getty Images Explore more on these topics Protest The Audio Long Read Civil rights movement US politics Disability Women Race This article is more than 1 year old Solidarity and strategy: the forgotten lessons of truly effective protest – podcast This article is more than 1 year old 00:00:00 00:00:00 Organising is a kind of alchemy: it turns alienation into connection, despair into dedication, and oppression into strength. By Astra Taylor and Leah Hunt-Hendrix Read the text version here Photograph: Universal History Archive/Universal Images Group/Getty Images Explore more on these topics Protest The Audio Long Read Civil rights movement US politics Disability Women Race This article is more than 1 year old Solidarity and strategy: the forgotten lessons of truly effective protest – podcast This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Solidarity and strategy: the forgotten lessons of truly effective protest – podcast This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Solidarity and strategy: the forgotten lessons of truly effective protest – podcast This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Organising is a kind of alchemy: it turns alienation into connection, despair into dedication, and oppression into strength. By Astra Taylor and Leah Hunt-Hendrix Organising is a kind of alchemy: it turns alienation into connection, despair into dedication, and oppression into strength. By Astra Taylor and Leah Hunt-Hendrix Organising is a kind of alchemy: it turns alienation into connection, despair into dedication, and oppression into strength. By Astra Taylor and Leah Hunt-Hendrix Read the text version here Photograph: Universal History Archive/Universal Images Group/Getty Images Explore more on these topics Protest The Audio Long Read Civil rights movement US politics Disability Women Race Read the text version here Photograph: Universal History Archive/Universal Images Group/Getty Images Explore more on these topics Protest The Audio Long Read Civil rights movement US politics Disability Women Race Read the text version here Photograph: Universal History Archive/Universal Images Group/Getty Images Read the text version here Photograph: Universal History Archive/Universal Images Group/Getty Images Explore more on these topics Protest The Audio Long Read Civil rights movement US politics Disability Women Race Protest The Audio Long Read Civil rights movement US politics Disability Women Race |
New EU nature law will fail without farmers, scientists warn
There have been protests across Europe – such as this one in Kraków, Poland – against the EU’s nature restoration law. Photograph: Dominika Zarzycka/NurPhoto/REX/Shutterstock View image in fullscreen There have been protests across Europe – such as this one in Kraków, Poland – against the EU’s nature restoration law. Photograph: Dominika Zarzycka/NurPhoto/REX/Shutterstock This article is more than 1 year old New EU nature law will fail without farmers, scientists warn This article is more than 1 year old Open letter calls for green policies that empower farmers, after months of protests jeopardise future of flagship biodiversity deal The EU’s nature restoration law will only work if it is enacted in partnership with farmers, a group of leading scientists has said, after months of protests have pushed the proposals to the brink of collapse. In an open letter , leading biodiversity researchers from across the world said that efforts to restore nature are vital for guaranteeing food supplies – but farmers must be empowered to help make agriculture more environmentally friendly if the measures are to succeed. The letter, signed by researchers from the University of Oxford, ETH Zurich and Wageningen University, reads: “At no point in history has there been more pressure on farmers. They are responsible for feeding an ever-growing population. And now we want them to save us all from the global climate and biodiversity crises, at the same time as market forces keep making the financial situation harder. “We desperately need land to support a resilient agricultural sector. We need our policies to empower farmers to be the heroes we need them to be. But to do this, we are also going to need to save space for nature. The EU’s nature restoration law , which has been two years in the making and aims to reverse the catastrophic decline of nature in the bloc, appears to be on the brink of collapse after months of farmers’ protests across Europe against some of the proposals. Several member states have withdrawn support for the legislation. The EU was a leading voice at the Cop15 biodiversity negotiations in December 2022 where governments agreed to protect 30% of the planet for nature, repurpose billions of dollars of environmentally harmful subsidies and reduce pesticide use. EU nature restoration laws face collapse as member states withdraw support Read more But the bloc has been unable to pass many of the targets into law, prompting warnings from Virginijus Sinkevičius, the European environment commissioner, that the EU would arrive at the biodiversity Cop16 in Colombia empty handed later this year, undermining its reputation as a reliable international partner. World governments have never met a single target they have set for themselves to protect biodiversity – a trend that this decade’s agreement was meant to break. “Policies like the EU restoration law could be vital as we strive to save nature, and secure agricultural productivity across Europe ,” the open letter reads. “But these policies will only work if they are built alongside farmers. If governments can provide the right incentives, they can empower farmers to create a world where people and nature can thrive together.” Find more age of extinction coverage here , and follow biodiversity reporters Phoebe Weston and Patrick Greenfield on X for all the latest news and features Explore more on these topics Biodiversity The age of extinction Europe Wildlife European Union Climate crisis news Share Reuse this content There have been protests across Europe – such as this one in Kraków, Poland – against the EU’s nature restoration law. Photograph: Dominika Zarzycka/NurPhoto/REX/Shutterstock View image in fullscreen There have been protests across Europe – such as this one in Kraków, Poland – against the EU’s nature restoration law. Photograph: Dominika Zarzycka/NurPhoto/REX/Shutterstock This article is more than 1 year old New EU nature law will fail without farmers, scientists warn This article is more than 1 year old Open letter calls for green policies that empower farmers, after months of protests jeopardise future of flagship biodiversity deal The EU’s nature restoration law will only work if it is enacted in partnership with farmers, a group of leading scientists has said, after months of protests have pushed the proposals to the brink of collapse. In an open letter , leading biodiversity researchers from across the world said that efforts to restore nature are vital for guaranteeing food supplies – but farmers must be empowered to help make agriculture more environmentally friendly if the measures are to succeed. The letter, signed by researchers from the University of Oxford, ETH Zurich and Wageningen University, reads: “At no point in history has there been more pressure on farmers. They are responsible for feeding an ever-growing population. And now we want them to save us all from the global climate and biodiversity crises, at the same time as market forces keep making the financial situation harder. “We desperately need land to support a resilient agricultural sector. We need our policies to empower farmers to be the heroes we need them to be. But to do this, we are also going to need to save space for nature. The EU’s nature restoration law , which has been two years in the making and aims to reverse the catastrophic decline of nature in the bloc, appears to be on the brink of collapse after months of farmers’ protests across Europe against some of the proposals. Several member states have withdrawn support for the legislation. The EU was a leading voice at the Cop15 biodiversity negotiations in December 2022 where governments agreed to protect 30% of the planet for nature, repurpose billions of dollars of environmentally harmful subsidies and reduce pesticide use. EU nature restoration laws face collapse as member states withdraw support Read more But the bloc has been unable to pass many of the targets into law, prompting warnings from Virginijus Sinkevičius, the European environment commissioner, that the EU would arrive at the biodiversity Cop16 in Colombia empty handed later this year, undermining its reputation as a reliable international partner. World governments have never met a single target they have set for themselves to protect biodiversity – a trend that this decade’s agreement was meant to break. “Policies like the EU restoration law could be vital as we strive to save nature, and secure agricultural productivity across Europe ,” the open letter reads. “But these policies will only work if they are built alongside farmers. If governments can provide the right incentives, they can empower farmers to create a world where people and nature can thrive together.” Find more age of extinction coverage here , and follow biodiversity reporters Phoebe Weston and Patrick Greenfield on X for all the latest news and features Explore more on these topics Biodiversity The age of extinction Europe Wildlife European Union Climate crisis news Share Reuse this content There have been protests across Europe – such as this one in Kraków, Poland – against the EU’s nature restoration law. Photograph: Dominika Zarzycka/NurPhoto/REX/Shutterstock View image in fullscreen There have been protests across Europe – such as this one in Kraków, Poland – against the EU’s nature restoration law. Photograph: Dominika Zarzycka/NurPhoto/REX/Shutterstock There have been protests across Europe – such as this one in Kraków, Poland – against the EU’s nature restoration law. Photograph: Dominika Zarzycka/NurPhoto/REX/Shutterstock View image in fullscreen There have been protests across Europe – such as this one in Kraków, Poland – against the EU’s nature restoration law. Photograph: Dominika Zarzycka/NurPhoto/REX/Shutterstock There have been protests across Europe – such as this one in Kraków, Poland – against the EU’s nature restoration law. Photograph: Dominika Zarzycka/NurPhoto/REX/Shutterstock View image in fullscreen There have been protests across Europe – such as this one in Kraków, Poland – against the EU’s nature restoration law. Photograph: Dominika Zarzycka/NurPhoto/REX/Shutterstock There have been protests across Europe – such as this one in Kraków, Poland – against the EU’s nature restoration law. Photograph: Dominika Zarzycka/NurPhoto/REX/Shutterstock View image in fullscreen There have been protests across Europe – such as this one in Kraków, Poland – against the EU’s nature restoration law. Photograph: Dominika Zarzycka/NurPhoto/REX/Shutterstock There have been protests across Europe – such as this one in Kraków, Poland – against the EU’s nature restoration law. Photograph: Dominika Zarzycka/NurPhoto/REX/Shutterstock There have been protests across Europe – such as this one in Kraków, Poland – against the EU’s nature restoration law. Photograph: Dominika Zarzycka/NurPhoto/REX/Shutterstock This article is more than 1 year old New EU nature law will fail without farmers, scientists warn This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old New EU nature law will fail without farmers, scientists warn This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old New EU nature law will fail without farmers, scientists warn This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Open letter calls for green policies that empower farmers, after months of protests jeopardise future of flagship biodiversity deal Open letter calls for green policies that empower farmers, after months of protests jeopardise future of flagship biodiversity deal Open letter calls for green policies that empower farmers, after months of protests jeopardise future of flagship biodiversity deal The EU’s nature restoration law will only work if it is enacted in partnership with farmers, a group of leading scientists has said, after months of protests have pushed the proposals to the brink of collapse. In an open letter , leading biodiversity researchers from across the world said that efforts to restore nature are vital for guaranteeing food supplies – but farmers must be empowered to help make agriculture more environmentally friendly if the measures are to succeed. The letter, signed by researchers from the University of Oxford, ETH Zurich and Wageningen University, reads: “At no point in history has there been more pressure on farmers. They are responsible for feeding an ever-growing population. And now we want them to save us all from the global climate and biodiversity crises, at the same time as market forces keep making the financial situation harder. “We desperately need land to support a resilient agricultural sector. We need our policies to empower farmers to be the heroes we need them to be. But to do this, we are also going to need to save space for nature. The EU’s nature restoration law , which has been two years in the making and aims to reverse the catastrophic decline of nature in the bloc, appears to be on the brink of collapse after months of farmers’ protests across Europe against some of the proposals. Several member states have withdrawn support for the legislation. The EU was a leading voice at the Cop15 biodiversity negotiations in December 2022 where governments agreed to protect 30% of the planet for nature, repurpose billions of dollars of environmentally harmful subsidies and reduce pesticide use. EU nature restoration laws face collapse as member states withdraw support Read more But the bloc has been unable to pass many of the targets into law, prompting warnings from Virginijus Sinkevičius, the European environment commissioner, that the EU would arrive at the biodiversity Cop16 in Colombia empty handed later this year, undermining its reputation as a reliable international partner. World governments have never met a single target they have set for themselves to protect biodiversity – a trend that this decade’s agreement was meant to break. “Policies like the EU restoration law could be vital as we strive to save nature, and secure agricultural productivity across Europe ,” the open letter reads. “But these policies will only work if they are built alongside farmers. If governments can provide the right incentives, they can empower farmers to create a world where people and nature can thrive together.” Find more age of extinction coverage here , and follow biodiversity reporters Phoebe Weston and Patrick Greenfield on X for all the latest news and features Explore more on these topics Biodiversity The age of extinction Europe Wildlife European Union Climate crisis news Share Reuse this content The EU’s nature restoration law will only work if it is enacted in partnership with farmers, a group of leading scientists has said, after months of protests have pushed the proposals to the brink of collapse. In an open letter , leading biodiversity researchers from across the world said that efforts to restore nature are vital for guaranteeing food supplies – but farmers must be empowered to help make agriculture more environmentally friendly if the measures are to succeed. The letter, signed by researchers from the University of Oxford, ETH Zurich and Wageningen University, reads: “At no point in history has there been more pressure on farmers. They are responsible for feeding an ever-growing population. And now we want them to save us all from the global climate and biodiversity crises, at the same time as market forces keep making the financial situation harder. “We desperately need land to support a resilient agricultural sector. We need our policies to empower farmers to be the heroes we need them to be. But to do this, we are also going to need to save space for nature. The EU’s nature restoration law , which has been two years in the making and aims to reverse the catastrophic decline of nature in the bloc, appears to be on the brink of collapse after months of farmers’ protests across Europe against some of the proposals. Several member states have withdrawn support for the legislation. The EU was a leading voice at the Cop15 biodiversity negotiations in December 2022 where governments agreed to protect 30% of the planet for nature, repurpose billions of dollars of environmentally harmful subsidies and reduce pesticide use. EU nature restoration laws face collapse as member states withdraw support Read more But the bloc has been unable to pass many of the targets into law, prompting warnings from Virginijus Sinkevičius, the European environment commissioner, that the EU would arrive at the biodiversity Cop16 in Colombia empty handed later this year, undermining its reputation as a reliable international partner. World governments have never met a single target they have set for themselves to protect biodiversity – a trend that this decade’s agreement was meant to break. “Policies like the EU restoration law could be vital as we strive to save nature, and secure agricultural productivity across Europe ,” the open letter reads. “But these policies will only work if they are built alongside farmers. If governments can provide the right incentives, they can empower farmers to create a world where people and nature can thrive together.” Find more age of extinction coverage here , and follow biodiversity reporters Phoebe Weston and Patrick Greenfield on X for all the latest news and features Explore more on these topics Biodiversity The age of extinction Europe Wildlife European Union Climate crisis news Share Reuse this content The EU’s nature restoration law will only work if it is enacted in partnership with farmers, a group of leading scientists has said, after months of protests have pushed the proposals to the brink of collapse. In an open letter , leading biodiversity researchers from across the world said that efforts to restore nature are vital for guaranteeing food supplies – but farmers must be empowered to help make agriculture more environmentally friendly if the measures are to succeed. The letter, signed by researchers from the University of Oxford, ETH Zurich and Wageningen University, reads: “At no point in history has there been more pressure on farmers. They are responsible for feeding an ever-growing population. And now we want them to save us all from the global climate and biodiversity crises, at the same time as market forces keep making the financial situation harder. “We desperately need land to support a resilient agricultural sector. We need our policies to empower farmers to be the heroes we need them to be. But to do this, we are also going to need to save space for nature. The EU’s nature restoration law , which has been two years in the making and aims to reverse the catastrophic decline of nature in the bloc, appears to be on the brink of collapse after months of farmers’ protests across Europe against some of the proposals. Several member states have withdrawn support for the legislation. The EU was a leading voice at the Cop15 biodiversity negotiations in December 2022 where governments agreed to protect 30% of the planet for nature, repurpose billions of dollars of environmentally harmful subsidies and reduce pesticide use. EU nature restoration laws face collapse as member states withdraw support Read more But the bloc has been unable to pass many of the targets into law, prompting warnings from Virginijus Sinkevičius, the European environment commissioner, that the EU would arrive at the biodiversity Cop16 in Colombia empty handed later this year, undermining its reputation as a reliable international partner. World governments have never met a single target they have set for themselves to protect biodiversity – a trend that this decade’s agreement was meant to break. “Policies like the EU restoration law could be vital as we strive to save nature, and secure agricultural productivity across Europe ,” the open letter reads. “But these policies will only work if they are built alongside farmers. If governments can provide the right incentives, they can empower farmers to create a world where people and nature can thrive together.” Find more age of extinction coverage here , and follow biodiversity reporters Phoebe Weston and Patrick Greenfield on X for all the latest news and features The EU’s nature restoration law will only work if it is enacted in partnership with farmers, a group of leading scientists has said, after months of protests have pushed the proposals to the brink of collapse. In an open letter , leading biodiversity researchers from across the world said that efforts to restore nature are vital for guaranteeing food supplies – but farmers must be empowered to help make agriculture more environmentally friendly if the measures are to succeed. The letter, signed by researchers from the University of Oxford, ETH Zurich and Wageningen University, reads: “At no point in history has there been more pressure on farmers. They are responsible for feeding an ever-growing population. And now we want them to save us all from the global climate and biodiversity crises, at the same time as market forces keep making the financial situation harder. “We desperately need land to support a resilient agricultural sector. We need our policies to empower farmers to be the heroes we need them to be. But to do this, we are also going to need to save space for nature. The EU’s nature restoration law , which has been two years in the making and aims to reverse the catastrophic decline of nature in the bloc, appears to be on the brink of collapse after months of farmers’ protests across Europe against some of the proposals. Several member states have withdrawn support for the legislation. The EU was a leading voice at the Cop15 biodiversity negotiations in December 2022 where governments agreed to protect 30% of the planet for nature, repurpose billions of dollars of environmentally harmful subsidies and reduce pesticide use. EU nature restoration laws face collapse as member states withdraw support Read more But the bloc has been unable to pass many of the targets into law, prompting warnings from Virginijus Sinkevičius, the European environment commissioner, that the EU would arrive at the biodiversity Cop16 in Colombia empty handed later this year, undermining its reputation as a reliable international partner. World governments have never met a single target they have set for themselves to protect biodiversity – a trend that this decade’s agreement was meant to break. “Policies like the EU restoration law could be vital as we strive to save nature, and secure agricultural productivity across Europe ,” the open letter reads. “But these policies will only work if they are built alongside farmers. If governments can provide the right incentives, they can empower farmers to create a world where people and nature can thrive together.” Find more age of extinction coverage here , and follow biodiversity reporters Phoebe Weston and Patrick Greenfield on X for all the latest news and features The EU’s nature restoration law will only work if it is enacted in partnership with farmers, a group of leading scientists has said, after months of protests have pushed the proposals to the brink of collapse. In an open letter , leading biodiversity researchers from across the world said that efforts to restore nature are vital for guaranteeing food supplies – but farmers must be empowered to help make agriculture more environmentally friendly if the measures are to succeed. The letter, signed by researchers from the University of Oxford, ETH Zurich and Wageningen University, reads: “At no point in history has there been more pressure on farmers. They are responsible for feeding an ever-growing population. And now we want them to save us all from the global climate and biodiversity crises, at the same time as market forces keep making the financial situation harder. “We desperately need land to support a resilient agricultural sector. We need our policies to empower farmers to be the heroes we need them to be. But to do this, we are also going to need to save space for nature. The EU’s nature restoration law , which has been two years in the making and aims to reverse the catastrophic decline of nature in the bloc, appears to be on the brink of collapse after months of farmers’ protests across Europe against some of the proposals. Several member states have withdrawn support for the legislation. The EU was a leading voice at the Cop15 biodiversity negotiations in December 2022 where governments agreed to protect 30% of the planet for nature, repurpose billions of dollars of environmentally harmful subsidies and reduce pesticide use. EU nature restoration laws face collapse as member states withdraw support Read more EU nature restoration laws face collapse as member states withdraw support Read more EU nature restoration laws face collapse as member states withdraw support Read more EU nature restoration laws face collapse as member states withdraw support EU nature restoration laws face collapse as member states withdraw support But the bloc has been unable to pass many of the targets into law, prompting warnings from Virginijus Sinkevičius, the European environment commissioner, that the EU would arrive at the biodiversity Cop16 in Colombia empty handed later this year, undermining its reputation as a reliable international partner. World governments have never met a single target they have set for themselves to protect biodiversity – a trend that this decade’s agreement was meant to break. “Policies like the EU restoration law could be vital as we strive to save nature, and secure agricultural productivity across Europe ,” the open letter reads. “But these policies will only work if they are built alongside farmers. If governments can provide the right incentives, they can empower farmers to create a world where people and nature can thrive together.” Find more age of extinction coverage here , and follow biodiversity reporters Phoebe Weston and Patrick Greenfield on X for all the latest news and features Explore more on these topics Biodiversity The age of extinction Europe Wildlife European Union Climate crisis news Share Reuse this content Biodiversity The age of extinction Europe Wildlife European Union Climate crisis news |
Jordan Klepper on campus protests: ‘You’re not going to resolve tension by adding violence’
Jordan Klepper on criticism of student protesters: ‘It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes.’ Photograph: YouTube View image in fullscreen Jordan Klepper on criticism of student protesters: ‘It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes.’ Photograph: YouTube This article is more than 1 year old Jordan Klepper on campus protests: ‘You’re not going to resolve tension by adding violence’ This article is more than 1 year old Late-night hosts discuss the crackdown on, and Republican criticism of, college campus protests against Israel’s war in Gaza W ith other late-night hosts on vacation, The Daily Show guest hosts Jordan Klepper and Ronny Chieng dug into the disproportionate force used on college campus protests against Israel’s disproportionate force in Gaza. The Daily Show It was a week of unrest at college campuses across the nation, as thousands of students protested against Israel’s war in Gaza. “This presents a challenge for the colleges,” said the Daily Show co-host Jordan Klepper. “Loud and even disruptive protests are a cherished tradition on campuses. And college investments in Israel are a legitimate issue for students. But, at the same time, there’s a real element of antisemitism among some protests, and Jewish students have the right to feel safe at their own schools. “It’s a delicate balance that requires keeping a cool head, and listening respectfully. And above all, the colleges should not escalate the tension,” Klepper continued. Cut to clips of Columbia University’s president and NYU’s president calling the NYPD to intervene and break up student protests. College protests over Gaza are growing, and Republicans don't seem to be into the whole de-escalation thing. pic.twitter.com/b2whOKFlaO — The Daily Show (@TheDailyShow) April 26, 2024 “I said DE-escalate. DE-escalate!” said Klepper. “Does de-escalate not mean what I think it means? Reverse escalate. Don’t make it worse!” Even worse, the Texas governor, Greg Abbott, called the national guard to handle peaceful protesters at the University of Texas at Austin. “Send in the national guard and wake these kids up!” said Senator Josh Hawley on Fox News. “Do these fuckers ever think of a solution besides force?” Klepper wondered. “I mean, when this guy’s wifi goes down, is he like ‘get the national guard in here! We need to fuck up my modem.’” Jimmy Kimmel on Trump: ‘He keeps his caps lock tighter than the door to Melania’s bedroom’ Read more “You don’t use the national guard because students are camping on the quad,” Klepper’s co-host Ronny Chieng added. “You use them for when aliens invade and you want to test the aliens’ weapon capabilities.” “You’re not going to resolve tension by adding violence,” said Klepper. He spitballed a different tactic: “maybe instead of armed soldiers, why not try sending in the college improv troupe, you know? A group of communications majors in bright colored shirts asking for suggestions should clear out a crowd in no time.” Hawley was not the only Republican to publicly denigrate the student protesters. The House speaker, Mike Johnson, during a speech at Columbia University, called on the university president to resign if the protests didn’t stop and called on “kids” to “stop wasting your parents’ money” and go back to class. “Yes, stop wasting your parents’ money. Be like Mike Johnson – get into government and waste everyone’s money,” Chieng joked. “It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes,” Klepper added. “There’s a lot of noise and plenty of bad actors,” Klepper concluded. “But fundamentally, what’s driving these protests is anger over Israel’s disproportionate use of force. So, before we respond to the protests with disproportionate force, maybe we should listen to what they have to say. And then, if we still don’t agree with the students, then we can send in the college improv troupe.” Explore more on these topics Late-night TV roundup TV comedy Comedy Television US campus protests features Share Reuse this content Jordan Klepper on criticism of student protesters: ‘It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes.’ Photograph: YouTube View image in fullscreen Jordan Klepper on criticism of student protesters: ‘It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes.’ Photograph: YouTube This article is more than 1 year old Jordan Klepper on campus protests: ‘You’re not going to resolve tension by adding violence’ This article is more than 1 year old Late-night hosts discuss the crackdown on, and Republican criticism of, college campus protests against Israel’s war in Gaza W ith other late-night hosts on vacation, The Daily Show guest hosts Jordan Klepper and Ronny Chieng dug into the disproportionate force used on college campus protests against Israel’s disproportionate force in Gaza. The Daily Show It was a week of unrest at college campuses across the nation, as thousands of students protested against Israel’s war in Gaza. “This presents a challenge for the colleges,” said the Daily Show co-host Jordan Klepper. “Loud and even disruptive protests are a cherished tradition on campuses. And college investments in Israel are a legitimate issue for students. But, at the same time, there’s a real element of antisemitism among some protests, and Jewish students have the right to feel safe at their own schools. “It’s a delicate balance that requires keeping a cool head, and listening respectfully. And above all, the colleges should not escalate the tension,” Klepper continued. Cut to clips of Columbia University’s president and NYU’s president calling the NYPD to intervene and break up student protests. College protests over Gaza are growing, and Republicans don't seem to be into the whole de-escalation thing. pic.twitter.com/b2whOKFlaO — The Daily Show (@TheDailyShow) April 26, 2024 “I said DE-escalate. DE-escalate!” said Klepper. “Does de-escalate not mean what I think it means? Reverse escalate. Don’t make it worse!” Even worse, the Texas governor, Greg Abbott, called the national guard to handle peaceful protesters at the University of Texas at Austin. “Send in the national guard and wake these kids up!” said Senator Josh Hawley on Fox News. “Do these fuckers ever think of a solution besides force?” Klepper wondered. “I mean, when this guy’s wifi goes down, is he like ‘get the national guard in here! We need to fuck up my modem.’” Jimmy Kimmel on Trump: ‘He keeps his caps lock tighter than the door to Melania’s bedroom’ Read more “You don’t use the national guard because students are camping on the quad,” Klepper’s co-host Ronny Chieng added. “You use them for when aliens invade and you want to test the aliens’ weapon capabilities.” “You’re not going to resolve tension by adding violence,” said Klepper. He spitballed a different tactic: “maybe instead of armed soldiers, why not try sending in the college improv troupe, you know? A group of communications majors in bright colored shirts asking for suggestions should clear out a crowd in no time.” Hawley was not the only Republican to publicly denigrate the student protesters. The House speaker, Mike Johnson, during a speech at Columbia University, called on the university president to resign if the protests didn’t stop and called on “kids” to “stop wasting your parents’ money” and go back to class. “Yes, stop wasting your parents’ money. Be like Mike Johnson – get into government and waste everyone’s money,” Chieng joked. “It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes,” Klepper added. “There’s a lot of noise and plenty of bad actors,” Klepper concluded. “But fundamentally, what’s driving these protests is anger over Israel’s disproportionate use of force. So, before we respond to the protests with disproportionate force, maybe we should listen to what they have to say. And then, if we still don’t agree with the students, then we can send in the college improv troupe.” Explore more on these topics Late-night TV roundup TV comedy Comedy Television US campus protests features Share Reuse this content Jordan Klepper on criticism of student protesters: ‘It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes.’ Photograph: YouTube View image in fullscreen Jordan Klepper on criticism of student protesters: ‘It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes.’ Photograph: YouTube Jordan Klepper on criticism of student protesters: ‘It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes.’ Photograph: YouTube View image in fullscreen Jordan Klepper on criticism of student protesters: ‘It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes.’ Photograph: YouTube Jordan Klepper on criticism of student protesters: ‘It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes.’ Photograph: YouTube View image in fullscreen Jordan Klepper on criticism of student protesters: ‘It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes.’ Photograph: YouTube Jordan Klepper on criticism of student protesters: ‘It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes.’ Photograph: YouTube View image in fullscreen Jordan Klepper on criticism of student protesters: ‘It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes.’ Photograph: YouTube Jordan Klepper on criticism of student protesters: ‘It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes.’ Photograph: YouTube Jordan Klepper on criticism of student protesters: ‘It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes.’ Photograph: YouTube This article is more than 1 year old Jordan Klepper on campus protests: ‘You’re not going to resolve tension by adding violence’ This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Jordan Klepper on campus protests: ‘You’re not going to resolve tension by adding violence’ This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Jordan Klepper on campus protests: ‘You’re not going to resolve tension by adding violence’ This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Late-night hosts discuss the crackdown on, and Republican criticism of, college campus protests against Israel’s war in Gaza Late-night hosts discuss the crackdown on, and Republican criticism of, college campus protests against Israel’s war in Gaza Late-night hosts discuss the crackdown on, and Republican criticism of, college campus protests against Israel’s war in Gaza W ith other late-night hosts on vacation, The Daily Show guest hosts Jordan Klepper and Ronny Chieng dug into the disproportionate force used on college campus protests against Israel’s disproportionate force in Gaza. The Daily Show It was a week of unrest at college campuses across the nation, as thousands of students protested against Israel’s war in Gaza. “This presents a challenge for the colleges,” said the Daily Show co-host Jordan Klepper. “Loud and even disruptive protests are a cherished tradition on campuses. And college investments in Israel are a legitimate issue for students. But, at the same time, there’s a real element of antisemitism among some protests, and Jewish students have the right to feel safe at their own schools. “It’s a delicate balance that requires keeping a cool head, and listening respectfully. And above all, the colleges should not escalate the tension,” Klepper continued. Cut to clips of Columbia University’s president and NYU’s president calling the NYPD to intervene and break up student protests. College protests over Gaza are growing, and Republicans don't seem to be into the whole de-escalation thing. pic.twitter.com/b2whOKFlaO — The Daily Show (@TheDailyShow) April 26, 2024 “I said DE-escalate. DE-escalate!” said Klepper. “Does de-escalate not mean what I think it means? Reverse escalate. Don’t make it worse!” Even worse, the Texas governor, Greg Abbott, called the national guard to handle peaceful protesters at the University of Texas at Austin. “Send in the national guard and wake these kids up!” said Senator Josh Hawley on Fox News. “Do these fuckers ever think of a solution besides force?” Klepper wondered. “I mean, when this guy’s wifi goes down, is he like ‘get the national guard in here! We need to fuck up my modem.’” Jimmy Kimmel on Trump: ‘He keeps his caps lock tighter than the door to Melania’s bedroom’ Read more “You don’t use the national guard because students are camping on the quad,” Klepper’s co-host Ronny Chieng added. “You use them for when aliens invade and you want to test the aliens’ weapon capabilities.” “You’re not going to resolve tension by adding violence,” said Klepper. He spitballed a different tactic: “maybe instead of armed soldiers, why not try sending in the college improv troupe, you know? A group of communications majors in bright colored shirts asking for suggestions should clear out a crowd in no time.” Hawley was not the only Republican to publicly denigrate the student protesters. The House speaker, Mike Johnson, during a speech at Columbia University, called on the university president to resign if the protests didn’t stop and called on “kids” to “stop wasting your parents’ money” and go back to class. “Yes, stop wasting your parents’ money. Be like Mike Johnson – get into government and waste everyone’s money,” Chieng joked. “It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes,” Klepper added. “There’s a lot of noise and plenty of bad actors,” Klepper concluded. “But fundamentally, what’s driving these protests is anger over Israel’s disproportionate use of force. So, before we respond to the protests with disproportionate force, maybe we should listen to what they have to say. And then, if we still don’t agree with the students, then we can send in the college improv troupe.” Explore more on these topics Late-night TV roundup TV comedy Comedy Television US campus protests features Share Reuse this content W ith other late-night hosts on vacation, The Daily Show guest hosts Jordan Klepper and Ronny Chieng dug into the disproportionate force used on college campus protests against Israel’s disproportionate force in Gaza. The Daily Show It was a week of unrest at college campuses across the nation, as thousands of students protested against Israel’s war in Gaza. “This presents a challenge for the colleges,” said the Daily Show co-host Jordan Klepper. “Loud and even disruptive protests are a cherished tradition on campuses. And college investments in Israel are a legitimate issue for students. But, at the same time, there’s a real element of antisemitism among some protests, and Jewish students have the right to feel safe at their own schools. “It’s a delicate balance that requires keeping a cool head, and listening respectfully. And above all, the colleges should not escalate the tension,” Klepper continued. Cut to clips of Columbia University’s president and NYU’s president calling the NYPD to intervene and break up student protests. College protests over Gaza are growing, and Republicans don't seem to be into the whole de-escalation thing. pic.twitter.com/b2whOKFlaO — The Daily Show (@TheDailyShow) April 26, 2024 “I said DE-escalate. DE-escalate!” said Klepper. “Does de-escalate not mean what I think it means? Reverse escalate. Don’t make it worse!” Even worse, the Texas governor, Greg Abbott, called the national guard to handle peaceful protesters at the University of Texas at Austin. “Send in the national guard and wake these kids up!” said Senator Josh Hawley on Fox News. “Do these fuckers ever think of a solution besides force?” Klepper wondered. “I mean, when this guy’s wifi goes down, is he like ‘get the national guard in here! We need to fuck up my modem.’” Jimmy Kimmel on Trump: ‘He keeps his caps lock tighter than the door to Melania’s bedroom’ Read more “You don’t use the national guard because students are camping on the quad,” Klepper’s co-host Ronny Chieng added. “You use them for when aliens invade and you want to test the aliens’ weapon capabilities.” “You’re not going to resolve tension by adding violence,” said Klepper. He spitballed a different tactic: “maybe instead of armed soldiers, why not try sending in the college improv troupe, you know? A group of communications majors in bright colored shirts asking for suggestions should clear out a crowd in no time.” Hawley was not the only Republican to publicly denigrate the student protesters. The House speaker, Mike Johnson, during a speech at Columbia University, called on the university president to resign if the protests didn’t stop and called on “kids” to “stop wasting your parents’ money” and go back to class. “Yes, stop wasting your parents’ money. Be like Mike Johnson – get into government and waste everyone’s money,” Chieng joked. “It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes,” Klepper added. “There’s a lot of noise and plenty of bad actors,” Klepper concluded. “But fundamentally, what’s driving these protests is anger over Israel’s disproportionate use of force. So, before we respond to the protests with disproportionate force, maybe we should listen to what they have to say. And then, if we still don’t agree with the students, then we can send in the college improv troupe.” Explore more on these topics Late-night TV roundup TV comedy Comedy Television US campus protests features Share Reuse this content W ith other late-night hosts on vacation, The Daily Show guest hosts Jordan Klepper and Ronny Chieng dug into the disproportionate force used on college campus protests against Israel’s disproportionate force in Gaza. The Daily Show It was a week of unrest at college campuses across the nation, as thousands of students protested against Israel’s war in Gaza. “This presents a challenge for the colleges,” said the Daily Show co-host Jordan Klepper. “Loud and even disruptive protests are a cherished tradition on campuses. And college investments in Israel are a legitimate issue for students. But, at the same time, there’s a real element of antisemitism among some protests, and Jewish students have the right to feel safe at their own schools. “It’s a delicate balance that requires keeping a cool head, and listening respectfully. And above all, the colleges should not escalate the tension,” Klepper continued. Cut to clips of Columbia University’s president and NYU’s president calling the NYPD to intervene and break up student protests. College protests over Gaza are growing, and Republicans don't seem to be into the whole de-escalation thing. pic.twitter.com/b2whOKFlaO — The Daily Show (@TheDailyShow) April 26, 2024 “I said DE-escalate. DE-escalate!” said Klepper. “Does de-escalate not mean what I think it means? Reverse escalate. Don’t make it worse!” Even worse, the Texas governor, Greg Abbott, called the national guard to handle peaceful protesters at the University of Texas at Austin. “Send in the national guard and wake these kids up!” said Senator Josh Hawley on Fox News. “Do these fuckers ever think of a solution besides force?” Klepper wondered. “I mean, when this guy’s wifi goes down, is he like ‘get the national guard in here! We need to fuck up my modem.’” Jimmy Kimmel on Trump: ‘He keeps his caps lock tighter than the door to Melania’s bedroom’ Read more “You don’t use the national guard because students are camping on the quad,” Klepper’s co-host Ronny Chieng added. “You use them for when aliens invade and you want to test the aliens’ weapon capabilities.” “You’re not going to resolve tension by adding violence,” said Klepper. He spitballed a different tactic: “maybe instead of armed soldiers, why not try sending in the college improv troupe, you know? A group of communications majors in bright colored shirts asking for suggestions should clear out a crowd in no time.” Hawley was not the only Republican to publicly denigrate the student protesters. The House speaker, Mike Johnson, during a speech at Columbia University, called on the university president to resign if the protests didn’t stop and called on “kids” to “stop wasting your parents’ money” and go back to class. “Yes, stop wasting your parents’ money. Be like Mike Johnson – get into government and waste everyone’s money,” Chieng joked. “It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes,” Klepper added. “There’s a lot of noise and plenty of bad actors,” Klepper concluded. “But fundamentally, what’s driving these protests is anger over Israel’s disproportionate use of force. So, before we respond to the protests with disproportionate force, maybe we should listen to what they have to say. And then, if we still don’t agree with the students, then we can send in the college improv troupe.” W ith other late-night hosts on vacation, The Daily Show guest hosts Jordan Klepper and Ronny Chieng dug into the disproportionate force used on college campus protests against Israel’s disproportionate force in Gaza. The Daily Show It was a week of unrest at college campuses across the nation, as thousands of students protested against Israel’s war in Gaza. “This presents a challenge for the colleges,” said the Daily Show co-host Jordan Klepper. “Loud and even disruptive protests are a cherished tradition on campuses. And college investments in Israel are a legitimate issue for students. But, at the same time, there’s a real element of antisemitism among some protests, and Jewish students have the right to feel safe at their own schools. “It’s a delicate balance that requires keeping a cool head, and listening respectfully. And above all, the colleges should not escalate the tension,” Klepper continued. Cut to clips of Columbia University’s president and NYU’s president calling the NYPD to intervene and break up student protests. College protests over Gaza are growing, and Republicans don't seem to be into the whole de-escalation thing. pic.twitter.com/b2whOKFlaO — The Daily Show (@TheDailyShow) April 26, 2024 “I said DE-escalate. DE-escalate!” said Klepper. “Does de-escalate not mean what I think it means? Reverse escalate. Don’t make it worse!” Even worse, the Texas governor, Greg Abbott, called the national guard to handle peaceful protesters at the University of Texas at Austin. “Send in the national guard and wake these kids up!” said Senator Josh Hawley on Fox News. “Do these fuckers ever think of a solution besides force?” Klepper wondered. “I mean, when this guy’s wifi goes down, is he like ‘get the national guard in here! We need to fuck up my modem.’” Jimmy Kimmel on Trump: ‘He keeps his caps lock tighter than the door to Melania’s bedroom’ Read more “You don’t use the national guard because students are camping on the quad,” Klepper’s co-host Ronny Chieng added. “You use them for when aliens invade and you want to test the aliens’ weapon capabilities.” “You’re not going to resolve tension by adding violence,” said Klepper. He spitballed a different tactic: “maybe instead of armed soldiers, why not try sending in the college improv troupe, you know? A group of communications majors in bright colored shirts asking for suggestions should clear out a crowd in no time.” Hawley was not the only Republican to publicly denigrate the student protesters. The House speaker, Mike Johnson, during a speech at Columbia University, called on the university president to resign if the protests didn’t stop and called on “kids” to “stop wasting your parents’ money” and go back to class. “Yes, stop wasting your parents’ money. Be like Mike Johnson – get into government and waste everyone’s money,” Chieng joked. “It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes,” Klepper added. “There’s a lot of noise and plenty of bad actors,” Klepper concluded. “But fundamentally, what’s driving these protests is anger over Israel’s disproportionate use of force. So, before we respond to the protests with disproportionate force, maybe we should listen to what they have to say. And then, if we still don’t agree with the students, then we can send in the college improv troupe.” W ith other late-night hosts on vacation, The Daily Show guest hosts Jordan Klepper and Ronny Chieng dug into the disproportionate force used on college campus protests against Israel’s disproportionate force in Gaza. It was a week of unrest at college campuses across the nation, as thousands of students protested against Israel’s war in Gaza. “This presents a challenge for the colleges,” said the Daily Show co-host Jordan Klepper. “Loud and even disruptive protests are a cherished tradition on campuses. And college investments in Israel are a legitimate issue for students. But, at the same time, there’s a real element of antisemitism among some protests, and Jewish students have the right to feel safe at their own schools. “It’s a delicate balance that requires keeping a cool head, and listening respectfully. And above all, the colleges should not escalate the tension,” Klepper continued. Cut to clips of Columbia University’s president and NYU’s president calling the NYPD to intervene and break up student protests. College protests over Gaza are growing, and Republicans don't seem to be into the whole de-escalation thing. pic.twitter.com/b2whOKFlaO — The Daily Show (@TheDailyShow) April 26, 2024 College protests over Gaza are growing, and Republicans don't seem to be into the whole de-escalation thing. pic.twitter.com/b2whOKFlaO “I said DE-escalate. DE-escalate!” said Klepper. “Does de-escalate not mean what I think it means? Reverse escalate. Don’t make it worse!” Even worse, the Texas governor, Greg Abbott, called the national guard to handle peaceful protesters at the University of Texas at Austin. “Send in the national guard and wake these kids up!” said Senator Josh Hawley on Fox News. “Do these fuckers ever think of a solution besides force?” Klepper wondered. “I mean, when this guy’s wifi goes down, is he like ‘get the national guard in here! We need to fuck up my modem.’” Jimmy Kimmel on Trump: ‘He keeps his caps lock tighter than the door to Melania’s bedroom’ Read more Jimmy Kimmel on Trump: ‘He keeps his caps lock tighter than the door to Melania’s bedroom’ Read more Jimmy Kimmel on Trump: ‘He keeps his caps lock tighter than the door to Melania’s bedroom’ Read more Jimmy Kimmel on Trump: ‘He keeps his caps lock tighter than the door to Melania’s bedroom’ Jimmy Kimmel on Trump: ‘He keeps his caps lock tighter than the door to Melania’s bedroom’ “You don’t use the national guard because students are camping on the quad,” Klepper’s co-host Ronny Chieng added. “You use them for when aliens invade and you want to test the aliens’ weapon capabilities.” “You’re not going to resolve tension by adding violence,” said Klepper. He spitballed a different tactic: “maybe instead of armed soldiers, why not try sending in the college improv troupe, you know? A group of communications majors in bright colored shirts asking for suggestions should clear out a crowd in no time.” Hawley was not the only Republican to publicly denigrate the student protesters. The House speaker, Mike Johnson, during a speech at Columbia University, called on the university president to resign if the protests didn’t stop and called on “kids” to “stop wasting your parents’ money” and go back to class. “Yes, stop wasting your parents’ money. Be like Mike Johnson – get into government and waste everyone’s money,” Chieng joked. “It’s quite a flip-flop for Republicans to be telling New York college kids to go back to their woke ideology classes,” Klepper added. “There’s a lot of noise and plenty of bad actors,” Klepper concluded. “But fundamentally, what’s driving these protests is anger over Israel’s disproportionate use of force. So, before we respond to the protests with disproportionate force, maybe we should listen to what they have to say. And then, if we still don’t agree with the students, then we can send in the college improv troupe.” Explore more on these topics Late-night TV roundup TV comedy Comedy Television US campus protests features Share Reuse this content Late-night TV roundup TV comedy Comedy Television US campus protests features |
Jacob Rees-Mogg says university protests against him were ‘legitimate, if noisy’
Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg (pictured in February 2024): ‘The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe.’ Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA View image in fullscreen Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg (pictured in February 2024): ‘The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe.’ Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA This article is more than 1 year old Jacob Rees-Mogg says university protests against him were ‘legitimate, if noisy’ This article is more than 1 year old Cross-party MPs criticise protesters who waved Palestinian flags and shouted at former Tory minister who was flanked by security Jacob Rees-Mogg has said the protests against him at Cardiff University were “legitimate and peaceful, if noisy” after he was chased off campus on Friday, as the incident received cross-party condemnation from elsewhere. Footage showed the Conservative MP being followed by a small number of shouting demonstrators as he was escorted into a waiting car by eight security guards after speaking at the university’s Conservative society. Protesters could be seen waving Palestine and Revolutionary Communist party flags and shouting at the MP in the video, while security staff encircled the former business secretary and held them back. Rees-Mog was filmed being escorted into a security vehicle as one protester leaned over the car’s bonnet and held up a sign at the windscreen before being pulled away by guards. The former Cabinet minister said on Saturday: “It was a legitimate and peaceful if noisy protest. “The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe. “Universities ought to be bastions of free speech and as both the protesters and I were able to give our views without fear or intimidation the proper traditions of adversarial debate were upheld.” Earlier Jo Stevens, the shadow Welsh secretary, said: “Concerned by footage of Jacob Rees-Mogg’s treatment by protesters in Cardiff. I disagree with him on almost everything, but we cannot accept a culture of intimidation in our politics. “The right to lawful protest is sacrosanct, but harassment and intimidation is unacceptable.” The Conservative party chair, Richard Holden, wrote on X: “How silly of these morons – whatever they think their cause is, they do it a disservice. “I’m sure @Jacob_Rees_Mogg will have taken it in his stride but no elected politician should have to put up with this shrill intimidatory idiocy.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Jacob Rees-Mogg chased by pro-Palestinian protesters https://t.co/Gkooy8fjmG pic.twitter.com/iegrcqELde — Sky News (@SkyNews) April 27, 2024 Cardiff Labour Students also condemned what it labelled as “abuse” toward the Tory, saying: “We disagree strongly with his political views. That does not mean he should be subjected to violence and intimidation at events. “Those who equivocate on this forget the dangerous levels that violence and abuse of politicians can get to, especially since the murders of David Amess and Jo Cox, and the countless numbers of MPs subjected to abuse on a daily basis.” The protest was organised by Welsh Underground Network and Cardiff Communists, with the former tweeting afterwards: “We helped organise a demonstration against this imperialist politician. We managed to block the doors, shutting them inside for several [hours]. Mogg left under a barrage of our anger, anger at his Zionism, anger at his cruelty to the working class, anger at his very existence.” Explore more on these topics Jacob Rees-Mogg Cardiff Cardiff University Palestine Gaza Protest news Share Reuse this content Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg (pictured in February 2024): ‘The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe.’ Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA View image in fullscreen Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg (pictured in February 2024): ‘The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe.’ Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA This article is more than 1 year old Jacob Rees-Mogg says university protests against him were ‘legitimate, if noisy’ This article is more than 1 year old Cross-party MPs criticise protesters who waved Palestinian flags and shouted at former Tory minister who was flanked by security Jacob Rees-Mogg has said the protests against him at Cardiff University were “legitimate and peaceful, if noisy” after he was chased off campus on Friday, as the incident received cross-party condemnation from elsewhere. Footage showed the Conservative MP being followed by a small number of shouting demonstrators as he was escorted into a waiting car by eight security guards after speaking at the university’s Conservative society. Protesters could be seen waving Palestine and Revolutionary Communist party flags and shouting at the MP in the video, while security staff encircled the former business secretary and held them back. Rees-Mog was filmed being escorted into a security vehicle as one protester leaned over the car’s bonnet and held up a sign at the windscreen before being pulled away by guards. The former Cabinet minister said on Saturday: “It was a legitimate and peaceful if noisy protest. “The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe. “Universities ought to be bastions of free speech and as both the protesters and I were able to give our views without fear or intimidation the proper traditions of adversarial debate were upheld.” Earlier Jo Stevens, the shadow Welsh secretary, said: “Concerned by footage of Jacob Rees-Mogg’s treatment by protesters in Cardiff. I disagree with him on almost everything, but we cannot accept a culture of intimidation in our politics. “The right to lawful protest is sacrosanct, but harassment and intimidation is unacceptable.” The Conservative party chair, Richard Holden, wrote on X: “How silly of these morons – whatever they think their cause is, they do it a disservice. “I’m sure @Jacob_Rees_Mogg will have taken it in his stride but no elected politician should have to put up with this shrill intimidatory idiocy.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Jacob Rees-Mogg chased by pro-Palestinian protesters https://t.co/Gkooy8fjmG pic.twitter.com/iegrcqELde — Sky News (@SkyNews) April 27, 2024 Cardiff Labour Students also condemned what it labelled as “abuse” toward the Tory, saying: “We disagree strongly with his political views. That does not mean he should be subjected to violence and intimidation at events. “Those who equivocate on this forget the dangerous levels that violence and abuse of politicians can get to, especially since the murders of David Amess and Jo Cox, and the countless numbers of MPs subjected to abuse on a daily basis.” The protest was organised by Welsh Underground Network and Cardiff Communists, with the former tweeting afterwards: “We helped organise a demonstration against this imperialist politician. We managed to block the doors, shutting them inside for several [hours]. Mogg left under a barrage of our anger, anger at his Zionism, anger at his cruelty to the working class, anger at his very existence.” Explore more on these topics Jacob Rees-Mogg Cardiff Cardiff University Palestine Gaza Protest news Share Reuse this content Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg (pictured in February 2024): ‘The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe.’ Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA View image in fullscreen Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg (pictured in February 2024): ‘The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe.’ Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg (pictured in February 2024): ‘The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe.’ Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA View image in fullscreen Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg (pictured in February 2024): ‘The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe.’ Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg (pictured in February 2024): ‘The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe.’ Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA View image in fullscreen Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg (pictured in February 2024): ‘The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe.’ Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg (pictured in February 2024): ‘The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe.’ Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA View image in fullscreen Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg (pictured in February 2024): ‘The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe.’ Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg (pictured in February 2024): ‘The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe.’ Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg (pictured in February 2024): ‘The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe.’ Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA This article is more than 1 year old Jacob Rees-Mogg says university protests against him were ‘legitimate, if noisy’ This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Jacob Rees-Mogg says university protests against him were ‘legitimate, if noisy’ This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Jacob Rees-Mogg says university protests against him were ‘legitimate, if noisy’ This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Cross-party MPs criticise protesters who waved Palestinian flags and shouted at former Tory minister who was flanked by security Cross-party MPs criticise protesters who waved Palestinian flags and shouted at former Tory minister who was flanked by security Cross-party MPs criticise protesters who waved Palestinian flags and shouted at former Tory minister who was flanked by security Jacob Rees-Mogg has said the protests against him at Cardiff University were “legitimate and peaceful, if noisy” after he was chased off campus on Friday, as the incident received cross-party condemnation from elsewhere. Footage showed the Conservative MP being followed by a small number of shouting demonstrators as he was escorted into a waiting car by eight security guards after speaking at the university’s Conservative society. Protesters could be seen waving Palestine and Revolutionary Communist party flags and shouting at the MP in the video, while security staff encircled the former business secretary and held them back. Rees-Mog was filmed being escorted into a security vehicle as one protester leaned over the car’s bonnet and held up a sign at the windscreen before being pulled away by guards. The former Cabinet minister said on Saturday: “It was a legitimate and peaceful if noisy protest. “The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe. “Universities ought to be bastions of free speech and as both the protesters and I were able to give our views without fear or intimidation the proper traditions of adversarial debate were upheld.” Earlier Jo Stevens, the shadow Welsh secretary, said: “Concerned by footage of Jacob Rees-Mogg’s treatment by protesters in Cardiff. I disagree with him on almost everything, but we cannot accept a culture of intimidation in our politics. “The right to lawful protest is sacrosanct, but harassment and intimidation is unacceptable.” The Conservative party chair, Richard Holden, wrote on X: “How silly of these morons – whatever they think their cause is, they do it a disservice. “I’m sure @Jacob_Rees_Mogg will have taken it in his stride but no elected politician should have to put up with this shrill intimidatory idiocy.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Jacob Rees-Mogg chased by pro-Palestinian protesters https://t.co/Gkooy8fjmG pic.twitter.com/iegrcqELde — Sky News (@SkyNews) April 27, 2024 Cardiff Labour Students also condemned what it labelled as “abuse” toward the Tory, saying: “We disagree strongly with his political views. That does not mean he should be subjected to violence and intimidation at events. “Those who equivocate on this forget the dangerous levels that violence and abuse of politicians can get to, especially since the murders of David Amess and Jo Cox, and the countless numbers of MPs subjected to abuse on a daily basis.” The protest was organised by Welsh Underground Network and Cardiff Communists, with the former tweeting afterwards: “We helped organise a demonstration against this imperialist politician. We managed to block the doors, shutting them inside for several [hours]. Mogg left under a barrage of our anger, anger at his Zionism, anger at his cruelty to the working class, anger at his very existence.” Explore more on these topics Jacob Rees-Mogg Cardiff Cardiff University Palestine Gaza Protest news Share Reuse this content Jacob Rees-Mogg has said the protests against him at Cardiff University were “legitimate and peaceful, if noisy” after he was chased off campus on Friday, as the incident received cross-party condemnation from elsewhere. Footage showed the Conservative MP being followed by a small number of shouting demonstrators as he was escorted into a waiting car by eight security guards after speaking at the university’s Conservative society. Protesters could be seen waving Palestine and Revolutionary Communist party flags and shouting at the MP in the video, while security staff encircled the former business secretary and held them back. Rees-Mog was filmed being escorted into a security vehicle as one protester leaned over the car’s bonnet and held up a sign at the windscreen before being pulled away by guards. The former Cabinet minister said on Saturday: “It was a legitimate and peaceful if noisy protest. “The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe. “Universities ought to be bastions of free speech and as both the protesters and I were able to give our views without fear or intimidation the proper traditions of adversarial debate were upheld.” Earlier Jo Stevens, the shadow Welsh secretary, said: “Concerned by footage of Jacob Rees-Mogg’s treatment by protesters in Cardiff. I disagree with him on almost everything, but we cannot accept a culture of intimidation in our politics. “The right to lawful protest is sacrosanct, but harassment and intimidation is unacceptable.” The Conservative party chair, Richard Holden, wrote on X: “How silly of these morons – whatever they think their cause is, they do it a disservice. “I’m sure @Jacob_Rees_Mogg will have taken it in his stride but no elected politician should have to put up with this shrill intimidatory idiocy.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Jacob Rees-Mogg chased by pro-Palestinian protesters https://t.co/Gkooy8fjmG pic.twitter.com/iegrcqELde — Sky News (@SkyNews) April 27, 2024 Cardiff Labour Students also condemned what it labelled as “abuse” toward the Tory, saying: “We disagree strongly with his political views. That does not mean he should be subjected to violence and intimidation at events. “Those who equivocate on this forget the dangerous levels that violence and abuse of politicians can get to, especially since the murders of David Amess and Jo Cox, and the countless numbers of MPs subjected to abuse on a daily basis.” The protest was organised by Welsh Underground Network and Cardiff Communists, with the former tweeting afterwards: “We helped organise a demonstration against this imperialist politician. We managed to block the doors, shutting them inside for several [hours]. Mogg left under a barrage of our anger, anger at his Zionism, anger at his cruelty to the working class, anger at his very existence.” Explore more on these topics Jacob Rees-Mogg Cardiff Cardiff University Palestine Gaza Protest news Share Reuse this content Jacob Rees-Mogg has said the protests against him at Cardiff University were “legitimate and peaceful, if noisy” after he was chased off campus on Friday, as the incident received cross-party condemnation from elsewhere. Footage showed the Conservative MP being followed by a small number of shouting demonstrators as he was escorted into a waiting car by eight security guards after speaking at the university’s Conservative society. Protesters could be seen waving Palestine and Revolutionary Communist party flags and shouting at the MP in the video, while security staff encircled the former business secretary and held them back. Rees-Mog was filmed being escorted into a security vehicle as one protester leaned over the car’s bonnet and held up a sign at the windscreen before being pulled away by guards. The former Cabinet minister said on Saturday: “It was a legitimate and peaceful if noisy protest. “The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe. “Universities ought to be bastions of free speech and as both the protesters and I were able to give our views without fear or intimidation the proper traditions of adversarial debate were upheld.” Earlier Jo Stevens, the shadow Welsh secretary, said: “Concerned by footage of Jacob Rees-Mogg’s treatment by protesters in Cardiff. I disagree with him on almost everything, but we cannot accept a culture of intimidation in our politics. “The right to lawful protest is sacrosanct, but harassment and intimidation is unacceptable.” The Conservative party chair, Richard Holden, wrote on X: “How silly of these morons – whatever they think their cause is, they do it a disservice. “I’m sure @Jacob_Rees_Mogg will have taken it in his stride but no elected politician should have to put up with this shrill intimidatory idiocy.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Jacob Rees-Mogg chased by pro-Palestinian protesters https://t.co/Gkooy8fjmG pic.twitter.com/iegrcqELde — Sky News (@SkyNews) April 27, 2024 Cardiff Labour Students also condemned what it labelled as “abuse” toward the Tory, saying: “We disagree strongly with his political views. That does not mean he should be subjected to violence and intimidation at events. “Those who equivocate on this forget the dangerous levels that violence and abuse of politicians can get to, especially since the murders of David Amess and Jo Cox, and the countless numbers of MPs subjected to abuse on a daily basis.” The protest was organised by Welsh Underground Network and Cardiff Communists, with the former tweeting afterwards: “We helped organise a demonstration against this imperialist politician. We managed to block the doors, shutting them inside for several [hours]. Mogg left under a barrage of our anger, anger at his Zionism, anger at his cruelty to the working class, anger at his very existence.” Jacob Rees-Mogg has said the protests against him at Cardiff University were “legitimate and peaceful, if noisy” after he was chased off campus on Friday, as the incident received cross-party condemnation from elsewhere. Footage showed the Conservative MP being followed by a small number of shouting demonstrators as he was escorted into a waiting car by eight security guards after speaking at the university’s Conservative society. Protesters could be seen waving Palestine and Revolutionary Communist party flags and shouting at the MP in the video, while security staff encircled the former business secretary and held them back. Rees-Mog was filmed being escorted into a security vehicle as one protester leaned over the car’s bonnet and held up a sign at the windscreen before being pulled away by guards. The former Cabinet minister said on Saturday: “It was a legitimate and peaceful if noisy protest. “The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe. “Universities ought to be bastions of free speech and as both the protesters and I were able to give our views without fear or intimidation the proper traditions of adversarial debate were upheld.” Earlier Jo Stevens, the shadow Welsh secretary, said: “Concerned by footage of Jacob Rees-Mogg’s treatment by protesters in Cardiff. I disagree with him on almost everything, but we cannot accept a culture of intimidation in our politics. “The right to lawful protest is sacrosanct, but harassment and intimidation is unacceptable.” The Conservative party chair, Richard Holden, wrote on X: “How silly of these morons – whatever they think their cause is, they do it a disservice. “I’m sure @Jacob_Rees_Mogg will have taken it in his stride but no elected politician should have to put up with this shrill intimidatory idiocy.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Jacob Rees-Mogg chased by pro-Palestinian protesters https://t.co/Gkooy8fjmG pic.twitter.com/iegrcqELde — Sky News (@SkyNews) April 27, 2024 Cardiff Labour Students also condemned what it labelled as “abuse” toward the Tory, saying: “We disagree strongly with his political views. That does not mean he should be subjected to violence and intimidation at events. “Those who equivocate on this forget the dangerous levels that violence and abuse of politicians can get to, especially since the murders of David Amess and Jo Cox, and the countless numbers of MPs subjected to abuse on a daily basis.” The protest was organised by Welsh Underground Network and Cardiff Communists, with the former tweeting afterwards: “We helped organise a demonstration against this imperialist politician. We managed to block the doors, shutting them inside for several [hours]. Mogg left under a barrage of our anger, anger at his Zionism, anger at his cruelty to the working class, anger at his very existence.” Jacob Rees-Mogg has said the protests against him at Cardiff University were “legitimate and peaceful, if noisy” after he was chased off campus on Friday, as the incident received cross-party condemnation from elsewhere. Footage showed the Conservative MP being followed by a small number of shouting demonstrators as he was escorted into a waiting car by eight security guards after speaking at the university’s Conservative society. Protesters could be seen waving Palestine and Revolutionary Communist party flags and shouting at the MP in the video, while security staff encircled the former business secretary and held them back. Rees-Mog was filmed being escorted into a security vehicle as one protester leaned over the car’s bonnet and held up a sign at the windscreen before being pulled away by guards. The former Cabinet minister said on Saturday: “It was a legitimate and peaceful if noisy protest. “The Cardiff University security team was exemplary in allowing a lawful protest while keeping everyone safe. “Universities ought to be bastions of free speech and as both the protesters and I were able to give our views without fear or intimidation the proper traditions of adversarial debate were upheld.” Earlier Jo Stevens, the shadow Welsh secretary, said: “Concerned by footage of Jacob Rees-Mogg’s treatment by protesters in Cardiff. I disagree with him on almost everything, but we cannot accept a culture of intimidation in our politics. “The right to lawful protest is sacrosanct, but harassment and intimidation is unacceptable.” The Conservative party chair, Richard Holden, wrote on X: “How silly of these morons – whatever they think their cause is, they do it a disservice. “I’m sure @Jacob_Rees_Mogg will have taken it in his stride but no elected politician should have to put up with this shrill intimidatory idiocy.” Jacob Rees-Mogg chased by pro-Palestinian protesters https://t.co/Gkooy8fjmG pic.twitter.com/iegrcqELde — Sky News (@SkyNews) April 27, 2024 Jacob Rees-Mogg chased by pro-Palestinian protesters https://t.co/Gkooy8fjmG pic.twitter.com/iegrcqELde Cardiff Labour Students also condemned what it labelled as “abuse” toward the Tory, saying: “We disagree strongly with his political views. That does not mean he should be subjected to violence and intimidation at events. “Those who equivocate on this forget the dangerous levels that violence and abuse of politicians can get to, especially since the murders of David Amess and Jo Cox, and the countless numbers of MPs subjected to abuse on a daily basis.” The protest was organised by Welsh Underground Network and Cardiff Communists, with the former tweeting afterwards: “We helped organise a demonstration against this imperialist politician. We managed to block the doors, shutting them inside for several [hours]. Mogg left under a barrage of our anger, anger at his Zionism, anger at his cruelty to the working class, anger at his very existence.” Explore more on these topics Jacob Rees-Mogg Cardiff Cardiff University Palestine Gaza Protest news Share Reuse this content Jacob Rees-Mogg Cardiff Cardiff University Palestine Gaza Protest news |
London Gaza protest: has row over ‘openly Jewish’ remark changed the march’s mood?
Thousands march to Hyde Park during a demonstration in solidarity with Palestinians in London on Saturday. Photograph: Rasid Necati Aslim/Anadolu/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Thousands march to Hyde Park during a demonstration in solidarity with Palestinians in London on Saturday. Photograph: Rasid Necati Aslim/Anadolu/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old London Gaza protest: has row over ‘openly Jewish’ remark changed the march’s mood? This article is more than 1 year old In the wake of a controversial viral video, Holocaust survivors joined pro-Palestine demonstration while fears of antisemitism grow A woman is standing next to a group of Holocaust survivors and their descendants in Trafalgar Square, clutching her dog’s lead and livestreaming her challenge to the pro-Palestine marchers on her phone. “Why will none of you condemn Hamas?” she repeats several times, for the benefit of those watching online. Most of the marchers ignore her, preferring instead to show their appreciation for the group of 11 survivors who oppose Israel’s actions in the war in Gaza. One man yells at her but is quickly ushered along by his friends. One young woman standing with the survivors kneels down to make friends with the dog. But this is a march of thousands of people and one Londoner, probably in his 50s, takes the bait, yelling about “you bloody evangelical Christians” and knocks her phone out of her hands as she turns to film him. “Where are the police?” she calls, and in the commotion ends up on the ground, cutting her leg on some broken glass. Some of the marchers come to her help, and she dabs the blood with a tissue, then goes back to her livestream. She refuses to give her name, just that she “represents the kingdom of God”. Does the scuffle show that London is a no-go zone for people who disagree with the demonstrators? Or, if even someone apparently trying to provoke a response can stand in relative safety, is that evidence, as the Holocaust survivors group hopes to show, that this is a peaceful protest where Jews should feel safe? The survivors group were at the front of the march when it set off just before 1pm in Whitehall on Saturday, the thirteenth time demonstrators have gathered in central London to oppose the war in Gaza after the 7 October attacks by Hamas . After the previous march, Gideon Falter, the leader of the Campaign Against Antisemitism , released a video clip of a police officer telling him that he could not walk across the march because he was “openly Jewish”, which Falter said showed that London had become a no-go area for Jews during the protests. It led to calls from former home secretary Suella Braverman for the Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, to resign. View image in fullscreen The Rev Hayley Ace at the Enough is Enough counter-demonstation on Saturday. Photograph: Sophia Evans/The Observer But the release of a 13-minute video showed a much longer and more nuanced exchange between Falter and the officer, who offered to escort Falter away from the demonstration and said he was being disingenuous about his motives for wanting to cross the road at that point. Stephen Kapos, an 87-year-old from Budapest who lost most of his family in the Holocaust, was in the centre as they walked up Whitehall. “We want to stress our solidarity with the Palestinian people,” he said, adding that memories of the Holocaust should not be used as cover for Israel’s actions in Gaza . “The right wing has been claiming that there are no-go areas of London for Jews. We want to prove that’s wrong – we are very welcome here.” “Openly Jewish” had become something of a slogan on the march yesterday, and some people were spurred to join the demonstration by Falter’s video. Simon Moore, a GP from Muswell Hill in north London, wore a handmade sign around his neck about his father, who arrived on the Kindertransport. “I know my dad would have believed in the Palestinian cause,” he says. “He was a victim of the same thing that is happening now. It’s very important that Jews or people with Jewish heritage say that this is wrong.” Along Pall Mall, there was another potential flashpoint – a counter-demonstration by a group called Enough is Enough, separated by lines of police and barriers, too far away for anything except a few rounds of football finger-pointing. One of the organisers, Rev Hayley Ace, said: “We’ve had enough of open calls for support for terrorist organisations such as Hezbollah and Hamas.” Jews are being demonised, she said, adding of the marchers: “If they want a ceasefire, why aren’t they calling for the release of the hostages?” View image in fullscreen Richard Wistreich from Hastings British Jews forming the ‘Jewish Block’ group gather outside the Ministry of Defence during the pro-Palestine march. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer Since 7 October, both antisemitism and anti-Muslim hatred have risen – factors that led to fewer organisations commemorating Holocaust Memorial Day on 27 January, according to Olivia Marks-Woldman, the chief executive of the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust. Numbers fell from 4,500 last year to 3,700. “Some local organisers were worried about the physical safety of their events,” she said on Friday. “At the same time, we had some people who were very deliberately disengaging and citing community tensions, but occasionally cited reasons which are intrinsically antisemitic.” She said that Holocaust survivors who worked with the trust had a variety of views on the Israeli government and its western allies, but were “almost all very, very worried about the rise in antisemitism”. “One thing we hear quite often is people saying ‘the war in Gaza is another genocide, it’s just like the Holocaust’, or comparing the Israeli government with the Nazis,” she said. “Those are Holocaust distortions, where victims of the Holocaust, the Jewish people, are being accused of being Nazis themselves. That’s antisemitic. It’s deeply worrying. And it shows a fundamental lack of knowledge of the Holocaust.” View image in fullscreen Marchers at the protest in London on 27 April. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer In Trafalgar Square, people stopped to greet the Holocaust survivor group. Mark Etkind is one of the organisers – his father Michael was from Łódź in Poland and survived after the 45 Aid Society brought him to the UK. “It was quite clear from the beginning that Netanyahu was going to take the opportunity to conduct massive ethnic cleansing, what could become a genocide,” he said. “Myself and my friends in the group realised we had a responsibility to make it plain that we were opposed to that. “It’s hard to talk about without getting a bit upset,” he added. “When we are on the protest, being openly Jewish, the level of warmth and support has been overwhelming.” What of Marks-Woldman’s point that some of the ways the Holocaust is used in the debate are distortions? “I think that people who compare what is happening in Gaza to the Holocaust are not being antisemitic,” Etkind says. “Anyone who knows history knows that we can’t understand things except in comparison to each other. What is happening now or in the future will never be on the scale of the tragedy of what happened in the second world war. “But that’s not a comfort to someone who has lost their whole family in Gaza, and it would be cruel to say so to them.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics UK news The Observer Gaza Protest London Palestine Hamas Israel news Share Reuse this content Thousands march to Hyde Park during a demonstration in solidarity with Palestinians in London on Saturday. Photograph: Rasid Necati Aslim/Anadolu/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Thousands march to Hyde Park during a demonstration in solidarity with Palestinians in London on Saturday. Photograph: Rasid Necati Aslim/Anadolu/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old London Gaza protest: has row over ‘openly Jewish’ remark changed the march’s mood? This article is more than 1 year old In the wake of a controversial viral video, Holocaust survivors joined pro-Palestine demonstration while fears of antisemitism grow A woman is standing next to a group of Holocaust survivors and their descendants in Trafalgar Square, clutching her dog’s lead and livestreaming her challenge to the pro-Palestine marchers on her phone. “Why will none of you condemn Hamas?” she repeats several times, for the benefit of those watching online. Most of the marchers ignore her, preferring instead to show their appreciation for the group of 11 survivors who oppose Israel’s actions in the war in Gaza. One man yells at her but is quickly ushered along by his friends. One young woman standing with the survivors kneels down to make friends with the dog. But this is a march of thousands of people and one Londoner, probably in his 50s, takes the bait, yelling about “you bloody evangelical Christians” and knocks her phone out of her hands as she turns to film him. “Where are the police?” she calls, and in the commotion ends up on the ground, cutting her leg on some broken glass. Some of the marchers come to her help, and she dabs the blood with a tissue, then goes back to her livestream. She refuses to give her name, just that she “represents the kingdom of God”. Does the scuffle show that London is a no-go zone for people who disagree with the demonstrators? Or, if even someone apparently trying to provoke a response can stand in relative safety, is that evidence, as the Holocaust survivors group hopes to show, that this is a peaceful protest where Jews should feel safe? The survivors group were at the front of the march when it set off just before 1pm in Whitehall on Saturday, the thirteenth time demonstrators have gathered in central London to oppose the war in Gaza after the 7 October attacks by Hamas . After the previous march, Gideon Falter, the leader of the Campaign Against Antisemitism , released a video clip of a police officer telling him that he could not walk across the march because he was “openly Jewish”, which Falter said showed that London had become a no-go area for Jews during the protests. It led to calls from former home secretary Suella Braverman for the Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, to resign. View image in fullscreen The Rev Hayley Ace at the Enough is Enough counter-demonstation on Saturday. Photograph: Sophia Evans/The Observer But the release of a 13-minute video showed a much longer and more nuanced exchange between Falter and the officer, who offered to escort Falter away from the demonstration and said he was being disingenuous about his motives for wanting to cross the road at that point. Stephen Kapos, an 87-year-old from Budapest who lost most of his family in the Holocaust, was in the centre as they walked up Whitehall. “We want to stress our solidarity with the Palestinian people,” he said, adding that memories of the Holocaust should not be used as cover for Israel’s actions in Gaza . “The right wing has been claiming that there are no-go areas of London for Jews. We want to prove that’s wrong – we are very welcome here.” “Openly Jewish” had become something of a slogan on the march yesterday, and some people were spurred to join the demonstration by Falter’s video. Simon Moore, a GP from Muswell Hill in north London, wore a handmade sign around his neck about his father, who arrived on the Kindertransport. “I know my dad would have believed in the Palestinian cause,” he says. “He was a victim of the same thing that is happening now. It’s very important that Jews or people with Jewish heritage say that this is wrong.” Along Pall Mall, there was another potential flashpoint – a counter-demonstration by a group called Enough is Enough, separated by lines of police and barriers, too far away for anything except a few rounds of football finger-pointing. One of the organisers, Rev Hayley Ace, said: “We’ve had enough of open calls for support for terrorist organisations such as Hezbollah and Hamas.” Jews are being demonised, she said, adding of the marchers: “If they want a ceasefire, why aren’t they calling for the release of the hostages?” View image in fullscreen Richard Wistreich from Hastings British Jews forming the ‘Jewish Block’ group gather outside the Ministry of Defence during the pro-Palestine march. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer Since 7 October, both antisemitism and anti-Muslim hatred have risen – factors that led to fewer organisations commemorating Holocaust Memorial Day on 27 January, according to Olivia Marks-Woldman, the chief executive of the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust. Numbers fell from 4,500 last year to 3,700. “Some local organisers were worried about the physical safety of their events,” she said on Friday. “At the same time, we had some people who were very deliberately disengaging and citing community tensions, but occasionally cited reasons which are intrinsically antisemitic.” She said that Holocaust survivors who worked with the trust had a variety of views on the Israeli government and its western allies, but were “almost all very, very worried about the rise in antisemitism”. “One thing we hear quite often is people saying ‘the war in Gaza is another genocide, it’s just like the Holocaust’, or comparing the Israeli government with the Nazis,” she said. “Those are Holocaust distortions, where victims of the Holocaust, the Jewish people, are being accused of being Nazis themselves. That’s antisemitic. It’s deeply worrying. And it shows a fundamental lack of knowledge of the Holocaust.” View image in fullscreen Marchers at the protest in London on 27 April. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer In Trafalgar Square, people stopped to greet the Holocaust survivor group. Mark Etkind is one of the organisers – his father Michael was from Łódź in Poland and survived after the 45 Aid Society brought him to the UK. “It was quite clear from the beginning that Netanyahu was going to take the opportunity to conduct massive ethnic cleansing, what could become a genocide,” he said. “Myself and my friends in the group realised we had a responsibility to make it plain that we were opposed to that. “It’s hard to talk about without getting a bit upset,” he added. “When we are on the protest, being openly Jewish, the level of warmth and support has been overwhelming.” What of Marks-Woldman’s point that some of the ways the Holocaust is used in the debate are distortions? “I think that people who compare what is happening in Gaza to the Holocaust are not being antisemitic,” Etkind says. “Anyone who knows history knows that we can’t understand things except in comparison to each other. What is happening now or in the future will never be on the scale of the tragedy of what happened in the second world war. “But that’s not a comfort to someone who has lost their whole family in Gaza, and it would be cruel to say so to them.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics UK news The Observer Gaza Protest London Palestine Hamas Israel news Share Reuse this content Thousands march to Hyde Park during a demonstration in solidarity with Palestinians in London on Saturday. Photograph: Rasid Necati Aslim/Anadolu/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Thousands march to Hyde Park during a demonstration in solidarity with Palestinians in London on Saturday. Photograph: Rasid Necati Aslim/Anadolu/Getty Images Thousands march to Hyde Park during a demonstration in solidarity with Palestinians in London on Saturday. Photograph: Rasid Necati Aslim/Anadolu/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Thousands march to Hyde Park during a demonstration in solidarity with Palestinians in London on Saturday. Photograph: Rasid Necati Aslim/Anadolu/Getty Images Thousands march to Hyde Park during a demonstration in solidarity with Palestinians in London on Saturday. Photograph: Rasid Necati Aslim/Anadolu/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Thousands march to Hyde Park during a demonstration in solidarity with Palestinians in London on Saturday. Photograph: Rasid Necati Aslim/Anadolu/Getty Images Thousands march to Hyde Park during a demonstration in solidarity with Palestinians in London on Saturday. Photograph: Rasid Necati Aslim/Anadolu/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Thousands march to Hyde Park during a demonstration in solidarity with Palestinians in London on Saturday. Photograph: Rasid Necati Aslim/Anadolu/Getty Images Thousands march to Hyde Park during a demonstration in solidarity with Palestinians in London on Saturday. Photograph: Rasid Necati Aslim/Anadolu/Getty Images Thousands march to Hyde Park during a demonstration in solidarity with Palestinians in London on Saturday. Photograph: Rasid Necati Aslim/Anadolu/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old London Gaza protest: has row over ‘openly Jewish’ remark changed the march’s mood? This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old London Gaza protest: has row over ‘openly Jewish’ remark changed the march’s mood? This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old London Gaza protest: has row over ‘openly Jewish’ remark changed the march’s mood? This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old In the wake of a controversial viral video, Holocaust survivors joined pro-Palestine demonstration while fears of antisemitism grow In the wake of a controversial viral video, Holocaust survivors joined pro-Palestine demonstration while fears of antisemitism grow In the wake of a controversial viral video, Holocaust survivors joined pro-Palestine demonstration while fears of antisemitism grow A woman is standing next to a group of Holocaust survivors and their descendants in Trafalgar Square, clutching her dog’s lead and livestreaming her challenge to the pro-Palestine marchers on her phone. “Why will none of you condemn Hamas?” she repeats several times, for the benefit of those watching online. Most of the marchers ignore her, preferring instead to show their appreciation for the group of 11 survivors who oppose Israel’s actions in the war in Gaza. One man yells at her but is quickly ushered along by his friends. One young woman standing with the survivors kneels down to make friends with the dog. But this is a march of thousands of people and one Londoner, probably in his 50s, takes the bait, yelling about “you bloody evangelical Christians” and knocks her phone out of her hands as she turns to film him. “Where are the police?” she calls, and in the commotion ends up on the ground, cutting her leg on some broken glass. Some of the marchers come to her help, and she dabs the blood with a tissue, then goes back to her livestream. She refuses to give her name, just that she “represents the kingdom of God”. Does the scuffle show that London is a no-go zone for people who disagree with the demonstrators? Or, if even someone apparently trying to provoke a response can stand in relative safety, is that evidence, as the Holocaust survivors group hopes to show, that this is a peaceful protest where Jews should feel safe? The survivors group were at the front of the march when it set off just before 1pm in Whitehall on Saturday, the thirteenth time demonstrators have gathered in central London to oppose the war in Gaza after the 7 October attacks by Hamas . After the previous march, Gideon Falter, the leader of the Campaign Against Antisemitism , released a video clip of a police officer telling him that he could not walk across the march because he was “openly Jewish”, which Falter said showed that London had become a no-go area for Jews during the protests. It led to calls from former home secretary Suella Braverman for the Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, to resign. View image in fullscreen The Rev Hayley Ace at the Enough is Enough counter-demonstation on Saturday. Photograph: Sophia Evans/The Observer But the release of a 13-minute video showed a much longer and more nuanced exchange between Falter and the officer, who offered to escort Falter away from the demonstration and said he was being disingenuous about his motives for wanting to cross the road at that point. Stephen Kapos, an 87-year-old from Budapest who lost most of his family in the Holocaust, was in the centre as they walked up Whitehall. “We want to stress our solidarity with the Palestinian people,” he said, adding that memories of the Holocaust should not be used as cover for Israel’s actions in Gaza . “The right wing has been claiming that there are no-go areas of London for Jews. We want to prove that’s wrong – we are very welcome here.” “Openly Jewish” had become something of a slogan on the march yesterday, and some people were spurred to join the demonstration by Falter’s video. Simon Moore, a GP from Muswell Hill in north London, wore a handmade sign around his neck about his father, who arrived on the Kindertransport. “I know my dad would have believed in the Palestinian cause,” he says. “He was a victim of the same thing that is happening now. It’s very important that Jews or people with Jewish heritage say that this is wrong.” Along Pall Mall, there was another potential flashpoint – a counter-demonstration by a group called Enough is Enough, separated by lines of police and barriers, too far away for anything except a few rounds of football finger-pointing. One of the organisers, Rev Hayley Ace, said: “We’ve had enough of open calls for support for terrorist organisations such as Hezbollah and Hamas.” Jews are being demonised, she said, adding of the marchers: “If they want a ceasefire, why aren’t they calling for the release of the hostages?” View image in fullscreen Richard Wistreich from Hastings British Jews forming the ‘Jewish Block’ group gather outside the Ministry of Defence during the pro-Palestine march. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer Since 7 October, both antisemitism and anti-Muslim hatred have risen – factors that led to fewer organisations commemorating Holocaust Memorial Day on 27 January, according to Olivia Marks-Woldman, the chief executive of the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust. Numbers fell from 4,500 last year to 3,700. “Some local organisers were worried about the physical safety of their events,” she said on Friday. “At the same time, we had some people who were very deliberately disengaging and citing community tensions, but occasionally cited reasons which are intrinsically antisemitic.” She said that Holocaust survivors who worked with the trust had a variety of views on the Israeli government and its western allies, but were “almost all very, very worried about the rise in antisemitism”. “One thing we hear quite often is people saying ‘the war in Gaza is another genocide, it’s just like the Holocaust’, or comparing the Israeli government with the Nazis,” she said. “Those are Holocaust distortions, where victims of the Holocaust, the Jewish people, are being accused of being Nazis themselves. That’s antisemitic. It’s deeply worrying. And it shows a fundamental lack of knowledge of the Holocaust.” View image in fullscreen Marchers at the protest in London on 27 April. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer In Trafalgar Square, people stopped to greet the Holocaust survivor group. Mark Etkind is one of the organisers – his father Michael was from Łódź in Poland and survived after the 45 Aid Society brought him to the UK. “It was quite clear from the beginning that Netanyahu was going to take the opportunity to conduct massive ethnic cleansing, what could become a genocide,” he said. “Myself and my friends in the group realised we had a responsibility to make it plain that we were opposed to that. “It’s hard to talk about without getting a bit upset,” he added. “When we are on the protest, being openly Jewish, the level of warmth and support has been overwhelming.” What of Marks-Woldman’s point that some of the ways the Holocaust is used in the debate are distortions? “I think that people who compare what is happening in Gaza to the Holocaust are not being antisemitic,” Etkind says. “Anyone who knows history knows that we can’t understand things except in comparison to each other. What is happening now or in the future will never be on the scale of the tragedy of what happened in the second world war. “But that’s not a comfort to someone who has lost their whole family in Gaza, and it would be cruel to say so to them.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics UK news The Observer Gaza Protest London Palestine Hamas Israel news Share Reuse this content A woman is standing next to a group of Holocaust survivors and their descendants in Trafalgar Square, clutching her dog’s lead and livestreaming her challenge to the pro-Palestine marchers on her phone. “Why will none of you condemn Hamas?” she repeats several times, for the benefit of those watching online. Most of the marchers ignore her, preferring instead to show their appreciation for the group of 11 survivors who oppose Israel’s actions in the war in Gaza. One man yells at her but is quickly ushered along by his friends. One young woman standing with the survivors kneels down to make friends with the dog. But this is a march of thousands of people and one Londoner, probably in his 50s, takes the bait, yelling about “you bloody evangelical Christians” and knocks her phone out of her hands as she turns to film him. “Where are the police?” she calls, and in the commotion ends up on the ground, cutting her leg on some broken glass. Some of the marchers come to her help, and she dabs the blood with a tissue, then goes back to her livestream. She refuses to give her name, just that she “represents the kingdom of God”. Does the scuffle show that London is a no-go zone for people who disagree with the demonstrators? Or, if even someone apparently trying to provoke a response can stand in relative safety, is that evidence, as the Holocaust survivors group hopes to show, that this is a peaceful protest where Jews should feel safe? The survivors group were at the front of the march when it set off just before 1pm in Whitehall on Saturday, the thirteenth time demonstrators have gathered in central London to oppose the war in Gaza after the 7 October attacks by Hamas . After the previous march, Gideon Falter, the leader of the Campaign Against Antisemitism , released a video clip of a police officer telling him that he could not walk across the march because he was “openly Jewish”, which Falter said showed that London had become a no-go area for Jews during the protests. It led to calls from former home secretary Suella Braverman for the Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, to resign. View image in fullscreen The Rev Hayley Ace at the Enough is Enough counter-demonstation on Saturday. Photograph: Sophia Evans/The Observer But the release of a 13-minute video showed a much longer and more nuanced exchange between Falter and the officer, who offered to escort Falter away from the demonstration and said he was being disingenuous about his motives for wanting to cross the road at that point. Stephen Kapos, an 87-year-old from Budapest who lost most of his family in the Holocaust, was in the centre as they walked up Whitehall. “We want to stress our solidarity with the Palestinian people,” he said, adding that memories of the Holocaust should not be used as cover for Israel’s actions in Gaza . “The right wing has been claiming that there are no-go areas of London for Jews. We want to prove that’s wrong – we are very welcome here.” “Openly Jewish” had become something of a slogan on the march yesterday, and some people were spurred to join the demonstration by Falter’s video. Simon Moore, a GP from Muswell Hill in north London, wore a handmade sign around his neck about his father, who arrived on the Kindertransport. “I know my dad would have believed in the Palestinian cause,” he says. “He was a victim of the same thing that is happening now. It’s very important that Jews or people with Jewish heritage say that this is wrong.” Along Pall Mall, there was another potential flashpoint – a counter-demonstration by a group called Enough is Enough, separated by lines of police and barriers, too far away for anything except a few rounds of football finger-pointing. One of the organisers, Rev Hayley Ace, said: “We’ve had enough of open calls for support for terrorist organisations such as Hezbollah and Hamas.” Jews are being demonised, she said, adding of the marchers: “If they want a ceasefire, why aren’t they calling for the release of the hostages?” View image in fullscreen Richard Wistreich from Hastings British Jews forming the ‘Jewish Block’ group gather outside the Ministry of Defence during the pro-Palestine march. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer Since 7 October, both antisemitism and anti-Muslim hatred have risen – factors that led to fewer organisations commemorating Holocaust Memorial Day on 27 January, according to Olivia Marks-Woldman, the chief executive of the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust. Numbers fell from 4,500 last year to 3,700. “Some local organisers were worried about the physical safety of their events,” she said on Friday. “At the same time, we had some people who were very deliberately disengaging and citing community tensions, but occasionally cited reasons which are intrinsically antisemitic.” She said that Holocaust survivors who worked with the trust had a variety of views on the Israeli government and its western allies, but were “almost all very, very worried about the rise in antisemitism”. “One thing we hear quite often is people saying ‘the war in Gaza is another genocide, it’s just like the Holocaust’, or comparing the Israeli government with the Nazis,” she said. “Those are Holocaust distortions, where victims of the Holocaust, the Jewish people, are being accused of being Nazis themselves. That’s antisemitic. It’s deeply worrying. And it shows a fundamental lack of knowledge of the Holocaust.” View image in fullscreen Marchers at the protest in London on 27 April. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer In Trafalgar Square, people stopped to greet the Holocaust survivor group. Mark Etkind is one of the organisers – his father Michael was from Łódź in Poland and survived after the 45 Aid Society brought him to the UK. “It was quite clear from the beginning that Netanyahu was going to take the opportunity to conduct massive ethnic cleansing, what could become a genocide,” he said. “Myself and my friends in the group realised we had a responsibility to make it plain that we were opposed to that. “It’s hard to talk about without getting a bit upset,” he added. “When we are on the protest, being openly Jewish, the level of warmth and support has been overwhelming.” What of Marks-Woldman’s point that some of the ways the Holocaust is used in the debate are distortions? “I think that people who compare what is happening in Gaza to the Holocaust are not being antisemitic,” Etkind says. “Anyone who knows history knows that we can’t understand things except in comparison to each other. What is happening now or in the future will never be on the scale of the tragedy of what happened in the second world war. “But that’s not a comfort to someone who has lost their whole family in Gaza, and it would be cruel to say so to them.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics UK news The Observer Gaza Protest London Palestine Hamas Israel news Share Reuse this content A woman is standing next to a group of Holocaust survivors and their descendants in Trafalgar Square, clutching her dog’s lead and livestreaming her challenge to the pro-Palestine marchers on her phone. “Why will none of you condemn Hamas?” she repeats several times, for the benefit of those watching online. Most of the marchers ignore her, preferring instead to show their appreciation for the group of 11 survivors who oppose Israel’s actions in the war in Gaza. One man yells at her but is quickly ushered along by his friends. One young woman standing with the survivors kneels down to make friends with the dog. But this is a march of thousands of people and one Londoner, probably in his 50s, takes the bait, yelling about “you bloody evangelical Christians” and knocks her phone out of her hands as she turns to film him. “Where are the police?” she calls, and in the commotion ends up on the ground, cutting her leg on some broken glass. Some of the marchers come to her help, and she dabs the blood with a tissue, then goes back to her livestream. She refuses to give her name, just that she “represents the kingdom of God”. Does the scuffle show that London is a no-go zone for people who disagree with the demonstrators? Or, if even someone apparently trying to provoke a response can stand in relative safety, is that evidence, as the Holocaust survivors group hopes to show, that this is a peaceful protest where Jews should feel safe? The survivors group were at the front of the march when it set off just before 1pm in Whitehall on Saturday, the thirteenth time demonstrators have gathered in central London to oppose the war in Gaza after the 7 October attacks by Hamas . After the previous march, Gideon Falter, the leader of the Campaign Against Antisemitism , released a video clip of a police officer telling him that he could not walk across the march because he was “openly Jewish”, which Falter said showed that London had become a no-go area for Jews during the protests. It led to calls from former home secretary Suella Braverman for the Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, to resign. View image in fullscreen The Rev Hayley Ace at the Enough is Enough counter-demonstation on Saturday. Photograph: Sophia Evans/The Observer But the release of a 13-minute video showed a much longer and more nuanced exchange between Falter and the officer, who offered to escort Falter away from the demonstration and said he was being disingenuous about his motives for wanting to cross the road at that point. Stephen Kapos, an 87-year-old from Budapest who lost most of his family in the Holocaust, was in the centre as they walked up Whitehall. “We want to stress our solidarity with the Palestinian people,” he said, adding that memories of the Holocaust should not be used as cover for Israel’s actions in Gaza . “The right wing has been claiming that there are no-go areas of London for Jews. We want to prove that’s wrong – we are very welcome here.” “Openly Jewish” had become something of a slogan on the march yesterday, and some people were spurred to join the demonstration by Falter’s video. Simon Moore, a GP from Muswell Hill in north London, wore a handmade sign around his neck about his father, who arrived on the Kindertransport. “I know my dad would have believed in the Palestinian cause,” he says. “He was a victim of the same thing that is happening now. It’s very important that Jews or people with Jewish heritage say that this is wrong.” Along Pall Mall, there was another potential flashpoint – a counter-demonstration by a group called Enough is Enough, separated by lines of police and barriers, too far away for anything except a few rounds of football finger-pointing. One of the organisers, Rev Hayley Ace, said: “We’ve had enough of open calls for support for terrorist organisations such as Hezbollah and Hamas.” Jews are being demonised, she said, adding of the marchers: “If they want a ceasefire, why aren’t they calling for the release of the hostages?” View image in fullscreen Richard Wistreich from Hastings British Jews forming the ‘Jewish Block’ group gather outside the Ministry of Defence during the pro-Palestine march. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer Since 7 October, both antisemitism and anti-Muslim hatred have risen – factors that led to fewer organisations commemorating Holocaust Memorial Day on 27 January, according to Olivia Marks-Woldman, the chief executive of the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust. Numbers fell from 4,500 last year to 3,700. “Some local organisers were worried about the physical safety of their events,” she said on Friday. “At the same time, we had some people who were very deliberately disengaging and citing community tensions, but occasionally cited reasons which are intrinsically antisemitic.” She said that Holocaust survivors who worked with the trust had a variety of views on the Israeli government and its western allies, but were “almost all very, very worried about the rise in antisemitism”. “One thing we hear quite often is people saying ‘the war in Gaza is another genocide, it’s just like the Holocaust’, or comparing the Israeli government with the Nazis,” she said. “Those are Holocaust distortions, where victims of the Holocaust, the Jewish people, are being accused of being Nazis themselves. That’s antisemitic. It’s deeply worrying. And it shows a fundamental lack of knowledge of the Holocaust.” View image in fullscreen Marchers at the protest in London on 27 April. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer In Trafalgar Square, people stopped to greet the Holocaust survivor group. Mark Etkind is one of the organisers – his father Michael was from Łódź in Poland and survived after the 45 Aid Society brought him to the UK. “It was quite clear from the beginning that Netanyahu was going to take the opportunity to conduct massive ethnic cleansing, what could become a genocide,” he said. “Myself and my friends in the group realised we had a responsibility to make it plain that we were opposed to that. “It’s hard to talk about without getting a bit upset,” he added. “When we are on the protest, being openly Jewish, the level of warmth and support has been overwhelming.” What of Marks-Woldman’s point that some of the ways the Holocaust is used in the debate are distortions? “I think that people who compare what is happening in Gaza to the Holocaust are not being antisemitic,” Etkind says. “Anyone who knows history knows that we can’t understand things except in comparison to each other. What is happening now or in the future will never be on the scale of the tragedy of what happened in the second world war. “But that’s not a comfort to someone who has lost their whole family in Gaza, and it would be cruel to say so to them.” A woman is standing next to a group of Holocaust survivors and their descendants in Trafalgar Square, clutching her dog’s lead and livestreaming her challenge to the pro-Palestine marchers on her phone. “Why will none of you condemn Hamas?” she repeats several times, for the benefit of those watching online. Most of the marchers ignore her, preferring instead to show their appreciation for the group of 11 survivors who oppose Israel’s actions in the war in Gaza. One man yells at her but is quickly ushered along by his friends. One young woman standing with the survivors kneels down to make friends with the dog. But this is a march of thousands of people and one Londoner, probably in his 50s, takes the bait, yelling about “you bloody evangelical Christians” and knocks her phone out of her hands as she turns to film him. “Where are the police?” she calls, and in the commotion ends up on the ground, cutting her leg on some broken glass. Some of the marchers come to her help, and she dabs the blood with a tissue, then goes back to her livestream. She refuses to give her name, just that she “represents the kingdom of God”. Does the scuffle show that London is a no-go zone for people who disagree with the demonstrators? Or, if even someone apparently trying to provoke a response can stand in relative safety, is that evidence, as the Holocaust survivors group hopes to show, that this is a peaceful protest where Jews should feel safe? The survivors group were at the front of the march when it set off just before 1pm in Whitehall on Saturday, the thirteenth time demonstrators have gathered in central London to oppose the war in Gaza after the 7 October attacks by Hamas . After the previous march, Gideon Falter, the leader of the Campaign Against Antisemitism , released a video clip of a police officer telling him that he could not walk across the march because he was “openly Jewish”, which Falter said showed that London had become a no-go area for Jews during the protests. It led to calls from former home secretary Suella Braverman for the Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, to resign. View image in fullscreen The Rev Hayley Ace at the Enough is Enough counter-demonstation on Saturday. Photograph: Sophia Evans/The Observer But the release of a 13-minute video showed a much longer and more nuanced exchange between Falter and the officer, who offered to escort Falter away from the demonstration and said he was being disingenuous about his motives for wanting to cross the road at that point. Stephen Kapos, an 87-year-old from Budapest who lost most of his family in the Holocaust, was in the centre as they walked up Whitehall. “We want to stress our solidarity with the Palestinian people,” he said, adding that memories of the Holocaust should not be used as cover for Israel’s actions in Gaza . “The right wing has been claiming that there are no-go areas of London for Jews. We want to prove that’s wrong – we are very welcome here.” “Openly Jewish” had become something of a slogan on the march yesterday, and some people were spurred to join the demonstration by Falter’s video. Simon Moore, a GP from Muswell Hill in north London, wore a handmade sign around his neck about his father, who arrived on the Kindertransport. “I know my dad would have believed in the Palestinian cause,” he says. “He was a victim of the same thing that is happening now. It’s very important that Jews or people with Jewish heritage say that this is wrong.” Along Pall Mall, there was another potential flashpoint – a counter-demonstration by a group called Enough is Enough, separated by lines of police and barriers, too far away for anything except a few rounds of football finger-pointing. One of the organisers, Rev Hayley Ace, said: “We’ve had enough of open calls for support for terrorist organisations such as Hezbollah and Hamas.” Jews are being demonised, she said, adding of the marchers: “If they want a ceasefire, why aren’t they calling for the release of the hostages?” View image in fullscreen Richard Wistreich from Hastings British Jews forming the ‘Jewish Block’ group gather outside the Ministry of Defence during the pro-Palestine march. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer Since 7 October, both antisemitism and anti-Muslim hatred have risen – factors that led to fewer organisations commemorating Holocaust Memorial Day on 27 January, according to Olivia Marks-Woldman, the chief executive of the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust. Numbers fell from 4,500 last year to 3,700. “Some local organisers were worried about the physical safety of their events,” she said on Friday. “At the same time, we had some people who were very deliberately disengaging and citing community tensions, but occasionally cited reasons which are intrinsically antisemitic.” She said that Holocaust survivors who worked with the trust had a variety of views on the Israeli government and its western allies, but were “almost all very, very worried about the rise in antisemitism”. “One thing we hear quite often is people saying ‘the war in Gaza is another genocide, it’s just like the Holocaust’, or comparing the Israeli government with the Nazis,” she said. “Those are Holocaust distortions, where victims of the Holocaust, the Jewish people, are being accused of being Nazis themselves. That’s antisemitic. It’s deeply worrying. And it shows a fundamental lack of knowledge of the Holocaust.” View image in fullscreen Marchers at the protest in London on 27 April. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer In Trafalgar Square, people stopped to greet the Holocaust survivor group. Mark Etkind is one of the organisers – his father Michael was from Łódź in Poland and survived after the 45 Aid Society brought him to the UK. “It was quite clear from the beginning that Netanyahu was going to take the opportunity to conduct massive ethnic cleansing, what could become a genocide,” he said. “Myself and my friends in the group realised we had a responsibility to make it plain that we were opposed to that. “It’s hard to talk about without getting a bit upset,” he added. “When we are on the protest, being openly Jewish, the level of warmth and support has been overwhelming.” What of Marks-Woldman’s point that some of the ways the Holocaust is used in the debate are distortions? “I think that people who compare what is happening in Gaza to the Holocaust are not being antisemitic,” Etkind says. “Anyone who knows history knows that we can’t understand things except in comparison to each other. What is happening now or in the future will never be on the scale of the tragedy of what happened in the second world war. “But that’s not a comfort to someone who has lost their whole family in Gaza, and it would be cruel to say so to them.” A woman is standing next to a group of Holocaust survivors and their descendants in Trafalgar Square, clutching her dog’s lead and livestreaming her challenge to the pro-Palestine marchers on her phone. “Why will none of you condemn Hamas?” she repeats several times, for the benefit of those watching online. Most of the marchers ignore her, preferring instead to show their appreciation for the group of 11 survivors who oppose Israel’s actions in the war in Gaza. One man yells at her but is quickly ushered along by his friends. One young woman standing with the survivors kneels down to make friends with the dog. But this is a march of thousands of people and one Londoner, probably in his 50s, takes the bait, yelling about “you bloody evangelical Christians” and knocks her phone out of her hands as she turns to film him. “Where are the police?” she calls, and in the commotion ends up on the ground, cutting her leg on some broken glass. Some of the marchers come to her help, and she dabs the blood with a tissue, then goes back to her livestream. She refuses to give her name, just that she “represents the kingdom of God”. Does the scuffle show that London is a no-go zone for people who disagree with the demonstrators? Or, if even someone apparently trying to provoke a response can stand in relative safety, is that evidence, as the Holocaust survivors group hopes to show, that this is a peaceful protest where Jews should feel safe? The survivors group were at the front of the march when it set off just before 1pm in Whitehall on Saturday, the thirteenth time demonstrators have gathered in central London to oppose the war in Gaza after the 7 October attacks by Hamas . After the previous march, Gideon Falter, the leader of the Campaign Against Antisemitism , released a video clip of a police officer telling him that he could not walk across the march because he was “openly Jewish”, which Falter said showed that London had become a no-go area for Jews during the protests. It led to calls from former home secretary Suella Braverman for the Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, to resign. But the release of a 13-minute video showed a much longer and more nuanced exchange between Falter and the officer, who offered to escort Falter away from the demonstration and said he was being disingenuous about his motives for wanting to cross the road at that point. Stephen Kapos, an 87-year-old from Budapest who lost most of his family in the Holocaust, was in the centre as they walked up Whitehall. “We want to stress our solidarity with the Palestinian people,” he said, adding that memories of the Holocaust should not be used as cover for Israel’s actions in Gaza . “The right wing has been claiming that there are no-go areas of London for Jews. We want to prove that’s wrong – we are very welcome here.” “Openly Jewish” had become something of a slogan on the march yesterday, and some people were spurred to join the demonstration by Falter’s video. Simon Moore, a GP from Muswell Hill in north London, wore a handmade sign around his neck about his father, who arrived on the Kindertransport. “I know my dad would have believed in the Palestinian cause,” he says. “He was a victim of the same thing that is happening now. It’s very important that Jews or people with Jewish heritage say that this is wrong.” Along Pall Mall, there was another potential flashpoint – a counter-demonstration by a group called Enough is Enough, separated by lines of pol
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
Violence against women rallies: thousands attend protests as Mark Dreyfus rules out royal commission
Protesters take part in a rally against violence towards women in Sydney. Other rallies were held in Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Protesters take part in a rally against violence towards women in Sydney. Other rallies were held in Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Violence against women rallies: thousands attend protests as Mark Dreyfus rules out royal commission This article is more than 1 year old More rallies to be held across the country on Sunday with attorney general claiming state and federal governments need to cooperate on plan of action Australian politics podcast: Sarah Hanson-Young on gender-based violence, free speech and corporate greenwashing Get our morning and afternoon news emails , free app or daily news podcast Thousands of people have rallied in Sydney calling for an end to violence against women amid growing anger at the number of those being killed in violent attacks across the country. No More: National rallies against gender based violence were held in Sydney , Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday, with more due to be held across the country on Sunday, calling for greater action, including calls for a royal commission, to address the epidemic of women killed in violent attacks. It comes as the federal attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, rejected the idea of holding a royal commission into domestic violence, saying that it should be dealt with via cooperation between the federal government working with state and territory governments. As regional Australia reels from several women’s deaths, advocates seek both policing and prevention Read more “I think we’ve actually identified a whole range of actions already that need to be taken, and I think what we probably can say is that we need to be working harder on the kinds of actions that have already been identified,” he said. The Sydney crowd chanted and sang as they marched from Belmore Park to Hyde Park in Sydney’s CBD, before speakers demanded policy and cultural change to address the violence. Organised by advocacy group What Were You Wearing (WWYW), the rally was attended by people young and old, many holding signs calling for an end to violence, and greater accountability. Twenty-six women have been violently killed in the first 114 days of the year, according to data compiled by advocacy group Destroy the Joint’s project Counting Dead Women . Sign up for Guardian Australia’s free morning and afternoon email newsletters for your daily news roundup The prime minister, Anthony Albanese, is due to attend the rally in Canberra, with the minister for women, Katy Gallagher. In a statement posted to X, Albanese said a woman had been killed every four days so far this year. Protesters said they were “horrified” and “outraged” by the growing violence, with figures from the Destroy the Joint’s Counting Dead Women and Femicide Watch’s Red Heart Campaign showing that an average of one woman is murdered in domestic violence incidents every four days across the country. Last year, that figure was one woman a week. View image in fullscreen Protesters in Sydney said a sense of grief and solidarity as well as anger defined the rally. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images “I’m here today because I am horrified at the continued number of deaths and serious assaults against women in this country,” said Siobhan Ferguson, one of the protesters at the rally on Saturday. “Not enough is being done, in my opinion, to change people’s mindset and to change legislation.” But Ferguson said she felt heartened by the turnout, that stretched through the city and closed multiple major streets. “I get the sense there are a broad range of feelings but I’d say people are disappointed and angry, predominantly, and wanting action.” “They want to see things moving, they’re trying to raise awareness,” she said. The writer Emmy Hee said she had attended because she was “incensed” by the violence women have been facing. “We’re just incensed by the loss of life, and by the beautiful women who’ve had their lives cut short, and if ever there was a time to come together, it’s now.” She added: “I think we can build from here, I can feel the momentum.” Hee said she did not feel it was just anger that defined the rally, but a sense of grief and solidarity. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion “We feel angry but we also feel the pain. And we want to see cultural change, not just empty words. We need action on every level.” The business owner Helen Cooper said she was attending to support the women affected by domestic violence across the country. “Solidarity is an important part of today, we aren’t just hear to march, we are here to be together in this time. “We have definitely seen a spike in violence against women this year, we can all feel it, and not enough is being done.” Cooper said the turnout made her feel “supported” and hoped all the attenders felt similarly. “Especially for the people attending alone like me, this makes me feel like I am not alone, like I am supported by everyone here. “Things are changing, but slowly,” she added. Sarah Hanson-Young on the debate around free speech on social media – podcast Read more Speaking at a press conference in Ipswich, Queensland on Saturday morning, Dreyfus added that the rallies organised over the weekend reflected the huge level of community distress about the number of women who are dying in violent incidents. “We have in this country an epidemic of male violence and we all need to step up. We need to do more about it. What these rallies are about are reflecting that level of community distress. “I’m going to keep saying it: men need to step up. Men need to talk to their sons, to their brothers, to their colleagues at work and try to work together. It cannot be left to women to do something about this,” he said. Here are where the rallies will take place on Sunday: Melbourne: State Library at 10am Perth: Parliament House at 1pm Brisbane: King George Square at 11am Canberra: Commonwealth Park at 2pm Bendigo: Rosalind Park at 11am Geelong: Market Square Mall at 11am Coffs Harbour: Jetty foreshore at 11am Sunshine Coast: Foundation Park at 11am Gold Coast: Broadwater Parklands at 11am Orange: Robertson Park at 2.30pm Cobram: Federation Park at 11am Wagga Wagga: Victory Memorial Gardens at 11am In Australia, the crisis support service Lifeline is on 13 11 14 and the national family violence counselling service is on 1800 737 732. In the UK, Samaritans can be contacted on freephone 116 123 and the domestic abuse helpline is 0808 2000 247. In the US, the suicide prevention lifeline is 988 and the domestic violence hotline is 1-800-799-SAFE (7233). Other international helplines can be found via www.befrienders.org Explore more on these topics Women Domestic violence Crime - Australia Sydney Australian politics news Share Reuse this content Protesters take part in a rally against violence towards women in Sydney. Other rallies were held in Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Protesters take part in a rally against violence towards women in Sydney. Other rallies were held in Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Violence against women rallies: thousands attend protests as Mark Dreyfus rules out royal commission This article is more than 1 year old More rallies to be held across the country on Sunday with attorney general claiming state and federal governments need to cooperate on plan of action Australian politics podcast: Sarah Hanson-Young on gender-based violence, free speech and corporate greenwashing Get our morning and afternoon news emails , free app or daily news podcast Thousands of people have rallied in Sydney calling for an end to violence against women amid growing anger at the number of those being killed in violent attacks across the country. No More: National rallies against gender based violence were held in Sydney , Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday, with more due to be held across the country on Sunday, calling for greater action, including calls for a royal commission, to address the epidemic of women killed in violent attacks. It comes as the federal attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, rejected the idea of holding a royal commission into domestic violence, saying that it should be dealt with via cooperation between the federal government working with state and territory governments. As regional Australia reels from several women’s deaths, advocates seek both policing and prevention Read more “I think we’ve actually identified a whole range of actions already that need to be taken, and I think what we probably can say is that we need to be working harder on the kinds of actions that have already been identified,” he said. The Sydney crowd chanted and sang as they marched from Belmore Park to Hyde Park in Sydney’s CBD, before speakers demanded policy and cultural change to address the violence. Organised by advocacy group What Were You Wearing (WWYW), the rally was attended by people young and old, many holding signs calling for an end to violence, and greater accountability. Twenty-six women have been violently killed in the first 114 days of the year, according to data compiled by advocacy group Destroy the Joint’s project Counting Dead Women . Sign up for Guardian Australia’s free morning and afternoon email newsletters for your daily news roundup The prime minister, Anthony Albanese, is due to attend the rally in Canberra, with the minister for women, Katy Gallagher. In a statement posted to X, Albanese said a woman had been killed every four days so far this year. Protesters said they were “horrified” and “outraged” by the growing violence, with figures from the Destroy the Joint’s Counting Dead Women and Femicide Watch’s Red Heart Campaign showing that an average of one woman is murdered in domestic violence incidents every four days across the country. Last year, that figure was one woman a week. View image in fullscreen Protesters in Sydney said a sense of grief and solidarity as well as anger defined the rally. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images “I’m here today because I am horrified at the continued number of deaths and serious assaults against women in this country,” said Siobhan Ferguson, one of the protesters at the rally on Saturday. “Not enough is being done, in my opinion, to change people’s mindset and to change legislation.” But Ferguson said she felt heartened by the turnout, that stretched through the city and closed multiple major streets. “I get the sense there are a broad range of feelings but I’d say people are disappointed and angry, predominantly, and wanting action.” “They want to see things moving, they’re trying to raise awareness,” she said. The writer Emmy Hee said she had attended because she was “incensed” by the violence women have been facing. “We’re just incensed by the loss of life, and by the beautiful women who’ve had their lives cut short, and if ever there was a time to come together, it’s now.” She added: “I think we can build from here, I can feel the momentum.” Hee said she did not feel it was just anger that defined the rally, but a sense of grief and solidarity. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion “We feel angry but we also feel the pain. And we want to see cultural change, not just empty words. We need action on every level.” The business owner Helen Cooper said she was attending to support the women affected by domestic violence across the country. “Solidarity is an important part of today, we aren’t just hear to march, we are here to be together in this time. “We have definitely seen a spike in violence against women this year, we can all feel it, and not enough is being done.” Cooper said the turnout made her feel “supported” and hoped all the attenders felt similarly. “Especially for the people attending alone like me, this makes me feel like I am not alone, like I am supported by everyone here. “Things are changing, but slowly,” she added. Sarah Hanson-Young on the debate around free speech on social media – podcast Read more Speaking at a press conference in Ipswich, Queensland on Saturday morning, Dreyfus added that the rallies organised over the weekend reflected the huge level of community distress about the number of women who are dying in violent incidents. “We have in this country an epidemic of male violence and we all need to step up. We need to do more about it. What these rallies are about are reflecting that level of community distress. “I’m going to keep saying it: men need to step up. Men need to talk to their sons, to their brothers, to their colleagues at work and try to work together. It cannot be left to women to do something about this,” he said. Here are where the rallies will take place on Sunday: Melbourne: State Library at 10am Perth: Parliament House at 1pm Brisbane: King George Square at 11am Canberra: Commonwealth Park at 2pm Bendigo: Rosalind Park at 11am Geelong: Market Square Mall at 11am Coffs Harbour: Jetty foreshore at 11am Sunshine Coast: Foundation Park at 11am Gold Coast: Broadwater Parklands at 11am Orange: Robertson Park at 2.30pm Cobram: Federation Park at 11am Wagga Wagga: Victory Memorial Gardens at 11am In Australia, the crisis support service Lifeline is on 13 11 14 and the national family violence counselling service is on 1800 737 732. In the UK, Samaritans can be contacted on freephone 116 123 and the domestic abuse helpline is 0808 2000 247. In the US, the suicide prevention lifeline is 988 and the domestic violence hotline is 1-800-799-SAFE (7233). Other international helplines can be found via www.befrienders.org Explore more on these topics Women Domestic violence Crime - Australia Sydney Australian politics news Share Reuse this content Protesters take part in a rally against violence towards women in Sydney. Other rallies were held in Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Protesters take part in a rally against violence towards women in Sydney. Other rallies were held in Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images Protesters take part in a rally against violence towards women in Sydney. Other rallies were held in Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Protesters take part in a rally against violence towards women in Sydney. Other rallies were held in Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images Protesters take part in a rally against violence towards women in Sydney. Other rallies were held in Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Protesters take part in a rally against violence towards women in Sydney. Other rallies were held in Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images Protesters take part in a rally against violence towards women in Sydney. Other rallies were held in Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Protesters take part in a rally against violence towards women in Sydney. Other rallies were held in Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images Protesters take part in a rally against violence towards women in Sydney. Other rallies were held in Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images Protesters take part in a rally against violence towards women in Sydney. Other rallies were held in Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Violence against women rallies: thousands attend protests as Mark Dreyfus rules out royal commission This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Violence against women rallies: thousands attend protests as Mark Dreyfus rules out royal commission This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Violence against women rallies: thousands attend protests as Mark Dreyfus rules out royal commission This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old More rallies to be held across the country on Sunday with attorney general claiming state and federal governments need to cooperate on plan of action Australian politics podcast: Sarah Hanson-Young on gender-based violence, free speech and corporate greenwashing Get our morning and afternoon news emails , free app or daily news podcast More rallies to be held across the country on Sunday with attorney general claiming state and federal governments need to cooperate on plan of action Australian politics podcast: Sarah Hanson-Young on gender-based violence, free speech and corporate greenwashing Get our morning and afternoon news emails , free app or daily news podcast More rallies to be held across the country on Sunday with attorney general claiming state and federal governments need to cooperate on plan of action Thousands of people have rallied in Sydney calling for an end to violence against women amid growing anger at the number of those being killed in violent attacks across the country. No More: National rallies against gender based violence were held in Sydney , Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday, with more due to be held across the country on Sunday, calling for greater action, including calls for a royal commission, to address the epidemic of women killed in violent attacks. It comes as the federal attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, rejected the idea of holding a royal commission into domestic violence, saying that it should be dealt with via cooperation between the federal government working with state and territory governments. As regional Australia reels from several women’s deaths, advocates seek both policing and prevention Read more “I think we’ve actually identified a whole range of actions already that need to be taken, and I think what we probably can say is that we need to be working harder on the kinds of actions that have already been identified,” he said. The Sydney crowd chanted and sang as they marched from Belmore Park to Hyde Park in Sydney’s CBD, before speakers demanded policy and cultural change to address the violence. Organised by advocacy group What Were You Wearing (WWYW), the rally was attended by people young and old, many holding signs calling for an end to violence, and greater accountability. Twenty-six women have been violently killed in the first 114 days of the year, according to data compiled by advocacy group Destroy the Joint’s project Counting Dead Women . Sign up for Guardian Australia’s free morning and afternoon email newsletters for your daily news roundup The prime minister, Anthony Albanese, is due to attend the rally in Canberra, with the minister for women, Katy Gallagher. In a statement posted to X, Albanese said a woman had been killed every four days so far this year. Protesters said they were “horrified” and “outraged” by the growing violence, with figures from the Destroy the Joint’s Counting Dead Women and Femicide Watch’s Red Heart Campaign showing that an average of one woman is murdered in domestic violence incidents every four days across the country. Last year, that figure was one woman a week. View image in fullscreen Protesters in Sydney said a sense of grief and solidarity as well as anger defined the rally. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images “I’m here today because I am horrified at the continued number of deaths and serious assaults against women in this country,” said Siobhan Ferguson, one of the protesters at the rally on Saturday. “Not enough is being done, in my opinion, to change people’s mindset and to change legislation.” But Ferguson said she felt heartened by the turnout, that stretched through the city and closed multiple major streets. “I get the sense there are a broad range of feelings but I’d say people are disappointed and angry, predominantly, and wanting action.” “They want to see things moving, they’re trying to raise awareness,” she said. The writer Emmy Hee said she had attended because she was “incensed” by the violence women have been facing. “We’re just incensed by the loss of life, and by the beautiful women who’ve had their lives cut short, and if ever there was a time to come together, it’s now.” She added: “I think we can build from here, I can feel the momentum.” Hee said she did not feel it was just anger that defined the rally, but a sense of grief and solidarity. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion “We feel angry but we also feel the pain. And we want to see cultural change, not just empty words. We need action on every level.” The business owner Helen Cooper said she was attending to support the women affected by domestic violence across the country. “Solidarity is an important part of today, we aren’t just hear to march, we are here to be together in this time. “We have definitely seen a spike in violence against women this year, we can all feel it, and not enough is being done.” Cooper said the turnout made her feel “supported” and hoped all the attenders felt similarly. “Especially for the people attending alone like me, this makes me feel like I am not alone, like I am supported by everyone here. “Things are changing, but slowly,” she added. Sarah Hanson-Young on the debate around free speech on social media – podcast Read more Speaking at a press conference in Ipswich, Queensland on Saturday morning, Dreyfus added that the rallies organised over the weekend reflected the huge level of community distress about the number of women who are dying in violent incidents. “We have in this country an epidemic of male violence and we all need to step up. We need to do more about it. What these rallies are about are reflecting that level of community distress. “I’m going to keep saying it: men need to step up. Men need to talk to their sons, to their brothers, to their colleagues at work and try to work together. It cannot be left to women to do something about this,” he said. Here are where the rallies will take place on Sunday: Melbourne: State Library at 10am Perth: Parliament House at 1pm Brisbane: King George Square at 11am Canberra: Commonwealth Park at 2pm Bendigo: Rosalind Park at 11am Geelong: Market Square Mall at 11am Coffs Harbour: Jetty foreshore at 11am Sunshine Coast: Foundation Park at 11am Gold Coast: Broadwater Parklands at 11am Orange: Robertson Park at 2.30pm Cobram: Federation Park at 11am Wagga Wagga: Victory Memorial Gardens at 11am In Australia, the crisis support service Lifeline is on 13 11 14 and the national family violence counselling service is on 1800 737 732. In the UK, Samaritans can be contacted on freephone 116 123 and the domestic abuse helpline is 0808 2000 247. In the US, the suicide prevention lifeline is 988 and the domestic violence hotline is 1-800-799-SAFE (7233). Other international helplines can be found via www.befrienders.org Explore more on these topics Women Domestic violence Crime - Australia Sydney Australian politics news Share Reuse this content Thousands of people have rallied in Sydney calling for an end to violence against women amid growing anger at the number of those being killed in violent attacks across the country. No More: National rallies against gender based violence were held in Sydney , Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday, with more due to be held across the country on Sunday, calling for greater action, including calls for a royal commission, to address the epidemic of women killed in violent attacks. It comes as the federal attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, rejected the idea of holding a royal commission into domestic violence, saying that it should be dealt with via cooperation between the federal government working with state and territory governments. As regional Australia reels from several women’s deaths, advocates seek both policing and prevention Read more “I think we’ve actually identified a whole range of actions already that need to be taken, and I think what we probably can say is that we need to be working harder on the kinds of actions that have already been identified,” he said. The Sydney crowd chanted and sang as they marched from Belmore Park to Hyde Park in Sydney’s CBD, before speakers demanded policy and cultural change to address the violence. Organised by advocacy group What Were You Wearing (WWYW), the rally was attended by people young and old, many holding signs calling for an end to violence, and greater accountability. Twenty-six women have been violently killed in the first 114 days of the year, according to data compiled by advocacy group Destroy the Joint’s project Counting Dead Women . Sign up for Guardian Australia’s free morning and afternoon email newsletters for your daily news roundup The prime minister, Anthony Albanese, is due to attend the rally in Canberra, with the minister for women, Katy Gallagher. In a statement posted to X, Albanese said a woman had been killed every four days so far this year. Protesters said they were “horrified” and “outraged” by the growing violence, with figures from the Destroy the Joint’s Counting Dead Women and Femicide Watch’s Red Heart Campaign showing that an average of one woman is murdered in domestic violence incidents every four days across the country. Last year, that figure was one woman a week. View image in fullscreen Protesters in Sydney said a sense of grief and solidarity as well as anger defined the rally. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images “I’m here today because I am horrified at the continued number of deaths and serious assaults against women in this country,” said Siobhan Ferguson, one of the protesters at the rally on Saturday. “Not enough is being done, in my opinion, to change people’s mindset and to change legislation.” But Ferguson said she felt heartened by the turnout, that stretched through the city and closed multiple major streets. “I get the sense there are a broad range of feelings but I’d say people are disappointed and angry, predominantly, and wanting action.” “They want to see things moving, they’re trying to raise awareness,” she said. The writer Emmy Hee said she had attended because she was “incensed” by the violence women have been facing. “We’re just incensed by the loss of life, and by the beautiful women who’ve had their lives cut short, and if ever there was a time to come together, it’s now.” She added: “I think we can build from here, I can feel the momentum.” Hee said she did not feel it was just anger that defined the rally, but a sense of grief and solidarity. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion “We feel angry but we also feel the pain. And we want to see cultural change, not just empty words. We need action on every level.” The business owner Helen Cooper said she was attending to support the women affected by domestic violence across the country. “Solidarity is an important part of today, we aren’t just hear to march, we are here to be together in this time. “We have definitely seen a spike in violence against women this year, we can all feel it, and not enough is being done.” Cooper said the turnout made her feel “supported” and hoped all the attenders felt similarly. “Especially for the people attending alone like me, this makes me feel like I am not alone, like I am supported by everyone here. “Things are changing, but slowly,” she added. Sarah Hanson-Young on the debate around free speech on social media – podcast Read more Speaking at a press conference in Ipswich, Queensland on Saturday morning, Dreyfus added that the rallies organised over the weekend reflected the huge level of community distress about the number of women who are dying in violent incidents. “We have in this country an epidemic of male violence and we all need to step up. We need to do more about it. What these rallies are about are reflecting that level of community distress. “I’m going to keep saying it: men need to step up. Men need to talk to their sons, to their brothers, to their colleagues at work and try to work together. It cannot be left to women to do something about this,” he said. Here are where the rallies will take place on Sunday: Melbourne: State Library at 10am Perth: Parliament House at 1pm Brisbane: King George Square at 11am Canberra: Commonwealth Park at 2pm Bendigo: Rosalind Park at 11am Geelong: Market Square Mall at 11am Coffs Harbour: Jetty foreshore at 11am Sunshine Coast: Foundation Park at 11am Gold Coast: Broadwater Parklands at 11am Orange: Robertson Park at 2.30pm Cobram: Federation Park at 11am Wagga Wagga: Victory Memorial Gardens at 11am In Australia, the crisis support service Lifeline is on 13 11 14 and the national family violence counselling service is on 1800 737 732. In the UK, Samaritans can be contacted on freephone 116 123 and the domestic abuse helpline is 0808 2000 247. In the US, the suicide prevention lifeline is 988 and the domestic violence hotline is 1-800-799-SAFE (7233). Other international helplines can be found via www.befrienders.org Explore more on these topics Women Domestic violence Crime - Australia Sydney Australian politics news Share Reuse this content Thousands of people have rallied in Sydney calling for an end to violence against women amid growing anger at the number of those being killed in violent attacks across the country. No More: National rallies against gender based violence were held in Sydney , Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday, with more due to be held across the country on Sunday, calling for greater action, including calls for a royal commission, to address the epidemic of women killed in violent attacks. It comes as the federal attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, rejected the idea of holding a royal commission into domestic violence, saying that it should be dealt with via cooperation between the federal government working with state and territory governments. As regional Australia reels from several women’s deaths, advocates seek both policing and prevention Read more “I think we’ve actually identified a whole range of actions already that need to be taken, and I think what we probably can say is that we need to be working harder on the kinds of actions that have already been identified,” he said. The Sydney crowd chanted and sang as they marched from Belmore Park to Hyde Park in Sydney’s CBD, before speakers demanded policy and cultural change to address the violence. Organised by advocacy group What Were You Wearing (WWYW), the rally was attended by people young and old, many holding signs calling for an end to violence, and greater accountability. Twenty-six women have been violently killed in the first 114 days of the year, according to data compiled by advocacy group Destroy the Joint’s project Counting Dead Women . Sign up for Guardian Australia’s free morning and afternoon email newsletters for your daily news roundup The prime minister, Anthony Albanese, is due to attend the rally in Canberra, with the minister for women, Katy Gallagher. In a statement posted to X, Albanese said a woman had been killed every four days so far this year. Protesters said they were “horrified” and “outraged” by the growing violence, with figures from the Destroy the Joint’s Counting Dead Women and Femicide Watch’s Red Heart Campaign showing that an average of one woman is murdered in domestic violence incidents every four days across the country. Last year, that figure was one woman a week. View image in fullscreen Protesters in Sydney said a sense of grief and solidarity as well as anger defined the rally. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images “I’m here today because I am horrified at the continued number of deaths and serious assaults against women in this country,” said Siobhan Ferguson, one of the protesters at the rally on Saturday. “Not enough is being done, in my opinion, to change people’s mindset and to change legislation.” But Ferguson said she felt heartened by the turnout, that stretched through the city and closed multiple major streets. “I get the sense there are a broad range of feelings but I’d say people are disappointed and angry, predominantly, and wanting action.” “They want to see things moving, they’re trying to raise awareness,” she said. The writer Emmy Hee said she had attended because she was “incensed” by the violence women have been facing. “We’re just incensed by the loss of life, and by the beautiful women who’ve had their lives cut short, and if ever there was a time to come together, it’s now.” She added: “I think we can build from here, I can feel the momentum.” Hee said she did not feel it was just anger that defined the rally, but a sense of grief and solidarity. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion “We feel angry but we also feel the pain. And we want to see cultural change, not just empty words. We need action on every level.” The business owner Helen Cooper said she was attending to support the women affected by domestic violence across the country. “Solidarity is an important part of today, we aren’t just hear to march, we are here to be together in this time. “We have definitely seen a spike in violence against women this year, we can all feel it, and not enough is being done.” Cooper said the turnout made her feel “supported” and hoped all the attenders felt similarly. “Especially for the people attending alone like me, this makes me feel like I am not alone, like I am supported by everyone here. “Things are changing, but slowly,” she added. Sarah Hanson-Young on the debate around free speech on social media – podcast Read more Speaking at a press conference in Ipswich, Queensland on Saturday morning, Dreyfus added that the rallies organised over the weekend reflected the huge level of community distress about the number of women who are dying in violent incidents. “We have in this country an epidemic of male violence and we all need to step up. We need to do more about it. What these rallies are about are reflecting that level of community distress. “I’m going to keep saying it: men need to step up. Men need to talk to their sons, to their brothers, to their colleagues at work and try to work together. It cannot be left to women to do something about this,” he said. Here are where the rallies will take place on Sunday: Melbourne: State Library at 10am Perth: Parliament House at 1pm Brisbane: King George Square at 11am Canberra: Commonwealth Park at 2pm Bendigo: Rosalind Park at 11am Geelong: Market Square Mall at 11am Coffs Harbour: Jetty foreshore at 11am Sunshine Coast: Foundation Park at 11am Gold Coast: Broadwater Parklands at 11am Orange: Robertson Park at 2.30pm Cobram: Federation Park at 11am Wagga Wagga: Victory Memorial Gardens at 11am In Australia, the crisis support service Lifeline is on 13 11 14 and the national family violence counselling service is on 1800 737 732. In the UK, Samaritans can be contacted on freephone 116 123 and the domestic abuse helpline is 0808 2000 247. In the US, the suicide prevention lifeline is 988 and the domestic violence hotline is 1-800-799-SAFE (7233). Other international helplines can be found via www.befrienders.org Thousands of people have rallied in Sydney calling for an end to violence against women amid growing anger at the number of those being killed in violent attacks across the country. No More: National rallies against gender based violence were held in Sydney , Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday, with more due to be held across the country on Sunday, calling for greater action, including calls for a royal commission, to address the epidemic of women killed in violent attacks. It comes as the federal attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, rejected the idea of holding a royal commission into domestic violence, saying that it should be dealt with via cooperation between the federal government working with state and territory governments. As regional Australia reels from several women’s deaths, advocates seek both policing and prevention Read more “I think we’ve actually identified a whole range of actions already that need to be taken, and I think what we probably can say is that we need to be working harder on the kinds of actions that have already been identified,” he said. The Sydney crowd chanted and sang as they marched from Belmore Park to Hyde Park in Sydney’s CBD, before speakers demanded policy and cultural change to address the violence. Organised by advocacy group What Were You Wearing (WWYW), the rally was attended by people young and old, many holding signs calling for an end to violence, and greater accountability. Twenty-six women have been violently killed in the first 114 days of the year, according to data compiled by advocacy group Destroy the Joint’s project Counting Dead Women . Sign up for Guardian Australia’s free morning and afternoon email newsletters for your daily news roundup The prime minister, Anthony Albanese, is due to attend the rally in Canberra, with the minister for women, Katy Gallagher. In a statement posted to X, Albanese said a woman had been killed every four days so far this year. Protesters said they were “horrified” and “outraged” by the growing violence, with figures from the Destroy the Joint’s Counting Dead Women and Femicide Watch’s Red Heart Campaign showing that an average of one woman is murdered in domestic violence incidents every four days across the country. Last year, that figure was one woman a week. View image in fullscreen Protesters in Sydney said a sense of grief and solidarity as well as anger defined the rally. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images “I’m here today because I am horrified at the continued number of deaths and serious assaults against women in this country,” said Siobhan Ferguson, one of the protesters at the rally on Saturday. “Not enough is being done, in my opinion, to change people’s mindset and to change legislation.” But Ferguson said she felt heartened by the turnout, that stretched through the city and closed multiple major streets. “I get the sense there are a broad range of feelings but I’d say people are disappointed and angry, predominantly, and wanting action.” “They want to see things moving, they’re trying to raise awareness,” she said. The writer Emmy Hee said she had attended because she was “incensed” by the violence women have been facing. “We’re just incensed by the loss of life, and by the beautiful women who’ve had their lives cut short, and if ever there was a time to come together, it’s now.” She added: “I think we can build from here, I can feel the momentum.” Hee said she did not feel it was just anger that defined the rally, but a sense of grief and solidarity. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion “We feel angry but we also feel the pain. And we want to see cultural change, not just empty words. We need action on every level.” The business owner Helen Cooper said she was attending to support the women affected by domestic violence across the country. “Solidarity is an important part of today, we aren’t just hear to march, we are here to be together in this time. “We have definitely seen a spike in violence against women this year, we can all feel it, and not enough is being done.” Cooper said the turnout made her feel “supported” and hoped all the attenders felt similarly. “Especially for the people attending alone like me, this makes me feel like I am not alone, like I am supported by everyone here. “Things are changing, but slowly,” she added. Sarah Hanson-Young on the debate around free speech on social media – podcast Read more Speaking at a press conference in Ipswich, Queensland on Saturday morning, Dreyfus added that the rallies organised over the weekend reflected the huge level of community distress about the number of women who are dying in violent incidents. “We have in this country an epidemic of male violence and we all need to step up. We need to do more about it. What these rallies are about are reflecting that level of community distress. “I’m going to keep saying it: men need to step up. Men need to talk to their sons, to their brothers, to their colleagues at work and try to work together. It cannot be left to women to do something about this,” he said. Here are where the rallies will take place on Sunday: Melbourne: State Library at 10am Perth: Parliament House at 1pm Brisbane: King George Square at 11am Canberra: Commonwealth Park at 2pm Bendigo: Rosalind Park at 11am Geelong: Market Square Mall at 11am Coffs Harbour: Jetty foreshore at 11am Sunshine Coast: Foundation Park at 11am Gold Coast: Broadwater Parklands at 11am Orange: Robertson Park at 2.30pm Cobram: Federation Park at 11am Wagga Wagga: Victory Memorial Gardens at 11am In Australia, the crisis support service Lifeline is on 13 11 14 and the national family violence counselling service is on 1800 737 732. In the UK, Samaritans can be contacted on freephone 116 123 and the domestic abuse helpline is 0808 2000 247. In the US, the suicide prevention lifeline is 988 and the domestic violence hotline is 1-800-799-SAFE (7233). Other international helplines can be found via www.befrienders.org Thousands of people have rallied in Sydney calling for an end to violence against women amid growing anger at the number of those being killed in violent attacks across the country. No More: National rallies against gender based violence were held in Sydney , Hobart and Adelaide on Saturday, with more due to be held across the country on Sunday, calling for greater action, including calls for a royal commission, to address the epidemic of women killed in violent attacks. It comes as the federal attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, rejected the idea of holding a royal commission into domestic violence, saying that it should be dealt with via cooperation between the federal government working with state and territory governments. As regional Australia reels from several women’s deaths, advocates seek both policing and prevention Read more As regional Australia reels from several women’s deaths, advocates seek both policing and prevention Read more As regional Australia reels from several women’s deaths, advocates seek both policing and prevention Read more As regional Australia reels from several women’s deaths, advocates seek both policing and prevention As regional Australia reels from several women’s deaths, advocates seek both policing and prevention “I think we’ve actually identified a whole range of actions already that need to be taken, and I think what we probably can say is that we need to be working harder on the kinds of actions that have already been identified,” he said. The Sydney crowd chanted and sang as they marched from Belmore Park to Hyde Park in Sydney’s CBD, before speakers demanded policy and cultural change to address the violence. Organised by advocacy group What Were You Wearing (WWYW), the rally was attended by people young and old, many holding signs calling for an end to violence, and greater accountability. Twenty-six women have been violently killed in the first 114 days of the year, according to data compiled by advocacy group Destroy the Joint’s project Counting Dead Women . Sign up for Guardian Australia’s free morning and afternoon email newsletters for your daily news roundup The prime minister, Anthony Albanese, is due to attend the rally in Canberra, with the minister for women, Katy Gallagher. In a statement posted to X, Albanese said a woman had been killed every four days so far this year. Protesters said they were “horrified” and “outraged” by the growing violence, with figures from the Destroy the Joint’s Counting Dead Women and Femicide Watch’s Red Heart Campaign showing that an average of one woman is murdered in domestic violence incidents every four days across the country. Last year, that figure was one woman a week. “I’m here today because I am horrified at the continued number of deaths and serious assaults against women in this country,” said Siobhan Ferguson, one of the protesters at the rally on Saturday. “Not enough is being done, in my opinion, to change people’s mindset and to change legislation.” But Ferguson said she felt heartened by the turnout, that stretched through the city and closed multiple major streets. “I get the sense there are a broad range of feelings but I’d say people are disappointed and angry, predominantly, and wanting action.” “They want to see things moving, they’re trying to raise awareness,” she said. The writer Emmy Hee said she had attended because she was “incensed” by the violence women have been facing. “We’re just incensed by the loss of life, and by the beautiful women who’ve had their lives cut short, and if ever there was a time to come together, it’s now.” She added: “I think we can build from here, I can feel the momentum.” Hee said she did not feel it was just anger that defined the rally, but a sense of grief and solidarity. “We feel angry but we also feel the pain. And we want to see cultural change, not just empty words. We need action on every level.” The business owner Helen Cooper said she was attending to support the women affected by domestic violence across the country. “Solidarity is an important part of today, we aren’t just hear to march, we are here to be together in this time. “We have definitely seen a spike in violence against women this year, we can all feel it, and not enough is being done.” Cooper said the turnout made her feel “supported” and hoped all the attenders felt similarly. “Especially for the people attending alone like me, this makes me feel like I am not alone, like I am supported by everyone here. “Things are changing, but slowly,” she added. Sarah Hanson-Young on the debate around free speech on social media – podcast Read more Sarah Hanson-Young on the debate around free speech on social media – podcast Read more Sarah Hanson-Young on the debate around free speech on social media – podcast Read more Sarah Hanson-Young on the debate around free speech on social media – podcast Sarah Hanson-Young on the debate around free speech on social media – podcast Speaking at a press conference in Ipswich, Queensland on Saturday morning, Dreyfus added that the rallies organised over the weekend reflected the huge level of community distress about the number of women who are dying in violent incidents. “We have in this country an epidemic of male violence and we all need to step up. We need to do more about it. What these rallies are about are reflecting that level of community distress. “I’m going to keep saying it: men need to step up. Men need to talk to their sons, to their brothers, to their colleagues at work and try to work together. It cannot be left to women to do something about this,” he said. Melbourne: State Library at 10am Brisbane: King George Square at 11am Canberra: Commonwealth Park at 2pm Geelong: Market Square Mall at 11am Coffs Harbour: Jetty foreshore at 11am Sunshine Coast: Foundation Park at 11am Gold Coast: Broadwater Parklands at 11am Orange: Robertson Park at 2.30pm Cobram: Federation Park at 11am Wagga Wagga: Victory Memorial Gardens at 11am In Australia, the crisis support service Lifeline is on 13 11 14 and the national family violence counselling service is on 1800 737 732. In the UK, Samaritans can be contacted on freephone 116 123 and the domestic abuse helpline is 0808 2000 247. In the US, the suicide prevention lifeline is 988 and the domestic violence hotline is 1-800-799-SAFE (7233). Other international helplines can be found via www.befrienders.org Explore more on these topics Women Domestic violence Crime - Australia Sydney Australian politics news Share Reuse this content Women Domestic violence Crime - Australia Sydney Australian politics news |
Workers accuse Google of ‘tantrum’ after 50 fired over Israel contract protest
Shoes and children’s clothes form part of a pro-Palestinian protest outside the city hall in Palo Alto, California, against Google's Project Nimbus on Sunday. Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Shoes and children’s clothes form part of a pro-Palestinian protest outside the city hall in Palo Alto, California, against Google's Project Nimbus on Sunday. Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Workers accuse Google of ‘tantrum’ after 50 fired over Israel contract protest This article is more than 1 year old Tech giant fired number of people who protested against $1.2bn Project Nimbus, which supports Israeli military and government Google has been accused of throwing a “tantrum” after sacking more than 50 workers in response to a protest over the company’s military ties to the Israeli government – firings that have shone a light on a controversial project and long-simmering tensions between staff and management. The workers were sacked following protests at Google offices in New York City and Sunnyvale, California, organized by No Tech for Apartheid – an alliance of Google and Amazon workers who have been protesting against a $1.2bn contract with the Israeli government called Project Nimbus that they claim will make it “easier for the Israeli government to surveil Palestinians and force them off their land”. Initially, Google fired 28 workers over the protests and then fired more than 20 workers a few days later. ‘A betrayal’: Google workers protest Israeli military contract at vigil for ex-intern killed in airstrike Read more The firings are the largest to occur since Israel’s military campaign in response to the 7 October 2023 terrorist attack by Hamas in which about 1,200 people were killed and more than 200 hostages were taken. Since then, more than 34,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza, including more than 14,000 children and 9,670 women. Google has fired and reprimanded workers for participating in protests before, such as over a 2018 walkout and sit-in protest about sexual harassment issues at the company, but not previously to this extent. In March, Google fired a cloud engineer who protested against an Israel tech event in New York City. Emaan Haseem, a software engineer at Google and organizer with No Tech for Apartheid, was one of the fired workers. “Many of us had just recently gotten promoted. I was the fastest promoted person underneath my manager,” she said. This was a peaceful protest, she said, “with high visibility, high transparency, that we livestreamed . Everything and everybody could see how it went.” Haseem said the sit-in protests were a response to Google’s refusal to engage with workers’ concerns. “Look at the way Google has overreacted, so emotionally, and has lashed out at 50 workers over this contract rather than giving any more transparency, clarity, or attempting to prove they are not especially providing the Israeli military resources to aid and abet their genocide and continue their apartheid,” added Haseem. “They fully had the option to do that but instead they chose to throw a tantrum and take it out on 50 workers, many of whom were not involved in the sit-in. “It was done so emotionally, so irrationally, that Google has also taken its mask off in the process. It has shown its honest and true self, how contradictory they are, how they don’t actually care about doing the right thing, about not being evil, about their values where we should speak up and speak out against anything wrong that we see happening in our work or in the workplace.” Since the contract was awarded in 2021, workers at Google and Amazon have been organizing in opposition to the corporations’ joint contract with the Israeli military and government. The $1.2bn contract to provide cloud services “allows for further surveillance of and unlawful data collection on Palestinians, and facilitates expansion of Israel’s illegal settlements on Palestinian land”, according to an op-ed workers wrote in 2021. The firings have disrupted the financial stability of workers, Haseem said, but she and others affected have received significant support from co-workers and others. She also said that one of the biggest challenges with the campaign against Project Nimbus was outreach and educating others on the issues – something which Google’s firings had only facilitated. Hasan Ibraheem, a Google software engineer in New York who was fired and arrested for participating in the protest, said he and other workers were put on administrative leave, losing corporate access, and then fired the next day by email en masse. “We don’t know of anyone who had actually been reached out to by HR. We were asked no questions. There was no consulting with us. No one asked us anything. It was just a very cold mass email sent out, you are now fired, goodbye, because they don’t want to deal with us, they want to silence us and we’re not going to stay silent,” said Ibraheem. “We don’t want our labor to be used for aiding a genocide and that’s why we did that action and we are going to continue fighting to have this project dropped.” We are Google and Amazon workers. We condemn Project Nimbus | Anonymous Google and Amazon workers Read more The workers declined to comment on any potential legal proceedings they may pursue in response to the firings. No Tech for Apartheid called the firings “illegal” in a blogpost in response to Google’s actions. A spokesperson for Google said in an email on the firings: “We continued our investigation into the physical disruption inside our buildings on April 16, looking at additional details provided by coworkers who were physically disrupted, as well as those employees who took longer to identify because their identity was partly concealed – like by wearing a mask without their badge – while engaged in the disruption. Our investigation into these events is now concluded, and we have terminated the employment of additional employees who were found to have been directly involved in disruptive activity.” They denied firing any employees not involved. Google also denied protesters’ characterizations of Project Nimbus, stating: “We have been very clear that the Nimbus contract is for workloads running on our commercial cloud by Israeli government ministries, who agree to comply with our Terms of Service and Acceptable Use Policy . This work is not directed at highly sensitive, classified, or military workloads relevant to weapons or intelligence services.” Explore more on these topics Google Gaza Israel Amazon California Alphabet Protest news Share Reuse this content Shoes and children’s clothes form part of a pro-Palestinian protest outside the city hall in Palo Alto, California, against Google's Project Nimbus on Sunday. Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Shoes and children’s clothes form part of a pro-Palestinian protest outside the city hall in Palo Alto, California, against Google's Project Nimbus on Sunday. Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Workers accuse Google of ‘tantrum’ after 50 fired over Israel contract protest This article is more than 1 year old Tech giant fired number of people who protested against $1.2bn Project Nimbus, which supports Israeli military and government Google has been accused of throwing a “tantrum” after sacking more than 50 workers in response to a protest over the company’s military ties to the Israeli government – firings that have shone a light on a controversial project and long-simmering tensions between staff and management. The workers were sacked following protests at Google offices in New York City and Sunnyvale, California, organized by No Tech for Apartheid – an alliance of Google and Amazon workers who have been protesting against a $1.2bn contract with the Israeli government called Project Nimbus that they claim will make it “easier for the Israeli government to surveil Palestinians and force them off their land”. Initially, Google fired 28 workers over the protests and then fired more than 20 workers a few days later. ‘A betrayal’: Google workers protest Israeli military contract at vigil for ex-intern killed in airstrike Read more The firings are the largest to occur since Israel’s military campaign in response to the 7 October 2023 terrorist attack by Hamas in which about 1,200 people were killed and more than 200 hostages were taken. Since then, more than 34,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza, including more than 14,000 children and 9,670 women. Google has fired and reprimanded workers for participating in protests before, such as over a 2018 walkout and sit-in protest about sexual harassment issues at the company, but not previously to this extent. In March, Google fired a cloud engineer who protested against an Israel tech event in New York City. Emaan Haseem, a software engineer at Google and organizer with No Tech for Apartheid, was one of the fired workers. “Many of us had just recently gotten promoted. I was the fastest promoted person underneath my manager,” she said. This was a peaceful protest, she said, “with high visibility, high transparency, that we livestreamed . Everything and everybody could see how it went.” Haseem said the sit-in protests were a response to Google’s refusal to engage with workers’ concerns. “Look at the way Google has overreacted, so emotionally, and has lashed out at 50 workers over this contract rather than giving any more transparency, clarity, or attempting to prove they are not especially providing the Israeli military resources to aid and abet their genocide and continue their apartheid,” added Haseem. “They fully had the option to do that but instead they chose to throw a tantrum and take it out on 50 workers, many of whom were not involved in the sit-in. “It was done so emotionally, so irrationally, that Google has also taken its mask off in the process. It has shown its honest and true self, how contradictory they are, how they don’t actually care about doing the right thing, about not being evil, about their values where we should speak up and speak out against anything wrong that we see happening in our work or in the workplace.” Since the contract was awarded in 2021, workers at Google and Amazon have been organizing in opposition to the corporations’ joint contract with the Israeli military and government. The $1.2bn contract to provide cloud services “allows for further surveillance of and unlawful data collection on Palestinians, and facilitates expansion of Israel’s illegal settlements on Palestinian land”, according to an op-ed workers wrote in 2021. The firings have disrupted the financial stability of workers, Haseem said, but she and others affected have received significant support from co-workers and others. She also said that one of the biggest challenges with the campaign against Project Nimbus was outreach and educating others on the issues – something which Google’s firings had only facilitated. Hasan Ibraheem, a Google software engineer in New York who was fired and arrested for participating in the protest, said he and other workers were put on administrative leave, losing corporate access, and then fired the next day by email en masse. “We don’t know of anyone who had actually been reached out to by HR. We were asked no questions. There was no consulting with us. No one asked us anything. It was just a very cold mass email sent out, you are now fired, goodbye, because they don’t want to deal with us, they want to silence us and we’re not going to stay silent,” said Ibraheem. “We don’t want our labor to be used for aiding a genocide and that’s why we did that action and we are going to continue fighting to have this project dropped.” We are Google and Amazon workers. We condemn Project Nimbus | Anonymous Google and Amazon workers Read more The workers declined to comment on any potential legal proceedings they may pursue in response to the firings. No Tech for Apartheid called the firings “illegal” in a blogpost in response to Google’s actions. A spokesperson for Google said in an email on the firings: “We continued our investigation into the physical disruption inside our buildings on April 16, looking at additional details provided by coworkers who were physically disrupted, as well as those employees who took longer to identify because their identity was partly concealed – like by wearing a mask without their badge – while engaged in the disruption. Our investigation into these events is now concluded, and we have terminated the employment of additional employees who were found to have been directly involved in disruptive activity.” They denied firing any employees not involved. Google also denied protesters’ characterizations of Project Nimbus, stating: “We have been very clear that the Nimbus contract is for workloads running on our commercial cloud by Israeli government ministries, who agree to comply with our Terms of Service and Acceptable Use Policy . This work is not directed at highly sensitive, classified, or military workloads relevant to weapons or intelligence services.” Explore more on these topics Google Gaza Israel Amazon California Alphabet Protest news Share Reuse this content Shoes and children’s clothes form part of a pro-Palestinian protest outside the city hall in Palo Alto, California, against Google's Project Nimbus on Sunday. Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Shoes and children’s clothes form part of a pro-Palestinian protest outside the city hall in Palo Alto, California, against Google's Project Nimbus on Sunday. Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images Shoes and children’s clothes form part of a pro-Palestinian protest outside the city hall in Palo Alto, California, against Google's Project Nimbus on Sunday. Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Shoes and children’s clothes form part of a pro-Palestinian protest outside the city hall in Palo Alto, California, against Google's Project Nimbus on Sunday. Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images Shoes and children’s clothes form part of a pro-Palestinian protest outside the city hall in Palo Alto, California, against Google's Project Nimbus on Sunday. Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Shoes and children’s clothes form part of a pro-Palestinian protest outside the city hall in Palo Alto, California, against Google's Project Nimbus on Sunday. Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images Shoes and children’s clothes form part of a pro-Palestinian protest outside the city hall in Palo Alto, California, against Google's Project Nimbus on Sunday. Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Shoes and children’s clothes form part of a pro-Palestinian protest outside the city hall in Palo Alto, California, against Google's Project Nimbus on Sunday. Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images Shoes and children’s clothes form part of a pro-Palestinian protest outside the city hall in Palo Alto, California, against Google's Project Nimbus on Sunday. Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images Shoes and children’s clothes form part of a pro-Palestinian protest outside the city hall in Palo Alto, California, against Google's Project Nimbus on Sunday. Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Workers accuse Google of ‘tantrum’ after 50 fired over Israel contract protest This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Workers accuse Google of ‘tantrum’ after 50 fired over Israel contract protest This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Workers accuse Google of ‘tantrum’ after 50 fired over Israel contract protest This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Tech giant fired number of people who protested against $1.2bn Project Nimbus, which supports Israeli military and government Tech giant fired number of people who protested against $1.2bn Project Nimbus, which supports Israeli military and government Tech giant fired number of people who protested against $1.2bn Project Nimbus, which supports Israeli military and government Google has been accused of throwing a “tantrum” after sacking more than 50 workers in response to a protest over the company’s military ties to the Israeli government – firings that have shone a light on a controversial project and long-simmering tensions between staff and management. The workers were sacked following protests at Google offices in New York City and Sunnyvale, California, organized by No Tech for Apartheid – an alliance of Google and Amazon workers who have been protesting against a $1.2bn contract with the Israeli government called Project Nimbus that they claim will make it “easier for the Israeli government to surveil Palestinians and force them off their land”. Initially, Google fired 28 workers over the protests and then fired more than 20 workers a few days later. ‘A betrayal’: Google workers protest Israeli military contract at vigil for ex-intern killed in airstrike Read more The firings are the largest to occur since Israel’s military campaign in response to the 7 October 2023 terrorist attack by Hamas in which about 1,200 people were killed and more than 200 hostages were taken. Since then, more than 34,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza, including more than 14,000 children and 9,670 women. Google has fired and reprimanded workers for participating in protests before, such as over a 2018 walkout and sit-in protest about sexual harassment issues at the company, but not previously to this extent. In March, Google fired a cloud engineer who protested against an Israel tech event in New York City. Emaan Haseem, a software engineer at Google and organizer with No Tech for Apartheid, was one of the fired workers. “Many of us had just recently gotten promoted. I was the fastest promoted person underneath my manager,” she said. This was a peaceful protest, she said, “with high visibility, high transparency, that we livestreamed . Everything and everybody could see how it went.” Haseem said the sit-in protests were a response to Google’s refusal to engage with workers’ concerns. “Look at the way Google has overreacted, so emotionally, and has lashed out at 50 workers over this contract rather than giving any more transparency, clarity, or attempting to prove they are not especially providing the Israeli military resources to aid and abet their genocide and continue their apartheid,” added Haseem. “They fully had the option to do that but instead they chose to throw a tantrum and take it out on 50 workers, many of whom were not involved in the sit-in. “It was done so emotionally, so irrationally, that Google has also taken its mask off in the process. It has shown its honest and true self, how contradictory they are, how they don’t actually care about doing the right thing, about not being evil, about their values where we should speak up and speak out against anything wrong that we see happening in our work or in the workplace.” Since the contract was awarded in 2021, workers at Google and Amazon have been organizing in opposition to the corporations’ joint contract with the Israeli military and government. The $1.2bn contract to provide cloud services “allows for further surveillance of and unlawful data collection on Palestinians, and facilitates expansion of Israel’s illegal settlements on Palestinian land”, according to an op-ed workers wrote in 2021. The firings have disrupted the financial stability of workers, Haseem said, but she and others affected have received significant support from co-workers and others. She also said that one of the biggest challenges with the campaign against Project Nimbus was outreach and educating others on the issues – something which Google’s firings had only facilitated. Hasan Ibraheem, a Google software engineer in New York who was fired and arrested for participating in the protest, said he and other workers were put on administrative leave, losing corporate access, and then fired the next day by email en masse. “We don’t know of anyone who had actually been reached out to by HR. We were asked no questions. There was no consulting with us. No one asked us anything. It was just a very cold mass email sent out, you are now fired, goodbye, because they don’t want to deal with us, they want to silence us and we’re not going to stay silent,” said Ibraheem. “We don’t want our labor to be used for aiding a genocide and that’s why we did that action and we are going to continue fighting to have this project dropped.” We are Google and Amazon workers. We condemn Project Nimbus | Anonymous Google and Amazon workers Read more The workers declined to comment on any potential legal proceedings they may pursue in response to the firings. No Tech for Apartheid called the firings “illegal” in a blogpost in response to Google’s actions. A spokesperson for Google said in an email on the firings: “We continued our investigation into the physical disruption inside our buildings on April 16, looking at additional details provided by coworkers who were physically disrupted, as well as those employees who took longer to identify because their identity was partly concealed – like by wearing a mask without their badge – while engaged in the disruption. Our investigation into these events is now concluded, and we have terminated the employment of additional employees who were found to have been directly involved in disruptive activity.” They denied firing any employees not involved. Google also denied protesters’ characterizations of Project Nimbus, stating: “We have been very clear that the Nimbus contract is for workloads running on our commercial cloud by Israeli government ministries, who agree to comply with our Terms of Service and Acceptable Use Policy . This work is not directed at highly sensitive, classified, or military workloads relevant to weapons or intelligence services.” Explore more on these topics Google Gaza Israel Amazon California Alphabet Protest news Share Reuse this content Google has been accused of throwing a “tantrum” after sacking more than 50 workers in response to a protest over the company’s military ties to the Israeli government – firings that have shone a light on a controversial project and long-simmering tensions between staff and management. The workers were sacked following protests at Google offices in New York City and Sunnyvale, California, organized by No Tech for Apartheid – an alliance of Google and Amazon workers who have been protesting against a $1.2bn contract with the Israeli government called Project Nimbus that they claim will make it “easier for the Israeli government to surveil Palestinians and force them off their land”. Initially, Google fired 28 workers over the protests and then fired more than 20 workers a few days later. ‘A betrayal’: Google workers protest Israeli military contract at vigil for ex-intern killed in airstrike Read more The firings are the largest to occur since Israel’s military campaign in response to the 7 October 2023 terrorist attack by Hamas in which about 1,200 people were killed and more than 200 hostages were taken. Since then, more than 34,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza, including more than 14,000 children and 9,670 women. Google has fired and reprimanded workers for participating in protests before, such as over a 2018 walkout and sit-in protest about sexual harassment issues at the company, but not previously to this extent. In March, Google fired a cloud engineer who protested against an Israel tech event in New York City. Emaan Haseem, a software engineer at Google and organizer with No Tech for Apartheid, was one of the fired workers. “Many of us had just recently gotten promoted. I was the fastest promoted person underneath my manager,” she said. This was a peaceful protest, she said, “with high visibility, high transparency, that we livestreamed . Everything and everybody could see how it went.” Haseem said the sit-in protests were a response to Google’s refusal to engage with workers’ concerns. “Look at the way Google has overreacted, so emotionally, and has lashed out at 50 workers over this contract rather than giving any more transparency, clarity, or attempting to prove they are not especially providing the Israeli military resources to aid and abet their genocide and continue their apartheid,” added Haseem. “They fully had the option to do that but instead they chose to throw a tantrum and take it out on 50 workers, many of whom were not involved in the sit-in. “It was done so emotionally, so irrationally, that Google has also taken its mask off in the process. It has shown its honest and true self, how contradictory they are, how they don’t actually care about doing the right thing, about not being evil, about their values where we should speak up and speak out against anything wrong that we see happening in our work or in the workplace.” Since the contract was awarded in 2021, workers at Google and Amazon have been organizing in opposition to the corporations’ joint contract with the Israeli military and government. The $1.2bn contract to provide cloud services “allows for further surveillance of and unlawful data collection on Palestinians, and facilitates expansion of Israel’s illegal settlements on Palestinian land”, according to an op-ed workers wrote in 2021. The firings have disrupted the financial stability of workers, Haseem said, but she and others affected have received significant support from co-workers and others. She also said that one of the biggest challenges with the campaign against Project Nimbus was outreach and educating others on the issues – something which Google’s firings had only facilitated. Hasan Ibraheem, a Google software engineer in New York who was fired and arrested for participating in the protest, said he and other workers were put on administrative leave, losing corporate access, and then fired the next day by email en masse. “We don’t know of anyone who had actually been reached out to by HR. We were asked no questions. There was no consulting with us. No one asked us anything. It was just a very cold mass email sent out, you are now fired, goodbye, because they don’t want to deal with us, they want to silence us and we’re not going to stay silent,” said Ibraheem. “We don’t want our labor to be used for aiding a genocide and that’s why we did that action and we are going to continue fighting to have this project dropped.” We are Google and Amazon workers. We condemn Project Nimbus | Anonymous Google and Amazon workers Read more The workers declined to comment on any potential legal proceedings they may pursue in response to the firings. No Tech for Apartheid called the firings “illegal” in a blogpost in response to Google’s actions. A spokesperson for Google said in an email on the firings: “We continued our investigation into the physical disruption inside our buildings on April 16, looking at additional details provided by coworkers who were physically disrupted, as well as those employees who took longer to identify because their identity was partly concealed – like by wearing a mask without their badge – while engaged in the disruption. Our investigation into these events is now concluded, and we have terminated the employment of additional employees who were found to have been directly involved in disruptive activity.” They denied firing any employees not involved. Google also denied protesters’ characterizations of Project Nimbus, stating: “We have been very clear that the Nimbus contract is for workloads running on our commercial cloud by Israeli government ministries, who agree to comply with our Terms of Service and Acceptable Use Policy . This work is not directed at highly sensitive, classified, or military workloads relevant to weapons or intelligence services.” Explore more on these topics Google Gaza Israel Amazon California Alphabet Protest news Share Reuse this content Google has been accused of throwing a “tantrum” after sacking more than 50 workers in response to a protest over the company’s military ties to the Israeli government – firings that have shone a light on a controversial project and long-simmering tensions between staff and management. The workers were sacked following protests at Google offices in New York City and Sunnyvale, California, organized by No Tech for Apartheid – an alliance of Google and Amazon workers who have been protesting against a $1.2bn contract with the Israeli government called Project Nimbus that they claim will make it “easier for the Israeli government to surveil Palestinians and force them off their land”. Initially, Google fired 28 workers over the protests and then fired more than 20 workers a few days later. ‘A betrayal’: Google workers protest Israeli military contract at vigil for ex-intern killed in airstrike Read more The firings are the largest to occur since Israel’s military campaign in response to the 7 October 2023 terrorist attack by Hamas in which about 1,200 people were killed and more than 200 hostages were taken. Since then, more than 34,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza, including more than 14,000 children and 9,670 women. Google has fired and reprimanded workers for participating in protests before, such as over a 2018 walkout and sit-in protest about sexual harassment issues at the company, but not previously to this extent. In March, Google fired a cloud engineer who protested against an Israel tech event in New York City. Emaan Haseem, a software engineer at Google and organizer with No Tech for Apartheid, was one of the fired workers. “Many of us had just recently gotten promoted. I was the fastest promoted person underneath my manager,” she said. This was a peaceful protest, she said, “with high visibility, high transparency, that we livestreamed . Everything and everybody could see how it went.” Haseem said the sit-in protests were a response to Google’s refusal to engage with workers’ concerns. “Look at the way Google has overreacted, so emotionally, and has lashed out at 50 workers over this contract rather than giving any more transparency, clarity, or attempting to prove they are not especially providing the Israeli military resources to aid and abet their genocide and continue their apartheid,” added Haseem. “They fully had the option to do that but instead they chose to throw a tantrum and take it out on 50 workers, many of whom were not involved in the sit-in. “It was done so emotionally, so irrationally, that Google has also taken its mask off in the process. It has shown its honest and true self, how contradictory they are, how they don’t actually care about doing the right thing, about not being evil, about their values where we should speak up and speak out against anything wrong that we see happening in our work or in the workplace.” Since the contract was awarded in 2021, workers at Google and Amazon have been organizing in opposition to the corporations’ joint contract with the Israeli military and government. The $1.2bn contract to provide cloud services “allows for further surveillance of and unlawful data collection on Palestinians, and facilitates expansion of Israel’s illegal settlements on Palestinian land”, according to an op-ed workers wrote in 2021. The firings have disrupted the financial stability of workers, Haseem said, but she and others affected have received significant support from co-workers and others. She also said that one of the biggest challenges with the campaign against Project Nimbus was outreach and educating others on the issues – something which Google’s firings had only facilitated. Hasan Ibraheem, a Google software engineer in New York who was fired and arrested for participating in the protest, said he and other workers were put on administrative leave, losing corporate access, and then fired the next day by email en masse. “We don’t know of anyone who had actually been reached out to by HR. We were asked no questions. There was no consulting with us. No one asked us anything. It was just a very cold mass email sent out, you are now fired, goodbye, because they don’t want to deal with us, they want to silence us and we’re not going to stay silent,” said Ibraheem. “We don’t want our labor to be used for aiding a genocide and that’s why we did that action and we are going to continue fighting to have this project dropped.” We are Google and Amazon workers. We condemn Project Nimbus | Anonymous Google and Amazon workers Read more The workers declined to comment on any potential legal proceedings they may pursue in response to the firings. No Tech for Apartheid called the firings “illegal” in a blogpost in response to Google’s actions. A spokesperson for Google said in an email on the firings: “We continued our investigation into the physical disruption inside our buildings on April 16, looking at additional details provided by coworkers who were physically disrupted, as well as those employees who took longer to identify because their identity was partly concealed – like by wearing a mask without their badge – while engaged in the disruption. Our investigation into these events is now concluded, and we have terminated the employment of additional employees who were found to have been directly involved in disruptive activity.” They denied firing any employees not involved. Google also denied protesters’ characterizations of Project Nimbus, stating: “We have been very clear that the Nimbus contract is for workloads running on our commercial cloud by Israeli government ministries, who agree to comply with our Terms of Service and Acceptable Use Policy . This work is not directed at highly sensitive, classified, or military workloads relevant to weapons or intelligence services.” Google has been accused of throwing a “tantrum” after sacking more than 50 workers in response to a protest over the company’s military ties to the Israeli government – firings that have shone a light on a controversial project and long-simmering tensions between staff and management. The workers were sacked following protests at Google offices in New York City and Sunnyvale, California, organized by No Tech for Apartheid – an alliance of Google and Amazon workers who have been protesting against a $1.2bn contract with the Israeli government called Project Nimbus that they claim will make it “easier for the Israeli government to surveil Palestinians and force them off their land”. Initially, Google fired 28 workers over the protests and then fired more than 20 workers a few days later. ‘A betrayal’: Google workers protest Israeli military contract at vigil for ex-intern killed in airstrike Read more The firings are the largest to occur since Israel’s military campaign in response to the 7 October 2023 terrorist attack by Hamas in which about 1,200 people were killed and more than 200 hostages were taken. Since then, more than 34,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza, including more than 14,000 children and 9,670 women. Google has fired and reprimanded workers for participating in protests before, such as over a 2018 walkout and sit-in protest about sexual harassment issues at the company, but not previously to this extent. In March, Google fired a cloud engineer who protested against an Israel tech event in New York City. Emaan Haseem, a software engineer at Google and organizer with No Tech for Apartheid, was one of the fired workers. “Many of us had just recently gotten promoted. I was the fastest promoted person underneath my manager,” she said. This was a peaceful protest, she said, “with high visibility, high transparency, that we livestreamed . Everything and everybody could see how it went.” Haseem said the sit-in protests were a response to Google’s refusal to engage with workers’ concerns. “Look at the way Google has overreacted, so emotionally, and has lashed out at 50 workers over this contract rather than giving any more transparency, clarity, or attempting to prove they are not especially providing the Israeli military resources to aid and abet their genocide and continue their apartheid,” added Haseem. “They fully had the option to do that but instead they chose to throw a tantrum and take it out on 50 workers, many of whom were not involved in the sit-in. “It was done so emotionally, so irrationally, that Google has also taken its mask off in the process. It has shown its honest and true self, how contradictory they are, how they don’t actually care about doing the right thing, about not being evil, about their values where we should speak up and speak out against anything wrong that we see happening in our work or in the workplace.” Since the contract was awarded in 2021, workers at Google and Amazon have been organizing in opposition to the corporations’ joint contract with the Israeli military and government. The $1.2bn contract to provide cloud services “allows for further surveillance of and unlawful data collection on Palestinians, and facilitates expansion of Israel’s illegal settlements on Palestinian land”, according to an op-ed workers wrote in 2021. The firings have disrupted the financial stability of workers, Haseem said, but she and others affected have received significant support from co-workers and others. She also said that one of the biggest challenges with the campaign against Project Nimbus was outreach and educating others on the issues – something which Google’s firings had only facilitated. Hasan Ibraheem, a Google software engineer in New York who was fired and arrested for participating in the protest, said he and other workers were put on administrative leave, losing corporate access, and then fired the next day by email en masse. “We don’t know of anyone who had actually been reached out to by HR. We were asked no questions. There was no consulting with us. No one asked us anything. It was just a very cold mass email sent out, you are now fired, goodbye, because they don’t want to deal with us, they want to silence us and we’re not going to stay silent,” said Ibraheem. “We don’t want our labor to be used for aiding a genocide and that’s why we did that action and we are going to continue fighting to have this project dropped.” We are Google and Amazon workers. We condemn Project Nimbus | Anonymous Google and Amazon workers Read more The workers declined to comment on any potential legal proceedings they may pursue in response to the firings. No Tech for Apartheid called the firings “illegal” in a blogpost in response to Google’s actions. A spokesperson for Google said in an email on the firings: “We continued our investigation into the physical disruption inside our buildings on April 16, looking at additional details provided by coworkers who were physically disrupted, as well as those employees who took longer to identify because their identity was partly concealed – like by wearing a mask without their badge – while engaged in the disruption. Our investigation into these events is now concluded, and we have terminated the employment of additional employees who were found to have been directly involved in disruptive activity.” They denied firing any employees not involved. Google also denied protesters’ characterizations of Project Nimbus, stating: “We have been very clear that the Nimbus contract is for workloads running on our commercial cloud by Israeli government ministries, who agree to comply with our Terms of Service and Acceptable Use Policy . This work is not directed at highly sensitive, classified, or military workloads relevant to weapons or intelligence services.” Google has been accused of throwing a “tantrum” after sacking more than 50 workers in response to a protest over the company’s military ties to the Israeli government – firings that have shone a light on a controversial project and long-simmering tensions between staff and management. The workers were sacked following protests at Google offices in New York City and Sunnyvale, California, organized by No Tech for Apartheid – an alliance of Google and Amazon workers who have been protesting against a $1.2bn contract with the Israeli government called Project Nimbus that they claim will make it “easier for the Israeli government to surveil Palestinians and force them off their land”. Initially, Google fired 28 workers over the protests and then fired more than 20 workers a few days later. ‘A betrayal’: Google workers protest Israeli military contract at vigil for ex-intern killed in airstrike Read more ‘A betrayal’: Google workers protest Israeli military contract at vigil for ex-intern killed in airstrike Read more ‘A betrayal’: Google workers protest Israeli military contract at vigil for ex-intern killed in airstrike Read more ‘A betrayal’: Google workers protest Israeli military contract at vigil for ex-intern killed in airstrike ‘A betrayal’: Google workers protest Israeli military contract at vigil for ex-intern killed in airstrike The firings are the largest to occur since Israel’s military campaign in response to the 7 October 2023 terrorist attack by Hamas in which about 1,200 people were killed and more than 200 hostages were taken. Since then, more than 34,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza, including more than 14,000 children and 9,670 women. Google has fired and reprimanded workers for participating in protests before, such as over a 2018 walkout and sit-in protest about sexual harassment issues at the company, but not previously to this extent. In March, Google fired a cloud engineer who protested against an Israel tech event in New York City. Emaan Haseem, a software engineer at Google and organizer with No Tech for Apartheid, was one of the fired workers. “Many of us had just recently gotten promoted. I was the fastest promoted person underneath my manager,” she said. This was a peaceful protest, she said, “with high visibility, high transparency, that we livestreamed . Everything and everybody could see how it went.” Haseem said the sit-in protests were a response to Google’s refusal to engage with workers’ concerns. “Look at the way Google has overreacted, so emotionally, and has lashed out at 50 workers over this contract rather than giving any more transparency, clarity, or attempting to prove they are not especially providing the Israeli military resources to aid and abet their genocide and continue their apartheid,” added Haseem. “They fully had the option to do that but instead they chose to throw a tantrum and take it out on 50 workers, many of whom were not involved in the sit-in. “It was done so emotionally, so irrationally, that Google has also taken its mask off in the process. It has shown its honest and true self, how contradictory they are, how they don’t actually care about doing the right thing, about not being evil, about their values where we should speak up and speak out against anything wrong that we see happening in our work or in the workplace.” Since the contract was awarded in 2021, workers at Google and Amazon have been organizing in opposition to the corporations’ joint contract with the Israeli military and government. The $1.2bn contract to provide cloud services “allows for further surveillance of and unlawful data collection on Palestinians, and facilitates expansion of Israel’s illegal settlements on Palestinian land”, according to an op-ed workers wrote in 2021. The firings have disrupted the financial stability of workers, Haseem said, but she and others affected have received significant support from co-workers and others. She also said that one of the biggest challenges with the campaign against Project Nimbus was outreach and educating others on the issues – something which Google’s firings had only facilitated. Hasan Ibraheem, a Google software engineer in New York who was fired and arrested for participating in the protest, said he and other workers were put on administrative leave, losing corporate access, and then fired the next day by email en masse. “We don’t know of anyone who had actually been reached out to by HR. We were asked no questions. There was no consulting with us. No one asked us anything. It was just a very cold mass email sent out, you are now fired, goodbye, because they don’t want to deal with us, they want to silence us and we’re not going to stay silent,” said Ibraheem. “We don’t want our labor to be used for aiding a genocide and that’s why we did that action and we are going to continue fighting to have this project dropped.” We are Google and Amazon workers. We condemn Project Nimbus | Anonymous Google and Amazon workers Read more We are Google and Amazon workers. We condemn Project Nimbus | Anonymous Google and Amazon workers Read more We are Google and Amazon workers. We condemn Project Nimbus | Anonymous Google and Amazon workers Read more We are Google and Amazon workers. We condemn Project Nimbus | Anonymous Google and Amazon workers We are Google and Amazon workers. We condemn Project Nimbus | Anonymous Google and Amazon workers The workers declined to comment on any potential legal proceedings they may pursue in response to the firings. No Tech for Apartheid called the firings “illegal” in a blogpost in response to Google’s actions. A spokesperson for Google said in an email on the firings: “We continued our investigation into the physical disruption inside our buildings on April 16, looking at additional details provided by coworkers who were physically disrupted, as well as those employees who took longer to identify because their identity was partly concealed – like by wearing a mask without their badge – while engaged in the disruption. Our investigation into these events is now concluded, and we have terminated the employment of additional employees who were found to have been directly involved in disruptive activity.” They denied firing any employees not involved. Google also denied protesters’ characterizations of Project Nimbus, stating: “We have been very clear that the Nimbus contract is for workloads running on our commercial cloud by Israeli government ministries, who agree to comply with our Terms of Service and Acceptable Use Policy . This work is not directed at highly sensitive, classified, or military workloads relevant to weapons or intelligence services.” Explore more on these topics Google Gaza Israel Amazon California Alphabet Protest news Share Reuse this content Google Gaza Israel Amazon California Alphabet Protest news |
Home Office to detain asylum seekers across UK in shock Rwanda operation
Officials plan to hold refugees who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices. They will be transferred to detention centres. Photograph: Benjamin John/Alamy View image in fullscreen Officials plan to hold refugees who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices. They will be transferred to detention centres. Photograph: Benjamin John/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old Home Office to detain asylum seekers across UK in shock Rwanda operation This article is more than 1 year old Exclusive: Operation comes weeks earlier than expected and is thought to have been timed to coincide with local elections The Home Office will launch a major operation to detain asylum seekers across the UK on Monday, weeks earlier than expected, in preparation for their deportation to Rwanda, the Guardian can reveal. Officials plan to hold asylum seekers who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices or bail appointments and will also pick people up nationwide in a surprise two-week exercise. Lawyers and campaigners said the detentions risked provoking protracted legal battles, community protests and clashes with police – with officers in Scotland put on high alert. Enver Solomon, the chief executive of the Refugee Council, said: “The government is determined to recklessly pursue its inhumane Rwanda plan despite the cost, chaos and human misery it will unleash. We know it is likely to cause a catastrophic system meltdown.” Detainees will be immediately transferred to detention centres, which have already been prepared for the operation, and held until they are put on planes to Rwanda. Some will be put on the first flight due to take off this summer. The Home Office said ratification of the prime minister’s Safety of Rwanda Act meant “the government is entering the final phase of operationalising this landmark policy to tackle illegal migration and stop the boats”. Interviews, a history lesson and football: what awaits people sent to Rwanda by UK? Read more It added: “At some stage inevitably this will include detaining people in preparation for the first flight, which is set to take off to Rwanda in 10 to 12 weeks. It would be inappropriate to comment further on operational activity.” The start of the Home Office’s detention operation, which had not been anticipated for weeks, coincides with Thursday’s local council elections in England where the Tories face losing up to half the seats they currently hold. Rishi Sunak said on Sunday that cracking down on illegal migration was central to the Tory campaign. Police in Scotland have been put on alert because of the high risk of street protests and attempts by pro-refugee campaigners to stop detentions. Officers will not take part in the detentions but will take charge of crowd control and public order. A Police Scotland spokesperson referred the Guardian to the Home Office. Local communities in Scotland have twice prevented deportations by staging mass protests, on Kenmure Street in Glasgow in May 2021, and in Nicolson Square, Edinburgh, in June 2022. On both occasions, hundreds of people surrounded immigration enforcement vehicles to prevent asylum seekers being removed. During an interview in which he mentioned Rwanda and illegal migration 13 times, the prime minister said on Sunday that he was focused on “stopping the boats”, as well as his pledges on the economy. He told Sky News’s Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips of his “determination to get that Rwanda scheme going”. However, the latest official data, released on Sunday, showed the number of people arriving by small boats in the first four months of 2024 was the highest ever for that period, at 7,167 people, compared with 5,745 for the same period last year. The previous record for those four months was 6,691. Speaking on Monday before the Lords and Commons sat through the night to pass the safety of Rwanda (asylum and immigration) bill, Sunak said: “To detain people while we prepare to remove them, we’ve increased detention spaces to 2,200. “To quickly process claims, we’ve got 200 trained, dedicated caseworkers ready and waiting. To deal with any legal cases quickly and decisively, the judiciary have made available 25 courtrooms and identified 150 judges who could provide over 5,000 sitting days.” Aamer Anwar, a Glasgow-based human rights lawyer who was directly involved in the Kenmure Street protests, said Police Scotland and the Scottish government had to be certain they believed this was lawful. He revealed he had been inundated with calls from activists after the Guardian first reported the Home Office move on Sunday morning. “People are extremely angry and upset, and ready to mobilise,” Anwar said, adding it would be “extremely dangerous” for Police Scotland to put itself in the middle of a deportation protest if people felt they were acting to protect deportation operations. “I suspect in the coming days we will see an explosion of the spirit of Kenmure Street across the UK, opposing a policy that will lead to misery, self-harm and death, driving so many more into the arms of people smugglers,” Anwar said. “The fundamental question for the Scottish government as well as Police Scotland is whether they are willing to engage in this barbaric abuse of power against a desperate people.” Solomon said the detention and removal operations were likely to persuade other asylum seekers already in the UK to disappear, for fear of being deported. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion “Even if a few thousand people are removed to Rwanda this year, there will be tens of thousands of refugees who have fled from countries like Afghanistan, Sudan and Syria, stranded in permanent limbo in the UK, likely to fall out of contact with services and face the risk of exploitation and abuse. “This could be avoided if the government opted instead to operate a fair, effective and humane asylum system.” The Labour MP Kim Johnson, who sits on the home affairs committee, said: “Rishi Sunak and his government are determined to prove this scheme will work, when everyone apart from the Tories know it is an abject failure. Detaining desperate people who have been languishing in a state of uncertainty for far too long, and using them for political point-scoring, is amoral. It sums up this government, and that’s why we need a general election ASAP, to get rid once and for all. “This government is determined to kick the most vulnerable communities on the way out of the door in a desperate attempt to rebuild its credibility with the electorate.” The Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesperson, Alistair Carmichael, said the “cruel political gimmick” was “the sound of the bottom of the barrel being scraped”. He added: “This is a grubby attempt by the Conservatives to distract from their appalling record a few days out from the local elections. The Rwanda scheme is immoral, unworkable and expensive for taxpayers.” Sonya Sceats, the chief executive of Freedom from Torture, a charity that supports torture survivors, said the detentions and deportations would add to the trauma refugees had already experienced. “News of this crackdown is sure to trigger mental health collapse in many men, women and children in the care of our therapists. “Compassionate people up and down the country will be sickened by this performative cruelty designed to generate headlines and stoke fear among people fleeing torture and persecution. This is not who we are as a country.” A Scottish government spokesperson said: “We have been absolutely clear in our opposition to the Rwanda bill since it was introduced. The UK should be upholding the 1951 UN refugee convention and supporting people in need of protection, not undermining international protection. “The UK government should focus on improving the UK asylum system, so that people are treated fairly and with dignity and respect throughout the process. UK government asylum policy and legislation has a significant impact on people living in our communities as well as on local authorities who play a critical role in supporting asylum seekers and refugees.” Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum Conservatives Home Office Scotland Refugees Rishi Sunak news Share Reuse this content Officials plan to hold refugees who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices. They will be transferred to detention centres. Photograph: Benjamin John/Alamy View image in fullscreen Officials plan to hold refugees who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices. They will be transferred to detention centres. Photograph: Benjamin John/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old Home Office to detain asylum seekers across UK in shock Rwanda operation This article is more than 1 year old Exclusive: Operation comes weeks earlier than expected and is thought to have been timed to coincide with local elections The Home Office will launch a major operation to detain asylum seekers across the UK on Monday, weeks earlier than expected, in preparation for their deportation to Rwanda, the Guardian can reveal. Officials plan to hold asylum seekers who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices or bail appointments and will also pick people up nationwide in a surprise two-week exercise. Lawyers and campaigners said the detentions risked provoking protracted legal battles, community protests and clashes with police – with officers in Scotland put on high alert. Enver Solomon, the chief executive of the Refugee Council, said: “The government is determined to recklessly pursue its inhumane Rwanda plan despite the cost, chaos and human misery it will unleash. We know it is likely to cause a catastrophic system meltdown.” Detainees will be immediately transferred to detention centres, which have already been prepared for the operation, and held until they are put on planes to Rwanda. Some will be put on the first flight due to take off this summer. The Home Office said ratification of the prime minister’s Safety of Rwanda Act meant “the government is entering the final phase of operationalising this landmark policy to tackle illegal migration and stop the boats”. Interviews, a history lesson and football: what awaits people sent to Rwanda by UK? Read more It added: “At some stage inevitably this will include detaining people in preparation for the first flight, which is set to take off to Rwanda in 10 to 12 weeks. It would be inappropriate to comment further on operational activity.” The start of the Home Office’s detention operation, which had not been anticipated for weeks, coincides with Thursday’s local council elections in England where the Tories face losing up to half the seats they currently hold. Rishi Sunak said on Sunday that cracking down on illegal migration was central to the Tory campaign. Police in Scotland have been put on alert because of the high risk of street protests and attempts by pro-refugee campaigners to stop detentions. Officers will not take part in the detentions but will take charge of crowd control and public order. A Police Scotland spokesperson referred the Guardian to the Home Office. Local communities in Scotland have twice prevented deportations by staging mass protests, on Kenmure Street in Glasgow in May 2021, and in Nicolson Square, Edinburgh, in June 2022. On both occasions, hundreds of people surrounded immigration enforcement vehicles to prevent asylum seekers being removed. During an interview in which he mentioned Rwanda and illegal migration 13 times, the prime minister said on Sunday that he was focused on “stopping the boats”, as well as his pledges on the economy. He told Sky News’s Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips of his “determination to get that Rwanda scheme going”. However, the latest official data, released on Sunday, showed the number of people arriving by small boats in the first four months of 2024 was the highest ever for that period, at 7,167 people, compared with 5,745 for the same period last year. The previous record for those four months was 6,691. Speaking on Monday before the Lords and Commons sat through the night to pass the safety of Rwanda (asylum and immigration) bill, Sunak said: “To detain people while we prepare to remove them, we’ve increased detention spaces to 2,200. “To quickly process claims, we’ve got 200 trained, dedicated caseworkers ready and waiting. To deal with any legal cases quickly and decisively, the judiciary have made available 25 courtrooms and identified 150 judges who could provide over 5,000 sitting days.” Aamer Anwar, a Glasgow-based human rights lawyer who was directly involved in the Kenmure Street protests, said Police Scotland and the Scottish government had to be certain they believed this was lawful. He revealed he had been inundated with calls from activists after the Guardian first reported the Home Office move on Sunday morning. “People are extremely angry and upset, and ready to mobilise,” Anwar said, adding it would be “extremely dangerous” for Police Scotland to put itself in the middle of a deportation protest if people felt they were acting to protect deportation operations. “I suspect in the coming days we will see an explosion of the spirit of Kenmure Street across the UK, opposing a policy that will lead to misery, self-harm and death, driving so many more into the arms of people smugglers,” Anwar said. “The fundamental question for the Scottish government as well as Police Scotland is whether they are willing to engage in this barbaric abuse of power against a desperate people.” Solomon said the detention and removal operations were likely to persuade other asylum seekers already in the UK to disappear, for fear of being deported. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion “Even if a few thousand people are removed to Rwanda this year, there will be tens of thousands of refugees who have fled from countries like Afghanistan, Sudan and Syria, stranded in permanent limbo in the UK, likely to fall out of contact with services and face the risk of exploitation and abuse. “This could be avoided if the government opted instead to operate a fair, effective and humane asylum system.” The Labour MP Kim Johnson, who sits on the home affairs committee, said: “Rishi Sunak and his government are determined to prove this scheme will work, when everyone apart from the Tories know it is an abject failure. Detaining desperate people who have been languishing in a state of uncertainty for far too long, and using them for political point-scoring, is amoral. It sums up this government, and that’s why we need a general election ASAP, to get rid once and for all. “This government is determined to kick the most vulnerable communities on the way out of the door in a desperate attempt to rebuild its credibility with the electorate.” The Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesperson, Alistair Carmichael, said the “cruel political gimmick” was “the sound of the bottom of the barrel being scraped”. He added: “This is a grubby attempt by the Conservatives to distract from their appalling record a few days out from the local elections. The Rwanda scheme is immoral, unworkable and expensive for taxpayers.” Sonya Sceats, the chief executive of Freedom from Torture, a charity that supports torture survivors, said the detentions and deportations would add to the trauma refugees had already experienced. “News of this crackdown is sure to trigger mental health collapse in many men, women and children in the care of our therapists. “Compassionate people up and down the country will be sickened by this performative cruelty designed to generate headlines and stoke fear among people fleeing torture and persecution. This is not who we are as a country.” A Scottish government spokesperson said: “We have been absolutely clear in our opposition to the Rwanda bill since it was introduced. The UK should be upholding the 1951 UN refugee convention and supporting people in need of protection, not undermining international protection. “The UK government should focus on improving the UK asylum system, so that people are treated fairly and with dignity and respect throughout the process. UK government asylum policy and legislation has a significant impact on people living in our communities as well as on local authorities who play a critical role in supporting asylum seekers and refugees.” Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum Conservatives Home Office Scotland Refugees Rishi Sunak news Share Reuse this content Officials plan to hold refugees who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices. They will be transferred to detention centres. Photograph: Benjamin John/Alamy View image in fullscreen Officials plan to hold refugees who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices. They will be transferred to detention centres. Photograph: Benjamin John/Alamy Officials plan to hold refugees who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices. They will be transferred to detention centres. Photograph: Benjamin John/Alamy View image in fullscreen Officials plan to hold refugees who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices. They will be transferred to detention centres. Photograph: Benjamin John/Alamy Officials plan to hold refugees who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices. They will be transferred to detention centres. Photograph: Benjamin John/Alamy View image in fullscreen Officials plan to hold refugees who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices. They will be transferred to detention centres. Photograph: Benjamin John/Alamy Officials plan to hold refugees who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices. They will be transferred to detention centres. Photograph: Benjamin John/Alamy View image in fullscreen Officials plan to hold refugees who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices. They will be transferred to detention centres. Photograph: Benjamin John/Alamy Officials plan to hold refugees who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices. They will be transferred to detention centres. Photograph: Benjamin John/Alamy Officials plan to hold refugees who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices. They will be transferred to detention centres. Photograph: Benjamin John/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old Home Office to detain asylum seekers across UK in shock Rwanda operation This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Home Office to detain asylum seekers across UK in shock Rwanda operation This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Home Office to detain asylum seekers across UK in shock Rwanda operation This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Exclusive: Operation comes weeks earlier than expected and is thought to have been timed to coincide with local elections Exclusive: Operation comes weeks earlier than expected and is thought to have been timed to coincide with local elections Exclusive: Operation comes weeks earlier than expected and is thought to have been timed to coincide with local elections The Home Office will launch a major operation to detain asylum seekers across the UK on Monday, weeks earlier than expected, in preparation for their deportation to Rwanda, the Guardian can reveal. Officials plan to hold asylum seekers who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices or bail appointments and will also pick people up nationwide in a surprise two-week exercise. Lawyers and campaigners said the detentions risked provoking protracted legal battles, community protests and clashes with police – with officers in Scotland put on high alert. Enver Solomon, the chief executive of the Refugee Council, said: “The government is determined to recklessly pursue its inhumane Rwanda plan despite the cost, chaos and human misery it will unleash. We know it is likely to cause a catastrophic system meltdown.” Detainees will be immediately transferred to detention centres, which have already been prepared for the operation, and held until they are put on planes to Rwanda. Some will be put on the first flight due to take off this summer. The Home Office said ratification of the prime minister’s Safety of Rwanda Act meant “the government is entering the final phase of operationalising this landmark policy to tackle illegal migration and stop the boats”. Interviews, a history lesson and football: what awaits people sent to Rwanda by UK? Read more It added: “At some stage inevitably this will include detaining people in preparation for the first flight, which is set to take off to Rwanda in 10 to 12 weeks. It would be inappropriate to comment further on operational activity.” The start of the Home Office’s detention operation, which had not been anticipated for weeks, coincides with Thursday’s local council elections in England where the Tories face losing up to half the seats they currently hold. Rishi Sunak said on Sunday that cracking down on illegal migration was central to the Tory campaign. Police in Scotland have been put on alert because of the high risk of street protests and attempts by pro-refugee campaigners to stop detentions. Officers will not take part in the detentions but will take charge of crowd control and public order. A Police Scotland spokesperson referred the Guardian to the Home Office. Local communities in Scotland have twice prevented deportations by staging mass protests, on Kenmure Street in Glasgow in May 2021, and in Nicolson Square, Edinburgh, in June 2022. On both occasions, hundreds of people surrounded immigration enforcement vehicles to prevent asylum seekers being removed. During an interview in which he mentioned Rwanda and illegal migration 13 times, the prime minister said on Sunday that he was focused on “stopping the boats”, as well as his pledges on the economy. He told Sky News’s Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips of his “determination to get that Rwanda scheme going”. However, the latest official data, released on Sunday, showed the number of people arriving by small boats in the first four months of 2024 was the highest ever for that period, at 7,167 people, compared with 5,745 for the same period last year. The previous record for those four months was 6,691. Speaking on Monday before the Lords and Commons sat through the night to pass the safety of Rwanda (asylum and immigration) bill, Sunak said: “To detain people while we prepare to remove them, we’ve increased detention spaces to 2,200. “To quickly process claims, we’ve got 200 trained, dedicated caseworkers ready and waiting. To deal with any legal cases quickly and decisively, the judiciary have made available 25 courtrooms and identified 150 judges who could provide over 5,000 sitting days.” Aamer Anwar, a Glasgow-based human rights lawyer who was directly involved in the Kenmure Street protests, said Police Scotland and the Scottish government had to be certain they believed this was lawful. He revealed he had been inundated with calls from activists after the Guardian first reported the Home Office move on Sunday morning. “People are extremely angry and upset, and ready to mobilise,” Anwar said, adding it would be “extremely dangerous” for Police Scotland to put itself in the middle of a deportation protest if people felt they were acting to protect deportation operations. “I suspect in the coming days we will see an explosion of the spirit of Kenmure Street across the UK, opposing a policy that will lead to misery, self-harm and death, driving so many more into the arms of people smugglers,” Anwar said. “The fundamental question for the Scottish government as well as Police Scotland is whether they are willing to engage in this barbaric abuse of power against a desperate people.” Solomon said the detention and removal operations were likely to persuade other asylum seekers already in the UK to disappear, for fear of being deported. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion “Even if a few thousand people are removed to Rwanda this year, there will be tens of thousands of refugees who have fled from countries like Afghanistan, Sudan and Syria, stranded in permanent limbo in the UK, likely to fall out of contact with services and face the risk of exploitation and abuse. “This could be avoided if the government opted instead to operate a fair, effective and humane asylum system.” The Labour MP Kim Johnson, who sits on the home affairs committee, said: “Rishi Sunak and his government are determined to prove this scheme will work, when everyone apart from the Tories know it is an abject failure. Detaining desperate people who have been languishing in a state of uncertainty for far too long, and using them for political point-scoring, is amoral. It sums up this government, and that’s why we need a general election ASAP, to get rid once and for all. “This government is determined to kick the most vulnerable communities on the way out of the door in a desperate attempt to rebuild its credibility with the electorate.” The Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesperson, Alistair Carmichael, said the “cruel political gimmick” was “the sound of the bottom of the barrel being scraped”. He added: “This is a grubby attempt by the Conservatives to distract from their appalling record a few days out from the local elections. The Rwanda scheme is immoral, unworkable and expensive for taxpayers.” Sonya Sceats, the chief executive of Freedom from Torture, a charity that supports torture survivors, said the detentions and deportations would add to the trauma refugees had already experienced. “News of this crackdown is sure to trigger mental health collapse in many men, women and children in the care of our therapists. “Compassionate people up and down the country will be sickened by this performative cruelty designed to generate headlines and stoke fear among people fleeing torture and persecution. This is not who we are as a country.” A Scottish government spokesperson said: “We have been absolutely clear in our opposition to the Rwanda bill since it was introduced. The UK should be upholding the 1951 UN refugee convention and supporting people in need of protection, not undermining international protection. “The UK government should focus on improving the UK asylum system, so that people are treated fairly and with dignity and respect throughout the process. UK government asylum policy and legislation has a significant impact on people living in our communities as well as on local authorities who play a critical role in supporting asylum seekers and refugees.” Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum Conservatives Home Office Scotland Refugees Rishi Sunak news Share Reuse this content The Home Office will launch a major operation to detain asylum seekers across the UK on Monday, weeks earlier than expected, in preparation for their deportation to Rwanda, the Guardian can reveal. Officials plan to hold asylum seekers who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices or bail appointments and will also pick people up nationwide in a surprise two-week exercise. Lawyers and campaigners said the detentions risked provoking protracted legal battles, community protests and clashes with police – with officers in Scotland put on high alert. Enver Solomon, the chief executive of the Refugee Council, said: “The government is determined to recklessly pursue its inhumane Rwanda plan despite the cost, chaos and human misery it will unleash. We know it is likely to cause a catastrophic system meltdown.” Detainees will be immediately transferred to detention centres, which have already been prepared for the operation, and held until they are put on planes to Rwanda. Some will be put on the first flight due to take off this summer. The Home Office said ratification of the prime minister’s Safety of Rwanda Act meant “the government is entering the final phase of operationalising this landmark policy to tackle illegal migration and stop the boats”. Interviews, a history lesson and football: what awaits people sent to Rwanda by UK? Read more It added: “At some stage inevitably this will include detaining people in preparation for the first flight, which is set to take off to Rwanda in 10 to 12 weeks. It would be inappropriate to comment further on operational activity.” The start of the Home Office’s detention operation, which had not been anticipated for weeks, coincides with Thursday’s local council elections in England where the Tories face losing up to half the seats they currently hold. Rishi Sunak said on Sunday that cracking down on illegal migration was central to the Tory campaign. Police in Scotland have been put on alert because of the high risk of street protests and attempts by pro-refugee campaigners to stop detentions. Officers will not take part in the detentions but will take charge of crowd control and public order. A Police Scotland spokesperson referred the Guardian to the Home Office. Local communities in Scotland have twice prevented deportations by staging mass protests, on Kenmure Street in Glasgow in May 2021, and in Nicolson Square, Edinburgh, in June 2022. On both occasions, hundreds of people surrounded immigration enforcement vehicles to prevent asylum seekers being removed. During an interview in which he mentioned Rwanda and illegal migration 13 times, the prime minister said on Sunday that he was focused on “stopping the boats”, as well as his pledges on the economy. He told Sky News’s Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips of his “determination to get that Rwanda scheme going”. However, the latest official data, released on Sunday, showed the number of people arriving by small boats in the first four months of 2024 was the highest ever for that period, at 7,167 people, compared with 5,745 for the same period last year. The previous record for those four months was 6,691. Speaking on Monday before the Lords and Commons sat through the night to pass the safety of Rwanda (asylum and immigration) bill, Sunak said: “To detain people while we prepare to remove them, we’ve increased detention spaces to 2,200. “To quickly process claims, we’ve got 200 trained, dedicated caseworkers ready and waiting. To deal with any legal cases quickly and decisively, the judiciary have made available 25 courtrooms and identified 150 judges who could provide over 5,000 sitting days.” Aamer Anwar, a Glasgow-based human rights lawyer who was directly involved in the Kenmure Street protests, said Police Scotland and the Scottish government had to be certain they believed this was lawful. He revealed he had been inundated with calls from activists after the Guardian first reported the Home Office move on Sunday morning. “People are extremely angry and upset, and ready to mobilise,” Anwar said, adding it would be “extremely dangerous” for Police Scotland to put itself in the middle of a deportation protest if people felt they were acting to protect deportation operations. “I suspect in the coming days we will see an explosion of the spirit of Kenmure Street across the UK, opposing a policy that will lead to misery, self-harm and death, driving so many more into the arms of people smugglers,” Anwar said. “The fundamental question for the Scottish government as well as Police Scotland is whether they are willing to engage in this barbaric abuse of power against a desperate people.” Solomon said the detention and removal operations were likely to persuade other asylum seekers already in the UK to disappear, for fear of being deported. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion “Even if a few thousand people are removed to Rwanda this year, there will be tens of thousands of refugees who have fled from countries like Afghanistan, Sudan and Syria, stranded in permanent limbo in the UK, likely to fall out of contact with services and face the risk of exploitation and abuse. “This could be avoided if the government opted instead to operate a fair, effective and humane asylum system.” The Labour MP Kim Johnson, who sits on the home affairs committee, said: “Rishi Sunak and his government are determined to prove this scheme will work, when everyone apart from the Tories know it is an abject failure. Detaining desperate people who have been languishing in a state of uncertainty for far too long, and using them for political point-scoring, is amoral. It sums up this government, and that’s why we need a general election ASAP, to get rid once and for all. “This government is determined to kick the most vulnerable communities on the way out of the door in a desperate attempt to rebuild its credibility with the electorate.” The Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesperson, Alistair Carmichael, said the “cruel political gimmick” was “the sound of the bottom of the barrel being scraped”. He added: “This is a grubby attempt by the Conservatives to distract from their appalling record a few days out from the local elections. The Rwanda scheme is immoral, unworkable and expensive for taxpayers.” Sonya Sceats, the chief executive of Freedom from Torture, a charity that supports torture survivors, said the detentions and deportations would add to the trauma refugees had already experienced. “News of this crackdown is sure to trigger mental health collapse in many men, women and children in the care of our therapists. “Compassionate people up and down the country will be sickened by this performative cruelty designed to generate headlines and stoke fear among people fleeing torture and persecution. This is not who we are as a country.” A Scottish government spokesperson said: “We have been absolutely clear in our opposition to the Rwanda bill since it was introduced. The UK should be upholding the 1951 UN refugee convention and supporting people in need of protection, not undermining international protection. “The UK government should focus on improving the UK asylum system, so that people are treated fairly and with dignity and respect throughout the process. UK government asylum policy and legislation has a significant impact on people living in our communities as well as on local authorities who play a critical role in supporting asylum seekers and refugees.” Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum Conservatives Home Office Scotland Refugees Rishi Sunak news Share Reuse this content The Home Office will launch a major operation to detain asylum seekers across the UK on Monday, weeks earlier than expected, in preparation for their deportation to Rwanda, the Guardian can reveal. Officials plan to hold asylum seekers who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices or bail appointments and will also pick people up nationwide in a surprise two-week exercise. Lawyers and campaigners said the detentions risked provoking protracted legal battles, community protests and clashes with police – with officers in Scotland put on high alert. Enver Solomon, the chief executive of the Refugee Council, said: “The government is determined to recklessly pursue its inhumane Rwanda plan despite the cost, chaos and human misery it will unleash. We know it is likely to cause a catastrophic system meltdown.” Detainees will be immediately transferred to detention centres, which have already been prepared for the operation, and held until they are put on planes to Rwanda. Some will be put on the first flight due to take off this summer. The Home Office said ratification of the prime minister’s Safety of Rwanda Act meant “the government is entering the final phase of operationalising this landmark policy to tackle illegal migration and stop the boats”. Interviews, a history lesson and football: what awaits people sent to Rwanda by UK? Read more It added: “At some stage inevitably this will include detaining people in preparation for the first flight, which is set to take off to Rwanda in 10 to 12 weeks. It would be inappropriate to comment further on operational activity.” The start of the Home Office’s detention operation, which had not been anticipated for weeks, coincides with Thursday’s local council elections in England where the Tories face losing up to half the seats they currently hold. Rishi Sunak said on Sunday that cracking down on illegal migration was central to the Tory campaign. Police in Scotland have been put on alert because of the high risk of street protests and attempts by pro-refugee campaigners to stop detentions. Officers will not take part in the detentions but will take charge of crowd control and public order. A Police Scotland spokesperson referred the Guardian to the Home Office. Local communities in Scotland have twice prevented deportations by staging mass protests, on Kenmure Street in Glasgow in May 2021, and in Nicolson Square, Edinburgh, in June 2022. On both occasions, hundreds of people surrounded immigration enforcement vehicles to prevent asylum seekers being removed. During an interview in which he mentioned Rwanda and illegal migration 13 times, the prime minister said on Sunday that he was focused on “stopping the boats”, as well as his pledges on the economy. He told Sky News’s Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips of his “determination to get that Rwanda scheme going”. However, the latest official data, released on Sunday, showed the number of people arriving by small boats in the first four months of 2024 was the highest ever for that period, at 7,167 people, compared with 5,745 for the same period last year. The previous record for those four months was 6,691. Speaking on Monday before the Lords and Commons sat through the night to pass the safety of Rwanda (asylum and immigration) bill, Sunak said: “To detain people while we prepare to remove them, we’ve increased detention spaces to 2,200. “To quickly process claims, we’ve got 200 trained, dedicated caseworkers ready and waiting. To deal with any legal cases quickly and decisively, the judiciary have made available 25 courtrooms and identified 150 judges who could provide over 5,000 sitting days.” Aamer Anwar, a Glasgow-based human rights lawyer who was directly involved in the Kenmure Street protests, said Police Scotland and the Scottish government had to be certain they believed this was lawful. He revealed he had been inundated with calls from activists after the Guardian first reported the Home Office move on Sunday morning. “People are extremely angry and upset, and ready to mobilise,” Anwar said, adding it would be “extremely dangerous” for Police Scotland to put itself in the middle of a deportation protest if people felt they were acting to protect deportation operations. “I suspect in the coming days we will see an explosion of the spirit of Kenmure Street across the UK, opposing a policy that will lead to misery, self-harm and death, driving so many more into the arms of people smugglers,” Anwar said. “The fundamental question for the Scottish government as well as Police Scotland is whether they are willing to engage in this barbaric abuse of power against a desperate people.” Solomon said the detention and removal operations were likely to persuade other asylum seekers already in the UK to disappear, for fear of being deported. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion “Even if a few thousand people are removed to Rwanda this year, there will be tens of thousands of refugees who have fled from countries like Afghanistan, Sudan and Syria, stranded in permanent limbo in the UK, likely to fall out of contact with services and face the risk of exploitation and abuse. “This could be avoided if the government opted instead to operate a fair, effective and humane asylum system.” The Labour MP Kim Johnson, who sits on the home affairs committee, said: “Rishi Sunak and his government are determined to prove this scheme will work, when everyone apart from the Tories know it is an abject failure. Detaining desperate people who have been languishing in a state of uncertainty for far too long, and using them for political point-scoring, is amoral. It sums up this government, and that’s why we need a general election ASAP, to get rid once and for all. “This government is determined to kick the most vulnerable communities on the way out of the door in a desperate attempt to rebuild its credibility with the electorate.” The Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesperson, Alistair Carmichael, said the “cruel political gimmick” was “the sound of the bottom of the barrel being scraped”. He added: “This is a grubby attempt by the Conservatives to distract from their appalling record a few days out from the local elections. The Rwanda scheme is immoral, unworkable and expensive for taxpayers.” Sonya Sceats, the chief executive of Freedom from Torture, a charity that supports torture survivors, said the detentions and deportations would add to the trauma refugees had already experienced. “News of this crackdown is sure to trigger mental health collapse in many men, women and children in the care of our therapists. “Compassionate people up and down the country will be sickened by this performative cruelty designed to generate headlines and stoke fear among people fleeing torture and persecution. This is not who we are as a country.” A Scottish government spokesperson said: “We have been absolutely clear in our opposition to the Rwanda bill since it was introduced. The UK should be upholding the 1951 UN refugee convention and supporting people in need of protection, not undermining international protection. “The UK government should focus on improving the UK asylum system, so that people are treated fairly and with dignity and respect throughout the process. UK government asylum policy and legislation has a significant impact on people living in our communities as well as on local authorities who play a critical role in supporting asylum seekers and refugees.” The Home Office will launch a major operation to detain asylum seekers across the UK on Monday, weeks earlier than expected, in preparation for their deportation to Rwanda, the Guardian can reveal. Officials plan to hold asylum seekers who turn up for routine meetings at immigration service offices or bail appointments and will also pick people up nationwide in a surprise two-week exercise. Lawyers and campaigners said the detentions risked provoking protracted legal battles, community protests and clashes with police – with officers in Scotland put on high alert. Enver Solomon, the chief executive of the Refugee Council, said: “The government is determined to recklessly pursue its inhumane Rwanda plan despite the cost, chaos and human misery it will unleash. We know it is likely to cause a catastrophic system meltdown.” Detainees will be immediately transferred to detention centres, which have already been prepared for the operation, and held until they are put on planes to Rwanda. Some will be put on the first flight due to take off this summer. The Home Office said ratification of the prime minister’s Safety of Rwanda Act meant “the government is entering the final phase of operationalising this landmark policy to tackle illegal migration and stop the boats”. Interviews, a history lesson and football: what awaits people sent to Rwanda by UK? Read more It added: “At some stage inevitably this will include detaining people in preparation for the first flight, which is set to take off to Rwanda in 10 to 12 weeks. It would be inappropriate to comment further on operational activity.” The start of the Home Office’s detention operation, which had not been anticipated for weeks, coincides with Thursday’s local council elections in England where the Tories face losing up to half the seats they currently hold. Rishi Sunak said on Sunday that cracking down on illegal migration was central to the Tory campaign. Police in Scotland have been put on alert because of the high risk of street protests and attempts by pro-refugee campaigners to stop detentions. Officers will not take part in the detentions but will take charge of crowd control and public order. A Police Scotland spokesperson referred the Guardian to the Home Office. Local communities in Scotland have twice prevented deportations by staging mass protests, on Kenmure Street in Glasgow in May 2021, and in Nicolson Square, Edinburgh, in June 2022. On both occasions, hundreds of people surrounded immigration enforcement vehicles to prevent asylum seekers being removed. During an interview in which he mentioned Rwanda and illegal migration 13 times, the prime minister said on Sunday that he was focused on “stopping the boats”, as well as his pledges on the economy. He told Sky News’s Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips of his “determination to get that Rwanda scheme going”. However, the latest official data, released on Sunday, showed the number of people arriving by small boats in the first four months of 2024 was the highest ever for that period, at 7,167 people, compared with 5,745 for the same period last year. The previous record for those four months was 6,691. Speaking on Monday before the Lords and Commons sat through the night to pass the safety of Rwanda (asylum and immigration) bill, Sunak said: “To detain people while we prepare to remove them, we’ve increased detention spaces to 2,200. “To quickly process claims, we’ve got 200 trained, dedicated caseworkers ready and waiting. To deal with any legal cases quickly and decisively, the judiciary have made available 25 courtrooms and identified 150 judges who could provide over 5,000 sitting days.” Aamer Anwar, a Glasgow-based human rights lawyer who was directly involved in the Kenmure Street protests, said Police Scotland and the Scottish government had to be certain they believed this was lawful. He revealed he had been inundated with calls from activists after the Guardian first reported the Home Office move on Sunday morning. “People are extremely angry and upset, and ready to mobilise,” Anwar said, adding it would be “extremely dangerous” for Police Scotland to put itself in the middle of a deportation protest if people felt they were acting to protect deportation operations. “I suspect in the coming days we will see an explosion of the spirit of Kenmure Street across the UK, opposing a policy that will lead to misery, self-harm and death, driving so many more into the arms of people smugglers,” Anwar said. “The fundamental question for the Scottish government as well as Police Scotland is whether they are willing to engage in this barbaric abuse of power against a desperate people.” Solomon said the detention and removal operations were likely to persuade other asylum seekers already in the UK to disappear, for fear of being deported. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion “Even if a few thousand people are removed to Rwanda this year, there will be tens of thousands of refugees who have fled from countries like Afghanistan, Sudan and Syria, stranded in permanent limbo in the UK, likely to fall out of contact with services and face the risk of exploitation and abuse. “This could be avoided if the government opted instead to operate a fair, effective and humane asylum system.” The Labour MP Kim Johnson, who sits on the home affairs committee, said: “Rishi Sunak and his government are determined to prove this scheme will work, when everyone apart from the Tories know it is an abject failure. Detaining desperate people who have been languishing in a state of uncertainty for far too long, and using them for political point-scoring, is amoral. It sums up this government, and that’s why we need a general election ASAP, to get rid once and for all. “This government is determined to kick the most vulnerable communities on the way out of the door in a desperate attempt to rebuild its credibility with the electorate.” The Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesperson, Alistair Carmichael, said the “cruel political gimmick” was “the sound of the bottom of the barrel being scraped”. He added: “This is a grubby attempt by the Conservatives to distract from their appalling record a few days out from the local elections. The Rwanda scheme is immoral, unworkable and expensive for taxpayers.” Sonya Sceats, the chief executive of Freedom from Torture, a charity that supports torture survivors, said the detentions and deportations would add to the trauma refugees had already experienced. “News of this crackdown is sure to trigger mental health collapse in many men, women and children in the care of our therapists. “Compassionate people up and down the country will be sickened by this performative cruelty designed to generate headlines and stoke fear among people fleeing torture and persecution. T
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
Scottish Greens will not back down in Humza Yousaf row, co-leader says
Humza Yousaf has insisted he will not resign as first minister and vowed to win the confidence vote. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf has insisted he will not resign as first minister and vowed to win the confidence vote. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Scottish Greens will not back down in Humza Yousaf row, co-leader says This article is more than 1 year old Lorna Slater says she cannot imagine anything that would change party’s position after ‘spectacular breach of trust’ Humza Yousaf’s leadership hangs by a thread as he approaches a confidence vote this week, with the Scottish Greens remaining unequivocal that he no longer has their support after he axed their power-sharing agreement. Scottish government sources have admitted they are not assuming the Greens will shift position after Yousaf precipitated a spiralling crisis in his government on Thursday morning. The first minister blindsided colleagues by ripping up the Bute House agreement, brokered by Nicola Sturgeon after the 2021 Holyrood election, which cemented a progressive pro-independence majority in the Scottish parliament. Denouncing Yousaf’s actions as “a spectacular breach of trust”, the Scottish Green co-leader Lorna Slater told BBC Scotland’s Sunday Show: “We will vote in support of a vote of no confidence against Humza Yousaf and I cannot imagine anything at this point that would change that position.” On Friday Yousaf said he would not resign as first minister and vowed to win the vote, brought by the Scottish Conservatives and likely to be debated on Wednesday or Thursday – although he would not rule out an early Holyrood election. Slater told the BBC: “This was a spectacular breach of trust, from on Tuesday saying the Bute House agreement was worth its weight in gold to stopping it unilaterally on Thursday.” Asked whether the Scottish Green MSPs would consider abstaining if Yousaf went to them “on bended knee”, Slater dismissed that option too. “The Bute House agreement was based on mutual trust and respect,” she said. “Humza Yousaf himself has broken that and he needs to face the consequences.” Slater would not be drawn on how the party would vote in a second no confidence vote against the entire Scottish government, brought by Scottish Labour, which would require the first minister and his ministers to resign if successful. Elsewhere on Sunday morning, senior Scottish National party figures attempted to calm the row, with the party’s former Westminster leader Ian Blackford using an appearance on BBC One’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg show to apologise to the Greens for the way the dissolution was handled and urging them to support the first minister. Michelle Thomson, the MSP who ran the SNP leadership campaign for Kate Forbes, who lost narrowly to Yousaf last March and has been critical of many of the Green-influenced policies, expressed regret at the manner in which the partnership ended. While acknowledging it would be “difficult” if Yousaf lost the confidence vote, which, according to Holyrood rules, is non-binding, she told BBC Radio Scotland that “everybody in the SNP is rooting strongly for [Yousaf] and I am confident he is doing everything he can to bring others onside”. Sources close to the first minister said he would continue to reach out to the Greens, as he was doing with all parties, but admitted they were not assuming the Greens would change their minds by the time of the vote. With the SNP two votes short of a majority at Holyrood, this leaves Yousaf dependent on the vote of the former SNP minister Ash Regan, who defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party last October in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender recognition reform and lack of progress on independence. This led the Scottish Conservative leader, Douglas Ross, to declare Yousaf’s premiership “finished”. Ross told the Sunday Show: “Even if he survives on a tied vote with the presiding officer voting for the status quo, that is not holding the confidence of the entire Scottish parliament.” Speaking to Kuenssberg, Salmond appeared to pull back from Sunday newspaper reports that he was demanding an electoral pact between Alba and the SNP, after Scottish government sources rejected it overnight as a “fantasy”. Salmond said Regan, his only MSP, was in a “highly influential position” and would be meeting Yousaf in the coming days to discuss “how we can re-emphasise independence as the priority of the Scottish government … how we can move away from the identity agenda that has taken up so much bandwidth … and also how we can return to the people’s agenda of education, health, housing, and above all jobs and industry.” Explore more on these topics Humza Yousaf Scottish National party (SNP) Scottish politics Green party Scotland news Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf has insisted he will not resign as first minister and vowed to win the confidence vote. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf has insisted he will not resign as first minister and vowed to win the confidence vote. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Scottish Greens will not back down in Humza Yousaf row, co-leader says This article is more than 1 year old Lorna Slater says she cannot imagine anything that would change party’s position after ‘spectacular breach of trust’ Humza Yousaf’s leadership hangs by a thread as he approaches a confidence vote this week, with the Scottish Greens remaining unequivocal that he no longer has their support after he axed their power-sharing agreement. Scottish government sources have admitted they are not assuming the Greens will shift position after Yousaf precipitated a spiralling crisis in his government on Thursday morning. The first minister blindsided colleagues by ripping up the Bute House agreement, brokered by Nicola Sturgeon after the 2021 Holyrood election, which cemented a progressive pro-independence majority in the Scottish parliament. Denouncing Yousaf’s actions as “a spectacular breach of trust”, the Scottish Green co-leader Lorna Slater told BBC Scotland’s Sunday Show: “We will vote in support of a vote of no confidence against Humza Yousaf and I cannot imagine anything at this point that would change that position.” On Friday Yousaf said he would not resign as first minister and vowed to win the vote, brought by the Scottish Conservatives and likely to be debated on Wednesday or Thursday – although he would not rule out an early Holyrood election. Slater told the BBC: “This was a spectacular breach of trust, from on Tuesday saying the Bute House agreement was worth its weight in gold to stopping it unilaterally on Thursday.” Asked whether the Scottish Green MSPs would consider abstaining if Yousaf went to them “on bended knee”, Slater dismissed that option too. “The Bute House agreement was based on mutual trust and respect,” she said. “Humza Yousaf himself has broken that and he needs to face the consequences.” Slater would not be drawn on how the party would vote in a second no confidence vote against the entire Scottish government, brought by Scottish Labour, which would require the first minister and his ministers to resign if successful. Elsewhere on Sunday morning, senior Scottish National party figures attempted to calm the row, with the party’s former Westminster leader Ian Blackford using an appearance on BBC One’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg show to apologise to the Greens for the way the dissolution was handled and urging them to support the first minister. Michelle Thomson, the MSP who ran the SNP leadership campaign for Kate Forbes, who lost narrowly to Yousaf last March and has been critical of many of the Green-influenced policies, expressed regret at the manner in which the partnership ended. While acknowledging it would be “difficult” if Yousaf lost the confidence vote, which, according to Holyrood rules, is non-binding, she told BBC Radio Scotland that “everybody in the SNP is rooting strongly for [Yousaf] and I am confident he is doing everything he can to bring others onside”. Sources close to the first minister said he would continue to reach out to the Greens, as he was doing with all parties, but admitted they were not assuming the Greens would change their minds by the time of the vote. With the SNP two votes short of a majority at Holyrood, this leaves Yousaf dependent on the vote of the former SNP minister Ash Regan, who defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party last October in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender recognition reform and lack of progress on independence. This led the Scottish Conservative leader, Douglas Ross, to declare Yousaf’s premiership “finished”. Ross told the Sunday Show: “Even if he survives on a tied vote with the presiding officer voting for the status quo, that is not holding the confidence of the entire Scottish parliament.” Speaking to Kuenssberg, Salmond appeared to pull back from Sunday newspaper reports that he was demanding an electoral pact between Alba and the SNP, after Scottish government sources rejected it overnight as a “fantasy”. Salmond said Regan, his only MSP, was in a “highly influential position” and would be meeting Yousaf in the coming days to discuss “how we can re-emphasise independence as the priority of the Scottish government … how we can move away from the identity agenda that has taken up so much bandwidth … and also how we can return to the people’s agenda of education, health, housing, and above all jobs and industry.” Explore more on these topics Humza Yousaf Scottish National party (SNP) Scottish politics Green party Scotland news Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf has insisted he will not resign as first minister and vowed to win the confidence vote. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf has insisted he will not resign as first minister and vowed to win the confidence vote. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images Humza Yousaf has insisted he will not resign as first minister and vowed to win the confidence vote. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf has insisted he will not resign as first minister and vowed to win the confidence vote. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images Humza Yousaf has insisted he will not resign as first minister and vowed to win the confidence vote. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf has insisted he will not resign as first minister and vowed to win the confidence vote. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images Humza Yousaf has insisted he will not resign as first minister and vowed to win the confidence vote. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf has insisted he will not resign as first minister and vowed to win the confidence vote. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images Humza Yousaf has insisted he will not resign as first minister and vowed to win the confidence vote. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images Humza Yousaf has insisted he will not resign as first minister and vowed to win the confidence vote. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Scottish Greens will not back down in Humza Yousaf row, co-leader says This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Scottish Greens will not back down in Humza Yousaf row, co-leader says This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Scottish Greens will not back down in Humza Yousaf row, co-leader says This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Lorna Slater says she cannot imagine anything that would change party’s position after ‘spectacular breach of trust’ Lorna Slater says she cannot imagine anything that would change party’s position after ‘spectacular breach of trust’ Lorna Slater says she cannot imagine anything that would change party’s position after ‘spectacular breach of trust’ Humza Yousaf’s leadership hangs by a thread as he approaches a confidence vote this week, with the Scottish Greens remaining unequivocal that he no longer has their support after he axed their power-sharing agreement. Scottish government sources have admitted they are not assuming the Greens will shift position after Yousaf precipitated a spiralling crisis in his government on Thursday morning. The first minister blindsided colleagues by ripping up the Bute House agreement, brokered by Nicola Sturgeon after the 2021 Holyrood election, which cemented a progressive pro-independence majority in the Scottish parliament. Denouncing Yousaf’s actions as “a spectacular breach of trust”, the Scottish Green co-leader Lorna Slater told BBC Scotland’s Sunday Show: “We will vote in support of a vote of no confidence against Humza Yousaf and I cannot imagine anything at this point that would change that position.” On Friday Yousaf said he would not resign as first minister and vowed to win the vote, brought by the Scottish Conservatives and likely to be debated on Wednesday or Thursday – although he would not rule out an early Holyrood election. Slater told the BBC: “This was a spectacular breach of trust, from on Tuesday saying the Bute House agreement was worth its weight in gold to stopping it unilaterally on Thursday.” Asked whether the Scottish Green MSPs would consider abstaining if Yousaf went to them “on bended knee”, Slater dismissed that option too. “The Bute House agreement was based on mutual trust and respect,” she said. “Humza Yousaf himself has broken that and he needs to face the consequences.” Slater would not be drawn on how the party would vote in a second no confidence vote against the entire Scottish government, brought by Scottish Labour, which would require the first minister and his ministers to resign if successful. Elsewhere on Sunday morning, senior Scottish National party figures attempted to calm the row, with the party’s former Westminster leader Ian Blackford using an appearance on BBC One’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg show to apologise to the Greens for the way the dissolution was handled and urging them to support the first minister. Michelle Thomson, the MSP who ran the SNP leadership campaign for Kate Forbes, who lost narrowly to Yousaf last March and has been critical of many of the Green-influenced policies, expressed regret at the manner in which the partnership ended. While acknowledging it would be “difficult” if Yousaf lost the confidence vote, which, according to Holyrood rules, is non-binding, she told BBC Radio Scotland that “everybody in the SNP is rooting strongly for [Yousaf] and I am confident he is doing everything he can to bring others onside”. Sources close to the first minister said he would continue to reach out to the Greens, as he was doing with all parties, but admitted they were not assuming the Greens would change their minds by the time of the vote. With the SNP two votes short of a majority at Holyrood, this leaves Yousaf dependent on the vote of the former SNP minister Ash Regan, who defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party last October in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender recognition reform and lack of progress on independence. This led the Scottish Conservative leader, Douglas Ross, to declare Yousaf’s premiership “finished”. Ross told the Sunday Show: “Even if he survives on a tied vote with the presiding officer voting for the status quo, that is not holding the confidence of the entire Scottish parliament.” Speaking to Kuenssberg, Salmond appeared to pull back from Sunday newspaper reports that he was demanding an electoral pact between Alba and the SNP, after Scottish government sources rejected it overnight as a “fantasy”. Salmond said Regan, his only MSP, was in a “highly influential position” and would be meeting Yousaf in the coming days to discuss “how we can re-emphasise independence as the priority of the Scottish government … how we can move away from the identity agenda that has taken up so much bandwidth … and also how we can return to the people’s agenda of education, health, housing, and above all jobs and industry.” Explore more on these topics Humza Yousaf Scottish National party (SNP) Scottish politics Green party Scotland news Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf’s leadership hangs by a thread as he approaches a confidence vote this week, with the Scottish Greens remaining unequivocal that he no longer has their support after he axed their power-sharing agreement. Scottish government sources have admitted they are not assuming the Greens will shift position after Yousaf precipitated a spiralling crisis in his government on Thursday morning. The first minister blindsided colleagues by ripping up the Bute House agreement, brokered by Nicola Sturgeon after the 2021 Holyrood election, which cemented a progressive pro-independence majority in the Scottish parliament. Denouncing Yousaf’s actions as “a spectacular breach of trust”, the Scottish Green co-leader Lorna Slater told BBC Scotland’s Sunday Show: “We will vote in support of a vote of no confidence against Humza Yousaf and I cannot imagine anything at this point that would change that position.” On Friday Yousaf said he would not resign as first minister and vowed to win the vote, brought by the Scottish Conservatives and likely to be debated on Wednesday or Thursday – although he would not rule out an early Holyrood election. Slater told the BBC: “This was a spectacular breach of trust, from on Tuesday saying the Bute House agreement was worth its weight in gold to stopping it unilaterally on Thursday.” Asked whether the Scottish Green MSPs would consider abstaining if Yousaf went to them “on bended knee”, Slater dismissed that option too. “The Bute House agreement was based on mutual trust and respect,” she said. “Humza Yousaf himself has broken that and he needs to face the consequences.” Slater would not be drawn on how the party would vote in a second no confidence vote against the entire Scottish government, brought by Scottish Labour, which would require the first minister and his ministers to resign if successful. Elsewhere on Sunday morning, senior Scottish National party figures attempted to calm the row, with the party’s former Westminster leader Ian Blackford using an appearance on BBC One’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg show to apologise to the Greens for the way the dissolution was handled and urging them to support the first minister. Michelle Thomson, the MSP who ran the SNP leadership campaign for Kate Forbes, who lost narrowly to Yousaf last March and has been critical of many of the Green-influenced policies, expressed regret at the manner in which the partnership ended. While acknowledging it would be “difficult” if Yousaf lost the confidence vote, which, according to Holyrood rules, is non-binding, she told BBC Radio Scotland that “everybody in the SNP is rooting strongly for [Yousaf] and I am confident he is doing everything he can to bring others onside”. Sources close to the first minister said he would continue to reach out to the Greens, as he was doing with all parties, but admitted they were not assuming the Greens would change their minds by the time of the vote. With the SNP two votes short of a majority at Holyrood, this leaves Yousaf dependent on the vote of the former SNP minister Ash Regan, who defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party last October in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender recognition reform and lack of progress on independence. This led the Scottish Conservative leader, Douglas Ross, to declare Yousaf’s premiership “finished”. Ross told the Sunday Show: “Even if he survives on a tied vote with the presiding officer voting for the status quo, that is not holding the confidence of the entire Scottish parliament.” Speaking to Kuenssberg, Salmond appeared to pull back from Sunday newspaper reports that he was demanding an electoral pact between Alba and the SNP, after Scottish government sources rejected it overnight as a “fantasy”. Salmond said Regan, his only MSP, was in a “highly influential position” and would be meeting Yousaf in the coming days to discuss “how we can re-emphasise independence as the priority of the Scottish government … how we can move away from the identity agenda that has taken up so much bandwidth … and also how we can return to the people’s agenda of education, health, housing, and above all jobs and industry.” Explore more on these topics Humza Yousaf Scottish National party (SNP) Scottish politics Green party Scotland news Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf’s leadership hangs by a thread as he approaches a confidence vote this week, with the Scottish Greens remaining unequivocal that he no longer has their support after he axed their power-sharing agreement. Scottish government sources have admitted they are not assuming the Greens will shift position after Yousaf precipitated a spiralling crisis in his government on Thursday morning. The first minister blindsided colleagues by ripping up the Bute House agreement, brokered by Nicola Sturgeon after the 2021 Holyrood election, which cemented a progressive pro-independence majority in the Scottish parliament. Denouncing Yousaf’s actions as “a spectacular breach of trust”, the Scottish Green co-leader Lorna Slater told BBC Scotland’s Sunday Show: “We will vote in support of a vote of no confidence against Humza Yousaf and I cannot imagine anything at this point that would change that position.” On Friday Yousaf said he would not resign as first minister and vowed to win the vote, brought by the Scottish Conservatives and likely to be debated on Wednesday or Thursday – although he would not rule out an early Holyrood election. Slater told the BBC: “This was a spectacular breach of trust, from on Tuesday saying the Bute House agreement was worth its weight in gold to stopping it unilaterally on Thursday.” Asked whether the Scottish Green MSPs would consider abstaining if Yousaf went to them “on bended knee”, Slater dismissed that option too. “The Bute House agreement was based on mutual trust and respect,” she said. “Humza Yousaf himself has broken that and he needs to face the consequences.” Slater would not be drawn on how the party would vote in a second no confidence vote against the entire Scottish government, brought by Scottish Labour, which would require the first minister and his ministers to resign if successful. Elsewhere on Sunday morning, senior Scottish National party figures attempted to calm the row, with the party’s former Westminster leader Ian Blackford using an appearance on BBC One’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg show to apologise to the Greens for the way the dissolution was handled and urging them to support the first minister. Michelle Thomson, the MSP who ran the SNP leadership campaign for Kate Forbes, who lost narrowly to Yousaf last March and has been critical of many of the Green-influenced policies, expressed regret at the manner in which the partnership ended. While acknowledging it would be “difficult” if Yousaf lost the confidence vote, which, according to Holyrood rules, is non-binding, she told BBC Radio Scotland that “everybody in the SNP is rooting strongly for [Yousaf] and I am confident he is doing everything he can to bring others onside”. Sources close to the first minister said he would continue to reach out to the Greens, as he was doing with all parties, but admitted they were not assuming the Greens would change their minds by the time of the vote. With the SNP two votes short of a majority at Holyrood, this leaves Yousaf dependent on the vote of the former SNP minister Ash Regan, who defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party last October in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender recognition reform and lack of progress on independence. This led the Scottish Conservative leader, Douglas Ross, to declare Yousaf’s premiership “finished”. Ross told the Sunday Show: “Even if he survives on a tied vote with the presiding officer voting for the status quo, that is not holding the confidence of the entire Scottish parliament.” Speaking to Kuenssberg, Salmond appeared to pull back from Sunday newspaper reports that he was demanding an electoral pact between Alba and the SNP, after Scottish government sources rejected it overnight as a “fantasy”. Salmond said Regan, his only MSP, was in a “highly influential position” and would be meeting Yousaf in the coming days to discuss “how we can re-emphasise independence as the priority of the Scottish government … how we can move away from the identity agenda that has taken up so much bandwidth … and also how we can return to the people’s agenda of education, health, housing, and above all jobs and industry.” Humza Yousaf’s leadership hangs by a thread as he approaches a confidence vote this week, with the Scottish Greens remaining unequivocal that he no longer has their support after he axed their power-sharing agreement. Scottish government sources have admitted they are not assuming the Greens will shift position after Yousaf precipitated a spiralling crisis in his government on Thursday morning. The first minister blindsided colleagues by ripping up the Bute House agreement, brokered by Nicola Sturgeon after the 2021 Holyrood election, which cemented a progressive pro-independence majority in the Scottish parliament. Denouncing Yousaf’s actions as “a spectacular breach of trust”, the Scottish Green co-leader Lorna Slater told BBC Scotland’s Sunday Show: “We will vote in support of a vote of no confidence against Humza Yousaf and I cannot imagine anything at this point that would change that position.” On Friday Yousaf said he would not resign as first minister and vowed to win the vote, brought by the Scottish Conservatives and likely to be debated on Wednesday or Thursday – although he would not rule out an early Holyrood election. Slater told the BBC: “This was a spectacular breach of trust, from on Tuesday saying the Bute House agreement was worth its weight in gold to stopping it unilaterally on Thursday.” Asked whether the Scottish Green MSPs would consider abstaining if Yousaf went to them “on bended knee”, Slater dismissed that option too. “The Bute House agreement was based on mutual trust and respect,” she said. “Humza Yousaf himself has broken that and he needs to face the consequences.” Slater would not be drawn on how the party would vote in a second no confidence vote against the entire Scottish government, brought by Scottish Labour, which would require the first minister and his ministers to resign if successful. Elsewhere on Sunday morning, senior Scottish National party figures attempted to calm the row, with the party’s former Westminster leader Ian Blackford using an appearance on BBC One’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg show to apologise to the Greens for the way the dissolution was handled and urging them to support the first minister. Michelle Thomson, the MSP who ran the SNP leadership campaign for Kate Forbes, who lost narrowly to Yousaf last March and has been critical of many of the Green-influenced policies, expressed regret at the manner in which the partnership ended. While acknowledging it would be “difficult” if Yousaf lost the confidence vote, which, according to Holyrood rules, is non-binding, she told BBC Radio Scotland that “everybody in the SNP is rooting strongly for [Yousaf] and I am confident he is doing everything he can to bring others onside”. Sources close to the first minister said he would continue to reach out to the Greens, as he was doing with all parties, but admitted they were not assuming the Greens would change their minds by the time of the vote. With the SNP two votes short of a majority at Holyrood, this leaves Yousaf dependent on the vote of the former SNP minister Ash Regan, who defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party last October in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender recognition reform and lack of progress on independence. This led the Scottish Conservative leader, Douglas Ross, to declare Yousaf’s premiership “finished”. Ross told the Sunday Show: “Even if he survives on a tied vote with the presiding officer voting for the status quo, that is not holding the confidence of the entire Scottish parliament.” Speaking to Kuenssberg, Salmond appeared to pull back from Sunday newspaper reports that he was demanding an electoral pact between Alba and the SNP, after Scottish government sources rejected it overnight as a “fantasy”. Salmond said Regan, his only MSP, was in a “highly influential position” and would be meeting Yousaf in the coming days to discuss “how we can re-emphasise independence as the priority of the Scottish government … how we can move away from the identity agenda that has taken up so much bandwidth … and also how we can return to the people’s agenda of education, health, housing, and above all jobs and industry.” Humza Yousaf’s leadership hangs by a thread as he approaches a confidence vote this week, with the Scottish Greens remaining unequivocal that he no longer has their support after he axed their power-sharing agreement. Scottish government sources have admitted they are not assuming the Greens will shift position after Yousaf precipitated a spiralling crisis in his government on Thursday morning. The first minister blindsided colleagues by ripping up the Bute House agreement, brokered by Nicola Sturgeon after the 2021 Holyrood election, which cemented a progressive pro-independence majority in the Scottish parliament. Denouncing Yousaf’s actions as “a spectacular breach of trust”, the Scottish Green co-leader Lorna Slater told BBC Scotland’s Sunday Show: “We will vote in support of a vote of no confidence against Humza Yousaf and I cannot imagine anything at this point that would change that position.” On Friday Yousaf said he would not resign as first minister and vowed to win the vote, brought by the Scottish Conservatives and likely to be debated on Wednesday or Thursday – although he would not rule out an early Holyrood election. Slater told the BBC: “This was a spectacular breach of trust, from on Tuesday saying the Bute House agreement was worth its weight in gold to stopping it unilaterally on Thursday.” Asked whether the Scottish Green MSPs would consider abstaining if Yousaf went to them “on bended knee”, Slater dismissed that option too. “The Bute House agreement was based on mutual trust and respect,” she said. “Humza Yousaf himself has broken that and he needs to face the consequences.” Slater would not be drawn on how the party would vote in a second no confidence vote against the entire Scottish government, brought by Scottish Labour, which would require the first minister and his ministers to resign if successful. Elsewhere on Sunday morning, senior Scottish National party figures attempted to calm the row, with the party’s former Westminster leader Ian Blackford using an appearance on BBC One’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg show to apologise to the Greens for the way the dissolution was handled and urging them to support the first minister. Michelle Thomson, the MSP who ran the SNP leadership campaign for Kate Forbes, who lost narrowly to Yousaf last March and has been critical of many of the Green-influenced policies, expressed regret at the manner in which the partnership ended. While acknowledging it would be “difficult” if Yousaf lost the confidence vote, which, according to Holyrood rules, is non-binding, she told BBC Radio Scotland that “everybody in the SNP is rooting strongly for [Yousaf] and I am confident he is doing everything he can to bring others onside”. Sources close to the first minister said he would continue to reach out to the Greens, as he was doing with all parties, but admitted they were not assuming the Greens would change their minds by the time of the vote. With the SNP two votes short of a majority at Holyrood, this leaves Yousaf dependent on the vote of the former SNP minister Ash Regan, who defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party last October in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender recognition reform and lack of progress on independence. This led the Scottish Conservative leader, Douglas Ross, to declare Yousaf’s premiership “finished”. Ross told the Sunday Show: “Even if he survives on a tied vote with the presiding officer voting for the status quo, that is not holding the confidence of the entire Scottish parliament.” Speaking to Kuenssberg, Salmond appeared to pull back from Sunday newspaper reports that he was demanding an electoral pact between Alba and the SNP, after Scottish government sources rejected it overnight as a “fantasy”. Salmond said Regan, his only MSP, was in a “highly influential position” and would be meeting Yousaf in the coming days to discuss “how we can re-emphasise independence as the priority of the Scottish government … how we can move away from the identity agenda that has taken up so much bandwidth … and also how we can return to the people’s agenda of education, health, housing, and above all jobs and industry.” Explore more on these topics Humza Yousaf Scottish National party (SNP) Scottish politics Green party Scotland news Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf Scottish National party (SNP) Scottish politics Green party Scotland news |
Hundreds of Heathrow Border Force officers to start four-day strike
The Public and Commercial Services union says plans to introduce new rosters would force 250 people out of their jobs at passport control. Photograph: Fabrizio Bensch/Reuters View image in fullscreen The Public and Commercial Services union says plans to introduce new rosters would force 250 people out of their jobs at passport control. Photograph: Fabrizio Bensch/Reuters This article is more than 1 year old Hundreds of Heathrow Border Force officers to start four-day strike This article is more than 1 year old More than 300 workers will take action over plans to introduce rosters that could force 250 of them out of jobs Hundreds of Border Force officers at Heathrow airport will begin a four-day strike on Monday in a dispute over working conditions. The Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) said more than 300 of its members will walk out from 5am on Monday to 7am on Friday. The union said the workers, based at Heathrow terminals two, three, four and five, are protesting against plans to introduce rosters they say would force about 250 of them out of their jobs at passport control. The union’s general secretary, Fran Heathcote, said: “It’s disappointing that despite talks last week, the Home Office is not prepared to grant any flexibility to their new roster. “None of our dedicated and highly experienced members in the Border Force want to take strike action but the way they’ve been treated by their employer leaves them with no option. “The Home Office still have time to prevent tomorrow’s strike if they agree to abandon this unworkable new system.” A Home Office spokesperson said: “We are disappointed with the union’s decision to strike but remain open to discussing a resolution with the PCS. “The changes we are implementing will bring the working arrangements for Border Force Heathrow staff in line with the way staff work at all other major ports, provide them with more certainty on working patterns and improve the service to the travelling public. “We have robust plans in place to minimise disruption where possible, but we urge passengers to check the latest advice from operators before they travel.” The Home Office has not applied to use a recently passed law aimed at guaranteeing a minimum level of service during strikes. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Lisa Webb, Which? consumer law expert, said: “Travellers will understandably be concerned about upcoming strikes and what this could mean for them. If you are travelling in or out of Heathrow on these days, be prepared for longer queues and delays. “Travellers should also ensure they have comprehensive travel insurance from the date they book their trip and check the policy carefully: not all will cover them in the event of strikes by airline or airport staff, for example.” Explore more on these topics Heathrow airport Transport Air transport Home Office news Share Reuse this content The Public and Commercial Services union says plans to introduce new rosters would force 250 people out of their jobs at passport control. Photograph: Fabrizio Bensch/Reuters View image in fullscreen The Public and Commercial Services union says plans to introduce new rosters would force 250 people out of their jobs at passport control. Photograph: Fabrizio Bensch/Reuters This article is more than 1 year old Hundreds of Heathrow Border Force officers to start four-day strike This article is more than 1 year old More than 300 workers will take action over plans to introduce rosters that could force 250 of them out of jobs Hundreds of Border Force officers at Heathrow airport will begin a four-day strike on Monday in a dispute over working conditions. The Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) said more than 300 of its members will walk out from 5am on Monday to 7am on Friday. The union said the workers, based at Heathrow terminals two, three, four and five, are protesting against plans to introduce rosters they say would force about 250 of them out of their jobs at passport control. The union’s general secretary, Fran Heathcote, said: “It’s disappointing that despite talks last week, the Home Office is not prepared to grant any flexibility to their new roster. “None of our dedicated and highly experienced members in the Border Force want to take strike action but the way they’ve been treated by their employer leaves them with no option. “The Home Office still have time to prevent tomorrow’s strike if they agree to abandon this unworkable new system.” A Home Office spokesperson said: “We are disappointed with the union’s decision to strike but remain open to discussing a resolution with the PCS. “The changes we are implementing will bring the working arrangements for Border Force Heathrow staff in line with the way staff work at all other major ports, provide them with more certainty on working patterns and improve the service to the travelling public. “We have robust plans in place to minimise disruption where possible, but we urge passengers to check the latest advice from operators before they travel.” The Home Office has not applied to use a recently passed law aimed at guaranteeing a minimum level of service during strikes. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Lisa Webb, Which? consumer law expert, said: “Travellers will understandably be concerned about upcoming strikes and what this could mean for them. If you are travelling in or out of Heathrow on these days, be prepared for longer queues and delays. “Travellers should also ensure they have comprehensive travel insurance from the date they book their trip and check the policy carefully: not all will cover them in the event of strikes by airline or airport staff, for example.” Explore more on these topics Heathrow airport Transport Air transport Home Office news Share Reuse this content The Public and Commercial Services union says plans to introduce new rosters would force 250 people out of their jobs at passport control. Photograph: Fabrizio Bensch/Reuters View image in fullscreen The Public and Commercial Services union says plans to introduce new rosters would force 250 people out of their jobs at passport control. Photograph: Fabrizio Bensch/Reuters The Public and Commercial Services union says plans to introduce new rosters would force 250 people out of their jobs at passport control. Photograph: Fabrizio Bensch/Reuters View image in fullscreen The Public and Commercial Services union says plans to introduce new rosters would force 250 people out of their jobs at passport control. Photograph: Fabrizio Bensch/Reuters The Public and Commercial Services union says plans to introduce new rosters would force 250 people out of their jobs at passport control. Photograph: Fabrizio Bensch/Reuters View image in fullscreen The Public and Commercial Services union says plans to introduce new rosters would force 250 people out of their jobs at passport control. Photograph: Fabrizio Bensch/Reuters The Public and Commercial Services union says plans to introduce new rosters would force 250 people out of their jobs at passport control. Photograph: Fabrizio Bensch/Reuters View image in fullscreen The Public and Commercial Services union says plans to introduce new rosters would force 250 people out of their jobs at passport control. Photograph: Fabrizio Bensch/Reuters The Public and Commercial Services union says plans to introduce new rosters would force 250 people out of their jobs at passport control. Photograph: Fabrizio Bensch/Reuters The Public and Commercial Services union says plans to introduce new rosters would force 250 people out of their jobs at passport control. Photograph: Fabrizio Bensch/Reuters This article is more than 1 year old Hundreds of Heathrow Border Force officers to start four-day strike This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Hundreds of Heathrow Border Force officers to start four-day strike This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Hundreds of Heathrow Border Force officers to start four-day strike This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old More than 300 workers will take action over plans to introduce rosters that could force 250 of them out of jobs More than 300 workers will take action over plans to introduce rosters that could force 250 of them out of jobs More than 300 workers will take action over plans to introduce rosters that could force 250 of them out of jobs Hundreds of Border Force officers at Heathrow airport will begin a four-day strike on Monday in a dispute over working conditions. The Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) said more than 300 of its members will walk out from 5am on Monday to 7am on Friday. The union said the workers, based at Heathrow terminals two, three, four and five, are protesting against plans to introduce rosters they say would force about 250 of them out of their jobs at passport control. The union’s general secretary, Fran Heathcote, said: “It’s disappointing that despite talks last week, the Home Office is not prepared to grant any flexibility to their new roster. “None of our dedicated and highly experienced members in the Border Force want to take strike action but the way they’ve been treated by their employer leaves them with no option. “The Home Office still have time to prevent tomorrow’s strike if they agree to abandon this unworkable new system.” A Home Office spokesperson said: “We are disappointed with the union’s decision to strike but remain open to discussing a resolution with the PCS. “The changes we are implementing will bring the working arrangements for Border Force Heathrow staff in line with the way staff work at all other major ports, provide them with more certainty on working patterns and improve the service to the travelling public. “We have robust plans in place to minimise disruption where possible, but we urge passengers to check the latest advice from operators before they travel.” The Home Office has not applied to use a recently passed law aimed at guaranteeing a minimum level of service during strikes. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Lisa Webb, Which? consumer law expert, said: “Travellers will understandably be concerned about upcoming strikes and what this could mean for them. If you are travelling in or out of Heathrow on these days, be prepared for longer queues and delays. “Travellers should also ensure they have comprehensive travel insurance from the date they book their trip and check the policy carefully: not all will cover them in the event of strikes by airline or airport staff, for example.” Explore more on these topics Heathrow airport Transport Air transport Home Office news Share Reuse this content Hundreds of Border Force officers at Heathrow airport will begin a four-day strike on Monday in a dispute over working conditions. The Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) said more than 300 of its members will walk out from 5am on Monday to 7am on Friday. The union said the workers, based at Heathrow terminals two, three, four and five, are protesting against plans to introduce rosters they say would force about 250 of them out of their jobs at passport control. The union’s general secretary, Fran Heathcote, said: “It’s disappointing that despite talks last week, the Home Office is not prepared to grant any flexibility to their new roster. “None of our dedicated and highly experienced members in the Border Force want to take strike action but the way they’ve been treated by their employer leaves them with no option. “The Home Office still have time to prevent tomorrow’s strike if they agree to abandon this unworkable new system.” A Home Office spokesperson said: “We are disappointed with the union’s decision to strike but remain open to discussing a resolution with the PCS. “The changes we are implementing will bring the working arrangements for Border Force Heathrow staff in line with the way staff work at all other major ports, provide them with more certainty on working patterns and improve the service to the travelling public. “We have robust plans in place to minimise disruption where possible, but we urge passengers to check the latest advice from operators before they travel.” The Home Office has not applied to use a recently passed law aimed at guaranteeing a minimum level of service during strikes. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Lisa Webb, Which? consumer law expert, said: “Travellers will understandably be concerned about upcoming strikes and what this could mean for them. If you are travelling in or out of Heathrow on these days, be prepared for longer queues and delays. “Travellers should also ensure they have comprehensive travel insurance from the date they book their trip and check the policy carefully: not all will cover them in the event of strikes by airline or airport staff, for example.” Explore more on these topics Heathrow airport Transport Air transport Home Office news Share Reuse this content Hundreds of Border Force officers at Heathrow airport will begin a four-day strike on Monday in a dispute over working conditions. The Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) said more than 300 of its members will walk out from 5am on Monday to 7am on Friday. The union said the workers, based at Heathrow terminals two, three, four and five, are protesting against plans to introduce rosters they say would force about 250 of them out of their jobs at passport control. The union’s general secretary, Fran Heathcote, said: “It’s disappointing that despite talks last week, the Home Office is not prepared to grant any flexibility to their new roster. “None of our dedicated and highly experienced members in the Border Force want to take strike action but the way they’ve been treated by their employer leaves them with no option. “The Home Office still have time to prevent tomorrow’s strike if they agree to abandon this unworkable new system.” A Home Office spokesperson said: “We are disappointed with the union’s decision to strike but remain open to discussing a resolution with the PCS. “The changes we are implementing will bring the working arrangements for Border Force Heathrow staff in line with the way staff work at all other major ports, provide them with more certainty on working patterns and improve the service to the travelling public. “We have robust plans in place to minimise disruption where possible, but we urge passengers to check the latest advice from operators before they travel.” The Home Office has not applied to use a recently passed law aimed at guaranteeing a minimum level of service during strikes. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Lisa Webb, Which? consumer law expert, said: “Travellers will understandably be concerned about upcoming strikes and what this could mean for them. If you are travelling in or out of Heathrow on these days, be prepared for longer queues and delays. “Travellers should also ensure they have comprehensive travel insurance from the date they book their trip and check the policy carefully: not all will cover them in the event of strikes by airline or airport staff, for example.” Hundreds of Border Force officers at Heathrow airport will begin a four-day strike on Monday in a dispute over working conditions. The Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) said more than 300 of its members will walk out from 5am on Monday to 7am on Friday. The union said the workers, based at Heathrow terminals two, three, four and five, are protesting against plans to introduce rosters they say would force about 250 of them out of their jobs at passport control. The union’s general secretary, Fran Heathcote, said: “It’s disappointing that despite talks last week, the Home Office is not prepared to grant any flexibility to their new roster. “None of our dedicated and highly experienced members in the Border Force want to take strike action but the way they’ve been treated by their employer leaves them with no option. “The Home Office still have time to prevent tomorrow’s strike if they agree to abandon this unworkable new system.” A Home Office spokesperson said: “We are disappointed with the union’s decision to strike but remain open to discussing a resolution with the PCS. “The changes we are implementing will bring the working arrangements for Border Force Heathrow staff in line with the way staff work at all other major ports, provide them with more certainty on working patterns and improve the service to the travelling public. “We have robust plans in place to minimise disruption where possible, but we urge passengers to check the latest advice from operators before they travel.” The Home Office has not applied to use a recently passed law aimed at guaranteeing a minimum level of service during strikes. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Lisa Webb, Which? consumer law expert, said: “Travellers will understandably be concerned about upcoming strikes and what this could mean for them. If you are travelling in or out of Heathrow on these days, be prepared for longer queues and delays. “Travellers should also ensure they have comprehensive travel insurance from the date they book their trip and check the policy carefully: not all will cover them in the event of strikes by airline or airport staff, for example.” Hundreds of Border Force officers at Heathrow airport will begin a four-day strike on Monday in a dispute over working conditions. The Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) said more than 300 of its members will walk out from 5am on Monday to 7am on Friday. The union said the workers, based at Heathrow terminals two, three, four and five, are protesting against plans to introduce rosters they say would force about 250 of them out of their jobs at passport control. The union’s general secretary, Fran Heathcote, said: “It’s disappointing that despite talks last week, the Home Office is not prepared to grant any flexibility to their new roster. “None of our dedicated and highly experienced members in the Border Force want to take strike action but the way they’ve been treated by their employer leaves them with no option. “The Home Office still have time to prevent tomorrow’s strike if they agree to abandon this unworkable new system.” A Home Office spokesperson said: “We are disappointed with the union’s decision to strike but remain open to discussing a resolution with the PCS. “The changes we are implementing will bring the working arrangements for Border Force Heathrow staff in line with the way staff work at all other major ports, provide them with more certainty on working patterns and improve the service to the travelling public. “We have robust plans in place to minimise disruption where possible, but we urge passengers to check the latest advice from operators before they travel.” The Home Office has not applied to use a recently passed law aimed at guaranteeing a minimum level of service during strikes. Lisa Webb, Which? consumer law expert, said: “Travellers will understandably be concerned about upcoming strikes and what this could mean for them. If you are travelling in or out of Heathrow on these days, be prepared for longer queues and delays. “Travellers should also ensure they have comprehensive travel insurance from the date they book their trip and check the policy carefully: not all will cover them in the event of strikes by airline or airport staff, for example.” Explore more on these topics Heathrow airport Transport Air transport Home Office news Share Reuse this content Heathrow airport Transport Air transport Home Office news |
One word to describe Ofsted and the government
‘Perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance?’ Photograph: Daisy Images/Alamy View image in fullscreen ‘Perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance?’ Photograph: Daisy Images/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old Letters One word to describe Ofsted and the government This article is more than 1 year old Readers respond to the news that single-word ratings for schools are to be retained How depressing to read that the government sees “significant benefits” with Ofsted’s four grades in that they provide “a succinct and accessible summary for parents” ( Ruth Perry family furious as Ofsted single-word ratings are retained, 25 April ). Clearly my 50-plus years of involvement in the education service has not led to a population capable of dealing with more than one-word summaries – hence my depression. Even greater is my outrage that it appears of lesser relevance to the government that such summaries may not be accurate or complete. It is time for the educational system to rise up in protest at this insensitivity. Ken Wales Preston As the saying goes, to label is to libel. Even when inspectors’ opinions are well-grounded, it is as inappropriate for Ofsted to libel schools with one-word judgments, as it is for teachers to label and libel pupils, especially by telling those who struggle that they need improvement or, worse still, are simply inadequate. Anthony Lawton Market Harborough, Leicestershire What’s good enough for schools is good enough for the government, so perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance? Mine has five letters beginning with “sh” and ending with “te” but I’m sure other more articulate readers can think of better ones. Ed Griffiths Cambridge If party manifestos were reduced to a single word, what would we have? Tories: incompetent. Labour: inspirational. Liberal Democrats: ineffectual. But then I’m biased. Hugh Levinson London Explore more on these topics Education policy Ofsted Exams Conservatives Schools Labour Liberal Democrats letters Share Reuse this content ‘Perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance?’ Photograph: Daisy Images/Alamy View image in fullscreen ‘Perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance?’ Photograph: Daisy Images/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old Letters One word to describe Ofsted and the government This article is more than 1 year old Readers respond to the news that single-word ratings for schools are to be retained How depressing to read that the government sees “significant benefits” with Ofsted’s four grades in that they provide “a succinct and accessible summary for parents” ( Ruth Perry family furious as Ofsted single-word ratings are retained, 25 April ). Clearly my 50-plus years of involvement in the education service has not led to a population capable of dealing with more than one-word summaries – hence my depression. Even greater is my outrage that it appears of lesser relevance to the government that such summaries may not be accurate or complete. It is time for the educational system to rise up in protest at this insensitivity. Ken Wales Preston As the saying goes, to label is to libel. Even when inspectors’ opinions are well-grounded, it is as inappropriate for Ofsted to libel schools with one-word judgments, as it is for teachers to label and libel pupils, especially by telling those who struggle that they need improvement or, worse still, are simply inadequate. Anthony Lawton Market Harborough, Leicestershire What’s good enough for schools is good enough for the government, so perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance? Mine has five letters beginning with “sh” and ending with “te” but I’m sure other more articulate readers can think of better ones. Ed Griffiths Cambridge If party manifestos were reduced to a single word, what would we have? Tories: incompetent. Labour: inspirational. Liberal Democrats: ineffectual. But then I’m biased. Hugh Levinson London Explore more on these topics Education policy Ofsted Exams Conservatives Schools Labour Liberal Democrats letters Share Reuse this content ‘Perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance?’ Photograph: Daisy Images/Alamy View image in fullscreen ‘Perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance?’ Photograph: Daisy Images/Alamy ‘Perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance?’ Photograph: Daisy Images/Alamy View image in fullscreen ‘Perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance?’ Photograph: Daisy Images/Alamy ‘Perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance?’ Photograph: Daisy Images/Alamy View image in fullscreen ‘Perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance?’ Photograph: Daisy Images/Alamy ‘Perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance?’ Photograph: Daisy Images/Alamy View image in fullscreen ‘Perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance?’ Photograph: Daisy Images/Alamy ‘Perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance?’ Photograph: Daisy Images/Alamy ‘Perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance?’ Photograph: Daisy Images/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old Letters One word to describe Ofsted and the government This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Letters One word to describe Ofsted and the government This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Letters One word to describe Ofsted and the government This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Letters One word to describe Ofsted and the government This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Readers respond to the news that single-word ratings for schools are to be retained Readers respond to the news that single-word ratings for schools are to be retained Readers respond to the news that single-word ratings for schools are to be retained How depressing to read that the government sees “significant benefits” with Ofsted’s four grades in that they provide “a succinct and accessible summary for parents” ( Ruth Perry family furious as Ofsted single-word ratings are retained, 25 April ). Clearly my 50-plus years of involvement in the education service has not led to a population capable of dealing with more than one-word summaries – hence my depression. Even greater is my outrage that it appears of lesser relevance to the government that such summaries may not be accurate or complete. It is time for the educational system to rise up in protest at this insensitivity. Ken Wales Preston As the saying goes, to label is to libel. Even when inspectors’ opinions are well-grounded, it is as inappropriate for Ofsted to libel schools with one-word judgments, as it is for teachers to label and libel pupils, especially by telling those who struggle that they need improvement or, worse still, are simply inadequate. Anthony Lawton Market Harborough, Leicestershire What’s good enough for schools is good enough for the government, so perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance? Mine has five letters beginning with “sh” and ending with “te” but I’m sure other more articulate readers can think of better ones. Ed Griffiths Cambridge If party manifestos were reduced to a single word, what would we have? Tories: incompetent. Labour: inspirational. Liberal Democrats: ineffectual. But then I’m biased. Hugh Levinson London Explore more on these topics Education policy Ofsted Exams Conservatives Schools Labour Liberal Democrats letters Share Reuse this content How depressing to read that the government sees “significant benefits” with Ofsted’s four grades in that they provide “a succinct and accessible summary for parents” ( Ruth Perry family furious as Ofsted single-word ratings are retained, 25 April ). Clearly my 50-plus years of involvement in the education service has not led to a population capable of dealing with more than one-word summaries – hence my depression. Even greater is my outrage that it appears of lesser relevance to the government that such summaries may not be accurate or complete. It is time for the educational system to rise up in protest at this insensitivity. Ken Wales Preston As the saying goes, to label is to libel. Even when inspectors’ opinions are well-grounded, it is as inappropriate for Ofsted to libel schools with one-word judgments, as it is for teachers to label and libel pupils, especially by telling those who struggle that they need improvement or, worse still, are simply inadequate. Anthony Lawton Market Harborough, Leicestershire What’s good enough for schools is good enough for the government, so perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance? Mine has five letters beginning with “sh” and ending with “te” but I’m sure other more articulate readers can think of better ones. Ed Griffiths Cambridge If party manifestos were reduced to a single word, what would we have? Tories: incompetent. Labour: inspirational. Liberal Democrats: ineffectual. But then I’m biased. Hugh Levinson London Explore more on these topics Education policy Ofsted Exams Conservatives Schools Labour Liberal Democrats letters Share Reuse this content How depressing to read that the government sees “significant benefits” with Ofsted’s four grades in that they provide “a succinct and accessible summary for parents” ( Ruth Perry family furious as Ofsted single-word ratings are retained, 25 April ). Clearly my 50-plus years of involvement in the education service has not led to a population capable of dealing with more than one-word summaries – hence my depression. Even greater is my outrage that it appears of lesser relevance to the government that such summaries may not be accurate or complete. It is time for the educational system to rise up in protest at this insensitivity. Ken Wales Preston As the saying goes, to label is to libel. Even when inspectors’ opinions are well-grounded, it is as inappropriate for Ofsted to libel schools with one-word judgments, as it is for teachers to label and libel pupils, especially by telling those who struggle that they need improvement or, worse still, are simply inadequate. Anthony Lawton Market Harborough, Leicestershire What’s good enough for schools is good enough for the government, so perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance? Mine has five letters beginning with “sh” and ending with “te” but I’m sure other more articulate readers can think of better ones. Ed Griffiths Cambridge If party manifestos were reduced to a single word, what would we have? Tories: incompetent. Labour: inspirational. Liberal Democrats: ineffectual. But then I’m biased. Hugh Levinson London Explore more on these topics Education policy Ofsted Exams Conservatives Schools Labour Liberal Democrats letters Share Reuse this content How depressing to read that the government sees “significant benefits” with Ofsted’s four grades in that they provide “a succinct and accessible summary for parents” ( Ruth Perry family furious as Ofsted single-word ratings are retained, 25 April ). Clearly my 50-plus years of involvement in the education service has not led to a population capable of dealing with more than one-word summaries – hence my depression. Even greater is my outrage that it appears of lesser relevance to the government that such summaries may not be accurate or complete. It is time for the educational system to rise up in protest at this insensitivity. Ken Wales Preston As the saying goes, to label is to libel. Even when inspectors’ opinions are well-grounded, it is as inappropriate for Ofsted to libel schools with one-word judgments, as it is for teachers to label and libel pupils, especially by telling those who struggle that they need improvement or, worse still, are simply inadequate. Anthony Lawton Market Harborough, Leicestershire What’s good enough for schools is good enough for the government, so perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance? Mine has five letters beginning with “sh” and ending with “te” but I’m sure other more articulate readers can think of better ones. Ed Griffiths Cambridge If party manifestos were reduced to a single word, what would we have? Tories: incompetent. Labour: inspirational. Liberal Democrats: ineffectual. But then I’m biased. Hugh Levinson London How depressing to read that the government sees “significant benefits” with Ofsted’s four grades in that they provide “a succinct and accessible summary for parents” ( Ruth Perry family furious as Ofsted single-word ratings are retained, 25 April ). Clearly my 50-plus years of involvement in the education service has not led to a population capable of dealing with more than one-word summaries – hence my depression. Even greater is my outrage that it appears of lesser relevance to the government that such summaries may not be accurate or complete. It is time for the educational system to rise up in protest at this insensitivity. Ken Wales Preston As the saying goes, to label is to libel. Even when inspectors’ opinions are well-grounded, it is as inappropriate for Ofsted to libel schools with one-word judgments, as it is for teachers to label and libel pupils, especially by telling those who struggle that they need improvement or, worse still, are simply inadequate. Anthony Lawton Market Harborough, Leicestershire What’s good enough for schools is good enough for the government, so perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance? Mine has five letters beginning with “sh” and ending with “te” but I’m sure other more articulate readers can think of better ones. Ed Griffiths Cambridge If party manifestos were reduced to a single word, what would we have? Tories: incompetent. Labour: inspirational. Liberal Democrats: ineffectual. But then I’m biased. Hugh Levinson London How depressing to read that the government sees “significant benefits” with Ofsted’s four grades in that they provide “a succinct and accessible summary for parents” ( Ruth Perry family furious as Ofsted single-word ratings are retained, 25 April ). Clearly my 50-plus years of involvement in the education service has not led to a population capable of dealing with more than one-word summaries – hence my depression. Even greater is my outrage that it appears of lesser relevance to the government that such summaries may not be accurate or complete. It is time for the educational system to rise up in protest at this insensitivity. Ken Wales Preston As the saying goes, to label is to libel. Even when inspectors’ opinions are well-grounded, it is as inappropriate for Ofsted to libel schools with one-word judgments, as it is for teachers to label and libel pupils, especially by telling those who struggle that they need improvement or, worse still, are simply inadequate. Anthony Lawton Market Harborough, Leicestershire What’s good enough for schools is good enough for the government, so perhaps you could invite readers to send in their one‑word summaries of the current administration’s performance? Mine has five letters beginning with “sh” and ending with “te” but I’m sure other more articulate readers can think of better ones. Ed Griffiths Cambridge If party manifestos were reduced to a single word, what would we have? Tories: incompetent. Labour: inspirational. Liberal Democrats: ineffectual. But then I’m biased. Hugh Levinson London Explore more on these topics Education policy Ofsted Exams Conservatives Schools Labour Liberal Democrats letters Share Reuse this content Education policy Ofsted Exams Conservatives Schools Labour Liberal Democrats letters |
Humza Yousaf inherited a deeply fractured SNP – as will his successor
Humza Yousaf announced his resignation as SNP leader and first minister on Monday after just over a year in post. Photograph: Murdo MacLeod/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf announced his resignation as SNP leader and first minister on Monday after just over a year in post. Photograph: Murdo MacLeod/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old Analysis Humza Yousaf inherited a deeply fractured SNP – as will his successor This article is more than 1 year old Libby Brooks Previous contest exposed splits on issues such as LGBTQ+ rights and green policy that next leader must tackle When Humza Yousaf was narrowly elected leader of the SNP last March, it was after a bruising leadership contest that exposed profound divisions in the party over LGBTQ+ rights, Westminster’s veto of Holyrood law, and environmental and economic policy. Indeed, it could be said the end of the SNP’s partnership with the Greens, and the downward spiral of chaos that ended with Yousaf’s resignation little over a year later, was telegraphed by the fault lines that emerged back then, setting the scene for the myriad conflicts that Yousaf was forced to manage – and ultimately failed to resolve – as leader. Those fault lines remain just as stark and will demand the new leader’s immediate attention. Just as crucial, in an election year when the SNP is forecast to take heavy losses at the hands of a resurgent Scottish Labour party, is how to communicate that the party is genuinely focused on voters’ concerns as well as rebuilding cross-party trust at Holyrood in minority government. Scottish opinion polls chart since the last general election shows Labour rising in popularity as SNP support dips As one senior SNP MSP puts it: “The litmus test for a new leader will be the continuing fault line in the party on social policy. In a sense, bringing in the Greens masked a bigger issue within the party that now has to be resolved for the SNP to move forward. “Is the party going to remain a broad church that has appeal to middle-class and working-class voters, left and right of centre, bringing together people with a range of views but with the common aim of independence? That’s been entirely possible for a very long time and it’s been a very successful formula.” As support coalesces around John Swinney , what is clear is a desperation for leadership that many feel has been lacking over the past year. Swinney is known as much for his steeliness as for his quiet charm, and enjoys an unassailable familiarity with internal loyalties and fallings out. View image in fullscreen The former deputy first minister John Swinney is a favourite to replace Yousaf. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA “It is genuinely hard to think of anyone else who is strong enough and serious enough,” says one colleague. “Every time he speaks, the whole Holyrood group listens, no matter what faction,” explains another MSP. While activists and elected members believe the party has benefitted from Yousaf’s more inclusive leadership style, in comparison with Sturgeon, there has been an increasing frustration at his desire to be all things to all people. In the earlier days of his tenure, there was sympathy as he battled crises not of his own making – in particular, the ongoing Police Scotland investigation into party finances – but latterly there were repeated complaints about a sense of drift, with the promised big ideas from his leadership platform never materialising. View image in fullscreen Polling on Humza Yousaf, carried out before his resignation. Photograph: YouGov Yousaf faced significant rebellions within his own party. Last October, the former SNP minister Ash Regan defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender recognition policy and lack of progress on independence. In an excruciating irony, she would have had the deciding vote in the motion of confidence in Yousaf. Restive backbenchers grouped around Kate Forbes, who came second to Yousaf in the leadership contest, and outspoken critics such as Fergus Ewing, one of the party’s longest-serving MSPs, who declared Yousaf to be a “doormat” to the Greens as he was suspended for not supporting the Green co-leader Lorna Slater in an earlier vote of confidence. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion There is also a sense that Yousaf’s treatment of the Greens was part of a pattern of making big decisions very quickly with little consultation beyond a small band of advisers. Another being the council tax freeze – his response to the SNP’s crushing defeat by Labour in October’s Rutherglen byelection , which infuriated local authority leaders and appeared to breach commitments in the Bute House agreement to progressive taxation. There is also some anger building among the Holyrood group with the party’s Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn, who returned to Edinburgh last week to advise Yousaf immediately before his crunch meeting with the Greens. Some MSPs blame him for encouraging the first minister to rip up the deal in the brutal manner he did and putting the interests of his MPs – who were concerned that Yousaf’s seeming focus on identity issues was causing problems on the doorstep, when voters wanted to talk about cost of living – ahead of Holyrood. View image in fullscreen The SNP Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA The common view among the Holyrood SNP group is that people are upset about how the Greens were treated but accept it was time to end the agreement, and exasperated with Yousaf for not recognising the consequences, appearing dumbfounded with the Greens’ reaction. The Guardian understands that senior SNP figures other than the first minister reached out to the Greens over the weekend to secure their commitment to abstain at the very least in forthcoming confidence votes as long as Yousaf himself stood down. After Yousaf’s announcement on Monday morning, the Greens confirmed they were “not interested in bringing down the Scottish government”. By then, Yousaf was aware that the numbers for the confidence vote were impossible – the Guardian understands that any deal with Regan, which would in effect deliver power to the Scottish government’s most vicious critic, the former first minister Alex Salmond, would have resulted in a number of his cabinet walking out. Yousaf was clear in his resignation speech that he would not “trade in my values or principles or do deals with whomever simply for retaining power”. Explore more on these topics Scottish National party (SNP) Humza Yousaf Scotland Scottish politics Alba analysis Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf announced his resignation as SNP leader and first minister on Monday after just over a year in post. Photograph: Murdo MacLeod/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf announced his resignation as SNP leader and first minister on Monday after just over a year in post. Photograph: Murdo MacLeod/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old Analysis Humza Yousaf inherited a deeply fractured SNP – as will his successor This article is more than 1 year old Libby Brooks Previous contest exposed splits on issues such as LGBTQ+ rights and green policy that next leader must tackle When Humza Yousaf was narrowly elected leader of the SNP last March, it was after a bruising leadership contest that exposed profound divisions in the party over LGBTQ+ rights, Westminster’s veto of Holyrood law, and environmental and economic policy. Indeed, it could be said the end of the SNP’s partnership with the Greens, and the downward spiral of chaos that ended with Yousaf’s resignation little over a year later, was telegraphed by the fault lines that emerged back then, setting the scene for the myriad conflicts that Yousaf was forced to manage – and ultimately failed to resolve – as leader. Those fault lines remain just as stark and will demand the new leader’s immediate attention. Just as crucial, in an election year when the SNP is forecast to take heavy losses at the hands of a resurgent Scottish Labour party, is how to communicate that the party is genuinely focused on voters’ concerns as well as rebuilding cross-party trust at Holyrood in minority government. Scottish opinion polls chart since the last general election shows Labour rising in popularity as SNP support dips As one senior SNP MSP puts it: “The litmus test for a new leader will be the continuing fault line in the party on social policy. In a sense, bringing in the Greens masked a bigger issue within the party that now has to be resolved for the SNP to move forward. “Is the party going to remain a broad church that has appeal to middle-class and working-class voters, left and right of centre, bringing together people with a range of views but with the common aim of independence? That’s been entirely possible for a very long time and it’s been a very successful formula.” As support coalesces around John Swinney , what is clear is a desperation for leadership that many feel has been lacking over the past year. Swinney is known as much for his steeliness as for his quiet charm, and enjoys an unassailable familiarity with internal loyalties and fallings out. View image in fullscreen The former deputy first minister John Swinney is a favourite to replace Yousaf. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA “It is genuinely hard to think of anyone else who is strong enough and serious enough,” says one colleague. “Every time he speaks, the whole Holyrood group listens, no matter what faction,” explains another MSP. While activists and elected members believe the party has benefitted from Yousaf’s more inclusive leadership style, in comparison with Sturgeon, there has been an increasing frustration at his desire to be all things to all people. In the earlier days of his tenure, there was sympathy as he battled crises not of his own making – in particular, the ongoing Police Scotland investigation into party finances – but latterly there were repeated complaints about a sense of drift, with the promised big ideas from his leadership platform never materialising. View image in fullscreen Polling on Humza Yousaf, carried out before his resignation. Photograph: YouGov Yousaf faced significant rebellions within his own party. Last October, the former SNP minister Ash Regan defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender recognition policy and lack of progress on independence. In an excruciating irony, she would have had the deciding vote in the motion of confidence in Yousaf. Restive backbenchers grouped around Kate Forbes, who came second to Yousaf in the leadership contest, and outspoken critics such as Fergus Ewing, one of the party’s longest-serving MSPs, who declared Yousaf to be a “doormat” to the Greens as he was suspended for not supporting the Green co-leader Lorna Slater in an earlier vote of confidence. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion There is also a sense that Yousaf’s treatment of the Greens was part of a pattern of making big decisions very quickly with little consultation beyond a small band of advisers. Another being the council tax freeze – his response to the SNP’s crushing defeat by Labour in October’s Rutherglen byelection , which infuriated local authority leaders and appeared to breach commitments in the Bute House agreement to progressive taxation. There is also some anger building among the Holyrood group with the party’s Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn, who returned to Edinburgh last week to advise Yousaf immediately before his crunch meeting with the Greens. Some MSPs blame him for encouraging the first minister to rip up the deal in the brutal manner he did and putting the interests of his MPs – who were concerned that Yousaf’s seeming focus on identity issues was causing problems on the doorstep, when voters wanted to talk about cost of living – ahead of Holyrood. View image in fullscreen The SNP Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA The common view among the Holyrood SNP group is that people are upset about how the Greens were treated but accept it was time to end the agreement, and exasperated with Yousaf for not recognising the consequences, appearing dumbfounded with the Greens’ reaction. The Guardian understands that senior SNP figures other than the first minister reached out to the Greens over the weekend to secure their commitment to abstain at the very least in forthcoming confidence votes as long as Yousaf himself stood down. After Yousaf’s announcement on Monday morning, the Greens confirmed they were “not interested in bringing down the Scottish government”. By then, Yousaf was aware that the numbers for the confidence vote were impossible – the Guardian understands that any deal with Regan, which would in effect deliver power to the Scottish government’s most vicious critic, the former first minister Alex Salmond, would have resulted in a number of his cabinet walking out. Yousaf was clear in his resignation speech that he would not “trade in my values or principles or do deals with whomever simply for retaining power”. Explore more on these topics Scottish National party (SNP) Humza Yousaf Scotland Scottish politics Alba analysis Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf announced his resignation as SNP leader and first minister on Monday after just over a year in post. Photograph: Murdo MacLeod/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf announced his resignation as SNP leader and first minister on Monday after just over a year in post. Photograph: Murdo MacLeod/The Guardian Humza Yousaf announced his resignation as SNP leader and first minister on Monday after just over a year in post. Photograph: Murdo MacLeod/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf announced his resignation as SNP leader and first minister on Monday after just over a year in post. Photograph: Murdo MacLeod/The Guardian Humza Yousaf announced his resignation as SNP leader and first minister on Monday after just over a year in post. Photograph: Murdo MacLeod/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf announced his resignation as SNP leader and first minister on Monday after just over a year in post. Photograph: Murdo MacLeod/The Guardian Humza Yousaf announced his resignation as SNP leader and first minister on Monday after just over a year in post. Photograph: Murdo MacLeod/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf announced his resignation as SNP leader and first minister on Monday after just over a year in post. Photograph: Murdo MacLeod/The Guardian Humza Yousaf announced his resignation as SNP leader and first minister on Monday after just over a year in post. Photograph: Murdo MacLeod/The Guardian Humza Yousaf announced his resignation as SNP leader and first minister on Monday after just over a year in post. Photograph: Murdo MacLeod/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old Analysis Humza Yousaf inherited a deeply fractured SNP – as will his successor This article is more than 1 year old Libby Brooks This article is more than 1 year old Analysis Humza Yousaf inherited a deeply fractured SNP – as will his successor This article is more than 1 year old Libby Brooks This article is more than 1 year old Analysis Humza Yousaf inherited a deeply fractured SNP – as will his successor This article is more than 1 year old Libby Brooks This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Previous contest exposed splits on issues such as LGBTQ+ rights and green policy that next leader must tackle Previous contest exposed splits on issues such as LGBTQ+ rights and green policy that next leader must tackle Previous contest exposed splits on issues such as LGBTQ+ rights and green policy that next leader must tackle When Humza Yousaf was narrowly elected leader of the SNP last March, it was after a bruising leadership contest that exposed profound divisions in the party over LGBTQ+ rights, Westminster’s veto of Holyrood law, and environmental and economic policy. Indeed, it could be said the end of the SNP’s partnership with the Greens, and the downward spiral of chaos that ended with Yousaf’s resignation little over a year later, was telegraphed by the fault lines that emerged back then, setting the scene for the myriad conflicts that Yousaf was forced to manage – and ultimately failed to resolve – as leader. Those fault lines remain just as stark and will demand the new leader’s immediate attention. Just as crucial, in an election year when the SNP is forecast to take heavy losses at the hands of a resurgent Scottish Labour party, is how to communicate that the party is genuinely focused on voters’ concerns as well as rebuilding cross-party trust at Holyrood in minority government. Scottish opinion polls chart since the last general election shows Labour rising in popularity as SNP support dips As one senior SNP MSP puts it: “The litmus test for a new leader will be the continuing fault line in the party on social policy. In a sense, bringing in the Greens masked a bigger issue within the party that now has to be resolved for the SNP to move forward. “Is the party going to remain a broad church that has appeal to middle-class and working-class voters, left and right of centre, bringing together people with a range of views but with the common aim of independence? That’s been entirely possible for a very long time and it’s been a very successful formula.” As support coalesces around John Swinney , what is clear is a desperation for leadership that many feel has been lacking over the past year. Swinney is known as much for his steeliness as for his quiet charm, and enjoys an unassailable familiarity with internal loyalties and fallings out. View image in fullscreen The former deputy first minister John Swinney is a favourite to replace Yousaf. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA “It is genuinely hard to think of anyone else who is strong enough and serious enough,” says one colleague. “Every time he speaks, the whole Holyrood group listens, no matter what faction,” explains another MSP. While activists and elected members believe the party has benefitted from Yousaf’s more inclusive leadership style, in comparison with Sturgeon, there has been an increasing frustration at his desire to be all things to all people. In the earlier days of his tenure, there was sympathy as he battled crises not of his own making – in particular, the ongoing Police Scotland investigation into party finances – but latterly there were repeated complaints about a sense of drift, with the promised big ideas from his leadership platform never materialising. View image in fullscreen Polling on Humza Yousaf, carried out before his resignation. Photograph: YouGov Yousaf faced significant rebellions within his own party. Last October, the former SNP minister Ash Regan defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender recognition policy and lack of progress on independence. In an excruciating irony, she would have had the deciding vote in the motion of confidence in Yousaf. Restive backbenchers grouped around Kate Forbes, who came second to Yousaf in the leadership contest, and outspoken critics such as Fergus Ewing, one of the party’s longest-serving MSPs, who declared Yousaf to be a “doormat” to the Greens as he was suspended for not supporting the Green co-leader Lorna Slater in an earlier vote of confidence. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion There is also a sense that Yousaf’s treatment of the Greens was part of a pattern of making big decisions very quickly with little consultation beyond a small band of advisers. Another being the council tax freeze – his response to the SNP’s crushing defeat by Labour in October’s Rutherglen byelection , which infuriated local authority leaders and appeared to breach commitments in the Bute House agreement to progressive taxation. There is also some anger building among the Holyrood group with the party’s Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn, who returned to Edinburgh last week to advise Yousaf immediately before his crunch meeting with the Greens. Some MSPs blame him for encouraging the first minister to rip up the deal in the brutal manner he did and putting the interests of his MPs – who were concerned that Yousaf’s seeming focus on identity issues was causing problems on the doorstep, when voters wanted to talk about cost of living – ahead of Holyrood. View image in fullscreen The SNP Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA The common view among the Holyrood SNP group is that people are upset about how the Greens were treated but accept it was time to end the agreement, and exasperated with Yousaf for not recognising the consequences, appearing dumbfounded with the Greens’ reaction. The Guardian understands that senior SNP figures other than the first minister reached out to the Greens over the weekend to secure their commitment to abstain at the very least in forthcoming confidence votes as long as Yousaf himself stood down. After Yousaf’s announcement on Monday morning, the Greens confirmed they were “not interested in bringing down the Scottish government”. By then, Yousaf was aware that the numbers for the confidence vote were impossible – the Guardian understands that any deal with Regan, which would in effect deliver power to the Scottish government’s most vicious critic, the former first minister Alex Salmond, would have resulted in a number of his cabinet walking out. Yousaf was clear in his resignation speech that he would not “trade in my values or principles or do deals with whomever simply for retaining power”. Explore more on these topics Scottish National party (SNP) Humza Yousaf Scotland Scottish politics Alba analysis Share Reuse this content When Humza Yousaf was narrowly elected leader of the SNP last March, it was after a bruising leadership contest that exposed profound divisions in the party over LGBTQ+ rights, Westminster’s veto of Holyrood law, and environmental and economic policy. Indeed, it could be said the end of the SNP’s partnership with the Greens, and the downward spiral of chaos that ended with Yousaf’s resignation little over a year later, was telegraphed by the fault lines that emerged back then, setting the scene for the myriad conflicts that Yousaf was forced to manage – and ultimately failed to resolve – as leader. Those fault lines remain just as stark and will demand the new leader’s immediate attention. Just as crucial, in an election year when the SNP is forecast to take heavy losses at the hands of a resurgent Scottish Labour party, is how to communicate that the party is genuinely focused on voters’ concerns as well as rebuilding cross-party trust at Holyrood in minority government. Scottish opinion polls chart since the last general election shows Labour rising in popularity as SNP support dips As one senior SNP MSP puts it: “The litmus test for a new leader will be the continuing fault line in the party on social policy. In a sense, bringing in the Greens masked a bigger issue within the party that now has to be resolved for the SNP to move forward. “Is the party going to remain a broad church that has appeal to middle-class and working-class voters, left and right of centre, bringing together people with a range of views but with the common aim of independence? That’s been entirely possible for a very long time and it’s been a very successful formula.” As support coalesces around John Swinney , what is clear is a desperation for leadership that many feel has been lacking over the past year. Swinney is known as much for his steeliness as for his quiet charm, and enjoys an unassailable familiarity with internal loyalties and fallings out. View image in fullscreen The former deputy first minister John Swinney is a favourite to replace Yousaf. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA “It is genuinely hard to think of anyone else who is strong enough and serious enough,” says one colleague. “Every time he speaks, the whole Holyrood group listens, no matter what faction,” explains another MSP. While activists and elected members believe the party has benefitted from Yousaf’s more inclusive leadership style, in comparison with Sturgeon, there has been an increasing frustration at his desire to be all things to all people. In the earlier days of his tenure, there was sympathy as he battled crises not of his own making – in particular, the ongoing Police Scotland investigation into party finances – but latterly there were repeated complaints about a sense of drift, with the promised big ideas from his leadership platform never materialising. View image in fullscreen Polling on Humza Yousaf, carried out before his resignation. Photograph: YouGov Yousaf faced significant rebellions within his own party. Last October, the former SNP minister Ash Regan defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender recognition policy and lack of progress on independence. In an excruciating irony, she would have had the deciding vote in the motion of confidence in Yousaf. Restive backbenchers grouped around Kate Forbes, who came second to Yousaf in the leadership contest, and outspoken critics such as Fergus Ewing, one of the party’s longest-serving MSPs, who declared Yousaf to be a “doormat” to the Greens as he was suspended for not supporting the Green co-leader Lorna Slater in an earlier vote of confidence. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion There is also a sense that Yousaf’s treatment of the Greens was part of a pattern of making big decisions very quickly with little consultation beyond a small band of advisers. Another being the council tax freeze – his response to the SNP’s crushing defeat by Labour in October’s Rutherglen byelection , which infuriated local authority leaders and appeared to breach commitments in the Bute House agreement to progressive taxation. There is also some anger building among the Holyrood group with the party’s Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn, who returned to Edinburgh last week to advise Yousaf immediately before his crunch meeting with the Greens. Some MSPs blame him for encouraging the first minister to rip up the deal in the brutal manner he did and putting the interests of his MPs – who were concerned that Yousaf’s seeming focus on identity issues was causing problems on the doorstep, when voters wanted to talk about cost of living – ahead of Holyrood. View image in fullscreen The SNP Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA The common view among the Holyrood SNP group is that people are upset about how the Greens were treated but accept it was time to end the agreement, and exasperated with Yousaf for not recognising the consequences, appearing dumbfounded with the Greens’ reaction. The Guardian understands that senior SNP figures other than the first minister reached out to the Greens over the weekend to secure their commitment to abstain at the very least in forthcoming confidence votes as long as Yousaf himself stood down. After Yousaf’s announcement on Monday morning, the Greens confirmed they were “not interested in bringing down the Scottish government”. By then, Yousaf was aware that the numbers for the confidence vote were impossible – the Guardian understands that any deal with Regan, which would in effect deliver power to the Scottish government’s most vicious critic, the former first minister Alex Salmond, would have resulted in a number of his cabinet walking out. Yousaf was clear in his resignation speech that he would not “trade in my values or principles or do deals with whomever simply for retaining power”. Explore more on these topics Scottish National party (SNP) Humza Yousaf Scotland Scottish politics Alba analysis Share Reuse this content When Humza Yousaf was narrowly elected leader of the SNP last March, it was after a bruising leadership contest that exposed profound divisions in the party over LGBTQ+ rights, Westminster’s veto of Holyrood law, and environmental and economic policy. Indeed, it could be said the end of the SNP’s partnership with the Greens, and the downward spiral of chaos that ended with Yousaf’s resignation little over a year later, was telegraphed by the fault lines that emerged back then, setting the scene for the myriad conflicts that Yousaf was forced to manage – and ultimately failed to resolve – as leader. Those fault lines remain just as stark and will demand the new leader’s immediate attention. Just as crucial, in an election year when the SNP is forecast to take heavy losses at the hands of a resurgent Scottish Labour party, is how to communicate that the party is genuinely focused on voters’ concerns as well as rebuilding cross-party trust at Holyrood in minority government. Scottish opinion polls chart since the last general election shows Labour rising in popularity as SNP support dips As one senior SNP MSP puts it: “The litmus test for a new leader will be the continuing fault line in the party on social policy. In a sense, bringing in the Greens masked a bigger issue within the party that now has to be resolved for the SNP to move forward. “Is the party going to remain a broad church that has appeal to middle-class and working-class voters, left and right of centre, bringing together people with a range of views but with the common aim of independence? That’s been entirely possible for a very long time and it’s been a very successful formula.” As support coalesces around John Swinney , what is clear is a desperation for leadership that many feel has been lacking over the past year. Swinney is known as much for his steeliness as for his quiet charm, and enjoys an unassailable familiarity with internal loyalties and fallings out. View image in fullscreen The former deputy first minister John Swinney is a favourite to replace Yousaf. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA “It is genuinely hard to think of anyone else who is strong enough and serious enough,” says one colleague. “Every time he speaks, the whole Holyrood group listens, no matter what faction,” explains another MSP. While activists and elected members believe the party has benefitted from Yousaf’s more inclusive leadership style, in comparison with Sturgeon, there has been an increasing frustration at his desire to be all things to all people. In the earlier days of his tenure, there was sympathy as he battled crises not of his own making – in particular, the ongoing Police Scotland investigation into party finances – but latterly there were repeated complaints about a sense of drift, with the promised big ideas from his leadership platform never materialising. View image in fullscreen Polling on Humza Yousaf, carried out before his resignation. Photograph: YouGov Yousaf faced significant rebellions within his own party. Last October, the former SNP minister Ash Regan defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender recognition policy and lack of progress on independence. In an excruciating irony, she would have had the deciding vote in the motion of confidence in Yousaf. Restive backbenchers grouped around Kate Forbes, who came second to Yousaf in the leadership contest, and outspoken critics such as Fergus Ewing, one of the party’s longest-serving MSPs, who declared Yousaf to be a “doormat” to the Greens as he was suspended for not supporting the Green co-leader Lorna Slater in an earlier vote of confidence. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion There is also a sense that Yousaf’s treatment of the Greens was part of a pattern of making big decisions very quickly with little consultation beyond a small band of advisers. Another being the council tax freeze – his response to the SNP’s crushing defeat by Labour in October’s Rutherglen byelection , which infuriated local authority leaders and appeared to breach commitments in the Bute House agreement to progressive taxation. There is also some anger building among the Holyrood group with the party’s Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn, who returned to Edinburgh last week to advise Yousaf immediately before his crunch meeting with the Greens. Some MSPs blame him for encouraging the first minister to rip up the deal in the brutal manner he did and putting the interests of his MPs – who were concerned that Yousaf’s seeming focus on identity issues was causing problems on the doorstep, when voters wanted to talk about cost of living – ahead of Holyrood. View image in fullscreen The SNP Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA The common view among the Holyrood SNP group is that people are upset about how the Greens were treated but accept it was time to end the agreement, and exasperated with Yousaf for not recognising the consequences, appearing dumbfounded with the Greens’ reaction. The Guardian understands that senior SNP figures other than the first minister reached out to the Greens over the weekend to secure their commitment to abstain at the very least in forthcoming confidence votes as long as Yousaf himself stood down. After Yousaf’s announcement on Monday morning, the Greens confirmed they were “not interested in bringing down the Scottish government”. By then, Yousaf was aware that the numbers for the confidence vote were impossible – the Guardian understands that any deal with Regan, which would in effect deliver power to the Scottish government’s most vicious critic, the former first minister Alex Salmond, would have resulted in a number of his cabinet walking out. Yousaf was clear in his resignation speech that he would not “trade in my values or principles or do deals with whomever simply for retaining power”. When Humza Yousaf was narrowly elected leader of the SNP last March, it was after a bruising leadership contest that exposed profound divisions in the party over LGBTQ+ rights, Westminster’s veto of Holyrood law, and environmental and economic policy. Indeed, it could be said the end of the SNP’s partnership with the Greens, and the downward spiral of chaos that ended with Yousaf’s resignation little over a year later, was telegraphed by the fault lines that emerged back then, setting the scene for the myriad conflicts that Yousaf was forced to manage – and ultimately failed to resolve – as leader. Those fault lines remain just as stark and will demand the new leader’s immediate attention. Just as crucial, in an election year when the SNP is forecast to take heavy losses at the hands of a resurgent Scottish Labour party, is how to communicate that the party is genuinely focused on voters’ concerns as well as rebuilding cross-party trust at Holyrood in minority government. Scottish opinion polls chart since the last general election shows Labour rising in popularity as SNP support dips As one senior SNP MSP puts it: “The litmus test for a new leader will be the continuing fault line in the party on social policy. In a sense, bringing in the Greens masked a bigger issue within the party that now has to be resolved for the SNP to move forward. “Is the party going to remain a broad church that has appeal to middle-class and working-class voters, left and right of centre, bringing together people with a range of views but with the common aim of independence? That’s been entirely possible for a very long time and it’s been a very successful formula.” As support coalesces around John Swinney , what is clear is a desperation for leadership that many feel has been lacking over the past year. Swinney is known as much for his steeliness as for his quiet charm, and enjoys an unassailable familiarity with internal loyalties and fallings out. View image in fullscreen The former deputy first minister John Swinney is a favourite to replace Yousaf. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA “It is genuinely hard to think of anyone else who is strong enough and serious enough,” says one colleague. “Every time he speaks, the whole Holyrood group listens, no matter what faction,” explains another MSP. While activists and elected members believe the party has benefitted from Yousaf’s more inclusive leadership style, in comparison with Sturgeon, there has been an increasing frustration at his desire to be all things to all people. In the earlier days of his tenure, there was sympathy as he battled crises not of his own making – in particular, the ongoing Police Scotland investigation into party finances – but latterly there were repeated complaints about a sense of drift, with the promised big ideas from his leadership platform never materialising. View image in fullscreen Polling on Humza Yousaf, carried out before his resignation. Photograph: YouGov Yousaf faced significant rebellions within his own party. Last October, the former SNP minister Ash Regan defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender recognition policy and lack of progress on independence. In an excruciating irony, she would have had the deciding vote in the motion of confidence in Yousaf. Restive backbenchers grouped around Kate Forbes, who came second to Yousaf in the leadership contest, and outspoken critics such as Fergus Ewing, one of the party’s longest-serving MSPs, who declared Yousaf to be a “doormat” to the Greens as he was suspended for not supporting the Green co-leader Lorna Slater in an earlier vote of confidence. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion There is also a sense that Yousaf’s treatment of the Greens was part of a pattern of making big decisions very quickly with little consultation beyond a small band of advisers. Another being the council tax freeze – his response to the SNP’s crushing defeat by Labour in October’s Rutherglen byelection , which infuriated local authority leaders and appeared to breach commitments in the Bute House agreement to progressive taxation. There is also some anger building among the Holyrood group with the party’s Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn, who returned to Edinburgh last week to advise Yousaf immediately before his crunch meeting with the Greens. Some MSPs blame him for encouraging the first minister to rip up the deal in the brutal manner he did and putting the interests of his MPs – who were concerned that Yousaf’s seeming focus on identity issues was causing problems on the doorstep, when voters wanted to talk about cost of living – ahead of Holyrood. View image in fullscreen The SNP Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA The common view among the Holyrood SNP group is that people are upset about how the Greens were treated but accept it was time to end the agreement, and exasperated with Yousaf for not recognising the consequences, appearing dumbfounded with the Greens’ reaction. The Guardian understands that senior SNP figures other than the first minister reached out to the Greens over the weekend to secure their commitment to abstain at the very least in forthcoming confidence votes as long as Yousaf himself stood down. After Yousaf’s announcement on Monday morning, the Greens confirmed they were “not interested in bringing down the Scottish government”. By then, Yousaf was aware that the numbers for the confidence vote were impossible – the Guardian understands that any deal with Regan, which would in effect deliver power to the Scottish government’s most vicious critic, the former first minister Alex Salmond, would have resulted in a number of his cabinet walking out. Yousaf was clear in his resignation speech that he would not “trade in my values or principles or do deals with whomever simply for retaining power”. When Humza Yousaf was narrowly elected leader of the SNP last March, it was after a bruising leadership contest that exposed profound divisions in the party over LGBTQ+ rights, Westminster’s veto of Holyrood law, and environmental and economic policy. Indeed, it could be said the end of the SNP’s partnership with the Greens, and the downward spiral of chaos that ended with Yousaf’s resignation little over a year later, was telegraphed by the fault lines that emerged back then, setting the scene for the myriad conflicts that Yousaf was forced to manage – and ultimately failed to resolve – as leader. Those fault lines remain just as stark and will demand the new leader’s immediate attention. Just as crucial, in an election year when the SNP is forecast to take heavy losses at the hands of a resurgent Scottish Labour party, is how to communicate that the party is genuinely focused on voters’ concerns as well as rebuilding cross-party trust at Holyrood in minority government. As one senior SNP MSP puts it: “The litmus test for a new leader will be the continuing fault line in the party on social policy. In a sense, bringing in the Greens masked a bigger issue within the party that now has to be resolved for the SNP to move forward. “Is the party going to remain a broad church that has appeal to middle-class and working-class voters, left and right of centre, bringing together people with a range of views but with the common aim of independence? That’s been entirely possible for a very long time and it’s been a very successful formula.” As support coalesces around John Swinney , what is clear is a desperation for leadership that many feel has been lacking over the past year. Swinney is known as much for his steeliness as for his quiet charm, and enjoys an unassailable familiarity with internal loyalties and fallings out. “It is genuinely hard to think of anyone else who is strong enough and serious enough,” says one colleague. “Every time he speaks, the whole Holyrood group listens, no matter what faction,” explains another MSP. While activists and elected members believe the party has benefitted from Yousaf’s more inclusive leadership style, in comparison with Sturgeon, there has been an increasing frustration at his desire to be all things to all people. In the earlier days of his tenure, there was sympathy as he battled crises not of his own making – in particular, the ongoing Police Scotland investigation into party finances – but latterly there were repeated complaints about a sense of drift, with the promised big ideas from his leadership platform never materialising. Yousaf faced significant rebellions within his own party. Last October, the former SNP minister Ash Regan defected to Alex Salmond’s Alba party in protest at the SNP’s stance on gender recognition policy and lack of progress on independence. In an excruciating irony, she would have had the deciding vote in the motion of confidence in Yousaf. Restive backbenchers grouped around Kate Forbes, who came second to Yousaf in the leadership contest, and outspoken critics such as Fergus Ewing, one of the party’s longest-serving MSPs, who declared Yousaf to be a “doormat” to the Greens as he was suspended for not supporting the Green co-leader Lorna Slater in an earlier vote of confidence. There is also a sense that Yousaf’s treatment of the Greens was part of a pattern of making big decisions very quickly with little consultation beyond a small band of advisers. Another being the council tax freeze – his response to the SNP’s crushing defeat by Labour in October’s Rutherglen byelection , which infuriated local authority leaders and appeared to breach commitments in the Bute House agreement to progressive taxation. There is also some anger building among the Holyrood group with the party’s Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn, who returned to Edinburgh last week to advise Yousaf immediately before his crunch meeting with the Greens. Some MSPs blame him for encouraging the first minister to rip up the deal in the brutal manner he did and putting the interests of his MPs – who were concerned that Yousaf’s seeming focus on identity issues was causing problems on the doorstep, when voters wanted to talk about cost of living – ahead of Holyrood. The common view among the Holyrood SNP group is that people are upset about how the Greens were treated but accept it was time to end the agreement, and exasperated with Yousaf for not recognising the consequences, appearing dumbfounded with the Greens’ reaction. The Guardian understands that senior SNP figures other than the first minister reached out to the Greens over the weekend to secure their commitment to abstain at the very least in forthcoming confidence votes as long as Yousaf himself stood down. After Yousaf’s announcement on Monday morning, the Greens confirmed they were “not interested in bringing down the Scottish government”. By then, Yousaf was aware that the numbers for the confidence vote were impossible – the Guardian understands that any deal with Regan, which would in effect deliver power to the Scottish government’s most vicious critic, the former first minister Alex Salmond, would have resulted in a number of his cabinet walking out. Yousaf was clear in his resignation speech that he would not “trade in my values or principles or do deals with whomever simply for retaining power”. Explore more on these topics Scottish National party (SNP) Humza Yousaf Scotland Scottish politics Alba analysis Share Reuse this content Scottish National party (SNP) Humza Yousaf Scotland Scottish politics Alba analysis |
ICC urged to delay possible war crimes charges against Israel and Hamas
Benjamin Netanyahu has said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. Photograph: Abir Sultan/AP View image in fullscreen Benjamin Netanyahu has said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. Photograph: Abir Sultan/AP This article is more than 1 year old ICC urged to delay possible war crimes charges against Israel and Hamas This article is more than 1 year old G7 diplomats argue any move now in investigation launched in 2021 could disrupt current ceasefire talks Diplomats from the G7 industrialised nations have urged officials at the international criminal court not to announce war crimes charges against Israel or Hamas officials, amid concerns that such a move could disrupt the chances of a breakthrough in ceasefire talks. Israeli politicians including the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, have suggested that the ICC could press charges imminently after an investigation launched in 2021 that covers events starting in 2014. The inquiry has also been looking at Israel’s construction of settlements in occupied territory. The ICC has not commented officially and has advised diplomats that it is not aware of any dramatic moves in the investigation. The prosecutor Karim Khan must have any request for an arrest warrant validated by three judges, and this final step would have to be completed if charges were to be announced this week. But Israel appeared to be taking the rumours of imminent arrest warrants so seriously that late on Sunday the foreign minister, Israel Katz, sent messages to Israel’s embassies abroad advising them to prepare for a severe antisemitic backlash should the court take action. Reports in Israeli media suggested the warrants could potentially be against Netanyahu, the defence minister, Yoav Gallant, and the Israel Defense Forces chief of staff, Lt Gen Herzi Halevi. Katz said: “There is nothing more distorted than attempting to prevent Israel from defending itself against a murderous enemy openly calling for the destruction of the state of Israel. If the warrants are issued, they will harm the commanders and soldiers of the IDF and provide a morale boost to the terrorist organisation Hamas and the axis of radical Islam led by Iran against which we are fighting.” The ICC rumours started to swirl on Friday when Netanyahu said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. “We will never stop defending ourselves. Whereas decisions of the court in The Hague will not affect Israel’s actions, they would set a dangerous precedent threatening the soldiers and officials of any democracy fighting criminal terrorism and aggression,” he said. Israel has made a string of announcements in recent days about allowing more humanitarian aid into Gaza , but that appears to be a strategic response to renewed pressure from the White House rather than heading off possible ICC action. The ICC’s Khan said during a visit to Egypt in December that the investigation was “moving forward at pace, with rigour”. One of his first acts as prosecutor was to establish a dedicated team to investigate the Palestinian situation. In a speech in Egypt in which he condemned the 7 October raid by Hamas on Israel and underlined that the taking of hostages was a war crime, he also said of people in Gaza: “The fact that innocent civilians are trapped under the weight of a war they cannot escape and which is not their fault is not tenable.” Any ICC arrest warrants could put Israeli officials at risk of arrest in other countries. They would also serve as a major rebuke of Israel’s actions at a time when pro-Palestinian protests have spread across US college campuses and elsewhere. What will happen if the ICC charges Netanyahu with war crimes? | Kenneth Roth Read more US diplomats at the UN insisted that Washington regarded the ICC as independent and it would not be interfering in its decision-making process. The US and Israel do not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC, which is vested with the task of prosecuting war crimes. According to a report on the Axios news website , Netanyahu has appealed to Biden to intervene to stop the warrants being issued. The US is not a member of the court, but under the Trump administration it sanctioned court officials after complaining about its investigations of US military operations in Afghanistan and Israeli actions in the occupied Palestinian territories. Asked about the prospect of ICC warrants, the White House spokesperson, Karine Jeanne-Pierre, said: “We’ve been really clear about the ICC investigation. We don’t support it; we don’t believe that they have the jurisdiction.” US politicians spoke out, with the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives, Mike Johnson, saying: “Such a lawless action by the ICC would directly undermine US national security interests. If unchallenged by the Biden administration, the ICC could create and assume unprecedented power to issue arrest warrants against American political leaders, American diplomats, and American military personnel, thereby endangering our country’s sovereign authority.” Democratic senator John Fetterman warned: “It would be a fatal blow to the judicial and moral standing of ICC to pursue this path against Israel.” He said he was calling on Joe Biden to intervene as part of the administration’s ongoing commitment to Israel. The international court of justice, a separate UN court responsible for handling inter-state disputes, is due to reveal on Tuesday if it will accept a request by Nicaragua to order Germany to stop providing humanitarian or military aid to Israel on the basis that Germany has a duty under the genocide convention to prevent a potential genocide. Israel has rejected allegations of wrongdoing and accused both international courts of severe bias. Explore more on these topics International criminal court Israel Hamas Gaza Israel-Gaza war Palestine International criminal justice news Share Reuse this content Benjamin Netanyahu has said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. Photograph: Abir Sultan/AP View image in fullscreen Benjamin Netanyahu has said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. Photograph: Abir Sultan/AP This article is more than 1 year old ICC urged to delay possible war crimes charges against Israel and Hamas This article is more than 1 year old G7 diplomats argue any move now in investigation launched in 2021 could disrupt current ceasefire talks Diplomats from the G7 industrialised nations have urged officials at the international criminal court not to announce war crimes charges against Israel or Hamas officials, amid concerns that such a move could disrupt the chances of a breakthrough in ceasefire talks. Israeli politicians including the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, have suggested that the ICC could press charges imminently after an investigation launched in 2021 that covers events starting in 2014. The inquiry has also been looking at Israel’s construction of settlements in occupied territory. The ICC has not commented officially and has advised diplomats that it is not aware of any dramatic moves in the investigation. The prosecutor Karim Khan must have any request for an arrest warrant validated by three judges, and this final step would have to be completed if charges were to be announced this week. But Israel appeared to be taking the rumours of imminent arrest warrants so seriously that late on Sunday the foreign minister, Israel Katz, sent messages to Israel’s embassies abroad advising them to prepare for a severe antisemitic backlash should the court take action. Reports in Israeli media suggested the warrants could potentially be against Netanyahu, the defence minister, Yoav Gallant, and the Israel Defense Forces chief of staff, Lt Gen Herzi Halevi. Katz said: “There is nothing more distorted than attempting to prevent Israel from defending itself against a murderous enemy openly calling for the destruction of the state of Israel. If the warrants are issued, they will harm the commanders and soldiers of the IDF and provide a morale boost to the terrorist organisation Hamas and the axis of radical Islam led by Iran against which we are fighting.” The ICC rumours started to swirl on Friday when Netanyahu said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. “We will never stop defending ourselves. Whereas decisions of the court in The Hague will not affect Israel’s actions, they would set a dangerous precedent threatening the soldiers and officials of any democracy fighting criminal terrorism and aggression,” he said. Israel has made a string of announcements in recent days about allowing more humanitarian aid into Gaza , but that appears to be a strategic response to renewed pressure from the White House rather than heading off possible ICC action. The ICC’s Khan said during a visit to Egypt in December that the investigation was “moving forward at pace, with rigour”. One of his first acts as prosecutor was to establish a dedicated team to investigate the Palestinian situation. In a speech in Egypt in which he condemned the 7 October raid by Hamas on Israel and underlined that the taking of hostages was a war crime, he also said of people in Gaza: “The fact that innocent civilians are trapped under the weight of a war they cannot escape and which is not their fault is not tenable.” Any ICC arrest warrants could put Israeli officials at risk of arrest in other countries. They would also serve as a major rebuke of Israel’s actions at a time when pro-Palestinian protests have spread across US college campuses and elsewhere. What will happen if the ICC charges Netanyahu with war crimes? | Kenneth Roth Read more US diplomats at the UN insisted that Washington regarded the ICC as independent and it would not be interfering in its decision-making process. The US and Israel do not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC, which is vested with the task of prosecuting war crimes. According to a report on the Axios news website , Netanyahu has appealed to Biden to intervene to stop the warrants being issued. The US is not a member of the court, but under the Trump administration it sanctioned court officials after complaining about its investigations of US military operations in Afghanistan and Israeli actions in the occupied Palestinian territories. Asked about the prospect of ICC warrants, the White House spokesperson, Karine Jeanne-Pierre, said: “We’ve been really clear about the ICC investigation. We don’t support it; we don’t believe that they have the jurisdiction.” US politicians spoke out, with the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives, Mike Johnson, saying: “Such a lawless action by the ICC would directly undermine US national security interests. If unchallenged by the Biden administration, the ICC could create and assume unprecedented power to issue arrest warrants against American political leaders, American diplomats, and American military personnel, thereby endangering our country’s sovereign authority.” Democratic senator John Fetterman warned: “It would be a fatal blow to the judicial and moral standing of ICC to pursue this path against Israel.” He said he was calling on Joe Biden to intervene as part of the administration’s ongoing commitment to Israel. The international court of justice, a separate UN court responsible for handling inter-state disputes, is due to reveal on Tuesday if it will accept a request by Nicaragua to order Germany to stop providing humanitarian or military aid to Israel on the basis that Germany has a duty under the genocide convention to prevent a potential genocide. Israel has rejected allegations of wrongdoing and accused both international courts of severe bias. Explore more on these topics International criminal court Israel Hamas Gaza Israel-Gaza war Palestine International criminal justice news Share Reuse this content Benjamin Netanyahu has said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. Photograph: Abir Sultan/AP View image in fullscreen Benjamin Netanyahu has said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. Photograph: Abir Sultan/AP Benjamin Netanyahu has said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. Photograph: Abir Sultan/AP View image in fullscreen Benjamin Netanyahu has said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. Photograph: Abir Sultan/AP Benjamin Netanyahu has said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. Photograph: Abir Sultan/AP View image in fullscreen Benjamin Netanyahu has said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. Photograph: Abir Sultan/AP Benjamin Netanyahu has said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. Photograph: Abir Sultan/AP View image in fullscreen Benjamin Netanyahu has said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. Photograph: Abir Sultan/AP Benjamin Netanyahu has said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. Photograph: Abir Sultan/AP Benjamin Netanyahu has said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. Photograph: Abir Sultan/AP This article is more than 1 year old ICC urged to delay possible war crimes charges against Israel and Hamas This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ICC urged to delay possible war crimes charges against Israel and Hamas This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ICC urged to delay possible war crimes charges against Israel and Hamas This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old G7 diplomats argue any move now in investigation launched in 2021 could disrupt current ceasefire talks G7 diplomats argue any move now in investigation launched in 2021 could disrupt current ceasefire talks G7 diplomats argue any move now in investigation launched in 2021 could disrupt current ceasefire talks Diplomats from the G7 industrialised nations have urged officials at the international criminal court not to announce war crimes charges against Israel or Hamas officials, amid concerns that such a move could disrupt the chances of a breakthrough in ceasefire talks. Israeli politicians including the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, have suggested that the ICC could press charges imminently after an investigation launched in 2021 that covers events starting in 2014. The inquiry has also been looking at Israel’s construction of settlements in occupied territory. The ICC has not commented officially and has advised diplomats that it is not aware of any dramatic moves in the investigation. The prosecutor Karim Khan must have any request for an arrest warrant validated by three judges, and this final step would have to be completed if charges were to be announced this week. But Israel appeared to be taking the rumours of imminent arrest warrants so seriously that late on Sunday the foreign minister, Israel Katz, sent messages to Israel’s embassies abroad advising them to prepare for a severe antisemitic backlash should the court take action. Reports in Israeli media suggested the warrants could potentially be against Netanyahu, the defence minister, Yoav Gallant, and the Israel Defense Forces chief of staff, Lt Gen Herzi Halevi. Katz said: “There is nothing more distorted than attempting to prevent Israel from defending itself against a murderous enemy openly calling for the destruction of the state of Israel. If the warrants are issued, they will harm the commanders and soldiers of the IDF and provide a morale boost to the terrorist organisation Hamas and the axis of radical Islam led by Iran against which we are fighting.” The ICC rumours started to swirl on Friday when Netanyahu said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. “We will never stop defending ourselves. Whereas decisions of the court in The Hague will not affect Israel’s actions, they would set a dangerous precedent threatening the soldiers and officials of any democracy fighting criminal terrorism and aggression,” he said. Israel has made a string of announcements in recent days about allowing more humanitarian aid into Gaza , but that appears to be a strategic response to renewed pressure from the White House rather than heading off possible ICC action. The ICC’s Khan said during a visit to Egypt in December that the investigation was “moving forward at pace, with rigour”. One of his first acts as prosecutor was to establish a dedicated team to investigate the Palestinian situation. In a speech in Egypt in which he condemned the 7 October raid by Hamas on Israel and underlined that the taking of hostages was a war crime, he also said of people in Gaza: “The fact that innocent civilians are trapped under the weight of a war they cannot escape and which is not their fault is not tenable.” Any ICC arrest warrants could put Israeli officials at risk of arrest in other countries. They would also serve as a major rebuke of Israel’s actions at a time when pro-Palestinian protests have spread across US college campuses and elsewhere. What will happen if the ICC charges Netanyahu with war crimes? | Kenneth Roth Read more US diplomats at the UN insisted that Washington regarded the ICC as independent and it would not be interfering in its decision-making process. The US and Israel do not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC, which is vested with the task of prosecuting war crimes. According to a report on the Axios news website , Netanyahu has appealed to Biden to intervene to stop the warrants being issued. The US is not a member of the court, but under the Trump administration it sanctioned court officials after complaining about its investigations of US military operations in Afghanistan and Israeli actions in the occupied Palestinian territories. Asked about the prospect of ICC warrants, the White House spokesperson, Karine Jeanne-Pierre, said: “We’ve been really clear about the ICC investigation. We don’t support it; we don’t believe that they have the jurisdiction.” US politicians spoke out, with the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives, Mike Johnson, saying: “Such a lawless action by the ICC would directly undermine US national security interests. If unchallenged by the Biden administration, the ICC could create and assume unprecedented power to issue arrest warrants against American political leaders, American diplomats, and American military personnel, thereby endangering our country’s sovereign authority.” Democratic senator John Fetterman warned: “It would be a fatal blow to the judicial and moral standing of ICC to pursue this path against Israel.” He said he was calling on Joe Biden to intervene as part of the administration’s ongoing commitment to Israel. The international court of justice, a separate UN court responsible for handling inter-state disputes, is due to reveal on Tuesday if it will accept a request by Nicaragua to order Germany to stop providing humanitarian or military aid to Israel on the basis that Germany has a duty under the genocide convention to prevent a potential genocide. Israel has rejected allegations of wrongdoing and accused both international courts of severe bias. Explore more on these topics International criminal court Israel Hamas Gaza Israel-Gaza war Palestine International criminal justice news Share Reuse this content Diplomats from the G7 industrialised nations have urged officials at the international criminal court not to announce war crimes charges against Israel or Hamas officials, amid concerns that such a move could disrupt the chances of a breakthrough in ceasefire talks. Israeli politicians including the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, have suggested that the ICC could press charges imminently after an investigation launched in 2021 that covers events starting in 2014. The inquiry has also been looking at Israel’s construction of settlements in occupied territory. The ICC has not commented officially and has advised diplomats that it is not aware of any dramatic moves in the investigation. The prosecutor Karim Khan must have any request for an arrest warrant validated by three judges, and this final step would have to be completed if charges were to be announced this week. But Israel appeared to be taking the rumours of imminent arrest warrants so seriously that late on Sunday the foreign minister, Israel Katz, sent messages to Israel’s embassies abroad advising them to prepare for a severe antisemitic backlash should the court take action. Reports in Israeli media suggested the warrants could potentially be against Netanyahu, the defence minister, Yoav Gallant, and the Israel Defense Forces chief of staff, Lt Gen Herzi Halevi. Katz said: “There is nothing more distorted than attempting to prevent Israel from defending itself against a murderous enemy openly calling for the destruction of the state of Israel. If the warrants are issued, they will harm the commanders and soldiers of the IDF and provide a morale boost to the terrorist organisation Hamas and the axis of radical Islam led by Iran against which we are fighting.” The ICC rumours started to swirl on Friday when Netanyahu said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. “We will never stop defending ourselves. Whereas decisions of the court in The Hague will not affect Israel’s actions, they would set a dangerous precedent threatening the soldiers and officials of any democracy fighting criminal terrorism and aggression,” he said. Israel has made a string of announcements in recent days about allowing more humanitarian aid into Gaza , but that appears to be a strategic response to renewed pressure from the White House rather than heading off possible ICC action. The ICC’s Khan said during a visit to Egypt in December that the investigation was “moving forward at pace, with rigour”. One of his first acts as prosecutor was to establish a dedicated team to investigate the Palestinian situation. In a speech in Egypt in which he condemned the 7 October raid by Hamas on Israel and underlined that the taking of hostages was a war crime, he also said of people in Gaza: “The fact that innocent civilians are trapped under the weight of a war they cannot escape and which is not their fault is not tenable.” Any ICC arrest warrants could put Israeli officials at risk of arrest in other countries. They would also serve as a major rebuke of Israel’s actions at a time when pro-Palestinian protests have spread across US college campuses and elsewhere. What will happen if the ICC charges Netanyahu with war crimes? | Kenneth Roth Read more US diplomats at the UN insisted that Washington regarded the ICC as independent and it would not be interfering in its decision-making process. The US and Israel do not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC, which is vested with the task of prosecuting war crimes. According to a report on the Axios news website , Netanyahu has appealed to Biden to intervene to stop the warrants being issued. The US is not a member of the court, but under the Trump administration it sanctioned court officials after complaining about its investigations of US military operations in Afghanistan and Israeli actions in the occupied Palestinian territories. Asked about the prospect of ICC warrants, the White House spokesperson, Karine Jeanne-Pierre, said: “We’ve been really clear about the ICC investigation. We don’t support it; we don’t believe that they have the jurisdiction.” US politicians spoke out, with the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives, Mike Johnson, saying: “Such a lawless action by the ICC would directly undermine US national security interests. If unchallenged by the Biden administration, the ICC could create and assume unprecedented power to issue arrest warrants against American political leaders, American diplomats, and American military personnel, thereby endangering our country’s sovereign authority.” Democratic senator John Fetterman warned: “It would be a fatal blow to the judicial and moral standing of ICC to pursue this path against Israel.” He said he was calling on Joe Biden to intervene as part of the administration’s ongoing commitment to Israel. The international court of justice, a separate UN court responsible for handling inter-state disputes, is due to reveal on Tuesday if it will accept a request by Nicaragua to order Germany to stop providing humanitarian or military aid to Israel on the basis that Germany has a duty under the genocide convention to prevent a potential genocide. Israel has rejected allegations of wrongdoing and accused both international courts of severe bias. Explore more on these topics International criminal court Israel Hamas Gaza Israel-Gaza war Palestine International criminal justice news Share Reuse this content Diplomats from the G7 industrialised nations have urged officials at the international criminal court not to announce war crimes charges against Israel or Hamas officials, amid concerns that such a move could disrupt the chances of a breakthrough in ceasefire talks. Israeli politicians including the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, have suggested that the ICC could press charges imminently after an investigation launched in 2021 that covers events starting in 2014. The inquiry has also been looking at Israel’s construction of settlements in occupied territory. The ICC has not commented officially and has advised diplomats that it is not aware of any dramatic moves in the investigation. The prosecutor Karim Khan must have any request for an arrest warrant validated by three judges, and this final step would have to be completed if charges were to be announced this week. But Israel appeared to be taking the rumours of imminent arrest warrants so seriously that late on Sunday the foreign minister, Israel Katz, sent messages to Israel’s embassies abroad advising them to prepare for a severe antisemitic backlash should the court take action. Reports in Israeli media suggested the warrants could potentially be against Netanyahu, the defence minister, Yoav Gallant, and the Israel Defense Forces chief of staff, Lt Gen Herzi Halevi. Katz said: “There is nothing more distorted than attempting to prevent Israel from defending itself against a murderous enemy openly calling for the destruction of the state of Israel. If the warrants are issued, they will harm the commanders and soldiers of the IDF and provide a morale boost to the terrorist organisation Hamas and the axis of radical Islam led by Iran against which we are fighting.” The ICC rumours started to swirl on Friday when Netanyahu said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. “We will never stop defending ourselves. Whereas decisions of the court in The Hague will not affect Israel’s actions, they would set a dangerous precedent threatening the soldiers and officials of any democracy fighting criminal terrorism and aggression,” he said. Israel has made a string of announcements in recent days about allowing more humanitarian aid into Gaza , but that appears to be a strategic response to renewed pressure from the White House rather than heading off possible ICC action. The ICC’s Khan said during a visit to Egypt in December that the investigation was “moving forward at pace, with rigour”. One of his first acts as prosecutor was to establish a dedicated team to investigate the Palestinian situation. In a speech in Egypt in which he condemned the 7 October raid by Hamas on Israel and underlined that the taking of hostages was a war crime, he also said of people in Gaza: “The fact that innocent civilians are trapped under the weight of a war they cannot escape and which is not their fault is not tenable.” Any ICC arrest warrants could put Israeli officials at risk of arrest in other countries. They would also serve as a major rebuke of Israel’s actions at a time when pro-Palestinian protests have spread across US college campuses and elsewhere. What will happen if the ICC charges Netanyahu with war crimes? | Kenneth Roth Read more US diplomats at the UN insisted that Washington regarded the ICC as independent and it would not be interfering in its decision-making process. The US and Israel do not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC, which is vested with the task of prosecuting war crimes. According to a report on the Axios news website , Netanyahu has appealed to Biden to intervene to stop the warrants being issued. The US is not a member of the court, but under the Trump administration it sanctioned court officials after complaining about its investigations of US military operations in Afghanistan and Israeli actions in the occupied Palestinian territories. Asked about the prospect of ICC warrants, the White House spokesperson, Karine Jeanne-Pierre, said: “We’ve been really clear about the ICC investigation. We don’t support it; we don’t believe that they have the jurisdiction.” US politicians spoke out, with the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives, Mike Johnson, saying: “Such a lawless action by the ICC would directly undermine US national security interests. If unchallenged by the Biden administration, the ICC could create and assume unprecedented power to issue arrest warrants against American political leaders, American diplomats, and American military personnel, thereby endangering our country’s sovereign authority.” Democratic senator John Fetterman warned: “It would be a fatal blow to the judicial and moral standing of ICC to pursue this path against Israel.” He said he was calling on Joe Biden to intervene as part of the administration’s ongoing commitment to Israel. The international court of justice, a separate UN court responsible for handling inter-state disputes, is due to reveal on Tuesday if it will accept a request by Nicaragua to order Germany to stop providing humanitarian or military aid to Israel on the basis that Germany has a duty under the genocide convention to prevent a potential genocide. Israel has rejected allegations of wrongdoing and accused both international courts of severe bias. Diplomats from the G7 industrialised nations have urged officials at the international criminal court not to announce war crimes charges against Israel or Hamas officials, amid concerns that such a move could disrupt the chances of a breakthrough in ceasefire talks. Israeli politicians including the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, have suggested that the ICC could press charges imminently after an investigation launched in 2021 that covers events starting in 2014. The inquiry has also been looking at Israel’s construction of settlements in occupied territory. The ICC has not commented officially and has advised diplomats that it is not aware of any dramatic moves in the investigation. The prosecutor Karim Khan must have any request for an arrest warrant validated by three judges, and this final step would have to be completed if charges were to be announced this week. But Israel appeared to be taking the rumours of imminent arrest warrants so seriously that late on Sunday the foreign minister, Israel Katz, sent messages to Israel’s embassies abroad advising them to prepare for a severe antisemitic backlash should the court take action. Reports in Israeli media suggested the warrants could potentially be against Netanyahu, the defence minister, Yoav Gallant, and the Israel Defense Forces chief of staff, Lt Gen Herzi Halevi. Katz said: “There is nothing more distorted than attempting to prevent Israel from defending itself against a murderous enemy openly calling for the destruction of the state of Israel. If the warrants are issued, they will harm the commanders and soldiers of the IDF and provide a morale boost to the terrorist organisation Hamas and the axis of radical Islam led by Iran against which we are fighting.” The ICC rumours started to swirl on Friday when Netanyahu said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. “We will never stop defending ourselves. Whereas decisions of the court in The Hague will not affect Israel’s actions, they would set a dangerous precedent threatening the soldiers and officials of any democracy fighting criminal terrorism and aggression,” he said. Israel has made a string of announcements in recent days about allowing more humanitarian aid into Gaza , but that appears to be a strategic response to renewed pressure from the White House rather than heading off possible ICC action. The ICC’s Khan said during a visit to Egypt in December that the investigation was “moving forward at pace, with rigour”. One of his first acts as prosecutor was to establish a dedicated team to investigate the Palestinian situation. In a speech in Egypt in which he condemned the 7 October raid by Hamas on Israel and underlined that the taking of hostages was a war crime, he also said of people in Gaza: “The fact that innocent civilians are trapped under the weight of a war they cannot escape and which is not their fault is not tenable.” Any ICC arrest warrants could put Israeli officials at risk of arrest in other countries. They would also serve as a major rebuke of Israel’s actions at a time when pro-Palestinian protests have spread across US college campuses and elsewhere. What will happen if the ICC charges Netanyahu with war crimes? | Kenneth Roth Read more US diplomats at the UN insisted that Washington regarded the ICC as independent and it would not be interfering in its decision-making process. The US and Israel do not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC, which is vested with the task of prosecuting war crimes. According to a report on the Axios news website , Netanyahu has appealed to Biden to intervene to stop the warrants being issued. The US is not a member of the court, but under the Trump administration it sanctioned court officials after complaining about its investigations of US military operations in Afghanistan and Israeli actions in the occupied Palestinian territories. Asked about the prospect of ICC warrants, the White House spokesperson, Karine Jeanne-Pierre, said: “We’ve been really clear about the ICC investigation. We don’t support it; we don’t believe that they have the jurisdiction.” US politicians spoke out, with the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives, Mike Johnson, saying: “Such a lawless action by the ICC would directly undermine US national security interests. If unchallenged by the Biden administration, the ICC could create and assume unprecedented power to issue arrest warrants against American political leaders, American diplomats, and American military personnel, thereby endangering our country’s sovereign authority.” Democratic senator John Fetterman warned: “It would be a fatal blow to the judicial and moral standing of ICC to pursue this path against Israel.” He said he was calling on Joe Biden to intervene as part of the administration’s ongoing commitment to Israel. The international court of justice, a separate UN court responsible for handling inter-state disputes, is due to reveal on Tuesday if it will accept a request by Nicaragua to order Germany to stop providing humanitarian or military aid to Israel on the basis that Germany has a duty under the genocide convention to prevent a potential genocide. Israel has rejected allegations of wrongdoing and accused both international courts of severe bias. Diplomats from the G7 industrialised nations have urged officials at the international criminal court not to announce war crimes charges against Israel or Hamas officials, amid concerns that such a move could disrupt the chances of a breakthrough in ceasefire talks. Israeli politicians including the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, have suggested that the ICC could press charges imminently after an investigation launched in 2021 that covers events starting in 2014. The inquiry has also been looking at Israel’s construction of settlements in occupied territory. The ICC has not commented officially and has advised diplomats that it is not aware of any dramatic moves in the investigation. The prosecutor Karim Khan must have any request for an arrest warrant validated by three judges, and this final step would have to be completed if charges were to be announced this week. But Israel appeared to be taking the rumours of imminent arrest warrants so seriously that late on Sunday the foreign minister, Israel Katz, sent messages to Israel’s embassies abroad advising them to prepare for a severe antisemitic backlash should the court take action. Reports in Israeli media suggested the warrants could potentially be against Netanyahu, the defence minister, Yoav Gallant, and the Israel Defense Forces chief of staff, Lt Gen Herzi Halevi. Katz said: “There is nothing more distorted than attempting to prevent Israel from defending itself against a murderous enemy openly calling for the destruction of the state of Israel. If the warrants are issued, they will harm the commanders and soldiers of the IDF and provide a morale boost to the terrorist organisation Hamas and the axis of radical Islam led by Iran against which we are fighting.” The ICC rumours started to swirl on Friday when Netanyahu said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a dangerous precedent. “We will never stop defending ourselves. Whereas decisions of the court in The Hague will not affect Israel’s actions, they would set a dangerous precedent threatening the soldiers and officials of any democracy fighting criminal terrorism and aggression,” he said. Israel has made a string of announcements in recent days about allowing more humanitarian aid into Gaza , but that appears to be a strategic response to renewed pressure from the White House rather than heading off possible ICC action. The ICC’s Khan said during a visit to Egypt in December that the investigation was “moving forward at pace, with rigour”. One of his first acts as prosecutor was to establish a dedicated team to investigate the Palestinian situation. In a speech in Egypt in which he condemned the 7 October raid by Hamas on Israel and underlined that the taking of hostages was a war crime, he also said of people in Gaza: “The fact that innocent civilians are trapped under the weight of a war they cannot escape and which is not their fault is not tenable.” Any ICC arrest warrants could put Israeli officials at risk of arrest in other countries. They would also serve as a major rebuke of Israel’s actions at a time when pro-Palestinian protests have spread across US college campuses and elsewhere. What will happen if the ICC charges Netanyahu with war crimes? | Kenneth Roth Read more What will happen if the ICC charges Netanyahu with war crimes? | Kenneth Roth Read more What will happen if the ICC charges Netanyahu with war crimes? | Kenneth Roth Read more What will happen if the ICC charges Netanyahu with war crimes? | Kenneth Roth What will happen if the ICC charges Netanyahu with war crimes? | Kenneth Roth US diplomats at the UN insisted that Washington regarded the ICC as independent and it would not be interfering in its decision-making process. The US and Israel do not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC, which is vested with the task of prosecuting war crimes. According to a report on the Axios news website , Netanyahu has appealed to Biden to intervene to stop the warrants being issued. The US is not a member of the court, but under the Trump administration it sanctioned court officials after complaining about its investigations of US military operations in Afghanistan and Israeli actions in the occupied Palestinian territories. Asked about the prospect of ICC warrants, the White House spokesperson, Karine Jeanne-Pierre, said: “We’ve been really clear about the ICC investigation. We don’t support it; we don’t believe that they have the jurisdiction.” US politicians spoke out, with the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives, Mike Johnson, saying: “Such a lawless action by the ICC would directly undermine US national security interests. If unchallenged by the Biden administration, the ICC could create and assume unprecedented power to issue arrest warrants against American political leaders, American diplomats, and American military personnel, thereby endangering our country’s sovereign authority.” Democratic senator John Fetterman warned: “It would be a fatal blow to the judicial and moral standing of ICC to pursue this path against Israel.” He said he was calling on Joe Biden to intervene as part of the administration’s ongoing commitment to Israel. The international court of justice, a separate UN court responsible for handling inter-state disputes, is due to reveal on Tuesday if it will accept a request by Nicaragua to order Germany to stop providing humanitarian or military aid to Israel on the basis that Germany has a duty under the genocide convention to prevent a potential genocide. Israel has rejected allegations of wrongdoing and accused both international courts of severe bias. Explore more on these topics International criminal court Israel Hamas Gaza Israel-Gaza war Palestine International criminal justice news Share Reuse this content International criminal court Israel Hamas Gaza Israel-Gaza war Palestine International criminal justice news |
Met police to pay ‘five-figure sum’ to French publisher arrested under anti-terror laws
Protesters rally outside the British embassy in Paris to demand the release of Ernest Moret in April 2023. Photograph: NurPhoto/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Protesters rally outside the British embassy in Paris to demand the release of Ernest Moret in April 2023. Photograph: NurPhoto/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Met police to pay ‘five-figure sum’ to French publisher arrested under anti-terror laws This article is more than 1 year old Exclusive: Ernest Moret was held en route to a book fair amid fears police are using counter-terrorism powers to target activists A French publisher who was arrested in London by counter-terror officers has been awarded “substantial” damages by the Metropolitan police , as new figures reveal thousands of foreign nationals have been stopped at UK ports under anti-terror laws. Ernest Moret, 29, a foreign rights manager for Éditions la Fabrique, was detained at St Pancras station in April last year on his way to the London book fair. He was held under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, and questioned by counter-terrorist officers about whether he had taken part in anti-government demonstrations in France and if he backed the French president , Emmanuel Macron. Moret’s mobile phone and laptop were also confiscated for several weeks, before being returned to him after police decided to take no further action. The police also admitted downloading Moret’s sim card before returning his phone. Moret and his lawyer, Richard Parry of Saunders Solicitors, pursued a claim for misfeasance in a public office and false imprisonment. To settle the claim without recourse to litigation, the Met has now agreed to pay Moret a five-figure sum plus his legal fees. Parry has also written to the Met commissioner, Mark Rowley, demanding an apology for Moret. Parry said: “In our view the stop was neither necessary nor proportionate. With the financial compensation settled it is now time for a full apology from the Metropolitan police.” The move comes after an inquiry by the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall KC, which said the Met’s treatment of Moret was “exaggerated and overbearing”. Hall said the police should not be using counter-terrorism powers in public order policing. “The rights of free expression and protest are too important in a democracy to allow individuals to be investigated for potential terrorism merely because they may have been involved in protests that have turned violent,” Hall’s report said. Moret was one of at least 4,525 foreign nationals to be stopped at UK ports from 2020 to 2023, under schedule 7 of the 2000 Terrorism Act, according to daily logs released under freedom of information laws. Of these, 1,432 citizens were from the UK’s allies in EU member states, including 334 Irish, 192 Dutch, 175 French, 99 Swedes and 94 Germans. Countries with more fraught relations with the UK had fewer of their citizens stopped. For example, 72 Russians and 32 Chinese citizens were recorded being stopped under the Terrorism Act in the three-year period, the logs reveal. Of the 8,001 people stopped from 2020 to 2023 whose nationality was recorded, 3,476 or 43.4% were British with the remaining 56.5% coming from almost 100 different countries. The figures, released by the National Police Chiefs’ Council, are likely to be an underestimate of the foreign nationals stopped under the terrorism act because recording nationality is not a mandatory requirement under the logging system. The figures have deepened concerns that police are using counter-terrorism powers to target political activists. Kevin Blowe, campaigns coordinator at the police monitoring group Netpol, said the figures were “genuinely alarming”. He said: “We know these powers are used for purposes other than investigating terrorism, including the targeting of political activists visiting Britain. “The data does suggest that EU states are seeking the active help of British police to target their own citizens too, although state surveillance is so lacking in transparency and accountability that this is almost impossible to confirm. “Schedule 7 is discriminatory and draconian, it undermines civil rights and criminalises communities and political dissent. Like so many other counter-terrorism powers put in place a decade ago by the last Labour government, it is something that we would all be better off without.” Chris Jones, from the European civil liberties group Statewatch, said the figures demonstrate the working links between UK police, their counterparts in Europe and Europol. He added: “While Europol obviously are responsible for dealing with some seriously harmful activities such as murder and human trafficking, their monitoring of peaceful protest groups is not the kind of thing that the police should be doing in an ostensibly liberal democratic system. “How they draw the lines between those things is a mystery, but arguably they don’t do a great job of it.” The Met confirmed the force had reached a settlement with Moret, the details of which were private. In a statement, the Met added: “We fully cooperated with a review into the circumstances of this case, which was carried out by Jonathan Hall KC, and following the publication of his report, we also voluntarily referred the matter to the Independent Office of Police Conduct (IOPC). The IOPC subsequently directed the Met police to carry out a local investigation and that remains ongoing at this time. “Schedule 7 is an important power in protecting the borders of the UK and it remains a vital tool in our efforts to counter the terrorist threat and keep the public safe.” “We remain fully committed to ensuring that we use these powers proportionately and responsibly. Explore more on these topics UK security and counter-terrorism Counter-terrorism policy Schedule 7 Metropolitan police Police France Protest news Share Reuse this content Protesters rally outside the British embassy in Paris to demand the release of Ernest Moret in April 2023. Photograph: NurPhoto/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Protesters rally outside the British embassy in Paris to demand the release of Ernest Moret in April 2023. Photograph: NurPhoto/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Met police to pay ‘five-figure sum’ to French publisher arrested under anti-terror laws This article is more than 1 year old Exclusive: Ernest Moret was held en route to a book fair amid fears police are using counter-terrorism powers to target activists A French publisher who was arrested in London by counter-terror officers has been awarded “substantial” damages by the Metropolitan police , as new figures reveal thousands of foreign nationals have been stopped at UK ports under anti-terror laws. Ernest Moret, 29, a foreign rights manager for Éditions la Fabrique, was detained at St Pancras station in April last year on his way to the London book fair. He was held under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, and questioned by counter-terrorist officers about whether he had taken part in anti-government demonstrations in France and if he backed the French president , Emmanuel Macron. Moret’s mobile phone and laptop were also confiscated for several weeks, before being returned to him after police decided to take no further action. The police also admitted downloading Moret’s sim card before returning his phone. Moret and his lawyer, Richard Parry of Saunders Solicitors, pursued a claim for misfeasance in a public office and false imprisonment. To settle the claim without recourse to litigation, the Met has now agreed to pay Moret a five-figure sum plus his legal fees. Parry has also written to the Met commissioner, Mark Rowley, demanding an apology for Moret. Parry said: “In our view the stop was neither necessary nor proportionate. With the financial compensation settled it is now time for a full apology from the Metropolitan police.” The move comes after an inquiry by the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall KC, which said the Met’s treatment of Moret was “exaggerated and overbearing”. Hall said the police should not be using counter-terrorism powers in public order policing. “The rights of free expression and protest are too important in a democracy to allow individuals to be investigated for potential terrorism merely because they may have been involved in protests that have turned violent,” Hall’s report said. Moret was one of at least 4,525 foreign nationals to be stopped at UK ports from 2020 to 2023, under schedule 7 of the 2000 Terrorism Act, according to daily logs released under freedom of information laws. Of these, 1,432 citizens were from the UK’s allies in EU member states, including 334 Irish, 192 Dutch, 175 French, 99 Swedes and 94 Germans. Countries with more fraught relations with the UK had fewer of their citizens stopped. For example, 72 Russians and 32 Chinese citizens were recorded being stopped under the Terrorism Act in the three-year period, the logs reveal. Of the 8,001 people stopped from 2020 to 2023 whose nationality was recorded, 3,476 or 43.4% were British with the remaining 56.5% coming from almost 100 different countries. The figures, released by the National Police Chiefs’ Council, are likely to be an underestimate of the foreign nationals stopped under the terrorism act because recording nationality is not a mandatory requirement under the logging system. The figures have deepened concerns that police are using counter-terrorism powers to target political activists. Kevin Blowe, campaigns coordinator at the police monitoring group Netpol, said the figures were “genuinely alarming”. He said: “We know these powers are used for purposes other than investigating terrorism, including the targeting of political activists visiting Britain. “The data does suggest that EU states are seeking the active help of British police to target their own citizens too, although state surveillance is so lacking in transparency and accountability that this is almost impossible to confirm. “Schedule 7 is discriminatory and draconian, it undermines civil rights and criminalises communities and political dissent. Like so many other counter-terrorism powers put in place a decade ago by the last Labour government, it is something that we would all be better off without.” Chris Jones, from the European civil liberties group Statewatch, said the figures demonstrate the working links between UK police, their counterparts in Europe and Europol. He added: “While Europol obviously are responsible for dealing with some seriously harmful activities such as murder and human trafficking, their monitoring of peaceful protest groups is not the kind of thing that the police should be doing in an ostensibly liberal democratic system. “How they draw the lines between those things is a mystery, but arguably they don’t do a great job of it.” The Met confirmed the force had reached a settlement with Moret, the details of which were private. In a statement, the Met added: “We fully cooperated with a review into the circumstances of this case, which was carried out by Jonathan Hall KC, and following the publication of his report, we also voluntarily referred the matter to the Independent Office of Police Conduct (IOPC). The IOPC subsequently directed the Met police to carry out a local investigation and that remains ongoing at this time. “Schedule 7 is an important power in protecting the borders of the UK and it remains a vital tool in our efforts to counter the terrorist threat and keep the public safe.” “We remain fully committed to ensuring that we use these powers proportionately and responsibly. Explore more on these topics UK security and counter-terrorism Counter-terrorism policy Schedule 7 Metropolitan police Police France Protest news Share Reuse this content Protesters rally outside the British embassy in Paris to demand the release of Ernest Moret in April 2023. Photograph: NurPhoto/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Protesters rally outside the British embassy in Paris to demand the release of Ernest Moret in April 2023. Photograph: NurPhoto/Getty Images Protesters rally outside the British embassy in Paris to demand the release of Ernest Moret in April 2023. Photograph: NurPhoto/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Protesters rally outside the British embassy in Paris to demand the release of Ernest Moret in April 2023. Photograph: NurPhoto/Getty Images Protesters rally outside the British embassy in Paris to demand the release of Ernest Moret in April 2023. Photograph: NurPhoto/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Protesters rally outside the British embassy in Paris to demand the release of Ernest Moret in April 2023. Photograph: NurPhoto/Getty Images Protesters rally outside the British embassy in Paris to demand the release of Ernest Moret in April 2023. Photograph: NurPhoto/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Protesters rally outside the British embassy in Paris to demand the release of Ernest Moret in April 2023. Photograph: NurPhoto/Getty Images Protesters rally outside the British embassy in Paris to demand the release of Ernest Moret in April 2023. Photograph: NurPhoto/Getty Images Protesters rally outside the British embassy in Paris to demand the release of Ernest Moret in April 2023. Photograph: NurPhoto/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Met police to pay ‘five-figure sum’ to French publisher arrested under anti-terror laws This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Met police to pay ‘five-figure sum’ to French publisher arrested under anti-terror laws This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Met police to pay ‘five-figure sum’ to French publisher arrested under anti-terror laws This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Exclusive: Ernest Moret was held en route to a book fair amid fears police are using counter-terrorism powers to target activists Exclusive: Ernest Moret was held en route to a book fair amid fears police are using counter-terrorism powers to target activists Exclusive: Ernest Moret was held en route to a book fair amid fears police are using counter-terrorism powers to target activists A French publisher who was arrested in London by counter-terror officers has been awarded “substantial” damages by the Metropolitan police , as new figures reveal thousands of foreign nationals have been stopped at UK ports under anti-terror laws. Ernest Moret, 29, a foreign rights manager for Éditions la Fabrique, was detained at St Pancras station in April last year on his way to the London book fair. He was held under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, and questioned by counter-terrorist officers about whether he had taken part in anti-government demonstrations in France and if he backed the French president , Emmanuel Macron. Moret’s mobile phone and laptop were also confiscated for several weeks, before being returned to him after police decided to take no further action. The police also admitted downloading Moret’s sim card before returning his phone. Moret and his lawyer, Richard Parry of Saunders Solicitors, pursued a claim for misfeasance in a public office and false imprisonment. To settle the claim without recourse to litigation, the Met has now agreed to pay Moret a five-figure sum plus his legal fees. Parry has also written to the Met commissioner, Mark Rowley, demanding an apology for Moret. Parry said: “In our view the stop was neither necessary nor proportionate. With the financial compensation settled it is now time for a full apology from the Metropolitan police.” The move comes after an inquiry by the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall KC, which said the Met’s treatment of Moret was “exaggerated and overbearing”. Hall said the police should not be using counter-terrorism powers in public order policing. “The rights of free expression and protest are too important in a democracy to allow individuals to be investigated for potential terrorism merely because they may have been involved in protests that have turned violent,” Hall’s report said. Moret was one of at least 4,525 foreign nationals to be stopped at UK ports from 2020 to 2023, under schedule 7 of the 2000 Terrorism Act, according to daily logs released under freedom of information laws. Of these, 1,432 citizens were from the UK’s allies in EU member states, including 334 Irish, 192 Dutch, 175 French, 99 Swedes and 94 Germans. Countries with more fraught relations with the UK had fewer of their citizens stopped. For example, 72 Russians and 32 Chinese citizens were recorded being stopped under the Terrorism Act in the three-year period, the logs reveal. Of the 8,001 people stopped from 2020 to 2023 whose nationality was recorded, 3,476 or 43.4% were British with the remaining 56.5% coming from almost 100 different countries. The figures, released by the National Police Chiefs’ Council, are likely to be an underestimate of the foreign nationals stopped under the terrorism act because recording nationality is not a mandatory requirement under the logging system. The figures have deepened concerns that police are using counter-terrorism powers to target political activists. Kevin Blowe, campaigns coordinator at the police monitoring group Netpol, said the figures were “genuinely alarming”. He said: “We know these powers are used for purposes other than investigating terrorism, including the targeting of political activists visiting Britain. “The data does suggest that EU states are seeking the active help of British police to target their own citizens too, although state surveillance is so lacking in transparency and accountability that this is almost impossible to confirm. “Schedule 7 is discriminatory and draconian, it undermines civil rights and criminalises communities and political dissent. Like so many other counter-terrorism powers put in place a decade ago by the last Labour government, it is something that we would all be better off without.” Chris Jones, from the European civil liberties group Statewatch, said the figures demonstrate the working links between UK police, their counterparts in Europe and Europol. He added: “While Europol obviously are responsible for dealing with some seriously harmful activities such as murder and human trafficking, their monitoring of peaceful protest groups is not the kind of thing that the police should be doing in an ostensibly liberal democratic system. “How they draw the lines between those things is a mystery, but arguably they don’t do a great job of it.” The Met confirmed the force had reached a settlement with Moret, the details of which were private. In a statement, the Met added: “We fully cooperated with a review into the circumstances of this case, which was carried out by Jonathan Hall KC, and following the publication of his report, we also voluntarily referred the matter to the Independent Office of Police Conduct (IOPC). The IOPC subsequently directed the Met police to carry out a local investigation and that remains ongoing at this time. “Schedule 7 is an important power in protecting the borders of the UK and it remains a vital tool in our efforts to counter the terrorist threat and keep the public safe.” “We remain fully committed to ensuring that we use these powers proportionately and responsibly. Explore more on these topics UK security and counter-terrorism Counter-terrorism policy Schedule 7 Metropolitan police Police France Protest news Share Reuse this content A French publisher who was arrested in London by counter-terror officers has been awarded “substantial” damages by the Metropolitan police , as new figures reveal thousands of foreign nationals have been stopped at UK ports under anti-terror laws. Ernest Moret, 29, a foreign rights manager for Éditions la Fabrique, was detained at St Pancras station in April last year on his way to the London book fair. He was held under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, and questioned by counter-terrorist officers about whether he had taken part in anti-government demonstrations in France and if he backed the French president , Emmanuel Macron. Moret’s mobile phone and laptop were also confiscated for several weeks, before being returned to him after police decided to take no further action. The police also admitted downloading Moret’s sim card before returning his phone. Moret and his lawyer, Richard Parry of Saunders Solicitors, pursued a claim for misfeasance in a public office and false imprisonment. To settle the claim without recourse to litigation, the Met has now agreed to pay Moret a five-figure sum plus his legal fees. Parry has also written to the Met commissioner, Mark Rowley, demanding an apology for Moret. Parry said: “In our view the stop was neither necessary nor proportionate. With the financial compensation settled it is now time for a full apology from the Metropolitan police.” The move comes after an inquiry by the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall KC, which said the Met’s treatment of Moret was “exaggerated and overbearing”. Hall said the police should not be using counter-terrorism powers in public order policing. “The rights of free expression and protest are too important in a democracy to allow individuals to be investigated for potential terrorism merely because they may have been involved in protests that have turned violent,” Hall’s report said. Moret was one of at least 4,525 foreign nationals to be stopped at UK ports from 2020 to 2023, under schedule 7 of the 2000 Terrorism Act, according to daily logs released under freedom of information laws. Of these, 1,432 citizens were from the UK’s allies in EU member states, including 334 Irish, 192 Dutch, 175 French, 99 Swedes and 94 Germans. Countries with more fraught relations with the UK had fewer of their citizens stopped. For example, 72 Russians and 32 Chinese citizens were recorded being stopped under the Terrorism Act in the three-year period, the logs reveal. Of the 8,001 people stopped from 2020 to 2023 whose nationality was recorded, 3,476 or 43.4% were British with the remaining 56.5% coming from almost 100 different countries. The figures, released by the National Police Chiefs’ Council, are likely to be an underestimate of the foreign nationals stopped under the terrorism act because recording nationality is not a mandatory requirement under the logging system. The figures have deepened concerns that police are using counter-terrorism powers to target political activists. Kevin Blowe, campaigns coordinator at the police monitoring group Netpol, said the figures were “genuinely alarming”. He said: “We know these powers are used for purposes other than investigating terrorism, including the targeting of political activists visiting Britain. “The data does suggest that EU states are seeking the active help of British police to target their own citizens too, although state surveillance is so lacking in transparency and accountability that this is almost impossible to confirm. “Schedule 7 is discriminatory and draconian, it undermines civil rights and criminalises communities and political dissent. Like so many other counter-terrorism powers put in place a decade ago by the last Labour government, it is something that we would all be better off without.” Chris Jones, from the European civil liberties group Statewatch, said the figures demonstrate the working links between UK police, their counterparts in Europe and Europol. He added: “While Europol obviously are responsible for dealing with some seriously harmful activities such as murder and human trafficking, their monitoring of peaceful protest groups is not the kind of thing that the police should be doing in an ostensibly liberal democratic system. “How they draw the lines between those things is a mystery, but arguably they don’t do a great job of it.” The Met confirmed the force had reached a settlement with Moret, the details of which were private. In a statement, the Met added: “We fully cooperated with a review into the circumstances of this case, which was carried out by Jonathan Hall KC, and following the publication of his report, we also voluntarily referred the matter to the Independent Office of Police Conduct (IOPC). The IOPC subsequently directed the Met police to carry out a local investigation and that remains ongoing at this time. “Schedule 7 is an important power in protecting the borders of the UK and it remains a vital tool in our efforts to counter the terrorist threat and keep the public safe.” “We remain fully committed to ensuring that we use these powers proportionately and responsibly. Explore more on these topics UK security and counter-terrorism Counter-terrorism policy Schedule 7 Metropolitan police Police France Protest news Share Reuse this content A French publisher who was arrested in London by counter-terror officers has been awarded “substantial” damages by the Metropolitan police , as new figures reveal thousands of foreign nationals have been stopped at UK ports under anti-terror laws. Ernest Moret, 29, a foreign rights manager for Éditions la Fabrique, was detained at St Pancras station in April last year on his way to the London book fair. He was held under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, and questioned by counter-terrorist officers about whether he had taken part in anti-government demonstrations in France and if he backed the French president , Emmanuel Macron. Moret’s mobile phone and laptop were also confiscated for several weeks, before being returned to him after police decided to take no further action. The police also admitted downloading Moret’s sim card before returning his phone. Moret and his lawyer, Richard Parry of Saunders Solicitors, pursued a claim for misfeasance in a public office and false imprisonment. To settle the claim without recourse to litigation, the Met has now agreed to pay Moret a five-figure sum plus his legal fees. Parry has also written to the Met commissioner, Mark Rowley, demanding an apology for Moret. Parry said: “In our view the stop was neither necessary nor proportionate. With the financial compensation settled it is now time for a full apology from the Metropolitan police.” The move comes after an inquiry by the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall KC, which said the Met’s treatment of Moret was “exaggerated and overbearing”. Hall said the police should not be using counter-terrorism powers in public order policing. “The rights of free expression and protest are too important in a democracy to allow individuals to be investigated for potential terrorism merely because they may have been involved in protests that have turned violent,” Hall’s report said. Moret was one of at least 4,525 foreign nationals to be stopped at UK ports from 2020 to 2023, under schedule 7 of the 2000 Terrorism Act, according to daily logs released under freedom of information laws. Of these, 1,432 citizens were from the UK’s allies in EU member states, including 334 Irish, 192 Dutch, 175 French, 99 Swedes and 94 Germans. Countries with more fraught relations with the UK had fewer of their citizens stopped. For example, 72 Russians and 32 Chinese citizens were recorded being stopped under the Terrorism Act in the three-year period, the logs reveal. Of the 8,001 people stopped from 2020 to 2023 whose nationality was recorded, 3,476 or 43.4% were British with the remaining 56.5% coming from almost 100 different countries. The figures, released by the National Police Chiefs’ Council, are likely to be an underestimate of the foreign nationals stopped under the terrorism act because recording nationality is not a mandatory requirement under the logging system. The figures have deepened concerns that police are using counter-terrorism powers to target political activists. Kevin Blowe, campaigns coordinator at the police monitoring group Netpol, said the figures were “genuinely alarming”. He said: “We know these powers are used for purposes other than investigating terrorism, including the targeting of political activists visiting Britain. “The data does suggest that EU states are seeking the active help of British police to target their own citizens too, although state surveillance is so lacking in transparency and accountability that this is almost impossible to confirm. “Schedule 7 is discriminatory and draconian, it undermines civil rights and criminalises communities and political dissent. Like so many other counter-terrorism powers put in place a decade ago by the last Labour government, it is something that we would all be better off without.” Chris Jones, from the European civil liberties group Statewatch, said the figures demonstrate the working links between UK police, their counterparts in Europe and Europol. He added: “While Europol obviously are responsible for dealing with some seriously harmful activities such as murder and human trafficking, their monitoring of peaceful protest groups is not the kind of thing that the police should be doing in an ostensibly liberal democratic system. “How they draw the lines between those things is a mystery, but arguably they don’t do a great job of it.” The Met confirmed the force had reached a settlement with Moret, the details of which were private. In a statement, the Met added: “We fully cooperated with a review into the circumstances of this case, which was carried out by Jonathan Hall KC, and following the publication of his report, we also voluntarily referred the matter to the Independent Office of Police Conduct (IOPC). The IOPC subsequently directed the Met police to carry out a local investigation and that remains ongoing at this time. “Schedule 7 is an important power in protecting the borders of the UK and it remains a vital tool in our efforts to counter the terrorist threat and keep the public safe.” “We remain fully committed to ensuring that we use these powers proportionately and responsibly. A French publisher who was arrested in London by counter-terror officers has been awarded “substantial” damages by the Metropolitan police , as new figures reveal thousands of foreign nationals have been stopped at UK ports under anti-terror laws. Ernest Moret, 29, a foreign rights manager for Éditions la Fabrique, was detained at St Pancras station in April last year on his way to the London book fair. He was held under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, and questioned by counter-terrorist officers about whether he had taken part in anti-government demonstrations in France and if he backed the French president , Emmanuel Macron. Moret’s mobile phone and laptop were also confiscated for several weeks, before being returned to him after police decided to take no further action. The police also admitted downloading Moret’s sim card before returning his phone. Moret and his lawyer, Richard Parry of Saunders Solicitors, pursued a claim for misfeasance in a public office and false imprisonment. To settle the claim without recourse to litigation, the Met has now agreed to pay Moret a five-figure sum plus his legal fees. Parry has also written to the Met commissioner, Mark Rowley, demanding an apology for Moret. Parry said: “In our view the stop was neither necessary nor proportionate. With the financial compensation settled it is now time for a full apology from the Metropolitan police.” The move comes after an inquiry by the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall KC, which said the Met’s treatment of Moret was “exaggerated and overbearing”. Hall said the police should not be using counter-terrorism powers in public order policing. “The rights of free expression and protest are too important in a democracy to allow individuals to be investigated for potential terrorism merely because they may have been involved in protests that have turned violent,” Hall’s report said. Moret was one of at least 4,525 foreign nationals to be stopped at UK ports from 2020 to 2023, under schedule 7 of the 2000 Terrorism Act, according to daily logs released under freedom of information laws. Of these, 1,432 citizens were from the UK’s allies in EU member states, including 334 Irish, 192 Dutch, 175 French, 99 Swedes and 94 Germans. Countries with more fraught relations with the UK had fewer of their citizens stopped. For example, 72 Russians and 32 Chinese citizens were recorded being stopped under the Terrorism Act in the three-year period, the logs reveal. Of the 8,001 people stopped from 2020 to 2023 whose nationality was recorded, 3,476 or 43.4% were British with the remaining 56.5% coming from almost 100 different countries. The figures, released by the National Police Chiefs’ Council, are likely to be an underestimate of the foreign nationals stopped under the terrorism act because recording nationality is not a mandatory requirement under the logging system. The figures have deepened concerns that police are using counter-terrorism powers to target political activists. Kevin Blowe, campaigns coordinator at the police monitoring group Netpol, said the figures were “genuinely alarming”. He said: “We know these powers are used for purposes other than investigating terrorism, including the targeting of political activists visiting Britain. “The data does suggest that EU states are seeking the active help of British police to target their own citizens too, although state surveillance is so lacking in transparency and accountability that this is almost impossible to confirm. “Schedule 7 is discriminatory and draconian, it undermines civil rights and criminalises communities and political dissent. Like so many other counter-terrorism powers put in place a decade ago by the last Labour government, it is something that we would all be better off without.” Chris Jones, from the European civil liberties group Statewatch, said the figures demonstrate the working links between UK police, their counterparts in Europe and Europol. He added: “While Europol obviously are responsible for dealing with some seriously harmful activities such as murder and human trafficking, their monitoring of peaceful protest groups is not the kind of thing that the police should be doing in an ostensibly liberal democratic system. “How they draw the lines between those things is a mystery, but arguably they don’t do a great job of it.” The Met confirmed the force had reached a settlement with Moret, the details of which were private. In a statement, the Met added: “We fully cooperated with a review into the circumstances of this case, which was carried out by Jonathan Hall KC, and following the publication of his report, we also voluntarily referred the matter to the Independent Office of Police Conduct (IOPC). The IOPC subsequently directed the Met police to carry out a local investigation and that remains ongoing at this time. “Schedule 7 is an important power in protecting the borders of the UK and it remains a vital tool in our efforts to counter the terrorist threat and keep the public safe.” “We remain fully committed to ensuring that we use these powers proportionately and responsibly. A French publisher who was arrested in London by counter-terror officers has been awarded “substantial” damages by the Metropolitan police , as new figures reveal thousands of foreign nationals have been stopped at UK ports under anti-terror laws. Ernest Moret, 29, a foreign rights manager for Éditions la Fabrique, was detained at St Pancras station in April last year on his way to the London book fair. He was held under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, and questioned by counter-terrorist officers about whether he had taken part in anti-government demonstrations in France and if he backed the French president , Emmanuel Macron. Moret’s mobile phone and laptop were also confiscated for several weeks, before being returned to him after police decided to take no further action. The police also admitted downloading Moret’s sim card before returning his phone. Moret and his lawyer, Richard Parry of Saunders Solicitors, pursued a claim for misfeasance in a public office and false imprisonment. To settle the claim without recourse to litigation, the Met has now agreed to pay Moret a five-figure sum plus his legal fees. Parry has also written to the Met commissioner, Mark Rowley, demanding an apology for Moret. Parry said: “In our view the stop was neither necessary nor proportionate. With the financial compensation settled it is now time for a full apology from the Metropolitan police.” The move comes after an inquiry by the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall KC, which said the Met’s treatment of Moret was “exaggerated and overbearing”. Hall said the police should not be using counter-terrorism powers in public order policing. “The rights of free expression and protest are too important in a democracy to allow individuals to be investigated for potential terrorism merely because they may have been involved in protests that have turned violent,” Hall’s report said. Moret was one of at least 4,525 foreign nationals to be stopped at UK ports from 2020 to 2023, under schedule 7 of the 2000 Terrorism Act, according to daily logs released under freedom of information laws. Of these, 1,432 citizens were from the UK’s allies in EU member states, including 334 Irish, 192 Dutch, 175 French, 99 Swedes and 94 Germans. Countries with more fraught relations with the UK had fewer of their citizens stopped. For example, 72 Russians and 32 Chinese citizens were recorded being stopped under the Terrorism Act in the three-year period, the logs reveal. Of the 8,001 people stopped from 2020 to 2023 whose nationality was recorded, 3,476 or 43.4% were British with the remaining 56.5% coming from almost 100 different countries. The figures, released by the National Police Chiefs’ Council, are likely to be an underestimate of the foreign nationals stopped under the terrorism act because recording nationality is not a mandatory requirement under the logging system. The figures have deepened concerns that police are using counter-terrorism powers to target political activists. Kevin Blowe, campaigns coordinator at the police monitoring group Netpol, said the figures were “genuinely alarming”. He said: “We know these powers are used for purposes other than investigating terrorism, including the targeting of political activists visiting Britain. “The data does suggest that EU states are seeking the active help of British police to target their own citizens too, although state surveillance is so lacking in transparency and accountability that this is almost impossible to confirm. “Schedule 7 is discriminatory and draconian, it undermines civil rights and criminalises communities and political dissent. Like so many other counter-terrorism powers put in place a decade ago by the last Labour government, it is something that we would all be better off without.” Chris Jones, from the European civil liberties group Statewatch, said the figures demonstrate the working links between UK police, their counterparts in Europe and Europol. He added: “While Europol obviously are responsible for dealing with some seriously harmful activities such as murder and human trafficking, their monitoring of peaceful protest groups is not the kind of thing that the police should be doing in an ostensibly liberal democratic system. “How they draw the lines between those things is a mystery, but arguably they don’t do a great job of it.” The Met confirmed the force had reached a settlement with Moret, the details of which were private. In a statement, the Met added: “We fully cooperated with a review into the circumstances of this case, which was carried out by Jonathan Hall KC, and following the publication of his report, we also voluntarily referred the matter to the Independent Office of Police Conduct (IOPC). The IOPC subsequently directed the Met police to carry out a local investigation and that remains ongoing at this time. “Schedule 7 is an important power in protecting the borders of the UK and it remains a vital tool in our efforts to counter the terrorist threat and keep the public safe.” “We remain fully committed to ensuring that we use these powers proportionately and responsibly. Explore more on these topics UK security and counter-terrorism Counter-terrorism policy Schedule 7 Metropolitan police Police France Protest news Share Reuse this content UK security and counter-terrorism Counter-terrorism policy Schedule 7 Metropolitan police Police France Protest news |
John Swinney favourite to become Scotland’s first minister after Humza Yousaf quits
Humza Yousaf (left) and John Swinney arrive for First Minister’s Questions at the Scottish Parliament in 2022. Photograph: SST/Alamy View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf (left) and John Swinney arrive for First Minister’s Questions at the Scottish Parliament in 2022. Photograph: SST/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old John Swinney favourite to become Scotland’s first minister after Humza Yousaf quits This article is more than 1 year old Former SNP leader may stand as unity candidate as Yousaf steps down after one year in job Humza Yousaf has stepped down as Scotland’s first minister after failing to secure enough cross-party support to survive a major crisis with the Scottish Greens. His resignation on Monday has thrown the Scottish National party into crisis, a little over a year after he took office, with the party’s former leader John Swinney quickly emerging as the favourite to become Scotland’s next first minister. Various bookmakers said they had stopped taking bets on Swinney. Swinney, who quit government after Nicola Sturgeon stood down in February 2023, confirmed he was “giving very careful consideration” to standing as a unity candidate, after coming under intense pressure from senior figures inside the SNP. Humza Yousaf quits as Scotland’s first minister – UK politics live Read more “I’ve been somewhat overwhelmed by the requests that have been made for me to do that, with many, many messages from many colleagues across the party,” he told Sky News. “So I’m giving that issue very active consideration.” In a hastily arranged speech in Edinburgh, Yousaf admitted he triggered the crisis by unilaterally scrapping a government coalition deal with the Scottish Greens four days ago, leading to the Greens demanding his resignation. “After spending the weekend reflecting on what is best for my party, for the government and for the country I lead, I’ve concluded that repairing our relationship across the political divide can only be done with someone else at the helm,” he said in a statement at Bute House, the first minister’s official residence. Yousaf said he planned to stay on as first minister until the party was able to elect his successor, who will lead a minority government dependent on opposition support to get laws passed and its budget agreed. View image in fullscreen John Swinney speaking to the media in London following Humza Yousaf’s announcement that he is stepping down a SNP leader and Scotland’s first minister. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA His government’s survival also depends on Scottish Labour either dropping its plans to call a vote of no confidence in the SNP government this week, or the motion being defeated. The SNP needs the Scottish Greens to either abstain on the Labour motion or to support the SNP to avoid defeat. Under Holyrood’s rules, a government cannot stay in power if it loses a vote of no confidence. Party dealmakers expect they can persuade Kate Forbes, the former finance secretary, to stand aside in Swinney’s favour, in order to avoid another bruising leadership contest which could further damage the SNP’s popularity, so close to a general election. Forbes narrowly lost to Yousaf in last year’s leadership contest after mounting aggressive attacks on his centre-left politics and his close ties to Sturgeon, and pushing a much more mainstream policy agenda. If Swinney does not stand, Forbes will run for the leadership. Speaking in London on Monday, before Yousaf’s resignation statement, Swinney acknowledged he was weighing up the request, but said it was a “very demanding role”. He added: “I will consider what the first minister [Yousaf] says and reflect on that. I may well have more to say at a later stage during the week.” One party veteran said Swinney, who is the SNP’s most experienced senior figure, had been asked to stay as party leader until at least the Scottish parliamentary elections due in May 2026. His allies say Swinney has to weigh that decision against the needs of his family, however. “I’ve got lots of things to think about,” Swinney said. “There’s the whole question of my family and I have to make sure that I do the right thing by my family, they are precious to me. I have to do the right thing by my party and by my country.” The party source said: “He’s the best placed to give us a soft landing” after the last few tumultuous months for the party, which has been overshadowed by the police investigation into the SNP’s finances and the recent embezzlement charges levelled against Peter Murrell , Sturgeon’s husband and the party’s former chief executive. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Swinney, who previously served as SNP leader between 2000 and 2004, is seen by his backers as far more likely than Forbes to win the support of the Scottish Greens, who will refuse to work with Forbes because of her socially-conservative views on abortion, gender reform and same-sex marriage. Yousaf had been facing two confidence votes at Holyrood in the coming days in a spiralling crisis precipitated by his axing of the governing partnership with the Scottish Greens last Thursday. The Greens responded by announcing hours later they would support a motion of no confidence in Yousaf’s leadership brought by the Scottish Conservatives. Without the support of the Greens and with the SNP two votes short of a majority, this left Yousaf reliant on the vote of Ash Regan, who defected from the SNP last year to join Alex Salmond’s Alba party in protest at a lack of progress on independence and the Scottish government’s stance on gender recognition changes. The party’s distaste for doing any deals with Salmond and Alba has partly fuelled the quest to get Swinney to stand for the leadership. Yousaf, who was Scotland’s first leader of Asian and Muslim heritage, scrapped the Bute House agreement – which was brokered by Sturgeon in 2021 and cemented a progressive, pro-independence majority at Holyrood – after increasing internal criticism within the SNP of Green influence on policy direction. The Scottish Greens planned its own vote on the future of the agreement after members reacted furiously to the scrapping of climate targets and an NHS Scotland decision to pause the prescription of puberty blockers after the publication of the Cass review of gender identity services . Yousaf has faced a series of challenges since his election, including the continuing police investigation into party finances that resulted in the arrest of Sturgeon and Murrell being charged with embezzlement. Responding to Yousaf’s announcement, the Scottish Labour leader, Anas Sarwar, called for an election. “The SNP are a divided party which is out of ideas and incapable of rising to the challenges Scotland faces,” he said. “They cannot impose another unelected first minister on Scotland in a backroom deal; the people of Scotland should decide who leads our country. There must be an election – it’s time for change and Scottish Labour is ready to deliver it.” Explore more on these topics Humza Yousaf Scottish politics Scotland Scottish National party (SNP) John Swinney news Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf (left) and John Swinney arrive for First Minister’s Questions at the Scottish Parliament in 2022. Photograph: SST/Alamy View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf (left) and John Swinney arrive for First Minister’s Questions at the Scottish Parliament in 2022. Photograph: SST/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old John Swinney favourite to become Scotland’s first minister after Humza Yousaf quits This article is more than 1 year old Former SNP leader may stand as unity candidate as Yousaf steps down after one year in job Humza Yousaf has stepped down as Scotland’s first minister after failing to secure enough cross-party support to survive a major crisis with the Scottish Greens. His resignation on Monday has thrown the Scottish National party into crisis, a little over a year after he took office, with the party’s former leader John Swinney quickly emerging as the favourite to become Scotland’s next first minister. Various bookmakers said they had stopped taking bets on Swinney. Swinney, who quit government after Nicola Sturgeon stood down in February 2023, confirmed he was “giving very careful consideration” to standing as a unity candidate, after coming under intense pressure from senior figures inside the SNP. Humza Yousaf quits as Scotland’s first minister – UK politics live Read more “I’ve been somewhat overwhelmed by the requests that have been made for me to do that, with many, many messages from many colleagues across the party,” he told Sky News. “So I’m giving that issue very active consideration.” In a hastily arranged speech in Edinburgh, Yousaf admitted he triggered the crisis by unilaterally scrapping a government coalition deal with the Scottish Greens four days ago, leading to the Greens demanding his resignation. “After spending the weekend reflecting on what is best for my party, for the government and for the country I lead, I’ve concluded that repairing our relationship across the political divide can only be done with someone else at the helm,” he said in a statement at Bute House, the first minister’s official residence. Yousaf said he planned to stay on as first minister until the party was able to elect his successor, who will lead a minority government dependent on opposition support to get laws passed and its budget agreed. View image in fullscreen John Swinney speaking to the media in London following Humza Yousaf’s announcement that he is stepping down a SNP leader and Scotland’s first minister. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA His government’s survival also depends on Scottish Labour either dropping its plans to call a vote of no confidence in the SNP government this week, or the motion being defeated. The SNP needs the Scottish Greens to either abstain on the Labour motion or to support the SNP to avoid defeat. Under Holyrood’s rules, a government cannot stay in power if it loses a vote of no confidence. Party dealmakers expect they can persuade Kate Forbes, the former finance secretary, to stand aside in Swinney’s favour, in order to avoid another bruising leadership contest which could further damage the SNP’s popularity, so close to a general election. Forbes narrowly lost to Yousaf in last year’s leadership contest after mounting aggressive attacks on his centre-left politics and his close ties to Sturgeon, and pushing a much more mainstream policy agenda. If Swinney does not stand, Forbes will run for the leadership. Speaking in London on Monday, before Yousaf’s resignation statement, Swinney acknowledged he was weighing up the request, but said it was a “very demanding role”. He added: “I will consider what the first minister [Yousaf] says and reflect on that. I may well have more to say at a later stage during the week.” One party veteran said Swinney, who is the SNP’s most experienced senior figure, had been asked to stay as party leader until at least the Scottish parliamentary elections due in May 2026. His allies say Swinney has to weigh that decision against the needs of his family, however. “I’ve got lots of things to think about,” Swinney said. “There’s the whole question of my family and I have to make sure that I do the right thing by my family, they are precious to me. I have to do the right thing by my party and by my country.” The party source said: “He’s the best placed to give us a soft landing” after the last few tumultuous months for the party, which has been overshadowed by the police investigation into the SNP’s finances and the recent embezzlement charges levelled against Peter Murrell , Sturgeon’s husband and the party’s former chief executive. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Swinney, who previously served as SNP leader between 2000 and 2004, is seen by his backers as far more likely than Forbes to win the support of the Scottish Greens, who will refuse to work with Forbes because of her socially-conservative views on abortion, gender reform and same-sex marriage. Yousaf had been facing two confidence votes at Holyrood in the coming days in a spiralling crisis precipitated by his axing of the governing partnership with the Scottish Greens last Thursday. The Greens responded by announcing hours later they would support a motion of no confidence in Yousaf’s leadership brought by the Scottish Conservatives. Without the support of the Greens and with the SNP two votes short of a majority, this left Yousaf reliant on the vote of Ash Regan, who defected from the SNP last year to join Alex Salmond’s Alba party in protest at a lack of progress on independence and the Scottish government’s stance on gender recognition changes. The party’s distaste for doing any deals with Salmond and Alba has partly fuelled the quest to get Swinney to stand for the leadership. Yousaf, who was Scotland’s first leader of Asian and Muslim heritage, scrapped the Bute House agreement – which was brokered by Sturgeon in 2021 and cemented a progressive, pro-independence majority at Holyrood – after increasing internal criticism within the SNP of Green influence on policy direction. The Scottish Greens planned its own vote on the future of the agreement after members reacted furiously to the scrapping of climate targets and an NHS Scotland decision to pause the prescription of puberty blockers after the publication of the Cass review of gender identity services . Yousaf has faced a series of challenges since his election, including the continuing police investigation into party finances that resulted in the arrest of Sturgeon and Murrell being charged with embezzlement. Responding to Yousaf’s announcement, the Scottish Labour leader, Anas Sarwar, called for an election. “The SNP are a divided party which is out of ideas and incapable of rising to the challenges Scotland faces,” he said. “They cannot impose another unelected first minister on Scotland in a backroom deal; the people of Scotland should decide who leads our country. There must be an election – it’s time for change and Scottish Labour is ready to deliver it.” Explore more on these topics Humza Yousaf Scottish politics Scotland Scottish National party (SNP) John Swinney news Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf (left) and John Swinney arrive for First Minister’s Questions at the Scottish Parliament in 2022. Photograph: SST/Alamy View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf (left) and John Swinney arrive for First Minister’s Questions at the Scottish Parliament in 2022. Photograph: SST/Alamy Humza Yousaf (left) and John Swinney arrive for First Minister’s Questions at the Scottish Parliament in 2022. Photograph: SST/Alamy View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf (left) and John Swinney arrive for First Minister’s Questions at the Scottish Parliament in 2022. Photograph: SST/Alamy Humza Yousaf (left) and John Swinney arrive for First Minister’s Questions at the Scottish Parliament in 2022. Photograph: SST/Alamy View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf (left) and John Swinney arrive for First Minister’s Questions at the Scottish Parliament in 2022. Photograph: SST/Alamy Humza Yousaf (left) and John Swinney arrive for First Minister’s Questions at the Scottish Parliament in 2022. Photograph: SST/Alamy View image in fullscreen Humza Yousaf (left) and John Swinney arrive for First Minister’s Questions at the Scottish Parliament in 2022. Photograph: SST/Alamy Humza Yousaf (left) and John Swinney arrive for First Minister’s Questions at the Scottish Parliament in 2022. Photograph: SST/Alamy Humza Yousaf (left) and John Swinney arrive for First Minister’s Questions at the Scottish Parliament in 2022. Photograph: SST/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old John Swinney favourite to become Scotland’s first minister after Humza Yousaf quits This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old John Swinney favourite to become Scotland’s first minister after Humza Yousaf quits This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old John Swinney favourite to become Scotland’s first minister after Humza Yousaf quits This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Former SNP leader may stand as unity candidate as Yousaf steps down after one year in job Former SNP leader may stand as unity candidate as Yousaf steps down after one year in job Former SNP leader may stand as unity candidate as Yousaf steps down after one year in job Humza Yousaf has stepped down as Scotland’s first minister after failing to secure enough cross-party support to survive a major crisis with the Scottish Greens. His resignation on Monday has thrown the Scottish National party into crisis, a little over a year after he took office, with the party’s former leader John Swinney quickly emerging as the favourite to become Scotland’s next first minister. Various bookmakers said they had stopped taking bets on Swinney. Swinney, who quit government after Nicola Sturgeon stood down in February 2023, confirmed he was “giving very careful consideration” to standing as a unity candidate, after coming under intense pressure from senior figures inside the SNP. Humza Yousaf quits as Scotland’s first minister – UK politics live Read more “I’ve been somewhat overwhelmed by the requests that have been made for me to do that, with many, many messages from many colleagues across the party,” he told Sky News. “So I’m giving that issue very active consideration.” In a hastily arranged speech in Edinburgh, Yousaf admitted he triggered the crisis by unilaterally scrapping a government coalition deal with the Scottish Greens four days ago, leading to the Greens demanding his resignation. “After spending the weekend reflecting on what is best for my party, for the government and for the country I lead, I’ve concluded that repairing our relationship across the political divide can only be done with someone else at the helm,” he said in a statement at Bute House, the first minister’s official residence. Yousaf said he planned to stay on as first minister until the party was able to elect his successor, who will lead a minority government dependent on opposition support to get laws passed and its budget agreed. View image in fullscreen John Swinney speaking to the media in London following Humza Yousaf’s announcement that he is stepping down a SNP leader and Scotland’s first minister. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA His government’s survival also depends on Scottish Labour either dropping its plans to call a vote of no confidence in the SNP government this week, or the motion being defeated. The SNP needs the Scottish Greens to either abstain on the Labour motion or to support the SNP to avoid defeat. Under Holyrood’s rules, a government cannot stay in power if it loses a vote of no confidence. Party dealmakers expect they can persuade Kate Forbes, the former finance secretary, to stand aside in Swinney’s favour, in order to avoid another bruising leadership contest which could further damage the SNP’s popularity, so close to a general election. Forbes narrowly lost to Yousaf in last year’s leadership contest after mounting aggressive attacks on his centre-left politics and his close ties to Sturgeon, and pushing a much more mainstream policy agenda. If Swinney does not stand, Forbes will run for the leadership. Speaking in London on Monday, before Yousaf’s resignation statement, Swinney acknowledged he was weighing up the request, but said it was a “very demanding role”. He added: “I will consider what the first minister [Yousaf] says and reflect on that. I may well have more to say at a later stage during the week.” One party veteran said Swinney, who is the SNP’s most experienced senior figure, had been asked to stay as party leader until at least the Scottish parliamentary elections due in May 2026. His allies say Swinney has to weigh that decision against the needs of his family, however. “I’ve got lots of things to think about,” Swinney said. “There’s the whole question of my family and I have to make sure that I do the right thing by my family, they are precious to me. I have to do the right thing by my party and by my country.” The party source said: “He’s the best placed to give us a soft landing” after the last few tumultuous months for the party, which has been overshadowed by the police investigation into the SNP’s finances and the recent embezzlement charges levelled against Peter Murrell , Sturgeon’s husband and the party’s former chief executive. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Swinney, who previously served as SNP leader between 2000 and 2004, is seen by his backers as far more likely than Forbes to win the support of the Scottish Greens, who will refuse to work with Forbes because of her socially-conservative views on abortion, gender reform and same-sex marriage. Yousaf had been facing two confidence votes at Holyrood in the coming days in a spiralling crisis precipitated by his axing of the governing partnership with the Scottish Greens last Thursday. The Greens responded by announcing hours later they would support a motion of no confidence in Yousaf’s leadership brought by the Scottish Conservatives. Without the support of the Greens and with the SNP two votes short of a majority, this left Yousaf reliant on the vote of Ash Regan, who defected from the SNP last year to join Alex Salmond’s Alba party in protest at a lack of progress on independence and the Scottish government’s stance on gender recognition changes. The party’s distaste for doing any deals with Salmond and Alba has partly fuelled the quest to get Swinney to stand for the leadership. Yousaf, who was Scotland’s first leader of Asian and Muslim heritage, scrapped the Bute House agreement – which was brokered by Sturgeon in 2021 and cemented a progressive, pro-independence majority at Holyrood – after increasing internal criticism within the SNP of Green influence on policy direction. The Scottish Greens planned its own vote on the future of the agreement after members reacted furiously to the scrapping of climate targets and an NHS Scotland decision to pause the prescription of puberty blockers after the publication of the Cass review of gender identity services . Yousaf has faced a series of challenges since his election, including the continuing police investigation into party finances that resulted in the arrest of Sturgeon and Murrell being charged with embezzlement. Responding to Yousaf’s announcement, the Scottish Labour leader, Anas Sarwar, called for an election. “The SNP are a divided party which is out of ideas and incapable of rising to the challenges Scotland faces,” he said. “They cannot impose another unelected first minister on Scotland in a backroom deal; the people of Scotland should decide who leads our country. There must be an election – it’s time for change and Scottish Labour is ready to deliver it.” Explore more on these topics Humza Yousaf Scottish politics Scotland Scottish National party (SNP) John Swinney news Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf has stepped down as Scotland’s first minister after failing to secure enough cross-party support to survive a major crisis with the Scottish Greens. His resignation on Monday has thrown the Scottish National party into crisis, a little over a year after he took office, with the party’s former leader John Swinney quickly emerging as the favourite to become Scotland’s next first minister. Various bookmakers said they had stopped taking bets on Swinney. Swinney, who quit government after Nicola Sturgeon stood down in February 2023, confirmed he was “giving very careful consideration” to standing as a unity candidate, after coming under intense pressure from senior figures inside the SNP. Humza Yousaf quits as Scotland’s first minister – UK politics live Read more “I’ve been somewhat overwhelmed by the requests that have been made for me to do that, with many, many messages from many colleagues across the party,” he told Sky News. “So I’m giving that issue very active consideration.” In a hastily arranged speech in Edinburgh, Yousaf admitted he triggered the crisis by unilaterally scrapping a government coalition deal with the Scottish Greens four days ago, leading to the Greens demanding his resignation. “After spending the weekend reflecting on what is best for my party, for the government and for the country I lead, I’ve concluded that repairing our relationship across the political divide can only be done with someone else at the helm,” he said in a statement at Bute House, the first minister’s official residence. Yousaf said he planned to stay on as first minister until the party was able to elect his successor, who will lead a minority government dependent on opposition support to get laws passed and its budget agreed. View image in fullscreen John Swinney speaking to the media in London following Humza Yousaf’s announcement that he is stepping down a SNP leader and Scotland’s first minister. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA His government’s survival also depends on Scottish Labour either dropping its plans to call a vote of no confidence in the SNP government this week, or the motion being defeated. The SNP needs the Scottish Greens to either abstain on the Labour motion or to support the SNP to avoid defeat. Under Holyrood’s rules, a government cannot stay in power if it loses a vote of no confidence. Party dealmakers expect they can persuade Kate Forbes, the former finance secretary, to stand aside in Swinney’s favour, in order to avoid another bruising leadership contest which could further damage the SNP’s popularity, so close to a general election. Forbes narrowly lost to Yousaf in last year’s leadership contest after mounting aggressive attacks on his centre-left politics and his close ties to Sturgeon, and pushing a much more mainstream policy agenda. If Swinney does not stand, Forbes will run for the leadership. Speaking in London on Monday, before Yousaf’s resignation statement, Swinney acknowledged he was weighing up the request, but said it was a “very demanding role”. He added: “I will consider what the first minister [Yousaf] says and reflect on that. I may well have more to say at a later stage during the week.” One party veteran said Swinney, who is the SNP’s most experienced senior figure, had been asked to stay as party leader until at least the Scottish parliamentary elections due in May 2026. His allies say Swinney has to weigh that decision against the needs of his family, however. “I’ve got lots of things to think about,” Swinney said. “There’s the whole question of my family and I have to make sure that I do the right thing by my family, they are precious to me. I have to do the right thing by my party and by my country.” The party source said: “He’s the best placed to give us a soft landing” after the last few tumultuous months for the party, which has been overshadowed by the police investigation into the SNP’s finances and the recent embezzlement charges levelled against Peter Murrell , Sturgeon’s husband and the party’s former chief executive. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Swinney, who previously served as SNP leader between 2000 and 2004, is seen by his backers as far more likely than Forbes to win the support of the Scottish Greens, who will refuse to work with Forbes because of her socially-conservative views on abortion, gender reform and same-sex marriage. Yousaf had been facing two confidence votes at Holyrood in the coming days in a spiralling crisis precipitated by his axing of the governing partnership with the Scottish Greens last Thursday. The Greens responded by announcing hours later they would support a motion of no confidence in Yousaf’s leadership brought by the Scottish Conservatives. Without the support of the Greens and with the SNP two votes short of a majority, this left Yousaf reliant on the vote of Ash Regan, who defected from the SNP last year to join Alex Salmond’s Alba party in protest at a lack of progress on independence and the Scottish government’s stance on gender recognition changes. The party’s distaste for doing any deals with Salmond and Alba has partly fuelled the quest to get Swinney to stand for the leadership. Yousaf, who was Scotland’s first leader of Asian and Muslim heritage, scrapped the Bute House agreement – which was brokered by Sturgeon in 2021 and cemented a progressive, pro-independence majority at Holyrood – after increasing internal criticism within the SNP of Green influence on policy direction. The Scottish Greens planned its own vote on the future of the agreement after members reacted furiously to the scrapping of climate targets and an NHS Scotland decision to pause the prescription of puberty blockers after the publication of the Cass review of gender identity services . Yousaf has faced a series of challenges since his election, including the continuing police investigation into party finances that resulted in the arrest of Sturgeon and Murrell being charged with embezzlement. Responding to Yousaf’s announcement, the Scottish Labour leader, Anas Sarwar, called for an election. “The SNP are a divided party which is out of ideas and incapable of rising to the challenges Scotland faces,” he said. “They cannot impose another unelected first minister on Scotland in a backroom deal; the people of Scotland should decide who leads our country. There must be an election – it’s time for change and Scottish Labour is ready to deliver it.” Explore more on these topics Humza Yousaf Scottish politics Scotland Scottish National party (SNP) John Swinney news Share Reuse this content Humza Yousaf has stepped down as Scotland’s first minister after failing to secure enough cross-party support to survive a major crisis with the Scottish Greens. His resignation on Monday has thrown the Scottish National party into crisis, a little over a year after he took office, with the party’s former leader John Swinney quickly emerging as the favourite to become Scotland’s next first minister. Various bookmakers said they had stopped taking bets on Swinney. Swinney, who quit government after Nicola Sturgeon stood down in February 2023, confirmed he was “giving very careful consideration” to standing as a unity candidate, after coming under intense pressure from senior figures inside the SNP. Humza Yousaf quits as Scotland’s first minister – UK politics live Read more “I’ve been somewhat overwhelmed by the requests that have been made for me to do that, with many, many messages from many colleagues across the party,” he told Sky News. “So I’m giving that issue very active consideration.” In a hastily arranged speech in Edinburgh, Yousaf admitted he triggered the crisis by unilaterally scrapping a government coalition deal with the Scottish Greens four days ago, leading to the Greens demanding his resignation. “After spending the weekend reflecting on what is best for my party, for the government and for the country I lead, I’ve concluded that repairing our relationship across the political divide can only be done with someone else at the helm,” he said in a statement at Bute House, the first minister’s official residence. Yousaf said he planned to stay on as first minister until the party was able to elect his successor, who will lead a minority government dependent on opposition support to get laws passed and its budget agreed. View image in fullscreen John Swinney speaking to the media in London following Humza Yousaf’s announcement that he is stepping down a SNP leader and Scotland’s first minister. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA His government’s survival also depends on Scottish Labour either dropping its plans to call a vote of no confidence in the SNP government this week, or the motion being defeated. The SNP needs the Scottish Greens to either abstain on the Labour motion or to support the SNP to avoid defeat. Under Holyrood’s rules, a government cannot stay in power if it loses a vote of no confidence. Party dealmakers expect they can persuade Kate Forbes, the former finance secretary, to stand aside in Swinney’s favour, in order to avoid another bruising leadership contest which could further damage the SNP’s popularity, so close to a general election. Forbes narrowly lost to Yousaf in last year’s leadership contest after mounting aggressive attacks on his centre-left politics and his close ties to Sturgeon, and pushing a much more mainstream policy agenda. If Swinney does not stand, Forbes will run for the leadership. Speaking in London on Monday, before Yousaf’s resignation statement, Swinney acknowledged he was weighing up the request, but said it was a “very demanding role”. He added: “I will consider what the first minister [Yousaf] says and reflect on that. I may well have more to say at a later stage during the week.” One party veteran said Swinney, who is the SNP’s most experienced senior figure, had been asked to stay as party leader until at least the Scottish parliamentary elections due in May 2026. His allies say Swinney has to weigh that decision against the needs of his family, however. “I’ve got lots of things to think about,” Swinney said. “There’s the whole question of my family and I have to make sure that I do the right thing by my family, they are precious to me. I have to do the right thing by my party and by my country.” The party source said: “He’s the best placed to give us a soft landing” after the last few tumultuous months for the party, which has been overshadowed by the police investigation into the SNP’s finances and the recent embezzlement charges levelled against Peter Murrell , Sturgeon’s husband and the party’s former chief executive. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Swinney, who previously served as SNP leader between 2000 and 2004, is seen by his backers as far more likely than Forbes to win the support of the Scottish Greens, who will refuse to work with Forbes because of her socially-conservative views on abortion, gender reform and same-sex marriage. Yousaf had been facing two confidence votes at Holyrood in the coming days in a spiralling crisis precipitated by his axing of the governing partnership with the Scottish Greens last Thursday. The Greens responded by announcing hours later they would support a motion of no confidence in Yousaf’s leadership brought by the Scottish Conservatives. Without the support of the Greens and with the SNP two votes short of a majority, this left Yousaf reliant on the vote of Ash Regan, who defected from the SNP last year to join Alex Salmond’s Alba party in protest at a lack of progress on independence and the Scottish government’s stance on gender recognition changes. The party’s distaste for doing any deals with Salmond and Alba has partly fuelled the quest to get Swinney to stand for the leadership. Yousaf, who was Scotland’s first leader of Asian and Muslim heritage, scrapped the Bute House agreement – which was brokered by Sturgeon in 2021 and cemented a progressive, pro-independence majority at Holyrood – after increasing internal criticism within the SNP of Green influence on policy direction. The Scottish Greens planned its own vote on the future of the agreement after members reacted furiously to the scrapping of climate targets and an NHS Scotland decision to pause the prescription of puberty blockers after the publication of the Cass review of gender identity services . Yousaf has faced a series of challenges since his election, including the continuing police investigation into party finances that resulted in the arrest of Sturgeon and Murrell being charged with embezzlement. Responding to Yousaf’s announcement, the Scottish Labour leader, Anas Sarwar, called for an election. “The SNP are a divided party which is out of ideas and incapable of rising to the challenges Scotland faces,” he said. “They cannot impose another unelected first minister on Scotland in a backroom deal; the people of Scotland should decide who leads our country. There must be an election – it’s time for change and Scottish Labour is ready to deliver it.” Humza Yousaf has stepped down as Scotland’s first minister after failing to secure enough cross-party support to survive a major crisis with the Scottish Greens. His resignation on Monday has thrown the Scottish National party into crisis, a little over a year after he took office, with the party’s former leader John Swinney quickly emerging as the favourite to become Scotland’s next first minister. Various bookmakers said they had stopped taking bets on Swinney. Swinney, who quit government after Nicola Sturgeon stood down in February 2023, confirmed he was “giving very careful consideration” to standing as a unity candidate, after coming under intense pressure from senior figures inside the SNP. Humza Yousaf quits as Scotland’s first minister – UK politics live Read more “I’ve been somewhat overwhelmed by the requests that have been made for me to do that, with many, many messages from many colleagues across the party,” he told Sky News. “So I’m giving that issue very active consideration.” In a hastily arranged speech in Edinburgh, Yousaf admitted he triggered the crisis by unilaterally scrapping a government coalition deal with the Scottish Greens four days ago, leading to the Greens demanding his resignation. “After spending the weekend reflecting on what is best for my party, for the government and for the country I lead, I’ve concluded that repairing our relationship across the political divide can only be done with someone else at the helm,” he said in a statement at Bute House, the first minister’s official residence. Yousaf said he planned to stay on as first minister until the party was able to elect his successor, who will lead a minority government dependent on opposition support to get laws passed and its budget agreed. View image in fullscreen John Swinney speaking to the media in London following Humza Yousaf’s announcement that he is stepping down a SNP leader and Scotland’s first minister. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA His government’s survival also depends on Scottish Labour either dropping its plans to call a vote of no confidence in the SNP government this week, or the motion being defeated. The SNP needs the Scottish Greens to either abstain on the Labour motion or to support the SNP to avoid defeat. Under Holyrood’s rules, a government cannot stay in power if it loses a vote of no confidence. Party dealmakers expect they can persuade Kate Forbes, the former finance secretary, to stand aside in Swinney’s favour, in order to avoid another bruising leadership contest which could further damage the SNP’s popularity, so close to a general election. Forbes narrowly lost to Yousaf in last year’s leadership contest after mounting aggressive attacks on his centre-left politics and his close ties to Sturgeon, and pushing a much more mainstream policy agenda. If Swinney does not stand, Forbes will run for the leadership. Speaking in London on Monday, before Yousaf’s resignation statement, Swinney acknowledged he was weighing up the request, but said it was a “very demanding role”. He added: “I will consider what the first minister [Yousaf] says and reflect on that. I may well have more to say at a later stage during the week.” One party veteran said Swinney, who is the SNP’s most experienced senior figure, had been asked to stay as party leader until at least the Scottish parliamentary elections due in May 2026. His allies say Swinney has to weigh that decision against the needs of his family, however. “I’ve got lots of things to think about,” Swinney said. “There’s the whole question of my family and I have to make sure that I do the right thing by my family, they are precious to me. I have to do the right thing by my party and by my country.” The party source said: “He’s the best placed to give us a soft landing” after the last few tumultuous months for the party, which has been overshadowed by the police investigation into the SNP’s finances and the recent embezzlement charges levelled against Peter Murrell , Sturgeon’s husband and the party’s former chief executive. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Swinney, who previously served as SNP leader between 2000 and 2004, is seen by his backers as far more likely than Forbes to win the support of the Scottish Greens, who will refuse to work with Forbes because of her socially-conservative views on abortion, gender reform and same-sex marriage. Yousaf had been facing two confidence votes at Holyrood in the coming days in a spiralling crisis precipitated by his axing of the governing partnership with the Scottish Greens last Thursday. The Greens responded by announcing hours later they would support a motion of no confidence in Yousaf’s leadership brought by the Scottish Conservatives. Without the support of the Greens and with the SNP two votes short of a majority, this left Yousaf reliant on the vote of Ash Regan, who defected from the SNP last year to join Alex Salmond’s Alba party in protest at a lack of progress on independence and the Scottish government’s stance on gender recognition changes. The party’s distaste for doing any deals with Salmond and Alba has partly fuelled the quest to get Swinney to stand for the leadership. Yousaf, who was Scotland’s first leader of Asian and Muslim heritage, scrapped the Bute House agreement – which was brokered by Sturgeon in 2021 and cemented a progressive, pro-independence majority at Holyrood – after increasing internal criticism within the SNP of Green influence on policy direction. The Scottish Greens planned its own vote on the future of the agreement after members reacted furiously to the scrapping of climate targets and an NHS Scotland decision to pause the prescription of puberty blockers after the publication of the Cass review of gender identity services . Yousaf has faced a series of challenges since his election, including the continuing police investigation into party finances that resulted in the arrest of Sturgeon and Murrell being charged with embezzlement. Responding to Yousaf’s announcement, the Scottish Labour leader, Anas Sarwar, called for an election. “The SNP are a divided party which is out of ideas and incapable of rising to the challenges Scotland faces,” he said. “They cannot impose another unelected first minister on Scotland in a backroom deal; the people of Scotland should decide who leads our country. There must be an election – it’s time for change and Scottish Labour is ready to deliver it.” Humza Yousaf has stepped down as Scotland’s first minister after failing to secure enough cross-party support to survive a major crisis with the Scottish Greens. His resignation on Monday has thrown the Scottish National party into crisis, a little over a year after he took office, with the party’s former leader John Swinney quickly emerging as the favourite to become Scotland’s next first minister. Various bookmakers said they had stopped taking bets on Swinney. Swinney, who quit government after Nicola Sturgeon stood down in February 2023, confirmed he was “giving very careful consideration” to standing as a unity candidate, after coming under intense pressure from senior figures inside the SNP. Humza Yousaf quits as Scotland’s first minister – UK politics live Read more Humza Yousaf quits as Scotland’s first minister – UK politics live Read more Humza Yousaf quits as Scotland’s first minister – UK politics live Read more Humza Yousaf quits as Scotland’s first minister – UK politics live Humza Yousaf quits as Scotland’s first minister – UK politics live “I’ve been somewhat overwhelmed by the requests that have been made for me to do that, with many, many messages from many colleagues across the party,” he told Sky News. “So I’m giving that issue very active consideration.” In a hastily arranged speech in Edinburgh, Yousaf admitted he triggered the crisis by unilaterally scrapping a government coalition deal with the Scottish Greens four days ago, leading to the Greens demanding his resignation. “After spending the weekend reflecting on what is best for my party, for the government and for the country I lead, I’ve concluded that repairing our relationship across the political divide can only be done with someone else at the helm,” he said in a statement at Bute House, the first minister’s official residence. Yousaf said he planned to stay on as first minister until the party was able to elect his successor, who will lead a minority government dependent on opposition support to get laws passed and its budget agreed. His government’s survival also depends on Scottish Labour either dropping its plans to call a vote of no confidence in the SNP government this week, or the motion being defeated. The SNP needs the Scottish Greens to either abstain on the Labour motion or to support the SNP to avoid defeat. Under Holyrood’s rules, a government cannot stay in power if it loses a vote of no confidence. Party dealmakers expect they can persuade Kate Forbes, the former finance secretary, to stand aside in Swinney’s favour, in order to avoid another bruising leadership contest which could further damage the SNP’s popularity, so close to a general election. Forbes narrowly lost to Yousaf in last year’s leadership contest after mounting aggressive attacks on his centre-left politics and his close ties to Sturgeon, and pushing a much more mainstream policy agenda. If Swinney does not stand, Forbes will run for the leadership. Speaking in London on Monday, before Yousaf’s resignation statement, Swinney acknowledged he was weighing up the request, but said it was a “very demanding role”. He added: “I will consider what the first minister [Yousaf] says and reflect on that. I may well have more to say at a later stage during the week.” One party veteran said Swinney, who is the SNP’s most experienced senior figure, had been asked to stay as party leader until at least the Scottish parliamentary elections due in May 2026. His allies say Swinney has to weigh that decision against the needs of his family, however. “I’ve got lots of things to think about,” Swinney said. “There’s the whole question of my family and I have to make sure that I do the right thing by my family, they are precious to me. I have to do the right thing by my party and by my country.” The party source said: “He’s the best placed to give us a soft landing” after the last few tumultuous months for the party, which has been overshadowed by the police investigation into the SNP’s finances and the recent embezzlement charges levelled against Peter Murrell , Sturgeon’s husband and the party’s former chief executive. Swinney, who previously served as SNP leader between 2000 and 2004, is seen by his backers as far more likely than Forbes to win the support of the Scottish Greens, who will refuse to work with Forbes because of her socially-conservative views on abortion, gender reform and same-sex marriage. Yousaf had been facing two confidence votes at Holyrood in the coming days in a spiralling crisis precipitated by his axing of the governing partnership with the Scottish Greens last Thursday. The Greens responded by announcing hours later they would support a motion of no confidence in Yousaf’s leadership brought by the Scottish Conservatives. Without the support of the Greens and with the SNP two votes short of a majority, this left Yousaf reliant on the vote of Ash Regan, who defected from the SNP last year to join Alex Salmond’s Alba party in protest at a lack of progress on independence and the Scottish government’s stance on gender recognition changes. The party’s distaste for doing any deals with Salmond and Alba has partly fuelled the quest to get Swinney to stand for the leadership. Yousaf, who was Scotland’s first leader of Asian and Muslim heritage, scrapped the Bute House agreement – which was brokered by Sturgeon in 2021 and cemented a progressive, pro-independence majority at Holyrood – after increasing internal criticism within the SNP of Green influence on policy direction. The Scottish Greens planned its own vote on the future of the agreement after members reacted furiously to the scrapping of climate targets and an NHS Scotland decision to pause the prescription of puberty blockers after the publication of the Cass review of gender identity services . Yousaf has faced a series of challenges since his election, including the continuing police investigation into party finances that resulted in the arrest of Sturgeon and Murrell being charged with embezzlement. Responding to Yousaf’s announcement, the Scottish Labour leader, Anas Sarwar, called for an election. “The SNP are a divided party which is out of ideas and incapable of rising to the chall
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
Could Vienna’s approach to affordable housing work in California?
Apartment buildings in Vienna, Austria, in 2022. Photograph: Leonhard Föger/Reuters View image in fullscreen Apartment buildings in Vienna, Austria, in 2022. Photograph: Leonhard Föger/Reuters This article is more than 1 year old Could Vienna’s approach to affordable housing work in California? This article is more than 1 year old Housing costs and homelessness are on the rise in California. In the Austrian capital, people of all income levels live in subsidised housing – and more is being built Imagine a beautiful city where a centrally located two-bedroom apartment can cost you as little as $600 a month. For many US policymakers, it’s a pipe dream. And yet in Vienna, it’s a reality. In the past two years, at least four delegations of housing experts and political leaders from California have visited the Austrian capital, hoping to unlock the secrets of why Vienna regularly comes top in surveys of the world’s most livable cities. ‘We just need a little help’: how a safe parking plan for people living in cars split a US town Read more They’re struck by the absence of homeless encampments, and marvel at the sheer scale of the subsidised housing developments which include shared amenities such swimming pools, gyms, workshops, communal gardens and spacious roof terraces. And they wonder how they can bring some of it home to a region gripped by an unaffordability crisis that lands long-term residents out of state or on the streets. Last year, California counted more than 180,000 people living on the streets, a 40% rise in five years. Housing costs in the state are now double what they are in the rest of the US. Average monthly payments for a newly purchased mid-tier home are more than $5,500 a month and wages have not kept pace with rising rents. “You now need to earn $200,000 a year to have a comfortable middle-class life in California,” said Jennifer LeSar of the Global Policy Leadership Academy, which organises the trips to Vienna. The foundation of Vienna’s success is a housing policy that ensures all people live in dignified circumstances at affordable rents in homes they can keep for their lifetime and even pass on to their children. It’s not just for the poorest but the middle class as well. Sixty per cent of people in Vienna live in subsidised housing, compared with just 5% of Californians. “This is incredible. The US sucks man. Why can’t we do this?” said Ruben Mendoza, a young activist from Uplift San Bernardino, shaking his head in disbelief as he was shown around a mixed housing development near the city centre with communal facilities and affordable rents. Mendoza said one of the reasons he became a housing advocate was because he feared never being able to own a home in the community he grew up in. Like most Californians, he spends more than 50% of his disposable household income on rent. In Vienna, residents on average spend 27% of their income on housing. There are some obvious differences. Vienna is densely built, with the majority of residents living in relatively small apartments within easy distance of the city centre. Most Viennese are renters, and use the well-connected public transport system to move around. Most Californians live in owner-occupied single-family homes in the suburbs. Public transportation systems are underfunded, and most residents use their car to travel. But the biggest difference is how much new affordable housing is going up in Vienna. “Just look at all the cranes,” said Adam Briones from California’s Community Builders, a research and advocacy organization working to close the racial wealth gap through housing. The city of Vienna builds about 6,000-7,000 new units of subsidised housing every year as it tries to keep up with rising demand. “They’re just building more housing than us. It’s not rocket science,” said Corey Smith of San Francisco’s Housing Action Coalition. Vienna is the fastest-growing capital in Europe. Half of its residents were either born outside Austria or have parents who were, so city planners are constantly anticipating future demand. Until the 1990s, this once grand imperial capital was in the doldrums, stuck out on the edge of western Europe. It was once the centre of the Habsburg empire and the cultural and intellectual capital of Europe. Two world wars, fascism and the brutal destruction of the city’s once-vibrant Jewish population put an end to that. The artists and the intellectuals had left. It was an ageing city, full of ghosts and the remnants of a fallen empire. Two historic shifts at the end of the last millennium changed Vienna’s fortunes. Communism collapsed in 1989, the iron curtain came down and Austria joined the European Union six years after that. Young people from across central and southern Europe moved to Vienna, attracted by the wide availability of housing, its relative affordability, job opportunities and its position at the centre of a new enlarged European Union. Since then, its population has grown by 25%. Today 2 million people live there, and their number is growing year on year. Nimbyism was a recurring topic during the week-long visit, with the Californians complaining that often when new developments are planned, small groups of residents try to block them through the courts, which makes the construction process slower and more expensive. Gleam Davis, a Santa Monica city councillor and former mayor, said that when her city tried to build affordable housing on parking lots, residents protested. “Unfortunately, in my city, some people think finding room for cars is more important than building homes for people.” Even within her own city council, there is strong opposition to building more housing, she said. “Some of my colleagues think we can police ourselves out of this or build our share of affordable housing in the desert and move those people out there.” Vienna has a more top-down approach to tackling nimbyism. As the delegation toured Seestadt Aspern, a new town built on a former military airfield outside Vienna, the urban planner Kurt Hoftstetter explained that they had held up to 20 meetings in the nearby villages before they began construction. “We did this to inform residents of our plans and ask them how we could make it more acceptable to them. But we did not ask their permission.” Tech billionaires want to build a new city in rural California. Voters may get a say on it Read more Vienna’s affordable housing system is supported by a 1% tax on all salaries which provides a permanent funding stream for new construction. This goes back 100 years to the end of the first world war, when the city was overflowing with refugees and homeless people. The Habsburg empire had collapsed, and Vienna became a city state with its own tax-raising ability inside the new federal Republic of Austria. “Red Vienna”, as it was known in the 1920s, has been a social democrat bastion within a largely conservative, Catholic country ever since (apart from 12 years under fascist rule) and providing permanently affordable housing became part of its DNA. The housing tax currently generates about $250m annually and the city gets a further $200m in rental income and loan repayments. Since the 1990s, most new developments are built by limited-profit housing associations, which benefit from 1% government loans. They also benefit from building on land sold to them by Vienna’s landbank (Wohnfonds Wien), a quasi-governmental body that buys up land to build new neighbourhoods with a mix of private and subsidised housing. Inspired by the Vienna model, Los Angeles launched its own landbank in 2022 aimed at setting aside city land for affordable housing construction. And the city passed a new measure increasing transfer taxes on homes over $5m. The hope is that this “mansion tax” will create a permanent funding stream for affordable housing. “A lot of people who worked on that measure visited Vienna,” says Jackson Loop from the Southern Californian Association of Nonprofit Housing. “But we’re getting push-back from the real estate lobby who are trying to overturn the tax increase in the courts, so it’s in a legal limbo right now.” Property taxes, both residential and corporate, are comparatively low in California, said Loop. That’s because of proposition 13, he explained– a provision that passed back in the late 1970s and limited the possible annual increase in property taxes if a property didn’t change owners, including for large landowning corporations such as Disney. Another key difference is the way Vienna chooses to spend its annual housing budget. Most of it goes into subsidising construction, whereas in the US it mostly goes to directly subsidising residents through vouchers and housing benefit schemes. In other words, Vienna focuses on supply whereas the US focuses on demand. “I’d love someone to do a calculation of how much the US is spending on housing vouchers nationwide and see whether some of this money could be transferred into building new homes instead,” said Davis, the Santa Monica city councilmember. One of the biggest cohorts in the delegation was from San Diego, where the number of unhoused residents has risen significantly in recent years. San Diego has seen dramatic increases in home and rent prices, making the county increasingly unaffordable for longtime residents. The median home sale price for an existing single-family home in the county clocked in at $980,000 in February, according to the local NBC affiliate , up from $925,000 the previous month and $878,000 one year ago. “There’s about 10,000 people living on our streets” says Elyse Lowe, director of development services. “We have families living in their cars, tented communities, and open drug use. This is impacting businesses downtown. People don’t want to see that. We also have many people living from paycheck to paycheck which means they are at high risk of homelessness.” Inspired by what she has learnt in Vienna, Lowe wants to start a discussion in San Diego about “re-evaluating” city land. “I’ve never heard anyone ask the question: is the small municipal airfield in the city centre that only serves small planes the best use of our land when we are trying to put people first?” she said. Heidi Vonblum, San Diego’s planning director, said her biggest takeaway was the cleanliness and sense of stability in a city like Vienna. “Lack of affordable housing isn’t just an individual problem, it’s a problem for the whole community,” she observed. “What I notice here is that housing is seen as a means of providing social stability for lower-income communities, and it is very family-orientated. All their policies start from a base of how we best support children and families?” Why are women in California facing homelessness at an alarming rate? Read more All the visitors were surprised by how the subsidised housing has been dispersed throughout the city. “The mayor likes to say that you cannot tell if a person is rich or poor in Vienna from their address,” says Christian Shantl from the Vienna housing department. He said the city focused on creating mixed-income neighbourhoods with all the necessary services for the poorest as well as middle-class families. They’re particularly keen on helping young people, so those between 18 and 30 still living with their parents can get on the housing list. The last four California delegations were brought to Vienna by the Global Policy Leadership Academy (GPLA), which aims to educate leaders who want to tackle deep-rooted societal problems. Its CEO, LeSar, said she wanted “to get a conversation going back home about building affordable homes on a large scale”. “I think that is happening,” she added. “We had two legislators from California who came here in the first delegation and they’re now sponsoring bills.” Helmi Hisserich, a former GPLA executive who is now director of housing for Portland, Oregon, has accompanied all four delegations and says participants often get emotional. “We have had delegates weeping when they see what is on offer in Vienna. It tends to be the younger ones, the under 40s who can only dream of getting on the housing ladder in California.” Beatriz Stambuk-Torres, a young GPLA researcher and city planner who moved to Vienna a year ago, told the group how she used to spend over 50% of her income on rent while living in Irvine, California. Now she has a nice apartment near Vienna’s city centre and spends 25% of her salary on rent and doesn’t need a car. “I had a good job and a master’s from one of our best universities, but I couldn’t save because of housing costs and my student loans. When I had a medical bill, I had to borrow from friends and family. I did everything right and I still was struggling to make ends meet.” As she spoke about doing “everything right” her voice cracked, and her eyes filled with tears. Discussing housing policy can be dry and technical but the impact on people’s lives is profound. Explore more on these topics Housing California Austria US house prices Social housing West Coast features Share Reuse this content Apartment buildings in Vienna, Austria, in 2022. Photograph: Leonhard Föger/Reuters View image in fullscreen Apartment buildings in Vienna, Austria, in 2022. Photograph: Leonhard Föger/Reuters This article is more than 1 year old Could Vienna’s approach to affordable housing work in California? This article is more than 1 year old Housing costs and homelessness are on the rise in California. In the Austrian capital, people of all income levels live in subsidised housing – and more is being built Imagine a beautiful city where a centrally located two-bedroom apartment can cost you as little as $600 a month. For many US policymakers, it’s a pipe dream. And yet in Vienna, it’s a reality. In the past two years, at least four delegations of housing experts and political leaders from California have visited the Austrian capital, hoping to unlock the secrets of why Vienna regularly comes top in surveys of the world’s most livable cities. ‘We just need a little help’: how a safe parking plan for people living in cars split a US town Read more They’re struck by the absence of homeless encampments, and marvel at the sheer scale of the subsidised housing developments which include shared amenities such swimming pools, gyms, workshops, communal gardens and spacious roof terraces. And they wonder how they can bring some of it home to a region gripped by an unaffordability crisis that lands long-term residents out of state or on the streets. Last year, California counted more than 180,000 people living on the streets, a 40% rise in five years. Housing costs in the state are now double what they are in the rest of the US. Average monthly payments for a newly purchased mid-tier home are more than $5,500 a month and wages have not kept pace with rising rents. “You now need to earn $200,000 a year to have a comfortable middle-class life in California,” said Jennifer LeSar of the Global Policy Leadership Academy, which organises the trips to Vienna. The foundation of Vienna’s success is a housing policy that ensures all people live in dignified circumstances at affordable rents in homes they can keep for their lifetime and even pass on to their children. It’s not just for the poorest but the middle class as well. Sixty per cent of people in Vienna live in subsidised housing, compared with just 5% of Californians. “This is incredible. The US sucks man. Why can’t we do this?” said Ruben Mendoza, a young activist from Uplift San Bernardino, shaking his head in disbelief as he was shown around a mixed housing development near the city centre with communal facilities and affordable rents. Mendoza said one of the reasons he became a housing advocate was because he feared never being able to own a home in the community he grew up in. Like most Californians, he spends more than 50% of his disposable household income on rent. In Vienna, residents on average spend 27% of their income on housing. There are some obvious differences. Vienna is densely built, with the majority of residents living in relatively small apartments within easy distance of the city centre. Most Viennese are renters, and use the well-connected public transport system to move around. Most Californians live in owner-occupied single-family homes in the suburbs. Public transportation systems are underfunded, and most residents use their car to travel. But the biggest difference is how much new affordable housing is going up in Vienna. “Just look at all the cranes,” said Adam Briones from California’s Community Builders, a research and advocacy organization working to close the racial wealth gap through housing. The city of Vienna builds about 6,000-7,000 new units of subsidised housing every year as it tries to keep up with rising demand. “They’re just building more housing than us. It’s not rocket science,” said Corey Smith of San Francisco’s Housing Action Coalition. Vienna is the fastest-growing capital in Europe. Half of its residents were either born outside Austria or have parents who were, so city planners are constantly anticipating future demand. Until the 1990s, this once grand imperial capital was in the doldrums, stuck out on the edge of western Europe. It was once the centre of the Habsburg empire and the cultural and intellectual capital of Europe. Two world wars, fascism and the brutal destruction of the city’s once-vibrant Jewish population put an end to that. The artists and the intellectuals had left. It was an ageing city, full of ghosts and the remnants of a fallen empire. Two historic shifts at the end of the last millennium changed Vienna’s fortunes. Communism collapsed in 1989, the iron curtain came down and Austria joined the European Union six years after that. Young people from across central and southern Europe moved to Vienna, attracted by the wide availability of housing, its relative affordability, job opportunities and its position at the centre of a new enlarged European Union. Since then, its population has grown by 25%. Today 2 million people live there, and their number is growing year on year. Nimbyism was a recurring topic during the week-long visit, with the Californians complaining that often when new developments are planned, small groups of residents try to block them through the courts, which makes the construction process slower and more expensive. Gleam Davis, a Santa Monica city councillor and former mayor, said that when her city tried to build affordable housing on parking lots, residents protested. “Unfortunately, in my city, some people think finding room for cars is more important than building homes for people.” Even within her own city council, there is strong opposition to building more housing, she said. “Some of my colleagues think we can police ourselves out of this or build our share of affordable housing in the desert and move those people out there.” Vienna has a more top-down approach to tackling nimbyism. As the delegation toured Seestadt Aspern, a new town built on a former military airfield outside Vienna, the urban planner Kurt Hoftstetter explained that they had held up to 20 meetings in the nearby villages before they began construction. “We did this to inform residents of our plans and ask them how we could make it more acceptable to them. But we did not ask their permission.” Tech billionaires want to build a new city in rural California. Voters may get a say on it Read more Vienna’s affordable housing system is supported by a 1% tax on all salaries which provides a permanent funding stream for new construction. This goes back 100 years to the end of the first world war, when the city was overflowing with refugees and homeless people. The Habsburg empire had collapsed, and Vienna became a city state with its own tax-raising ability inside the new federal Republic of Austria. “Red Vienna”, as it was known in the 1920s, has been a social democrat bastion within a largely conservative, Catholic country ever since (apart from 12 years under fascist rule) and providing permanently affordable housing became part of its DNA. The housing tax currently generates about $250m annually and the city gets a further $200m in rental income and loan repayments. Since the 1990s, most new developments are built by limited-profit housing associations, which benefit from 1% government loans. They also benefit from building on land sold to them by Vienna’s landbank (Wohnfonds Wien), a quasi-governmental body that buys up land to build new neighbourhoods with a mix of private and subsidised housing. Inspired by the Vienna model, Los Angeles launched its own landbank in 2022 aimed at setting aside city land for affordable housing construction. And the city passed a new measure increasing transfer taxes on homes over $5m. The hope is that this “mansion tax” will create a permanent funding stream for affordable housing. “A lot of people who worked on that measure visited Vienna,” says Jackson Loop from the Southern Californian Association of Nonprofit Housing. “But we’re getting push-back from the real estate lobby who are trying to overturn the tax increase in the courts, so it’s in a legal limbo right now.” Property taxes, both residential and corporate, are comparatively low in California, said Loop. That’s because of proposition 13, he explained– a provision that passed back in the late 1970s and limited the possible annual increase in property taxes if a property didn’t change owners, including for large landowning corporations such as Disney. Another key difference is the way Vienna chooses to spend its annual housing budget. Most of it goes into subsidising construction, whereas in the US it mostly goes to directly subsidising residents through vouchers and housing benefit schemes. In other words, Vienna focuses on supply whereas the US focuses on demand. “I’d love someone to do a calculation of how much the US is spending on housing vouchers nationwide and see whether some of this money could be transferred into building new homes instead,” said Davis, the Santa Monica city councilmember. One of the biggest cohorts in the delegation was from San Diego, where the number of unhoused residents has risen significantly in recent years. San Diego has seen dramatic increases in home and rent prices, making the county increasingly unaffordable for longtime residents. The median home sale price for an existing single-family home in the county clocked in at $980,000 in February, according to the local NBC affiliate , up from $925,000 the previous month and $878,000 one year ago. “There’s about 10,000 people living on our streets” says Elyse Lowe, director of development services. “We have families living in their cars, tented communities, and open drug use. This is impacting businesses downtown. People don’t want to see that. We also have many people living from paycheck to paycheck which means they are at high risk of homelessness.” Inspired by what she has learnt in Vienna, Lowe wants to start a discussion in San Diego about “re-evaluating” city land. “I’ve never heard anyone ask the question: is the small municipal airfield in the city centre that only serves small planes the best use of our land when we are trying to put people first?” she said. Heidi Vonblum, San Diego’s planning director, said her biggest takeaway was the cleanliness and sense of stability in a city like Vienna. “Lack of affordable housing isn’t just an individual problem, it’s a problem for the whole community,” she observed. “What I notice here is that housing is seen as a means of providing social stability for lower-income communities, and it is very family-orientated. All their policies start from a base of how we best support children and families?” Why are women in California facing homelessness at an alarming rate? Read more All the visitors were surprised by how the subsidised housing has been dispersed throughout the city. “The mayor likes to say that you cannot tell if a person is rich or poor in Vienna from their address,” says Christian Shantl from the Vienna housing department. He said the city focused on creating mixed-income neighbourhoods with all the necessary services for the poorest as well as middle-class families. They’re particularly keen on helping young people, so those between 18 and 30 still living with their parents can get on the housing list. The last four California delegations were brought to Vienna by the Global Policy Leadership Academy (GPLA), which aims to educate leaders who want to tackle deep-rooted societal problems. Its CEO, LeSar, said she wanted “to get a conversation going back home about building affordable homes on a large scale”. “I think that is happening,” she added. “We had two legislators from California who came here in the first delegation and they’re now sponsoring bills.” Helmi Hisserich, a former GPLA executive who is now director of housing for Portland, Oregon, has accompanied all four delegations and says participants often get emotional. “We have had delegates weeping when they see what is on offer in Vienna. It tends to be the younger ones, the under 40s who can only dream of getting on the housing ladder in California.” Beatriz Stambuk-Torres, a young GPLA researcher and city planner who moved to Vienna a year ago, told the group how she used to spend over 50% of her income on rent while living in Irvine, California. Now she has a nice apartment near Vienna’s city centre and spends 25% of her salary on rent and doesn’t need a car. “I had a good job and a master’s from one of our best universities, but I couldn’t save because of housing costs and my student loans. When I had a medical bill, I had to borrow from friends and family. I did everything right and I still was struggling to make ends meet.” As she spoke about doing “everything right” her voice cracked, and her eyes filled with tears. Discussing housing policy can be dry and technical but the impact on people’s lives is profound. Explore more on these topics Housing California Austria US house prices Social housing West Coast features Share Reuse this content Apartment buildings in Vienna, Austria, in 2022. Photograph: Leonhard Föger/Reuters View image in fullscreen Apartment buildings in Vienna, Austria, in 2022. Photograph: Leonhard Föger/Reuters Apartment buildings in Vienna, Austria, in 2022. Photograph: Leonhard Föger/Reuters View image in fullscreen Apartment buildings in Vienna, Austria, in 2022. Photograph: Leonhard Föger/Reuters Apartment buildings in Vienna, Austria, in 2022. Photograph: Leonhard Föger/Reuters View image in fullscreen Apartment buildings in Vienna, Austria, in 2022. Photograph: Leonhard Föger/Reuters Apartment buildings in Vienna, Austria, in 2022. Photograph: Leonhard Föger/Reuters View image in fullscreen Apartment buildings in Vienna, Austria, in 2022. Photograph: Leonhard Föger/Reuters Apartment buildings in Vienna, Austria, in 2022. Photograph: Leonhard Föger/Reuters Apartment buildings in Vienna, Austria, in 2022. Photograph: Leonhard Föger/Reuters This article is more than 1 year old Could Vienna’s approach to affordable housing work in California? This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Could Vienna’s approach to affordable housing work in California? This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Could Vienna’s approach to affordable housing work in California? This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Housing costs and homelessness are on the rise in California. In the Austrian capital, people of all income levels live in subsidised housing – and more is being built Housing costs and homelessness are on the rise in California. In the Austrian capital, people of all income levels live in subsidised housing – and more is being built Housing costs and homelessness are on the rise in California. In the Austrian capital, people of all income levels live in subsidised housing – and more is being built Imagine a beautiful city where a centrally located two-bedroom apartment can cost you as little as $600 a month. For many US policymakers, it’s a pipe dream. And yet in Vienna, it’s a reality. In the past two years, at least four delegations of housing experts and political leaders from California have visited the Austrian capital, hoping to unlock the secrets of why Vienna regularly comes top in surveys of the world’s most livable cities. ‘We just need a little help’: how a safe parking plan for people living in cars split a US town Read more They’re struck by the absence of homeless encampments, and marvel at the sheer scale of the subsidised housing developments which include shared amenities such swimming pools, gyms, workshops, communal gardens and spacious roof terraces. And they wonder how they can bring some of it home to a region gripped by an unaffordability crisis that lands long-term residents out of state or on the streets. Last year, California counted more than 180,000 people living on the streets, a 40% rise in five years. Housing costs in the state are now double what they are in the rest of the US. Average monthly payments for a newly purchased mid-tier home are more than $5,500 a month and wages have not kept pace with rising rents. “You now need to earn $200,000 a year to have a comfortable middle-class life in California,” said Jennifer LeSar of the Global Policy Leadership Academy, which organises the trips to Vienna. The foundation of Vienna’s success is a housing policy that ensures all people live in dignified circumstances at affordable rents in homes they can keep for their lifetime and even pass on to their children. It’s not just for the poorest but the middle class as well. Sixty per cent of people in Vienna live in subsidised housing, compared with just 5% of Californians. “This is incredible. The US sucks man. Why can’t we do this?” said Ruben Mendoza, a young activist from Uplift San Bernardino, shaking his head in disbelief as he was shown around a mixed housing development near the city centre with communal facilities and affordable rents. Mendoza said one of the reasons he became a housing advocate was because he feared never being able to own a home in the community he grew up in. Like most Californians, he spends more than 50% of his disposable household income on rent. In Vienna, residents on average spend 27% of their income on housing. There are some obvious differences. Vienna is densely built, with the majority of residents living in relatively small apartments within easy distance of the city centre. Most Viennese are renters, and use the well-connected public transport system to move around. Most Californians live in owner-occupied single-family homes in the suburbs. Public transportation systems are underfunded, and most residents use their car to travel. But the biggest difference is how much new affordable housing is going up in Vienna. “Just look at all the cranes,” said Adam Briones from California’s Community Builders, a research and advocacy organization working to close the racial wealth gap through housing. The city of Vienna builds about 6,000-7,000 new units of subsidised housing every year as it tries to keep up with rising demand. “They’re just building more housing than us. It’s not rocket science,” said Corey Smith of San Francisco’s Housing Action Coalition. Vienna is the fastest-growing capital in Europe. Half of its residents were either born outside Austria or have parents who were, so city planners are constantly anticipating future demand. Until the 1990s, this once grand imperial capital was in the doldrums, stuck out on the edge of western Europe. It was once the centre of the Habsburg empire and the cultural and intellectual capital of Europe. Two world wars, fascism and the brutal destruction of the city’s once-vibrant Jewish population put an end to that. The artists and the intellectuals had left. It was an ageing city, full of ghosts and the remnants of a fallen empire. Two historic shifts at the end of the last millennium changed Vienna’s fortunes. Communism collapsed in 1989, the iron curtain came down and Austria joined the European Union six years after that. Young people from across central and southern Europe moved to Vienna, attracted by the wide availability of housing, its relative affordability, job opportunities and its position at the centre of a new enlarged European Union. Since then, its population has grown by 25%. Today 2 million people live there, and their number is growing year on year. Nimbyism was a recurring topic during the week-long visit, with the Californians complaining that often when new developments are planned, small groups of residents try to block them through the courts, which makes the construction process slower and more expensive. Gleam Davis, a Santa Monica city councillor and former mayor, said that when her city tried to build affordable housing on parking lots, residents protested. “Unfortunately, in my city, some people think finding room for cars is more important than building homes for people.” Even within her own city council, there is strong opposition to building more housing, she said. “Some of my colleagues think we can police ourselves out of this or build our share of affordable housing in the desert and move those people out there.” Vienna has a more top-down approach to tackling nimbyism. As the delegation toured Seestadt Aspern, a new town built on a former military airfield outside Vienna, the urban planner Kurt Hoftstetter explained that they had held up to 20 meetings in the nearby villages before they began construction. “We did this to inform residents of our plans and ask them how we could make it more acceptable to them. But we did not ask their permission.” Tech billionaires want to build a new city in rural California. Voters may get a say on it Read more Vienna’s affordable housing system is supported by a 1% tax on all salaries which provides a permanent funding stream for new construction. This goes back 100 years to the end of the first world war, when the city was overflowing with refugees and homeless people. The Habsburg empire had collapsed, and Vienna became a city state with its own tax-raising ability inside the new federal Republic of Austria. “Red Vienna”, as it was known in the 1920s, has been a social democrat bastion within a largely conservative, Catholic country ever since (apart from 12 years under fascist rule) and providing permanently affordable housing became part of its DNA. The housing tax currently generates about $250m annually and the city gets a further $200m in rental income and loan repayments. Since the 1990s, most new developments are built by limited-profit housing associations, which benefit from 1% government loans. They also benefit from building on land sold to them by Vienna’s landbank (Wohnfonds Wien), a quasi-governmental body that buys up land to build new neighbourhoods with a mix of private and subsidised housing. Inspired by the Vienna model, Los Angeles launched its own landbank in 2022 aimed at setting aside city land for affordable housing construction. And the city passed a new measure increasing transfer taxes on homes over $5m. The hope is that this “mansion tax” will create a permanent funding stream for affordable housing. “A lot of people who worked on that measure visited Vienna,” says Jackson Loop from the Southern Californian Association of Nonprofit Housing. “But we’re getting push-back from the real estate lobby who are trying to overturn the tax increase in the courts, so it’s in a legal limbo right now.” Property taxes, both residential and corporate, are comparatively low in California, said Loop. That’s because of proposition 13, he explained– a provision that passed back in the late 1970s and limited the possible annual increase in property taxes if a property didn’t change owners, including for large landowning corporations such as Disney. Another key difference is the way Vienna chooses to spend its annual housing budget. Most of it goes into subsidising construction, whereas in the US it mostly goes to directly subsidising residents through vouchers and housing benefit schemes. In other words, Vienna focuses on supply whereas the US focuses on demand. “I’d love someone to do a calculation of how much the US is spending on housing vouchers nationwide and see whether some of this money could be transferred into building new homes instead,” said Davis, the Santa Monica city councilmember. One of the biggest cohorts in the delegation was from San Diego, where the number of unhoused residents has risen significantly in recent years. San Diego has seen dramatic increases in home and rent prices, making the county increasingly unaffordable for longtime residents. The median home sale price for an existing single-family home in the county clocked in at $980,000 in February, according to the local NBC affiliate , up from $925,000 the previous month and $878,000 one year ago. “There’s about 10,000 people living on our streets” says Elyse Lowe, director of development services. “We have families living in their cars, tented communities, and open drug use. This is impacting businesses downtown. People don’t want to see that. We also have many people living from paycheck to paycheck which means they are at high risk of homelessness.” Inspired by what she has learnt in Vienna, Lowe wants to start a discussion in San Diego about “re-evaluating” city land. “I’ve never heard anyone ask the question: is the small municipal airfield in the city centre that only serves small planes the best use of our land when we are trying to put people first?” she said. Heidi Vonblum, San Diego’s planning director, said her biggest takeaway was the cleanliness and sense of stability in a city like Vienna. “Lack of affordable housing isn’t just an individual problem, it’s a problem for the whole community,” she observed. “What I notice here is that housing is seen as a means of providing social stability for lower-income communities, and it is very family-orientated. All their policies start from a base of how we best support children and families?” Why are women in California facing homelessness at an alarming rate? Read more All the visitors were surprised by how the subsidised housing has been dispersed throughout the city. “The mayor likes to say that you cannot tell if a person is rich or poor in Vienna from their address,” says Christian Shantl from the Vienna housing department. He said the city focused on creating mixed-income neighbourhoods with all the necessary services for the poorest as well as middle-class families. They’re particularly keen on helping young people, so those between 18 and 30 still living with their parents can get on the housing list. The last four California delegations were brought to Vienna by the Global Policy Leadership Academy (GPLA), which aims to educate leaders who want to tackle deep-rooted societal problems. Its CEO, LeSar, said she wanted “to get a conversation going back home about building affordable homes on a large scale”. “I think that is happening,” she added. “We had two legislators from California who came here in the first delegation and they’re now sponsoring bills.” Helmi Hisserich, a former GPLA executive who is now director of housing for Portland, Oregon, has accompanied all four delegations and says participants often get emotional. “We have had delegates weeping when they see what is on offer in Vienna. It tends to be the younger ones, the under 40s who can only dream of getting on the housing ladder in California.” Beatriz Stambuk-Torres, a young GPLA researcher and city planner who moved to Vienna a year ago, told the group how she used to spend over 50% of her income on rent while living in Irvine, California. Now she has a nice apartment near Vienna’s city centre and spends 25% of her salary on rent and doesn’t need a car. “I had a good job and a master’s from one of our best universities, but I couldn’t save because of housing costs and my student loans. When I had a medical bill, I had to borrow from friends and family. I did everything right and I still was struggling to make ends meet.” As she spoke about doing “everything right” her voice cracked, and her eyes filled with tears. Discussing housing policy can be dry and technical but the impact on people’s lives is profound. Explore more on these topics Housing California Austria US house prices Social housing West Coast features Share Reuse this content Imagine a beautiful city where a centrally located two-bedroom apartment can cost you as little as $600 a month. For many US policymakers, it’s a pipe dream. And yet in Vienna, it’s a reality. In the past two years, at least four delegations of housing experts and political leaders from California have visited the Austrian capital, hoping to unlock the secrets of why Vienna regularly comes top in surveys of the world’s most livable cities. ‘We just need a little help’: how a safe parking plan for people living in cars split a US town Read more They’re struck by the absence of homeless encampments, and marvel at the sheer scale of the subsidised housing developments which include shared amenities such swimming pools, gyms, workshops, communal gardens and spacious roof terraces. And they wonder how they can bring some of it home to a region gripped by an unaffordability crisis that lands long-term residents out of state or on the streets. Last year, California counted more than 180,000 people living on the streets, a 40% rise in five years. Housing costs in the state are now double what they are in the rest of the US. Average monthly payments for a newly purchased mid-tier home are more than $5,500 a month and wages have not kept pace with rising rents. “You now need to earn $200,000 a year to have a comfortable middle-class life in California,” said Jennifer LeSar of the Global Policy Leadership Academy, which organises the trips to Vienna. The foundation of Vienna’s success is a housing policy that ensures all people live in dignified circumstances at affordable rents in homes they can keep for their lifetime and even pass on to their children. It’s not just for the poorest but the middle class as well. Sixty per cent of people in Vienna live in subsidised housing, compared with just 5% of Californians. “This is incredible. The US sucks man. Why can’t we do this?” said Ruben Mendoza, a young activist from Uplift San Bernardino, shaking his head in disbelief as he was shown around a mixed housing development near the city centre with communal facilities and affordable rents. Mendoza said one of the reasons he became a housing advocate was because he feared never being able to own a home in the community he grew up in. Like most Californians, he spends more than 50% of his disposable household income on rent. In Vienna, residents on average spend 27% of their income on housing. There are some obvious differences. Vienna is densely built, with the majority of residents living in relatively small apartments within easy distance of the city centre. Most Viennese are renters, and use the well-connected public transport system to move around. Most Californians live in owner-occupied single-family homes in the suburbs. Public transportation systems are underfunded, and most residents use their car to travel. But the biggest difference is how much new affordable housing is going up in Vienna. “Just look at all the cranes,” said Adam Briones from California’s Community Builders, a research and advocacy organization working to close the racial wealth gap through housing. The city of Vienna builds about 6,000-7,000 new units of subsidised housing every year as it tries to keep up with rising demand. “They’re just building more housing than us. It’s not rocket science,” said Corey Smith of San Francisco’s Housing Action Coalition. Vienna is the fastest-growing capital in Europe. Half of its residents were either born outside Austria or have parents who were, so city planners are constantly anticipating future demand. Until the 1990s, this once grand imperial capital was in the doldrums, stuck out on the edge of western Europe. It was once the centre of the Habsburg empire and the cultural and intellectual capital of Europe. Two world wars, fascism and the brutal destruction of the city’s once-vibrant Jewish population put an end to that. The artists and the intellectuals had left. It was an ageing city, full of ghosts and the remnants of a fallen empire. Two historic shifts at the end of the last millennium changed Vienna’s fortunes. Communism collapsed in 1989, the iron curtain came down and Austria joined the European Union six years after that. Young people from across central and southern Europe moved to Vienna, attracted by the wide availability of housing, its relative affordability, job opportunities and its position at the centre of a new enlarged European Union. Since then, its population has grown by 25%. Today 2 million people live there, and their number is growing year on year. Nimbyism was a recurring topic during the week-long visit, with the Californians complaining that often when new developments are planned, small groups of residents try to block them through the courts, which makes the construction process slower and more expensive. Gleam Davis, a Santa Monica city councillor and former mayor, said that when her city tried to build affordable housing on parking lots, residents protested. “Unfortunately, in my city, some people think finding room for cars is more important than building homes for people.” Even within her own city council, there is strong opposition to building more housing, she said. “Some of my colleagues think we can police ourselves out of this or build our share of affordable housing in the desert and move those people out there.” Vienna has a more top-down approach to tackling nimbyism. As the delegation toured Seestadt Aspern, a new town built on a former military airfield outside Vienna, the urban planner Kurt Hoftstetter explained that they had held up to 20 meetings in the nearby villages before they began construction. “We did this to inform residents of our plans and ask them how we could make it more acceptable to them. But we did not ask their permission.” Tech billionaires want to build a new city in rural California. Voters may get a say on it Read more Vienna’s affordable housing system is supported by a 1% tax on all salaries which provides a permanent funding stream for new construction. This goes back 100 years to the end of the first world war, when the city was overflowing with refugees and homeless people. The Habsburg empire had collapsed, and Vienna became a city state with its own tax-raising ability inside the new federal Republic of Austria. “Red Vienna”, as it was known in the 1920s, has been a social democrat bastion within a largely conservative, Catholic country ever since (apart from 12 years under fascist rule) and providing permanently affordable housing became part of its DNA. The housing tax currently generates about $250m annually and the city gets a further $200m in rental income and loan repayments. Since the 1990s, most new developments are built by limited-profit housing associations, which benefit from 1% government loans. They also benefit from building on land sold to them by Vienna’s landbank (Wohnfonds Wien), a quasi-governmental body that buys up land to build new neighbourhoods with a mix of private and subsidised housing. Inspired by the Vienna model, Los Angeles launched its own landbank in 2022 aimed at setting aside city land for affordable housing construction. And the city passed a new measure increasing transfer taxes on homes over $5m. The hope is that this “mansion tax” will create a permanent funding stream for affordable housing. “A lot of people who worked on that measure visited Vienna,” says Jackson Loop from the Southern Californian Association of Nonprofit Housing. “But we’re getting push-back from the real estate lobby who are trying to overturn the tax increase in the courts, so it’s in a legal limbo right now.” Property taxes, both residential and corporate, are comparatively low in California, said Loop. That’s because of proposition 13, he explained– a provision that passed back in the late 1970s and limited the possible annual increase in property taxes if a property didn’t change owners, including for large landowning corporations such as Disney. Another key difference is the way Vienna chooses to spend its annual housing budget. Most of it goes into subsidising construction, whereas in the US it mostly goes to directly subsidising residents through vouchers and housing benefit schemes. In other words, Vienna focuses on supply wherea
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
How do we define climate responsibility? Woodside has no answer
‘The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while’, Adam Morton writes. Photograph: Reuters View image in fullscreen ‘The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while’, Adam Morton writes. Photograph: Reuters This article is more than 1 year old How do we define climate responsibility? Woodside has no answer This article is more than 1 year old Adam Morton So long as oil and gas companies remain wedded to self-interest, the push against them isn’t going away Get our morning and afternoon news emails , free app or daily news podcast A ustralia’s south-west is suffering through a historic dry stretch. Perth had the lowest rainfall on record in the six months to March, and trees in eucalyptus forests and scrubland across a 1,000 kilometre stretch are dying in shocking and spectacular fashion , with spillover effects through the ecosystems that rely on them. The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while. Winter rainfall has fallen up to 20% since the 1970s in what scientists have for years described as one of the earliest examples of the climate crisis having a measurable influence. This was one of the backdrops as Woodside Energy – Australia’s biggest oil and gas company, with multi-billion dollar developments in the works at home and in Africa and the Gulf of Mexico – held its annual general meeting in the Western Australian capital last week. Western Australia’s eucalypt forests fade to brown as century-old giant jarrahs die in heat and drought Read more Across four hours, Woodside’s chairman, Richard Goyder, and chief executive, Meg O’Neill, made the company’s case and took questions from shareholders and their proxies. Many related to climate change. A handful of the shareholders couldn’t understand what the fuss was about. They argued CO 2 from burning fossil fuels was airborne plant food and called the climate-concerned idiots. But the overwhelming sentiment from investors was that the company was failing to address their concerns, and not living up to its rhetoric that it aimed to have net zero emissions by 2050. They lodged a 58% protest vote against Woodside’s climate report, the strongest against a listed company anywhere across the globe. It was a remarkable result, reached after a concerted campaign by shareholder activist groups, and public rebukes by global pension and Australian super funds. Goyder, who has had a torrid recent time as the chair of both Woodside and Qantas, ended the meeting by saying the company took the non-binding feedback seriously, and would consider it as it reviewed its approach to climate change. They were the words he had to say after an embarrassing slap down, but there was little else at the meeting to back them up. The message was internally contradictory. On the one hand: we’re listening, we hear you and we’re open to change. But also: we reject what you say. And we have some giant fossil fuel developments to be getting on with so we can reward your financial investment. Standard 21st century operating procedure for a fossil fuel company, in other words. The disconnect between Woodside’s rhetoric and climate reality echoed throughout the AGM, but crystallised in a few moments. Some were throwaway – Goyder saying it was good to have a question “on the business” when discussion veered away from the ecological impact of its operations – but others were more telling. One shareholder, referring to the state’s drought, asked whether 2.7m seedlings the company planted last year to offset some of its emissions had survived. Another asked if Woodside believed it had moral and financial culpability for the impact of the climate crisis on local farmers. Goyder acknowledged the underlying issue – “It’d be nice to get some rain in the agricultural regions of Western Australia sooner rather than later” – but said it was “a pretty long bow” to consider Woodside “responsible for the climate conditions in the agricultural parts of Western Australia”, and “nonsense” to even suggest it might be given the scale of global emissions. On one level, this is just a truism. Woodside is not uniquely or solely responsible for the growing force of climate change being felt in the state. No one suggests it is. On another level, it is an argument about responsibility that would not pass muster in most other walks of life. You’re only part of the cause of the problem? Ah well, keep doing more of that then. This is, of course, the climate conundrum. The problem can be solved only if everyone, or nearly everyone, does their bit. China is often singled out as a climate villain, and not without cause. But even if it stopped polluting tomorrow that would leave about two-thirds of carbon pollution unaddressed. Not everyone is equally responsible to make rapid and immediate emissions cuts and to help others to do the same. But it’s been widely agreed that those who are responsible to act now include (a) the wealthy and (b) polluters working in areas where there are viable and affordable zero-emissions alternatives. It should shock no one to learn an Australian oil and gas company qualifies on both counts. Woodside Energy’s climate plan rejected by shareholders in ‘globally unprecedented’ rebuke Read more Woodside’s response is to claim it is acting, mainly by paying for some carbon offsets to put a dent in its direct emissions. But when Bill Hare, a scientist and head of the global consultancy Climate Analytics, asked the company to justify its claim that its plans align with the goals of the landmark Paris agreement , Goyder and O’Neill had no answer, other than to assert that it did. The hole in the argument was so great, and so obvious, that a majority of voting shareholders felt they could not be seen to take it seriously. That hasn’t happened before. It shows the shift in sentiment in the investment community. But we shouldn’t get carried away. The pension and super funds still overwhelmingly backed in Goyder as chair, returning him with only 16% voting against. A cynic might say they scolded the company over its climate stance at zero cost while backing the existing management to continue to keep delivering fossil-fuel powered dividends. Out in the real world, the climate crisis comes in a rush, whether it is flooding in the Dubai desert , heatwaves shutting schools and upending lives across southern Asia , continent-sized sea ice loss in Antarctica , or record mass coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef . Boardroom change is a slower operation. What happens from here? Goyder said he and the company’s investor relations team had already held more than 150 meetings with investors over their climate concerns. Presumably there are more to come. But Woodside still plans to spend $18bn on fossil fuel projects over the next five years. The circle can’t be squared while it remains wedded to the self-interested line that gas – the largest source of fossil fuel emissions growth last decade – is a climate solution. But the AGM shows that argument is increasingly exposed, and the push against it isn’t going away. Explore more on these topics Climate crisis Clear air Woodside Gas (Business) Gas (Environment) Fossil fuels comment Share Reuse this content ‘The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while’, Adam Morton writes. Photograph: Reuters View image in fullscreen ‘The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while’, Adam Morton writes. Photograph: Reuters This article is more than 1 year old How do we define climate responsibility? Woodside has no answer This article is more than 1 year old Adam Morton So long as oil and gas companies remain wedded to self-interest, the push against them isn’t going away Get our morning and afternoon news emails , free app or daily news podcast A ustralia’s south-west is suffering through a historic dry stretch. Perth had the lowest rainfall on record in the six months to March, and trees in eucalyptus forests and scrubland across a 1,000 kilometre stretch are dying in shocking and spectacular fashion , with spillover effects through the ecosystems that rely on them. The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while. Winter rainfall has fallen up to 20% since the 1970s in what scientists have for years described as one of the earliest examples of the climate crisis having a measurable influence. This was one of the backdrops as Woodside Energy – Australia’s biggest oil and gas company, with multi-billion dollar developments in the works at home and in Africa and the Gulf of Mexico – held its annual general meeting in the Western Australian capital last week. Western Australia’s eucalypt forests fade to brown as century-old giant jarrahs die in heat and drought Read more Across four hours, Woodside’s chairman, Richard Goyder, and chief executive, Meg O’Neill, made the company’s case and took questions from shareholders and their proxies. Many related to climate change. A handful of the shareholders couldn’t understand what the fuss was about. They argued CO 2 from burning fossil fuels was airborne plant food and called the climate-concerned idiots. But the overwhelming sentiment from investors was that the company was failing to address their concerns, and not living up to its rhetoric that it aimed to have net zero emissions by 2050. They lodged a 58% protest vote against Woodside’s climate report, the strongest against a listed company anywhere across the globe. It was a remarkable result, reached after a concerted campaign by shareholder activist groups, and public rebukes by global pension and Australian super funds. Goyder, who has had a torrid recent time as the chair of both Woodside and Qantas, ended the meeting by saying the company took the non-binding feedback seriously, and would consider it as it reviewed its approach to climate change. They were the words he had to say after an embarrassing slap down, but there was little else at the meeting to back them up. The message was internally contradictory. On the one hand: we’re listening, we hear you and we’re open to change. But also: we reject what you say. And we have some giant fossil fuel developments to be getting on with so we can reward your financial investment. Standard 21st century operating procedure for a fossil fuel company, in other words. The disconnect between Woodside’s rhetoric and climate reality echoed throughout the AGM, but crystallised in a few moments. Some were throwaway – Goyder saying it was good to have a question “on the business” when discussion veered away from the ecological impact of its operations – but others were more telling. One shareholder, referring to the state’s drought, asked whether 2.7m seedlings the company planted last year to offset some of its emissions had survived. Another asked if Woodside believed it had moral and financial culpability for the impact of the climate crisis on local farmers. Goyder acknowledged the underlying issue – “It’d be nice to get some rain in the agricultural regions of Western Australia sooner rather than later” – but said it was “a pretty long bow” to consider Woodside “responsible for the climate conditions in the agricultural parts of Western Australia”, and “nonsense” to even suggest it might be given the scale of global emissions. On one level, this is just a truism. Woodside is not uniquely or solely responsible for the growing force of climate change being felt in the state. No one suggests it is. On another level, it is an argument about responsibility that would not pass muster in most other walks of life. You’re only part of the cause of the problem? Ah well, keep doing more of that then. This is, of course, the climate conundrum. The problem can be solved only if everyone, or nearly everyone, does their bit. China is often singled out as a climate villain, and not without cause. But even if it stopped polluting tomorrow that would leave about two-thirds of carbon pollution unaddressed. Not everyone is equally responsible to make rapid and immediate emissions cuts and to help others to do the same. But it’s been widely agreed that those who are responsible to act now include (a) the wealthy and (b) polluters working in areas where there are viable and affordable zero-emissions alternatives. It should shock no one to learn an Australian oil and gas company qualifies on both counts. Woodside Energy’s climate plan rejected by shareholders in ‘globally unprecedented’ rebuke Read more Woodside’s response is to claim it is acting, mainly by paying for some carbon offsets to put a dent in its direct emissions. But when Bill Hare, a scientist and head of the global consultancy Climate Analytics, asked the company to justify its claim that its plans align with the goals of the landmark Paris agreement , Goyder and O’Neill had no answer, other than to assert that it did. The hole in the argument was so great, and so obvious, that a majority of voting shareholders felt they could not be seen to take it seriously. That hasn’t happened before. It shows the shift in sentiment in the investment community. But we shouldn’t get carried away. The pension and super funds still overwhelmingly backed in Goyder as chair, returning him with only 16% voting against. A cynic might say they scolded the company over its climate stance at zero cost while backing the existing management to continue to keep delivering fossil-fuel powered dividends. Out in the real world, the climate crisis comes in a rush, whether it is flooding in the Dubai desert , heatwaves shutting schools and upending lives across southern Asia , continent-sized sea ice loss in Antarctica , or record mass coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef . Boardroom change is a slower operation. What happens from here? Goyder said he and the company’s investor relations team had already held more than 150 meetings with investors over their climate concerns. Presumably there are more to come. But Woodside still plans to spend $18bn on fossil fuel projects over the next five years. The circle can’t be squared while it remains wedded to the self-interested line that gas – the largest source of fossil fuel emissions growth last decade – is a climate solution. But the AGM shows that argument is increasingly exposed, and the push against it isn’t going away. Explore more on these topics Climate crisis Clear air Woodside Gas (Business) Gas (Environment) Fossil fuels comment Share Reuse this content ‘The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while’, Adam Morton writes. Photograph: Reuters View image in fullscreen ‘The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while’, Adam Morton writes. Photograph: Reuters ‘The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while’, Adam Morton writes. Photograph: Reuters View image in fullscreen ‘The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while’, Adam Morton writes. Photograph: Reuters ‘The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while’, Adam Morton writes. Photograph: Reuters View image in fullscreen ‘The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while’, Adam Morton writes. Photograph: Reuters ‘The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while’, Adam Morton writes. Photograph: Reuters View image in fullscreen ‘The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while’, Adam Morton writes. Photograph: Reuters ‘The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while’, Adam Morton writes. Photograph: Reuters ‘The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while’, Adam Morton writes. Photograph: Reuters This article is more than 1 year old How do we define climate responsibility? Woodside has no answer This article is more than 1 year old Adam Morton This article is more than 1 year old How do we define climate responsibility? Woodside has no answer This article is more than 1 year old Adam Morton This article is more than 1 year old How do we define climate responsibility? Woodside has no answer This article is more than 1 year old Adam Morton This article is more than 1 year old How do we define climate responsibility? Woodside has no answer This article is more than 1 year old Adam Morton This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old So long as oil and gas companies remain wedded to self-interest, the push against them isn’t going away Get our morning and afternoon news emails , free app or daily news podcast So long as oil and gas companies remain wedded to self-interest, the push against them isn’t going away Get our morning and afternoon news emails , free app or daily news podcast So long as oil and gas companies remain wedded to self-interest, the push against them isn’t going away A ustralia’s south-west is suffering through a historic dry stretch. Perth had the lowest rainfall on record in the six months to March, and trees in eucalyptus forests and scrubland across a 1,000 kilometre stretch are dying in shocking and spectacular fashion , with spillover effects through the ecosystems that rely on them. The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while. Winter rainfall has fallen up to 20% since the 1970s in what scientists have for years described as one of the earliest examples of the climate crisis having a measurable influence. This was one of the backdrops as Woodside Energy – Australia’s biggest oil and gas company, with multi-billion dollar developments in the works at home and in Africa and the Gulf of Mexico – held its annual general meeting in the Western Australian capital last week. Western Australia’s eucalypt forests fade to brown as century-old giant jarrahs die in heat and drought Read more Across four hours, Woodside’s chairman, Richard Goyder, and chief executive, Meg O’Neill, made the company’s case and took questions from shareholders and their proxies. Many related to climate change. A handful of the shareholders couldn’t understand what the fuss was about. They argued CO 2 from burning fossil fuels was airborne plant food and called the climate-concerned idiots. But the overwhelming sentiment from investors was that the company was failing to address their concerns, and not living up to its rhetoric that it aimed to have net zero emissions by 2050. They lodged a 58% protest vote against Woodside’s climate report, the strongest against a listed company anywhere across the globe. It was a remarkable result, reached after a concerted campaign by shareholder activist groups, and public rebukes by global pension and Australian super funds. Goyder, who has had a torrid recent time as the chair of both Woodside and Qantas, ended the meeting by saying the company took the non-binding feedback seriously, and would consider it as it reviewed its approach to climate change. They were the words he had to say after an embarrassing slap down, but there was little else at the meeting to back them up. The message was internally contradictory. On the one hand: we’re listening, we hear you and we’re open to change. But also: we reject what you say. And we have some giant fossil fuel developments to be getting on with so we can reward your financial investment. Standard 21st century operating procedure for a fossil fuel company, in other words. The disconnect between Woodside’s rhetoric and climate reality echoed throughout the AGM, but crystallised in a few moments. Some were throwaway – Goyder saying it was good to have a question “on the business” when discussion veered away from the ecological impact of its operations – but others were more telling. One shareholder, referring to the state’s drought, asked whether 2.7m seedlings the company planted last year to offset some of its emissions had survived. Another asked if Woodside believed it had moral and financial culpability for the impact of the climate crisis on local farmers. Goyder acknowledged the underlying issue – “It’d be nice to get some rain in the agricultural regions of Western Australia sooner rather than later” – but said it was “a pretty long bow” to consider Woodside “responsible for the climate conditions in the agricultural parts of Western Australia”, and “nonsense” to even suggest it might be given the scale of global emissions. On one level, this is just a truism. Woodside is not uniquely or solely responsible for the growing force of climate change being felt in the state. No one suggests it is. On another level, it is an argument about responsibility that would not pass muster in most other walks of life. You’re only part of the cause of the problem? Ah well, keep doing more of that then. This is, of course, the climate conundrum. The problem can be solved only if everyone, or nearly everyone, does their bit. China is often singled out as a climate villain, and not without cause. But even if it stopped polluting tomorrow that would leave about two-thirds of carbon pollution unaddressed. Not everyone is equally responsible to make rapid and immediate emissions cuts and to help others to do the same. But it’s been widely agreed that those who are responsible to act now include (a) the wealthy and (b) polluters working in areas where there are viable and affordable zero-emissions alternatives. It should shock no one to learn an Australian oil and gas company qualifies on both counts. Woodside Energy’s climate plan rejected by shareholders in ‘globally unprecedented’ rebuke Read more Woodside’s response is to claim it is acting, mainly by paying for some carbon offsets to put a dent in its direct emissions. But when Bill Hare, a scientist and head of the global consultancy Climate Analytics, asked the company to justify its claim that its plans align with the goals of the landmark Paris agreement , Goyder and O’Neill had no answer, other than to assert that it did. The hole in the argument was so great, and so obvious, that a majority of voting shareholders felt they could not be seen to take it seriously. That hasn’t happened before. It shows the shift in sentiment in the investment community. But we shouldn’t get carried away. The pension and super funds still overwhelmingly backed in Goyder as chair, returning him with only 16% voting against. A cynic might say they scolded the company over its climate stance at zero cost while backing the existing management to continue to keep delivering fossil-fuel powered dividends. Out in the real world, the climate crisis comes in a rush, whether it is flooding in the Dubai desert , heatwaves shutting schools and upending lives across southern Asia , continent-sized sea ice loss in Antarctica , or record mass coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef . Boardroom change is a slower operation. What happens from here? Goyder said he and the company’s investor relations team had already held more than 150 meetings with investors over their climate concerns. Presumably there are more to come. But Woodside still plans to spend $18bn on fossil fuel projects over the next five years. The circle can’t be squared while it remains wedded to the self-interested line that gas – the largest source of fossil fuel emissions growth last decade – is a climate solution. But the AGM shows that argument is increasingly exposed, and the push against it isn’t going away. Explore more on these topics Climate crisis Clear air Woodside Gas (Business) Gas (Environment) Fossil fuels comment Share Reuse this content A ustralia’s south-west is suffering through a historic dry stretch. Perth had the lowest rainfall on record in the six months to March, and trees in eucalyptus forests and scrubland across a 1,000 kilometre stretch are dying in shocking and spectacular fashion , with spillover effects through the ecosystems that rely on them. The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while. Winter rainfall has fallen up to 20% since the 1970s in what scientists have for years described as one of the earliest examples of the climate crisis having a measurable influence. This was one of the backdrops as Woodside Energy – Australia’s biggest oil and gas company, with multi-billion dollar developments in the works at home and in Africa and the Gulf of Mexico – held its annual general meeting in the Western Australian capital last week. Western Australia’s eucalypt forests fade to brown as century-old giant jarrahs die in heat and drought Read more Across four hours, Woodside’s chairman, Richard Goyder, and chief executive, Meg O’Neill, made the company’s case and took questions from shareholders and their proxies. Many related to climate change. A handful of the shareholders couldn’t understand what the fuss was about. They argued CO 2 from burning fossil fuels was airborne plant food and called the climate-concerned idiots. But the overwhelming sentiment from investors was that the company was failing to address their concerns, and not living up to its rhetoric that it aimed to have net zero emissions by 2050. They lodged a 58% protest vote against Woodside’s climate report, the strongest against a listed company anywhere across the globe. It was a remarkable result, reached after a concerted campaign by shareholder activist groups, and public rebukes by global pension and Australian super funds. Goyder, who has had a torrid recent time as the chair of both Woodside and Qantas, ended the meeting by saying the company took the non-binding feedback seriously, and would consider it as it reviewed its approach to climate change. They were the words he had to say after an embarrassing slap down, but there was little else at the meeting to back them up. The message was internally contradictory. On the one hand: we’re listening, we hear you and we’re open to change. But also: we reject what you say. And we have some giant fossil fuel developments to be getting on with so we can reward your financial investment. Standard 21st century operating procedure for a fossil fuel company, in other words. The disconnect between Woodside’s rhetoric and climate reality echoed throughout the AGM, but crystallised in a few moments. Some were throwaway – Goyder saying it was good to have a question “on the business” when discussion veered away from the ecological impact of its operations – but others were more telling. One shareholder, referring to the state’s drought, asked whether 2.7m seedlings the company planted last year to offset some of its emissions had survived. Another asked if Woodside believed it had moral and financial culpability for the impact of the climate crisis on local farmers. Goyder acknowledged the underlying issue – “It’d be nice to get some rain in the agricultural regions of Western Australia sooner rather than later” – but said it was “a pretty long bow” to consider Woodside “responsible for the climate conditions in the agricultural parts of Western Australia”, and “nonsense” to even suggest it might be given the scale of global emissions. On one level, this is just a truism. Woodside is not uniquely or solely responsible for the growing force of climate change being felt in the state. No one suggests it is. On another level, it is an argument about responsibility that would not pass muster in most other walks of life. You’re only part of the cause of the problem? Ah well, keep doing more of that then. This is, of course, the climate conundrum. The problem can be solved only if everyone, or nearly everyone, does their bit. China is often singled out as a climate villain, and not without cause. But even if it stopped polluting tomorrow that would leave about two-thirds of carbon pollution unaddressed. Not everyone is equally responsible to make rapid and immediate emissions cuts and to help others to do the same. But it’s been widely agreed that those who are responsible to act now include (a) the wealthy and (b) polluters working in areas where there are viable and affordable zero-emissions alternatives. It should shock no one to learn an Australian oil and gas company qualifies on both counts. Woodside Energy’s climate plan rejected by shareholders in ‘globally unprecedented’ rebuke Read more Woodside’s response is to claim it is acting, mainly by paying for some carbon offsets to put a dent in its direct emissions. But when Bill Hare, a scientist and head of the global consultancy Climate Analytics, asked the company to justify its claim that its plans align with the goals of the landmark Paris agreement , Goyder and O’Neill had no answer, other than to assert that it did. The hole in the argument was so great, and so obvious, that a majority of voting shareholders felt they could not be seen to take it seriously. That hasn’t happened before. It shows the shift in sentiment in the investment community. But we shouldn’t get carried away. The pension and super funds still overwhelmingly backed in Goyder as chair, returning him with only 16% voting against. A cynic might say they scolded the company over its climate stance at zero cost while backing the existing management to continue to keep delivering fossil-fuel powered dividends. Out in the real world, the climate crisis comes in a rush, whether it is flooding in the Dubai desert , heatwaves shutting schools and upending lives across southern Asia , continent-sized sea ice loss in Antarctica , or record mass coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef . Boardroom change is a slower operation. What happens from here? Goyder said he and the company’s investor relations team had already held more than 150 meetings with investors over their climate concerns. Presumably there are more to come. But Woodside still plans to spend $18bn on fossil fuel projects over the next five years. The circle can’t be squared while it remains wedded to the self-interested line that gas – the largest source of fossil fuel emissions growth last decade – is a climate solution. But the AGM shows that argument is increasingly exposed, and the push against it isn’t going away. Explore more on these topics Climate crisis Clear air Woodside Gas (Business) Gas (Environment) Fossil fuels comment Share Reuse this content A ustralia’s south-west is suffering through a historic dry stretch. Perth had the lowest rainfall on record in the six months to March, and trees in eucalyptus forests and scrubland across a 1,000 kilometre stretch are dying in shocking and spectacular fashion , with spillover effects through the ecosystems that rely on them. The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while. Winter rainfall has fallen up to 20% since the 1970s in what scientists have for years described as one of the earliest examples of the climate crisis having a measurable influence. This was one of the backdrops as Woodside Energy – Australia’s biggest oil and gas company, with multi-billion dollar developments in the works at home and in Africa and the Gulf of Mexico – held its annual general meeting in the Western Australian capital last week. Western Australia’s eucalypt forests fade to brown as century-old giant jarrahs die in heat and drought Read more Across four hours, Woodside’s chairman, Richard Goyder, and chief executive, Meg O’Neill, made the company’s case and took questions from shareholders and their proxies. Many related to climate change. A handful of the shareholders couldn’t understand what the fuss was about. They argued CO 2 from burning fossil fuels was airborne plant food and called the climate-concerned idiots. But the overwhelming sentiment from investors was that the company was failing to address their concerns, and not living up to its rhetoric that it aimed to have net zero emissions by 2050. They lodged a 58% protest vote against Woodside’s climate report, the strongest against a listed company anywhere across the globe. It was a remarkable result, reached after a concerted campaign by shareholder activist groups, and public rebukes by global pension and Australian super funds. Goyder, who has had a torrid recent time as the chair of both Woodside and Qantas, ended the meeting by saying the company took the non-binding feedback seriously, and would consider it as it reviewed its approach to climate change. They were the words he had to say after an embarrassing slap down, but there was little else at the meeting to back them up. The message was internally contradictory. On the one hand: we’re listening, we hear you and we’re open to change. But also: we reject what you say. And we have some giant fossil fuel developments to be getting on with so we can reward your financial investment. Standard 21st century operating procedure for a fossil fuel company, in other words. The disconnect between Woodside’s rhetoric and climate reality echoed throughout the AGM, but crystallised in a few moments. Some were throwaway – Goyder saying it was good to have a question “on the business” when discussion veered away from the ecological impact of its operations – but others were more telling. One shareholder, referring to the state’s drought, asked whether 2.7m seedlings the company planted last year to offset some of its emissions had survived. Another asked if Woodside believed it had moral and financial culpability for the impact of the climate crisis on local farmers. Goyder acknowledged the underlying issue – “It’d be nice to get some rain in the agricultural regions of Western Australia sooner rather than later” – but said it was “a pretty long bow” to consider Woodside “responsible for the climate conditions in the agricultural parts of Western Australia”, and “nonsense” to even suggest it might be given the scale of global emissions. On one level, this is just a truism. Woodside is not uniquely or solely responsible for the growing force of climate change being felt in the state. No one suggests it is. On another level, it is an argument about responsibility that would not pass muster in most other walks of life. You’re only part of the cause of the problem? Ah well, keep doing more of that then. This is, of course, the climate conundrum. The problem can be solved only if everyone, or nearly everyone, does their bit. China is often singled out as a climate villain, and not without cause. But even if it stopped polluting tomorrow that would leave about two-thirds of carbon pollution unaddressed. Not everyone is equally responsible to make rapid and immediate emissions cuts and to help others to do the same. But it’s been widely agreed that those who are responsible to act now include (a) the wealthy and (b) polluters working in areas where there are viable and affordable zero-emissions alternatives. It should shock no one to learn an Australian oil and gas company qualifies on both counts. Woodside Energy’s climate plan rejected by shareholders in ‘globally unprecedented’ rebuke Read more Woodside’s response is to claim it is acting, mainly by paying for some carbon offsets to put a dent in its direct emissions. But when Bill Hare, a scientist and head of the global consultancy Climate Analytics, asked the company to justify its claim that its plans align with the goals of the landmark Paris agreement , Goyder and O’Neill had no answer, other than to assert that it did. The hole in the argument was so great, and so obvious, that a majority of voting shareholders felt they could not be seen to take it seriously. That hasn’t happened before. It shows the shift in sentiment in the investment community. But we shouldn’t get carried away. The pension and super funds still overwhelmingly backed in Goyder as chair, returning him with only 16% voting against. A cynic might say they scolded the company over its climate stance at zero cost while backing the existing management to continue to keep delivering fossil-fuel powered dividends. Out in the real world, the climate crisis comes in a rush, whether it is flooding in the Dubai desert , heatwaves shutting schools and upending lives across southern Asia , continent-sized sea ice loss in Antarctica , or record mass coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef . Boardroom change is a slower operation. What happens from here? Goyder said he and the company’s investor relations team had already held more than 150 meetings with investors over their climate concerns. Presumably there are more to come. But Woodside still plans to spend $18bn on fossil fuel projects over the next five years. The circle can’t be squared while it remains wedded to the self-interested line that gas – the largest source of fossil fuel emissions growth last decade – is a climate solution. But the AGM shows that argument is increasingly exposed, and the push against it isn’t going away. Explore more on these topics Climate crisis Clear air Woodside Gas (Business) Gas (Environment) Fossil fuels comment Share Reuse this content A ustralia’s south-west is suffering through a historic dry stretch. Perth had the lowest rainfall on record in the six months to March, and trees in eucalyptus forests and scrubland across a 1,000 kilometre stretch are dying in shocking and spectacular fashion , with spillover effects through the ecosystems that rely on them. The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while. Winter rainfall has fallen up to 20% since the 1970s in what scientists have for years described as one of the earliest examples of the climate crisis having a measurable influence. This was one of the backdrops as Woodside Energy – Australia’s biggest oil and gas company, with multi-billion dollar developments in the works at home and in Africa and the Gulf of Mexico – held its annual general meeting in the Western Australian capital last week. Western Australia’s eucalypt forests fade to brown as century-old giant jarrahs die in heat and drought Read more Across four hours, Woodside’s chairman, Richard Goyder, and chief executive, Meg O’Neill, made the company’s case and took questions from shareholders and their proxies. Many related to climate change. A handful of the shareholders couldn’t understand what the fuss was about. They argued CO 2 from burning fossil fuels was airborne plant food and called the climate-concerned idiots. But the overwhelming sentiment from investors was that the company was failing to address their concerns, and not living up to its rhetoric that it aimed to have net zero emissions by 2050. They lodged a 58% protest vote against Woodside’s climate report, the strongest against a listed company anywhere across the globe. It was a remarkable result, reached after a concerted campaign by shareholder activist groups, and public rebukes by global pension and Australian super funds. Goyder, who has had a torrid recent time as the chair of both Woodside and Qantas, ended the meeting by saying the company took the non-binding feedback seriously, and would consider it as it reviewed its approach to climate change. They were the words he had to say after an embarrassing slap down, but there was little else at the meeting to back them up. The message was internally contradictory. On the one hand: we’re listening, we hear you and we’re open to change. But also: we reject what you say. And we have some giant fossil fuel developments to be getting on with so we can reward your financial investment. Standard 21st century operating procedure for a fossil fuel company, in other words. The disconnect between Woodside’s rhetoric and climate reality echoed throughout the AGM, but crystallised in a few moments. Some were throwaway – Goyder saying it was good to have a question “on the business” when discussion veered away from the ecological impact of its operations – but others were more telling. One shareholder, referring to the state’s drought, asked whether 2.7m seedlings the company planted last year to offset some of its emissions had survived. Another asked if Woodside believed it had moral and financial culpability for the impact of the climate crisis on local farmers. Goyder acknowledged the underlying issue – “It’d be nice to get some rain in the agricultural regions of Western Australia sooner rather than later” – but said it was “a pretty long bow” to consider Woodside “responsible for the climate conditions in the agricultural parts of Western Australia”, and “nonsense” to even suggest it might be given the scale of global emissions. On one level, this is just a truism. Woodside is not uniquely or solely responsible for the growing force of climate change being felt in the state. No one suggests it is. On another level, it is an argument about responsibility that would not pass muster in most other walks of life. You’re only part of the cause of the problem? Ah well, keep doing more of that then. This is, of course, the climate conundrum. The problem can be solved only if everyone, or nearly everyone, does their bit. China is often singled out as a climate villain, and not without cause. But even if it stopped polluting tomorrow that would leave about two-thirds of carbon pollution unaddressed. Not everyone is equally responsible to make rapid and immediate emissions cuts and to help others to do the same. But it’s been widely agreed that those who are responsible to act now include (a) the wealthy and (b) polluters working in areas where there are viable and affordable zero-emissions alternatives. It should shock no one to learn an Australian oil and gas company qualifies on both counts. Woodside Energy’s climate plan rejected by shareholders in ‘globally unprecedented’ rebuke Read more Woodside’s response is to claim it is acting, mainly by paying for some carbon offsets to put a dent in its direct emissions. But when Bill Hare, a scientist and head of the global consultancy Climate Analytics, asked the company to justify its claim that its plans align with the goals of the landmark Paris agreement , Goyder and O’Neill had no answer, other than to assert that it did. The hole in the argument was so great, and so obvious, that a majority of voting shareholders felt they could not be seen to take it seriously. That hasn’t happened before. It shows the shift in sentiment in the investment community. But we shouldn’t get carried away. The pension and super funds still overwhelmingly backed in Goyder as chair, returning him with only 16% voting against. A cynic might say they scolded the company over its climate stance at zero cost while backing the existing management to continue to keep delivering fossil-fuel powered dividends. Out in the real world, the climate crisis comes in a rush, whether it is flooding in the Dubai desert , heatwaves shutting schools and upending lives across southern Asia , continent-sized sea ice loss in Antarctica , or record mass coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef . Boardroom change is a slower operation. What happens from here? Goyder said he and the company’s investor relations team had already held more than 150 meetings with investors over their climate concerns. Presumably there are more to come. But Woodside still plans to spend $18bn on fossil fuel projects over the next five years. The circle can’t be squared while it remains wedded to the self-interested line that gas – the largest source of fossil fuel emissions growth last decade – is a climate solution. But the AGM shows that argument is increasingly exposed, and the push against it isn’t going away. A ustralia’s south-west is suffering through a historic dry stretch. Perth had the lowest rainfall on record in the six months to March, and trees in eucalyptus forests and scrubland across a 1,000 kilometre stretch are dying in shocking and spectacular fashion , with spillover effects through the ecosystems that rely on them. The climate signal – the impact of rising atmospheric greenhouse gases, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels – in this part of the world has been clear for a while. Winter rainfall has fallen up to 20% since the 1970s in what scientists have for years described as one of the earliest examples of the climate crisis having a measurable influence. This was one of the backdrops as Woodside Energy – Australia’s biggest oil and gas company, with multi-billion dollar developments in the works at home and in Africa and the Gulf of Mexico – held its annual general meeting in the Western Australian capital last week. Western Australia’s eucalypt forests fade to brown as century-old giant jarrahs die in heat and drought Read more Across four hours, Woodside’s chairman, Richard Goyder, and chief executive, Meg O’Neill, made the company’s case and took questions from shareholders and their proxies. Many related to climate change. A handful of the shareholders couldn’t understand what the fuss was about. They argued CO 2 from burning fossil fuels was airborne plant food and called the climate-concerned idiots. But the overwhelming sentiment from investors was that the company was failing to address their concerns, and not living up to its rhetoric that it aimed to have net zero emissions by 2050. They lodged a 58% protest vote against Woodside’s climate report, the strongest against a listed company anywhere across the globe. It was a remarkable result, reached after a concerted campaign by shareholder activist groups, and public rebukes by global pension and Australian super funds. Goyder, who has had a torrid recent time as the chair of both Woodside and Qantas, ended the meeting by saying the company took the non-binding feedback seriously, and would consider it as it reviewed its approach to climate change. They were the words he had to say after an embarrassing slap down, but there was little else at the meeting to back them up. The message was internally contradictory. On the one hand: we’re listening, we hear you and we’re open to change. But also: we reject what you say. And we have some giant fossil fuel developments to be getting on with so we can reward your financial investment. Standard 21st century operating procedure for a fossil fuel company, in other words. The disconnect between Woodside’s rhetoric and climate reality echoed throughout the AGM, but crystallised in a few moments. Some were throwaway – Goyder saying it was good to have a question “on the business” when discussion veered away from the ecological impact of its operations – but others were more telling. One shareholder, referring to the state’s drought, asked whether 2.7m seedlings the company planted last year to offset some of its emissions had survived. Another asked if Woodside believed it had moral and financial culpability for the impact of the climate crisis on local farmers. Goyder acknowledged the underlying issue – “It’d be nice to get some rain in the agricultural regions of Western Australia sooner rather than later” – but said it was “a pretty long bow” to consider Woodside “responsible for the climate conditions in the agricultural parts of Western Australi
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
The Lib Dems have lost their way – even some members admit it
Sir Ed Davey pictured during a visit to a farm in Treflach, Shropshire. Photograph: Jacob King/PA View image in fullscreen Sir Ed Davey pictured during a visit to a farm in Treflach, Shropshire. Photograph: Jacob King/PA This article is more than 1 year old Letters The Lib Dems have lost their way – even some members admit it This article is more than 1 year old Doubts about the role and direction of the Liberal Democrats are voiced by Michael Meadowcroft, Paul Lally, Gordon Vassell and Peter Loschi “Why don’t we take the UK’s third-biggest party seriously?” says the headline in your print edition on Martin Kettle’s article ( Frank Field saw benefit in the Lib Dems. In this election year, Labour would be wise to do the same, 25 April ). It is a question that many of us within the party have been attempting to answer for a long time. Even if most of the electorate does not interest itself in the depths of political philosophy, a party has to have a rigorous ideological position that gives it a vision of the kind of society it campaigns for. Only this encourages concerned individuals to commit themselves to working sacrificially for years in the political jungle. Despite the existence of a Liberal-shaped gap in British society today, in which, as Fraser Nelson of the Spectator stated recently, we have “ two conservative parties ”, the Liberal Democrats have failed to express and present the historical Liberal position as a non-statist radical party. Its last significant document setting out its values and philosophy was in 2002. Today its appeal is directed at Conservative seats and relies on the deep unpopularity of the Conservative party for any success. Its pathetic performance at the recent Rochdale byelection – a constituency the party won as recently as 2001 and almost won back in 2010 – demonstrated its lack of a broader positive appeal. The values that came to the fore in the Covid lockdown are essentially Liberal: solidarity between individuals, the value of community support, the importance of the public sector, and the necessity of an international response. The Liberal Democrats have so far failed to focus their appeal to these values that are latent within the broad electorate. They could still do so. Michael Meadowcroft Leeds West Liberal MP, 1983-87 Over the past 70 years, the Lib Dems and their predecessors have presented themselves as a party of protest primarily aimed at disaffected supporters of the government of the day. Before then, Liberal party key thinkers such as David Lloyd George, John Maynard Keynes and William Beveridge offered realistic critiques of political and economic “certainties” and were profoundly instrumental in establishing the welfare state and postwar full employment. Such far-sightedness offers a model of political thinking and practice to all who want substantial change today. In his column, Martin Kettle rightly highlights the important writings of David Marquand, a man of great analysis and vision. In Mammon’s Kingdom, he laid bare the devastating trajectory of UK politics and economics since 1979. Everyone interested in politics – left, centre or right – should read this book and, as they do, ask themselves how we stop this continuing catastrophe. Marquand’s death last week was a very severe loss for us all. Paul Lally Liverpool Maybe people don’t take the Lib Dems seriously because of the sense that the party is opportunistic, a fact that manifested itself in 2010. Under Nick Clegg, it couldn’t move fast enough to form a coalition government, which went on to inflict the cruel and callous economic austerity measures that reverberate to this day. The Lib Dems are, and always have been, anything to anyone, depending on which way the wind is blowing. Gordon Vassell Hull “Progressives” remember that the only time the Lib Dems were in government in the last 80 years, they voted for massive cuts to public services and council funding, and a tax on poorer people’s bedrooms, among many other catastrophes, for which we’re all paying a price. And don’t get me started on Vince Cable’s fire sale of Royal Mail. The question Martin Kettle should be asking is: “How is this disgraceful outfit still going?” Peter Loschi Oldham, Greater Manchester Explore more on these topics Liberal Democrats Frank Field letters Share Reuse this content Sir Ed Davey pictured during a visit to a farm in Treflach, Shropshire. Photograph: Jacob King/PA View image in fullscreen Sir Ed Davey pictured during a visit to a farm in Treflach, Shropshire. Photograph: Jacob King/PA This article is more than 1 year old Letters The Lib Dems have lost their way – even some members admit it This article is more than 1 year old Doubts about the role and direction of the Liberal Democrats are voiced by Michael Meadowcroft, Paul Lally, Gordon Vassell and Peter Loschi “Why don’t we take the UK’s third-biggest party seriously?” says the headline in your print edition on Martin Kettle’s article ( Frank Field saw benefit in the Lib Dems. In this election year, Labour would be wise to do the same, 25 April ). It is a question that many of us within the party have been attempting to answer for a long time. Even if most of the electorate does not interest itself in the depths of political philosophy, a party has to have a rigorous ideological position that gives it a vision of the kind of society it campaigns for. Only this encourages concerned individuals to commit themselves to working sacrificially for years in the political jungle. Despite the existence of a Liberal-shaped gap in British society today, in which, as Fraser Nelson of the Spectator stated recently, we have “ two conservative parties ”, the Liberal Democrats have failed to express and present the historical Liberal position as a non-statist radical party. Its last significant document setting out its values and philosophy was in 2002. Today its appeal is directed at Conservative seats and relies on the deep unpopularity of the Conservative party for any success. Its pathetic performance at the recent Rochdale byelection – a constituency the party won as recently as 2001 and almost won back in 2010 – demonstrated its lack of a broader positive appeal. The values that came to the fore in the Covid lockdown are essentially Liberal: solidarity between individuals, the value of community support, the importance of the public sector, and the necessity of an international response. The Liberal Democrats have so far failed to focus their appeal to these values that are latent within the broad electorate. They could still do so. Michael Meadowcroft Leeds West Liberal MP, 1983-87 Over the past 70 years, the Lib Dems and their predecessors have presented themselves as a party of protest primarily aimed at disaffected supporters of the government of the day. Before then, Liberal party key thinkers such as David Lloyd George, John Maynard Keynes and William Beveridge offered realistic critiques of political and economic “certainties” and were profoundly instrumental in establishing the welfare state and postwar full employment. Such far-sightedness offers a model of political thinking and practice to all who want substantial change today. In his column, Martin Kettle rightly highlights the important writings of David Marquand, a man of great analysis and vision. In Mammon’s Kingdom, he laid bare the devastating trajectory of UK politics and economics since 1979. Everyone interested in politics – left, centre or right – should read this book and, as they do, ask themselves how we stop this continuing catastrophe. Marquand’s death last week was a very severe loss for us all. Paul Lally Liverpool Maybe people don’t take the Lib Dems seriously because of the sense that the party is opportunistic, a fact that manifested itself in 2010. Under Nick Clegg, it couldn’t move fast enough to form a coalition government, which went on to inflict the cruel and callous economic austerity measures that reverberate to this day. The Lib Dems are, and always have been, anything to anyone, depending on which way the wind is blowing. Gordon Vassell Hull “Progressives” remember that the only time the Lib Dems were in government in the last 80 years, they voted for massive cuts to public services and council funding, and a tax on poorer people’s bedrooms, among many other catastrophes, for which we’re all paying a price. And don’t get me started on Vince Cable’s fire sale of Royal Mail. The question Martin Kettle should be asking is: “How is this disgraceful outfit still going?” Peter Loschi Oldham, Greater Manchester Explore more on these topics Liberal Democrats Frank Field letters Share Reuse this content Sir Ed Davey pictured during a visit to a farm in Treflach, Shropshire. Photograph: Jacob King/PA View image in fullscreen Sir Ed Davey pictured during a visit to a farm in Treflach, Shropshire. Photograph: Jacob King/PA Sir Ed Davey pictured during a visit to a farm in Treflach, Shropshire. Photograph: Jacob King/PA View image in fullscreen Sir Ed Davey pictured during a visit to a farm in Treflach, Shropshire. Photograph: Jacob King/PA Sir Ed Davey pictured during a visit to a farm in Treflach, Shropshire. Photograph: Jacob King/PA View image in fullscreen Sir Ed Davey pictured during a visit to a farm in Treflach, Shropshire. Photograph: Jacob King/PA Sir Ed Davey pictured during a visit to a farm in Treflach, Shropshire. Photograph: Jacob King/PA View image in fullscreen Sir Ed Davey pictured during a visit to a farm in Treflach, Shropshire. Photograph: Jacob King/PA Sir Ed Davey pictured during a visit to a farm in Treflach, Shropshire. Photograph: Jacob King/PA Sir Ed Davey pictured during a visit to a farm in Treflach, Shropshire. Photograph: Jacob King/PA This article is more than 1 year old Letters The Lib Dems have lost their way – even some members admit it This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Letters The Lib Dems have lost their way – even some members admit it This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Letters The Lib Dems have lost their way – even some members admit it This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Letters The Lib Dems have lost their way – even some members admit it This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Doubts about the role and direction of the Liberal Democrats are voiced by Michael Meadowcroft, Paul Lally, Gordon Vassell and Peter Loschi Doubts about the role and direction of the Liberal Democrats are voiced by Michael Meadowcroft, Paul Lally, Gordon Vassell and Peter Loschi Doubts about the role and direction of the Liberal Democrats are voiced by Michael Meadowcroft, Paul Lally, Gordon Vassell and Peter Loschi “Why don’t we take the UK’s third-biggest party seriously?” says the headline in your print edition on Martin Kettle’s article ( Frank Field saw benefit in the Lib Dems. In this election year, Labour would be wise to do the same, 25 April ). It is a question that many of us within the party have been attempting to answer for a long time. Even if most of the electorate does not interest itself in the depths of political philosophy, a party has to have a rigorous ideological position that gives it a vision of the kind of society it campaigns for. Only this encourages concerned individuals to commit themselves to working sacrificially for years in the political jungle. Despite the existence of a Liberal-shaped gap in British society today, in which, as Fraser Nelson of the Spectator stated recently, we have “ two conservative parties ”, the Liberal Democrats have failed to express and present the historical Liberal position as a non-statist radical party. Its last significant document setting out its values and philosophy was in 2002. Today its appeal is directed at Conservative seats and relies on the deep unpopularity of the Conservative party for any success. Its pathetic performance at the recent Rochdale byelection – a constituency the party won as recently as 2001 and almost won back in 2010 – demonstrated its lack of a broader positive appeal. The values that came to the fore in the Covid lockdown are essentially Liberal: solidarity between individuals, the value of community support, the importance of the public sector, and the necessity of an international response. The Liberal Democrats have so far failed to focus their appeal to these values that are latent within the broad electorate. They could still do so. Michael Meadowcroft Leeds West Liberal MP, 1983-87 Over the past 70 years, the Lib Dems and their predecessors have presented themselves as a party of protest primarily aimed at disaffected supporters of the government of the day. Before then, Liberal party key thinkers such as David Lloyd George, John Maynard Keynes and William Beveridge offered realistic critiques of political and economic “certainties” and were profoundly instrumental in establishing the welfare state and postwar full employment. Such far-sightedness offers a model of political thinking and practice to all who want substantial change today. In his column, Martin Kettle rightly highlights the important writings of David Marquand, a man of great analysis and vision. In Mammon’s Kingdom, he laid bare the devastating trajectory of UK politics and economics since 1979. Everyone interested in politics – left, centre or right – should read this book and, as they do, ask themselves how we stop this continuing catastrophe. Marquand’s death last week was a very severe loss for us all. Paul Lally Liverpool Maybe people don’t take the Lib Dems seriously because of the sense that the party is opportunistic, a fact that manifested itself in 2010. Under Nick Clegg, it couldn’t move fast enough to form a coalition government, which went on to inflict the cruel and callous economic austerity measures that reverberate to this day. The Lib Dems are, and always have been, anything to anyone, depending on which way the wind is blowing. Gordon Vassell Hull “Progressives” remember that the only time the Lib Dems were in government in the last 80 years, they voted for massive cuts to public services and council funding, and a tax on poorer people’s bedrooms, among many other catastrophes, for which we’re all paying a price. And don’t get me started on Vince Cable’s fire sale of Royal Mail. The question Martin Kettle should be asking is: “How is this disgraceful outfit still going?” Peter Loschi Oldham, Greater Manchester Explore more on these topics Liberal Democrats Frank Field letters Share Reuse this content “Why don’t we take the UK’s third-biggest party seriously?” says the headline in your print edition on Martin Kettle’s article ( Frank Field saw benefit in the Lib Dems. In this election year, Labour would be wise to do the same, 25 April ). It is a question that many of us within the party have been attempting to answer for a long time. Even if most of the electorate does not interest itself in the depths of political philosophy, a party has to have a rigorous ideological position that gives it a vision of the kind of society it campaigns for. Only this encourages concerned individuals to commit themselves to working sacrificially for years in the political jungle. Despite the existence of a Liberal-shaped gap in British society today, in which, as Fraser Nelson of the Spectator stated recently, we have “ two conservative parties ”, the Liberal Democrats have failed to express and present the historical Liberal position as a non-statist radical party. Its last significant document setting out its values and philosophy was in 2002. Today its appeal is directed at Conservative seats and relies on the deep unpopularity of the Conservative party for any success. Its pathetic performance at the recent Rochdale byelection – a constituency the party won as recently as 2001 and almost won back in 2010 – demonstrated its lack of a broader positive appeal. The values that came to the fore in the Covid lockdown are essentially Liberal: solidarity between individuals, the value of community support, the importance of the public sector, and the necessity of an international response. The Liberal Democrats have so far failed to focus their appeal to these values that are latent within the broad electorate. They could still do so. Michael Meadowcroft Leeds West Liberal MP, 1983-87 Over the past 70 years, the Lib Dems and their predecessors have presented themselves as a party of protest primarily aimed at disaffected supporters of the government of the day. Before then, Liberal party key thinkers such as David Lloyd George, John Maynard Keynes and William Beveridge offered realistic critiques of political and economic “certainties” and were profoundly instrumental in establishing the welfare state and postwar full employment. Such far-sightedness offers a model of political thinking and practice to all who want substantial change today. In his column, Martin Kettle rightly highlights the important writings of David Marquand, a man of great analysis and vision. In Mammon’s Kingdom, he laid bare the devastating trajectory of UK politics and economics since 1979. Everyone interested in politics – left, centre or right – should read this book and, as they do, ask themselves how we stop this continuing catastrophe. Marquand’s death last week was a very severe loss for us all. Paul Lally Liverpool Maybe people don’t take the Lib Dems seriously because of the sense that the party is opportunistic, a fact that manifested itself in 2010. Under Nick Clegg, it couldn’t move fast enough to form a coalition government, which went on to inflict the cruel and callous economic austerity measures that reverberate to this day. The Lib Dems are, and always have been, anything to anyone, depending on which way the wind is blowing. Gordon Vassell Hull “Progressives” remember that the only time the Lib Dems were in government in the last 80 years, they voted for massive cuts to public services and council funding, and a tax on poorer people’s bedrooms, among many other catastrophes, for which we’re all paying a price. And don’t get me started on Vince Cable’s fire sale of Royal Mail. The question Martin Kettle should be asking is: “How is this disgraceful outfit still going?” Peter Loschi Oldham, Greater Manchester Explore more on these topics Liberal Democrats Frank Field letters Share Reuse this content “Why don’t we take the UK’s third-biggest party seriously?” says the headline in your print edition on Martin Kettle’s article ( Frank Field saw benefit in the Lib Dems. In this election year, Labour would be wise to do the same, 25 April ). It is a question that many of us within the party have been attempting to answer for a long time. Even if most of the electorate does not interest itself in the depths of political philosophy, a party has to have a rigorous ideological position that gives it a vision of the kind of society it campaigns for. Only this encourages concerned individuals to commit themselves to working sacrificially for years in the political jungle. Despite the existence of a Liberal-shaped gap in British society today, in which, as Fraser Nelson of the Spectator stated recently, we have “ two conservative parties ”, the Liberal Democrats have failed to express and present the historical Liberal position as a non-statist radical party. Its last significant document setting out its values and philosophy was in 2002. Today its appeal is directed at Conservative seats and relies on the deep unpopularity of the Conservative party for any success. Its pathetic performance at the recent Rochdale byelection – a constituency the party won as recently as 2001 and almost won back in 2010 – demonstrated its lack of a broader positive appeal. The values that came to the fore in the Covid lockdown are essentially Liberal: solidarity between individuals, the value of community support, the importance of the public sector, and the necessity of an international response. The Liberal Democrats have so far failed to focus their appeal to these values that are latent within the broad electorate. They could still do so. Michael Meadowcroft Leeds West Liberal MP, 1983-87 Over the past 70 years, the Lib Dems and their predecessors have presented themselves as a party of protest primarily aimed at disaffected supporters of the government of the day. Before then, Liberal party key thinkers such as David Lloyd George, John Maynard Keynes and William Beveridge offered realistic critiques of political and economic “certainties” and were profoundly instrumental in establishing the welfare state and postwar full employment. Such far-sightedness offers a model of political thinking and practice to all who want substantial change today. In his column, Martin Kettle rightly highlights the important writings of David Marquand, a man of great analysis and vision. In Mammon’s Kingdom, he laid bare the devastating trajectory of UK politics and economics since 1979. Everyone interested in politics – left, centre or right – should read this book and, as they do, ask themselves how we stop this continuing catastrophe. Marquand’s death last week was a very severe loss for us all. Paul Lally Liverpool Maybe people don’t take the Lib Dems seriously because of the sense that the party is opportunistic, a fact that manifested itself in 2010. Under Nick Clegg, it couldn’t move fast enough to form a coalition government, which went on to inflict the cruel and callous economic austerity measures that reverberate to this day. The Lib Dems are, and always have been, anything to anyone, depending on which way the wind is blowing. Gordon Vassell Hull “Progressives” remember that the only time the Lib Dems were in government in the last 80 years, they voted for massive cuts to public services and council funding, and a tax on poorer people’s bedrooms, among many other catastrophes, for which we’re all paying a price. And don’t get me started on Vince Cable’s fire sale of Royal Mail. The question Martin Kettle should be asking is: “How is this disgraceful outfit still going?” Peter Loschi Oldham, Greater Manchester Explore more on these topics Liberal Democrats Frank Field letters Share Reuse this content “Why don’t we take the UK’s third-biggest party seriously?” says the headline in your print edition on Martin Kettle’s article ( Frank Field saw benefit in the Lib Dems. In this election year, Labour would be wise to do the same, 25 April ). It is a question that many of us within the party have been attempting to answer for a long time. Even if most of the electorate does not interest itself in the depths of political philosophy, a party has to have a rigorous ideological position that gives it a vision of the kind of society it campaigns for. Only this encourages concerned individuals to commit themselves to working sacrificially for years in the political jungle. Despite the existence of a Liberal-shaped gap in British society today, in which, as Fraser Nelson of the Spectator stated recently, we have “ two conservative parties ”, the Liberal Democrats have failed to express and present the historical Liberal position as a non-statist radical party. Its last significant document setting out its values and philosophy was in 2002. Today its appeal is directed at Conservative seats and relies on the deep unpopularity of the Conservative party for any success. Its pathetic performance at the recent Rochdale byelection – a constituency the party won as recently as 2001 and almost won back in 2010 – demonstrated its lack of a broader positive appeal. The values that came to the fore in the Covid lockdown are essentially Liberal: solidarity between individuals, the value of community support, the importance of the public sector, and the necessity of an international response. The Liberal Democrats have so far failed to focus their appeal to these values that are latent within the broad electorate. They could still do so. Michael Meadowcroft Leeds West Liberal MP, 1983-87 Over the past 70 years, the Lib Dems and their predecessors have presented themselves as a party of protest primarily aimed at disaffected supporters of the government of the day. Before then, Liberal party key thinkers such as David Lloyd George, John Maynard Keynes and William Beveridge offered realistic critiques of political and economic “certainties” and were profoundly instrumental in establishing the welfare state and postwar full employment. Such far-sightedness offers a model of political thinking and practice to all who want substantial change today. In his column, Martin Kettle rightly highlights the important writings of David Marquand, a man of great analysis and vision. In Mammon’s Kingdom, he laid bare the devastating trajectory of UK politics and economics since 1979. Everyone interested in politics – left, centre or right – should read this book and, as they do, ask themselves how we stop this continuing catastrophe. Marquand’s death last week was a very severe loss for us all. Paul Lally Liverpool Maybe people don’t take the Lib Dems seriously because of the sense that the party is opportunistic, a fact that manifested itself in 2010. Under Nick Clegg, it couldn’t move fast enough to form a coalition government, which went on to inflict the cruel and callous economic austerity measures that reverberate to this day. The Lib Dems are, and always have been, anything to anyone, depending on which way the wind is blowing. Gordon Vassell Hull “Progressives” remember that the only time the Lib Dems were in government in the last 80 years, they voted for massive cuts to public services and council funding, and a tax on poorer people’s bedrooms, among many other catastrophes, for which we’re all paying a price. And don’t get me started on Vince Cable’s fire sale of Royal Mail. The question Martin Kettle should be asking is: “How is this disgraceful outfit still going?” Peter Loschi Oldham, Greater Manchester “Why don’t we take the UK’s third-biggest party seriously?” says the headline in your print edition on Martin Kettle’s article ( Frank Field saw benefit in the Lib Dems. In this election year, Labour would be wise to do the same, 25 April ). It is a question that many of us within the party have been attempting to answer for a long time. Even if most of the electorate does not interest itself in the depths of political philosophy, a party has to have a rigorous ideological position that gives it a vision of the kind of society it campaigns for. Only this encourages concerned individuals to commit themselves to working sacrificially for years in the political jungle. Despite the existence of a Liberal-shaped gap in British society today, in which, as Fraser Nelson of the Spectator stated recently, we have “ two conservative parties ”, the Liberal Democrats have failed to express and present the historical Liberal position as a non-statist radical party. Its last significant document setting out its values and philosophy was in 2002. Today its appeal is directed at Conservative seats and relies on the deep unpopularity of the Conservative party for any success. Its pathetic performance at the recent Rochdale byelection – a constituency the party won as recently as 2001 and almost won back in 2010 – demonstrated its lack of a broader positive appeal. The values that came to the fore in the Covid lockdown are essentially Liberal: solidarity between individuals, the value of community support, the importance of the public sector, and the necessity of an international response. The Liberal Democrats have so far failed to focus their appeal to these values that are latent within the broad electorate. They could still do so. Michael Meadowcroft Leeds West Liberal MP, 1983-87 Over the past 70 years, the Lib Dems and their predecessors have presented themselves as a party of protest primarily aimed at disaffected supporters of the government of the day. Before then, Liberal party key thinkers such as David Lloyd George, John Maynard Keynes and William Beveridge offered realistic critiques of political and economic “certainties” and were profoundly instrumental in establishing the welfare state and postwar full employment. Such far-sightedness offers a model of political thinking and practice to all who want substantial change today. In his column, Martin Kettle rightly highlights the important writings of David Marquand, a man of great analysis and vision. In Mammon’s Kingdom, he laid bare the devastating trajectory of UK politics and economics since 1979. Everyone interested in politics – left, centre or right – should read this book and, as they do, ask themselves how we stop this continuing catastrophe. Marquand’s death last week was a very severe loss for us all. Paul Lally Liverpool Maybe people don’t take the Lib Dems seriously because of the sense that the party is opportunistic, a fact that manifested itself in 2010. Under Nick Clegg, it couldn’t move fast enough to form a coalition government, which went on to inflict the cruel and callous economic austerity measures that reverberate to this day. The Lib Dems are, and always have been, anything to anyone, depending on which way the wind is blowing. Gordon Vassell Hull “Progressives” remember that the only time the Lib Dems were in government in the last 80 years, they voted for massive cuts to public services and council funding, and a tax on poorer people’s bedrooms, among many other catastrophes, for which we’re all paying a price. And don’t get me started on Vince Cable’s fire sale of Royal Mail. The question Martin Kettle should be asking is: “How is this disgraceful outfit still going?” Peter Loschi Oldham, Greater Manchester “Why don’t we take the UK’s third-biggest party seriously?” says the headline in your print edition on Martin Kettle’s article ( Frank Field saw benefit in the Lib Dems. In this election year, Labour would be wise to do the same, 25 April ). It is a question that many of us within the party have been attempting to answer for a long time. Even if most of the electorate does not interest itself in the depths of political philosophy, a party has to have a rigorous ideological position that gives it a vision of the kind of society it campaigns for. Only this encourages concerned individuals to commit themselves to working sacrificially for years in the political jungle. Despite the existence of a Liberal-shaped gap in British society today, in which, as Fraser Nelson of the Spectator stated recently, we have “ two conservative parties ”, the Liberal Democrats have failed to express and present the historical Liberal position as a non-statist radical party. Its last significant document setting out its values and philosophy was in 2002. Today its appeal is directed at Conservative seats and relies on the deep unpopularity of the Conservative party for any success. Its pathetic performance at the recent Rochdale byelection – a constituency the party won as recently as 2001 and almost won back in 2010 – demonstrated its lack of a broader positive appeal. The values that came to the fore in the Covid lockdown are essentially Liberal: solidarity between individuals, the value of community support, the importance of the public sector, and the necessity of an international response. The Liberal Democrats have so far failed to focus their appeal to these values that are latent within the broad electorate. They could still do so. Michael Meadowcroft Leeds West Liberal MP, 1983-87 Over the past 70 years, the Lib Dems and their predecessors have presented themselves as a party of protest primarily aimed at disaffected supporters of the government of the day. Before then, Liberal party key thinkers such as David Lloyd George, John Maynard Keynes and William Beveridge offered realistic critiques of political and economic “certainties” and were profoundly instrumental in establishing the welfare state and postwar full employment. Such far-sightedness offers a model of political thinking and practice to all who want substantial change today. In his column, Martin Kettle rightly highlights the important writings of David Marquand, a man of great analysis and vision. In Mammon’s Kingdom, he laid bare the devastating trajectory of UK politics and economics since 1979. Everyone interested in politics – left, centre or right – should read this book and, as they do, ask themselves how we stop this continuing catastrophe. Marquand’s death last week was a very severe loss for us all. Paul Lally Liverpool Maybe people don’t take the Lib Dems seriously because of the sense that the party is opportunistic, a fact that manifested itself in 2010. Under Nick Clegg, it couldn’t move fast enough to form a coalition government, which went on to inflict the cruel and callous economic austerity measures that reverberate to this day. The Lib Dems are, and always have been, anything to anyone, depending on which way the wind is blowing. Gordon Vassell Hull “Progressives” remember that the only time the Lib Dems were in government in the last 80 years, they voted for massive cuts to public services and council funding, and a tax on poorer people’s bedrooms, among many other catastrophes, for which we’re all paying a price. And don’t get me started on Vince Cable’s fire sale of Royal Mail. The question Martin Kettle should be asking is: “How is this disgraceful outfit still going?” Peter Loschi Oldham, Greater Manchester Explore more on these topics Liberal Democrats Frank Field letters Share Reuse this content Liberal Democrats Frank Field letters |
New musical based on Horizon scandal is ‘deep dive into the crushing heartbreak’
The musical will be a form of protest: ‘Just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease’, says the lyricist. Photograph: Pentobus View image in fullscreen The musical will be a form of protest: ‘Just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease’, says the lyricist. Photograph: Pentobus This article is more than 1 year old New musical based on Horizon scandal is ‘deep dive into the crushing heartbreak’ This article is more than 1 year old Writer of Make Good: the Post Office Scandal says postal workers’ interviews helped describe ‘the power of the state coming down on you’ The creators of a new musical about the Post Office Horizon scandal are appealing to postal workers to form part of the choir for the production, which they say can help heal communities affected by the issue. Make Good: the Post Office Scandal is based on interviews with two post office operators from Shropshire whose lives were ruined when Fujitsu’s flawed computer software Horizon made it appear there were shortfalls in their accounting. Jeanie O’Hare , who wrote the script, said: “They have been our guide to make sure we are doing the story right – not only technical stuff but the deep dive into the crushing heartbreak, the shame and what it feels like to be an ordinary person and the power of the state is coming down on you.” View image in fullscreen Scriptwriter Jeanie O'Hare and lyricist Jim Fortune. Photograph: Joanne Marcus Co-produced by Pentabus and New Perspectives, the show will tour village halls around Shropshire initially, to audiences of 100-120 people. O’Hare – who commissioned the hit Matilda, the musical before becoming chair of playwriting at Yale School of Drama – said the story offers a chance for the community to have a “conversation with itself”. She said: “The subpostmasters actively created community – that is their superpower and song the best analogy for that. They create warmth, community and support and that’s what we all need. We are going back into the communities where the damage was done.” 0:30 Post Office inquiry: former executive 'truly, truly sorry' over Horizon scandal – video Olivier-award nominee Jim Fortune, who wrote the music and lyrics, said they would love the show’s choir to be made up of those affected by the scandal, which impacted at least 900 post office operators and is the subject of a government inquiry . “Our dream is to build a choir for this show from within the communities, especially postal workers,” he said. “If they want to join our choir, they’d be very welcome.” Fortune said that the idea of people being in confrontation with technology is a theme throughout the musical, with the production’s band being made up of analogue equipment, including a typewriter, a dial-up modem, and “stuff before the cloud and clever computer programmers made everything ‘better’”. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion James Fortune. Photograph: Pentabus O’Hare said: “This was during the era when that terrible catchphrase ‘computer says no’ was in the ether. People were coming up against these magical machines and they weren’t able to argue their position as a human being. “The focus on the show was always what was happening to the subpostmasters and their families but Horizon is very present as a force operating on their lives that doesn’t have to answer for itself.” Fortune said, despite being a musical, it will still be hard hitting and that song is often the most powerful way to unpack traumatic events. He said: “I think song is protest and it is the only and best way that I would know how to deal with emotions and politics at this level – just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease.” O’Hare believes that the story, which captured audiences in the ITV drama Mr Bates vs The Post Office , has resonated so much because many people recognise the plight of postal workers. “The subpostmasters are the canaries in the coalmine,” she said. “They were right there as we moved into the digital era from the analogue era. All the mistakes that developed as digital technology unfolded have played out and affected their lives.” Fortune added: “It means so much to us culturally that there’s a huge sense of betrayal.” The Make Good creative team didn’t want to say whether former Post Office chief executive Paula Vennells, or former business improvement director Angela van den Bogerd , will feature in the musical but said discussions were ongoing. O’Hare said: “There are people who are caricatures already but we are in the middle of the conversation on how named those people will be.” Make Good will tour from October to December for six weeks, starting at Ludlow Assembly Rooms on 18-19 October. Further venues, including a London run, will be announced. Explore more on these topics Stage Post Office Horizon scandal Post Office Musicals Theatre news Share Reuse this content The musical will be a form of protest: ‘Just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease’, says the lyricist. Photograph: Pentobus View image in fullscreen The musical will be a form of protest: ‘Just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease’, says the lyricist. Photograph: Pentobus This article is more than 1 year old New musical based on Horizon scandal is ‘deep dive into the crushing heartbreak’ This article is more than 1 year old Writer of Make Good: the Post Office Scandal says postal workers’ interviews helped describe ‘the power of the state coming down on you’ The creators of a new musical about the Post Office Horizon scandal are appealing to postal workers to form part of the choir for the production, which they say can help heal communities affected by the issue. Make Good: the Post Office Scandal is based on interviews with two post office operators from Shropshire whose lives were ruined when Fujitsu’s flawed computer software Horizon made it appear there were shortfalls in their accounting. Jeanie O’Hare , who wrote the script, said: “They have been our guide to make sure we are doing the story right – not only technical stuff but the deep dive into the crushing heartbreak, the shame and what it feels like to be an ordinary person and the power of the state is coming down on you.” View image in fullscreen Scriptwriter Jeanie O'Hare and lyricist Jim Fortune. Photograph: Joanne Marcus Co-produced by Pentabus and New Perspectives, the show will tour village halls around Shropshire initially, to audiences of 100-120 people. O’Hare – who commissioned the hit Matilda, the musical before becoming chair of playwriting at Yale School of Drama – said the story offers a chance for the community to have a “conversation with itself”. She said: “The subpostmasters actively created community – that is their superpower and song the best analogy for that. They create warmth, community and support and that’s what we all need. We are going back into the communities where the damage was done.” 0:30 Post Office inquiry: former executive 'truly, truly sorry' over Horizon scandal – video Olivier-award nominee Jim Fortune, who wrote the music and lyrics, said they would love the show’s choir to be made up of those affected by the scandal, which impacted at least 900 post office operators and is the subject of a government inquiry . “Our dream is to build a choir for this show from within the communities, especially postal workers,” he said. “If they want to join our choir, they’d be very welcome.” Fortune said that the idea of people being in confrontation with technology is a theme throughout the musical, with the production’s band being made up of analogue equipment, including a typewriter, a dial-up modem, and “stuff before the cloud and clever computer programmers made everything ‘better’”. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion James Fortune. Photograph: Pentabus O’Hare said: “This was during the era when that terrible catchphrase ‘computer says no’ was in the ether. People were coming up against these magical machines and they weren’t able to argue their position as a human being. “The focus on the show was always what was happening to the subpostmasters and their families but Horizon is very present as a force operating on their lives that doesn’t have to answer for itself.” Fortune said, despite being a musical, it will still be hard hitting and that song is often the most powerful way to unpack traumatic events. He said: “I think song is protest and it is the only and best way that I would know how to deal with emotions and politics at this level – just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease.” O’Hare believes that the story, which captured audiences in the ITV drama Mr Bates vs The Post Office , has resonated so much because many people recognise the plight of postal workers. “The subpostmasters are the canaries in the coalmine,” she said. “They were right there as we moved into the digital era from the analogue era. All the mistakes that developed as digital technology unfolded have played out and affected their lives.” Fortune added: “It means so much to us culturally that there’s a huge sense of betrayal.” The Make Good creative team didn’t want to say whether former Post Office chief executive Paula Vennells, or former business improvement director Angela van den Bogerd , will feature in the musical but said discussions were ongoing. O’Hare said: “There are people who are caricatures already but we are in the middle of the conversation on how named those people will be.” Make Good will tour from October to December for six weeks, starting at Ludlow Assembly Rooms on 18-19 October. Further venues, including a London run, will be announced. Explore more on these topics Stage Post Office Horizon scandal Post Office Musicals Theatre news Share Reuse this content The musical will be a form of protest: ‘Just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease’, says the lyricist. Photograph: Pentobus View image in fullscreen The musical will be a form of protest: ‘Just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease’, says the lyricist. Photograph: Pentobus The musical will be a form of protest: ‘Just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease’, says the lyricist. Photograph: Pentobus View image in fullscreen The musical will be a form of protest: ‘Just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease’, says the lyricist. Photograph: Pentobus The musical will be a form of protest: ‘Just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease’, says the lyricist. Photograph: Pentobus View image in fullscreen The musical will be a form of protest: ‘Just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease’, says the lyricist. Photograph: Pentobus The musical will be a form of protest: ‘Just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease’, says the lyricist. Photograph: Pentobus View image in fullscreen The musical will be a form of protest: ‘Just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease’, says the lyricist. Photograph: Pentobus The musical will be a form of protest: ‘Just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease’, says the lyricist. Photograph: Pentobus The musical will be a form of protest: ‘Just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease’, says the lyricist. Photograph: Pentobus This article is more than 1 year old New musical based on Horizon scandal is ‘deep dive into the crushing heartbreak’ This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old New musical based on Horizon scandal is ‘deep dive into the crushing heartbreak’ This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old New musical based on Horizon scandal is ‘deep dive into the crushing heartbreak’ This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Writer of Make Good: the Post Office Scandal says postal workers’ interviews helped describe ‘the power of the state coming down on you’ Writer of Make Good: the Post Office Scandal says postal workers’ interviews helped describe ‘the power of the state coming down on you’ Writer of Make Good: the Post Office Scandal says postal workers’ interviews helped describe ‘the power of the state coming down on you’ The creators of a new musical about the Post Office Horizon scandal are appealing to postal workers to form part of the choir for the production, which they say can help heal communities affected by the issue. Make Good: the Post Office Scandal is based on interviews with two post office operators from Shropshire whose lives were ruined when Fujitsu’s flawed computer software Horizon made it appear there were shortfalls in their accounting. Jeanie O’Hare , who wrote the script, said: “They have been our guide to make sure we are doing the story right – not only technical stuff but the deep dive into the crushing heartbreak, the shame and what it feels like to be an ordinary person and the power of the state is coming down on you.” View image in fullscreen Scriptwriter Jeanie O'Hare and lyricist Jim Fortune. Photograph: Joanne Marcus Co-produced by Pentabus and New Perspectives, the show will tour village halls around Shropshire initially, to audiences of 100-120 people. O’Hare – who commissioned the hit Matilda, the musical before becoming chair of playwriting at Yale School of Drama – said the story offers a chance for the community to have a “conversation with itself”. She said: “The subpostmasters actively created community – that is their superpower and song the best analogy for that. They create warmth, community and support and that’s what we all need. We are going back into the communities where the damage was done.” 0:30 Post Office inquiry: former executive 'truly, truly sorry' over Horizon scandal – video Olivier-award nominee Jim Fortune, who wrote the music and lyrics, said they would love the show’s choir to be made up of those affected by the scandal, which impacted at least 900 post office operators and is the subject of a government inquiry . “Our dream is to build a choir for this show from within the communities, especially postal workers,” he said. “If they want to join our choir, they’d be very welcome.” Fortune said that the idea of people being in confrontation with technology is a theme throughout the musical, with the production’s band being made up of analogue equipment, including a typewriter, a dial-up modem, and “stuff before the cloud and clever computer programmers made everything ‘better’”. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion James Fortune. Photograph: Pentabus O’Hare said: “This was during the era when that terrible catchphrase ‘computer says no’ was in the ether. People were coming up against these magical machines and they weren’t able to argue their position as a human being. “The focus on the show was always what was happening to the subpostmasters and their families but Horizon is very present as a force operating on their lives that doesn’t have to answer for itself.” Fortune said, despite being a musical, it will still be hard hitting and that song is often the most powerful way to unpack traumatic events. He said: “I think song is protest and it is the only and best way that I would know how to deal with emotions and politics at this level – just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease.” O’Hare believes that the story, which captured audiences in the ITV drama Mr Bates vs The Post Office , has resonated so much because many people recognise the plight of postal workers. “The subpostmasters are the canaries in the coalmine,” she said. “They were right there as we moved into the digital era from the analogue era. All the mistakes that developed as digital technology unfolded have played out and affected their lives.” Fortune added: “It means so much to us culturally that there’s a huge sense of betrayal.” The Make Good creative team didn’t want to say whether former Post Office chief executive Paula Vennells, or former business improvement director Angela van den Bogerd , will feature in the musical but said discussions were ongoing. O’Hare said: “There are people who are caricatures already but we are in the middle of the conversation on how named those people will be.” Make Good will tour from October to December for six weeks, starting at Ludlow Assembly Rooms on 18-19 October. Further venues, including a London run, will be announced. Explore more on these topics Stage Post Office Horizon scandal Post Office Musicals Theatre news Share Reuse this content The creators of a new musical about the Post Office Horizon scandal are appealing to postal workers to form part of the choir for the production, which they say can help heal communities affected by the issue. Make Good: the Post Office Scandal is based on interviews with two post office operators from Shropshire whose lives were ruined when Fujitsu’s flawed computer software Horizon made it appear there were shortfalls in their accounting. Jeanie O’Hare , who wrote the script, said: “They have been our guide to make sure we are doing the story right – not only technical stuff but the deep dive into the crushing heartbreak, the shame and what it feels like to be an ordinary person and the power of the state is coming down on you.” View image in fullscreen Scriptwriter Jeanie O'Hare and lyricist Jim Fortune. Photograph: Joanne Marcus Co-produced by Pentabus and New Perspectives, the show will tour village halls around Shropshire initially, to audiences of 100-120 people. O’Hare – who commissioned the hit Matilda, the musical before becoming chair of playwriting at Yale School of Drama – said the story offers a chance for the community to have a “conversation with itself”. She said: “The subpostmasters actively created community – that is their superpower and song the best analogy for that. They create warmth, community and support and that’s what we all need. We are going back into the communities where the damage was done.” 0:30 Post Office inquiry: former executive 'truly, truly sorry' over Horizon scandal – video Olivier-award nominee Jim Fortune, who wrote the music and lyrics, said they would love the show’s choir to be made up of those affected by the scandal, which impacted at least 900 post office operators and is the subject of a government inquiry . “Our dream is to build a choir for this show from within the communities, especially postal workers,” he said. “If they want to join our choir, they’d be very welcome.” Fortune said that the idea of people being in confrontation with technology is a theme throughout the musical, with the production’s band being made up of analogue equipment, including a typewriter, a dial-up modem, and “stuff before the cloud and clever computer programmers made everything ‘better’”. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion James Fortune. Photograph: Pentabus O’Hare said: “This was during the era when that terrible catchphrase ‘computer says no’ was in the ether. People were coming up against these magical machines and they weren’t able to argue their position as a human being. “The focus on the show was always what was happening to the subpostmasters and their families but Horizon is very present as a force operating on their lives that doesn’t have to answer for itself.” Fortune said, despite being a musical, it will still be hard hitting and that song is often the most powerful way to unpack traumatic events. He said: “I think song is protest and it is the only and best way that I would know how to deal with emotions and politics at this level – just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease.” O’Hare believes that the story, which captured audiences in the ITV drama Mr Bates vs The Post Office , has resonated so much because many people recognise the plight of postal workers. “The subpostmasters are the canaries in the coalmine,” she said. “They were right there as we moved into the digital era from the analogue era. All the mistakes that developed as digital technology unfolded have played out and affected their lives.” Fortune added: “It means so much to us culturally that there’s a huge sense of betrayal.” The Make Good creative team didn’t want to say whether former Post Office chief executive Paula Vennells, or former business improvement director Angela van den Bogerd , will feature in the musical but said discussions were ongoing. O’Hare said: “There are people who are caricatures already but we are in the middle of the conversation on how named those people will be.” Make Good will tour from October to December for six weeks, starting at Ludlow Assembly Rooms on 18-19 October. Further venues, including a London run, will be announced. Explore more on these topics Stage Post Office Horizon scandal Post Office Musicals Theatre news Share Reuse this content The creators of a new musical about the Post Office Horizon scandal are appealing to postal workers to form part of the choir for the production, which they say can help heal communities affected by the issue. Make Good: the Post Office Scandal is based on interviews with two post office operators from Shropshire whose lives were ruined when Fujitsu’s flawed computer software Horizon made it appear there were shortfalls in their accounting. Jeanie O’Hare , who wrote the script, said: “They have been our guide to make sure we are doing the story right – not only technical stuff but the deep dive into the crushing heartbreak, the shame and what it feels like to be an ordinary person and the power of the state is coming down on you.” View image in fullscreen Scriptwriter Jeanie O'Hare and lyricist Jim Fortune. Photograph: Joanne Marcus Co-produced by Pentabus and New Perspectives, the show will tour village halls around Shropshire initially, to audiences of 100-120 people. O’Hare – who commissioned the hit Matilda, the musical before becoming chair of playwriting at Yale School of Drama – said the story offers a chance for the community to have a “conversation with itself”. She said: “The subpostmasters actively created community – that is their superpower and song the best analogy for that. They create warmth, community and support and that’s what we all need. We are going back into the communities where the damage was done.” 0:30 Post Office inquiry: former executive 'truly, truly sorry' over Horizon scandal – video Olivier-award nominee Jim Fortune, who wrote the music and lyrics, said they would love the show’s choir to be made up of those affected by the scandal, which impacted at least 900 post office operators and is the subject of a government inquiry . “Our dream is to build a choir for this show from within the communities, especially postal workers,” he said. “If they want to join our choir, they’d be very welcome.” Fortune said that the idea of people being in confrontation with technology is a theme throughout the musical, with the production’s band being made up of analogue equipment, including a typewriter, a dial-up modem, and “stuff before the cloud and clever computer programmers made everything ‘better’”. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion James Fortune. Photograph: Pentabus O’Hare said: “This was during the era when that terrible catchphrase ‘computer says no’ was in the ether. People were coming up against these magical machines and they weren’t able to argue their position as a human being. “The focus on the show was always what was happening to the subpostmasters and their families but Horizon is very present as a force operating on their lives that doesn’t have to answer for itself.” Fortune said, despite being a musical, it will still be hard hitting and that song is often the most powerful way to unpack traumatic events. He said: “I think song is protest and it is the only and best way that I would know how to deal with emotions and politics at this level – just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease.” O’Hare believes that the story, which captured audiences in the ITV drama Mr Bates vs The Post Office , has resonated so much because many people recognise the plight of postal workers. “The subpostmasters are the canaries in the coalmine,” she said. “They were right there as we moved into the digital era from the analogue era. All the mistakes that developed as digital technology unfolded have played out and affected their lives.” Fortune added: “It means so much to us culturally that there’s a huge sense of betrayal.” The Make Good creative team didn’t want to say whether former Post Office chief executive Paula Vennells, or former business improvement director Angela van den Bogerd , will feature in the musical but said discussions were ongoing. O’Hare said: “There are people who are caricatures already but we are in the middle of the conversation on how named those people will be.” Make Good will tour from October to December for six weeks, starting at Ludlow Assembly Rooms on 18-19 October. Further venues, including a London run, will be announced. The creators of a new musical about the Post Office Horizon scandal are appealing to postal workers to form part of the choir for the production, which they say can help heal communities affected by the issue. Make Good: the Post Office Scandal is based on interviews with two post office operators from Shropshire whose lives were ruined when Fujitsu’s flawed computer software Horizon made it appear there were shortfalls in their accounting. Jeanie O’Hare , who wrote the script, said: “They have been our guide to make sure we are doing the story right – not only technical stuff but the deep dive into the crushing heartbreak, the shame and what it feels like to be an ordinary person and the power of the state is coming down on you.” View image in fullscreen Scriptwriter Jeanie O'Hare and lyricist Jim Fortune. Photograph: Joanne Marcus Co-produced by Pentabus and New Perspectives, the show will tour village halls around Shropshire initially, to audiences of 100-120 people. O’Hare – who commissioned the hit Matilda, the musical before becoming chair of playwriting at Yale School of Drama – said the story offers a chance for the community to have a “conversation with itself”. She said: “The subpostmasters actively created community – that is their superpower and song the best analogy for that. They create warmth, community and support and that’s what we all need. We are going back into the communities where the damage was done.” 0:30 Post Office inquiry: former executive 'truly, truly sorry' over Horizon scandal – video Olivier-award nominee Jim Fortune, who wrote the music and lyrics, said they would love the show’s choir to be made up of those affected by the scandal, which impacted at least 900 post office operators and is the subject of a government inquiry . “Our dream is to build a choir for this show from within the communities, especially postal workers,” he said. “If they want to join our choir, they’d be very welcome.” Fortune said that the idea of people being in confrontation with technology is a theme throughout the musical, with the production’s band being made up of analogue equipment, including a typewriter, a dial-up modem, and “stuff before the cloud and clever computer programmers made everything ‘better’”. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion James Fortune. Photograph: Pentabus O’Hare said: “This was during the era when that terrible catchphrase ‘computer says no’ was in the ether. People were coming up against these magical machines and they weren’t able to argue their position as a human being. “The focus on the show was always what was happening to the subpostmasters and their families but Horizon is very present as a force operating on their lives that doesn’t have to answer for itself.” Fortune said, despite being a musical, it will still be hard hitting and that song is often the most powerful way to unpack traumatic events. He said: “I think song is protest and it is the only and best way that I would know how to deal with emotions and politics at this level – just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease.” O’Hare believes that the story, which captured audiences in the ITV drama Mr Bates vs The Post Office , has resonated so much because many people recognise the plight of postal workers. “The subpostmasters are the canaries in the coalmine,” she said. “They were right there as we moved into the digital era from the analogue era. All the mistakes that developed as digital technology unfolded have played out and affected their lives.” Fortune added: “It means so much to us culturally that there’s a huge sense of betrayal.” The Make Good creative team didn’t want to say whether former Post Office chief executive Paula Vennells, or former business improvement director Angela van den Bogerd , will feature in the musical but said discussions were ongoing. O’Hare said: “There are people who are caricatures already but we are in the middle of the conversation on how named those people will be.” Make Good will tour from October to December for six weeks, starting at Ludlow Assembly Rooms on 18-19 October. Further venues, including a London run, will be announced. The creators of a new musical about the Post Office Horizon scandal are appealing to postal workers to form part of the choir for the production, which they say can help heal communities affected by the issue. Make Good: the Post Office Scandal is based on interviews with two post office operators from Shropshire whose lives were ruined when Fujitsu’s flawed computer software Horizon made it appear there were shortfalls in their accounting. Jeanie O’Hare , who wrote the script, said: “They have been our guide to make sure we are doing the story right – not only technical stuff but the deep dive into the crushing heartbreak, the shame and what it feels like to be an ordinary person and the power of the state is coming down on you.” Co-produced by Pentabus and New Perspectives, the show will tour village halls around Shropshire initially, to audiences of 100-120 people. O’Hare – who commissioned the hit Matilda, the musical before becoming chair of playwriting at Yale School of Drama – said the story offers a chance for the community to have a “conversation with itself”. She said: “The subpostmasters actively created community – that is their superpower and song the best analogy for that. They create warmth, community and support and that’s what we all need. We are going back into the communities where the damage was done.” 0:30 Post Office inquiry: former executive 'truly, truly sorry' over Horizon scandal – video Olivier-award nominee Jim Fortune, who wrote the music and lyrics, said they would love the show’s choir to be made up of those affected by the scandal, which impacted at least 900 post office operators and is the subject of a government inquiry . “Our dream is to build a choir for this show from within the communities, especially postal workers,” he said. “If they want to join our choir, they’d be very welcome.” Fortune said that the idea of people being in confrontation with technology is a theme throughout the musical, with the production’s band being made up of analogue equipment, including a typewriter, a dial-up modem, and “stuff before the cloud and clever computer programmers made everything ‘better’”. O’Hare said: “This was during the era when that terrible catchphrase ‘computer says no’ was in the ether. People were coming up against these magical machines and they weren’t able to argue their position as a human being. “The focus on the show was always what was happening to the subpostmasters and their families but Horizon is very present as a force operating on their lives that doesn’t have to answer for itself.” Fortune said, despite being a musical, it will still be hard hitting and that song is often the most powerful way to unpack traumatic events. He said: “I think song is protest and it is the only and best way that I would know how to deal with emotions and politics at this level – just because we’re doing it in a theatre, doesn’t mean we’re doing Grease.” O’Hare believes that the story, which captured audiences in the ITV drama Mr Bates vs The Post Office , has resonated so much because many people recognise the plight of postal workers. “The subpostmasters are the canaries in the coalmine,” she said. “They were right there as we moved into the digital era from the analogue era. All the mistakes that developed as digital technology unfolded have played out and affected their lives.” Fortune added: “It means so much to us culturally that there’s a huge sense of betrayal.” The Make Good creative team didn’t want to say whether former Post Office chief executive Paula Vennells, or former business improvement director Angela van den Bogerd , will feature in the musical but said discussions were ongoing. O’Hare said: “There are people who are caricatures already but we are in the middle of the conversation on how named those people will be.” Make Good will tour from October to December for six weeks, starting at Ludlow Assembly Rooms on 18-19 October. Further venues, including a London run, will be announced. Explore more on these topics Stage Post Office Horizon scandal Post Office Musicals Theatre news Share Reuse this content Stage Post Office Horizon scandal Post Office Musicals Theatre news |
Students in Europe: share your experience of pro-Palestinian university protests
The Parkinson Building of Leeds University was occupied in protest of the conflict in Gaza. Photograph: Gary Calton/The Observer View image in fullscreen The Parkinson Building of Leeds University was occupied in protest of the conflict in Gaza. Photograph: Gary Calton/The Observer This article is more than 1 year old Students in Europe: share your experience of pro-Palestinian university protests This article is more than 1 year old We would like to hear from students in the UK and other countries in Europe attending universities where demonstrations are taking place Students at UK universities are protesting over the war in Gaza , following a wave of demonstrations on US campuses that have been met with police crackdowns. With students at universities including Sciences Po in Paris staging a number of protests over the war, we would like to hear from students at universities in the UK and other countries in Europe where protests are taking place. We would like to hear from those who are participating as well as those who are not – how do you feel about what is happening at your university? What has your experience of it been? Explore more on these topics Students callout Share Reuse this content The Parkinson Building of Leeds University was occupied in protest of the conflict in Gaza. Photograph: Gary Calton/The Observer View image in fullscreen The Parkinson Building of Leeds University was occupied in protest of the conflict in Gaza. Photograph: Gary Calton/The Observer This article is more than 1 year old Students in Europe: share your experience of pro-Palestinian university protests This article is more than 1 year old We would like to hear from students in the UK and other countries in Europe attending universities where demonstrations are taking place Students at UK universities are protesting over the war in Gaza , following a wave of demonstrations on US campuses that have been met with police crackdowns. With students at universities including Sciences Po in Paris staging a number of protests over the war, we would like to hear from students at universities in the UK and other countries in Europe where protests are taking place. We would like to hear from those who are participating as well as those who are not – how do you feel about what is happening at your university? What has your experience of it been? Explore more on these topics Students callout Share Reuse this content The Parkinson Building of Leeds University was occupied in protest of the conflict in Gaza. Photograph: Gary Calton/The Observer View image in fullscreen The Parkinson Building of Leeds University was occupied in protest of the conflict in Gaza. Photograph: Gary Calton/The Observer The Parkinson Building of Leeds University was occupied in protest of the conflict in Gaza. Photograph: Gary Calton/The Observer View image in fullscreen The Parkinson Building of Leeds University was occupied in protest of the conflict in Gaza. Photograph: Gary Calton/The Observer The Parkinson Building of Leeds University was occupied in protest of the conflict in Gaza. Photograph: Gary Calton/The Observer View image in fullscreen The Parkinson Building of Leeds University was occupied in protest of the conflict in Gaza. Photograph: Gary Calton/The Observer The Parkinson Building of Leeds University was occupied in protest of the conflict in Gaza. Photograph: Gary Calton/The Observer View image in fullscreen The Parkinson Building of Leeds University was occupied in protest of the conflict in Gaza. Photograph: Gary Calton/The Observer The Parkinson Building of Leeds University was occupied in protest of the conflict in Gaza. Photograph: Gary Calton/The Observer The Parkinson Building of Leeds University was occupied in protest of the conflict in Gaza. Photograph: Gary Calton/The Observer This article is more than 1 year old Students in Europe: share your experience of pro-Palestinian university protests This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Students in Europe: share your experience of pro-Palestinian university protests This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Students in Europe: share your experience of pro-Palestinian university protests This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old We would like to hear from students in the UK and other countries in Europe attending universities where demonstrations are taking place We would like to hear from students in the UK and other countries in Europe attending universities where demonstrations are taking place We would like to hear from students in the UK and other countries in Europe attending universities where demonstrations are taking place Students at UK universities are protesting over the war in Gaza , following a wave of demonstrations on US campuses that have been met with police crackdowns. With students at universities including Sciences Po in Paris staging a number of protests over the war, we would like to hear from students at universities in the UK and other countries in Europe where protests are taking place. We would like to hear from those who are participating as well as those who are not – how do you feel about what is happening at your university? What has your experience of it been? Explore more on these topics Students callout Share Reuse this content Students at UK universities are protesting over the war in Gaza , following a wave of demonstrations on US campuses that have been met with police crackdowns. With students at universities including Sciences Po in Paris staging a number of protests over the war, we would like to hear from students at universities in the UK and other countries in Europe where protests are taking place. We would like to hear from those who are participating as well as those who are not – how do you feel about what is happening at your university? What has your experience of it been? Explore more on these topics Students callout Share Reuse this content Students at UK universities are protesting over the war in Gaza , following a wave of demonstrations on US campuses that have been met with police crackdowns. With students at universities including Sciences Po in Paris staging a number of protests over the war, we would like to hear from students at universities in the UK and other countries in Europe where protests are taking place. We would like to hear from those who are participating as well as those who are not – how do you feel about what is happening at your university? What has your experience of it been? Students at UK universities are protesting over the war in Gaza , following a wave of demonstrations on US campuses that have been met with police crackdowns. With students at universities including Sciences Po in Paris staging a number of protests over the war, we would like to hear from students at universities in the UK and other countries in Europe where protests are taking place. We would like to hear from those who are participating as well as those who are not – how do you feel about what is happening at your university? What has your experience of it been? Students at UK universities are protesting over the war in Gaza , following a wave of demonstrations on US campuses that have been met with police crackdowns. With students at universities including Sciences Po in Paris staging a number of protests over the war, we would like to hear from students at universities in the UK and other countries in Europe where protests are taking place. We would like to hear from those who are participating as well as those who are not – how do you feel about what is happening at your university? What has your experience of it been? Explore more on these topics Students callout Share Reuse this content |
‘Narrow and negative’: how Susan Hall’s London mayor bid could be a harbinger for Tories’ future
It is suggested that Hall, a loyal foot soldier of the Tory party, is acting in line with its general trend since 2016. Composite: Guardian Design/Shutterstock View image in fullscreen It is suggested that Hall, a loyal foot soldier of the Tory party, is acting in line with its general trend since 2016. Composite: Guardian Design/Shutterstock This article is more than 1 year old ‘Narrow and negative’: how Susan Hall’s London mayor bid could be a harbinger for Tories’ future This article is more than 1 year old Hall’s campaign has focused on cars and crime while the opposition has exploited her tendency to ‘shoot from the hip’ P aul Icely puffs out his cheeks – and then slowly exhales. He is visibly deflating. “I thought there might be a few more of us,” the 67-year-old black-cab driver admits, his eyes darting between the students milling outside Barking and Dagenham college. “You seen anyone else?” Icely asks Lisa Prager, 40, as she limps towards him with the aid of an NHS issue crutch. Prager, who harbours a grudge against a Labour council over the loss of her job at a local park, appears to be the only other supporter of Susan Hall , the Conservative candidate for mayor of London, to have turned up on this sunny mid morning in Dagenham, east London. Perhaps of more pressing concern is the fact that the candidate herself should have been canvassing here an hour ago. “I thought they would let me know if the plan had changed,” says Prager, scrolling through messages on WhatsApp. The Conservative campaign to get Hall elected as London mayor on Thursday and put an end to Sadiq Khan’s bid for a historic third term could not be described as sure footed. Hall’s candidature was born out of scandal when the favourite, Daniel Korski, a former Downing Street adviser, pulled out over allegations of sexual misconduct, and it is a rare week that Hall’s past tweets or tendency to “shoot from the hip”, as one ally generously described it, has not been exploited by the Khan camp to highlight her “Trumpian” approach to the climate emergency and potentially controversial views. She has called for the government to delay its commitment to be carbon net zero by 2050 and there was much consternation when comments emerged in which Hall, 69, claimed that there was a “problem with crime” in the black community, something her allies say was born out of concern for people of colour. But she had also replied to a social media post in 2019 from former Daily Mail columnist Katie Hopkins describing Khan as “our nipple-height mayor of Londonistan” with the words “thank you Katie” and was forced to apologise for liking a tweet in 2020 that had a picture of Enoch Powell captioned “it’s never too late to get London back”. Hall, a London assembly member, has explained this away as a tendency a few years back to spend “too much time on Twitter”, but then there are the more recent campaign gaffes. Criticising Khan’s record on crime, Hall had claimed to be a victim of pickpocketing on the underground. It later emerged her purse had been found lodged between seats on the Jubilee line with her £40 still in it. When asked how much people pay to get on a bus in London, Hall admitted to not having a clue. “I don’t use them,” she told LBC presenter Nick Ferrari, just days after criticising Khan’s decision to spend £123m on freezing Transport for London (TfL) fares until March 2025. “I use trains all the time,” she insisted. It would be easy then to write off the Hall campaign as having been doomed to failure from the start: a poor choice of candidate in a traditionally Labour-backing city that was always unlikely to buck the national trend after 14 years of Conservative government. The latest YouGov poll puts Khan 22 points ahead of Hall, with the Labour mayor on 47% to Hall’s 25%. The Green candidate, Zoe Garbett, is on 7% while Liberal Democrat Rob Blackie is tied on 6% with Reform UK’s Howard Cox. But insiders who know Hall suggest that there is something more concerning for those who would like to see future Conservative victories in the capital and more broadly. Hall, a former leader of Harrow council, had a history of reaching across the political divide to get stuff done. She acted against landlords who were cramming tenants into sub-divided properties, something she described as “beds in sheds”, and she is known for offering a kind word to those of a different political persuasion at times of personal difficulty. “Susan Hall is a decent person who will employ good quality people and desperately wants a better London,” said Steven Norris, the two-time Tory candidate for mayor during Ken Livingstone’s time in office. But her campaign has been notably narrow, said one former political ally. “She ran a minority administration in Harrow and had to do deals and it would have been better for her to show now that she can work across political divides,” the source said. “Instead, everything she has done has been negative rather than positive. When she was asked about her youth going to raves, she actually looked happy and smiled but for the rest of the campaign it looked like she had swallowed a wasp.” It is suggested that Hall, a loyal foot soldier of the Tory party, is acting in line with its general trend since 2016 – and could prove to be a harbinger of its post-general election shape. “The Conservatives appear to be going down a post-Brexit right-wing rabbit hole”, the source added. Hall’s campaign has been all about cars and crime. Dr Elizabeth Simon, a researcher in British politics at the Mile End Institute, said polling between 8 and 17 April indicated that Hall’s central policy offers had been popular. “One of Hall’s key pledges is to abolish the 20mph speed limit for London’s main roads, while maintaining this for residential areas and around schools,” said Simon. “We find that 55% of Londoners support this and just under a quarter oppose this, giving the policy a net approval rating of approximately 30 points.” Hall has also claimed that Khan wishes to charge motorists for every mile they drive, something the mayor denies. But the most high profile of Hall’s pledges has been to abolish the Ulez expansion to outer London, under which polluting vehicle owners pay a £12.50 daily charge. According to the Mile End Institute/Savanta polling, 63% of Londoners either think Ulez should be scrapped entirely (32%) or should return to its former inner London boundaries (31%), compared with 26% who think that it should continue to cover the entirety of the city. But Simon warned that Ulez did not appear to be the broad vote winner that Hall might hope. “Perhaps disappointingly, given the focus of her campaign on the Ulez issue, she is not significantly out-performing her average vote share among people who have cars in their household. Thirty-seven percent of Londoners in households with cars say they will vote Hall versus 33% of all Londoners,” she said. “The other issue is that most voters will not have the issue of Ulez at the forefront of their minds when deciding who to vote for.” Ulez ranks as the fifth most important issue for Londoners, with 9% saying it would determine their choice, the polling suggests, leading to the conclusion that a broader campaign could garner more support. Andrew Boff, the Tory chair of the London assembly, disagrees. “There are obviously other issues but nothing grabs the public imagination like Ulez and crime,” he said. “These are the big ones. I am a housing geek myself and I would love to hear her go on more about building family sized homes which she did but it wasn’t the centre of the campaign, quite rightly.” Boff said he had only “granular” criticisms of Hall’s strategy. “Khan and Susan have been playing this game whereby, if he’s not going to turn up [to public meetings], she’s not going to turn up,” he said. “And I think she should have just turned up. She turned up an awful lot but I did a few for her. I do think some of those meetings would have benefited from Susan being there.” “Susan gets things done,” Boff added. “She does shoot from the hip. And sometimes she gets a few burns off that but what you know with Susan is that if she says she’s going to do something she will do it.” As to Hall’s past support for Liz Truss’s leadership, Boff said there were plenty of people in the Tory party who regretted that. “I’ve had great fun going around saying all to my colleagues, ‘We did tell you’. That’s all in the past. Truss fooled a lot of people.” Norris believes the incumbent’s unpopularity over Ulez offers Hall a fighting chance. “This is more likely to be a ‘How much do you dislike Sadiq Khan’ election than ‘are you considering Susan Hall’s offering against Sadiq’s’,” he said. “Am I going to put my house on [her] winning? No, probably not. Because you can’t ever ignore what is going on in the national picture, but I think she’s going to do awful lot better than many people think and she might just give Sadiq the shock of his life.” Back in Dagenham, Icely, a regular at the anti-Ulez protests, is returning to his car when he stumbles into the Hall campaign bus, a red double decker emblazoned with the union flag. The location of that morning’s canvassing had been changed at the last minute and the message had not got through. There is a skip back in Icley’s step, as he laments that coverage of his stance is usually limited to GB News. Hall’s press officer is less enthused. “Susan will not be doing interviews,” he says of the candidate who is halfway up the road knocking doors. Then Hall turns up, with a handful of other door knockers in tow. “Very supportive,” she says of that morning’s doorsteps. “My message is that we need to stop Ulez expansion, make sure there is no ‘pay for miles’ and we need to build more homes.” Was it a mistake not to turn up at all the hustings? “Well, let’s wait and see on Thursday.” Will she win? “Let’s wait and see.” “I have had a year [of this] so I’m a little bit exhausted but you know it is going to be exciting,” Hall adds. “While this has been busy, when I am mayor of London there is so much that has to change. I will be flat out doing that. That is what I do. If you take a job on, you work like there is no tomorrow to make sure things improve and I will.” As Hall’s bus drives away, Biju Joseph, 49, an NHS worker who has been canvassing for her that morning, hangs around to chat. It had been a difficult morning, he concedes. Joseph, who came to the UK from India in 2010, backs Hall because he believes that too many migrants to the UK are on benefits. But he is not sure if the Tory message – or the messenger – is resonating. “Whether you like Khan or don’t like him, you can’t ignore him,” Joseph admits. “Many don’t really know her, actually.” Explore more on these topics London mayoral election 2024 Susan Hall Sadiq Khan London Mayoral elections Local politics England features Share Reuse this content It is suggested that Hall, a loyal foot soldier of the Tory party, is acting in line with its general trend since 2016. Composite: Guardian Design/Shutterstock View image in fullscreen It is suggested that Hall, a loyal foot soldier of the Tory party, is acting in line with its general trend since 2016. Composite: Guardian Design/Shutterstock This article is more than 1 year old ‘Narrow and negative’: how Susan Hall’s London mayor bid could be a harbinger for Tories’ future This article is more than 1 year old Hall’s campaign has focused on cars and crime while the opposition has exploited her tendency to ‘shoot from the hip’ P aul Icely puffs out his cheeks – and then slowly exhales. He is visibly deflating. “I thought there might be a few more of us,” the 67-year-old black-cab driver admits, his eyes darting between the students milling outside Barking and Dagenham college. “You seen anyone else?” Icely asks Lisa Prager, 40, as she limps towards him with the aid of an NHS issue crutch. Prager, who harbours a grudge against a Labour council over the loss of her job at a local park, appears to be the only other supporter of Susan Hall , the Conservative candidate for mayor of London, to have turned up on this sunny mid morning in Dagenham, east London. Perhaps of more pressing concern is the fact that the candidate herself should have been canvassing here an hour ago. “I thought they would let me know if the plan had changed,” says Prager, scrolling through messages on WhatsApp. The Conservative campaign to get Hall elected as London mayor on Thursday and put an end to Sadiq Khan’s bid for a historic third term could not be described as sure footed. Hall’s candidature was born out of scandal when the favourite, Daniel Korski, a former Downing Street adviser, pulled out over allegations of sexual misconduct, and it is a rare week that Hall’s past tweets or tendency to “shoot from the hip”, as one ally generously described it, has not been exploited by the Khan camp to highlight her “Trumpian” approach to the climate emergency and potentially controversial views. She has called for the government to delay its commitment to be carbon net zero by 2050 and there was much consternation when comments emerged in which Hall, 69, claimed that there was a “problem with crime” in the black community, something her allies say was born out of concern for people of colour. But she had also replied to a social media post in 2019 from former Daily Mail columnist Katie Hopkins describing Khan as “our nipple-height mayor of Londonistan” with the words “thank you Katie” and was forced to apologise for liking a tweet in 2020 that had a picture of Enoch Powell captioned “it’s never too late to get London back”. Hall, a London assembly member, has explained this away as a tendency a few years back to spend “too much time on Twitter”, but then there are the more recent campaign gaffes. Criticising Khan’s record on crime, Hall had claimed to be a victim of pickpocketing on the underground. It later emerged her purse had been found lodged between seats on the Jubilee line with her £40 still in it. When asked how much people pay to get on a bus in London, Hall admitted to not having a clue. “I don’t use them,” she told LBC presenter Nick Ferrari, just days after criticising Khan’s decision to spend £123m on freezing Transport for London (TfL) fares until March 2025. “I use trains all the time,” she insisted. It would be easy then to write off the Hall campaign as having been doomed to failure from the start: a poor choice of candidate in a traditionally Labour-backing city that was always unlikely to buck the national trend after 14 years of Conservative government. The latest YouGov poll puts Khan 22 points ahead of Hall, with the Labour mayor on 47% to Hall’s 25%. The Green candidate, Zoe Garbett, is on 7% while Liberal Democrat Rob Blackie is tied on 6% with Reform UK’s Howard Cox. But insiders who know Hall suggest that there is something more concerning for those who would like to see future Conservative victories in the capital and more broadly. Hall, a former leader of Harrow council, had a history of reaching across the political divide to get stuff done. She acted against landlords who were cramming tenants into sub-divided properties, something she described as “beds in sheds”, and she is known for offering a kind word to those of a different political persuasion at times of personal difficulty. “Susan Hall is a decent person who will employ good quality people and desperately wants a better London,” said Steven Norris, the two-time Tory candidate for mayor during Ken Livingstone’s time in office. But her campaign has been notably narrow, said one former political ally. “She ran a minority administration in Harrow and had to do deals and it would have been better for her to show now that she can work across political divides,” the source said. “Instead, everything she has done has been negative rather than positive. When she was asked about her youth going to raves, she actually looked happy and smiled but for the rest of the campaign it looked like she had swallowed a wasp.” It is suggested that Hall, a loyal foot soldier of the Tory party, is acting in line with its general trend since 2016 – and could prove to be a harbinger of its post-general election shape. “The Conservatives appear to be going down a post-Brexit right-wing rabbit hole”, the source added. Hall’s campaign has been all about cars and crime. Dr Elizabeth Simon, a researcher in British politics at the Mile End Institute, said polling between 8 and 17 April indicated that Hall’s central policy offers had been popular. “One of Hall’s key pledges is to abolish the 20mph speed limit for London’s main roads, while maintaining this for residential areas and around schools,” said Simon. “We find that 55% of Londoners support this and just under a quarter oppose this, giving the policy a net approval rating of approximately 30 points.” Hall has also claimed that Khan wishes to charge motorists for every mile they drive, something the mayor denies. But the most high profile of Hall’s pledges has been to abolish the Ulez expansion to outer London, under which polluting vehicle owners pay a £12.50 daily charge. According to the Mile End Institute/Savanta polling, 63% of Londoners either think Ulez should be scrapped entirely (32%) or should return to its former inner London boundaries (31%), compared with 26% who think that it should continue to cover the entirety of the city. But Simon warned that Ulez did not appear to be the broad vote winner that Hall might hope. “Perhaps disappointingly, given the focus of her campaign on the Ulez issue, she is not significantly out-performing her average vote share among people who have cars in their household. Thirty-seven percent of Londoners in households with cars say they will vote Hall versus 33% of all Londoners,” she said. “The other issue is that most voters will not have the issue of Ulez at the forefront of their minds when deciding who to vote for.” Ulez ranks as the fifth most important issue for Londoners, with 9% saying it would determine their choice, the polling suggests, leading to the conclusion that a broader campaign could garner more support. Andrew Boff, the Tory chair of the London assembly, disagrees. “There are obviously other issues but nothing grabs the public imagination like Ulez and crime,” he said. “These are the big ones. I am a housing geek myself and I would love to hear her go on more about building family sized homes which she did but it wasn’t the centre of the campaign, quite rightly.” Boff said he had only “granular” criticisms of Hall’s strategy. “Khan and Susan have been playing this game whereby, if he’s not going to turn up [to public meetings], she’s not going to turn up,” he said. “And I think she should have just turned up. She turned up an awful lot but I did a few for her. I do think some of those meetings would have benefited from Susan being there.” “Susan gets things done,” Boff added. “She does shoot from the hip. And sometimes she gets a few burns off that but what you know with Susan is that if she says she’s going to do something she will do it.” As to Hall’s past support for Liz Truss’s leadership, Boff said there were plenty of people in the Tory party who regretted that. “I’ve had great fun going around saying all to my colleagues, ‘We did tell you’. That’s all in the past. Truss fooled a lot of people.” Norris believes the incumbent’s unpopularity over Ulez offers Hall a fighting chance. “This is more likely to be a ‘How much do you dislike Sadiq Khan’ election than ‘are you considering Susan Hall’s offering against Sadiq’s’,” he said. “Am I going to put my house on [her] winning? No, probably not. Because you can’t ever ignore what is going on in the national picture, but I think she’s going to do awful lot better than many people think and she might just give Sadiq the shock of his life.” Back in Dagenham, Icely, a regular at the anti-Ulez protests, is returning to his car when he stumbles into the Hall campaign bus, a red double decker emblazoned with the union flag. The location of that morning’s canvassing had been changed at the last minute and the message had not got through. There is a skip back in Icley’s step, as he laments that coverage of his stance is usually limited to GB News. Hall’s press officer is less enthused. “Susan will not be doing interviews,” he says of the candidate who is halfway up the road knocking doors. Then Hall turns up, with a handful of other door knockers in tow. “Very supportive,” she says of that morning’s doorsteps. “My message is that we need to stop Ulez expansion, make sure there is no ‘pay for miles’ and we need to build more homes.” Was it a mistake not to turn up at all the hustings? “Well, let’s wait and see on Thursday.” Will she win? “Let’s wait and see.” “I have had a year [of this] so I’m a little bit exhausted but you know it is going to be exciting,” Hall adds. “While this has been busy, when I am mayor of London there is so much that has to change. I will be flat out doing that. That is what I do. If you take a job on, you work like there is no tomorrow to make sure things improve and I will.” As Hall’s bus drives away, Biju Joseph, 49, an NHS worker who has been canvassing for her that morning, hangs around to chat. It had been a difficult morning, he concedes. Joseph, who came to the UK from India in 2010, backs Hall because he believes that too many migrants to the UK are on benefits. But he is not sure if the Tory message – or the messenger – is resonating. “Whether you like Khan or don’t like him, you can’t ignore him,” Joseph admits. “Many don’t really know her, actually.” Explore more on these topics London mayoral election 2024 Susan Hall Sadiq Khan London Mayoral elections Local politics England features Share Reuse this content It is suggested that Hall, a loyal foot soldier of the Tory party, is acting in line with its general trend since 2016. Composite: Guardian Design/Shutterstock View image in fullscreen It is suggested that Hall, a loyal foot soldier of the Tory party, is acting in line with its general trend since 2016. Composite: Guardian Design/Shutterstock It is suggested that Hall, a loyal foot soldier of the Tory party, is acting in line with its general trend since 2016. Composite: Guardian Design/Shutterstock View image in fullscreen It is suggested that Hall, a loyal foot soldier of the Tory party, is acting in line with its general trend since 2016. Composite: Guardian Design/Shutterstock It is suggested that Hall, a loyal foot soldier of the Tory party, is acting in line with its general trend since 2016. Composite: Guardian Design/Shutterstock View image in fullscreen It is suggested that Hall, a loyal foot soldier of the Tory party, is acting in line with its general trend since 2016. Composite: Guardian Design/Shutterstock It is suggested that Hall, a loyal foot soldier of the Tory party, is acting in line with its general trend since 2016. Composite: Guardian Design/Shutterstock View image in fullscreen It is suggested that Hall, a loyal foot soldier of the Tory party, is acting in line with its general trend since 2016. Composite: Guardian Design/Shutterstock It is suggested that Hall, a loyal foot soldier of the Tory party, is acting in line with its general trend since 2016. Composite: Guardian Design/Shutterstock It is suggested that Hall, a loyal foot soldier of the Tory party, is acting in line with its general trend since 2016. Composite: Guardian Design/Shutterstock This article is more than 1 year old ‘Narrow and negative’: how Susan Hall’s London mayor bid could be a harbinger for Tories’ future This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Narrow and negative’: how Susan Hall’s London mayor bid could be a harbinger for Tories’ future This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Narrow and negative’: how Susan Hall’s London mayor bid could be a harbinger for Tories’ future This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Hall’s campaign has focused on cars and crime while the opposition has exploited her tendency to ‘shoot from the hip’ Hall’s campaign has focused on cars and crime while the opposition has exploited her tendency to ‘shoot from the hip’ Hall’s campaign has focused on cars and crime while the opposition has exploited her tendency to ‘shoot from the hip’ P aul Icely puffs out his cheeks – and then slowly exhales. He is visibly deflating. “I thought there might be a few more of us,” the 67-year-old black-cab driver admits, his eyes darting between the students milling outside Barking and Dagenham college. “You seen anyone else?” Icely asks Lisa Prager, 40, as she limps towards him with the aid of an NHS issue crutch. Prager, who harbours a grudge against a Labour council over the loss of her job at a local park, appears to be the only other supporter of Susan Hall , the Conservative candidate for mayor of London, to have turned up on this sunny mid morning in Dagenham, east London. Perhaps of more pressing concern is the fact that the candidate herself should have been canvassing here an hour ago. “I thought they would let me know if the plan had changed,” says Prager, scrolling through messages on WhatsApp. The Conservative campaign to get Hall elected as London mayor on Thursday and put an end to Sadiq Khan’s bid for a historic third term could not be described as sure footed. Hall’s candidature was born out of scandal when the favourite, Daniel Korski, a former Downing Street adviser, pulled out over allegations of sexual misconduct, and it is a rare week that Hall’s past tweets or tendency to “shoot from the hip”, as one ally generously described it, has not been exploited by the Khan camp to highlight her “Trumpian” approach to the climate emergency and potentially controversial views. She has called for the government to delay its commitment to be carbon net zero by 2050 and there was much consternation when comments emerged in which Hall, 69, claimed that there was a “problem with crime” in the black community, something her allies say was born out of concern for people of colour. But she had also replied to a social media post in 2019 from former Daily Mail columnist Katie Hopkins describing Khan as “our nipple-height mayor of Londonistan” with the words “thank you Katie” and was forced to apologise for liking a tweet in 2020 that had a picture of Enoch Powell captioned “it’s never too late to get London back”. Hall, a London assembly member, has explained this away as a tendency a few years back to spend “too much time on Twitter”, but then there are the more recent campaign gaffes. Criticising Khan’s record on crime, Hall had claimed to be a victim of pickpocketing on the underground. It later emerged her purse had been found lodged between seats on the Jubilee line with her £40 still in it. When asked how much people pay to get on a bus in London, Hall admitted to not having a clue. “I don’t use them,” she told LBC presenter Nick Ferrari, just days after criticising Khan’s decision to spend £123m on freezing Transport for London (TfL) fares until March 2025. “I use trains all the time,” she insisted. It would be easy then to write off the Hall campaign as having been doomed to failure from the start: a poor choice of candidate in a traditionally Labour-backing city that was always unlikely to buck the national trend after 14 years of Conservative government. The latest YouGov poll puts Khan 22 points ahead of Hall, with the Labour mayor on 47% to Hall’s 25%. The Green candidate, Zoe Garbett, is on 7% while Liberal Democrat Rob Blackie is tied on 6% with Reform UK’s Howard Cox. But insiders who know Hall suggest that there is something more concerning for those who would like to see future Conservative victories in the capital and more broadly. Hall, a former leader of Harrow council, had a history of reaching across the political divide to get stuff done. She acted against landlords who were cramming tenants into sub-divided properties, something she described as “beds in sheds”, and she is known for offering a kind word to those of a different political persuasion at times of personal difficulty. “Susan Hall is a decent person who will employ good quality people and desperately wants a better London,” said Steven Norris, the two-time Tory candidate for mayor during Ken Livingstone’s time in office. But her campaign has been notably narrow, said one former political ally. “She ran a minority administration in Harrow and had to do deals and it would have been better for her to show now that she can work across political divides,” the source said. “Instead, everything she has done has been negative rather than positive. When she was asked about her youth going to raves, she actually looked happy and smiled but for the rest of the campaign it looked like she had swallowed a wasp.” It is suggested that Hall, a loyal foot soldier of the Tory party, is acting in line with its general trend since 2016 – and could prove to be a harbinger of its post-general election shape. “The Conservatives appear to be going down a post-Brexit right-wing rabbit hole”, the source added. Hall’s campaign has been all about cars and crime. Dr Elizabeth Simon, a researcher in British politics at the Mile End Institute, said polling between 8 and 17 April indicated that Hall’s central policy offers had been popular. “One of Hall’s key pledges is to abolish the 20mph speed limit for London’s main roads, while maintaining this for residential areas and around schools,” said Simon. “We find that 55% of Londoners support this and just under a quarter oppose this, giving the policy a net approval rating of approximately 30 points.” Hall has also claimed that Khan wishes to charge motorists for every mile they drive, something the mayor denies. But the most high profile of Hall’s pledges has been to abolish the Ulez expansion to outer London, under which polluting vehicle owners pay a £12.50 daily charge. According to the Mile End Institute/Savanta polling, 63% of Londoners either think Ulez should be scrapped entirely (32%) or should return to its former inner London boundaries (31%), compared with 26% who think that it should continue to cover the entirety of the city. But Simon warned that Ulez did not appear to be the broad vote winner that Hall might hope. “Perhaps disappointingly, given the focus of her campaign on the Ulez issue, she is not significantly out-performing her average vote share among people who have cars in their household. Thirty-seven percent of Londoners in households with cars say they will vote Hall versus 33% of all Londoners,” she said. “The other issue is that most voters will not have the issue of Ulez at the forefront of their minds when deciding who to vote for.” Ulez ranks as the fifth most important issue for Londoners, with 9% saying it would determine their choice, the polling suggests, leading to the conclusion that a broader campaign could garner more support. Andrew Boff, the Tory chair of the London assembly, disagrees. “There are obviously other issues but nothing grabs the public imagination like Ulez and crime,” he said. “These are the big ones. I am a housing geek myself and I would love to hear her go on more about building family sized homes which she did but it wasn’t the centre of the campaign, quite rightly.” Boff said he had only “granular” criticisms of Hall’s strategy. “Khan and Susan have been playing this game whereby, if he’s not going to turn up [to public meetings], she’s not going to turn up,” he said. “And I think she should have just turned up. She turned up an awful lot but I did a few for her. I do think some of those meetings would have benefited from Susan being there.” “Susan gets things done,” Boff added. “She does shoot from the hip. And sometimes she gets a few burns off that but what you know with Susan is that if she says she’s going to do something she will do it.” As to Hall’s past support for Liz Truss’s leadership, Boff said there were plenty of people in the Tory party who regretted that. “I’ve had great fun going around saying all to my colleagues, ‘We did tell you’. That’s all in the past. Truss fooled a lot of people.” Norris believes the incumbent’s unpopularity over Ulez offers Hall a fighting chance. “This is more likely to be a ‘How much do you dislike Sadiq Khan’ election than ‘are you considering Susan Hall’s offering against Sadiq’s’,” he said. “Am I going to put my house on [her] winning? No, probably not. Because you can’t ever ignore what is going on in the national picture, but I think she’s going to do awful lot better than many people think and she might just give Sadiq the shock of his life.” Back in Dagenham, Icely, a regular at the anti-Ulez protests, is returning to his car when he stumbles into the Hall campaign bus, a red double decker emblazoned with the union flag. The location of that morning’s canvassing had been changed at the last minute and the message had not got through. There is a skip back in Icley’s step, as he laments that coverage of his stance is usually limited to GB News. Hall’s press officer is less enthused. “Susan will not be doing interviews,” he says of the candidate who is halfway up the road knocking doors. Then Hall turns up, with a handful of other door knockers in tow. “Very supportive,” she says of that morning’s doorsteps. “My message is that we need to stop Ulez expansion, make sure there is no ‘pay for miles’ and we need to build more homes.” Was it a mistake not to turn up at all the hustings? “Well, let’s wait and see on Thursday.” Will she win? “Let’s wait and see.” “I have had a year [of this] so I’m a little bit exhausted but you know it is going to be exciting,” Hall adds. “While this has been busy, when I am mayor of London there is so much that has to change. I will be flat out doing that. That is what I do. If you take a job on, you work like there is no tomorrow to make sure things improve and I will.” As Hall’s bus drives away, Biju Joseph, 49, an NHS worker who has been canvassing for her that morning, hangs around to chat. It had been a difficult morning, he concedes. Joseph, who came to the UK from India in 2010, backs Hall because he believes that too many migrants to the UK are on benefits. But he is not sure if the Tory message – or the messenger – is resonating. “Whether you like Khan or don’t like him, you can’t ignore him,” Joseph admits. “Many don’t really know her, actually.” Explore more on these topics London mayoral election 2024 Susan Hall Sadiq Khan London Mayoral elections Local politics England features Share Reuse this content P aul Icely puffs out his cheeks – and then slowly exhales. He is visibly deflating. “I thought there might be a few more of us,” the 67-year-old black-cab driver admits, his eyes darting between the students milling outside Barking and Dagenham college. “You seen anyone else?” Icely asks Lisa Prager, 40, as she limps towards him with the aid of an NHS issue crutch. Prager, who harbours a grudge against a Labour council over the loss of her job at a local park, appears to be the only other supporter of Susan Hall , the Conservative candidate for mayor of London, to have turned up on this sunny mid morning in Dagenham, east London. Perhaps of more pressing concern is the fact that the candidate herself should have been canvassing here an hour ago. “I thought they would let me know if the plan had changed,” says Prager, scrolling through messages on WhatsApp. The Conservative campaign to get Hall elected as London mayor on Thursday and put an end to Sadiq Khan’s bid for a historic third term could not be described as sure footed. Hall’s candidature was born out of scandal when the favourite, Daniel Korski, a former Downing Street adviser, pulled out over allegations of sexual misconduct, and it is a rare week that Hall’s past tweets or tendency to “shoot from the hip”, as one ally generously described it, has not been exploited by the Khan camp to highlight her “Trumpian” approach to the climate emergency and potentially controversial views. She has called for the government to delay its commitment to be carbon net zero by 2050 and there was much consternation when comments emerged in which Hall, 69, claimed that there was a “problem with crime” in the black community, something her allies say was born out of concern for people of colour. But she had also replied to a social media post in 2019 from former Daily Mail columnist Katie Hopkins describing Khan as “our nipple-height mayor of Londonistan” with the words “thank you Katie” and was forced to apologise for liking a tweet in 2020 that had a picture of Enoch Powell captioned “it’s never too late to get London back”. Hall, a London assembly member, has explained this away as a tendency a few years back to spend “too much time on Twitter”, but then there are the more recent campaign gaffes. Criticising Khan’s record on crime, Hall had claimed to be a victim of pickpocketing on the underground. It later emerged her purse had been found lodged between seats on the Jubilee line with her £40 still in it. When asked how much people pay to get on a bus in London, Hall admitted to not having a clue. “I don’t use them,” she told LBC presenter Nick Ferrari, just days after criticising Khan’s decision to spend £123m on freezing Transport for London (TfL) fares until March 2025. “I use trains all the time,” she insisted. It would be easy then to write off the Hall campaign as having been doomed to failure from the start: a poor choice of candidate in a traditionally Labour-backing city that was always unlikely to buck the national trend after 14 years of Conservative government. The latest YouGov poll puts Khan 22 points ahead of Hall, with the Labour mayor on 47% to Hall’s 25%. The Green candidate, Zoe Garbett, is on 7% while Liberal Democrat Rob Blackie is tied on 6% with Reform UK’s Howard Cox. But insiders who know Hall suggest that there is something more concerning for those who would like to see future Conservative victories in the capital and more broadly. Hall, a former leader of Harrow council, had a history of reaching across the political divide to get stuff done. She acted against landlords who were cramming tenants into sub-divided properties, something she described as “beds in sheds”, and she is known for offering a kind word to those of a different political persuasion at times of personal difficulty. “Susan Hall is a decent person who will employ good quality people and desperately wants a better London,” said Steven Norris, the two-time Tory candidate for mayor during Ken Livingstone’s time in office. But her campaign has been notably narrow, said one former political ally. “She ran a minority administration in Harrow and had to do deals and it would have been better for her to show now that she can work across political divides,” the source said. “Instead, everything she has done has been negative rather than positive. When she was asked about her youth going to raves, she actually looked happy and smiled but for the rest of the campaign it looked like she had swallowed a wasp.” It is suggested that Hall, a loyal foot soldier of the Tory party, is acting in line with its general trend since 2016 – and could prove to be a harbinger of its post-general election shape. “The Conservatives appear to be going down a post-Brexit right-wing rabbit hole”, the source added. Hall’s campaign has been all about cars and crime. Dr Elizabeth Simon, a researcher in British politics at the Mile End Institute, said polling between 8 and 17 April indicated that Hall’s central policy offers had been popular. “One of Hall’s key pledges is to abolish the 20mph speed limit for London’s main roads, while maintaining this for residential areas and around schools,” said Simon. “We find that 55% of Londoners support this and just under a quarter oppose this, giving the policy a net approval rating of approximately 30 points.” Hall has also claimed that Khan wishes to charge motorists for every mile they drive, something the mayor denies. But the most high profile of Hall’s pledges has been to abolish the Ulez expansion to outer London, under which polluting vehicle owners pay a £12.50 daily charge. According to the Mile End Institute/Savanta polling, 63% of Londoners either think Ulez should be scrapped entirely (32%) or should return to its former inner London boundaries (31%), compared with 26% who think that it should continue to cover the entirety of the city. But Simon warned that Ulez did not appear to be the broad vote winner that Hall might hope. “Perhaps disappointingly, given the focus of her campaign on the Ulez issue, she is not significantly out-performing her average vote share among people who have cars in their household. Thirty-seven percent of Londoners in households with cars say they will vote Hall versus 33% of all Londoners,” she said. “The other issue is that most voters will not have the issue of Ulez at the forefront of their minds when deciding who to vote for.” Ulez ranks as the fifth most important issue for Londoners, with 9% saying it would determine their choice, the polling suggests, leading to the conclusion that a broader campaign could garner more support. Andrew Boff, the Tory chair of the London assembly, disagrees. “There are obviously other issues but nothing grabs the public imagination like Ulez and crime,” he said. “These are the big ones. I am a housing geek myself and I would love to hear her go on more about building family sized homes which she did but it wasn’t the centre of the campaign, quite rightly.” Boff said he had only “granular” criticisms of Hall’s strategy. “Khan and Susan have been playing this game whereby, if he’s not going to turn up [to public meetings], she’s not going to turn up,” he said. “And I think she should have just turned up. She turned up an awful lot but I did a few for her. I do think some of those meetings would have benefited from Susan being there.” “Susan gets things done,” Boff added. “She does shoot from the hip. And sometimes she gets a few burns off that but what you know with Susan is that if she says she’s going to do something she will do it.” As to Hall’s past support for Liz Truss’s leadership, Boff said there were plenty of people in the Tory party who regretted that. “I’ve had great fun going around saying all to my colleagues, ‘We did tell you’. That’s all in the past. Truss fooled a lot of people.” Norris believes the incumbent’s unpopularity over Ulez offers Hall a fighting chance. “This is more likely to be a ‘How much do you dislike Sadiq Khan’ election than ‘are you considering Susan Hall’s offering against Sadiq’s’,” he said. “Am I going to put my house on [her] winning? No, probably not. Because you can’t ever ignore what is going on in the national picture, but I think she’s going to do awful lot better than many people think and she might just give Sadiq the shock of his life.” Back in Dagenham, Icely, a regular at the anti-Ulez protests, is returning to his car when he stumbles into the Hall campaign bus, a red double decker emblazoned with the union flag. The location of that morning’s canvassing had been changed at the last minute and the message had not got through. There is a skip back in Icley’s step, as he laments that coverage of his stance is usually limited to GB News. Hall’s press officer is less enthused. “Susan will not be doing interviews,” he says of the candidate who is halfway up the road knocking doors. Then Hall turns up, with a handful of other door knockers in tow. “Very supportive,” she says of that morning’s doorsteps. “My message is that we need to stop Ulez expansion, make sure there is no ‘pay for miles’ and we need to build more homes.” Was it a mistake not to turn up at all the hustings? “Well, let’s wait and see on Thursday.” Will she win? “Let’s wait and see.” “I have had a year [of this] so I’m a little bit exhausted but you know it is going to be exciting,” Hall adds. “While this has been busy, when I am mayor of London there is so much that has to change. I will be flat out doing that. That is what I do. If you take a job on, you work like there is no tomorrow to make sure things improve and I will.” As Hall’s bus drives away, Biju Joseph, 49, an NHS worker who has been canvassing for her that morning, hangs around to chat. It had been a difficult morning, he concedes. Joseph, who came to the UK from India in 2010, backs Hall because he believes that too many migrants to the UK are on benefits. But he is not sure if the Tory message – or the messenger – is resonating. “Whether you like Khan or don’t like him, you can’t ignore him,” Joseph admits. “Many don’t really know her, actually.” Explore more on these topics London mayoral election 2024 Susan Hall Sadiq Khan London Mayoral elections Local politics England features Share Reuse this content P aul Icely puffs out his cheeks – and then slowly exhales. He is visibly deflating. “I thought there might be a few more of us,” the 67-year-old black-cab driver admits, his eyes darting between the students milling outside Barking and Dagenham college. “You seen anyone else?” Icely asks Lisa Prager, 40, as she limps towards him with the aid of an NHS issue crutch. Prager, who harbours a grudge against a Labour council over the loss of her job at a local park, appears to be the only other supporter of Susan Hall , the Conservative candidate for mayor of London, to have turned up on this sunny mid morning in Dagenham, east London. Perhaps of more pressing concern is the fact that the candidate herself should have been canvassing here an hour ago. “I thought they would let me know if the plan had changed,” says Prager, scrolling through messages on WhatsApp. The Conservative campaign to get Hall elected as London mayor on Thursday and put an end to Sadiq Khan’s bid for a historic third term could not be described as sure footed. Hall’s candidature was born out of scandal when the favourite, Daniel Korski, a former Downing Street adviser, pulled out over allegations of sexual misconduct, and it is a rare week that Hall’s past tweets or tendency to “shoot from the hip”, as one ally generously described it, has not been exploited by the Khan camp to highlight her “Trumpian” approach to the climate emergency and potentially controversial views. She has called for the government to delay its commitment to be carbon net zero by 2050 and there was much consternation when comments emerged in which Hall, 69, claimed that there was a “problem with crime” in the black community, something her allies say was born out of concern for people of colour. But she had also replied to a social media post in 2019 from former Daily Mail columnist Katie Hopkins describing Khan as “our nipple-height mayor of Londonistan” with the words “thank you Katie” and was forced to apologise for liking a tweet in 2020 that had a picture of Enoch Powell captioned “it’s never too late to get London back”. Hall, a London assembly member, has explained this away as a tendency a few years back to spend “too much time on Twitter”, but then there are the more recent campaign gaffes. Criticising Khan’s record on crime, Hall had claimed to be a victim of pickpocketing on the underground. It later emerged her purse had been found lodged between seats on the Jubilee line with her £40 still in it. When asked how much people pay to get on a bus in London, Hall admitted to not having a clue. “I don’t use them,” she told LBC presenter Nick Ferrari, just days after criticising Khan’s decision to spend £123m on freezing Transport for London (TfL) fares until March 2025. “I use trains all the time,” she insisted. It would be easy then to write off the Hall campaign as having been doomed to failure from the start: a poor choice of candidate in a traditionally Labour-backing city that was always unlikely to buck the national trend after 14 years of Conservative government. The latest YouGov poll puts Khan 22 points ahead of Hall, with the Labour mayor on 47% to Hall’s 25%. The Green candidate, Zoe Garbett, is on 7% while Liberal Democrat Rob Blackie is tied on 6% with Reform UK’s Howard Cox. But insiders who know Hall suggest that there is something more concerning for those who would like to see future Conservative victories in the capital and more broadly. Hall, a former leader of Harrow council, had a history of reaching across the political divide to get stuff done. She acted against landlords who were cramming tenants into sub-divided properties, something she described as “beds in sheds”, and she is known for offering a kind word to those of a different political persuasion at times of personal difficulty. “Susan
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
Jimmy Kimmel on Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV?’
Jimmy Kimmel on the Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool!’ Photograph: YouTube View image in fullscreen Jimmy Kimmel on the Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool!’ Photograph: YouTube This article is more than 1 year old Jimmy Kimmel on Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV?’ This article is more than 1 year old Late-night hosts discuss Donald Trump’s court naps, police crackdowns on peaceful pro-Palestinian student protesters and Kristi Noem’s VP chances Late-night hosts talked about Donald Trump’s $9,000 gag order penalty , his falling asleep during the trial and Eric Trump’s day in court. Jimmy Kimmel As usual, Jimmy Kimmel relished all details from Donald Trump’s hush-money trial in New York, which resumed on Tuesday. “I guess Teddy Doze-evelt is tired from all the winning, because he nodded off in court again today,” Kimmel noted on Tuesday evening. CNN reported that Trump was “slumped back in his chair with his eyes closed”, which “is what some call sleeping”, Kimmel joked. “Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool! “The good news for Trump is that one of his family members finally showed up at court today,” he continued. “The bad news is it was Eric.” Stephen Colbert: ‘If you like puppies, you’re not going to like Kristi Noem’ Read more Trump’s middle son attended the trial in support of his father, “which in the Trump family is as close as you get to playing catch”, Kimmel quipped. “If Eric was on trial, do you think Trump would be there in court for him? Best-case scenario, he pulls up in a limo, yells ‘witch-hunt!’ out the window and drives back home for a taco bowl.” After days of warnings, the judge fined Trump $9,000 for repeatedly violating a gag order restricting public comments about the trial or its participants. “That should shut him up,” Kimmel deadpanned. “Trump spends $9,000 at the Wendy’s drive-through. “Honestly, even though I’m not on Trump’s side, I don’t think it’s fair,” he added. “This trial is about the fact that he paid a woman to be quiet. Now he isn’t quiet and he needs to pay them? It makes no sense. They’re using his thinking against him. It’s like Jesus, a carpenter, who they nailed to a cross. Think about it. Read about it in your Trump-brand Bible.” And after much outcry from rightwing media about the trial preventing Trump from attending his son Barron’s high school graduation, the judge announced that the court proceedings will be suspended on that date. “Which is funny, because now Trump has to go to Barron’s high school graduation,” said Kimmel. Stephen Colbert According to numerous witnesses, Trump sat with his eyes closed for large portions of the testimony on Tuesday. “So either he’s falling asleep again or he’s doing that little kid thing where he thinks if he can’t see you no one can see him,” said Stephen Colbert on The Late Show. “It’s a real challenge for his lawyers, I’ve got to tell you – ‘I wonder where the former president is! I guess I’ll have to eat all these cookies by myself …’” The judge fined Trump $9,000 for violating his gag order. “Nine thousand dollars may not seem like a lot to a successful business man, but what about to Trump?” The judge also warned that if Trump continued to violate the gag order, “jail may be a necessary punishment”. “I don’t know if it’s necessary for Trump, but I need it!” Colbert exclaimed. He then touched on the student movement protesting against Israel’s war in Gaza on college campuses, which some have called the most significant student movement since the anti-Vietnam war campus protests of the late 1960s. “Even if you don’t agree with the subject of their protests, as long as they are peaceful, students should be allowed to protest. It’s their first amendment right,” said Colbert, referring to brutal crackdowns from armed police . “That is the kind of idealism you learn in college. It’s one of the few college lessons you can use your whole life, unlike beer funneling, which you stop being able to do around 35 when your wife catches you.” Seth Meyers After Kristi Noem revealed in her new book that she killed her puppy for being excited about chickens, a Trump source said it was now impossible for her to be selected as his running mate. “After all, you can’t have her standing right next to an Old Yeller,” joked Seth Meyers on Late Night. A judge may have allowed Trump to attend his son Barron’s high school graduation, “but he drew the line at telling him the name of the high school”, Meyers quipped. The Biden administration announced a plan that would require all new cars to be equipped with a system that would prevent collisions with pedestrians. “Which would explain why Elon Musk supports Trump,” Meyers said of the Tesla owner. And Tuesday was National Adopt a Shelter Pet Day, but “not for you!!!” Meyers shouted over a photo of Noem. Explore more on these topics Late-night TV roundup Stephen Colbert Jimmy Kimmel Seth Meyers TV comedy Comedy Television features Share Reuse this content Jimmy Kimmel on the Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool!’ Photograph: YouTube View image in fullscreen Jimmy Kimmel on the Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool!’ Photograph: YouTube This article is more than 1 year old Jimmy Kimmel on Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV?’ This article is more than 1 year old Late-night hosts discuss Donald Trump’s court naps, police crackdowns on peaceful pro-Palestinian student protesters and Kristi Noem’s VP chances Late-night hosts talked about Donald Trump’s $9,000 gag order penalty , his falling asleep during the trial and Eric Trump’s day in court. Jimmy Kimmel As usual, Jimmy Kimmel relished all details from Donald Trump’s hush-money trial in New York, which resumed on Tuesday. “I guess Teddy Doze-evelt is tired from all the winning, because he nodded off in court again today,” Kimmel noted on Tuesday evening. CNN reported that Trump was “slumped back in his chair with his eyes closed”, which “is what some call sleeping”, Kimmel joked. “Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool! “The good news for Trump is that one of his family members finally showed up at court today,” he continued. “The bad news is it was Eric.” Stephen Colbert: ‘If you like puppies, you’re not going to like Kristi Noem’ Read more Trump’s middle son attended the trial in support of his father, “which in the Trump family is as close as you get to playing catch”, Kimmel quipped. “If Eric was on trial, do you think Trump would be there in court for him? Best-case scenario, he pulls up in a limo, yells ‘witch-hunt!’ out the window and drives back home for a taco bowl.” After days of warnings, the judge fined Trump $9,000 for repeatedly violating a gag order restricting public comments about the trial or its participants. “That should shut him up,” Kimmel deadpanned. “Trump spends $9,000 at the Wendy’s drive-through. “Honestly, even though I’m not on Trump’s side, I don’t think it’s fair,” he added. “This trial is about the fact that he paid a woman to be quiet. Now he isn’t quiet and he needs to pay them? It makes no sense. They’re using his thinking against him. It’s like Jesus, a carpenter, who they nailed to a cross. Think about it. Read about it in your Trump-brand Bible.” And after much outcry from rightwing media about the trial preventing Trump from attending his son Barron’s high school graduation, the judge announced that the court proceedings will be suspended on that date. “Which is funny, because now Trump has to go to Barron’s high school graduation,” said Kimmel. Stephen Colbert According to numerous witnesses, Trump sat with his eyes closed for large portions of the testimony on Tuesday. “So either he’s falling asleep again or he’s doing that little kid thing where he thinks if he can’t see you no one can see him,” said Stephen Colbert on The Late Show. “It’s a real challenge for his lawyers, I’ve got to tell you – ‘I wonder where the former president is! I guess I’ll have to eat all these cookies by myself …’” The judge fined Trump $9,000 for violating his gag order. “Nine thousand dollars may not seem like a lot to a successful business man, but what about to Trump?” The judge also warned that if Trump continued to violate the gag order, “jail may be a necessary punishment”. “I don’t know if it’s necessary for Trump, but I need it!” Colbert exclaimed. He then touched on the student movement protesting against Israel’s war in Gaza on college campuses, which some have called the most significant student movement since the anti-Vietnam war campus protests of the late 1960s. “Even if you don’t agree with the subject of their protests, as long as they are peaceful, students should be allowed to protest. It’s their first amendment right,” said Colbert, referring to brutal crackdowns from armed police . “That is the kind of idealism you learn in college. It’s one of the few college lessons you can use your whole life, unlike beer funneling, which you stop being able to do around 35 when your wife catches you.” Seth Meyers After Kristi Noem revealed in her new book that she killed her puppy for being excited about chickens, a Trump source said it was now impossible for her to be selected as his running mate. “After all, you can’t have her standing right next to an Old Yeller,” joked Seth Meyers on Late Night. A judge may have allowed Trump to attend his son Barron’s high school graduation, “but he drew the line at telling him the name of the high school”, Meyers quipped. The Biden administration announced a plan that would require all new cars to be equipped with a system that would prevent collisions with pedestrians. “Which would explain why Elon Musk supports Trump,” Meyers said of the Tesla owner. And Tuesday was National Adopt a Shelter Pet Day, but “not for you!!!” Meyers shouted over a photo of Noem. Explore more on these topics Late-night TV roundup Stephen Colbert Jimmy Kimmel Seth Meyers TV comedy Comedy Television features Share Reuse this content Jimmy Kimmel on the Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool!’ Photograph: YouTube View image in fullscreen Jimmy Kimmel on the Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool!’ Photograph: YouTube Jimmy Kimmel on the Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool!’ Photograph: YouTube View image in fullscreen Jimmy Kimmel on the Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool!’ Photograph: YouTube Jimmy Kimmel on the Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool!’ Photograph: YouTube View image in fullscreen Jimmy Kimmel on the Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool!’ Photograph: YouTube Jimmy Kimmel on the Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool!’ Photograph: YouTube View image in fullscreen Jimmy Kimmel on the Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool!’ Photograph: YouTube Jimmy Kimmel on the Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool!’ Photograph: YouTube Jimmy Kimmel on the Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool!’ Photograph: YouTube This article is more than 1 year old Jimmy Kimmel on Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV?’ This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Jimmy Kimmel on Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV?’ This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Jimmy Kimmel on Trump trial: ‘Why is this not on TV?’ This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Late-night hosts discuss Donald Trump’s court naps, police crackdowns on peaceful pro-Palestinian student protesters and Kristi Noem’s VP chances Late-night hosts discuss Donald Trump’s court naps, police crackdowns on peaceful pro-Palestinian student protesters and Kristi Noem’s VP chances Late-night hosts discuss Donald Trump’s court naps, police crackdowns on peaceful pro-Palestinian student protesters and Kristi Noem’s VP chances Late-night hosts talked about Donald Trump’s $9,000 gag order penalty , his falling asleep during the trial and Eric Trump’s day in court. Jimmy Kimmel As usual, Jimmy Kimmel relished all details from Donald Trump’s hush-money trial in New York, which resumed on Tuesday. “I guess Teddy Doze-evelt is tired from all the winning, because he nodded off in court again today,” Kimmel noted on Tuesday evening. CNN reported that Trump was “slumped back in his chair with his eyes closed”, which “is what some call sleeping”, Kimmel joked. “Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool! “The good news for Trump is that one of his family members finally showed up at court today,” he continued. “The bad news is it was Eric.” Stephen Colbert: ‘If you like puppies, you’re not going to like Kristi Noem’ Read more Trump’s middle son attended the trial in support of his father, “which in the Trump family is as close as you get to playing catch”, Kimmel quipped. “If Eric was on trial, do you think Trump would be there in court for him? Best-case scenario, he pulls up in a limo, yells ‘witch-hunt!’ out the window and drives back home for a taco bowl.” After days of warnings, the judge fined Trump $9,000 for repeatedly violating a gag order restricting public comments about the trial or its participants. “That should shut him up,” Kimmel deadpanned. “Trump spends $9,000 at the Wendy’s drive-through. “Honestly, even though I’m not on Trump’s side, I don’t think it’s fair,” he added. “This trial is about the fact that he paid a woman to be quiet. Now he isn’t quiet and he needs to pay them? It makes no sense. They’re using his thinking against him. It’s like Jesus, a carpenter, who they nailed to a cross. Think about it. Read about it in your Trump-brand Bible.” And after much outcry from rightwing media about the trial preventing Trump from attending his son Barron’s high school graduation, the judge announced that the court proceedings will be suspended on that date. “Which is funny, because now Trump has to go to Barron’s high school graduation,” said Kimmel. Stephen Colbert According to numerous witnesses, Trump sat with his eyes closed for large portions of the testimony on Tuesday. “So either he’s falling asleep again or he’s doing that little kid thing where he thinks if he can’t see you no one can see him,” said Stephen Colbert on The Late Show. “It’s a real challenge for his lawyers, I’ve got to tell you – ‘I wonder where the former president is! I guess I’ll have to eat all these cookies by myself …’” The judge fined Trump $9,000 for violating his gag order. “Nine thousand dollars may not seem like a lot to a successful business man, but what about to Trump?” The judge also warned that if Trump continued to violate the gag order, “jail may be a necessary punishment”. “I don’t know if it’s necessary for Trump, but I need it!” Colbert exclaimed. He then touched on the student movement protesting against Israel’s war in Gaza on college campuses, which some have called the most significant student movement since the anti-Vietnam war campus protests of the late 1960s. “Even if you don’t agree with the subject of their protests, as long as they are peaceful, students should be allowed to protest. It’s their first amendment right,” said Colbert, referring to brutal crackdowns from armed police . “That is the kind of idealism you learn in college. It’s one of the few college lessons you can use your whole life, unlike beer funneling, which you stop being able to do around 35 when your wife catches you.” Seth Meyers After Kristi Noem revealed in her new book that she killed her puppy for being excited about chickens, a Trump source said it was now impossible for her to be selected as his running mate. “After all, you can’t have her standing right next to an Old Yeller,” joked Seth Meyers on Late Night. A judge may have allowed Trump to attend his son Barron’s high school graduation, “but he drew the line at telling him the name of the high school”, Meyers quipped. The Biden administration announced a plan that would require all new cars to be equipped with a system that would prevent collisions with pedestrians. “Which would explain why Elon Musk supports Trump,” Meyers said of the Tesla owner. And Tuesday was National Adopt a Shelter Pet Day, but “not for you!!!” Meyers shouted over a photo of Noem. Explore more on these topics Late-night TV roundup Stephen Colbert Jimmy Kimmel Seth Meyers TV comedy Comedy Television features Share Reuse this content Late-night hosts talked about Donald Trump’s $9,000 gag order penalty , his falling asleep during the trial and Eric Trump’s day in court. Jimmy Kimmel As usual, Jimmy Kimmel relished all details from Donald Trump’s hush-money trial in New York, which resumed on Tuesday. “I guess Teddy Doze-evelt is tired from all the winning, because he nodded off in court again today,” Kimmel noted on Tuesday evening. CNN reported that Trump was “slumped back in his chair with his eyes closed”, which “is what some call sleeping”, Kimmel joked. “Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool! “The good news for Trump is that one of his family members finally showed up at court today,” he continued. “The bad news is it was Eric.” Stephen Colbert: ‘If you like puppies, you’re not going to like Kristi Noem’ Read more Trump’s middle son attended the trial in support of his father, “which in the Trump family is as close as you get to playing catch”, Kimmel quipped. “If Eric was on trial, do you think Trump would be there in court for him? Best-case scenario, he pulls up in a limo, yells ‘witch-hunt!’ out the window and drives back home for a taco bowl.” After days of warnings, the judge fined Trump $9,000 for repeatedly violating a gag order restricting public comments about the trial or its participants. “That should shut him up,” Kimmel deadpanned. “Trump spends $9,000 at the Wendy’s drive-through. “Honestly, even though I’m not on Trump’s side, I don’t think it’s fair,” he added. “This trial is about the fact that he paid a woman to be quiet. Now he isn’t quiet and he needs to pay them? It makes no sense. They’re using his thinking against him. It’s like Jesus, a carpenter, who they nailed to a cross. Think about it. Read about it in your Trump-brand Bible.” And after much outcry from rightwing media about the trial preventing Trump from attending his son Barron’s high school graduation, the judge announced that the court proceedings will be suspended on that date. “Which is funny, because now Trump has to go to Barron’s high school graduation,” said Kimmel. Stephen Colbert According to numerous witnesses, Trump sat with his eyes closed for large portions of the testimony on Tuesday. “So either he’s falling asleep again or he’s doing that little kid thing where he thinks if he can’t see you no one can see him,” said Stephen Colbert on The Late Show. “It’s a real challenge for his lawyers, I’ve got to tell you – ‘I wonder where the former president is! I guess I’ll have to eat all these cookies by myself …’” The judge fined Trump $9,000 for violating his gag order. “Nine thousand dollars may not seem like a lot to a successful business man, but what about to Trump?” The judge also warned that if Trump continued to violate the gag order, “jail may be a necessary punishment”. “I don’t know if it’s necessary for Trump, but I need it!” Colbert exclaimed. He then touched on the student movement protesting against Israel’s war in Gaza on college campuses, which some have called the most significant student movement since the anti-Vietnam war campus protests of the late 1960s. “Even if you don’t agree with the subject of their protests, as long as they are peaceful, students should be allowed to protest. It’s their first amendment right,” said Colbert, referring to brutal crackdowns from armed police . “That is the kind of idealism you learn in college. It’s one of the few college lessons you can use your whole life, unlike beer funneling, which you stop being able to do around 35 when your wife catches you.” Seth Meyers After Kristi Noem revealed in her new book that she killed her puppy for being excited about chickens, a Trump source said it was now impossible for her to be selected as his running mate. “After all, you can’t have her standing right next to an Old Yeller,” joked Seth Meyers on Late Night. A judge may have allowed Trump to attend his son Barron’s high school graduation, “but he drew the line at telling him the name of the high school”, Meyers quipped. The Biden administration announced a plan that would require all new cars to be equipped with a system that would prevent collisions with pedestrians. “Which would explain why Elon Musk supports Trump,” Meyers said of the Tesla owner. And Tuesday was National Adopt a Shelter Pet Day, but “not for you!!!” Meyers shouted over a photo of Noem. Explore more on these topics Late-night TV roundup Stephen Colbert Jimmy Kimmel Seth Meyers TV comedy Comedy Television features Share Reuse this content Late-night hosts talked about Donald Trump’s $9,000 gag order penalty , his falling asleep during the trial and Eric Trump’s day in court. Jimmy Kimmel As usual, Jimmy Kimmel relished all details from Donald Trump’s hush-money trial in New York, which resumed on Tuesday. “I guess Teddy Doze-evelt is tired from all the winning, because he nodded off in court again today,” Kimmel noted on Tuesday evening. CNN reported that Trump was “slumped back in his chair with his eyes closed”, which “is what some call sleeping”, Kimmel joked. “Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool! “The good news for Trump is that one of his family members finally showed up at court today,” he continued. “The bad news is it was Eric.” Stephen Colbert: ‘If you like puppies, you’re not going to like Kristi Noem’ Read more Trump’s middle son attended the trial in support of his father, “which in the Trump family is as close as you get to playing catch”, Kimmel quipped. “If Eric was on trial, do you think Trump would be there in court for him? Best-case scenario, he pulls up in a limo, yells ‘witch-hunt!’ out the window and drives back home for a taco bowl.” After days of warnings, the judge fined Trump $9,000 for repeatedly violating a gag order restricting public comments about the trial or its participants. “That should shut him up,” Kimmel deadpanned. “Trump spends $9,000 at the Wendy’s drive-through. “Honestly, even though I’m not on Trump’s side, I don’t think it’s fair,” he added. “This trial is about the fact that he paid a woman to be quiet. Now he isn’t quiet and he needs to pay them? It makes no sense. They’re using his thinking against him. It’s like Jesus, a carpenter, who they nailed to a cross. Think about it. Read about it in your Trump-brand Bible.” And after much outcry from rightwing media about the trial preventing Trump from attending his son Barron’s high school graduation, the judge announced that the court proceedings will be suspended on that date. “Which is funny, because now Trump has to go to Barron’s high school graduation,” said Kimmel. Stephen Colbert According to numerous witnesses, Trump sat with his eyes closed for large portions of the testimony on Tuesday. “So either he’s falling asleep again or he’s doing that little kid thing where he thinks if he can’t see you no one can see him,” said Stephen Colbert on The Late Show. “It’s a real challenge for his lawyers, I’ve got to tell you – ‘I wonder where the former president is! I guess I’ll have to eat all these cookies by myself …’” The judge fined Trump $9,000 for violating his gag order. “Nine thousand dollars may not seem like a lot to a successful business man, but what about to Trump?” The judge also warned that if Trump continued to violate the gag order, “jail may be a necessary punishment”. “I don’t know if it’s necessary for Trump, but I need it!” Colbert exclaimed. He then touched on the student movement protesting against Israel’s war in Gaza on college campuses, which some have called the most significant student movement since the anti-Vietnam war campus protests of the late 1960s. “Even if you don’t agree with the subject of their protests, as long as they are peaceful, students should be allowed to protest. It’s their first amendment right,” said Colbert, referring to brutal crackdowns from armed police . “That is the kind of idealism you learn in college. It’s one of the few college lessons you can use your whole life, unlike beer funneling, which you stop being able to do around 35 when your wife catches you.” Seth Meyers After Kristi Noem revealed in her new book that she killed her puppy for being excited about chickens, a Trump source said it was now impossible for her to be selected as his running mate. “After all, you can’t have her standing right next to an Old Yeller,” joked Seth Meyers on Late Night. A judge may have allowed Trump to attend his son Barron’s high school graduation, “but he drew the line at telling him the name of the high school”, Meyers quipped. The Biden administration announced a plan that would require all new cars to be equipped with a system that would prevent collisions with pedestrians. “Which would explain why Elon Musk supports Trump,” Meyers said of the Tesla owner. And Tuesday was National Adopt a Shelter Pet Day, but “not for you!!!” Meyers shouted over a photo of Noem. Late-night hosts talked about Donald Trump’s $9,000 gag order penalty , his falling asleep during the trial and Eric Trump’s day in court. Jimmy Kimmel As usual, Jimmy Kimmel relished all details from Donald Trump’s hush-money trial in New York, which resumed on Tuesday. “I guess Teddy Doze-evelt is tired from all the winning, because he nodded off in court again today,” Kimmel noted on Tuesday evening. CNN reported that Trump was “slumped back in his chair with his eyes closed”, which “is what some call sleeping”, Kimmel joked. “Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool! “The good news for Trump is that one of his family members finally showed up at court today,” he continued. “The bad news is it was Eric.” Stephen Colbert: ‘If you like puppies, you’re not going to like Kristi Noem’ Read more Trump’s middle son attended the trial in support of his father, “which in the Trump family is as close as you get to playing catch”, Kimmel quipped. “If Eric was on trial, do you think Trump would be there in court for him? Best-case scenario, he pulls up in a limo, yells ‘witch-hunt!’ out the window and drives back home for a taco bowl.” After days of warnings, the judge fined Trump $9,000 for repeatedly violating a gag order restricting public comments about the trial or its participants. “That should shut him up,” Kimmel deadpanned. “Trump spends $9,000 at the Wendy’s drive-through. “Honestly, even though I’m not on Trump’s side, I don’t think it’s fair,” he added. “This trial is about the fact that he paid a woman to be quiet. Now he isn’t quiet and he needs to pay them? It makes no sense. They’re using his thinking against him. It’s like Jesus, a carpenter, who they nailed to a cross. Think about it. Read about it in your Trump-brand Bible.” And after much outcry from rightwing media about the trial preventing Trump from attending his son Barron’s high school graduation, the judge announced that the court proceedings will be suspended on that date. “Which is funny, because now Trump has to go to Barron’s high school graduation,” said Kimmel. Stephen Colbert According to numerous witnesses, Trump sat with his eyes closed for large portions of the testimony on Tuesday. “So either he’s falling asleep again or he’s doing that little kid thing where he thinks if he can’t see you no one can see him,” said Stephen Colbert on The Late Show. “It’s a real challenge for his lawyers, I’ve got to tell you – ‘I wonder where the former president is! I guess I’ll have to eat all these cookies by myself …’” The judge fined Trump $9,000 for violating his gag order. “Nine thousand dollars may not seem like a lot to a successful business man, but what about to Trump?” The judge also warned that if Trump continued to violate the gag order, “jail may be a necessary punishment”. “I don’t know if it’s necessary for Trump, but I need it!” Colbert exclaimed. He then touched on the student movement protesting against Israel’s war in Gaza on college campuses, which some have called the most significant student movement since the anti-Vietnam war campus protests of the late 1960s. “Even if you don’t agree with the subject of their protests, as long as they are peaceful, students should be allowed to protest. It’s their first amendment right,” said Colbert, referring to brutal crackdowns from armed police . “That is the kind of idealism you learn in college. It’s one of the few college lessons you can use your whole life, unlike beer funneling, which you stop being able to do around 35 when your wife catches you.” Seth Meyers After Kristi Noem revealed in her new book that she killed her puppy for being excited about chickens, a Trump source said it was now impossible for her to be selected as his running mate. “After all, you can’t have her standing right next to an Old Yeller,” joked Seth Meyers on Late Night. A judge may have allowed Trump to attend his son Barron’s high school graduation, “but he drew the line at telling him the name of the high school”, Meyers quipped. The Biden administration announced a plan that would require all new cars to be equipped with a system that would prevent collisions with pedestrians. “Which would explain why Elon Musk supports Trump,” Meyers said of the Tesla owner. And Tuesday was National Adopt a Shelter Pet Day, but “not for you!!!” Meyers shouted over a photo of Noem. Late-night hosts talked about Donald Trump’s $9,000 gag order penalty , his falling asleep during the trial and Eric Trump’s day in court. As usual, Jimmy Kimmel relished all details from Donald Trump’s hush-money trial in New York, which resumed on Tuesday. “I guess Teddy Doze-evelt is tired from all the winning, because he nodded off in court again today,” Kimmel noted on Tuesday evening. CNN reported that Trump was “slumped back in his chair with his eyes closed”, which “is what some call sleeping”, Kimmel joked. “Why is this not on TV, by the way? I want to see the drool! “The good news for Trump is that one of his family members finally showed up at court today,” he continued. “The bad news is it was Eric.” Stephen Colbert: ‘If you like puppies, you’re not going to like Kristi Noem’ Read more Stephen Colbert: ‘If you like puppies, you’re not going to like Kristi Noem’ Read more Stephen Colbert: ‘If you like puppies, you’re not going to like Kristi Noem’ Read more Stephen Colbert: ‘If you like puppies, you’re not going to like Kristi Noem’ Stephen Colbert: ‘If you like puppies, you’re not going to like Kristi Noem’ Trump’s middle son attended the trial in support of his father, “which in the Trump family is as close as you get to playing catch”, Kimmel quipped. “If Eric was on trial, do you think Trump would be there in court for him? Best-case scenario, he pulls up in a limo, yells ‘witch-hunt!’ out the window and drives back home for a taco bowl.” After days of warnings, the judge fined Trump $9,000 for repeatedly violating a gag order restricting public comments about the trial or its participants. “That should shut him up,” Kimmel deadpanned. “Trump spends $9,000 at the Wendy’s drive-through. “Honestly, even though I’m not on Trump’s side, I don’t think it’s fair,” he added. “This trial is about the fact that he paid a woman to be quiet. Now he isn’t quiet and he needs to pay them? It makes no sense. They’re using his thinking against him. It’s like Jesus, a carpenter, who they nailed to a cross. Think about it. Read about it in your Trump-brand Bible.” And after much outcry from rightwing media about the trial preventing Trump from attending his son Barron’s high school graduation, the judge announced that the court proceedings will be suspended on that date. “Which is funny, because now Trump has to go to Barron’s high school graduation,” said Kimmel. According to numerous witnesses, Trump sat with his eyes closed for large portions of the testimony on Tuesday. “So either he’s falling asleep again or he’s doing that little kid thing where he thinks if he can’t see you no one can see him,” said Stephen Colbert on The Late Show. “It’s a real challenge for his lawyers, I’ve got to tell you – ‘I wonder where the former president is! I guess I’ll have to eat all these cookies by myself …’” The judge fined Trump $9,000 for violating his gag order. “Nine thousand dollars may not seem like a lot to a successful business man, but what about to Trump?” The judge also warned that if Trump continued to violate the gag order, “jail may be a necessary punishment”. “I don’t know if it’s necessary for Trump, but I need it!” Colbert exclaimed. He then touched on the student movement protesting against Israel’s war in Gaza on college campuses, which some have called the most significant student movement since the anti-Vietnam war campus protests of the late 1960s. “Even if you don’t agree with the subject of their protests, as long as they are peaceful, students should be allowed to protest. It’s their first amendment right,” said Colbert, referring to brutal crackdowns from armed police . “That is the kind of idealism you learn in college. It’s one of the few college lessons you can use your whole life, unlike beer funneling, which you stop being able to do around 35 when your wife catches you.” After Kristi Noem revealed in her new book that she killed her puppy for being excited about chickens, a Trump source said it was now impossible for her to be selected as his running mate. “After all, you can’t have her standing right next to an Old Yeller,” joked Seth Meyers on Late Night. A judge may have allowed Trump to attend his son Barron’s high school graduation, “but he drew the line at telling him the name of the high school”, Meyers quipped. The Biden administration announced a plan that would require all new cars to be equipped with a system that would prevent collisions with pedestrians. “Which would explain why Elon Musk supports Trump,” Meyers said of the Tesla owner. And Tuesday was National Adopt a Shelter Pet Day, but “not for you!!!” Meyers shouted over a photo of Noem. Explore more on these topics Late-night TV roundup Stephen Colbert Jimmy Kimmel Seth Meyers TV comedy Comedy Television features Share Reuse this content Late-night TV roundup Stephen Colbert Jimmy Kimmel Seth Meyers TV comedy Comedy Television features |
UK students begin new wave of protests against Gaza war after US arrests
Students marching in London in November to demand a ceasefire. Those at several universities have staged occupations and demonstrations. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Students marching in London in November to demand a ceasefire. Those at several universities have staged occupations and demonstrations. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old UK students begin new wave of protests against Gaza war after US arrests This article is more than 1 year old Protests planned across the country as encampment set up in Sheffield and UEA vice-chancellor says US scenes ‘could happen here’ A fresh wave of student demonstrations and encampments are under way at UK universities in protest over the war in Gaza after violent scenes on campuses in the US, where hundreds have been arrested in a crackdown by police. Protests were due to take place in at least six universities on Wednesday, including Sheffield, Bristol, Leeds and Newcastle, with others expected to follow suit, in a show of solidarity with Palestinians. Students are also calling for their individual universities to divest from firms that supply arms to Israel and in some cases sever links with universities in Israel. While the focus of the protest movement in the UK in recent months has been on mass marches in London and other cities, students occupied university buildings and held demonstrations, which have been on a smaller scale and have attracted less attention. ‘Like a war zone’: Emory University grapples with fallout from police response to protest Read more However, violent scenes from Columbia University and other US campuses over the past few days, broadcast across the world’s media, have triggered renewed anger among UK students and a sense of shared solidarity. David Maguire, the vice-chancellor of the University of East Anglia (UEA), said protests at UK universities had been generally peaceful but agreed that events like those in the US “could happen here”. In Sheffield, a group called the Sheffield Campus Coalition for Palestine , a coalition of “staff, students, and alumni” from the universities of Sheffield and Sheffield Hallam, began an encampment in solidarity with Palestinians. The SCCP said there had been a mass walkout from lectures, followed by a demonstration, and that many students were prepared to camp “indefinitely” in tents outside the student union. This followed an encampment at the University of Warwick, which began last week. “We’ve come prepared for the South Yorkshire weather,” said one research student taking part in the protest. “We’ve got gazebos and picnic tables and a generator for power. We’ll stay indefinitely until the university meets our demands.” In Newcastle, an organisation called Newcastle Apartheid off Campus said more than 40 students were taking part in an encampment and that a day of events and a rally was planned for 5pm on Wednesday. Organisers said students were outraged after the university apparently signed a partnership with Leonardo SpA, a defence and security company that they claim is responsible for producing the laser targeting system for the Israel Defense Forces’ F-35 fighter jets being used in the war in Gaza. “Although the student union has passed motions with 95% of people in favour of calling for the university to end its ties with Leonardo, and multiple ‘Leonardo off Campus’ protests on its campus, it is clear that the university has not listened to students’ concerns,” a statement said. The university was contacted for comment. The University of York, meanwhile, announced in a statement that it “no longer holds investments in companies that primarily make or sell weapons and defence-related products or services”. This followed prolonged pressure and protests from students and staff since the beginning of the war in Gaza. In Leeds, there was a May Day student walkout for Palestine, and in Bristol, university students established an encampment in Royal Fort Gardens opposite Senate House. This latest wave of action builds on earlier protests, which included student occupations of university buildings at the University of Manchester, Goldsmiths and at UCL. In Manchester, protesters said 50 students had set up camp, demanding that the university end its partnership with BAE Systems and other arms companies, cut its ties with Tel Aviv University and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and stop all “unethical research”. One first-year student said the US protests had highlighted “now is the time to act”. He said: “The courage that those students have shown faced with extreme violence from the police – it’s like a call that needs to be answered and picked up across the world.” Patrick Hackett, Manchester University’s registrar, secretary and chief operating officer, said it recognised the right of students and staff to protest within the law, but added that setting up camp in a city campus posed potential health and safety concerns “and ultimately is an unauthorised and unlawful use of the university’s campus”. He added: “You can be assured that we will do everything possible to maintain business as usual and we urge protesters to act accordingly. We are very conscious of the need to ensure that everyone on our campus remains safe and secure and this will be of utmost importance.” University vice-chancellors in the UK have been keeping a close eye on events on their own campuses and overseas, meeting regularly to discuss developments. Asked on BBC Radio 4 whether the scenes on campuses in North America could be replicated in the UK, the UEA’s Maguire said: “Of course it could happen here. “But this is a price that we pay for academic freedom and freedom of speech. Students have the opportunity, if they so wish, to protest about any issue. And I think we’ve got to remember that for a lot of students, these events have been completely cataclysmic. Any response from authorities must be commensurate and allowances need to be made.” A spokesperson for Universities UK, which speaks for 142 institutions, said: “Universities are monitoring the latest news on campus protests in the US and Canada. As with any high-profile issue, universities work hard to strike the right balance between ensuring the safety of all students and staff, including preventing harassment, and supporting lawful free speech on campus. We continue to meet regularly to discuss the latest position with university leaders.” Explore more on these topics Students Universities Israel-Gaza war Gaza Israel Palestine Protest news Share Reuse this content Students marching in London in November to demand a ceasefire. Those at several universities have staged occupations and demonstrations. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Students marching in London in November to demand a ceasefire. Those at several universities have staged occupations and demonstrations. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old UK students begin new wave of protests against Gaza war after US arrests This article is more than 1 year old Protests planned across the country as encampment set up in Sheffield and UEA vice-chancellor says US scenes ‘could happen here’ A fresh wave of student demonstrations and encampments are under way at UK universities in protest over the war in Gaza after violent scenes on campuses in the US, where hundreds have been arrested in a crackdown by police. Protests were due to take place in at least six universities on Wednesday, including Sheffield, Bristol, Leeds and Newcastle, with others expected to follow suit, in a show of solidarity with Palestinians. Students are also calling for their individual universities to divest from firms that supply arms to Israel and in some cases sever links with universities in Israel. While the focus of the protest movement in the UK in recent months has been on mass marches in London and other cities, students occupied university buildings and held demonstrations, which have been on a smaller scale and have attracted less attention. ‘Like a war zone’: Emory University grapples with fallout from police response to protest Read more However, violent scenes from Columbia University and other US campuses over the past few days, broadcast across the world’s media, have triggered renewed anger among UK students and a sense of shared solidarity. David Maguire, the vice-chancellor of the University of East Anglia (UEA), said protests at UK universities had been generally peaceful but agreed that events like those in the US “could happen here”. In Sheffield, a group called the Sheffield Campus Coalition for Palestine , a coalition of “staff, students, and alumni” from the universities of Sheffield and Sheffield Hallam, began an encampment in solidarity with Palestinians. The SCCP said there had been a mass walkout from lectures, followed by a demonstration, and that many students were prepared to camp “indefinitely” in tents outside the student union. This followed an encampment at the University of Warwick, which began last week. “We’ve come prepared for the South Yorkshire weather,” said one research student taking part in the protest. “We’ve got gazebos and picnic tables and a generator for power. We’ll stay indefinitely until the university meets our demands.” In Newcastle, an organisation called Newcastle Apartheid off Campus said more than 40 students were taking part in an encampment and that a day of events and a rally was planned for 5pm on Wednesday. Organisers said students were outraged after the university apparently signed a partnership with Leonardo SpA, a defence and security company that they claim is responsible for producing the laser targeting system for the Israel Defense Forces’ F-35 fighter jets being used in the war in Gaza. “Although the student union has passed motions with 95% of people in favour of calling for the university to end its ties with Leonardo, and multiple ‘Leonardo off Campus’ protests on its campus, it is clear that the university has not listened to students’ concerns,” a statement said. The university was contacted for comment. The University of York, meanwhile, announced in a statement that it “no longer holds investments in companies that primarily make or sell weapons and defence-related products or services”. This followed prolonged pressure and protests from students and staff since the beginning of the war in Gaza. In Leeds, there was a May Day student walkout for Palestine, and in Bristol, university students established an encampment in Royal Fort Gardens opposite Senate House. This latest wave of action builds on earlier protests, which included student occupations of university buildings at the University of Manchester, Goldsmiths and at UCL. In Manchester, protesters said 50 students had set up camp, demanding that the university end its partnership with BAE Systems and other arms companies, cut its ties with Tel Aviv University and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and stop all “unethical research”. One first-year student said the US protests had highlighted “now is the time to act”. He said: “The courage that those students have shown faced with extreme violence from the police – it’s like a call that needs to be answered and picked up across the world.” Patrick Hackett, Manchester University’s registrar, secretary and chief operating officer, said it recognised the right of students and staff to protest within the law, but added that setting up camp in a city campus posed potential health and safety concerns “and ultimately is an unauthorised and unlawful use of the university’s campus”. He added: “You can be assured that we will do everything possible to maintain business as usual and we urge protesters to act accordingly. We are very conscious of the need to ensure that everyone on our campus remains safe and secure and this will be of utmost importance.” University vice-chancellors in the UK have been keeping a close eye on events on their own campuses and overseas, meeting regularly to discuss developments. Asked on BBC Radio 4 whether the scenes on campuses in North America could be replicated in the UK, the UEA’s Maguire said: “Of course it could happen here. “But this is a price that we pay for academic freedom and freedom of speech. Students have the opportunity, if they so wish, to protest about any issue. And I think we’ve got to remember that for a lot of students, these events have been completely cataclysmic. Any response from authorities must be commensurate and allowances need to be made.” A spokesperson for Universities UK, which speaks for 142 institutions, said: “Universities are monitoring the latest news on campus protests in the US and Canada. As with any high-profile issue, universities work hard to strike the right balance between ensuring the safety of all students and staff, including preventing harassment, and supporting lawful free speech on campus. We continue to meet regularly to discuss the latest position with university leaders.” Explore more on these topics Students Universities Israel-Gaza war Gaza Israel Palestine Protest news Share Reuse this content Students marching in London in November to demand a ceasefire. Those at several universities have staged occupations and demonstrations. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Students marching in London in November to demand a ceasefire. Those at several universities have staged occupations and demonstrations. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images Students marching in London in November to demand a ceasefire. Those at several universities have staged occupations and demonstrations. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Students marching in London in November to demand a ceasefire. Those at several universities have staged occupations and demonstrations. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images Students marching in London in November to demand a ceasefire. Those at several universities have staged occupations and demonstrations. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Students marching in London in November to demand a ceasefire. Those at several universities have staged occupations and demonstrations. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images Students marching in London in November to demand a ceasefire. Those at several universities have staged occupations and demonstrations. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Students marching in London in November to demand a ceasefire. Those at several universities have staged occupations and demonstrations. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images Students marching in London in November to demand a ceasefire. Those at several universities have staged occupations and demonstrations. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images Students marching in London in November to demand a ceasefire. Those at several universities have staged occupations and demonstrations. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old UK students begin new wave of protests against Gaza war after US arrests This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old UK students begin new wave of protests against Gaza war after US arrests This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old UK students begin new wave of protests against Gaza war after US arrests This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Protests planned across the country as encampment set up in Sheffield and UEA vice-chancellor says US scenes ‘could happen here’ Protests planned across the country as encampment set up in Sheffield and UEA vice-chancellor says US scenes ‘could happen here’ Protests planned across the country as encampment set up in Sheffield and UEA vice-chancellor says US scenes ‘could happen here’ A fresh wave of student demonstrations and encampments are under way at UK universities in protest over the war in Gaza after violent scenes on campuses in the US, where hundreds have been arrested in a crackdown by police. Protests were due to take place in at least six universities on Wednesday, including Sheffield, Bristol, Leeds and Newcastle, with others expected to follow suit, in a show of solidarity with Palestinians. Students are also calling for their individual universities to divest from firms that supply arms to Israel and in some cases sever links with universities in Israel. While the focus of the protest movement in the UK in recent months has been on mass marches in London and other cities, students occupied university buildings and held demonstrations, which have been on a smaller scale and have attracted less attention. ‘Like a war zone’: Emory University grapples with fallout from police response to protest Read more However, violent scenes from Columbia University and other US campuses over the past few days, broadcast across the world’s media, have triggered renewed anger among UK students and a sense of shared solidarity. David Maguire, the vice-chancellor of the University of East Anglia (UEA), said protests at UK universities had been generally peaceful but agreed that events like those in the US “could happen here”. In Sheffield, a group called the Sheffield Campus Coalition for Palestine , a coalition of “staff, students, and alumni” from the universities of Sheffield and Sheffield Hallam, began an encampment in solidarity with Palestinians. The SCCP said there had been a mass walkout from lectures, followed by a demonstration, and that many students were prepared to camp “indefinitely” in tents outside the student union. This followed an encampment at the University of Warwick, which began last week. “We’ve come prepared for the South Yorkshire weather,” said one research student taking part in the protest. “We’ve got gazebos and picnic tables and a generator for power. We’ll stay indefinitely until the university meets our demands.” In Newcastle, an organisation called Newcastle Apartheid off Campus said more than 40 students were taking part in an encampment and that a day of events and a rally was planned for 5pm on Wednesday. Organisers said students were outraged after the university apparently signed a partnership with Leonardo SpA, a defence and security company that they claim is responsible for producing the laser targeting system for the Israel Defense Forces’ F-35 fighter jets being used in the war in Gaza. “Although the student union has passed motions with 95% of people in favour of calling for the university to end its ties with Leonardo, and multiple ‘Leonardo off Campus’ protests on its campus, it is clear that the university has not listened to students’ concerns,” a statement said. The university was contacted for comment. The University of York, meanwhile, announced in a statement that it “no longer holds investments in companies that primarily make or sell weapons and defence-related products or services”. This followed prolonged pressure and protests from students and staff since the beginning of the war in Gaza. In Leeds, there was a May Day student walkout for Palestine, and in Bristol, university students established an encampment in Royal Fort Gardens opposite Senate House. This latest wave of action builds on earlier protests, which included student occupations of university buildings at the University of Manchester, Goldsmiths and at UCL. In Manchester, protesters said 50 students had set up camp, demanding that the university end its partnership with BAE Systems and other arms companies, cut its ties with Tel Aviv University and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and stop all “unethical research”. One first-year student said the US protests had highlighted “now is the time to act”. He said: “The courage that those students have shown faced with extreme violence from the police – it’s like a call that needs to be answered and picked up across the world.” Patrick Hackett, Manchester University’s registrar, secretary and chief operating officer, said it recognised the right of students and staff to protest within the law, but added that setting up camp in a city campus posed potential health and safety concerns “and ultimately is an unauthorised and unlawful use of the university’s campus”. He added: “You can be assured that we will do everything possible to maintain business as usual and we urge protesters to act accordingly. We are very conscious of the need to ensure that everyone on our campus remains safe and secure and this will be of utmost importance.” University vice-chancellors in the UK have been keeping a close eye on events on their own campuses and overseas, meeting regularly to discuss developments. Asked on BBC Radio 4 whether the scenes on campuses in North America could be replicated in the UK, the UEA’s Maguire said: “Of course it could happen here. “But this is a price that we pay for academic freedom and freedom of speech. Students have the opportunity, if they so wish, to protest about any issue. And I think we’ve got to remember that for a lot of students, these events have been completely cataclysmic. Any response from authorities must be commensurate and allowances need to be made.” A spokesperson for Universities UK, which speaks for 142 institutions, said: “Universities are monitoring the latest news on campus protests in the US and Canada. As with any high-profile issue, universities work hard to strike the right balance between ensuring the safety of all students and staff, including preventing harassment, and supporting lawful free speech on campus. We continue to meet regularly to discuss the latest position with university leaders.” Explore more on these topics Students Universities Israel-Gaza war Gaza Israel Palestine Protest news Share Reuse this content A fresh wave of student demonstrations and encampments are under way at UK universities in protest over the war in Gaza after violent scenes on campuses in the US, where hundreds have been arrested in a crackdown by police. Protests were due to take place in at least six universities on Wednesday, including Sheffield, Bristol, Leeds and Newcastle, with others expected to follow suit, in a show of solidarity with Palestinians. Students are also calling for their individual universities to divest from firms that supply arms to Israel and in some cases sever links with universities in Israel. While the focus of the protest movement in the UK in recent months has been on mass marches in London and other cities, students occupied university buildings and held demonstrations, which have been on a smaller scale and have attracted less attention. ‘Like a war zone’: Emory University grapples with fallout from police response to protest Read more However, violent scenes from Columbia University and other US campuses over the past few days, broadcast across the world’s media, have triggered renewed anger among UK students and a sense of shared solidarity. David Maguire, the vice-chancellor of the University of East Anglia (UEA), said protests at UK universities had been generally peaceful but agreed that events like those in the US “could happen here”. In Sheffield, a group called the Sheffield Campus Coalition for Palestine , a coalition of “staff, students, and alumni” from the universities of Sheffield and Sheffield Hallam, began an encampment in solidarity with Palestinians. The SCCP said there had been a mass walkout from lectures, followed by a demonstration, and that many students were prepared to camp “indefinitely” in tents outside the student union. This followed an encampment at the University of Warwick, which began last week. “We’ve come prepared for the South Yorkshire weather,” said one research student taking part in the protest. “We’ve got gazebos and picnic tables and a generator for power. We’ll stay indefinitely until the university meets our demands.” In Newcastle, an organisation called Newcastle Apartheid off Campus said more than 40 students were taking part in an encampment and that a day of events and a rally was planned for 5pm on Wednesday. Organisers said students were outraged after the university apparently signed a partnership with Leonardo SpA, a defence and security company that they claim is responsible for producing the laser targeting system for the Israel Defense Forces’ F-35 fighter jets being used in the war in Gaza. “Although the student union has passed motions with 95% of people in favour of calling for the university to end its ties with Leonardo, and multiple ‘Leonardo off Campus’ protests on its campus, it is clear that the university has not listened to students’ concerns,” a statement said. The university was contacted for comment. The University of York, meanwhile, announced in a statement that it “no longer holds investments in companies that primarily make or sell weapons and defence-related products or services”. This followed prolonged pressure and protests from students and staff since the beginning of the war in Gaza. In Leeds, there was a May Day student walkout for Palestine, and in Bristol, university students established an encampment in Royal Fort Gardens opposite Senate House. This latest wave of action builds on earlier protests, which included student occupations of university buildings at the University of Manchester, Goldsmiths and at UCL. In Manchester, protesters said 50 students had set up camp, demanding that the university end its partnership with BAE Systems and other arms companies, cut its ties with Tel Aviv University and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and stop all “unethical research”. One first-year student said the US protests had highlighted “now is the time to act”. He said: “The courage that those students have shown faced with extreme violence from the police – it’s like a call that needs to be answered and picked up across the world.” Patrick Hackett, Manchester University’s registrar, secretary and chief operating officer, said it recognised the right of students and staff to protest within the law, but added that setting up camp in a city campus posed potential health and safety concerns “and ultimately is an unauthorised and unlawful use of the university’s campus”. He added: “You can be assured that we will do everything possible to maintain business as usual and we urge protesters to act accordingly. We are very conscious of the need to ensure that everyone on our campus remains safe and secure and this will be of utmost importance.” University vice-chancellors in the UK have been keeping a close eye on events on their own campuses and overseas, meeting regularly to discuss developments. Asked on BBC Radio 4 whether the scenes on campuses in North America could be replicated in the UK, the UEA’s Maguire said: “Of course it could happen here. “But this is a price that we pay for academic freedom and freedom of speech. Students have the opportunity, if they so wish, to protest about any issue. And I think we’ve got to remember that for a lot of students, these events have been completely cataclysmic. Any response from authorities must be commensurate and allowances need to be made.” A spokesperson for Universities UK, which speaks for 142 institutions, said: “Universities are monitoring the latest news on campus protests in the US and Canada. As with any high-profile issue, universities work hard to strike the right balance between ensuring the safety of all students and staff, including preventing harassment, and supporting lawful free speech on campus. We continue to meet regularly to discuss the latest position with university leaders.” Explore more on these topics Students Universities Israel-Gaza war Gaza Israel Palestine Protest news Share Reuse this content A fresh wave of student demonstrations and encampments are under way at UK universities in protest over the war in Gaza after violent scenes on campuses in the US, where hundreds have been arrested in a crackdown by police. Protests were due to take place in at least six universities on Wednesday, including Sheffield, Bristol, Leeds and Newcastle, with others expected to follow suit, in a show of solidarity with Palestinians. Students are also calling for their individual universities to divest from firms that supply arms to Israel and in some cases sever links with universities in Israel. While the focus of the protest movement in the UK in recent months has been on mass marches in London and other cities, students occupied university buildings and held demonstrations, which have been on a smaller scale and have attracted less attention. ‘Like a war zone’: Emory University grapples with fallout from police response to protest Read more However, violent scenes from Columbia University and other US campuses over the past few days, broadcast across the world’s media, have triggered renewed anger among UK students and a sense of shared solidarity. David Maguire, the vice-chancellor of the University of East Anglia (UEA), said protests at UK universities had been generally peaceful but agreed that events like those in the US “could happen here”. In Sheffield, a group called the Sheffield Campus Coalition for Palestine , a coalition of “staff, students, and alumni” from the universities of Sheffield and Sheffield Hallam, began an encampment in solidarity with Palestinians. The SCCP said there had been a mass walkout from lectures, followed by a demonstration, and that many students were prepared to camp “indefinitely” in tents outside the student union. This followed an encampment at the University of Warwick, which began last week. “We’ve come prepared for the South Yorkshire weather,” said one research student taking part in the protest. “We’ve got gazebos and picnic tables and a generator for power. We’ll stay indefinitely until the university meets our demands.” In Newcastle, an organisation called Newcastle Apartheid off Campus said more than 40 students were taking part in an encampment and that a day of events and a rally was planned for 5pm on Wednesday. Organisers said students were outraged after the university apparently signed a partnership with Leonardo SpA, a defence and security company that they claim is responsible for producing the laser targeting system for the Israel Defense Forces’ F-35 fighter jets being used in the war in Gaza. “Although the student union has passed motions with 95% of people in favour of calling for the university to end its ties with Leonardo, and multiple ‘Leonardo off Campus’ protests on its campus, it is clear that the university has not listened to students’ concerns,” a statement said. The university was contacted for comment. The University of York, meanwhile, announced in a statement that it “no longer holds investments in companies that primarily make or sell weapons and defence-related products or services”. This followed prolonged pressure and protests from students and staff since the beginning of the war in Gaza. In Leeds, there was a May Day student walkout for Palestine, and in Bristol, university students established an encampment in Royal Fort Gardens opposite Senate House. This latest wave of action builds on earlier protests, which included student occupations of university buildings at the University of Manchester, Goldsmiths and at UCL. In Manchester, protesters said 50 students had set up camp, demanding that the university end its partnership with BAE Systems and other arms companies, cut its ties with Tel Aviv University and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and stop all “unethical research”. One first-year student said the US protests had highlighted “now is the time to act”. He said: “The courage that those students have shown faced with extreme violence from the police – it’s like a call that needs to be answered and picked up across the world.” Patrick Hackett, Manchester University’s registrar, secretary and chief operating officer, said it recognised the right of students and staff to protest within the law, but added that setting up camp in a city campus posed potential health and safety concerns “and ultimately is an unauthorised and unlawful use of the university’s campus”. He added: “You can be assured that we will do everything possible to maintain business as usual and we urge protesters to act accordingly. We are very conscious of the need to ensure that everyone on our campus remains safe and secure and this will be of utmost importance.” University vice-chancellors in the UK have been keeping a close eye on events on their own campuses and overseas, meeting regularly to discuss developments. Asked on BBC Radio 4 whether the scenes on campuses in North America could be replicated in the UK, the UEA’s Maguire said: “Of course it could happen here. “But this is a price that we pay for academic freedom and freedom of speech. Students have the opportunity, if they so wish, to protest about any issue. And I think we’ve got to remember that for a lot of students, these events have been completely cataclysmic. Any response from authorities must be commensurate and allowances need to be made.” A spokesperson for Universities UK, which speaks for 142 institutions, said: “Universities are monitoring the latest news on campus protests in the US and Canada. As with any high-profile issue, universities work hard to strike the right balance between ensuring the safety of all students and staff, including preventing harassment, and supporting lawful free speech on campus. We continue to meet regularly to discuss the latest position with university leaders.” A fresh wave of student demonstrations and encampments are under way at UK universities in protest over the war in Gaza after violent scenes on campuses in the US, where hundreds have been arrested in a crackdown by police. Protests were due to take place in at least six universities on Wednesday, including Sheffield, Bristol, Leeds and Newcastle, with others expected to follow suit, in a show of solidarity with Palestinians. Students are also calling for their individual universities to divest from firms that supply arms to Israel and in some cases sever links with universities in Israel. While the focus of the protest movement in the UK in recent months has been on mass marches in London and other cities, students occupied university buildings and held demonstrations, which have been on a smaller scale and have attracted less attention. ‘Like a war zone’: Emory University grapples with fallout from police response to protest Read more However, violent scenes from Columbia University and other US campuses over the past few days, broadcast across the world’s media, have triggered renewed anger among UK students and a sense of shared solidarity. David Maguire, the vice-chancellor of the University of East Anglia (UEA), said protests at UK universities had been generally peaceful but agreed that events like those in the US “could happen here”. In Sheffield, a group called the Sheffield Campus Coalition for Palestine , a coalition of “staff, students, and alumni” from the universities of Sheffield and Sheffield Hallam, began an encampment in solidarity with Palestinians. The SCCP said there had been a mass walkout from lectures, followed by a demonstration, and that many students were prepared to camp “indefinitely” in tents outside the student union. This followed an encampment at the University of Warwick, which began last week. “We’ve come prepared for the South Yorkshire weather,” said one research student taking part in the protest. “We’ve got gazebos and picnic tables and a generator for power. We’ll stay indefinitely until the university meets our demands.” In Newcastle, an organisation called Newcastle Apartheid off Campus said more than 40 students were taking part in an encampment and that a day of events and a rally was planned for 5pm on Wednesday. Organisers said students were outraged after the university apparently signed a partnership with Leonardo SpA, a defence and security company that they claim is responsible for producing the laser targeting system for the Israel Defense Forces’ F-35 fighter jets being used in the war in Gaza. “Although the student union has passed motions with 95% of people in favour of calling for the university to end its ties with Leonardo, and multiple ‘Leonardo off Campus’ protests on its campus, it is clear that the university has not listened to students’ concerns,” a statement said. The university was contacted for comment. The University of York, meanwhile, announced in a statement that it “no longer holds investments in companies that primarily make or sell weapons and defence-related products or services”. This followed prolonged pressure and protests from students and staff since the beginning of the war in Gaza. In Leeds, there was a May Day student walkout for Palestine, and in Bristol, university students established an encampment in Royal Fort Gardens opposite Senate House. This latest wave of action builds on earlier protests, which included student occupations of university buildings at the University of Manchester, Goldsmiths and at UCL. In Manchester, protesters said 50 students had set up camp, demanding that the university end its partnership with BAE Systems and other arms companies, cut its ties with Tel Aviv University and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and stop all “unethical research”. One first-year student said the US protests had highlighted “now is the time to act”. He said: “The courage that those students have shown faced with extreme violence from the police – it’s like a call that needs to be answered and picked up across the world.” Patrick Hackett, Manchester University’s registrar, secretary and chief operating officer, said it recognised the right of students and staff to protest within the law, but added that setting up camp in a city campus posed potential health and safety concerns “and ultimately is an unauthorised and unlawful use of the university’s campus”. He added: “You can be assured that we will do everything possible to maintain business as usual and we urge protesters to act accordingly. We are very conscious of the need to ensure that everyone on our campus remains safe and secure and this will be of utmost importance.” University vice-chancellors in the UK have been keeping a close eye on events on their own campuses and overseas, meeting regularly to discuss developments. Asked on BBC Radio 4 whether the scenes on campuses in North America could be replicated in the UK, the UEA’s Maguire said: “Of course it could happen here. “But this is a price that we pay for academic freedom and freedom of speech. Students have the opportunity, if they so wish, to protest about any issue. And I think we’ve got to remember that for a lot of students, these events have been completely cataclysmic. Any response from authorities must be commensurate and allowances need to be made.” A spokesperson for Universities UK, which speaks for 142 institutions, said: “Universities are monitoring the latest news on campus protests in the US and Canada. As with any high-profile issue, universities work hard to strike the right balance between ensuring the safety of all students and staff, including preventing harassment, and supporting lawful free speech on campus. We continue to meet regularly to discuss the latest position with university leaders.” A fresh wave of student demonstrations and encampments are under way at UK universities in protest over the war in Gaza after violent scenes on campuses in the US, where hundreds have been arrested in a crackdown by police. Protests were due to take place in at least six universities on Wednesday, including Sheffield, Bristol, Leeds and Newcastle, with others expected to follow suit, in a show of solidarity with Palestinians. Students are also calling for their individual universities to divest from firms that supply arms to Israel and in some cases sever links with universities in Israel. While the focus of the protest movement in the UK in recent months has been on mass marches in London and other cities, students occupied university buildings and held demonstrations, which have been on a smaller scale and have attracted less attention. ‘Like a war zone’: Emory University grapples with fallout from police response to protest Read more ‘Like a war zone’: Emory University grapples with fallout from police response to protest Read more ‘Like a war zone’: Emory University grapples with fallout from police response to protest Read more ‘Like a war zone’: Emory University grapples with fallout from police response to protest ‘Like a war zone’: Emory University grapples with fallout from police response to protest However, violent scenes from Columbia University and other US campuses over the past few days, broadcast across the world’s media, have triggered renewed anger among UK students and a sense of shared solidarity. David Maguire, the vice-chancellor of the University of East Anglia (UEA), said protests at UK universities had been generally peaceful but agreed that events like those in the US “could happen here”. In Sheffield, a group called the Sheffield Campus Coalition for Palestine , a coalition of “staff, students, and alumni” from the universities of Sheffield and Sheffield Hallam, began an encampment in solidarity with Palestinians. The SCCP said there had been a mass walkout from lectures, followed by a demonstration, and that many students were prepared to camp “indefinitely” in tents outside the student union. This followed an encampment at the University of Warwick, which began last week. “We’ve come prepared for the South Yorkshire weather,” said one research student taking part in the protest. “We’ve got gazebos and picnic tables and a generator for power. We’ll stay indefinitely until the university meets our demands.” In Newcastle, an organisation called Newcastle Apartheid off Campus said more than 40 students were taking part in an encampment and that a day of events and a rally was planned for 5pm on Wednesday. Organisers said students were outraged after the university apparently signed a partnership with Leonardo SpA, a defence and security company that they claim is responsible for producing the laser targeting system for the Israel Defense Forces’ F-35 fighter jets being used in the war in Gaza. “Although the student union has passed motions with 95% of people in favour of calling for the university to end its ties with Leonardo, and multiple ‘Leonardo off Campus’ protests on its campus, it is clear that the university has not listened to students’ concerns,” a statement said. The university was contacted for comment. The University of York, meanwhile, announced in a statement that it “no longer holds investments in companies that primarily make or sell weapons and defence-related products or services”. This followed prolonged pressure and protests from students and staff since the beginning of the war in Gaza. In Leeds, there was a May Day student walkout for Palestine, and in Bristol, university students established an encampment in Royal Fort Gardens opposite Senate House. This latest wave of action builds on earlier protests, which included student occupations of university buildings at the University of Manchester, Goldsmiths and at UCL. In Manchester, protesters said 50 students had set up camp, demanding that the university end its partnership with BAE Systems and other arms companies, cut its ties with Tel Aviv University and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and stop all “unethical research”. One first-year student said the US protests had highlighted “now is the time to act”. He said: “The courage that those students have shown faced with extreme violence from the police – it’s like a call that needs to be answered and picked up across the world.” Patrick Hackett, Manchester University’s registrar, secretary and chief operating officer, said it recognised the right of students and staff to protest within the law, but added that setting up camp in a city campus posed potential health and safety concerns “and ultimately is an unauthorised and unlawful use of the university’s campus”. He added: “You can be assured that we will do everything possible to maintain business as usual and we urge protesters to act accordingly. We are very conscious of the need to ensure that everyone on our campus remains safe and secure and this will be of utmost importance.” University vice-chancellors in the UK have been keeping a close eye on events on their own campuses and overseas, meeting regularly to discuss developments. Asked on BBC Radio 4 whether the scenes on campuses in North America could be replicated in the UK, the UEA’s Maguire said: “Of course it could happen here. “But this is a price that we pay for academic freedom and freedom of speech. Students have the opportunity, if they so wish, to protest about any issue. And I think we’ve got to remember that for a lot of students, these events have been completely cataclysmic. Any response from authorities must be commensurate and allowances need to be made.” A spokesperson for Universities UK, which speaks for 142 institutions, said: “Universities are monitoring the latest news on campus protests in the US and Canada. As with any high-profile issue, universities work hard to strike the right balance between ensuring the safety of all students and staff, including preventing harassment, and supporting lawful free speech on campus. We continue to meet regularly to discuss the latest position with university leaders.” Explore more on these topics Students Universities Israel-Gaza war Gaza Israel Palestine Protest news Share Reuse this content Students Universities Israel-Gaza war Gaza Israel Palestine Protest news |
Sunak backs police action as Jewish students condemn ‘toxic’ protests
Students at an encampment at Newcastle University protesting against Israeli military action in Gaza. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA View image in fullscreen Students at an encampment at Newcastle University protesting against Israeli military action in Gaza. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA This article is more than 1 year old Sunak backs police action as Jewish students condemn ‘toxic’ protests This article is more than 1 year old PM backs action in case of disorder on campuses after claims that pro-Palestinian protests create hostile atmosphere The prime minister has backed a police crackdown on any outbreak of disorder on university campuses after Jewish students said pro-Palestinian encampments were creating a “hostile and toxic atmosphere”. In recent days, new encampments have been set up at the universities of Manchester, Sheffield, Bristol and Newcastle, among others, after violent scenes on US campuses resulted in mass arrests of students and staff. The Union of Jewish Students issued a statement on Thursday in which they said Jewish students were angry, tired and hurt by “the continuous torrent of antisemitic hatred on campus” since the 7 October attacks by Hamas. The group, which claims to represent 9,000 Jewish students in the UK and Ireland, said: “While students have a right to protest, these encampments create a hostile and toxic atmosphere on campus for Jewish students.” It urged universities to fulfil their responsibilities. “Let us be clear. We will not stand for this hatred. It’s time that universities took their duty of care to Jewish students seriously,” it said. Rishi Sunak’s official spokesperson said on Thursday: “We have always been clear that Jewish students must feel safe on campuses. Whilst our universities rightfully pride themselves on their openness and tolerance and diversity, it is obviously absolutely clear that any antisemitism shouldn’t be tolerated. “While we firmly believe in the power of rigorous free speech and debate, the right to that does not include the right to harass others or incite others to violence or terrorism.” The spokesperson added: “Obviously the police already have extensive public order powers to tackle disorder at protests and will continue to have our full support in doing so if needed.” Students participating in the protests have insisted that the encampments, the latest of which began at University College London, were peaceful and opposed to all forms of hate speech including antisemitism. Stella Swain, youth and student campaigns officer at the Palestinian Solidarity campaign, said: “There is nothing to suggest these student encampments are anything but completely peaceful. Peaceful protest is completely legal in this country.” A research student participating in the encampment at the University of Sheffield, who wished to remain anonymous , added: “Some of the most committed campaigners for Palestinian liberation on our campus are Jewish students. We are a fundamentally anti-racist movement. The fight against antisemitism is part and parcel of the fight against racism.” More than 100 students at the University of Manchester spent Wednesday night in the “camp of resistance for Palestine” in Brunswick Park. A statement issued by Manchester students said: “Our camp is welcoming to people from all faiths, united by the unwavering solidarity with the Palestinians and their struggle for liberation and justice.” Unlike the violent scenes on US campuses, protests by UK students since the crisis in Gaza began have been generally peaceful and on a much smaller scale. There has, however, been an increase in reported incidents of antisemitism at UK universities, according to the Community Security Trust, a charity that protects British Jews from antisemitism and related threats. The leader of the Commons, Penny Mordaunt, earlier condemned the “disgusting” scenes in the US, which resulted in the arrest of more than 1,000 protesters, and said UK protesters should be met with an “extremely strict response” if they attempt to replicate the violent demonstrations seen on US university campuses. Mordaunt said: “I think, and I hope, all UK universities will be in no doubt about their responsibilities to all that attend their campuses and their facilities but, in particular, those communities that are feeling particularly under attack. “That is what we expect of them and we hope and expect that they will meet any such notion of similar protests with an extremely strict response.” Tom Southerden, Amnesty International UK’s law and human rights director, said it was vital that UK universities and the police respect and protect peaceful student protests on Gaza. “The authorities in the UK must avoid the dangerous clampdown we’ve witnessed at university campuses across the US.” Universities UK, which represents 142 institutions, said: “The priority of UUK and our member universities is to ensure that our campuses remain safe for all our students and staff. We will do everything we can to prevent hate crime, antisemitism, Islamophobia, and intolerance, and support our universities to respond appropriately if incidents involving these take place.” Explore more on these topics Students Universities Higher education Israel-Gaza war Protest Judaism Israel news Share Reuse this content Students at an encampment at Newcastle University protesting against Israeli military action in Gaza. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA View image in fullscreen Students at an encampment at Newcastle University protesting against Israeli military action in Gaza. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA This article is more than 1 year old Sunak backs police action as Jewish students condemn ‘toxic’ protests This article is more than 1 year old PM backs action in case of disorder on campuses after claims that pro-Palestinian protests create hostile atmosphere The prime minister has backed a police crackdown on any outbreak of disorder on university campuses after Jewish students said pro-Palestinian encampments were creating a “hostile and toxic atmosphere”. In recent days, new encampments have been set up at the universities of Manchester, Sheffield, Bristol and Newcastle, among others, after violent scenes on US campuses resulted in mass arrests of students and staff. The Union of Jewish Students issued a statement on Thursday in which they said Jewish students were angry, tired and hurt by “the continuous torrent of antisemitic hatred on campus” since the 7 October attacks by Hamas. The group, which claims to represent 9,000 Jewish students in the UK and Ireland, said: “While students have a right to protest, these encampments create a hostile and toxic atmosphere on campus for Jewish students.” It urged universities to fulfil their responsibilities. “Let us be clear. We will not stand for this hatred. It’s time that universities took their duty of care to Jewish students seriously,” it said. Rishi Sunak’s official spokesperson said on Thursday: “We have always been clear that Jewish students must feel safe on campuses. Whilst our universities rightfully pride themselves on their openness and tolerance and diversity, it is obviously absolutely clear that any antisemitism shouldn’t be tolerated. “While we firmly believe in the power of rigorous free speech and debate, the right to that does not include the right to harass others or incite others to violence or terrorism.” The spokesperson added: “Obviously the police already have extensive public order powers to tackle disorder at protests and will continue to have our full support in doing so if needed.” Students participating in the protests have insisted that the encampments, the latest of which began at University College London, were peaceful and opposed to all forms of hate speech including antisemitism. Stella Swain, youth and student campaigns officer at the Palestinian Solidarity campaign, said: “There is nothing to suggest these student encampments are anything but completely peaceful. Peaceful protest is completely legal in this country.” A research student participating in the encampment at the University of Sheffield, who wished to remain anonymous , added: “Some of the most committed campaigners for Palestinian liberation on our campus are Jewish students. We are a fundamentally anti-racist movement. The fight against antisemitism is part and parcel of the fight against racism.” More than 100 students at the University of Manchester spent Wednesday night in the “camp of resistance for Palestine” in Brunswick Park. A statement issued by Manchester students said: “Our camp is welcoming to people from all faiths, united by the unwavering solidarity with the Palestinians and their struggle for liberation and justice.” Unlike the violent scenes on US campuses, protests by UK students since the crisis in Gaza began have been generally peaceful and on a much smaller scale. There has, however, been an increase in reported incidents of antisemitism at UK universities, according to the Community Security Trust, a charity that protects British Jews from antisemitism and related threats. The leader of the Commons, Penny Mordaunt, earlier condemned the “disgusting” scenes in the US, which resulted in the arrest of more than 1,000 protesters, and said UK protesters should be met with an “extremely strict response” if they attempt to replicate the violent demonstrations seen on US university campuses. Mordaunt said: “I think, and I hope, all UK universities will be in no doubt about their responsibilities to all that attend their campuses and their facilities but, in particular, those communities that are feeling particularly under attack. “That is what we expect of them and we hope and expect that they will meet any such notion of similar protests with an extremely strict response.” Tom Southerden, Amnesty International UK’s law and human rights director, said it was vital that UK universities and the police respect and protect peaceful student protests on Gaza. “The authorities in the UK must avoid the dangerous clampdown we’ve witnessed at university campuses across the US.” Universities UK, which represents 142 institutions, said: “The priority of UUK and our member universities is to ensure that our campuses remain safe for all our students and staff. We will do everything we can to prevent hate crime, antisemitism, Islamophobia, and intolerance, and support our universities to respond appropriately if incidents involving these take place.” Explore more on these topics Students Universities Higher education Israel-Gaza war Protest Judaism Israel news Share Reuse this content Students at an encampment at Newcastle University protesting against Israeli military action in Gaza. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA View image in fullscreen Students at an encampment at Newcastle University protesting against Israeli military action in Gaza. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA Students at an encampment at Newcastle University protesting against Israeli military action in Gaza. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA View image in fullscreen Students at an encampment at Newcastle University protesting against Israeli military action in Gaza. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA Students at an encampment at Newcastle University protesting against Israeli military action in Gaza. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA View image in fullscreen Students at an encampment at Newcastle University protesting against Israeli military action in Gaza. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA Students at an encampment at Newcastle University protesting against Israeli military action in Gaza. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA View image in fullscreen Students at an encampment at Newcastle University protesting against Israeli military action in Gaza. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA Students at an encampment at Newcastle University protesting against Israeli military action in Gaza. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA Students at an encampment at Newcastle University protesting against Israeli military action in Gaza. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA This article is more than 1 year old Sunak backs police action as Jewish students condemn ‘toxic’ protests This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Sunak backs police action as Jewish students condemn ‘toxic’ protests This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Sunak backs police action as Jewish students condemn ‘toxic’ protests This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old PM backs action in case of disorder on campuses after claims that pro-Palestinian protests create hostile atmosphere PM backs action in case of disorder on campuses after claims that pro-Palestinian protests create hostile atmosphere PM backs action in case of disorder on campuses after claims that pro-Palestinian protests create hostile atmosphere The prime minister has backed a police crackdown on any outbreak of disorder on university campuses after Jewish students said pro-Palestinian encampments were creating a “hostile and toxic atmosphere”. In recent days, new encampments have been set up at the universities of Manchester, Sheffield, Bristol and Newcastle, among others, after violent scenes on US campuses resulted in mass arrests of students and staff. The Union of Jewish Students issued a statement on Thursday in which they said Jewish students were angry, tired and hurt by “the continuous torrent of antisemitic hatred on campus” since the 7 October attacks by Hamas. The group, which claims to represent 9,000 Jewish students in the UK and Ireland, said: “While students have a right to protest, these encampments create a hostile and toxic atmosphere on campus for Jewish students.” It urged universities to fulfil their responsibilities. “Let us be clear. We will not stand for this hatred. It’s time that universities took their duty of care to Jewish students seriously,” it said. Rishi Sunak’s official spokesperson said on Thursday: “We have always been clear that Jewish students must feel safe on campuses. Whilst our universities rightfully pride themselves on their openness and tolerance and diversity, it is obviously absolutely clear that any antisemitism shouldn’t be tolerated. “While we firmly believe in the power of rigorous free speech and debate, the right to that does not include the right to harass others or incite others to violence or terrorism.” The spokesperson added: “Obviously the police already have extensive public order powers to tackle disorder at protests and will continue to have our full support in doing so if needed.” Students participating in the protests have insisted that the encampments, the latest of which began at University College London, were peaceful and opposed to all forms of hate speech including antisemitism. Stella Swain, youth and student campaigns officer at the Palestinian Solidarity campaign, said: “There is nothing to suggest these student encampments are anything but completely peaceful. Peaceful protest is completely legal in this country.” A research student participating in the encampment at the University of Sheffield, who wished to remain anonymous , added: “Some of the most committed campaigners for Palestinian liberation on our campus are Jewish students. We are a fundamentally anti-racist movement. The fight against antisemitism is part and parcel of the fight against racism.” More than 100 students at the University of Manchester spent Wednesday night in the “camp of resistance for Palestine” in Brunswick Park. A statement issued by Manchester students said: “Our camp is welcoming to people from all faiths, united by the unwavering solidarity with the Palestinians and their struggle for liberation and justice.” Unlike the violent scenes on US campuses, protests by UK students since the crisis in Gaza began have been generally peaceful and on a much smaller scale. There has, however, been an increase in reported incidents of antisemitism at UK universities, according to the Community Security Trust, a charity that protects British Jews from antisemitism and related threats. The leader of the Commons, Penny Mordaunt, earlier condemned the “disgusting” scenes in the US, which resulted in the arrest of more than 1,000 protesters, and said UK protesters should be met with an “extremely strict response” if they attempt to replicate the violent demonstrations seen on US university campuses. Mordaunt said: “I think, and I hope, all UK universities will be in no doubt about their responsibilities to all that attend their campuses and their facilities but, in particular, those communities that are feeling particularly under attack. “That is what we expect of them and we hope and expect that they will meet any such notion of similar protests with an extremely strict response.” Tom Southerden, Amnesty International UK’s law and human rights director, said it was vital that UK universities and the police respect and protect peaceful student protests on Gaza. “The authorities in the UK must avoid the dangerous clampdown we’ve witnessed at university campuses across the US.” Universities UK, which represents 142 institutions, said: “The priority of UUK and our member universities is to ensure that our campuses remain safe for all our students and staff. We will do everything we can to prevent hate crime, antisemitism, Islamophobia, and intolerance, and support our universities to respond appropriately if incidents involving these take place.” Explore more on these topics Students Universities Higher education Israel-Gaza war Protest Judaism Israel news Share Reuse this content The prime minister has backed a police crackdown on any outbreak of disorder on university campuses after Jewish students said pro-Palestinian encampments were creating a “hostile and toxic atmosphere”. In recent days, new encampments have been set up at the universities of Manchester, Sheffield, Bristol and Newcastle, among others, after violent scenes on US campuses resulted in mass arrests of students and staff. The Union of Jewish Students issued a statement on Thursday in which they said Jewish students were angry, tired and hurt by “the continuous torrent of antisemitic hatred on campus” since the 7 October attacks by Hamas. The group, which claims to represent 9,000 Jewish students in the UK and Ireland, said: “While students have a right to protest, these encampments create a hostile and toxic atmosphere on campus for Jewish students.” It urged universities to fulfil their responsibilities. “Let us be clear. We will not stand for this hatred. It’s time that universities took their duty of care to Jewish students seriously,” it said. Rishi Sunak’s official spokesperson said on Thursday: “We have always been clear that Jewish students must feel safe on campuses. Whilst our universities rightfully pride themselves on their openness and tolerance and diversity, it is obviously absolutely clear that any antisemitism shouldn’t be tolerated. “While we firmly believe in the power of rigorous free speech and debate, the right to that does not include the right to harass others or incite others to violence or terrorism.” The spokesperson added: “Obviously the police already have extensive public order powers to tackle disorder at protests and will continue to have our full support in doing so if needed.” Students participating in the protests have insisted that the encampments, the latest of which began at University College London, were peaceful and opposed to all forms of hate speech including antisemitism. Stella Swain, youth and student campaigns officer at the Palestinian Solidarity campaign, said: “There is nothing to suggest these student encampments are anything but completely peaceful. Peaceful protest is completely legal in this country.” A research student participating in the encampment at the University of Sheffield, who wished to remain anonymous , added: “Some of the most committed campaigners for Palestinian liberation on our campus are Jewish students. We are a fundamentally anti-racist movement. The fight against antisemitism is part and parcel of the fight against racism.” More than 100 students at the University of Manchester spent Wednesday night in the “camp of resistance for Palestine” in Brunswick Park. A statement issued by Manchester students said: “Our camp is welcoming to people from all faiths, united by the unwavering solidarity with the Palestinians and their struggle for liberation and justice.” Unlike the violent scenes on US campuses, protests by UK students since the crisis in Gaza began have been generally peaceful and on a much smaller scale. There has, however, been an increase in reported incidents of antisemitism at UK universities, according to the Community Security Trust, a charity that protects British Jews from antisemitism and related threats. The leader of the Commons, Penny Mordaunt, earlier condemned the “disgusting” scenes in the US, which resulted in the arrest of more than 1,000 protesters, and said UK protesters should be met with an “extremely strict response” if they attempt to replicate the violent demonstrations seen on US university campuses. Mordaunt said: “I think, and I hope, all UK universities will be in no doubt about their responsibilities to all that attend their campuses and their facilities but, in particular, those communities that are feeling particularly under attack. “That is what we expect of them and we hope and expect that they will meet any such notion of similar protests with an extremely strict response.” Tom Southerden, Amnesty International UK’s law and human rights director, said it was vital that UK universities and the police respect and protect peaceful student protests on Gaza. “The authorities in the UK must avoid the dangerous clampdown we’ve witnessed at university campuses across the US.” Universities UK, which represents 142 institutions, said: “The priority of UUK and our member universities is to ensure that our campuses remain safe for all our students and staff. We will do everything we can to prevent hate crime, antisemitism, Islamophobia, and intolerance, and support our universities to respond appropriately if incidents involving these take place.” Explore more on these topics Students Universities Higher education Israel-Gaza war Protest Judaism Israel news Share Reuse this content The prime minister has backed a police crackdown on any outbreak of disorder on university campuses after Jewish students said pro-Palestinian encampments were creating a “hostile and toxic atmosphere”. In recent days, new encampments have been set up at the universities of Manchester, Sheffield, Bristol and Newcastle, among others, after violent scenes on US campuses resulted in mass arrests of students and staff. The Union of Jewish Students issued a statement on Thursday in which they said Jewish students were angry, tired and hurt by “the continuous torrent of antisemitic hatred on campus” since the 7 October attacks by Hamas. The group, which claims to represent 9,000 Jewish students in the UK and Ireland, said: “While students have a right to protest, these encampments create a hostile and toxic atmosphere on campus for Jewish students.” It urged universities to fulfil their responsibilities. “Let us be clear. We will not stand for this hatred. It’s time that universities took their duty of care to Jewish students seriously,” it said. Rishi Sunak’s official spokesperson said on Thursday: “We have always been clear that Jewish students must feel safe on campuses. Whilst our universities rightfully pride themselves on their openness and tolerance and diversity, it is obviously absolutely clear that any antisemitism shouldn’t be tolerated. “While we firmly believe in the power of rigorous free speech and debate, the right to that does not include the right to harass others or incite others to violence or terrorism.” The spokesperson added: “Obviously the police already have extensive public order powers to tackle disorder at protests and will continue to have our full support in doing so if needed.” Students participating in the protests have insisted that the encampments, the latest of which began at University College London, were peaceful and opposed to all forms of hate speech including antisemitism. Stella Swain, youth and student campaigns officer at the Palestinian Solidarity campaign, said: “There is nothing to suggest these student encampments are anything but completely peaceful. Peaceful protest is completely legal in this country.” A research student participating in the encampment at the University of Sheffield, who wished to remain anonymous , added: “Some of the most committed campaigners for Palestinian liberation on our campus are Jewish students. We are a fundamentally anti-racist movement. The fight against antisemitism is part and parcel of the fight against racism.” More than 100 students at the University of Manchester spent Wednesday night in the “camp of resistance for Palestine” in Brunswick Park. A statement issued by Manchester students said: “Our camp is welcoming to people from all faiths, united by the unwavering solidarity with the Palestinians and their struggle for liberation and justice.” Unlike the violent scenes on US campuses, protests by UK students since the crisis in Gaza began have been generally peaceful and on a much smaller scale. There has, however, been an increase in reported incidents of antisemitism at UK universities, according to the Community Security Trust, a charity that protects British Jews from antisemitism and related threats. The leader of the Commons, Penny Mordaunt, earlier condemned the “disgusting” scenes in the US, which resulted in the arrest of more than 1,000 protesters, and said UK protesters should be met with an “extremely strict response” if they attempt to replicate the violent demonstrations seen on US university campuses. Mordaunt said: “I think, and I hope, all UK universities will be in no doubt about their responsibilities to all that attend their campuses and their facilities but, in particular, those communities that are feeling particularly under attack. “That is what we expect of them and we hope and expect that they will meet any such notion of similar protests with an extremely strict response.” Tom Southerden, Amnesty International UK’s law and human rights director, said it was vital that UK universities and the police respect and protect peaceful student protests on Gaza. “The authorities in the UK must avoid the dangerous clampdown we’ve witnessed at university campuses across the US.” Universities UK, which represents 142 institutions, said: “The priority of UUK and our member universities is to ensure that our campuses remain safe for all our students and staff. We will do everything we can to prevent hate crime, antisemitism, Islamophobia, and intolerance, and support our universities to respond appropriately if incidents involving these take place.” The prime minister has backed a police crackdown on any outbreak of disorder on university campuses after Jewish students said pro-Palestinian encampments were creating a “hostile and toxic atmosphere”. In recent days, new encampments have been set up at the universities of Manchester, Sheffield, Bristol and Newcastle, among others, after violent scenes on US campuses resulted in mass arrests of students and staff. The Union of Jewish Students issued a statement on Thursday in which they said Jewish students were angry, tired and hurt by “the continuous torrent of antisemitic hatred on campus” since the 7 October attacks by Hamas. The group, which claims to represent 9,000 Jewish students in the UK and Ireland, said: “While students have a right to protest, these encampments create a hostile and toxic atmosphere on campus for Jewish students.” It urged universities to fulfil their responsibilities. “Let us be clear. We will not stand for this hatred. It’s time that universities took their duty of care to Jewish students seriously,” it said. Rishi Sunak’s official spokesperson said on Thursday: “We have always been clear that Jewish students must feel safe on campuses. Whilst our universities rightfully pride themselves on their openness and tolerance and diversity, it is obviously absolutely clear that any antisemitism shouldn’t be tolerated. “While we firmly believe in the power of rigorous free speech and debate, the right to that does not include the right to harass others or incite others to violence or terrorism.” The spokesperson added: “Obviously the police already have extensive public order powers to tackle disorder at protests and will continue to have our full support in doing so if needed.” Students participating in the protests have insisted that the encampments, the latest of which began at University College London, were peaceful and opposed to all forms of hate speech including antisemitism. Stella Swain, youth and student campaigns officer at the Palestinian Solidarity campaign, said: “There is nothing to suggest these student encampments are anything but completely peaceful. Peaceful protest is completely legal in this country.” A research student participating in the encampment at the University of Sheffield, who wished to remain anonymous , added: “Some of the most committed campaigners for Palestinian liberation on our campus are Jewish students. We are a fundamentally anti-racist movement. The fight against antisemitism is part and parcel of the fight against racism.” More than 100 students at the University of Manchester spent Wednesday night in the “camp of resistance for Palestine” in Brunswick Park. A statement issued by Manchester students said: “Our camp is welcoming to people from all faiths, united by the unwavering solidarity with the Palestinians and their struggle for liberation and justice.” Unlike the violent scenes on US campuses, protests by UK students since the crisis in Gaza began have been generally peaceful and on a much smaller scale. There has, however, been an increase in reported incidents of antisemitism at UK universities, according to the Community Security Trust, a charity that protects British Jews from antisemitism and related threats. The leader of the Commons, Penny Mordaunt, earlier condemned the “disgusting” scenes in the US, which resulted in the arrest of more than 1,000 protesters, and said UK protesters should be met with an “extremely strict response” if they attempt to replicate the violent demonstrations seen on US university campuses. Mordaunt said: “I think, and I hope, all UK universities will be in no doubt about their responsibilities to all that attend their campuses and their facilities but, in particular, those communities that are feeling particularly under attack. “That is what we expect of them and we hope and expect that they will meet any such notion of similar protests with an extremely strict response.” Tom Southerden, Amnesty International UK’s law and human rights director, said it was vital that UK universities and the police respect and protect peaceful student protests on Gaza. “The authorities in the UK must avoid the dangerous clampdown we’ve witnessed at university campuses across the US.” Universities UK, which represents 142 institutions, said: “The priority of UUK and our member universities is to ensure that our campuses remain safe for all our students and staff. We will do everything we can to prevent hate crime, antisemitism, Islamophobia, and intolerance, and support our universities to respond appropriately if incidents involving these take place.” The prime minister has backed a police crackdown on any outbreak of disorder on university campuses after Jewish students said pro-Palestinian encampments were creating a “hostile and toxic atmosphere”. In recent days, new encampments have been set up at the universities of Manchester, Sheffield, Bristol and Newcastle, among others, after violent scenes on US campuses resulted in mass arrests of students and staff. The Union of Jewish Students issued a statement on Thursday in which they said Jewish students were angry, tired and hurt by “the continuous torrent of antisemitic hatred on campus” since the 7 October attacks by Hamas. The group, which claims to represent 9,000 Jewish students in the UK and Ireland, said: “While students have a right to protest, these encampments create a hostile and toxic atmosphere on campus for Jewish students.” It urged universities to fulfil their responsibilities. “Let us be clear. We will not stand for this hatred. It’s time that universities took their duty of care to Jewish students seriously,” it said. Rishi Sunak’s official spokesperson said on Thursday: “We have always been clear that Jewish students must feel safe on campuses. Whilst our universities rightfully pride themselves on their openness and tolerance and diversity, it is obviously absolutely clear that any antisemitism shouldn’t be tolerated. “While we firmly believe in the power of rigorous free speech and debate, the right to that does not include the right to harass others or incite others to violence or terrorism.” The spokesperson added: “Obviously the police already have extensive public order powers to tackle disorder at protests and will continue to have our full support in doing so if needed.” Students participating in the protests have insisted that the encampments, the latest of which began at University College London, were peaceful and opposed to all forms of hate speech including antisemitism. Stella Swain, youth and student campaigns officer at the Palestinian Solidarity campaign, said: “There is nothing to suggest these student encampments are anything but completely peaceful. Peaceful protest is completely legal in this country.” A research student participating in the encampment at the University of Sheffield, who wished to remain anonymous , added: “Some of the most committed campaigners for Palestinian liberation on our campus are Jewish students. We are a fundamentally anti-racist movement. The fight against antisemitism is part and parcel of the fight against racism.” More than 100 students at the University of Manchester spent Wednesday night in the “camp of resistance for Palestine” in Brunswick Park. A statement issued by Manchester students said: “Our camp is welcoming to people from all faiths, united by the unwavering solidarity with the Palestinians and their struggle for liberation and justice.” Unlike the violent scenes on US campuses, protests by UK students since the crisis in Gaza began have been generally peaceful and on a much smaller scale. There has, however, been an increase in reported incidents of antisemitism at UK universities, according to the Community Security Trust, a charity that protects British Jews from antisemitism and related threats. The leader of the Commons, Penny Mordaunt, earlier condemned the “disgusting” scenes in the US, which resulted in the arrest of more than 1,000 protesters, and said UK protesters should be met with an “extremely strict response” if they attempt to replicate the violent demonstrations seen on US university campuses. Mordaunt said: “I think, and I hope, all UK universities will be in no doubt about their responsibilities to all that attend their campuses and their facilities but, in particular, those communities that are feeling particularly under attack. “That is what we expect of them and we hope and expect that they will meet any such notion of similar protests with an extremely strict response.” Tom Southerden, Amnesty International UK’s law and human rights director, said it was vital that UK universities and the police respect and protect peaceful student protests on Gaza. “The authorities in the UK must avoid the dangerous clampdown we’ve witnessed at university campuses across the US.” Universities UK, which represents 142 institutions, said: “The priority of UUK and our member universities is to ensure that our campuses remain safe for all our students and staff. We will do everything we can to prevent hate crime, antisemitism, Islamophobia, and intolerance, and support our universities to respond appropriately if incidents involving these take place.” Explore more on these topics Students Universities Higher education Israel-Gaza war Protest Judaism Israel news Share Reuse this content Students Universities Higher education Israel-Gaza war Protest Judaism Israel news |
‘Those two weeks felt how the world should be’: the young single mums who took on the housing crisis – and won
‘Everyone felt so empowered’ … Janice Graham and Jasmin Stone. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian View image in fullscreen ‘Everyone felt so empowered’ … Janice Graham and Jasmin Stone. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old ‘Those two weeks felt how the world should be’: the young single mums who took on the housing crisis – and won This article is more than 1 year old When a group of teenage mothers were evicted from their homeless hostel, Focus E15, they took over a tower block of empty council flats in protest. Ten years on, they are still fighting O n 23 September 2014, protesters entered a disused block of council flats on the Carpenters estate in Newham, east London . The group, Focus E15, was made up of young single mums who had been evicted from a local homeless hostel a year earlier – and campaigners who had fought the eviction with them. When they entered the flats, they were shocked to find that some had newly installed kitchens and the electricity and water were still on. “We were very angry,” says Jasmin Stone, one of the single mums, who was 20 at the time. “People would cut off their arm to have a home there, and more than 400 flats were empty in the middle of a housing crisis.” From the balcony, they unfurled banners reading: “These people need homes, these homes need people.” They didn’t know how long they’d be able to keep the occupation going. They needn’t have worried. Their campaign won the attention of the national media , and it captured the public imagination: a microcosm of the housing crisis steadily engulfing more areas as austerity began to bite. The occupation had the atmosphere of a street party. The young mums danced and played with their children. People shared their skills, coming down to run clothing swaps and bike-fixing workshops, or to perform comedy and music. “We didn’t realise that that was going to happen,” says Stone. “It was beautiful. Those two weeks felt like how the world should be.” The almost empty estate was emblematic of the social cleansing taking place all over the capital, with people moved out of council housing to make way for private developments. The mums had been evicted from their own accommodation – a hostel called Focus E15, which became the name of their campaign group – after Newham council cut funding to the building’s mother and baby unit. They had been told they would have to accept private rented accommodation as far away as Birmingham and Manchester as there was nowhere to house them nearby. Now they wanted to draw attention to the same thing happening elsewhere. Newham council planned to sell the land on the Carpenters estate to a private developer, and had been systematically moving people out for years. By 2014, there were just 36 leaseholders and 21 tenants remaining, with hundreds of homes unoccupied. View image in fullscreen ‘We were very angry’ … Carpenters estate during the occupation in 2014. Photograph: Jess Hurd/The Guardian The council tried hard to evict the protesters. After a hearing at Bow court, Focus E15 agreed to leave on 7 October. Standing on the steps of the court, Stone and another young mum, Sam Middleton, delivered a statement to a large crowd of journalists and supporters. They held up their fists and declared: “This is the beginning of the end of the housing crisis.” It has been 10 years since that protest and the housing crisis has only got more acute. Today there are more than a million households on waiting lists for social housing in England, and more than 200,000 trapped in temporary accommodation, often in substandard conditions. The demolition and repurposing of social housing that the occupation highlighted has continued at speed, with a loss of well over 100,000 social homes in the past decade. I meet Stone and the others who occupied the estate a decade ago. Over giant mugs of tea in the back room of a cafe in Stratford, east London, we talk about their continuing fight for housing justice, and where it all began. F ocus E15 was formed a year before the Carpenters estate occupation, when the 29 young single mums living were served with their eviction notices. When Stone received notice in August 2013, she was 19 and her daughter was one. “We were a little community, so we were scared and angry for each other, not just ourselves,” she remembers. Stone’s entire family was in Newham and she couldn’t imagine leaving. “She was getting depressed. I was getting depressed, worried about her and the baby getting sent miles away,” says Stone’s mother, Janice Graham. Graham suggested Stone start a petition. They didn’t have a printer, so Stone wrote the petition on a piece of paper, and knocked on the doors of the other mums. They all signed. “We had no political history, and no idea what to do with the petition,” says Stone. The young women organised a meeting of all the building’s residents, handwriting more than 200 notes to slip through doors. (Along with the 29 mothers, the hostel housed other young people). But they were at a loss for what to do next. Then a group of them came across a street stall outside the Wilko on Stratford Broadway, where the Revolutionary Communist Group (RCG) was handing out leaflets about the bedroom tax. Hannah Caller was leafletting that day. “We were doing this quite boring stall, and along came this army of young women with babies, and some were pregnant,” Caller says. “They had a bit of paper with signatures in pencil. We had the resources to campaign so we said: ‘We can get you a petition board, we can print off your demands – and buy some pens.’ It was the power of collaboration.” The young women realised that their eviction was part of a wider crisis. “It wasn’t just us – it was a systemic problem,” says Stone. Activists from the RCG got the local press to come to the hostel. The group adopted the slogan: “Social housing, not social cleansing”. View image in fullscreen ‘Educate, organise – that’s our motto’ … members of Focus E15 outside Sylvia’s Corner today, with a banner designed by Andrew Cooper. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian The Focus E15 mums started to take part in the street stall (“We made your stall better,” Middleton told the communists) and protested. One day, they took the protest to an Olympic Village show flat – a luxury apartment for prospective buyers – and set up a children’s party. “It was very quiet when we got in, and then so loud with the poppers and all the babies and children,” says Stone. They wore party hats and handed out cake. The police came, but were reluctant to intervene. “They didn’t know what to do with all these young women and babies in buggies,” says Caller. Stone interjects, laughing: “Not just women – teenage women with hormones everywhere, pregnant or who had just had a baby.” They marched from the flat to the council’s housing office. “Everyone felt so empowered,” says Stone. “It was turning the depression into anger and feeling strong when you felt really, really weak.” Less than six months after the campaign began, Newham council agreed to rehouse all the young women concerned within the borough – but in private rented accommodation, not council flats. Given their own situation was still tenuous, and with a fresh awareness of the housing crisis, the women wanted to fight on. “You taste victory, and think: we’ve got some power to push it further,” says Saskia O’Hara, another RCG member who got involved with Focus E15. Caller adds: “No one was going to stop there.” W hile many of the single mothers have drifted away over time, Stone and her mum remain at the forefront a decade later, as do others who founded the group in 2013. “That campaign grew out of this amazing alliance of mothers and young pregnant women from the hostel, along with communists, anarchists, community groups,” says Caller. Getting involved was transformative for people beyond the group of young mothers, too. “I was an apprentice and a carpenter, and I hadn’t been able to access political movements,” says Ruth Sutcliffe, who joined Focus E15 in 2013. “To come across this group of people with different life experiences, ideas, knowledge, it felt like something that was really possible to be part of.” Focus E15 is still entirely run by volunteers. The strategy committee is made up of a group of core campaigners, with people coming and going as availability allows. A few years back they were awarded some funding which they used to rent a corner shop. Named Sylvia’s Corner, in honour of Sylvia Pankhurst, it is used as a community space. Every Saturday, Focus E15 continues to run a street stall to make contact with new people. “Educate, organise – that’s our motto,” says Stone. People might join Focus E15 because they need support with their own housing situation; the group sometimes tries to get a particular decision about someone’s housing overturned. But they also protest more widely about housing justice, highlighting poor conditions in specific buildings, or unfair local policy. “What connects all our campaigning is the trap of temporary accommodation,” says O’Hara. “It’s essentially replaced council housing, and sustainable housing for working-class people is just not part of the political conversation.” View image in fullscreen ‘I didn’t know how to fight for my rights, or what my rights were’ … Sadaf Afzal and her son Khizar. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian The Focus E15 hostel – renamed Brimstone House – is today used by the council as temporary accommodation. Stone remembers poor conditions when she lived there in 2013, and they have significantly worsened. Cramped units originally designed for a single person are now occupied by entire families, sometimes for months or years. In 2021, Sadaf Afzal came across Focus E15’s street stall. She was living in the hostel with her son in a small single room, and had been offered accommodation in Manchester. She didn’t want to leave London, her home for more than 20 years. Meeting the group was a lightbulb moment for her. “I didn’t know how to fight for my rights, or what my rights were,” she says. She got involved with the campaign and, like Stone and her friends had a decade earlier, mobilised other people in the building to join protests about their living conditions. In May 2022, Afzal attended Newham council’s general meeting with other Focus E15 activists. As the meeting proceeded, the group got up and chanted: “Brimstone House is no place for children!” Afzal says she had never done anything like this before, and that it was exhilarating. Newham’s mayor, Rokhsana Fiaz, was sympathetic, and promised that all families would be moved out of the building within a year. This has not happened. Afzal and her eight-year-old son Khizar have now been there for two and a half years. Recently, the council offered her a flat. It was 45 minutes from her son’s school, and on the third floor of a building. Afzal struggles with stairs owing to a back problem. The council warned that if she didn’t accept the offer, she would be making herself intentionally homeless. “People have very little time to make a decision and if they say no, the system becomes extremely harsh, withdrawing offers and discharging all responsibility,” says Ayesha Taylor, a member of Focus E15’s strategy group. She has also been involved since the group’s inception. As a support worker in primary schools, she’d long noticed the impact of insecure housing on children, and the campaign “was an expression of what I was seeing”. View image in fullscreen ‘We were a little community, so we were scared and angry for each other, not just ourselves.’ Photograph: Jess Hurd/The Guardian Fired up, Afzal took a risk and refused the offer: “I was worried inside, if they evict me what will happen? But I said to myself: ‘No. I have to stand my ground. I have to fight.’” She submitted medical evidence about her back problems and wrote an email outlining the impact of repeated school moves on her son. After a meeting with Afzal, the council agreed to retract the offer, without deeming her intentionally homeless. Although she does not know how long it will be before the council offers her another flat, it does mean they will offer one eventually. As she tells me this, Afzal’s face breaks into a huge smile, and the women around the table cheer. “We’re not going to sit here and say we’ve solved the housing crisis, because we haven’t, but, my God, do we celebrate victories,” says O’Hara. The question of what constitutes victory is complicated when the wider context of housing is so disastrous. When the 29 single mums who started the campaign were rehoused in Newham in 2014, they called it a “partial victory”: their privately rented flats were expensive, some of them were grotty, and they only had tenancies for 12 months. When Middleton moved in to hers, she found a mouse skeleton. Stone’s apartment had a sewage leak. “It was disgusting, just completely unsanitary,” she says. The Focus E15 protests – in pictures Read more A couple of years later, Stone left London for Colchester in Essex. It was a painful decision, but she didn’t want her daughter to have to keep moving. “It breaks my heart,” she says. “All my family are in Newham. I would have done anything to stay, and I’d do anything to move back.” Many of the other Focus E15 mums have also left London. Though most are no longer involved with the campaign, they keep in touch; some of them turned 30 this year. When she thinks back to the occupation of the Carpenters estate, Stone is angry that more than half of the flats are still unoccupied. Newham council did not end up selling the land – not least because of lengthy campaigning by residents. In 2020, the council approved developer Populo Living to carry out “a resident-led planning redesign process to restore the estate”, but progress has been slow. “The estate had green space, parks. Today it’s like working-class people don’t deserve that kind of living, we are put in a little tiny box and told to put up with it,” says Stone. “But there are ways of resisting and fighting back. And we’ll keep fighting.” Explore more on these topics Social housing Housing Communities London Protest Women Homelessness features Share Reuse this content ‘Everyone felt so empowered’ … Janice Graham and Jasmin Stone. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian View image in fullscreen ‘Everyone felt so empowered’ … Janice Graham and Jasmin Stone. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old ‘Those two weeks felt how the world should be’: the young single mums who took on the housing crisis – and won This article is more than 1 year old When a group of teenage mothers were evicted from their homeless hostel, Focus E15, they took over a tower block of empty council flats in protest. Ten years on, they are still fighting O n 23 September 2014, protesters entered a disused block of council flats on the Carpenters estate in Newham, east London . The group, Focus E15, was made up of young single mums who had been evicted from a local homeless hostel a year earlier – and campaigners who had fought the eviction with them. When they entered the flats, they were shocked to find that some had newly installed kitchens and the electricity and water were still on. “We were very angry,” says Jasmin Stone, one of the single mums, who was 20 at the time. “People would cut off their arm to have a home there, and more than 400 flats were empty in the middle of a housing crisis.” From the balcony, they unfurled banners reading: “These people need homes, these homes need people.” They didn’t know how long they’d be able to keep the occupation going. They needn’t have worried. Their campaign won the attention of the national media , and it captured the public imagination: a microcosm of the housing crisis steadily engulfing more areas as austerity began to bite. The occupation had the atmosphere of a street party. The young mums danced and played with their children. People shared their skills, coming down to run clothing swaps and bike-fixing workshops, or to perform comedy and music. “We didn’t realise that that was going to happen,” says Stone. “It was beautiful. Those two weeks felt like how the world should be.” The almost empty estate was emblematic of the social cleansing taking place all over the capital, with people moved out of council housing to make way for private developments. The mums had been evicted from their own accommodation – a hostel called Focus E15, which became the name of their campaign group – after Newham council cut funding to the building’s mother and baby unit. They had been told they would have to accept private rented accommodation as far away as Birmingham and Manchester as there was nowhere to house them nearby. Now they wanted to draw attention to the same thing happening elsewhere. Newham council planned to sell the land on the Carpenters estate to a private developer, and had been systematically moving people out for years. By 2014, there were just 36 leaseholders and 21 tenants remaining, with hundreds of homes unoccupied. View image in fullscreen ‘We were very angry’ … Carpenters estate during the occupation in 2014. Photograph: Jess Hurd/The Guardian The council tried hard to evict the protesters. After a hearing at Bow court, Focus E15 agreed to leave on 7 October. Standing on the steps of the court, Stone and another young mum, Sam Middleton, delivered a statement to a large crowd of journalists and supporters. They held up their fists and declared: “This is the beginning of the end of the housing crisis.” It has been 10 years since that protest and the housing crisis has only got more acute. Today there are more than a million households on waiting lists for social housing in England, and more than 200,000 trapped in temporary accommodation, often in substandard conditions. The demolition and repurposing of social housing that the occupation highlighted has continued at speed, with a loss of well over 100,000 social homes in the past decade. I meet Stone and the others who occupied the estate a decade ago. Over giant mugs of tea in the back room of a cafe in Stratford, east London, we talk about their continuing fight for housing justice, and where it all began. F ocus E15 was formed a year before the Carpenters estate occupation, when the 29 young single mums living were served with their eviction notices. When Stone received notice in August 2013, she was 19 and her daughter was one. “We were a little community, so we were scared and angry for each other, not just ourselves,” she remembers. Stone’s entire family was in Newham and she couldn’t imagine leaving. “She was getting depressed. I was getting depressed, worried about her and the baby getting sent miles away,” says Stone’s mother, Janice Graham. Graham suggested Stone start a petition. They didn’t have a printer, so Stone wrote the petition on a piece of paper, and knocked on the doors of the other mums. They all signed. “We had no political history, and no idea what to do with the petition,” says Stone. The young women organised a meeting of all the building’s residents, handwriting more than 200 notes to slip through doors. (Along with the 29 mothers, the hostel housed other young people). But they were at a loss for what to do next. Then a group of them came across a street stall outside the Wilko on Stratford Broadway, where the Revolutionary Communist Group (RCG) was handing out leaflets about the bedroom tax. Hannah Caller was leafletting that day. “We were doing this quite boring stall, and along came this army of young women with babies, and some were pregnant,” Caller says. “They had a bit of paper with signatures in pencil. We had the resources to campaign so we said: ‘We can get you a petition board, we can print off your demands – and buy some pens.’ It was the power of collaboration.” The young women realised that their eviction was part of a wider crisis. “It wasn’t just us – it was a systemic problem,” says Stone. Activists from the RCG got the local press to come to the hostel. The group adopted the slogan: “Social housing, not social cleansing”. View image in fullscreen ‘Educate, organise – that’s our motto’ … members of Focus E15 outside Sylvia’s Corner today, with a banner designed by Andrew Cooper. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian The Focus E15 mums started to take part in the street stall (“We made your stall better,” Middleton told the communists) and protested. One day, they took the protest to an Olympic Village show flat – a luxury apartment for prospective buyers – and set up a children’s party. “It was very quiet when we got in, and then so loud with the poppers and all the babies and children,” says Stone. They wore party hats and handed out cake. The police came, but were reluctant to intervene. “They didn’t know what to do with all these young women and babies in buggies,” says Caller. Stone interjects, laughing: “Not just women – teenage women with hormones everywhere, pregnant or who had just had a baby.” They marched from the flat to the council’s housing office. “Everyone felt so empowered,” says Stone. “It was turning the depression into anger and feeling strong when you felt really, really weak.” Less than six months after the campaign began, Newham council agreed to rehouse all the young women concerned within the borough – but in private rented accommodation, not council flats. Given their own situation was still tenuous, and with a fresh awareness of the housing crisis, the women wanted to fight on. “You taste victory, and think: we’ve got some power to push it further,” says Saskia O’Hara, another RCG member who got involved with Focus E15. Caller adds: “No one was going to stop there.” W hile many of the single mothers have drifted away over time, Stone and her mum remain at the forefront a decade later, as do others who founded the group in 2013. “That campaign grew out of this amazing alliance of mothers and young pregnant women from the hostel, along with communists, anarchists, community groups,” says Caller. Getting involved was transformative for people beyond the group of young mothers, too. “I was an apprentice and a carpenter, and I hadn’t been able to access political movements,” says Ruth Sutcliffe, who joined Focus E15 in 2013. “To come across this group of people with different life experiences, ideas, knowledge, it felt like something that was really possible to be part of.” Focus E15 is still entirely run by volunteers. The strategy committee is made up of a group of core campaigners, with people coming and going as availability allows. A few years back they were awarded some funding which they used to rent a corner shop. Named Sylvia’s Corner, in honour of Sylvia Pankhurst, it is used as a community space. Every Saturday, Focus E15 continues to run a street stall to make contact with new people. “Educate, organise – that’s our motto,” says Stone. People might join Focus E15 because they need support with their own housing situation; the group sometimes tries to get a particular decision about someone’s housing overturned. But they also protest more widely about housing justice, highlighting poor conditions in specific buildings, or unfair local policy. “What connects all our campaigning is the trap of temporary accommodation,” says O’Hara. “It’s essentially replaced council housing, and sustainable housing for working-class people is just not part of the political conversation.” View image in fullscreen ‘I didn’t know how to fight for my rights, or what my rights were’ … Sadaf Afzal and her son Khizar. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian The Focus E15 hostel – renamed Brimstone House – is today used by the council as temporary accommodation. Stone remembers poor conditions when she lived there in 2013, and they have significantly worsened. Cramped units originally designed for a single person are now occupied by entire families, sometimes for months or years. In 2021, Sadaf Afzal came across Focus E15’s street stall. She was living in the hostel with her son in a small single room, and had been offered accommodation in Manchester. She didn’t want to leave London, her home for more than 20 years. Meeting the group was a lightbulb moment for her. “I didn’t know how to fight for my rights, or what my rights were,” she says. She got involved with the campaign and, like Stone and her friends had a decade earlier, mobilised other people in the building to join protests about their living conditions. In May 2022, Afzal attended Newham council’s general meeting with other Focus E15 activists. As the meeting proceeded, the group got up and chanted: “Brimstone House is no place for children!” Afzal says she had never done anything like this before, and that it was exhilarating. Newham’s mayor, Rokhsana Fiaz, was sympathetic, and promised that all families would be moved out of the building within a year. This has not happened. Afzal and her eight-year-old son Khizar have now been there for two and a half years. Recently, the council offered her a flat. It was 45 minutes from her son’s school, and on the third floor of a building. Afzal struggles with stairs owing to a back problem. The council warned that if she didn’t accept the offer, she would be making herself intentionally homeless. “People have very little time to make a decision and if they say no, the system becomes extremely harsh, withdrawing offers and discharging all responsibility,” says Ayesha Taylor, a member of Focus E15’s strategy group. She has also been involved since the group’s inception. As a support worker in primary schools, she’d long noticed the impact of insecure housing on children, and the campaign “was an expression of what I was seeing”. View image in fullscreen ‘We were a little community, so we were scared and angry for each other, not just ourselves.’ Photograph: Jess Hurd/The Guardian Fired up, Afzal took a risk and refused the offer: “I was worried inside, if they evict me what will happen? But I said to myself: ‘No. I have to stand my ground. I have to fight.’” She submitted medical evidence about her back problems and wrote an email outlining the impact of repeated school moves on her son. After a meeting with Afzal, the council agreed to retract the offer, without deeming her intentionally homeless. Although she does not know how long it will be before the council offers her another flat, it does mean they will offer one eventually. As she tells me this, Afzal’s face breaks into a huge smile, and the women around the table cheer. “We’re not going to sit here and say we’ve solved the housing crisis, because we haven’t, but, my God, do we celebrate victories,” says O’Hara. The question of what constitutes victory is complicated when the wider context of housing is so disastrous. When the 29 single mums who started the campaign were rehoused in Newham in 2014, they called it a “partial victory”: their privately rented flats were expensive, some of them were grotty, and they only had tenancies for 12 months. When Middleton moved in to hers, she found a mouse skeleton. Stone’s apartment had a sewage leak. “It was disgusting, just completely unsanitary,” she says. The Focus E15 protests – in pictures Read more A couple of years later, Stone left London for Colchester in Essex. It was a painful decision, but she didn’t want her daughter to have to keep moving. “It breaks my heart,” she says. “All my family are in Newham. I would have done anything to stay, and I’d do anything to move back.” Many of the other Focus E15 mums have also left London. Though most are no longer involved with the campaign, they keep in touch; some of them turned 30 this year. When she thinks back to the occupation of the Carpenters estate, Stone is angry that more than half of the flats are still unoccupied. Newham council did not end up selling the land – not least because of lengthy campaigning by residents. In 2020, the council approved developer Populo Living to carry out “a resident-led planning redesign process to restore the estate”, but progress has been slow. “The estate had green space, parks. Today it’s like working-class people don’t deserve that kind of living, we are put in a little tiny box and told to put up with it,” says Stone. “But there are ways of resisting and fighting back. And we’ll keep fighting.” Explore more on these topics Social housing Housing Communities London Protest Women Homelessness features Share Reuse this content ‘Everyone felt so empowered’ … Janice Graham and Jasmin Stone. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian View image in fullscreen ‘Everyone felt so empowered’ … Janice Graham and Jasmin Stone. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian ‘Everyone felt so empowered’ … Janice Graham and Jasmin Stone. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian View image in fullscreen ‘Everyone felt so empowered’ … Janice Graham and Jasmin Stone. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian ‘Everyone felt so empowered’ … Janice Graham and Jasmin Stone. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian View image in fullscreen ‘Everyone felt so empowered’ … Janice Graham and Jasmin Stone. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian ‘Everyone felt so empowered’ … Janice Graham and Jasmin Stone. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian View image in fullscreen ‘Everyone felt so empowered’ … Janice Graham and Jasmin Stone. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian ‘Everyone felt so empowered’ … Janice Graham and Jasmin Stone. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian ‘Everyone felt so empowered’ … Janice Graham and Jasmin Stone. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old ‘Those two weeks felt how the world should be’: the young single mums who took on the housing crisis – and won This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Those two weeks felt how the world should be’: the young single mums who took on the housing crisis – and won This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Those two weeks felt how the world should be’: the young single mums who took on the housing crisis – and won This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old When a group of teenage mothers were evicted from their homeless hostel, Focus E15, they took over a tower block of empty council flats in protest. Ten years on, they are still fighting When a group of teenage mothers were evicted from their homeless hostel, Focus E15, they took over a tower block of empty council flats in protest. Ten years on, they are still fighting When a group of teenage mothers were evicted from their homeless hostel, Focus E15, they took over a tower block of empty council flats in protest. Ten years on, they are still fighting O n 23 September 2014, protesters entered a disused block of council flats on the Carpenters estate in Newham, east London . The group, Focus E15, was made up of young single mums who had been evicted from a local homeless hostel a year earlier – and campaigners who had fought the eviction with them. When they entered the flats, they were shocked to find that some had newly installed kitchens and the electricity and water were still on. “We were very angry,” says Jasmin Stone, one of the single mums, who was 20 at the time. “People would cut off their arm to have a home there, and more than 400 flats were empty in the middle of a housing crisis.” From the balcony, they unfurled banners reading: “These people need homes, these homes need people.” They didn’t know how long they’d be able to keep the occupation going. They needn’t have worried. Their campaign won the attention of the national media , and it captured the public imagination: a microcosm of the housing crisis steadily engulfing more areas as austerity began to bite. The occupation had the atmosphere of a street party. The young mums danced and played with their children. People shared their skills, coming down to run clothing swaps and bike-fixing workshops, or to perform comedy and music. “We didn’t realise that that was going to happen,” says Stone. “It was beautiful. Those two weeks felt like how the world should be.” The almost empty estate was emblematic of the social cleansing taking place all over the capital, with people moved out of council housing to make way for private developments. The mums had been evicted from their own accommodation – a hostel called Focus E15, which became the name of their campaign group – after Newham council cut funding to the building’s mother and baby unit. They had been told they would have to accept private rented accommodation as far away as Birmingham and Manchester as there was nowhere to house them nearby. Now they wanted to draw attention to the same thing happening elsewhere. Newham council planned to sell the land on the Carpenters estate to a private developer, and had been systematically moving people out for years. By 2014, there were just 36 leaseholders and 21 tenants remaining, with hundreds of homes unoccupied. View image in fullscreen ‘We were very angry’ … Carpenters estate during the occupation in 2014. Photograph: Jess Hurd/The Guardian The council tried hard to evict the protesters. After a hearing at Bow court, Focus E15 agreed to leave on 7 October. Standing on the steps of the court, Stone and another young mum, Sam Middleton, delivered a statement to a large crowd of journalists and supporters. They held up their fists and declared: “This is the beginning of the end of the housing crisis.” It has been 10 years since that protest and the housing crisis has only got more acute. Today there are more than a million households on waiting lists for social housing in England, and more than 200,000 trapped in temporary accommodation, often in substandard conditions. The demolition and repurposing of social housing that the occupation highlighted has continued at speed, with a loss of well over 100,000 social homes in the past decade. I meet Stone and the others who occupied the estate a decade ago. Over giant mugs of tea in the back room of a cafe in Stratford, east London, we talk about their continuing fight for housing justice, and where it all began. F ocus E15 was formed a year before the Carpenters estate occupation, when the 29 young single mums living were served with their eviction notices. When Stone received notice in August 2013, she was 19 and her daughter was one. “We were a little community, so we were scared and angry for each other, not just ourselves,” she remembers. Stone’s entire family was in Newham and she couldn’t imagine leaving. “She was getting depressed. I was getting depressed, worried about her and the baby getting sent miles away,” says Stone’s mother, Janice Graham. Graham suggested Stone start a petition. They didn’t have a printer, so Stone wrote the petition on a piece of paper, and knocked on the doors of the other mums. They all signed. “We had no political history, and no idea what to do with the petition,” says Stone. The young women organised a meeting of all the building’s residents, handwriting more than 200 notes to slip through doors. (Along with the 29 mothers, the hostel housed other young people). But they were at a loss for what to do next. Then a group of them came across a street stall outside the Wilko on Stratford Broadway, where the Revolutionary Communist Group (RCG) was handing out leaflets about the bedroom tax. Hannah Caller was leafletting that day. “We were doing this quite boring stall, and along came this army of young women with babies, and some were pregnant,” Caller says. “They had a bit of paper with signatures in pencil. We had the resources to campaign so we said: ‘We can get you a petition board, we can print off your demands – and buy some pens.’ It was the power of collaboration.” The young women realised that their eviction was part of a wider crisis. “It wasn’t just us – it was a systemic problem,” says Stone. Activists from the RCG got the local press to come to the hostel. The group adopted the slogan: “Social housing, not social cleansing”. View image in fullscreen ‘Educate, organise – that’s our motto’ … members of Focus E15 outside Sylvia’s Corner today, with a banner designed by Andrew Cooper. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian The Focus E15 mums started to take part in the street stall (“We made your stall better,” Middleton told the communists) and protested. One day, they took the protest to an Olympic Village show flat – a luxury apartment for prospective buyers – and set up a children’s party. “It was very quiet when we got in, and then so loud with the poppers and all the babies and children,” says Stone. They wore party hats and handed out cake. The police came, but were reluctant to intervene. “They didn’t know what to do with all these young women and babies in buggies,” says Caller. Stone interjects, laughing: “Not just women – teenage women with hormones everywhere, pregnant or who had just had a baby.” They marched from the flat to the council’s housing office. “Everyone felt so empowered,” says Stone. “It was turning the depression into anger and feeling strong when you felt really, really weak.” Less than six months after the campaign began, Newham council agreed to rehouse all the young women concerned within the borough – but in private rented accommodation, not council flats. Given their own situation was still tenuous, and with a fresh awareness of the housing crisis, the women wanted to fight on. “You taste victory, and think: we’ve got some power to push it further,” says Saskia O’Hara, another RCG member who got involved with Focus E15. Caller adds: “No one was going to stop there.” W hile many of the single mothers have drifted away over time, Stone and her mum remain at the forefront a decade later, as do others who founded the group in 2013. “That campaign grew out of this amazing alliance of mothers and young pregnant women from the hostel, along with communists, anarchists, community groups,” says Caller. Getting involved was transformative for people beyond the group of young mothers, too. “I was an apprentice and a carpenter, and I hadn’t been able to access political movements,” says Ruth Sutcliffe, who joined Focus E15 in 2013. “To come across this group of people with different life experiences, ideas, knowledge, it felt like something that was really possible to be part of.” Focus E15 is still entirely run by volunteers. The strategy committee is made up of a group of core campaigners, with people coming and going as availability allows. A few years back they were awarded some funding which they used to rent a corner shop. Named Sylvia’s Corner, in honour of Sylvia Pankhurst, it is used as a community space. Every Saturday, Focus E15 continues to run a street stall to make contact with new people. “Educate, organise – that’s our motto,” says Stone. People might join Focus E15 because they need support with their own housing situation; the group sometimes tries to get a particular decision about someone’s housing overturned. But they also protest more widely about housing justice, highlighting poor conditions in specific buildings, or unfair local policy. “What connects all our campaigning is the trap of temporary accommodation,” says O’Hara. “It’s essentially replaced council housing, and sustainable housing for working-class people is just not part of the political conversation.” View image in fullscreen ‘I didn’t know how to fight for my rights, or what my rights were’ … Sadaf Afzal and her son Khizar. Photograph: Anna Gordon/The Guardian The Focus E15 hostel – renamed Brimstone House – is today used by the council as temporary accommodation. Stone remembers poor conditions when she lived there in 2013, and they have significantly worsened. Cramped units originally designed for a single person are now occupied by entire families, sometimes for months or years. In 2021, Sadaf Afzal came across Focus E15’s street stall. She was living in the hostel with her son in a small single room, and had been offered accommodation in Manchester. She didn’t want to leave London, her home for more than 20 years. Meeting the group was a lightbulb moment for her. “I didn’t know how to fight for my rights, or what my rights were,” she says. She got involved with the campaign and, like Stone and her friends had a decade earlier, mobilised other people in the building to join protests about their living conditions. In May 2022, Afzal attended Newham council’s general meeting with other Focus E15 activists. As the meeting proceeded, the group got up and chanted: “Brimstone House is no place for children!” Afzal says she had never done anything like this before, and that it was exhilarating. Newham’s mayor, Rokhsana Fiaz, was sympathetic, and promised that all families would be moved out of the building within a year. This has not happened. Afzal and her eight-year-old son Khizar have now been there for two and a half years. Recently, the council offered her a flat. It was 45 minutes from her son’s school, and on the third floor of a building. Afzal struggles with stairs owing to a back problem. The council warned that if she didn’t accept the offer, she would be making herself intentionally homeless. “People have very little time to make a decision and if they say no, the system becomes extremely harsh, withdrawing offers and discharging all responsibility,” says Ayesha Taylor, a member of Focus E15’s strategy group. She has also been involved since the group’s inception. As a support worker in primary schools, she’d long noticed the impact of insecure housing on children, and the campaign “was an expression of what I was seeing”. View image in fullscreen ‘We were a little community, so we were scared and angry for each other, not just ourselves.’ Photograph: Jess Hurd/The Guardian Fired up, Afzal took a risk and refused the offer: “I was worried inside, if they evict me what will happen? But I said to myself: ‘No. I have to stand my ground. I have to fight.’” She submitted medical evidence about her back problems and wrote an email outlining the impact of repeated school moves on her son. After a meeting with Afzal, the council agreed to retract the offer, without deeming her intentionally homeless. Although she does not know how long it will be before the council offers her another flat, it does mean they will offer one eventually. As she tells me this, Afzal’s face breaks into a huge smile, and the women around the table cheer. “We’re not going to sit here and say we’ve solved the housing crisis, because we haven’t, but, my God, do we celebrate victories,” says O’Hara. The question of what constitutes victory is complicated when the wider context of housing is so disastrous. When the 29 single mums who started the campaign were rehoused in Newham in 2014, they called it a “partial victory”: their privately rented flats were expensive, some of them were grotty, and they only had tenancies for 12 months. When Middleton moved in to hers, she found a mouse skeleton. Stone’s apartment had a sewage leak. “It was disgusting, just completely unsanitary,” she says. The Focus E15 protests – in pictures Read more A couple of years later, Stone left London for Colchester in Essex. It was a painful decision, but she didn’t want her daughter to have to keep moving. “It breaks my heart,” she says. “All my family are in Newham. I would have done anything to stay, and I’d do anything to move back.” Many of the other Focus E15 mums have also left London. Though most are no longer involved with the campaign, they keep in touch; some of them turned 30 this year. When she thinks back to the occupation of the Carpenters estate, Stone is angry that more than half of the flats are still unoccupied. Newham council did not end up selling the land – not least because of lengthy campaigning by residents. In 2020, the council approved developer Populo Living to carry out “a resident-led planning redesign process to restore the estate”, but progress has been slow. “The estate had green space, parks. Today it’s like working-class people don’t deserve that kind of living, we are put in a little tiny box and told to put up with it,” says Stone. “But there are ways of resisting and fighting back. And we’ll keep fighting.” Explore more on these topics Social housing Housing Communities London Protest Women Homelessness features Share Reuse this content O n 23 September 2014, protesters entered a disused block of council flats on the Carpenters estate in Newham, east London . The group, Focus E15, was made up of young single mums who had been evicted from a local homeless hostel a year earlier – and campaigners who had fought the eviction with them. When they entered the flats, they were shocked to find that some had newly installed kitchens and the electricity and water were still on. “We were very angry,” says Jasmin Stone, one of the single mums, who was 20 at the time. “People would cut off their arm to have a home there, and more than 400 flats were empty in the middle of a housing crisis.” From the balcony, they unfurled banners reading: “These people need homes, these homes need people.” They didn’t know how long they’d be able to keep the occupation going. They needn’t have worried. Their campaign won the attention of the national media , and it captured the public imagination: a microcosm of the housing crisis steadily engulfing more areas as austerity began to bite. The occupation had the atmosphere of a street party. The young mums danced and played with their children. People shared their skills, coming down to run clothing swaps and bike-fixing workshops, or to perform comedy and music. “We didn’t realise that that was going to happen,” says Stone. “It was beautiful. Those two weeks felt like how the world should be.” The almost empty estate was emblematic of the social cleansing taking place all over the capital, with people moved out of council housing to make way for private developments. The mums had been evicted from their own accommodation – a hostel called Focus E15, which became the name of their campaign group – after Newham council cut funding to the building’s mother and baby unit. They had been told they would have to accept private rented accommodation as far away as Birmingham and Manchester as there was nowhere to house them nearby. Now they wanted to draw attention to the same thing happening elsewhere. Newham council planned to sell the land on the Carpenters estate to a private developer, and had been systematically moving people out for years. By 2014, there were just 36 leaseholders and 21 tenants remaining, with hundreds of homes unoccupied. View image in fullscreen ‘We were very angry’ … Carpenters estate during the occupation in 2014. Photograph: Jess Hurd/The Guardian The council tried hard to evict the protesters. After a hearing at Bow court, Focus E15 agreed to leave on 7 October. Standing on the steps of the court, Stone and another young mum, Sam Middleton, delivered a statement to a large crowd of journalists and supporters. They held up their fists and declared: “This is the beginning of the end of the housing crisis.” It has been 10 years since that protest and the housing crisis has only got more acute. Today there are more than a million households on waiting lists for social housing in England, and more than 200,000 trapped in temporary accommodation, often in substandard conditions. The demolition and repurposing of social housing that the occupation highlighted has continued at speed, with a loss of well over 100,000 social homes in the past decade. I meet Stone and the others who occupied the estate a decade ago. Over giant mugs of tea in the back room of a cafe in Stratford, east London, we talk about their continuing fight for housing justice, and where it all began. F ocus E15 was formed a year before the Carpenters estate occupation, when the 29 young single mums living were served with their eviction notices. When Stone received notice in August 2013, she was 19 and her daughter was one. “We were a little community, so we were scared and angry for each other, not just ourselves,” she remembers. Stone’s entire family was in Newham and she couldn’t imagine leaving. “She was getting depressed. I was getting depressed, worried about her and the baby getting sent miles away,” says Stone’s mother, Janice Graham. Graham suggested Stone start a petition. They didn’t have a printer, so Stone wrote the petition on a piece of paper, and knocked on the doors of the other mums. They all signed. “We had no political history, and no idea what to do with the petition,” says Stone. The young women organised a meeting of all the building’s residents, handwriting more than 200 notes to slip through doors. (Along with the 29 mothers, the hostel h
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
‘Compassion for the most vulnerable’: bishop thanks protesters who blocked asylum coaches
The bishop said she was ‘heartened to see [compassion] in action in Margate’ after protesters successfully blocked Home Office coaches in late April. Photograph: PA View image in fullscreen The bishop said she was ‘heartened to see [compassion] in action in Margate’ after protesters successfully blocked Home Office coaches in late April. Photograph: PA This article is more than 1 year old ‘Compassion for the most vulnerable’: bishop thanks protesters who blocked asylum coaches This article is more than 1 year old Bishop of Dover praised people who stopped removal of men from Margate to Bibby Stockholm barge A prominent Church of England bishop has praised the protesters who successfully disrupted Home Office attempts to move asylum seekers to the Bibby Stockholm barge in Dorset. Using words which could put her in conflict with Downing Street, the Right Rev Rose Hudson-Wilkin, the former chaplain to the late queen and the House of Commons, thanked the local people who had blocked buses and said: “Our Lord showed compassion for the most vulnerable.” Hudson-Wilkin’s statement, shared with the Guardian, came after a No 10 spokesperson said the protests were “unacceptable”. The Bishop of Dover’s words were prompted by the Home Office’s decision to abandon plans to move male asylum seekers from Margate, in Kent, which is inside her diocese. View image in fullscreen Rose Hudson-Wilkin said she wanted to ‘thank the local people who have stood up for those housed on their doorstep’. Photograph: Andrew Matthews/Reuters In late April, protesters blocked a government-commissioned coach which was used to try to move 22 men from Afghanistan and Pakistan who had been living in Margate for seven months. On Thursday it emerged that 15 of the 22 had received letters from the Home Office saying they would no longer be moved. Hudson-Wilkin said: “I want to thank the local people who have stood up for those who are housed on their doorstep. Their actions show that there is compassion within the community to care for people who are most vulnerable, so that the people most at risk are not moved from pillar to post. “Our Lord showed compassion for the most vulnerable and I am heartened to see this in action in Margate, so thank you.” The Commons home affairs select committee said in February that living conditions on the Bibby Stockholm were claustrophobic, with many of the men detained there experiencing mental health problems. In December, an Albanian national, Leonard Farruku, 27 , is thought to have killed himself on the barge. Responding to Hudson-Wilkin’s words, a Home Office spokesperson said: “Accommodation is allocated to asylum seekers on a no-choice basis and asylum seekers can make representations if they believe they are unsuitable to be moved to the Bibby Stockholm, which are considered in full before any decision is made.” View image in fullscreen ‘We’re ready to do this again,’ said the Labour mayor of Margate, Rob Yates, after the successful blocking of the Home Office coach. Photograph: PA The successful protest in Margate was organised by the local Labour mayor, Rob Yates. He said: “We tried to avoid shouting or disrupting traffic while blocking the coach, resulting in no police involvement and hopefully helped to make the men in the hotel feel safe. “Going forwards, we’re ready to do this again. Community activism is a valid tool when it comes to protecting asylum seekers, and I think in this current climate [it] is one that we should all consider.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Hudson-Wilkin, who was born in Montego Bay, has become one of the C of E’s most prominent bishops. ‘I’m Britain’s first black woman bishop and I long for the day when that’s not unusual’ Read more She came to wider attention as the first black woman to hold the role of queen’s chaplain, and has appeared on Desert Island Discs . After being appointed as chaplain to the speaker in the House of Commons, she called for a more civil attitude among MPs , and has criticised institutional racism within the church. No 10 criticised disruptive tactics on Thursday after a separate group of protesters blocked a coach believed to be taking asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London, to the Bibby Stockholm. “Clearly this disruption and disorder was completely unacceptable and it is unacceptable for Home Office staff to be prevented from carrying out their work,” a No 10 spokesperson said. “We have always acted to ensure that police have powers that they need to manage protest and tackle disorder. They have our full support in using those powers and upholding the law.” Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum Kent Bibby Stockholm Anglicanism Home Office Migration England news Share Reuse this content The bishop said she was ‘heartened to see [compassion] in action in Margate’ after protesters successfully blocked Home Office coaches in late April. Photograph: PA View image in fullscreen The bishop said she was ‘heartened to see [compassion] in action in Margate’ after protesters successfully blocked Home Office coaches in late April. Photograph: PA This article is more than 1 year old ‘Compassion for the most vulnerable’: bishop thanks protesters who blocked asylum coaches This article is more than 1 year old Bishop of Dover praised people who stopped removal of men from Margate to Bibby Stockholm barge A prominent Church of England bishop has praised the protesters who successfully disrupted Home Office attempts to move asylum seekers to the Bibby Stockholm barge in Dorset. Using words which could put her in conflict with Downing Street, the Right Rev Rose Hudson-Wilkin, the former chaplain to the late queen and the House of Commons, thanked the local people who had blocked buses and said: “Our Lord showed compassion for the most vulnerable.” Hudson-Wilkin’s statement, shared with the Guardian, came after a No 10 spokesperson said the protests were “unacceptable”. The Bishop of Dover’s words were prompted by the Home Office’s decision to abandon plans to move male asylum seekers from Margate, in Kent, which is inside her diocese. View image in fullscreen Rose Hudson-Wilkin said she wanted to ‘thank the local people who have stood up for those housed on their doorstep’. Photograph: Andrew Matthews/Reuters In late April, protesters blocked a government-commissioned coach which was used to try to move 22 men from Afghanistan and Pakistan who had been living in Margate for seven months. On Thursday it emerged that 15 of the 22 had received letters from the Home Office saying they would no longer be moved. Hudson-Wilkin said: “I want to thank the local people who have stood up for those who are housed on their doorstep. Their actions show that there is compassion within the community to care for people who are most vulnerable, so that the people most at risk are not moved from pillar to post. “Our Lord showed compassion for the most vulnerable and I am heartened to see this in action in Margate, so thank you.” The Commons home affairs select committee said in February that living conditions on the Bibby Stockholm were claustrophobic, with many of the men detained there experiencing mental health problems. In December, an Albanian national, Leonard Farruku, 27 , is thought to have killed himself on the barge. Responding to Hudson-Wilkin’s words, a Home Office spokesperson said: “Accommodation is allocated to asylum seekers on a no-choice basis and asylum seekers can make representations if they believe they are unsuitable to be moved to the Bibby Stockholm, which are considered in full before any decision is made.” View image in fullscreen ‘We’re ready to do this again,’ said the Labour mayor of Margate, Rob Yates, after the successful blocking of the Home Office coach. Photograph: PA The successful protest in Margate was organised by the local Labour mayor, Rob Yates. He said: “We tried to avoid shouting or disrupting traffic while blocking the coach, resulting in no police involvement and hopefully helped to make the men in the hotel feel safe. “Going forwards, we’re ready to do this again. Community activism is a valid tool when it comes to protecting asylum seekers, and I think in this current climate [it] is one that we should all consider.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Hudson-Wilkin, who was born in Montego Bay, has become one of the C of E’s most prominent bishops. ‘I’m Britain’s first black woman bishop and I long for the day when that’s not unusual’ Read more She came to wider attention as the first black woman to hold the role of queen’s chaplain, and has appeared on Desert Island Discs . After being appointed as chaplain to the speaker in the House of Commons, she called for a more civil attitude among MPs , and has criticised institutional racism within the church. No 10 criticised disruptive tactics on Thursday after a separate group of protesters blocked a coach believed to be taking asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London, to the Bibby Stockholm. “Clearly this disruption and disorder was completely unacceptable and it is unacceptable for Home Office staff to be prevented from carrying out their work,” a No 10 spokesperson said. “We have always acted to ensure that police have powers that they need to manage protest and tackle disorder. They have our full support in using those powers and upholding the law.” Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum Kent Bibby Stockholm Anglicanism Home Office Migration England news Share Reuse this content The bishop said she was ‘heartened to see [compassion] in action in Margate’ after protesters successfully blocked Home Office coaches in late April. Photograph: PA View image in fullscreen The bishop said she was ‘heartened to see [compassion] in action in Margate’ after protesters successfully blocked Home Office coaches in late April. Photograph: PA The bishop said she was ‘heartened to see [compassion] in action in Margate’ after protesters successfully blocked Home Office coaches in late April. Photograph: PA View image in fullscreen The bishop said she was ‘heartened to see [compassion] in action in Margate’ after protesters successfully blocked Home Office coaches in late April. Photograph: PA The bishop said she was ‘heartened to see [compassion] in action in Margate’ after protesters successfully blocked Home Office coaches in late April. Photograph: PA View image in fullscreen The bishop said she was ‘heartened to see [compassion] in action in Margate’ after protesters successfully blocked Home Office coaches in late April. Photograph: PA The bishop said she was ‘heartened to see [compassion] in action in Margate’ after protesters successfully blocked Home Office coaches in late April. Photograph: PA View image in fullscreen The bishop said she was ‘heartened to see [compassion] in action in Margate’ after protesters successfully blocked Home Office coaches in late April. Photograph: PA The bishop said she was ‘heartened to see [compassion] in action in Margate’ after protesters successfully blocked Home Office coaches in late April. Photograph: PA The bishop said she was ‘heartened to see [compassion] in action in Margate’ after protesters successfully blocked Home Office coaches in late April. Photograph: PA This article is more than 1 year old ‘Compassion for the most vulnerable’: bishop thanks protesters who blocked asylum coaches This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Compassion for the most vulnerable’: bishop thanks protesters who blocked asylum coaches This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Compassion for the most vulnerable’: bishop thanks protesters who blocked asylum coaches This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Bishop of Dover praised people who stopped removal of men from Margate to Bibby Stockholm barge Bishop of Dover praised people who stopped removal of men from Margate to Bibby Stockholm barge Bishop of Dover praised people who stopped removal of men from Margate to Bibby Stockholm barge A prominent Church of England bishop has praised the protesters who successfully disrupted Home Office attempts to move asylum seekers to the Bibby Stockholm barge in Dorset. Using words which could put her in conflict with Downing Street, the Right Rev Rose Hudson-Wilkin, the former chaplain to the late queen and the House of Commons, thanked the local people who had blocked buses and said: “Our Lord showed compassion for the most vulnerable.” Hudson-Wilkin’s statement, shared with the Guardian, came after a No 10 spokesperson said the protests were “unacceptable”. The Bishop of Dover’s words were prompted by the Home Office’s decision to abandon plans to move male asylum seekers from Margate, in Kent, which is inside her diocese. View image in fullscreen Rose Hudson-Wilkin said she wanted to ‘thank the local people who have stood up for those housed on their doorstep’. Photograph: Andrew Matthews/Reuters In late April, protesters blocked a government-commissioned coach which was used to try to move 22 men from Afghanistan and Pakistan who had been living in Margate for seven months. On Thursday it emerged that 15 of the 22 had received letters from the Home Office saying they would no longer be moved. Hudson-Wilkin said: “I want to thank the local people who have stood up for those who are housed on their doorstep. Their actions show that there is compassion within the community to care for people who are most vulnerable, so that the people most at risk are not moved from pillar to post. “Our Lord showed compassion for the most vulnerable and I am heartened to see this in action in Margate, so thank you.” The Commons home affairs select committee said in February that living conditions on the Bibby Stockholm were claustrophobic, with many of the men detained there experiencing mental health problems. In December, an Albanian national, Leonard Farruku, 27 , is thought to have killed himself on the barge. Responding to Hudson-Wilkin’s words, a Home Office spokesperson said: “Accommodation is allocated to asylum seekers on a no-choice basis and asylum seekers can make representations if they believe they are unsuitable to be moved to the Bibby Stockholm, which are considered in full before any decision is made.” View image in fullscreen ‘We’re ready to do this again,’ said the Labour mayor of Margate, Rob Yates, after the successful blocking of the Home Office coach. Photograph: PA The successful protest in Margate was organised by the local Labour mayor, Rob Yates. He said: “We tried to avoid shouting or disrupting traffic while blocking the coach, resulting in no police involvement and hopefully helped to make the men in the hotel feel safe. “Going forwards, we’re ready to do this again. Community activism is a valid tool when it comes to protecting asylum seekers, and I think in this current climate [it] is one that we should all consider.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Hudson-Wilkin, who was born in Montego Bay, has become one of the C of E’s most prominent bishops. ‘I’m Britain’s first black woman bishop and I long for the day when that’s not unusual’ Read more She came to wider attention as the first black woman to hold the role of queen’s chaplain, and has appeared on Desert Island Discs . After being appointed as chaplain to the speaker in the House of Commons, she called for a more civil attitude among MPs , and has criticised institutional racism within the church. No 10 criticised disruptive tactics on Thursday after a separate group of protesters blocked a coach believed to be taking asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London, to the Bibby Stockholm. “Clearly this disruption and disorder was completely unacceptable and it is unacceptable for Home Office staff to be prevented from carrying out their work,” a No 10 spokesperson said. “We have always acted to ensure that police have powers that they need to manage protest and tackle disorder. They have our full support in using those powers and upholding the law.” Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum Kent Bibby Stockholm Anglicanism Home Office Migration England news Share Reuse this content A prominent Church of England bishop has praised the protesters who successfully disrupted Home Office attempts to move asylum seekers to the Bibby Stockholm barge in Dorset. Using words which could put her in conflict with Downing Street, the Right Rev Rose Hudson-Wilkin, the former chaplain to the late queen and the House of Commons, thanked the local people who had blocked buses and said: “Our Lord showed compassion for the most vulnerable.” Hudson-Wilkin’s statement, shared with the Guardian, came after a No 10 spokesperson said the protests were “unacceptable”. The Bishop of Dover’s words were prompted by the Home Office’s decision to abandon plans to move male asylum seekers from Margate, in Kent, which is inside her diocese. View image in fullscreen Rose Hudson-Wilkin said she wanted to ‘thank the local people who have stood up for those housed on their doorstep’. Photograph: Andrew Matthews/Reuters In late April, protesters blocked a government-commissioned coach which was used to try to move 22 men from Afghanistan and Pakistan who had been living in Margate for seven months. On Thursday it emerged that 15 of the 22 had received letters from the Home Office saying they would no longer be moved. Hudson-Wilkin said: “I want to thank the local people who have stood up for those who are housed on their doorstep. Their actions show that there is compassion within the community to care for people who are most vulnerable, so that the people most at risk are not moved from pillar to post. “Our Lord showed compassion for the most vulnerable and I am heartened to see this in action in Margate, so thank you.” The Commons home affairs select committee said in February that living conditions on the Bibby Stockholm were claustrophobic, with many of the men detained there experiencing mental health problems. In December, an Albanian national, Leonard Farruku, 27 , is thought to have killed himself on the barge. Responding to Hudson-Wilkin’s words, a Home Office spokesperson said: “Accommodation is allocated to asylum seekers on a no-choice basis and asylum seekers can make representations if they believe they are unsuitable to be moved to the Bibby Stockholm, which are considered in full before any decision is made.” View image in fullscreen ‘We’re ready to do this again,’ said the Labour mayor of Margate, Rob Yates, after the successful blocking of the Home Office coach. Photograph: PA The successful protest in Margate was organised by the local Labour mayor, Rob Yates. He said: “We tried to avoid shouting or disrupting traffic while blocking the coach, resulting in no police involvement and hopefully helped to make the men in the hotel feel safe. “Going forwards, we’re ready to do this again. Community activism is a valid tool when it comes to protecting asylum seekers, and I think in this current climate [it] is one that we should all consider.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Hudson-Wilkin, who was born in Montego Bay, has become one of the C of E’s most prominent bishops. ‘I’m Britain’s first black woman bishop and I long for the day when that’s not unusual’ Read more She came to wider attention as the first black woman to hold the role of queen’s chaplain, and has appeared on Desert Island Discs . After being appointed as chaplain to the speaker in the House of Commons, she called for a more civil attitude among MPs , and has criticised institutional racism within the church. No 10 criticised disruptive tactics on Thursday after a separate group of protesters blocked a coach believed to be taking asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London, to the Bibby Stockholm. “Clearly this disruption and disorder was completely unacceptable and it is unacceptable for Home Office staff to be prevented from carrying out their work,” a No 10 spokesperson said. “We have always acted to ensure that police have powers that they need to manage protest and tackle disorder. They have our full support in using those powers and upholding the law.” Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum Kent Bibby Stockholm Anglicanism Home Office Migration England news Share Reuse this content A prominent Church of England bishop has praised the protesters who successfully disrupted Home Office attempts to move asylum seekers to the Bibby Stockholm barge in Dorset. Using words which could put her in conflict with Downing Street, the Right Rev Rose Hudson-Wilkin, the former chaplain to the late queen and the House of Commons, thanked the local people who had blocked buses and said: “Our Lord showed compassion for the most vulnerable.” Hudson-Wilkin’s statement, shared with the Guardian, came after a No 10 spokesperson said the protests were “unacceptable”. The Bishop of Dover’s words were prompted by the Home Office’s decision to abandon plans to move male asylum seekers from Margate, in Kent, which is inside her diocese. View image in fullscreen Rose Hudson-Wilkin said she wanted to ‘thank the local people who have stood up for those housed on their doorstep’. Photograph: Andrew Matthews/Reuters In late April, protesters blocked a government-commissioned coach which was used to try to move 22 men from Afghanistan and Pakistan who had been living in Margate for seven months. On Thursday it emerged that 15 of the 22 had received letters from the Home Office saying they would no longer be moved. Hudson-Wilkin said: “I want to thank the local people who have stood up for those who are housed on their doorstep. Their actions show that there is compassion within the community to care for people who are most vulnerable, so that the people most at risk are not moved from pillar to post. “Our Lord showed compassion for the most vulnerable and I am heartened to see this in action in Margate, so thank you.” The Commons home affairs select committee said in February that living conditions on the Bibby Stockholm were claustrophobic, with many of the men detained there experiencing mental health problems. In December, an Albanian national, Leonard Farruku, 27 , is thought to have killed himself on the barge. Responding to Hudson-Wilkin’s words, a Home Office spokesperson said: “Accommodation is allocated to asylum seekers on a no-choice basis and asylum seekers can make representations if they believe they are unsuitable to be moved to the Bibby Stockholm, which are considered in full before any decision is made.” View image in fullscreen ‘We’re ready to do this again,’ said the Labour mayor of Margate, Rob Yates, after the successful blocking of the Home Office coach. Photograph: PA The successful protest in Margate was organised by the local Labour mayor, Rob Yates. He said: “We tried to avoid shouting or disrupting traffic while blocking the coach, resulting in no police involvement and hopefully helped to make the men in the hotel feel safe. “Going forwards, we’re ready to do this again. Community activism is a valid tool when it comes to protecting asylum seekers, and I think in this current climate [it] is one that we should all consider.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Hudson-Wilkin, who was born in Montego Bay, has become one of the C of E’s most prominent bishops. ‘I’m Britain’s first black woman bishop and I long for the day when that’s not unusual’ Read more She came to wider attention as the first black woman to hold the role of queen’s chaplain, and has appeared on Desert Island Discs . After being appointed as chaplain to the speaker in the House of Commons, she called for a more civil attitude among MPs , and has criticised institutional racism within the church. No 10 criticised disruptive tactics on Thursday after a separate group of protesters blocked a coach believed to be taking asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London, to the Bibby Stockholm. “Clearly this disruption and disorder was completely unacceptable and it is unacceptable for Home Office staff to be prevented from carrying out their work,” a No 10 spokesperson said. “We have always acted to ensure that police have powers that they need to manage protest and tackle disorder. They have our full support in using those powers and upholding the law.” A prominent Church of England bishop has praised the protesters who successfully disrupted Home Office attempts to move asylum seekers to the Bibby Stockholm barge in Dorset. Using words which could put her in conflict with Downing Street, the Right Rev Rose Hudson-Wilkin, the former chaplain to the late queen and the House of Commons, thanked the local people who had blocked buses and said: “Our Lord showed compassion for the most vulnerable.” Hudson-Wilkin’s statement, shared with the Guardian, came after a No 10 spokesperson said the protests were “unacceptable”. The Bishop of Dover’s words were prompted by the Home Office’s decision to abandon plans to move male asylum seekers from Margate, in Kent, which is inside her diocese. View image in fullscreen Rose Hudson-Wilkin said she wanted to ‘thank the local people who have stood up for those housed on their doorstep’. Photograph: Andrew Matthews/Reuters In late April, protesters blocked a government-commissioned coach which was used to try to move 22 men from Afghanistan and Pakistan who had been living in Margate for seven months. On Thursday it emerged that 15 of the 22 had received letters from the Home Office saying they would no longer be moved. Hudson-Wilkin said: “I want to thank the local people who have stood up for those who are housed on their doorstep. Their actions show that there is compassion within the community to care for people who are most vulnerable, so that the people most at risk are not moved from pillar to post. “Our Lord showed compassion for the most vulnerable and I am heartened to see this in action in Margate, so thank you.” The Commons home affairs select committee said in February that living conditions on the Bibby Stockholm were claustrophobic, with many of the men detained there experiencing mental health problems. In December, an Albanian national, Leonard Farruku, 27 , is thought to have killed himself on the barge. Responding to Hudson-Wilkin’s words, a Home Office spokesperson said: “Accommodation is allocated to asylum seekers on a no-choice basis and asylum seekers can make representations if they believe they are unsuitable to be moved to the Bibby Stockholm, which are considered in full before any decision is made.” View image in fullscreen ‘We’re ready to do this again,’ said the Labour mayor of Margate, Rob Yates, after the successful blocking of the Home Office coach. Photograph: PA The successful protest in Margate was organised by the local Labour mayor, Rob Yates. He said: “We tried to avoid shouting or disrupting traffic while blocking the coach, resulting in no police involvement and hopefully helped to make the men in the hotel feel safe. “Going forwards, we’re ready to do this again. Community activism is a valid tool when it comes to protecting asylum seekers, and I think in this current climate [it] is one that we should all consider.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Hudson-Wilkin, who was born in Montego Bay, has become one of the C of E’s most prominent bishops. ‘I’m Britain’s first black woman bishop and I long for the day when that’s not unusual’ Read more She came to wider attention as the first black woman to hold the role of queen’s chaplain, and has appeared on Desert Island Discs . After being appointed as chaplain to the speaker in the House of Commons, she called for a more civil attitude among MPs , and has criticised institutional racism within the church. No 10 criticised disruptive tactics on Thursday after a separate group of protesters blocked a coach believed to be taking asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London, to the Bibby Stockholm. “Clearly this disruption and disorder was completely unacceptable and it is unacceptable for Home Office staff to be prevented from carrying out their work,” a No 10 spokesperson said. “We have always acted to ensure that police have powers that they need to manage protest and tackle disorder. They have our full support in using those powers and upholding the law.” A prominent Church of England bishop has praised the protesters who successfully disrupted Home Office attempts to move asylum seekers to the Bibby Stockholm barge in Dorset. Using words which could put her in conflict with Downing Street, the Right Rev Rose Hudson-Wilkin, the former chaplain to the late queen and the House of Commons, thanked the local people who had blocked buses and said: “Our Lord showed compassion for the most vulnerable.” Hudson-Wilkin’s statement, shared with the Guardian, came after a No 10 spokesperson said the protests were “unacceptable”. The Bishop of Dover’s words were prompted by the Home Office’s decision to abandon plans to move male asylum seekers from Margate, in Kent, which is inside her diocese. In late April, protesters blocked a government-commissioned coach which was used to try to move 22 men from Afghanistan and Pakistan who had been living in Margate for seven months. On Thursday it emerged that 15 of the 22 had received letters from the Home Office saying they would no longer be moved. Hudson-Wilkin said: “I want to thank the local people who have stood up for those who are housed on their doorstep. Their actions show that there is compassion within the community to care for people who are most vulnerable, so that the people most at risk are not moved from pillar to post. “Our Lord showed compassion for the most vulnerable and I am heartened to see this in action in Margate, so thank you.” The Commons home affairs select committee said in February that living conditions on the Bibby Stockholm were claustrophobic, with many of the men detained there experiencing mental health problems. In December, an Albanian national, Leonard Farruku, 27 , is thought to have killed himself on the barge. Responding to Hudson-Wilkin’s words, a Home Office spokesperson said: “Accommodation is allocated to asylum seekers on a no-choice basis and asylum seekers can make representations if they believe they are unsuitable to be moved to the Bibby Stockholm, which are considered in full before any decision is made.” The successful protest in Margate was organised by the local Labour mayor, Rob Yates. He said: “We tried to avoid shouting or disrupting traffic while blocking the coach, resulting in no police involvement and hopefully helped to make the men in the hotel feel safe. “Going forwards, we’re ready to do this again. Community activism is a valid tool when it comes to protecting asylum seekers, and I think in this current climate [it] is one that we should all consider.” Hudson-Wilkin, who was born in Montego Bay, has become one of the C of E’s most prominent bishops. ‘I’m Britain’s first black woman bishop and I long for the day when that’s not unusual’ Read more ‘I’m Britain’s first black woman bishop and I long for the day when that’s not unusual’ Read more ‘I’m Britain’s first black woman bishop and I long for the day when that’s not unusual’ Read more ‘I’m Britain’s first black woman bishop and I long for the day when that’s not unusual’ ‘I’m Britain’s first black woman bishop and I long for the day when that’s not unusual’ She came to wider attention as the first black woman to hold the role of queen’s chaplain, and has appeared on Desert Island Discs . After being appointed as chaplain to the speaker in the House of Commons, she called for a more civil attitude among MPs , and has criticised institutional racism within the church. No 10 criticised disruptive tactics on Thursday after a separate group of protesters blocked a coach believed to be taking asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London, to the Bibby Stockholm. “Clearly this disruption and disorder was completely unacceptable and it is unacceptable for Home Office staff to be prevented from carrying out their work,” a No 10 spokesperson said. “We have always acted to ensure that police have powers that they need to manage protest and tackle disorder. They have our full support in using those powers and upholding the law.” Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum Kent Bibby Stockholm Anglicanism Home Office Migration England news Share Reuse this content Immigration and asylum Kent Bibby Stockholm Anglicanism Home Office Migration England news |
The pro-Palestine protests: inside the 3 May Guardian Weekly
The cover of the 3 May edition of the Guardian Weekly. Illustration: Carl Godfrey/Guardian Design View image in fullscreen The cover of the 3 May edition of the Guardian Weekly. Illustration: Carl Godfrey/Guardian Design This article is more than 1 year old The pro-Palestine protests: inside the 3 May Guardian Weekly This article is more than 1 year old In the US and the UK, what is the real picture on the mass marches and campus rallies? Plus: the fall of Hunza Yousaf Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address Pro-Palestinian protests have made the news on both sides of the Atlantic this week. In the US, student campus demonstrations have led to hundreds of arrests in an at-times brutal crackdown by police, and appear to be evolving into a wider political battle with bitter historical echoes. In London, meanwhile, a series of mass marches have led to disputed claims that the city is becoming a no-go zone for people who disagree with the protesters. What is the mood within the Gaza demonstrations – and where might they be leading? For the Guardian Weekly’s big story this week, Ed Helmore reports from New York, while on a London march James Tapper speaks to the families of Holocaust survivors who are pushing back against the narrative that Jewish people are not welcome there. And columnist Jonathan Freedland argues that it is extremists on both sides who are consistently blocking the path to a peaceful and lasting solution. Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address View image in fullscreen Yinka Shonibare’s Refugee Astronaut at Venice Biennale. Photograph: David Levene/The Guardian Five essential reads in this week’s edition 1 Spotlight | Bearing the brunt on the eastern front Ukraine’s Azov brigade is tasked with repelling relentless Russian attacks as the invaders have made the most of an artillery mismatch. Dan Sabbagh reports. 2 Spotlight | The rise and fall of Humza Yousaf The Scottish National party leader’s resignation has exposed the faultlines within the nationalist grouping over social policy, writes Libby Brooks . 3 Feature | Talking trees: truth and fiction In the past 10 years the idea that trees communicate with and look after each other – dubbed the “wood-wide web” – has gained widespread currency. But have these claims outstripped the evidence, asks Daniel Immerwahr . 4 Opinion | No need to panic over bird flu – but we should plan This is not a repeat of the Covid pandemic, says Devi Sridhar . Yet global governments should follow the US and prepare a response. 5 Culture | Venice Biennale 2024: everything everywhere all at once From an alligator ride across Asia to an escape to outer space, the biennial art festival’s “foreigners everywhere” theme leaves our critic Adrian Searle beguiled, tantalised – and frequently appalled. What else we’ve been reading As I reluctantly crawled out of bed this morning, I was reminded of Isabel Manley’s brilliant comic on the oppressive nature of time in the modern world. Her thoughts on how strict time boundaries in schools suit neither student nor teacher were particularly insightful. Interspersed throughout these personal meanderings are historical and philosophical references from the new book Saving Time by Jenny Odell, which is now firmly on my reading list – if only I had more time! Emily El Nusairi, deputy production editor Other highlights from the Guardian website View image in fullscreen Arsenal’s Bukayo Saka celebrates scoring his team’s second goal in the north London derby against Tottenham Hotspur. Photograph: Clive Rose/Getty Images Audio | Football Weekly – Arsenal and Manchester City set up a two-horse race Video | Pressure and Release – How horses are healing childhood trauma Gallery | Photographer Magdalena Wosinska’s portraits of skaters, saunas and spontaneous stripping Get in touch We’d love to hear your thoughts on the magazine: for submissions to our letters page, please email weekly.letters@theguardian.com . For anything else, it’s editorial.feedback@theguardian.com Follow us X Facebook Instagram Get the Guardian Weekly magazine delivered to your home address Explore more on these topics Israel-Gaza war Inside Guardian Weekly Protest Palestine Israel Share Reuse this content The cover of the 3 May edition of the Guardian Weekly. Illustration: Carl Godfrey/Guardian Design View image in fullscreen The cover of the 3 May edition of the Guardian Weekly. Illustration: Carl Godfrey/Guardian Design This article is more than 1 year old The pro-Palestine protests: inside the 3 May Guardian Weekly This article is more than 1 year old In the US and the UK, what is the real picture on the mass marches and campus rallies? Plus: the fall of Hunza Yousaf Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address Pro-Palestinian protests have made the news on both sides of the Atlantic this week. In the US, student campus demonstrations have led to hundreds of arrests in an at-times brutal crackdown by police, and appear to be evolving into a wider political battle with bitter historical echoes. In London, meanwhile, a series of mass marches have led to disputed claims that the city is becoming a no-go zone for people who disagree with the protesters. What is the mood within the Gaza demonstrations – and where might they be leading? For the Guardian Weekly’s big story this week, Ed Helmore reports from New York, while on a London march James Tapper speaks to the families of Holocaust survivors who are pushing back against the narrative that Jewish people are not welcome there. And columnist Jonathan Freedland argues that it is extremists on both sides who are consistently blocking the path to a peaceful and lasting solution. Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address View image in fullscreen Yinka Shonibare’s Refugee Astronaut at Venice Biennale. Photograph: David Levene/The Guardian Five essential reads in this week’s edition 1 Spotlight | Bearing the brunt on the eastern front Ukraine’s Azov brigade is tasked with repelling relentless Russian attacks as the invaders have made the most of an artillery mismatch. Dan Sabbagh reports. 2 Spotlight | The rise and fall of Humza Yousaf The Scottish National party leader’s resignation has exposed the faultlines within the nationalist grouping over social policy, writes Libby Brooks . 3 Feature | Talking trees: truth and fiction In the past 10 years the idea that trees communicate with and look after each other – dubbed the “wood-wide web” – has gained widespread currency. But have these claims outstripped the evidence, asks Daniel Immerwahr . 4 Opinion | No need to panic over bird flu – but we should plan This is not a repeat of the Covid pandemic, says Devi Sridhar . Yet global governments should follow the US and prepare a response. 5 Culture | Venice Biennale 2024: everything everywhere all at once From an alligator ride across Asia to an escape to outer space, the biennial art festival’s “foreigners everywhere” theme leaves our critic Adrian Searle beguiled, tantalised – and frequently appalled. What else we’ve been reading As I reluctantly crawled out of bed this morning, I was reminded of Isabel Manley’s brilliant comic on the oppressive nature of time in the modern world. Her thoughts on how strict time boundaries in schools suit neither student nor teacher were particularly insightful. Interspersed throughout these personal meanderings are historical and philosophical references from the new book Saving Time by Jenny Odell, which is now firmly on my reading list – if only I had more time! Emily El Nusairi, deputy production editor Other highlights from the Guardian website View image in fullscreen Arsenal’s Bukayo Saka celebrates scoring his team’s second goal in the north London derby against Tottenham Hotspur. Photograph: Clive Rose/Getty Images Audio | Football Weekly – Arsenal and Manchester City set up a two-horse race Video | Pressure and Release – How horses are healing childhood trauma Gallery | Photographer Magdalena Wosinska’s portraits of skaters, saunas and spontaneous stripping Get in touch We’d love to hear your thoughts on the magazine: for submissions to our letters page, please email weekly.letters@theguardian.com . For anything else, it’s editorial.feedback@theguardian.com Follow us X Facebook Instagram Get the Guardian Weekly magazine delivered to your home address Explore more on these topics Israel-Gaza war Inside Guardian Weekly Protest Palestine Israel Share Reuse this content The cover of the 3 May edition of the Guardian Weekly. Illustration: Carl Godfrey/Guardian Design View image in fullscreen The cover of the 3 May edition of the Guardian Weekly. Illustration: Carl Godfrey/Guardian Design The cover of the 3 May edition of the Guardian Weekly. Illustration: Carl Godfrey/Guardian Design View image in fullscreen The cover of the 3 May edition of the Guardian Weekly. Illustration: Carl Godfrey/Guardian Design The cover of the 3 May edition of the Guardian Weekly. Illustration: Carl Godfrey/Guardian Design View image in fullscreen The cover of the 3 May edition of the Guardian Weekly. Illustration: Carl Godfrey/Guardian Design The cover of the 3 May edition of the Guardian Weekly. Illustration: Carl Godfrey/Guardian Design View image in fullscreen The cover of the 3 May edition of the Guardian Weekly. Illustration: Carl Godfrey/Guardian Design The cover of the 3 May edition of the Guardian Weekly. Illustration: Carl Godfrey/Guardian Design The cover of the 3 May edition of the Guardian Weekly. Illustration: Carl Godfrey/Guardian Design This article is more than 1 year old The pro-Palestine protests: inside the 3 May Guardian Weekly This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old The pro-Palestine protests: inside the 3 May Guardian Weekly This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old The pro-Palestine protests: inside the 3 May Guardian Weekly This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old In the US and the UK, what is the real picture on the mass marches and campus rallies? Plus: the fall of Hunza Yousaf Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address In the US and the UK, what is the real picture on the mass marches and campus rallies? Plus: the fall of Hunza Yousaf Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address In the US and the UK, what is the real picture on the mass marches and campus rallies? Plus: the fall of Hunza Yousaf Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address Pro-Palestinian protests have made the news on both sides of the Atlantic this week. In the US, student campus demonstrations have led to hundreds of arrests in an at-times brutal crackdown by police, and appear to be evolving into a wider political battle with bitter historical echoes. In London, meanwhile, a series of mass marches have led to disputed claims that the city is becoming a no-go zone for people who disagree with the protesters. What is the mood within the Gaza demonstrations – and where might they be leading? For the Guardian Weekly’s big story this week, Ed Helmore reports from New York, while on a London march James Tapper speaks to the families of Holocaust survivors who are pushing back against the narrative that Jewish people are not welcome there. And columnist Jonathan Freedland argues that it is extremists on both sides who are consistently blocking the path to a peaceful and lasting solution. Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address View image in fullscreen Yinka Shonibare’s Refugee Astronaut at Venice Biennale. Photograph: David Levene/The Guardian Five essential reads in this week’s edition 1 Spotlight | Bearing the brunt on the eastern front Ukraine’s Azov brigade is tasked with repelling relentless Russian attacks as the invaders have made the most of an artillery mismatch. Dan Sabbagh reports. 2 Spotlight | The rise and fall of Humza Yousaf The Scottish National party leader’s resignation has exposed the faultlines within the nationalist grouping over social policy, writes Libby Brooks . 3 Feature | Talking trees: truth and fiction In the past 10 years the idea that trees communicate with and look after each other – dubbed the “wood-wide web” – has gained widespread currency. But have these claims outstripped the evidence, asks Daniel Immerwahr . 4 Opinion | No need to panic over bird flu – but we should plan This is not a repeat of the Covid pandemic, says Devi Sridhar . Yet global governments should follow the US and prepare a response. 5 Culture | Venice Biennale 2024: everything everywhere all at once From an alligator ride across Asia to an escape to outer space, the biennial art festival’s “foreigners everywhere” theme leaves our critic Adrian Searle beguiled, tantalised – and frequently appalled. What else we’ve been reading As I reluctantly crawled out of bed this morning, I was reminded of Isabel Manley’s brilliant comic on the oppressive nature of time in the modern world. Her thoughts on how strict time boundaries in schools suit neither student nor teacher were particularly insightful. Interspersed throughout these personal meanderings are historical and philosophical references from the new book Saving Time by Jenny Odell, which is now firmly on my reading list – if only I had more time! Emily El Nusairi, deputy production editor Other highlights from the Guardian website View image in fullscreen Arsenal’s Bukayo Saka celebrates scoring his team’s second goal in the north London derby against Tottenham Hotspur. Photograph: Clive Rose/Getty Images Audio | Football Weekly – Arsenal and Manchester City set up a two-horse race Video | Pressure and Release – How horses are healing childhood trauma Gallery | Photographer Magdalena Wosinska’s portraits of skaters, saunas and spontaneous stripping Get in touch We’d love to hear your thoughts on the magazine: for submissions to our letters page, please email weekly.letters@theguardian.com . For anything else, it’s editorial.feedback@theguardian.com Follow us X Facebook Instagram Get the Guardian Weekly magazine delivered to your home address Explore more on these topics Israel-Gaza war Inside Guardian Weekly Protest Palestine Israel Share Reuse this content Pro-Palestinian protests have made the news on both sides of the Atlantic this week. In the US, student campus demonstrations have led to hundreds of arrests in an at-times brutal crackdown by police, and appear to be evolving into a wider political battle with bitter historical echoes. In London, meanwhile, a series of mass marches have led to disputed claims that the city is becoming a no-go zone for people who disagree with the protesters. What is the mood within the Gaza demonstrations – and where might they be leading? For the Guardian Weekly’s big story this week, Ed Helmore reports from New York, while on a London march James Tapper speaks to the families of Holocaust survivors who are pushing back against the narrative that Jewish people are not welcome there. And columnist Jonathan Freedland argues that it is extremists on both sides who are consistently blocking the path to a peaceful and lasting solution. Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address View image in fullscreen Yinka Shonibare’s Refugee Astronaut at Venice Biennale. Photograph: David Levene/The Guardian Five essential reads in this week’s edition 1 Spotlight | Bearing the brunt on the eastern front Ukraine’s Azov brigade is tasked with repelling relentless Russian attacks as the invaders have made the most of an artillery mismatch. Dan Sabbagh reports. 2 Spotlight | The rise and fall of Humza Yousaf The Scottish National party leader’s resignation has exposed the faultlines within the nationalist grouping over social policy, writes Libby Brooks . 3 Feature | Talking trees: truth and fiction In the past 10 years the idea that trees communicate with and look after each other – dubbed the “wood-wide web” – has gained widespread currency. But have these claims outstripped the evidence, asks Daniel Immerwahr . 4 Opinion | No need to panic over bird flu – but we should plan This is not a repeat of the Covid pandemic, says Devi Sridhar . Yet global governments should follow the US and prepare a response. 5 Culture | Venice Biennale 2024: everything everywhere all at once From an alligator ride across Asia to an escape to outer space, the biennial art festival’s “foreigners everywhere” theme leaves our critic Adrian Searle beguiled, tantalised – and frequently appalled. What else we’ve been reading As I reluctantly crawled out of bed this morning, I was reminded of Isabel Manley’s brilliant comic on the oppressive nature of time in the modern world. Her thoughts on how strict time boundaries in schools suit neither student nor teacher were particularly insightful. Interspersed throughout these personal meanderings are historical and philosophical references from the new book Saving Time by Jenny Odell, which is now firmly on my reading list – if only I had more time! Emily El Nusairi, deputy production editor Other highlights from the Guardian website View image in fullscreen Arsenal’s Bukayo Saka celebrates scoring his team’s second goal in the north London derby against Tottenham Hotspur. Photograph: Clive Rose/Getty Images Audio | Football Weekly – Arsenal and Manchester City set up a two-horse race Video | Pressure and Release – How horses are healing childhood trauma Gallery | Photographer Magdalena Wosinska’s portraits of skaters, saunas and spontaneous stripping Get in touch We’d love to hear your thoughts on the magazine: for submissions to our letters page, please email weekly.letters@theguardian.com . For anything else, it’s editorial.feedback@theguardian.com Follow us X Facebook Instagram Get the Guardian Weekly magazine delivered to your home address Explore more on these topics Israel-Gaza war Inside Guardian Weekly Protest Palestine Israel Share Reuse this content Pro-Palestinian protests have made the news on both sides of the Atlantic this week. In the US, student campus demonstrations have led to hundreds of arrests in an at-times brutal crackdown by police, and appear to be evolving into a wider political battle with bitter historical echoes. In London, meanwhile, a series of mass marches have led to disputed claims that the city is becoming a no-go zone for people who disagree with the protesters. What is the mood within the Gaza demonstrations – and where might they be leading? For the Guardian Weekly’s big story this week, Ed Helmore reports from New York, while on a London march James Tapper speaks to the families of Holocaust survivors who are pushing back against the narrative that Jewish people are not welcome there. And columnist Jonathan Freedland argues that it is extremists on both sides who are consistently blocking the path to a peaceful and lasting solution. Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address View image in fullscreen Yinka Shonibare’s Refugee Astronaut at Venice Biennale. Photograph: David Levene/The Guardian Five essential reads in this week’s edition 1 Spotlight | Bearing the brunt on the eastern front Ukraine’s Azov brigade is tasked with repelling relentless Russian attacks as the invaders have made the most of an artillery mismatch. Dan Sabbagh reports. 2 Spotlight | The rise and fall of Humza Yousaf The Scottish National party leader’s resignation has exposed the faultlines within the nationalist grouping over social policy, writes Libby Brooks . 3 Feature | Talking trees: truth and fiction In the past 10 years the idea that trees communicate with and look after each other – dubbed the “wood-wide web” – has gained widespread currency. But have these claims outstripped the evidence, asks Daniel Immerwahr . 4 Opinion | No need to panic over bird flu – but we should plan This is not a repeat of the Covid pandemic, says Devi Sridhar . Yet global governments should follow the US and prepare a response. 5 Culture | Venice Biennale 2024: everything everywhere all at once From an alligator ride across Asia to an escape to outer space, the biennial art festival’s “foreigners everywhere” theme leaves our critic Adrian Searle beguiled, tantalised – and frequently appalled. What else we’ve been reading As I reluctantly crawled out of bed this morning, I was reminded of Isabel Manley’s brilliant comic on the oppressive nature of time in the modern world. Her thoughts on how strict time boundaries in schools suit neither student nor teacher were particularly insightful. Interspersed throughout these personal meanderings are historical and philosophical references from the new book Saving Time by Jenny Odell, which is now firmly on my reading list – if only I had more time! Emily El Nusairi, deputy production editor Other highlights from the Guardian website View image in fullscreen Arsenal’s Bukayo Saka celebrates scoring his team’s second goal in the north London derby against Tottenham Hotspur. Photograph: Clive Rose/Getty Images Audio | Football Weekly – Arsenal and Manchester City set up a two-horse race Video | Pressure and Release – How horses are healing childhood trauma Gallery | Photographer Magdalena Wosinska’s portraits of skaters, saunas and spontaneous stripping Get in touch We’d love to hear your thoughts on the magazine: for submissions to our letters page, please email weekly.letters@theguardian.com . For anything else, it’s editorial.feedback@theguardian.com Follow us X Facebook Instagram Get the Guardian Weekly magazine delivered to your home address Pro-Palestinian protests have made the news on both sides of the Atlantic this week. In the US, student campus demonstrations have led to hundreds of arrests in an at-times brutal crackdown by police, and appear to be evolving into a wider political battle with bitter historical echoes. In London, meanwhile, a series of mass marches have led to disputed claims that the city is becoming a no-go zone for people who disagree with the protesters. What is the mood within the Gaza demonstrations – and where might they be leading? For the Guardian Weekly’s big story this week, Ed Helmore reports from New York, while on a London march James Tapper speaks to the families of Holocaust survivors who are pushing back against the narrative that Jewish people are not welcome there. And columnist Jonathan Freedland argues that it is extremists on both sides who are consistently blocking the path to a peaceful and lasting solution. Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address View image in fullscreen Yinka Shonibare’s Refugee Astronaut at Venice Biennale. Photograph: David Levene/The Guardian Five essential reads in this week’s edition 1 Spotlight | Bearing the brunt on the eastern front Ukraine’s Azov brigade is tasked with repelling relentless Russian attacks as the invaders have made the most of an artillery mismatch. Dan Sabbagh reports. 2 Spotlight | The rise and fall of Humza Yousaf The Scottish National party leader’s resignation has exposed the faultlines within the nationalist grouping over social policy, writes Libby Brooks . 3 Feature | Talking trees: truth and fiction In the past 10 years the idea that trees communicate with and look after each other – dubbed the “wood-wide web” – has gained widespread currency. But have these claims outstripped the evidence, asks Daniel Immerwahr . 4 Opinion | No need to panic over bird flu – but we should plan This is not a repeat of the Covid pandemic, says Devi Sridhar . Yet global governments should follow the US and prepare a response. 5 Culture | Venice Biennale 2024: everything everywhere all at once From an alligator ride across Asia to an escape to outer space, the biennial art festival’s “foreigners everywhere” theme leaves our critic Adrian Searle beguiled, tantalised – and frequently appalled. What else we’ve been reading As I reluctantly crawled out of bed this morning, I was reminded of Isabel Manley’s brilliant comic on the oppressive nature of time in the modern world. Her thoughts on how strict time boundaries in schools suit neither student nor teacher were particularly insightful. Interspersed throughout these personal meanderings are historical and philosophical references from the new book Saving Time by Jenny Odell, which is now firmly on my reading list – if only I had more time! Emily El Nusairi, deputy production editor Other highlights from the Guardian website View image in fullscreen Arsenal’s Bukayo Saka celebrates scoring his team’s second goal in the north London derby against Tottenham Hotspur. Photograph: Clive Rose/Getty Images Audio | Football Weekly – Arsenal and Manchester City set up a two-horse race Video | Pressure and Release – How horses are healing childhood trauma Gallery | Photographer Magdalena Wosinska’s portraits of skaters, saunas and spontaneous stripping Get in touch We’d love to hear your thoughts on the magazine: for submissions to our letters page, please email weekly.letters@theguardian.com . For anything else, it’s editorial.feedback@theguardian.com Follow us X Facebook Instagram Get the Guardian Weekly magazine delivered to your home address Pro-Palestinian protests have made the news on both sides of the Atlantic this week. In the US, student campus demonstrations have led to hundreds of arrests in an at-times brutal crackdown by police, and appear to be evolving into a wider political battle with bitter historical echoes. In London, meanwhile, a series of mass marches have led to disputed claims that the city is becoming a no-go zone for people who disagree with the protesters. What is the mood within the Gaza demonstrations – and where might they be leading? For the Guardian Weekly’s big story this week, Ed Helmore reports from New York, while on a London march James Tapper speaks to the families of Holocaust survivors who are pushing back against the narrative that Jewish people are not welcome there. And columnist Jonathan Freedland argues that it is extremists on both sides who are consistently blocking the path to a peaceful and lasting solution. Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address Spotlight | Bearing the brunt on the eastern front Ukraine’s Azov brigade is tasked with repelling relentless Russian attacks as the invaders have made the most of an artillery mismatch. Dan Sabbagh reports. Spotlight | The rise and fall of Humza Yousaf The Scottish National party leader’s resignation has exposed the faultlines within the nationalist grouping over social policy, writes Libby Brooks . Feature | Talking trees: truth and fiction In the past 10 years the idea that trees communicate with and look after each other – dubbed the “wood-wide web” – has gained widespread currency. But have these claims outstripped the evidence, asks Daniel Immerwahr . Opinion | No need to panic over bird flu – but we should plan This is not a repeat of the Covid pandemic, says Devi Sridhar . Yet global governments should follow the US and prepare a response. Culture | Venice Biennale 2024: everything everywhere all at once From an alligator ride across Asia to an escape to outer space, the biennial art festival’s “foreigners everywhere” theme leaves our critic Adrian Searle beguiled, tantalised – and frequently appalled. As I reluctantly crawled out of bed this morning, I was reminded of Isabel Manley’s brilliant comic on the oppressive nature of time in the modern world. Her thoughts on how strict time boundaries in schools suit neither student nor teacher were particularly insightful. Interspersed throughout these personal meanderings are historical and philosophical references from the new book Saving Time by Jenny Odell, which is now firmly on my reading list – if only I had more time! Emily El Nusairi, deputy production editor Audio | Football Weekly – Arsenal and Manchester City set up a two-horse race Video | Pressure and Release – How horses are healing childhood trauma Gallery | Photographer Magdalena Wosinska’s portraits of skaters, saunas and spontaneous stripping We’d love to hear your thoughts on the magazine: for submissions to our letters page, please email weekly.letters@theguardian.com . For anything else, it’s editorial.feedback@theguardian.com Get the Guardian Weekly magazine delivered to your home address Explore more on these topics Israel-Gaza war Inside Guardian Weekly Protest Palestine Israel Share Reuse this content Israel-Gaza war Inside Guardian Weekly Protest Palestine Israel |
Sunak to allow oil and gas exploration at sites intended for offshore wind
Teesside Offshore Windfarm. About 30 licences for fossil fuel prospecting will be granted at future windfarm sites. Photograph: Islandstock/Alamy View image in fullscreen Teesside Offshore Windfarm. About 30 licences for fossil fuel prospecting will be granted at future windfarm sites. Photograph: Islandstock/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old Sunak to allow oil and gas exploration at sites intended for offshore wind This article is more than 1 year old Exclusive: decision to grant licences condemned by critics as a stunt that shows Tories are ‘playing politics with climate’ Fossil fuel companies will be allowed to explore for oil and gas under offshore wind-power sites for the first time, the government will announce on Friday, in a move that campaigners said is further proof that ministers are abandoning the climate agenda. The North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA), which regulates North Sea oil and gas production, will confirm that it is granting licences to about 30 companies to look for hydrocarbons on sites earmarked for future offshore windfarms. The move has brought renewed criticism of Rishi Sunak from environmentalists, including from the prime minister’s own former net zero tsar, who worry that any future oil and gas production could hamper clean energy generation. But it will also give the embattled prime minister a welcome piece of news to sell to his restive backbenchers – many of whom are keen to see more oil and gas production in the North Sea – the day after what are set to be a bruising set of local election results. Chris Skidmore, the former Conservative MP who recently quit as Sunak’s net zero champion in protest at the government’s climate policies, said: “With a general election just months away, this is a deeply irresponsible and divisive move that goes against all advice from the International Energy Agency or the UN, and regrettably will further set back the UK’s climate reputation. “Instead of wind powering new oil, the investment should instead be in more wind and renewables. More fossil fuels will only create stranded assets and stranded jobs at a time when demand for oil and gas is falling.” He added: “This is a political and cynical stunt that will only backfire … We need to stop playing politics with climate and people’s future, and take a grownup position on seeking to find consensus for an end date to new oil and gas.” View image in fullscreen The move is likely to help Sunak with his own backbenchers after what are expected to be heavy losses in Thursday’s local elections. Photograph: Chris J Ratcliffe/Reuters A spokesperson for the NSTA said: “The NSTA have worked closely with other regulators to consider matters of co-location with offshore wind and other users.” Sources say that the oil exploration itself will not involve any drilling, with companies largely using data to decide whether sites have the potential to be profitable for extraction. Supporters of the scheme add that if any of the sites under windfarms prove suitable for production, oil and gas platforms will be able to use power from the wind turbines to lower their emissions. They will also have to strike an agreement with windfarm operators before they can begin drilling. Experts say, however, that the emissions from burning any oil and gas produced will far outweigh whatever is saved in the drilling and extraction processes. They add that Friday’s announcement is likely to undermine investor confidence in Britain’s green energy sector as a whole. The Guardian understands that investors in offshore wind have already expressed concern to the government about the decision, even threatening to pull out of the UK clean power sector altogether. Doug Parr, policy director at Greenpeace UK, said: “It’s hard to think of a worse use of clean electricity from windfarms than powering the dirty industry that’s driving the climate crisis. It’s like using a nicotine patch to roll a cigarette.” Sunak has made a series of announcements since becoming prime minister to roll back the government’s climate policies, including delaying the end of new sales of petrol and diesel cars and giving the green light for the huge new Rosebank oilfield off the coast of Shetland. The prime minister has said the policies are part of a push to bring energy costs down and improve energy security. But his critics believe Sunak is using them as a dividing issue between the Conservatives and Labour going into this year’s general election. Last month, Chris Stark, the outgoing head of the Climate Change Committee, accused the prime minister of abandoning Britain’s reputation as a world leader in the fight against the climate crisis. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Sunak, however, is also under pressure from Tory rebels, with the party more than 20 points behind in the polls and heading for heavy losses after Thursday’s local elections. A group of unhappy backbenchers is planning a move to unseat him altogether if the Tories lose the mayoralties in both the Tees Valley and the West Midlands this weekend. View image in fullscreen Chris Skidmore, the Conservatives’ former net zero champion, called the decision ‘irresponsible and divisive’. Photograph: Aaron Chown/PA No 10 has been working for weeks on a fightback plan to ward off any potential coup, and sources have told the Guardian the prime minister is likely to put his energy policies at the heart of any offer he makes to get his own MPs back on side. Friday’s announcement marks the third phase in the 33rd round of North Sea oil and gas licensing. Earlier this year the government gave licences to 17 companies to look for hydrocarbons, including Shell, Equinor, BP, Total and Neo. This phase differs from previous ones, however, because officials are opening up parts of the sea which have been leased to offshore wind operators for the first time. The government issues about 100 licences a year, only 2% of which go on to receive consent for production. Dan McGrail, the chief executive of the trade body RenewableUK, said: “Prioritising offshore wind over oil and gas isn’t just the right choice for the planet, but given renewables are the lowest-cost means of generating power, we should be doing this for bill payers.” Parr said: “Most of the planet-heating emissions from oil and gas rigs come from burning the polluting fuels, not extracting them. “At best, this will make a small dent in the carbon footprint of a few oil companies’ operations. But more likely than not, it will end up greenwashing the fossil fuel industry’s image just as the government keeps trying to expand extraction against the advice of leading scientists and experts.” A spokesperson for the energy department said: “To strengthen our energy security and grow the economy, we want to maximise the huge energy potential of the North Sea. “We will continue to need oil and gas over the coming decades as we increase our share of renewables; that’s why we welcome the work by the NSTA and the Crown Estates to facilitate the co-location of wind and oil and gas projects as the offshore space gets busier.” Explore more on these topics Oil Wind power Fossil fuels Renewable energy Energy Conservatives Rishi Sunak news Share Reuse this content Teesside Offshore Windfarm. About 30 licences for fossil fuel prospecting will be granted at future windfarm sites. Photograph: Islandstock/Alamy View image in fullscreen Teesside Offshore Windfarm. About 30 licences for fossil fuel prospecting will be granted at future windfarm sites. Photograph: Islandstock/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old Sunak to allow oil and gas exploration at sites intended for offshore wind This article is more than 1 year old Exclusive: decision to grant licences condemned by critics as a stunt that shows Tories are ‘playing politics with climate’ Fossil fuel companies will be allowed to explore for oil and gas under offshore wind-power sites for the first time, the government will announce on Friday, in a move that campaigners said is further proof that ministers are abandoning the climate agenda. The North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA), which regulates North Sea oil and gas production, will confirm that it is granting licences to about 30 companies to look for hydrocarbons on sites earmarked for future offshore windfarms. The move has brought renewed criticism of Rishi Sunak from environmentalists, including from the prime minister’s own former net zero tsar, who worry that any future oil and gas production could hamper clean energy generation. But it will also give the embattled prime minister a welcome piece of news to sell to his restive backbenchers – many of whom are keen to see more oil and gas production in the North Sea – the day after what are set to be a bruising set of local election results. Chris Skidmore, the former Conservative MP who recently quit as Sunak’s net zero champion in protest at the government’s climate policies, said: “With a general election just months away, this is a deeply irresponsible and divisive move that goes against all advice from the International Energy Agency or the UN, and regrettably will further set back the UK’s climate reputation. “Instead of wind powering new oil, the investment should instead be in more wind and renewables. More fossil fuels will only create stranded assets and stranded jobs at a time when demand for oil and gas is falling.” He added: “This is a political and cynical stunt that will only backfire … We need to stop playing politics with climate and people’s future, and take a grownup position on seeking to find consensus for an end date to new oil and gas.” View image in fullscreen The move is likely to help Sunak with his own backbenchers after what are expected to be heavy losses in Thursday’s local elections. Photograph: Chris J Ratcliffe/Reuters A spokesperson for the NSTA said: “The NSTA have worked closely with other regulators to consider matters of co-location with offshore wind and other users.” Sources say that the oil exploration itself will not involve any drilling, with companies largely using data to decide whether sites have the potential to be profitable for extraction. Supporters of the scheme add that if any of the sites under windfarms prove suitable for production, oil and gas platforms will be able to use power from the wind turbines to lower their emissions. They will also have to strike an agreement with windfarm operators before they can begin drilling. Experts say, however, that the emissions from burning any oil and gas produced will far outweigh whatever is saved in the drilling and extraction processes. They add that Friday’s announcement is likely to undermine investor confidence in Britain’s green energy sector as a whole. The Guardian understands that investors in offshore wind have already expressed concern to the government about the decision, even threatening to pull out of the UK clean power sector altogether. Doug Parr, policy director at Greenpeace UK, said: “It’s hard to think of a worse use of clean electricity from windfarms than powering the dirty industry that’s driving the climate crisis. It’s like using a nicotine patch to roll a cigarette.” Sunak has made a series of announcements since becoming prime minister to roll back the government’s climate policies, including delaying the end of new sales of petrol and diesel cars and giving the green light for the huge new Rosebank oilfield off the coast of Shetland. The prime minister has said the policies are part of a push to bring energy costs down and improve energy security. But his critics believe Sunak is using them as a dividing issue between the Conservatives and Labour going into this year’s general election. Last month, Chris Stark, the outgoing head of the Climate Change Committee, accused the prime minister of abandoning Britain’s reputation as a world leader in the fight against the climate crisis. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Sunak, however, is also under pressure from Tory rebels, with the party more than 20 points behind in the polls and heading for heavy losses after Thursday’s local elections. A group of unhappy backbenchers is planning a move to unseat him altogether if the Tories lose the mayoralties in both the Tees Valley and the West Midlands this weekend. View image in fullscreen Chris Skidmore, the Conservatives’ former net zero champion, called the decision ‘irresponsible and divisive’. Photograph: Aaron Chown/PA No 10 has been working for weeks on a fightback plan to ward off any potential coup, and sources have told the Guardian the prime minister is likely to put his energy policies at the heart of any offer he makes to get his own MPs back on side. Friday’s announcement marks the third phase in the 33rd round of North Sea oil and gas licensing. Earlier this year the government gave licences to 17 companies to look for hydrocarbons, including Shell, Equinor, BP, Total and Neo. This phase differs from previous ones, however, because officials are opening up parts of the sea which have been leased to offshore wind operators for the first time. The government issues about 100 licences a year, only 2% of which go on to receive consent for production. Dan McGrail, the chief executive of the trade body RenewableUK, said: “Prioritising offshore wind over oil and gas isn’t just the right choice for the planet, but given renewables are the lowest-cost means of generating power, we should be doing this for bill payers.” Parr said: “Most of the planet-heating emissions from oil and gas rigs come from burning the polluting fuels, not extracting them. “At best, this will make a small dent in the carbon footprint of a few oil companies’ operations. But more likely than not, it will end up greenwashing the fossil fuel industry’s image just as the government keeps trying to expand extraction against the advice of leading scientists and experts.” A spokesperson for the energy department said: “To strengthen our energy security and grow the economy, we want to maximise the huge energy potential of the North Sea. “We will continue to need oil and gas over the coming decades as we increase our share of renewables; that’s why we welcome the work by the NSTA and the Crown Estates to facilitate the co-location of wind and oil and gas projects as the offshore space gets busier.” Explore more on these topics Oil Wind power Fossil fuels Renewable energy Energy Conservatives Rishi Sunak news Share Reuse this content Teesside Offshore Windfarm. About 30 licences for fossil fuel prospecting will be granted at future windfarm sites. Photograph: Islandstock/Alamy View image in fullscreen Teesside Offshore Windfarm. About 30 licences for fossil fuel prospecting will be granted at future windfarm sites. Photograph: Islandstock/Alamy Teesside Offshore Windfarm. About 30 licences for fossil fuel prospecting will be granted at future windfarm sites. Photograph: Islandstock/Alamy View image in fullscreen Teesside Offshore Windfarm. About 30 licences for fossil fuel prospecting will be granted at future windfarm sites. Photograph: Islandstock/Alamy Teesside Offshore Windfarm. About 30 licences for fossil fuel prospecting will be granted at future windfarm sites. Photograph: Islandstock/Alamy View image in fullscreen Teesside Offshore Windfarm. About 30 licences for fossil fuel prospecting will be granted at future windfarm sites. Photograph: Islandstock/Alamy Teesside Offshore Windfarm. About 30 licences for fossil fuel prospecting will be granted at future windfarm sites. Photograph: Islandstock/Alamy View image in fullscreen Teesside Offshore Windfarm. About 30 licences for fossil fuel prospecting will be granted at future windfarm sites. Photograph: Islandstock/Alamy Teesside Offshore Windfarm. About 30 licences for fossil fuel prospecting will be granted at future windfarm sites. Photograph: Islandstock/Alamy Teesside Offshore Windfarm. About 30 licences for fossil fuel prospecting will be granted at future windfarm sites. Photograph: Islandstock/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old Sunak to allow oil and gas exploration at sites intended for offshore wind This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Sunak to allow oil and gas exploration at sites intended for offshore wind This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Sunak to allow oil and gas exploration at sites intended for offshore wind This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Exclusive: decision to grant licences condemned by critics as a stunt that shows Tories are ‘playing politics with climate’ Exclusive: decision to grant licences condemned by critics as a stunt that shows Tories are ‘playing politics with climate’ Exclusive: decision to grant licences condemned by critics as a stunt that shows Tories are ‘playing politics with climate’ Fossil fuel companies will be allowed to explore for oil and gas under offshore wind-power sites for the first time, the government will announce on Friday, in a move that campaigners said is further proof that ministers are abandoning the climate agenda. The North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA), which regulates North Sea oil and gas production, will confirm that it is granting licences to about 30 companies to look for hydrocarbons on sites earmarked for future offshore windfarms. The move has brought renewed criticism of Rishi Sunak from environmentalists, including from the prime minister’s own former net zero tsar, who worry that any future oil and gas production could hamper clean energy generation. But it will also give the embattled prime minister a welcome piece of news to sell to his restive backbenchers – many of whom are keen to see more oil and gas production in the North Sea – the day after what are set to be a bruising set of local election results. Chris Skidmore, the former Conservative MP who recently quit as Sunak’s net zero champion in protest at the government’s climate policies, said: “With a general election just months away, this is a deeply irresponsible and divisive move that goes against all advice from the International Energy Agency or the UN, and regrettably will further set back the UK’s climate reputation. “Instead of wind powering new oil, the investment should instead be in more wind and renewables. More fossil fuels will only create stranded assets and stranded jobs at a time when demand for oil and gas is falling.” He added: “This is a political and cynical stunt that will only backfire … We need to stop playing politics with climate and people’s future, and take a grownup position on seeking to find consensus for an end date to new oil and gas.” View image in fullscreen The move is likely to help Sunak with his own backbenchers after what are expected to be heavy losses in Thursday’s local elections. Photograph: Chris J Ratcliffe/Reuters A spokesperson for the NSTA said: “The NSTA have worked closely with other regulators to consider matters of co-location with offshore wind and other users.” Sources say that the oil exploration itself will not involve any drilling, with companies largely using data to decide whether sites have the potential to be profitable for extraction. Supporters of the scheme add that if any of the sites under windfarms prove suitable for production, oil and gas platforms will be able to use power from the wind turbines to lower their emissions. They will also have to strike an agreement with windfarm operators before they can begin drilling. Experts say, however, that the emissions from burning any oil and gas produced will far outweigh whatever is saved in the drilling and extraction processes. They add that Friday’s announcement is likely to undermine investor confidence in Britain’s green energy sector as a whole. The Guardian understands that investors in offshore wind have already expressed concern to the government about the decision, even threatening to pull out of the UK clean power sector altogether. Doug Parr, policy director at Greenpeace UK, said: “It’s hard to think of a worse use of clean electricity from windfarms than powering the dirty industry that’s driving the climate crisis. It’s like using a nicotine patch to roll a cigarette.” Sunak has made a series of announcements since becoming prime minister to roll back the government’s climate policies, including delaying the end of new sales of petrol and diesel cars and giving the green light for the huge new Rosebank oilfield off the coast of Shetland. The prime minister has said the policies are part of a push to bring energy costs down and improve energy security. But his critics believe Sunak is using them as a dividing issue between the Conservatives and Labour going into this year’s general election. Last month, Chris Stark, the outgoing head of the Climate Change Committee, accused the prime minister of abandoning Britain’s reputation as a world leader in the fight against the climate crisis. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Sunak, however, is also under pressure from Tory rebels, with the party more than 20 points behind in the polls and heading for heavy losses after Thursday’s local elections. A group of unhappy backbenchers is planning a move to unseat him altogether if the Tories lose the mayoralties in both the Tees Valley and the West Midlands this weekend. View image in fullscreen Chris Skidmore, the Conservatives’ former net zero champion, called the decision ‘irresponsible and divisive’. Photograph: Aaron Chown/PA No 10 has been working for weeks on a fightback plan to ward off any potential coup, and sources have told the Guardian the prime minister is likely to put his energy policies at the heart of any offer he makes to get his own MPs back on side. Friday’s announcement marks the third phase in the 33rd round of North Sea oil and gas licensing. Earlier this year the government gave licences to 17 companies to look for hydrocarbons, including Shell, Equinor, BP, Total and Neo. This phase differs from previous ones, however, because officials are opening up parts of the sea which have been leased to offshore wind operators for the first time. The government issues about 100 licences a year, only 2% of which go on to receive consent for production. Dan McGrail, the chief executive of the trade body RenewableUK, said: “Prioritising offshore wind over oil and gas isn’t just the right choice for the planet, but given renewables are the lowest-cost means of generating power, we should be doing this for bill payers.” Parr said: “Most of the planet-heating emissions from oil and gas rigs come from burning the polluting fuels, not extracting them. “At best, this will make a small dent in the carbon footprint of a few oil companies’ operations. But more likely than not, it will end up greenwashing the fossil fuel industry’s image just as the government keeps trying to expand extraction against the advice of leading scientists and experts.” A spokesperson for the energy department said: “To strengthen our energy security and grow the economy, we want to maximise the huge energy potential of the North Sea. “We will continue to need oil and gas over the coming decades as we increase our share of renewables; that’s why we welcome the work by the NSTA and the Crown Estates to facilitate the co-location of wind and oil and gas projects as the offshore space gets busier.” Explore more on these topics Oil Wind power Fossil fuels Renewable energy Energy Conservatives Rishi Sunak news Share Reuse this content Fossil fuel companies will be allowed to explore for oil and gas under offshore wind-power sites for the first time, the government will announce on Friday, in a move that campaigners said is further proof that ministers are abandoning the climate agenda. The North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA), which regulates North Sea oil and gas production, will confirm that it is granting licences to about 30 companies to look for hydrocarbons on sites earmarked for future offshore windfarms. The move has brought renewed criticism of Rishi Sunak from environmentalists, including from the prime minister’s own former net zero tsar, who worry that any future oil and gas production could hamper clean energy generation. But it will also give the embattled prime minister a welcome piece of news to sell to his restive backbenchers – many of whom are keen to see more oil and gas production in the North Sea – the day after what are set to be a bruising set of local election results. Chris Skidmore, the former Conservative MP who recently quit as Sunak’s net zero champion in protest at the government’s climate policies, said: “With a general election just months away, this is a deeply irresponsible and divisive move that goes against all advice from the International Energy Agency or the UN, and regrettably will further set back the UK’s climate reputation. “Instead of wind powering new oil, the investment should instead be in more wind and renewables. More fossil fuels will only create stranded assets and stranded jobs at a time when demand for oil and gas is falling.” He added: “This is a political and cynical stunt that will only backfire … We need to stop playing politics with climate and people’s future, and take a grownup position on seeking to find consensus for an end date to new oil and gas.” View image in fullscreen The move is likely to help Sunak with his own backbenchers after what are expected to be heavy losses in Thursday’s local elections. Photograph: Chris J Ratcliffe/Reuters A spokesperson for the NSTA said: “The NSTA have worked closely with other regulators to consider matters of co-location with offshore wind and other users.” Sources say that the oil exploration itself will not involve any drilling, with companies largely using data to decide whether sites have the potential to be profitable for extraction. Supporters of the scheme add that if any of the sites under windfarms prove suitable for production, oil and gas platforms will be able to use power from the wind turbines to lower their emissions. They will also have to strike an agreement with windfarm operators before they can begin drilling. Experts say, however, that the emissions from burning any oil and gas produced will far outweigh whatever is saved in the drilling and extraction processes. They add that Friday’s announcement is likely to undermine investor confidence in Britain’s green energy sector as a whole. The Guardian understands that investors in offshore wind have already expressed concern to the government about the decision, even threatening to pull out of the UK clean power sector altogether. Doug Parr, policy director at Greenpeace UK, said: “It’s hard to think of a worse use of clean electricity from windfarms than powering the dirty industry that’s driving the climate crisis. It’s like using a nicotine patch to roll a cigarette.” Sunak has made a series of announcements since becoming prime minister to roll back the government’s climate policies, including delaying the end of new sales of petrol and diesel cars and giving the green light for the huge new Rosebank oilfield off the coast of Shetland. The prime minister has said the policies are part of a push to bring energy costs down and improve energy security. But his critics believe Sunak is using them as a dividing issue between the Conservatives and Labour going into this year’s general election. Last month, Chris Stark, the outgoing head of the Climate Change Committee, accused the prime minister of abandoning Britain’s reputation as a world leader in the fight against the climate crisis. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Sunak, however, is also under pressure from Tory rebels, with the party more than 20 points behind in the polls and heading for heavy losses after Thursday’s local elections. A group of unhappy backbenchers is planning a move to unseat him altogether if the Tories lose the mayoralties in both the Tees Valley and the West Midlands this weekend. View image in fullscreen Chris Skidmore, the Conservatives’ former net zero champion, called the decision ‘irresponsible and divisive’. Photograph: Aaron Chown/PA No 10 has been working for weeks on a fightback plan to ward off any potential coup, and sources have told the Guardian the prime minister is likely to put his energy policies at the heart of any offer he makes to get his own MPs back on side. Friday’s announcement marks the third phase in the 33rd round of North Sea oil and gas licensing. Earlier this year the government gave licences to 17 companies to look for hydrocarbons, including Shell, Equinor, BP, Total and Neo. This phase differs from previous ones, however, because officials are opening up parts of the sea which have been leased to offshore wind operators for the first time. The government issues about 100 licences a year, only 2% of which go on to receive consent for production. Dan McGrail, the chief executive of the trade body RenewableUK, said: “Prioritising offshore wind over oil and gas isn’t just the right choice for the planet, but given renewables are the lowest-cost means of generating power, we should be doing this for bill payers.” Parr said: “Most of the planet-heating emissions from oil and gas rigs come from burning the polluting fuels, not extracting them. “At best, this will make a small dent in the carbon footprint of a few oil companies’ operations. But more likely than not, it will end up greenwashing the fossil fuel industry’s image just as the government keeps trying to expand extraction against the advice of leading scientists and experts.” A spokesperson for the energy department said: “To strengthen our energy security and grow the economy, we want to maximise the huge energy potential of the North Sea. “We will continue to need oil and gas over the coming decades as we increase our share of renewables; that’s why we welcome the work by the NSTA and the Crown Estates to facilitate the co-location of wind and oil and gas projects as the offshore space gets busier.” Explore more on these topics Oil Wind power Fossil fuels Renewable energy Energy Conservatives Rishi Sunak news Share Reuse this content Fossil fuel companies will be allowed to explore for oil and gas under offshore wind-power sites for the first time, the government will announce on Friday, in a move that campaigners said is further proof that ministers are abandoning the climate agenda. The North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA), which regulates North Sea oil and gas production, will confirm that it is granting licences to about 30 companies to look for hydrocarbons on sites earmarked for future offshore windfarms. The move has brought renewed criticism of Rishi Sunak from environmentalists, including from the prime minister’s own former net zero tsar, who worry that any future oil and gas production could hamper clean energy generation. But it will also give the embattled prime minister a welcome piece of news to sell to his restive backbenchers – many of whom are keen to see more oil and gas production in the North Sea – the day after what are set to be a bruising set of local election results. Chris Skidmore, the former Conservative MP who recently quit as Sunak’s net zero champion in protest at the government’s climate policies, said: “With a general election just months away, this is a deeply irresponsible and divisive move that goes against all advice from the International Energy Agency or the UN, and regrettably will further set back the UK’s climate reputation. “Instead of wind powering new oil, the investment should instead be in more wind and renewables. More fossil fuels will only create stranded assets and stranded jobs at a time when demand for oil and gas is falling.” He added: “This is a political and cynical stunt that will only backfire … We need to stop playing politics with climate and people’s future, and take a grownup position on seeking to find consensus for an end date to new oil and gas.” View image in fullscreen The move is likely to help Sunak with his own backbenchers after what are expected to be heavy losses in Thursday’s local elections. Photograph: Chris J Ratcliffe/Reuters A spokesperson for the NSTA said: “The NSTA have worked closely with other regulators to consider matters of co-location with offshore wind and other users.” Sources say that the oil exploration itself will not involve any drilling, with companies largely using data to decide whether sites have the potential to be profitable for extraction. Supporters of the scheme add that if any of the sites under windfarms prove suitable for production, oil and gas platforms will be able to use power from the wind turbines to lower their emissions. They will also have to strike an agreement with windfarm operators before they can begin drilling. Experts say, however, that the emissions from burning any oil and gas produced will far outweigh whatever is saved in the drilling and extraction processes. They add that Friday’s announcement is likely to undermine investor confidence in Britain’s green energy sector as a whole. The Guardian understands that investors in offshore wind have already expressed concern to the government about the decision, even threatening to pull out of the UK clean power sector altogether. Doug Parr, policy director at Greenpeace UK, said: “It’s hard to think of a worse use of clean electricity from windfarms than powering the dirty industry that’s driving the climate crisis. It’s like using a nicotine patch to roll a cigarette.” Sunak has made a series of announcements since becoming prime minister to roll back the government’s climate policies, including delaying the end of new sales of petrol and diesel cars and giving the green light for the huge new Rosebank oilfield off the coast of Shetland. The prime minister has said the policies are part of a push to bring energy costs down and improve energy security. But his critics believe Sunak is using them as a dividing issue between the Conservatives and Labour going into this year’s general election. Last month, Chris Stark, the outgoing head of the Climate Change Committee, accused the prime minister of abandoning Britain’s reputation as a world leader in the fight against the climate crisis. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Sunak, however, is also under pressure from Tory rebels, with the party more than 20 points behind in the polls and heading for heavy losses after Thursday’s local elections. A group of unhappy backbenchers is planning a move to unseat him altogether if the Tories lose the mayoralties in both the Tees Valley and the West Midlands this weekend. View image in fullscreen Chris Skidmore, the Conservatives’ former net zero champion, called the decision ‘irresponsible and divisive’. Photograph: Aaron Chown/PA No 10 has been working for weeks on a fightback plan to ward off any potential coup, and sources have told the Guardian the prime minister is likely to put his energy policies at the heart of any offer he makes to get his own MPs back on side. Friday’s announcement marks the third phase in the 33rd round of North Sea oil and gas licensing. Earlier this year the government gave licences to 17 companies to look for hydrocarbons, including Shell, Equinor, BP, Total and Neo. This phase differs from previous ones, however, because officials are opening up parts of the sea which have been leased to offshore wind operators for the first time. The government issues about 100 licences a year, only 2% of which go on to receive consent for production. Dan McGrail, the chief executive of the trade body RenewableUK, said: “Prioritising offshore wind over oil and gas isn’t just the right choice for the planet, but given renewables are the lowest-cost means of generating power, we should be doing this for bill payers.” Parr said: “Most of the planet-heating emissions from oil and gas rigs come from burning the polluting fuels, not extracting them. “At best, this will make a small dent in the carbon footprint of a few oil companies’ operations. But more likely than not, it will end up greenwashing the fossil fuel industry’s image just as the government keeps trying to expand extraction against the advice of leading scientists and experts.” A spokesperson for the energy department said: “To strengthen our energy security and grow the economy, we want to maximise the huge energy potential of the North Sea. “We will continue to need oil and gas over the coming decades as we increase our share of renewables; that’s why we welcome the work by the NSTA and the Crown Estates to facilitate the co-location of wind and oil and gas projects as the offshore space gets busier.” Fossil fuel companies will be allowed to explore for oil and gas under offshore wind-power sites for the first time, the government will announce on Friday, in a move that campaigners said is further proof that ministers are abandoning the climate agenda. The North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA), which regulates North Sea oil and gas production, will confirm that it is granting licences to about 30 companies to look for hydrocarbons on sites earmarked for future offshore windfarms. The move has brought renewed criticism of Rishi Sunak from environmentalists, including from the prime minister’s own former net zero tsar, who worry that any future oil and gas production could hamper clean energy generation. But it will also give the embattled prime minister a welcome piece of news to sell to his restive backbenchers – many of whom are keen to see more oil and gas production in the North Sea – the day after what are set to be a bruising set of local election results. Chris Skidmore, the former Conservative MP who recently quit as Sunak’s net zero champion in protest at the government’s climate policies, said: “With a general election just months away, this is a deeply irresponsible and divisive move that goes against all advice from the International Energy Agency or the UN, and regrettably will further set back the UK’s climate reputation. “Instead of wind powering new oil, the investment should instead be in more wind and renewables. More fossil fuels will only create stranded assets and stranded jobs at a time when demand for oil and gas is falling.” He added: “This is a political and cynical stunt that will only backfire … We need to stop playing politics with climate and people’s future, and take a grownup position on seeking to find consensus for an end date to new oil and gas.” View image in fullscreen The move is likely to help Sunak with his own backbenchers after what are expected to be heavy losses in Thursday’s local elections. Photograph: Chris J Ratcliffe/Reuters A spokesperson for the NSTA said: “The NSTA have worked closely with other regulators to consider matters of co-location with offshore wind and other users.” Sources say that the oil exploration itself will not involve any drilling, with companies largely using data to decide whether sites have the potential to be profitable for extraction. Supporters of the scheme add that if any of the sites under windfarms prove suitable for production, oil and gas platforms will be able to use power from the wind turbines to lower their emissions. They will also have to strike an agreement with windfarm operators before they can begin drilling. Experts say, however, that the emissions from burning any oil and gas produced will far outweigh whatever is saved in the drilling and extraction processes. They add that Friday’s announcement is likely to undermine investor confidence in Britain’s green energy sector as a whole. The Guardian understands that investors in offshore wind have already expressed concern to the government about the decision, even threatening to pull out of the UK clean power sector altogether. Doug Parr, policy director at Greenpeace UK, said: “It’s hard to think of a worse use of clean electricity from windfarms than powering the dirty industry that’s driving the climate crisis. It’s like using a nicotine patch to roll a cigarette.” Sunak has made a series of announcements since becoming prime minister to roll back the government’s climate policies, including delaying the end of new sales of petrol and diesel cars and giving the green light for the huge new Rosebank oilfield off the coast of Shetland. The prime minister has said the policies are part of a push to bring energy costs down and improve energy security. But his critics believe Sunak is using them as a dividing issue between the Conservatives and Labour going into this year’s general election. Last month, Chris Stark, the outgoing head of the Climate Change Committee, accused the prime minister of abandoning Britain’s reputation as a world leader in the fight against the climate crisis. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Sunak, however, is also under pressure from Tory rebels, with the party more than 20 points behind in the polls and heading for heavy losses after Thursday’s local elections. A group of unhappy backbenchers is planning a move to unseat him altogether if the Tories lose the mayoralties in both the Tees Valley and the West Midlands this weekend. View image in fullscreen Chris Skidmore, the Conservatives’ former net zero champion, called the decision ‘irresponsible and divisive’. Photograph: Aaron Chown/PA No 10 has been working for weeks on a fightback plan to ward off any potential coup, and sources have told the Guardian the prime minister is likely to put his energy policies at the heart of any offer he makes to get his own MPs back on side. Friday’s announcement marks the third phase in the 33rd round of North Sea oil and gas licensing. Earlier this year the government gave licences to 17 companies to look for hydrocarbons, including Shell, Equinor, BP, Total and Neo. This phase differs from previous ones, however, because officials are opening up parts of the sea which have been leased to offshore wind operators for the first time. The government issues about 100 licences a year, only 2% of which go on to receive consent for production. Dan McGrail, the chief executive of the trade body RenewableUK, said: “Prioritising offshore wind over oil and gas isn’t just the right choice for the planet, but given renewables are the lowest-cost means of generating power, we should be doing this for bill payers.” Parr said: “Most of the planet-heating emissions from oil and gas rigs come from burning the polluting fuels, not extracting them. “At best, this will make a small dent in the carbon footprint of a few oil companies’ operations. But more likely than not, it will end up greenwashing the fossil fuel industry’s image just as the government keeps trying to expand extraction against the advice of leading scientists and experts.” A spokesperson for the energy department said: “To strengthen our energy security and grow the economy, we want to maximise the huge energy potential of the North Sea. “We will continue to need oil and gas over the coming decades as we increase our share of renewables; that’s why we welcome the work by the NSTA and the Crown Estates to facilitate the co-location of wind and oil and gas projects as the offshore space gets busier.” Fossil fuel companies will be allowed to explore for oil and gas under offshore wind-power sites for the first time, the government will announce on Friday, in a move that campaigners said is further proof that ministers are abandoning the climate agenda. The North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA), which regulates North Sea oil and gas production, will confirm that it is granting licences to about 30 companies to look for hydrocarbons on sites earmarked for future offshore windfarms. The move has brought renewed criticism of Rishi Sunak from environmentalists, including from the prime minister’s own former net zero tsar, who worry that any future oil and gas production could hamper clean energy generation. But it will also give the embattled prime minister a welcome piece of news to sell to his restive backbenchers – many of whom are keen to see more oil and gas production in the North Sea – the day after what are set to be a bruising set of local election results. Chris Skidmore, the former Conservative MP who recently quit as Sunak’s net zero champion in protest at the government’s climate policies, said: “With a general election just months away, this is a deeply irresponsible and divisive move that goes against all advice from the International Energy Agency or the UN, and regrettably will further set back the UK’s climate reputation. “Instead of wind powering new oil, the investment should instead be in more wind and renewables. More fossil fuels will only create stranded assets and stranded jobs at a time when demand for oil and gas is falling.” He added: “This is a political and cynical stunt that will only backfire … We need to stop playing politics with climate and people’s future, and take a grownup position on seeking to find consensus for an end date to new oil and gas.” A spokesperson for the NSTA said: “The NSTA have worked closely with other regulators to consider matters of co-location with offshore wind and other users.” Sources say that the oil exploration itself will not involve any drilling, with companies largely using data to decide whether sites have the potential to be profitable for extraction. Supporters of the scheme add that if any of the sites under windfarms prove suitable for production, oil and gas platforms will be able to use power from the wind turbines to lower their emissions. They will also have to strike an agreement with windfarm operators before they can begin drilling. Experts say, however, that the emissions from burning any oil and gas produced will far outweigh whatever is saved in the drilling and extraction processes. They add that Friday’s announcement is likely to undermine investor confidence in Britain’s green energy sector as a whole. The Guardian understands that investors in offshore wind have already expressed concern to the government about the decision, even threatening to pull out of the UK clean power sector altogether. Doug Parr, policy director at Greenpeace UK, said: “It’s hard to think of a worse use of clean electricity from windfarms than powering the dirty industry that’s driving the climate crisis. It’s like using a nicotine patch to roll a cigarette.” Sunak has made a series of announcements since becoming prime minister to roll back the government’s climate policies, including delaying the end of new sales of petrol and diesel cars and giving the green light for the huge new Rosebank oilfield off the coast of Shetland. The prime minister has said the policies are part of a push to bring energy costs down and improve energy security. But his critics believe Sunak is using them as a dividing issue between the Conservatives and Labour going into this year’s general election. Last month, Chris Stark, the outgoing head of the Climate Change Committee, accused the prime minister of abandoning Britain’s reputation as a world leader in the fight against the climate crisis. Sunak, however, is also under pressure from Tory rebels, with the party more than 20 points behind in the polls and heading for heavy losses after Thursday’s local elections. A group of unhappy backbenchers is planning a move to unseat him altogether if the Tories lose the mayoralties in both the Tees Valley and the West Midlands this weekend. No 10 has been working for weeks on a fightback plan to ward off any potential coup, and sources have told the Guardian the prime minister is likely to put his energy policies at the heart of any offer he makes to get his own MPs back on side. Friday’s announcement marks the third phase in the 33rd round of North Sea oil and gas licensing. Earlier this year the government gave licences to 17 companies to look for hydrocarbons, including Shell, Equinor, BP, Total and Neo. This phase differs from previous ones, however, because officials are opening up parts of the sea which have been leased to offshore wind operators for the first time. The government issues about 100 licences a year, only 2% of which go on to receive consent for production. Dan McGrail, the chief executive of the trade body RenewableUK, said: “Prioritising offshore wind over oil and gas isn’t just the right choice for the planet, but given renewables are the lowest-cost means of generating power, we should be doing this for bill payers.” Parr said: “Most of the planet-heating emissions from oil and gas rigs come from burning the polluting fuels, not extracting them. “At best, this will make a small dent in the carbon footprint of a few oil companies’ o
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
‘Promising signs’: Greens dominate in Bristol election
Carla Denyer, co-leader of Green party (centre right) celebrates with councillors Guy Poultney (right) and Mohamed Makawi as news of their hold in Cotham ward in Bristol announced. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Carla Denyer, co-leader of Green party (centre right) celebrates with councillors Guy Poultney (right) and Mohamed Makawi as news of their hold in Cotham ward in Bristol announced. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old ‘Promising signs’: Greens dominate in Bristol election This article is more than 1 year old As party narrowly misses out on overall majority, co-leader says it has won spread of urban and rural seats The Greens are celebrating a spectacular win in Bristol, where it became by far the largest party, as it headed for a record number of councillors in local elections across England. Party officials said they believed they were on track to finish with more than 800 members on more than 170 councils. In Bristol they fell narrowly short of taking overall control, winning 34 of the 70 seats and leaving Labour trailing a distant second with 21. The Bristol Green group, which will lead the council, becomes the largest the party has had. Carla Denyer, the co-leader of the party in England and Wales, said it was an “exciting result”, telling the Guardian: “It’s really encouraging to see so many voters are giving their confidence to the Greens. It’s also a very promising sign for the general election.” The party picked up all 14 seats in the heart of the city, a boost to its chances of winning the Westminster seat of Bristol Central. The Greens went into the Bristol election as the biggest party with 24 seats but not ruling because Labour’s directly elected mayor, Marvin Rees , was in charge. The mayoral post was scrapped, however, clearing the way for the Greens to fight for a place running the city. View image in fullscreen Carla Denyer celebrates with party members. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian The party’s campaign in Bristol was marred after the government’s antisemitism adviser, Lord Mann, raised concerns about posts by two of its candidates. Both won seats. Denyer said: “As soon as we were made aware of those issues we spoke to the candidates and took the actions we needed. The posts weren’t in line with Green party values. “We’ve always been really clear to condemn the Hamas attacks. I’m satisfied it’s dealt with.” Asked if the party’s strong stance on a Gaza ceasefire had won over voters, Denyer said: “A lot of people are thinking about who they trust to make decisions on a local level about providing essential local services. But there is no doubt our stance on national and international issues also affected how people chose to vote. “We had a lot of voters bringing up Labour’s disappointing positions on Gaza and the £28bn climate change investment .” Denyer said that, unlike Labour, the Greens would be willing to work with other parties in the city. “Cross-party cooperation is woven into Green party principles,” she said. Elsewhere, the party was delighted to win first seats on councils including Newcastle upon Tyne, Sefton in Merseyside, Redditch in Worcestershire, and South Norfolk. It became the largest party on Hastings borough council, moving up from fourth place to first. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Adrian Ramsay, the party’s other co-leader, said: “We’ve had a really encouraging set of results, building on what we’ve seen over the last four sets of local elections where we have gained record numbers of Green councillors each time.” He said the party was glad to have won seats in places such as South Tyneside, Exeter, Peterborough and Colchester. “That spread of seats, winning seats from Labour and from the Conservatives in rural areas and in urban areas, really shows the depth and breadth of support the Green party has.” View image in fullscreen Carla Denyer is interviewed on election night. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian Asked why he thought the party was breaking through in places such as Newcastle, Ramsay said: “People are looking for a change and looking for a positive change, looking for councillors who represent them well on local issues, and what we’ve shown up and down the country is the practical impacts that Green councillors can make in being an advocate for their communities on everything from protecting green spaces to defending public services to pressing for more council housing. “These are things that matter to people right around the country and increasingly Greens have a strong track record of winning seats in local government, being strong local representatives, playing a key role in many ruling administrations.” The Greens hope the results will increase their chances in other general election targets such as North Herefordshire and Waveney Valley in East Anglia. The political scientist James Dennison, an expert on the Greens, said: “It looks like a great result [in the local elections]. Let’s see the number of seats but this probably means further establishment of the party at the local level and thus a basis for geographically focused Westminster campaigns. The clear Muslim shift to the Greens is another social group to add to their electoral coalition – environmentalists, protest voters, Corbynistas, [and the] economically struggling in certain historic Tory safe seats.” Explore more on these topics Local elections 2024 Green party Newcastle Bristol Green politics Local elections Local politics news Share Reuse this content Carla Denyer, co-leader of Green party (centre right) celebrates with councillors Guy Poultney (right) and Mohamed Makawi as news of their hold in Cotham ward in Bristol announced. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Carla Denyer, co-leader of Green party (centre right) celebrates with councillors Guy Poultney (right) and Mohamed Makawi as news of their hold in Cotham ward in Bristol announced. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old ‘Promising signs’: Greens dominate in Bristol election This article is more than 1 year old As party narrowly misses out on overall majority, co-leader says it has won spread of urban and rural seats The Greens are celebrating a spectacular win in Bristol, where it became by far the largest party, as it headed for a record number of councillors in local elections across England. Party officials said they believed they were on track to finish with more than 800 members on more than 170 councils. In Bristol they fell narrowly short of taking overall control, winning 34 of the 70 seats and leaving Labour trailing a distant second with 21. The Bristol Green group, which will lead the council, becomes the largest the party has had. Carla Denyer, the co-leader of the party in England and Wales, said it was an “exciting result”, telling the Guardian: “It’s really encouraging to see so many voters are giving their confidence to the Greens. It’s also a very promising sign for the general election.” The party picked up all 14 seats in the heart of the city, a boost to its chances of winning the Westminster seat of Bristol Central. The Greens went into the Bristol election as the biggest party with 24 seats but not ruling because Labour’s directly elected mayor, Marvin Rees , was in charge. The mayoral post was scrapped, however, clearing the way for the Greens to fight for a place running the city. View image in fullscreen Carla Denyer celebrates with party members. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian The party’s campaign in Bristol was marred after the government’s antisemitism adviser, Lord Mann, raised concerns about posts by two of its candidates. Both won seats. Denyer said: “As soon as we were made aware of those issues we spoke to the candidates and took the actions we needed. The posts weren’t in line with Green party values. “We’ve always been really clear to condemn the Hamas attacks. I’m satisfied it’s dealt with.” Asked if the party’s strong stance on a Gaza ceasefire had won over voters, Denyer said: “A lot of people are thinking about who they trust to make decisions on a local level about providing essential local services. But there is no doubt our stance on national and international issues also affected how people chose to vote. “We had a lot of voters bringing up Labour’s disappointing positions on Gaza and the £28bn climate change investment .” Denyer said that, unlike Labour, the Greens would be willing to work with other parties in the city. “Cross-party cooperation is woven into Green party principles,” she said. Elsewhere, the party was delighted to win first seats on councils including Newcastle upon Tyne, Sefton in Merseyside, Redditch in Worcestershire, and South Norfolk. It became the largest party on Hastings borough council, moving up from fourth place to first. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Adrian Ramsay, the party’s other co-leader, said: “We’ve had a really encouraging set of results, building on what we’ve seen over the last four sets of local elections where we have gained record numbers of Green councillors each time.” He said the party was glad to have won seats in places such as South Tyneside, Exeter, Peterborough and Colchester. “That spread of seats, winning seats from Labour and from the Conservatives in rural areas and in urban areas, really shows the depth and breadth of support the Green party has.” View image in fullscreen Carla Denyer is interviewed on election night. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian Asked why he thought the party was breaking through in places such as Newcastle, Ramsay said: “People are looking for a change and looking for a positive change, looking for councillors who represent them well on local issues, and what we’ve shown up and down the country is the practical impacts that Green councillors can make in being an advocate for their communities on everything from protecting green spaces to defending public services to pressing for more council housing. “These are things that matter to people right around the country and increasingly Greens have a strong track record of winning seats in local government, being strong local representatives, playing a key role in many ruling administrations.” The Greens hope the results will increase their chances in other general election targets such as North Herefordshire and Waveney Valley in East Anglia. The political scientist James Dennison, an expert on the Greens, said: “It looks like a great result [in the local elections]. Let’s see the number of seats but this probably means further establishment of the party at the local level and thus a basis for geographically focused Westminster campaigns. The clear Muslim shift to the Greens is another social group to add to their electoral coalition – environmentalists, protest voters, Corbynistas, [and the] economically struggling in certain historic Tory safe seats.” Explore more on these topics Local elections 2024 Green party Newcastle Bristol Green politics Local elections Local politics news Share Reuse this content Carla Denyer, co-leader of Green party (centre right) celebrates with councillors Guy Poultney (right) and Mohamed Makawi as news of their hold in Cotham ward in Bristol announced. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Carla Denyer, co-leader of Green party (centre right) celebrates with councillors Guy Poultney (right) and Mohamed Makawi as news of their hold in Cotham ward in Bristol announced. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian Carla Denyer, co-leader of Green party (centre right) celebrates with councillors Guy Poultney (right) and Mohamed Makawi as news of their hold in Cotham ward in Bristol announced. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Carla Denyer, co-leader of Green party (centre right) celebrates with councillors Guy Poultney (right) and Mohamed Makawi as news of their hold in Cotham ward in Bristol announced. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian Carla Denyer, co-leader of Green party (centre right) celebrates with councillors Guy Poultney (right) and Mohamed Makawi as news of their hold in Cotham ward in Bristol announced. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Carla Denyer, co-leader of Green party (centre right) celebrates with councillors Guy Poultney (right) and Mohamed Makawi as news of their hold in Cotham ward in Bristol announced. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian Carla Denyer, co-leader of Green party (centre right) celebrates with councillors Guy Poultney (right) and Mohamed Makawi as news of their hold in Cotham ward in Bristol announced. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Carla Denyer, co-leader of Green party (centre right) celebrates with councillors Guy Poultney (right) and Mohamed Makawi as news of their hold in Cotham ward in Bristol announced. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian Carla Denyer, co-leader of Green party (centre right) celebrates with councillors Guy Poultney (right) and Mohamed Makawi as news of their hold in Cotham ward in Bristol announced. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian Carla Denyer, co-leader of Green party (centre right) celebrates with councillors Guy Poultney (right) and Mohamed Makawi as news of their hold in Cotham ward in Bristol announced. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old ‘Promising signs’: Greens dominate in Bristol election This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Promising signs’: Greens dominate in Bristol election This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Promising signs’: Greens dominate in Bristol election This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old As party narrowly misses out on overall majority, co-leader says it has won spread of urban and rural seats As party narrowly misses out on overall majority, co-leader says it has won spread of urban and rural seats As party narrowly misses out on overall majority, co-leader says it has won spread of urban and rural seats The Greens are celebrating a spectacular win in Bristol, where it became by far the largest party, as it headed for a record number of councillors in local elections across England. Party officials said they believed they were on track to finish with more than 800 members on more than 170 councils. In Bristol they fell narrowly short of taking overall control, winning 34 of the 70 seats and leaving Labour trailing a distant second with 21. The Bristol Green group, which will lead the council, becomes the largest the party has had. Carla Denyer, the co-leader of the party in England and Wales, said it was an “exciting result”, telling the Guardian: “It’s really encouraging to see so many voters are giving their confidence to the Greens. It’s also a very promising sign for the general election.” The party picked up all 14 seats in the heart of the city, a boost to its chances of winning the Westminster seat of Bristol Central. The Greens went into the Bristol election as the biggest party with 24 seats but not ruling because Labour’s directly elected mayor, Marvin Rees , was in charge. The mayoral post was scrapped, however, clearing the way for the Greens to fight for a place running the city. View image in fullscreen Carla Denyer celebrates with party members. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian The party’s campaign in Bristol was marred after the government’s antisemitism adviser, Lord Mann, raised concerns about posts by two of its candidates. Both won seats. Denyer said: “As soon as we were made aware of those issues we spoke to the candidates and took the actions we needed. The posts weren’t in line with Green party values. “We’ve always been really clear to condemn the Hamas attacks. I’m satisfied it’s dealt with.” Asked if the party’s strong stance on a Gaza ceasefire had won over voters, Denyer said: “A lot of people are thinking about who they trust to make decisions on a local level about providing essential local services. But there is no doubt our stance on national and international issues also affected how people chose to vote. “We had a lot of voters bringing up Labour’s disappointing positions on Gaza and the £28bn climate change investment .” Denyer said that, unlike Labour, the Greens would be willing to work with other parties in the city. “Cross-party cooperation is woven into Green party principles,” she said. Elsewhere, the party was delighted to win first seats on councils including Newcastle upon Tyne, Sefton in Merseyside, Redditch in Worcestershire, and South Norfolk. It became the largest party on Hastings borough council, moving up from fourth place to first. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Adrian Ramsay, the party’s other co-leader, said: “We’ve had a really encouraging set of results, building on what we’ve seen over the last four sets of local elections where we have gained record numbers of Green councillors each time.” He said the party was glad to have won seats in places such as South Tyneside, Exeter, Peterborough and Colchester. “That spread of seats, winning seats from Labour and from the Conservatives in rural areas and in urban areas, really shows the depth and breadth of support the Green party has.” View image in fullscreen Carla Denyer is interviewed on election night. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian Asked why he thought the party was breaking through in places such as Newcastle, Ramsay said: “People are looking for a change and looking for a positive change, looking for councillors who represent them well on local issues, and what we’ve shown up and down the country is the practical impacts that Green councillors can make in being an advocate for their communities on everything from protecting green spaces to defending public services to pressing for more council housing. “These are things that matter to people right around the country and increasingly Greens have a strong track record of winning seats in local government, being strong local representatives, playing a key role in many ruling administrations.” The Greens hope the results will increase their chances in other general election targets such as North Herefordshire and Waveney Valley in East Anglia. The political scientist James Dennison, an expert on the Greens, said: “It looks like a great result [in the local elections]. Let’s see the number of seats but this probably means further establishment of the party at the local level and thus a basis for geographically focused Westminster campaigns. The clear Muslim shift to the Greens is another social group to add to their electoral coalition – environmentalists, protest voters, Corbynistas, [and the] economically struggling in certain historic Tory safe seats.” Explore more on these topics Local elections 2024 Green party Newcastle Bristol Green politics Local elections Local politics news Share Reuse this content The Greens are celebrating a spectacular win in Bristol, where it became by far the largest party, as it headed for a record number of councillors in local elections across England. Party officials said they believed they were on track to finish with more than 800 members on more than 170 councils. In Bristol they fell narrowly short of taking overall control, winning 34 of the 70 seats and leaving Labour trailing a distant second with 21. The Bristol Green group, which will lead the council, becomes the largest the party has had. Carla Denyer, the co-leader of the party in England and Wales, said it was an “exciting result”, telling the Guardian: “It’s really encouraging to see so many voters are giving their confidence to the Greens. It’s also a very promising sign for the general election.” The party picked up all 14 seats in the heart of the city, a boost to its chances of winning the Westminster seat of Bristol Central. The Greens went into the Bristol election as the biggest party with 24 seats but not ruling because Labour’s directly elected mayor, Marvin Rees , was in charge. The mayoral post was scrapped, however, clearing the way for the Greens to fight for a place running the city. View image in fullscreen Carla Denyer celebrates with party members. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian The party’s campaign in Bristol was marred after the government’s antisemitism adviser, Lord Mann, raised concerns about posts by two of its candidates. Both won seats. Denyer said: “As soon as we were made aware of those issues we spoke to the candidates and took the actions we needed. The posts weren’t in line with Green party values. “We’ve always been really clear to condemn the Hamas attacks. I’m satisfied it’s dealt with.” Asked if the party’s strong stance on a Gaza ceasefire had won over voters, Denyer said: “A lot of people are thinking about who they trust to make decisions on a local level about providing essential local services. But there is no doubt our stance on national and international issues also affected how people chose to vote. “We had a lot of voters bringing up Labour’s disappointing positions on Gaza and the £28bn climate change investment .” Denyer said that, unlike Labour, the Greens would be willing to work with other parties in the city. “Cross-party cooperation is woven into Green party principles,” she said. Elsewhere, the party was delighted to win first seats on councils including Newcastle upon Tyne, Sefton in Merseyside, Redditch in Worcestershire, and South Norfolk. It became the largest party on Hastings borough council, moving up from fourth place to first. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Adrian Ramsay, the party’s other co-leader, said: “We’ve had a really encouraging set of results, building on what we’ve seen over the last four sets of local elections where we have gained record numbers of Green councillors each time.” He said the party was glad to have won seats in places such as South Tyneside, Exeter, Peterborough and Colchester. “That spread of seats, winning seats from Labour and from the Conservatives in rural areas and in urban areas, really shows the depth and breadth of support the Green party has.” View image in fullscreen Carla Denyer is interviewed on election night. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian Asked why he thought the party was breaking through in places such as Newcastle, Ramsay said: “People are looking for a change and looking for a positive change, looking for councillors who represent them well on local issues, and what we’ve shown up and down the country is the practical impacts that Green councillors can make in being an advocate for their communities on everything from protecting green spaces to defending public services to pressing for more council housing. “These are things that matter to people right around the country and increasingly Greens have a strong track record of winning seats in local government, being strong local representatives, playing a key role in many ruling administrations.” The Greens hope the results will increase their chances in other general election targets such as North Herefordshire and Waveney Valley in East Anglia. The political scientist James Dennison, an expert on the Greens, said: “It looks like a great result [in the local elections]. Let’s see the number of seats but this probably means further establishment of the party at the local level and thus a basis for geographically focused Westminster campaigns. The clear Muslim shift to the Greens is another social group to add to their electoral coalition – environmentalists, protest voters, Corbynistas, [and the] economically struggling in certain historic Tory safe seats.” Explore more on these topics Local elections 2024 Green party Newcastle Bristol Green politics Local elections Local politics news Share Reuse this content The Greens are celebrating a spectacular win in Bristol, where it became by far the largest party, as it headed for a record number of councillors in local elections across England. Party officials said they believed they were on track to finish with more than 800 members on more than 170 councils. In Bristol they fell narrowly short of taking overall control, winning 34 of the 70 seats and leaving Labour trailing a distant second with 21. The Bristol Green group, which will lead the council, becomes the largest the party has had. Carla Denyer, the co-leader of the party in England and Wales, said it was an “exciting result”, telling the Guardian: “It’s really encouraging to see so many voters are giving their confidence to the Greens. It’s also a very promising sign for the general election.” The party picked up all 14 seats in the heart of the city, a boost to its chances of winning the Westminster seat of Bristol Central. The Greens went into the Bristol election as the biggest party with 24 seats but not ruling because Labour’s directly elected mayor, Marvin Rees , was in charge. The mayoral post was scrapped, however, clearing the way for the Greens to fight for a place running the city. View image in fullscreen Carla Denyer celebrates with party members. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian The party’s campaign in Bristol was marred after the government’s antisemitism adviser, Lord Mann, raised concerns about posts by two of its candidates. Both won seats. Denyer said: “As soon as we were made aware of those issues we spoke to the candidates and took the actions we needed. The posts weren’t in line with Green party values. “We’ve always been really clear to condemn the Hamas attacks. I’m satisfied it’s dealt with.” Asked if the party’s strong stance on a Gaza ceasefire had won over voters, Denyer said: “A lot of people are thinking about who they trust to make decisions on a local level about providing essential local services. But there is no doubt our stance on national and international issues also affected how people chose to vote. “We had a lot of voters bringing up Labour’s disappointing positions on Gaza and the £28bn climate change investment .” Denyer said that, unlike Labour, the Greens would be willing to work with other parties in the city. “Cross-party cooperation is woven into Green party principles,” she said. Elsewhere, the party was delighted to win first seats on councils including Newcastle upon Tyne, Sefton in Merseyside, Redditch in Worcestershire, and South Norfolk. It became the largest party on Hastings borough council, moving up from fourth place to first. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Adrian Ramsay, the party’s other co-leader, said: “We’ve had a really encouraging set of results, building on what we’ve seen over the last four sets of local elections where we have gained record numbers of Green councillors each time.” He said the party was glad to have won seats in places such as South Tyneside, Exeter, Peterborough and Colchester. “That spread of seats, winning seats from Labour and from the Conservatives in rural areas and in urban areas, really shows the depth and breadth of support the Green party has.” View image in fullscreen Carla Denyer is interviewed on election night. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian Asked why he thought the party was breaking through in places such as Newcastle, Ramsay said: “People are looking for a change and looking for a positive change, looking for councillors who represent them well on local issues, and what we’ve shown up and down the country is the practical impacts that Green councillors can make in being an advocate for their communities on everything from protecting green spaces to defending public services to pressing for more council housing. “These are things that matter to people right around the country and increasingly Greens have a strong track record of winning seats in local government, being strong local representatives, playing a key role in many ruling administrations.” The Greens hope the results will increase their chances in other general election targets such as North Herefordshire and Waveney Valley in East Anglia. The political scientist James Dennison, an expert on the Greens, said: “It looks like a great result [in the local elections]. Let’s see the number of seats but this probably means further establishment of the party at the local level and thus a basis for geographically focused Westminster campaigns. The clear Muslim shift to the Greens is another social group to add to their electoral coalition – environmentalists, protest voters, Corbynistas, [and the] economically struggling in certain historic Tory safe seats.” The Greens are celebrating a spectacular win in Bristol, where it became by far the largest party, as it headed for a record number of councillors in local elections across England. Party officials said they believed they were on track to finish with more than 800 members on more than 170 councils. In Bristol they fell narrowly short of taking overall control, winning 34 of the 70 seats and leaving Labour trailing a distant second with 21. The Bristol Green group, which will lead the council, becomes the largest the party has had. Carla Denyer, the co-leader of the party in England and Wales, said it was an “exciting result”, telling the Guardian: “It’s really encouraging to see so many voters are giving their confidence to the Greens. It’s also a very promising sign for the general election.” The party picked up all 14 seats in the heart of the city, a boost to its chances of winning the Westminster seat of Bristol Central. The Greens went into the Bristol election as the biggest party with 24 seats but not ruling because Labour’s directly elected mayor, Marvin Rees , was in charge. The mayoral post was scrapped, however, clearing the way for the Greens to fight for a place running the city. View image in fullscreen Carla Denyer celebrates with party members. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian The party’s campaign in Bristol was marred after the government’s antisemitism adviser, Lord Mann, raised concerns about posts by two of its candidates. Both won seats. Denyer said: “As soon as we were made aware of those issues we spoke to the candidates and took the actions we needed. The posts weren’t in line with Green party values. “We’ve always been really clear to condemn the Hamas attacks. I’m satisfied it’s dealt with.” Asked if the party’s strong stance on a Gaza ceasefire had won over voters, Denyer said: “A lot of people are thinking about who they trust to make decisions on a local level about providing essential local services. But there is no doubt our stance on national and international issues also affected how people chose to vote. “We had a lot of voters bringing up Labour’s disappointing positions on Gaza and the £28bn climate change investment .” Denyer said that, unlike Labour, the Greens would be willing to work with other parties in the city. “Cross-party cooperation is woven into Green party principles,” she said. Elsewhere, the party was delighted to win first seats on councils including Newcastle upon Tyne, Sefton in Merseyside, Redditch in Worcestershire, and South Norfolk. It became the largest party on Hastings borough council, moving up from fourth place to first. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Adrian Ramsay, the party’s other co-leader, said: “We’ve had a really encouraging set of results, building on what we’ve seen over the last four sets of local elections where we have gained record numbers of Green councillors each time.” He said the party was glad to have won seats in places such as South Tyneside, Exeter, Peterborough and Colchester. “That spread of seats, winning seats from Labour and from the Conservatives in rural areas and in urban areas, really shows the depth and breadth of support the Green party has.” View image in fullscreen Carla Denyer is interviewed on election night. Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian Asked why he thought the party was breaking through in places such as Newcastle, Ramsay said: “People are looking for a change and looking for a positive change, looking for councillors who represent them well on local issues, and what we’ve shown up and down the country is the practical impacts that Green councillors can make in being an advocate for their communities on everything from protecting green spaces to defending public services to pressing for more council housing. “These are things that matter to people right around the country and increasingly Greens have a strong track record of winning seats in local government, being strong local representatives, playing a key role in many ruling administrations.” The Greens hope the results will increase their chances in other general election targets such as North Herefordshire and Waveney Valley in East Anglia. The political scientist James Dennison, an expert on the Greens, said: “It looks like a great result [in the local elections]. Let’s see the number of seats but this probably means further establishment of the party at the local level and thus a basis for geographically focused Westminster campaigns. The clear Muslim shift to the Greens is another social group to add to their electoral coalition – environmentalists, protest voters, Corbynistas, [and the] economically struggling in certain historic Tory safe seats.” The Greens are celebrating a spectacular win in Bristol, where it became by far the largest party, as it headed for a record number of councillors in local elections across England. Party officials said they believed they were on track to finish with more than 800 members on more than 170 councils. In Bristol they fell narrowly short of taking overall control, winning 34 of the 70 seats and leaving Labour trailing a distant second with 21. The Bristol Green group, which will lead the council, becomes the largest the party has had. Carla Denyer, the co-leader of the party in England and Wales, said it was an “exciting result”, telling the Guardian: “It’s really encouraging to see so many voters are giving their confidence to the Greens. It’s also a very promising sign for the general election.” The party picked up all 14 seats in the heart of the city, a boost to its chances of winning the Westminster seat of Bristol Central. The Greens went into the Bristol election as the biggest party with 24 seats but not ruling because Labour’s directly elected mayor, Marvin Rees , was in charge. The mayoral post was scrapped, however, clearing the way for the Greens to fight for a place running the city. The party’s campaign in Bristol was marred after the government’s antisemitism adviser, Lord Mann, raised concerns about posts by two of its candidates. Both won seats. Denyer said: “As soon as we were made aware of those issues we spoke to the candidates and took the actions we needed. The posts weren’t in line with Green party values. “We’ve always been really clear to condemn the Hamas attacks. I’m satisfied it’s dealt with.” Asked if the party’s strong stance on a Gaza ceasefire had won over voters, Denyer said: “A lot of people are thinking about who they trust to make decisions on a local level about providing essential local services. But there is no doubt our stance on national and international issues also affected how people chose to vote. “We had a lot of voters bringing up Labour’s disappointing positions on Gaza and the £28bn climate change investment .” Denyer said that, unlike Labour, the Greens would be willing to work with other parties in the city. “Cross-party cooperation is woven into Green party principles,” she said. Elsewhere, the party was delighted to win first seats on councils including Newcastle upon Tyne, Sefton in Merseyside, Redditch in Worcestershire, and South Norfolk. It became the largest party on Hastings borough council, moving up from fourth place to first. Adrian Ramsay, the party’s other co-leader, said: “We’ve had a really encouraging set of results, building on what we’ve seen over the last four sets of local elections where we have gained record numbers of Green councillors each time.” He said the party was glad to have won seats in places such as South Tyneside, Exeter, Peterborough and Colchester. “That spread of seats, winning seats from Labour and from the Conservatives in rural areas and in urban areas, really shows the depth and breadth of support the Green party has.” Asked why he thought the party was breaking through in places such as Newcastle, Ramsay said: “People are looking for a change and looking for a positive change, looking for councillors who represent them well on local issues, and what we’ve shown up and down the country is the practical impacts that Green councillors can make in being an advocate for their communities on everything from protecting green spaces to defending public services to pressing for more council housing. “These are things that matter to people right around the country and increasingly Greens have a strong track record of winning seats in local government, being strong local representatives, playing a key role in many ruling administrations.” The Greens hope the results will increase their chances in other general election targets such as North Herefordshire and Waveney Valley in East Anglia. The political scientist James Dennison, an expert on the Greens, said: “It looks like a great result [in the local elections]. Let’s see the number of seats but this probably means further establishment of the party at the local level and thus a basis for geographically focused Westminster campaigns. The clear Muslim shift to the Greens is another social group to add to their electoral coalition – environmentalists, protest voters, Corbynistas, [and the] economically struggling in certain historic Tory safe seats.” Explore more on these topics Local elections 2024 Green party Newcastle Bristol Green politics Local elections Local politics news Share Reuse this content Local elections 2024 Green party Newcastle Bristol Green politics Local elections Local politics news |
‘Disrupt whenever possible’: police clash with protesters blocking bus to Bibby Stockholm – video
Live This article is more than 1 year old ‘Disrupt whenever possible’: police clash with protesters blocking bus to Bibby Stockholm – video This article is more than 1 year old Hundreds of protesters prevented an attempt to collect asylum seekers from a south London hotel and transfer them to the Bibby Stockholm barge. The Guardian witnessed crowds blocking the bus and the road outside the Best Western hotel in Peckham before police were able to move in and break up the protest. The bus eventually left the area after seven hours, with no asylum seekers onboard London protesters block transfer of asylum seekers to Bibby Stockholm Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum Bibby Stockholm Rwanda Protest Home Office Live This article is more than 1 year old ‘Disrupt whenever possible’: police clash with protesters blocking bus to Bibby Stockholm – video This article is more than 1 year old Hundreds of protesters prevented an attempt to collect asylum seekers from a south London hotel and transfer them to the Bibby Stockholm barge. The Guardian witnessed crowds blocking the bus and the road outside the Best Western hotel in Peckham before police were able to move in and break up the protest. The bus eventually left the area after seven hours, with no asylum seekers onboard London protesters block transfer of asylum seekers to Bibby Stockholm Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum Bibby Stockholm Rwanda Protest Home Office This article is more than 1 year old ‘Disrupt whenever possible’: police clash with protesters blocking bus to Bibby Stockholm – video This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Disrupt whenever possible’: police clash with protesters blocking bus to Bibby Stockholm – video This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Disrupt whenever possible’: police clash with protesters blocking bus to Bibby Stockholm – video This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Hundreds of protesters prevented an attempt to collect asylum seekers from a south London hotel and transfer them to the Bibby Stockholm barge. The Guardian witnessed crowds blocking the bus and the road outside the Best Western hotel in Peckham before police were able to move in and break up the protest. The bus eventually left the area after seven hours, with no asylum seekers onboard London protesters block transfer of asylum seekers to Bibby Stockholm Hundreds of protesters prevented an attempt to collect asylum seekers from a south London hotel and transfer them to the Bibby Stockholm barge. The Guardian witnessed crowds blocking the bus and the road outside the Best Western hotel in Peckham before police were able to move in and break up the protest. The bus eventually left the area after seven hours, with no asylum seekers onboard London protesters block transfer of asylum seekers to Bibby Stockholm Hundreds of protesters prevented an attempt to collect asylum seekers from a south London hotel and transfer them to the Bibby Stockholm barge. The Guardian witnessed crowds blocking the bus and the road outside the Best Western hotel in Peckham before police were able to move in and break up the protest. The bus eventually left the area after seven hours, with no asylum seekers onboard London protesters block transfer of asylum seekers to Bibby Stockholm Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum Bibby Stockholm Rwanda Protest Home Office Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum Bibby Stockholm Rwanda Protest Home Office Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum Bibby Stockholm Rwanda Protest Home Office Immigration and asylum Bibby Stockholm Rwanda Protest Home Office |
Seth Meyers on campus unrest: ‘The story is what’s happening in Gaza’
Seth Meyers on campus protests: ‘No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about.’ Photograph: YouTube View image in fullscreen Seth Meyers on campus protests: ‘No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about.’ Photograph: YouTube This article is more than 1 year old Seth Meyers on campus unrest: ‘The story is what’s happening in Gaza’ This article is more than 1 year old Late-night hosts talk police crackdowns on pro-Palestinian protests, Trump’s court naps and Kristi Noem’s dogged defense Late-night hosts talked use of force against college protesters and Donald Trump’s apparent struggle to stay awake during his criminal hush-money trial. Seth Meyers Seth Meyers responded to police crackdowns on college pro-Palestinian protesters nationwide this week, representing an unprecedented and disproportional use of force. He particularly cited Columbia, where the NYPD responded to a small group of students in a building with a huge riot squad. In a press conference, Mayor Eric Adams bragged about the NYPD managing to have “the element of surprise”. “Element of surprise? Did you see footage of the police approaching the school?” the Late Night host scoffed. “Usually when there are that many police together at one time, Bane is about to trick them into the Gotham City tunnels. “As a New Yorker, I just want to say I really appreciate knowing that this is where my tax dollars are going: using drones to round up co-eds rather than, say, keeping libraries open or building affordable housing or making sure the F train isn’t a total piece of shit,” Meyers deadpanned. Stephen Colbert on Trump’s trial: ‘He lasts only a few furious minutes and then nods off’ Read more “The NYPD responded with advanced technology and unprecedented force to a college protest. Columbia and city officials said they were left with no choice,” he continued. “And I mean let’s face it, it’s not like they had many alternatives. Unfortunately, there’s just no other way for a college to deal with a protest like this.” Meyers then played a clip from Brown University, where school officials reached an agreement with protesters to hold a vote later this year on ending investments in Israel; as a response, the students would disband an encampment on school grounds. “But what about our drones? If there’s a peaceful settlement, what are we going to do with all our drones?!” Meyers mocked. Jokes aside, Meyers concluded: “No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about. “The story is what’s happening in Gaza,” he added. “That’s what the protests are about.” Jimmy Kimmel In Los Angeles, Jimmy Kimmel bragged about his relevance to Trump’s criminal trial in New York, after prosecutors showed texts between lawyers about Stormy Daniels’ appearance on his show in 2018. “We are part of it now. We are part of the official record of the People v Donald Trump,” Kimmel said. “Suffice it to say that when Ryan Murphy makes the nine-part mini-series about this for Fubo, I will be in it. I would assume someone like George Clooney or maybe Chris Hemsworth will be playing me. “I don’t want to brag, but first time a late-night talkshow has been introduced into evidence in the criminal trial for a president of the United States,” he added. While Kimmel was “pleased as punch” to be included in the trial, he expressed disappointment that his other segment with Daniels from 2018 wasn’t mentioned, when he had her pick which orange mushroom most resembled the former president’s penis. “This is why I want to be in court. I’m sick of being out of the court. I want to be in it! Why was I not asked to testify? It’s outrageous! I’m going to start suing people,” he joked. “And I think I could keep Trump awake during the trial.” Stephen Colbert Thursday was a “10 out of 10” spring day in New York City, said Stephen Colbert on The Late Show. “Warm, sunny, a perfect time for Donald Trump to be stuck in a courtroom freezing his drowsy balls off.” On Thursday, Trump’s eyes were reportedly closed at the start of testimony. But his lawyers seemed “acutely aware” of how important his consciousness is to the case, according to the New York Times, and kept glancing over at him. “Eventually, they’re just going to have to put him on a baby monitor,” said Colbert. Thursday’s proceedings mostly saw testimony from lawyer Keith Davidson, who was asked several times to explain common internet abbreviations, including “wtf”. “Of course, in any text about Trump, it stands for ‘wake the farter,’” Colbert quipped. Colbert also touched on the “tragic career suicide” of the South Dakota governor and former Trump running mate hopeful Kristi Noem, after she talked about killing her 14-month-old puppy and a family goat in her new book. “I’ll be honest, I was conflicted about whether or not I should keep talking about it, because unlike Kristi Noem I don’t like beating a dead horse,” Colbert joked. Noem went on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show to defend herself, saying the 14-month-old Cricket was “a working dog, not a puppy”. “That’s right, she was a working dog, so Noem did not shoot her puppy. She shot her employee,” Colbert joked. Noem went on to claim that she’s a “dog lover” and “been around hundreds of them, of course”. “Although before she got there, it used to be thousands,” Colbert quipped. Explore more on these topics Late-night TV roundup Seth Meyers Jimmy Kimmel Stephen Colbert TV comedy Comedy Television features Share Reuse this content Seth Meyers on campus protests: ‘No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about.’ Photograph: YouTube View image in fullscreen Seth Meyers on campus protests: ‘No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about.’ Photograph: YouTube This article is more than 1 year old Seth Meyers on campus unrest: ‘The story is what’s happening in Gaza’ This article is more than 1 year old Late-night hosts talk police crackdowns on pro-Palestinian protests, Trump’s court naps and Kristi Noem’s dogged defense Late-night hosts talked use of force against college protesters and Donald Trump’s apparent struggle to stay awake during his criminal hush-money trial. Seth Meyers Seth Meyers responded to police crackdowns on college pro-Palestinian protesters nationwide this week, representing an unprecedented and disproportional use of force. He particularly cited Columbia, where the NYPD responded to a small group of students in a building with a huge riot squad. In a press conference, Mayor Eric Adams bragged about the NYPD managing to have “the element of surprise”. “Element of surprise? Did you see footage of the police approaching the school?” the Late Night host scoffed. “Usually when there are that many police together at one time, Bane is about to trick them into the Gotham City tunnels. “As a New Yorker, I just want to say I really appreciate knowing that this is where my tax dollars are going: using drones to round up co-eds rather than, say, keeping libraries open or building affordable housing or making sure the F train isn’t a total piece of shit,” Meyers deadpanned. Stephen Colbert on Trump’s trial: ‘He lasts only a few furious minutes and then nods off’ Read more “The NYPD responded with advanced technology and unprecedented force to a college protest. Columbia and city officials said they were left with no choice,” he continued. “And I mean let’s face it, it’s not like they had many alternatives. Unfortunately, there’s just no other way for a college to deal with a protest like this.” Meyers then played a clip from Brown University, where school officials reached an agreement with protesters to hold a vote later this year on ending investments in Israel; as a response, the students would disband an encampment on school grounds. “But what about our drones? If there’s a peaceful settlement, what are we going to do with all our drones?!” Meyers mocked. Jokes aside, Meyers concluded: “No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about. “The story is what’s happening in Gaza,” he added. “That’s what the protests are about.” Jimmy Kimmel In Los Angeles, Jimmy Kimmel bragged about his relevance to Trump’s criminal trial in New York, after prosecutors showed texts between lawyers about Stormy Daniels’ appearance on his show in 2018. “We are part of it now. We are part of the official record of the People v Donald Trump,” Kimmel said. “Suffice it to say that when Ryan Murphy makes the nine-part mini-series about this for Fubo, I will be in it. I would assume someone like George Clooney or maybe Chris Hemsworth will be playing me. “I don’t want to brag, but first time a late-night talkshow has been introduced into evidence in the criminal trial for a president of the United States,” he added. While Kimmel was “pleased as punch” to be included in the trial, he expressed disappointment that his other segment with Daniels from 2018 wasn’t mentioned, when he had her pick which orange mushroom most resembled the former president’s penis. “This is why I want to be in court. I’m sick of being out of the court. I want to be in it! Why was I not asked to testify? It’s outrageous! I’m going to start suing people,” he joked. “And I think I could keep Trump awake during the trial.” Stephen Colbert Thursday was a “10 out of 10” spring day in New York City, said Stephen Colbert on The Late Show. “Warm, sunny, a perfect time for Donald Trump to be stuck in a courtroom freezing his drowsy balls off.” On Thursday, Trump’s eyes were reportedly closed at the start of testimony. But his lawyers seemed “acutely aware” of how important his consciousness is to the case, according to the New York Times, and kept glancing over at him. “Eventually, they’re just going to have to put him on a baby monitor,” said Colbert. Thursday’s proceedings mostly saw testimony from lawyer Keith Davidson, who was asked several times to explain common internet abbreviations, including “wtf”. “Of course, in any text about Trump, it stands for ‘wake the farter,’” Colbert quipped. Colbert also touched on the “tragic career suicide” of the South Dakota governor and former Trump running mate hopeful Kristi Noem, after she talked about killing her 14-month-old puppy and a family goat in her new book. “I’ll be honest, I was conflicted about whether or not I should keep talking about it, because unlike Kristi Noem I don’t like beating a dead horse,” Colbert joked. Noem went on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show to defend herself, saying the 14-month-old Cricket was “a working dog, not a puppy”. “That’s right, she was a working dog, so Noem did not shoot her puppy. She shot her employee,” Colbert joked. Noem went on to claim that she’s a “dog lover” and “been around hundreds of them, of course”. “Although before she got there, it used to be thousands,” Colbert quipped. Explore more on these topics Late-night TV roundup Seth Meyers Jimmy Kimmel Stephen Colbert TV comedy Comedy Television features Share Reuse this content Seth Meyers on campus protests: ‘No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about.’ Photograph: YouTube View image in fullscreen Seth Meyers on campus protests: ‘No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about.’ Photograph: YouTube Seth Meyers on campus protests: ‘No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about.’ Photograph: YouTube View image in fullscreen Seth Meyers on campus protests: ‘No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about.’ Photograph: YouTube Seth Meyers on campus protests: ‘No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about.’ Photograph: YouTube View image in fullscreen Seth Meyers on campus protests: ‘No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about.’ Photograph: YouTube Seth Meyers on campus protests: ‘No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about.’ Photograph: YouTube View image in fullscreen Seth Meyers on campus protests: ‘No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about.’ Photograph: YouTube Seth Meyers on campus protests: ‘No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about.’ Photograph: YouTube Seth Meyers on campus protests: ‘No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about.’ Photograph: YouTube This article is more than 1 year old Seth Meyers on campus unrest: ‘The story is what’s happening in Gaza’ This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Seth Meyers on campus unrest: ‘The story is what’s happening in Gaza’ This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Seth Meyers on campus unrest: ‘The story is what’s happening in Gaza’ This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Late-night hosts talk police crackdowns on pro-Palestinian protests, Trump’s court naps and Kristi Noem’s dogged defense Late-night hosts talk police crackdowns on pro-Palestinian protests, Trump’s court naps and Kristi Noem’s dogged defense Late-night hosts talk police crackdowns on pro-Palestinian protests, Trump’s court naps and Kristi Noem’s dogged defense Late-night hosts talked use of force against college protesters and Donald Trump’s apparent struggle to stay awake during his criminal hush-money trial. Seth Meyers Seth Meyers responded to police crackdowns on college pro-Palestinian protesters nationwide this week, representing an unprecedented and disproportional use of force. He particularly cited Columbia, where the NYPD responded to a small group of students in a building with a huge riot squad. In a press conference, Mayor Eric Adams bragged about the NYPD managing to have “the element of surprise”. “Element of surprise? Did you see footage of the police approaching the school?” the Late Night host scoffed. “Usually when there are that many police together at one time, Bane is about to trick them into the Gotham City tunnels. “As a New Yorker, I just want to say I really appreciate knowing that this is where my tax dollars are going: using drones to round up co-eds rather than, say, keeping libraries open or building affordable housing or making sure the F train isn’t a total piece of shit,” Meyers deadpanned. Stephen Colbert on Trump’s trial: ‘He lasts only a few furious minutes and then nods off’ Read more “The NYPD responded with advanced technology and unprecedented force to a college protest. Columbia and city officials said they were left with no choice,” he continued. “And I mean let’s face it, it’s not like they had many alternatives. Unfortunately, there’s just no other way for a college to deal with a protest like this.” Meyers then played a clip from Brown University, where school officials reached an agreement with protesters to hold a vote later this year on ending investments in Israel; as a response, the students would disband an encampment on school grounds. “But what about our drones? If there’s a peaceful settlement, what are we going to do with all our drones?!” Meyers mocked. Jokes aside, Meyers concluded: “No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about. “The story is what’s happening in Gaza,” he added. “That’s what the protests are about.” Jimmy Kimmel In Los Angeles, Jimmy Kimmel bragged about his relevance to Trump’s criminal trial in New York, after prosecutors showed texts between lawyers about Stormy Daniels’ appearance on his show in 2018. “We are part of it now. We are part of the official record of the People v Donald Trump,” Kimmel said. “Suffice it to say that when Ryan Murphy makes the nine-part mini-series about this for Fubo, I will be in it. I would assume someone like George Clooney or maybe Chris Hemsworth will be playing me. “I don’t want to brag, but first time a late-night talkshow has been introduced into evidence in the criminal trial for a president of the United States,” he added. While Kimmel was “pleased as punch” to be included in the trial, he expressed disappointment that his other segment with Daniels from 2018 wasn’t mentioned, when he had her pick which orange mushroom most resembled the former president’s penis. “This is why I want to be in court. I’m sick of being out of the court. I want to be in it! Why was I not asked to testify? It’s outrageous! I’m going to start suing people,” he joked. “And I think I could keep Trump awake during the trial.” Stephen Colbert Thursday was a “10 out of 10” spring day in New York City, said Stephen Colbert on The Late Show. “Warm, sunny, a perfect time for Donald Trump to be stuck in a courtroom freezing his drowsy balls off.” On Thursday, Trump’s eyes were reportedly closed at the start of testimony. But his lawyers seemed “acutely aware” of how important his consciousness is to the case, according to the New York Times, and kept glancing over at him. “Eventually, they’re just going to have to put him on a baby monitor,” said Colbert. Thursday’s proceedings mostly saw testimony from lawyer Keith Davidson, who was asked several times to explain common internet abbreviations, including “wtf”. “Of course, in any text about Trump, it stands for ‘wake the farter,’” Colbert quipped. Colbert also touched on the “tragic career suicide” of the South Dakota governor and former Trump running mate hopeful Kristi Noem, after she talked about killing her 14-month-old puppy and a family goat in her new book. “I’ll be honest, I was conflicted about whether or not I should keep talking about it, because unlike Kristi Noem I don’t like beating a dead horse,” Colbert joked. Noem went on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show to defend herself, saying the 14-month-old Cricket was “a working dog, not a puppy”. “That’s right, she was a working dog, so Noem did not shoot her puppy. She shot her employee,” Colbert joked. Noem went on to claim that she’s a “dog lover” and “been around hundreds of them, of course”. “Although before she got there, it used to be thousands,” Colbert quipped. Explore more on these topics Late-night TV roundup Seth Meyers Jimmy Kimmel Stephen Colbert TV comedy Comedy Television features Share Reuse this content Late-night hosts talked use of force against college protesters and Donald Trump’s apparent struggle to stay awake during his criminal hush-money trial. Seth Meyers Seth Meyers responded to police crackdowns on college pro-Palestinian protesters nationwide this week, representing an unprecedented and disproportional use of force. He particularly cited Columbia, where the NYPD responded to a small group of students in a building with a huge riot squad. In a press conference, Mayor Eric Adams bragged about the NYPD managing to have “the element of surprise”. “Element of surprise? Did you see footage of the police approaching the school?” the Late Night host scoffed. “Usually when there are that many police together at one time, Bane is about to trick them into the Gotham City tunnels. “As a New Yorker, I just want to say I really appreciate knowing that this is where my tax dollars are going: using drones to round up co-eds rather than, say, keeping libraries open or building affordable housing or making sure the F train isn’t a total piece of shit,” Meyers deadpanned. Stephen Colbert on Trump’s trial: ‘He lasts only a few furious minutes and then nods off’ Read more “The NYPD responded with advanced technology and unprecedented force to a college protest. Columbia and city officials said they were left with no choice,” he continued. “And I mean let’s face it, it’s not like they had many alternatives. Unfortunately, there’s just no other way for a college to deal with a protest like this.” Meyers then played a clip from Brown University, where school officials reached an agreement with protesters to hold a vote later this year on ending investments in Israel; as a response, the students would disband an encampment on school grounds. “But what about our drones? If there’s a peaceful settlement, what are we going to do with all our drones?!” Meyers mocked. Jokes aside, Meyers concluded: “No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about. “The story is what’s happening in Gaza,” he added. “That’s what the protests are about.” Jimmy Kimmel In Los Angeles, Jimmy Kimmel bragged about his relevance to Trump’s criminal trial in New York, after prosecutors showed texts between lawyers about Stormy Daniels’ appearance on his show in 2018. “We are part of it now. We are part of the official record of the People v Donald Trump,” Kimmel said. “Suffice it to say that when Ryan Murphy makes the nine-part mini-series about this for Fubo, I will be in it. I would assume someone like George Clooney or maybe Chris Hemsworth will be playing me. “I don’t want to brag, but first time a late-night talkshow has been introduced into evidence in the criminal trial for a president of the United States,” he added. While Kimmel was “pleased as punch” to be included in the trial, he expressed disappointment that his other segment with Daniels from 2018 wasn’t mentioned, when he had her pick which orange mushroom most resembled the former president’s penis. “This is why I want to be in court. I’m sick of being out of the court. I want to be in it! Why was I not asked to testify? It’s outrageous! I’m going to start suing people,” he joked. “And I think I could keep Trump awake during the trial.” Stephen Colbert Thursday was a “10 out of 10” spring day in New York City, said Stephen Colbert on The Late Show. “Warm, sunny, a perfect time for Donald Trump to be stuck in a courtroom freezing his drowsy balls off.” On Thursday, Trump’s eyes were reportedly closed at the start of testimony. But his lawyers seemed “acutely aware” of how important his consciousness is to the case, according to the New York Times, and kept glancing over at him. “Eventually, they’re just going to have to put him on a baby monitor,” said Colbert. Thursday’s proceedings mostly saw testimony from lawyer Keith Davidson, who was asked several times to explain common internet abbreviations, including “wtf”. “Of course, in any text about Trump, it stands for ‘wake the farter,’” Colbert quipped. Colbert also touched on the “tragic career suicide” of the South Dakota governor and former Trump running mate hopeful Kristi Noem, after she talked about killing her 14-month-old puppy and a family goat in her new book. “I’ll be honest, I was conflicted about whether or not I should keep talking about it, because unlike Kristi Noem I don’t like beating a dead horse,” Colbert joked. Noem went on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show to defend herself, saying the 14-month-old Cricket was “a working dog, not a puppy”. “That’s right, she was a working dog, so Noem did not shoot her puppy. She shot her employee,” Colbert joked. Noem went on to claim that she’s a “dog lover” and “been around hundreds of them, of course”. “Although before she got there, it used to be thousands,” Colbert quipped. Explore more on these topics Late-night TV roundup Seth Meyers Jimmy Kimmel Stephen Colbert TV comedy Comedy Television features Share Reuse this content Late-night hosts talked use of force against college protesters and Donald Trump’s apparent struggle to stay awake during his criminal hush-money trial. Seth Meyers Seth Meyers responded to police crackdowns on college pro-Palestinian protesters nationwide this week, representing an unprecedented and disproportional use of force. He particularly cited Columbia, where the NYPD responded to a small group of students in a building with a huge riot squad. In a press conference, Mayor Eric Adams bragged about the NYPD managing to have “the element of surprise”. “Element of surprise? Did you see footage of the police approaching the school?” the Late Night host scoffed. “Usually when there are that many police together at one time, Bane is about to trick them into the Gotham City tunnels. “As a New Yorker, I just want to say I really appreciate knowing that this is where my tax dollars are going: using drones to round up co-eds rather than, say, keeping libraries open or building affordable housing or making sure the F train isn’t a total piece of shit,” Meyers deadpanned. Stephen Colbert on Trump’s trial: ‘He lasts only a few furious minutes and then nods off’ Read more “The NYPD responded with advanced technology and unprecedented force to a college protest. Columbia and city officials said they were left with no choice,” he continued. “And I mean let’s face it, it’s not like they had many alternatives. Unfortunately, there’s just no other way for a college to deal with a protest like this.” Meyers then played a clip from Brown University, where school officials reached an agreement with protesters to hold a vote later this year on ending investments in Israel; as a response, the students would disband an encampment on school grounds. “But what about our drones? If there’s a peaceful settlement, what are we going to do with all our drones?!” Meyers mocked. Jokes aside, Meyers concluded: “No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about. “The story is what’s happening in Gaza,” he added. “That’s what the protests are about.” Jimmy Kimmel In Los Angeles, Jimmy Kimmel bragged about his relevance to Trump’s criminal trial in New York, after prosecutors showed texts between lawyers about Stormy Daniels’ appearance on his show in 2018. “We are part of it now. We are part of the official record of the People v Donald Trump,” Kimmel said. “Suffice it to say that when Ryan Murphy makes the nine-part mini-series about this for Fubo, I will be in it. I would assume someone like George Clooney or maybe Chris Hemsworth will be playing me. “I don’t want to brag, but first time a late-night talkshow has been introduced into evidence in the criminal trial for a president of the United States,” he added. While Kimmel was “pleased as punch” to be included in the trial, he expressed disappointment that his other segment with Daniels from 2018 wasn’t mentioned, when he had her pick which orange mushroom most resembled the former president’s penis. “This is why I want to be in court. I’m sick of being out of the court. I want to be in it! Why was I not asked to testify? It’s outrageous! I’m going to start suing people,” he joked. “And I think I could keep Trump awake during the trial.” Stephen Colbert Thursday was a “10 out of 10” spring day in New York City, said Stephen Colbert on The Late Show. “Warm, sunny, a perfect time for Donald Trump to be stuck in a courtroom freezing his drowsy balls off.” On Thursday, Trump’s eyes were reportedly closed at the start of testimony. But his lawyers seemed “acutely aware” of how important his consciousness is to the case, according to the New York Times, and kept glancing over at him. “Eventually, they’re just going to have to put him on a baby monitor,” said Colbert. Thursday’s proceedings mostly saw testimony from lawyer Keith Davidson, who was asked several times to explain common internet abbreviations, including “wtf”. “Of course, in any text about Trump, it stands for ‘wake the farter,’” Colbert quipped. Colbert also touched on the “tragic career suicide” of the South Dakota governor and former Trump running mate hopeful Kristi Noem, after she talked about killing her 14-month-old puppy and a family goat in her new book. “I’ll be honest, I was conflicted about whether or not I should keep talking about it, because unlike Kristi Noem I don’t like beating a dead horse,” Colbert joked. Noem went on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show to defend herself, saying the 14-month-old Cricket was “a working dog, not a puppy”. “That’s right, she was a working dog, so Noem did not shoot her puppy. She shot her employee,” Colbert joked. Noem went on to claim that she’s a “dog lover” and “been around hundreds of them, of course”. “Although before she got there, it used to be thousands,” Colbert quipped. Late-night hosts talked use of force against college protesters and Donald Trump’s apparent struggle to stay awake during his criminal hush-money trial. Seth Meyers Seth Meyers responded to police crackdowns on college pro-Palestinian protesters nationwide this week, representing an unprecedented and disproportional use of force. He particularly cited Columbia, where the NYPD responded to a small group of students in a building with a huge riot squad. In a press conference, Mayor Eric Adams bragged about the NYPD managing to have “the element of surprise”. “Element of surprise? Did you see footage of the police approaching the school?” the Late Night host scoffed. “Usually when there are that many police together at one time, Bane is about to trick them into the Gotham City tunnels. “As a New Yorker, I just want to say I really appreciate knowing that this is where my tax dollars are going: using drones to round up co-eds rather than, say, keeping libraries open or building affordable housing or making sure the F train isn’t a total piece of shit,” Meyers deadpanned. Stephen Colbert on Trump’s trial: ‘He lasts only a few furious minutes and then nods off’ Read more “The NYPD responded with advanced technology and unprecedented force to a college protest. Columbia and city officials said they were left with no choice,” he continued. “And I mean let’s face it, it’s not like they had many alternatives. Unfortunately, there’s just no other way for a college to deal with a protest like this.” Meyers then played a clip from Brown University, where school officials reached an agreement with protesters to hold a vote later this year on ending investments in Israel; as a response, the students would disband an encampment on school grounds. “But what about our drones? If there’s a peaceful settlement, what are we going to do with all our drones?!” Meyers mocked. Jokes aside, Meyers concluded: “No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about. “The story is what’s happening in Gaza,” he added. “That’s what the protests are about.” Jimmy Kimmel In Los Angeles, Jimmy Kimmel bragged about his relevance to Trump’s criminal trial in New York, after prosecutors showed texts between lawyers about Stormy Daniels’ appearance on his show in 2018. “We are part of it now. We are part of the official record of the People v Donald Trump,” Kimmel said. “Suffice it to say that when Ryan Murphy makes the nine-part mini-series about this for Fubo, I will be in it. I would assume someone like George Clooney or maybe Chris Hemsworth will be playing me. “I don’t want to brag, but first time a late-night talkshow has been introduced into evidence in the criminal trial for a president of the United States,” he added. While Kimmel was “pleased as punch” to be included in the trial, he expressed disappointment that his other segment with Daniels from 2018 wasn’t mentioned, when he had her pick which orange mushroom most resembled the former president’s penis. “This is why I want to be in court. I’m sick of being out of the court. I want to be in it! Why was I not asked to testify? It’s outrageous! I’m going to start suing people,” he joked. “And I think I could keep Trump awake during the trial.” Stephen Colbert Thursday was a “10 out of 10” spring day in New York City, said Stephen Colbert on The Late Show. “Warm, sunny, a perfect time for Donald Trump to be stuck in a courtroom freezing his drowsy balls off.” On Thursday, Trump’s eyes were reportedly closed at the start of testimony. But his lawyers seemed “acutely aware” of how important his consciousness is to the case, according to the New York Times, and kept glancing over at him. “Eventually, they’re just going to have to put him on a baby monitor,” said Colbert. Thursday’s proceedings mostly saw testimony from lawyer Keith Davidson, who was asked several times to explain common internet abbreviations, including “wtf”. “Of course, in any text about Trump, it stands for ‘wake the farter,’” Colbert quipped. Colbert also touched on the “tragic career suicide” of the South Dakota governor and former Trump running mate hopeful Kristi Noem, after she talked about killing her 14-month-old puppy and a family goat in her new book. “I’ll be honest, I was conflicted about whether or not I should keep talking about it, because unlike Kristi Noem I don’t like beating a dead horse,” Colbert joked. Noem went on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show to defend herself, saying the 14-month-old Cricket was “a working dog, not a puppy”. “That’s right, she was a working dog, so Noem did not shoot her puppy. She shot her employee,” Colbert joked. Noem went on to claim that she’s a “dog lover” and “been around hundreds of them, of course”. “Although before she got there, it used to be thousands,” Colbert quipped. Late-night hosts talked use of force against college protesters and Donald Trump’s apparent struggle to stay awake during his criminal hush-money trial. Seth Meyers responded to police crackdowns on college pro-Palestinian protesters nationwide this week, representing an unprecedented and disproportional use of force. He particularly cited Columbia, where the NYPD responded to a small group of students in a building with a huge riot squad. In a press conference, Mayor Eric Adams bragged about the NYPD managing to have “the element of surprise”. “Element of surprise? Did you see footage of the police approaching the school?” the Late Night host scoffed. “Usually when there are that many police together at one time, Bane is about to trick them into the Gotham City tunnels. “As a New Yorker, I just want to say I really appreciate knowing that this is where my tax dollars are going: using drones to round up co-eds rather than, say, keeping libraries open or building affordable housing or making sure the F train isn’t a total piece of shit,” Meyers deadpanned. Stephen Colbert on Trump’s trial: ‘He lasts only a few furious minutes and then nods off’ Read more Stephen Colbert on Trump’s trial: ‘He lasts only a few furious minutes and then nods off’ Read more Stephen Colbert on Trump’s trial: ‘He lasts only a few furious minutes and then nods off’ Read more Stephen Colbert on Trump’s trial: ‘He lasts only a few furious minutes and then nods off’ Stephen Colbert on Trump’s trial: ‘He lasts only a few furious minutes and then nods off’ “The NYPD responded with advanced technology and unprecedented force to a college protest. Columbia and city officials said they were left with no choice,” he continued. “And I mean let’s face it, it’s not like they had many alternatives. Unfortunately, there’s just no other way for a college to deal with a protest like this.” Meyers then played a clip from Brown University, where school officials reached an agreement with protesters to hold a vote later this year on ending investments in Israel; as a response, the students would disband an encampment on school grounds. “But what about our drones? If there’s a peaceful settlement, what are we going to do with all our drones?!” Meyers mocked. Jokes aside, Meyers concluded: “No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about. “The story is what’s happening in Gaza,” he added. “That’s what the protests are about.” In Los Angeles, Jimmy Kimmel bragged about his relevance to Trump’s criminal trial in New York, after prosecutors showed texts between lawyers about Stormy Daniels’ appearance on his show in 2018. “We are part of it now. We are part of the official record of the People v Donald Trump,” Kimmel said. “Suffice it to say that when Ryan Murphy makes the nine-part mini-series about this for Fubo, I will be in it. I would assume someone like George Clooney or maybe Chris Hemsworth will be playing me. “I don’t want to brag, but first time a late-night talkshow has been introduced into evidence in the criminal trial for a president of the United States,” he added. While Kimmel was “pleased as punch” to be included in the trial, he expressed disappointment that his other segment with Daniels from 2018 wasn’t mentioned, when he had her pick which orange mushroom most resembled the former president’s penis. “This is why I want to be in court. I’m sick of being out of the court. I want to be in it! Why was I not asked to testify? It’s outrageous! I’m going to start suing people,” he joked. “And I think I could keep Trump awake during the trial.” Thursday was a “10 out of 10” spring day in New York City, said Stephen Colbert on The Late Show. “Warm, sunny, a perfect time for Donald Trump to be stuck in a courtroom freezing his drowsy balls off.” On Thursday, Trump’s eyes were reportedly closed at the start of testimony. But his lawyers seemed “acutely aware” of how important his consciousness is to the case, according to the New York Times, and kept glancing over at him. “Eventually, they’re just going to have to put him on a baby monitor,” said Colbert. Thursday’s proceedings mostly saw testimony from lawyer Keith Davidson, who was asked several times to explain common internet abbreviations, including “wtf”. “Of course, in any text about Trump, it stands for ‘wake the farter,’” Colbert quipped. Colbert also touched on the “tragic career suicide” of the South Dakota governor and former Trump running mate hopeful Kristi Noem, after she talked about killing her 14-month-old puppy and a family goat in her new book. “I’ll be honest, I was conflicted about whether or not I should keep talking about it, because unlike Kristi Noem I don’t like beating a dead horse,” Colbert joked. Noem went on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show to defend herself, saying the 14-month-old Cricket was “a working dog, not a puppy”. “That’s right, she was a working dog, so Noem did not shoot her puppy. She shot her employee,” Colbert joked. Noem went on to claim that she’s a “dog lover” and “been around hundreds of them, of course”. “Although before she got there, it used to be thousands,” Colbert quipped. Explore more on these topics Late-night TV roundup Seth Meyers Jimmy Kimmel Stephen Colbert TV comedy Comedy Television features Share Reuse this content Late-night TV roundup Seth Meyers Jimmy Kimmel Stephen Colbert TV comedy Comedy Television features |
Sadiq Khan’s win ‘bucks trend’ of Muslim voters rejecting Labour over Gaza, say party figures
Khan making his victory speech in London yesterday. Photograph: Peter Nicholls/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Khan making his victory speech in London yesterday. Photograph: Peter Nicholls/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Sadiq Khan’s win ‘bucks trend’ of Muslim voters rejecting Labour over Gaza, say party figures This article is more than 1 year old Resounding victory in London mayoral race came despite media reports suggesting it would be a close contest Sadiq Khan’s election victory as London mayor has “bucked the trend” of Muslim voters turning away from Labour over the party’s stance on the war in Gaza, party figures said. The 53-year-old won a third term as the capital’s mayor on Saturday, without seeming to have lost the support of large numbers of Muslim voters – unlike Labour candidates elsewhere in England last week. But Labour candidates elsewhere in England last week saw a significant loss of Muslim voters. Richard Parker became West Midlands mayor after a knife-edge contest with Andy Street, but it would have been much easier for the Labour man had substantial numbers of voters not backed an independent candidate whose campaign focused on Gaza. Akhmed Yakoob, a criminal defence lawyer, came third with 42,923 votes in Birmingham alone, where Parker saw a major decline on Labour’s 2021 vote. In contrast, Khan defeated his Conservative rival Susan Hall by 275,828 votes, a comfortable 11% margin. “We faced a campaign of nonstop negativity, but I couldn’t be more proud that we answered fear-mongering with facts, hate with hope and attempts to divide with efforts to unite,” Khan said in his victory speech. He also thanked his family and told them: “Some of the stuff on social media, the protests at my home, the threats – it’s upsetting, it’s frightening and it’s wrong. I’m truly sorry for putting you through this.” Labour supporters had been concerned that the mayor might suffer a Gaza backlash, opposition in outer London to the ultra-low emission zone (Ulez), and a switch from a supplementary vote system to first-past-the-post, even though a YouGov poll last week put Khan on 47%, well ahead of Susan Hall, on 25%. After the votes were counted, Ulez appeared to have had little effect, but the mayor did well in the two constituencies with higher numbers of Muslim voters. In North East, which includes Waltham Forest, Khan got 127,455 votes compared with 111,359 first preferences in 2021, while in City and East, which includes Newham and Tower Hamlets, the turnout fell by 30,000, but Khan had nearly 10,000 more votes than first preferences in 2021. The emphatic win ran counter to reporting by the BBC and other media outlets, who had claimed the race was close. Torsten Bell, chief executive of the Resolution Foundation thinktank, wrote on X on Saturday: “1pm BBC news still reporting ‘evidence that London closer than expected’ despite literally zero evidence – now or at any point over the last 24hrs.” “Should have been a VERY high evidence bar for thinking this was close,” he added. Khan was among the earliest Labour figures to call for a ceasefire in Gaza, in contrast to the Labour leader, who was hit by several defections and resignations after he said last October that Israel had “the right” to withhold power and water from Gaza. There was a furious reaction from those on the left, which has continued to simmer. At the most recent Palestine Solidarity Campaign march in London last month, the most obvious political placards were demonic cut-outs of Starmer and deputy leader Angela Rayner, dubbed Starmer for Genocide and Angela of Death. Ali Milani, the national chair of the Labour Muslim Network and a former Labour councillor who stood against Boris Johnson in Uxbridge in 2021, said that many Muslim voters had felt betrayed by Labour’s stance on Gaza. “This is something I’ve been warning about for months and it’s no longer polls and speculation – it’s real-life votes,” he said. “Whether it’s Oldham or Bolton, Birmingham or Elswick in Newcastle, there’s no question now there’s a serious problem. “Sadiq is bucking the trend and there’s a reason for that. He was very early in calling for a ceasefire. He is now supporting a suspension of arms sales, as long as it’s clear that international law has been breached. So he did what we should have done and reaped the electoral rewards for that. “Unfortunately, and it pains me to say it, Muslims don’t think that the Labour party broadly values Palestinian and Muslim lives as equal to others. And nothing encapsulates that better than the message we’ve been sent around the country in other seats and constituencies and mayoralties.” At last week’s polls, this translated into a 17.9% drop in the Labour vote in areas where more than a fifth of people identified as Muslim, according to Professor Will Jennings of Southampton University. Although Labour gained control of eight councils, it lost seats and lost control of Oldham council in Greater Manchester. It failed to regain Oxford, lost ground in Blackburn with Darwen and Bradford, while the Workers Party of Britain, founded by George Galloway, unseated Manchester council’s deputy leader Luthfur Rahman. A Momentum spokesperson said the defeats should be “a wake-up call for the Labour leadership” and said Starmer should call for a suspension of arms sales to Israel. It said: “Any party which takes its core vote for granted risks disaster sooner or later. When the going gets tough, Labour will need to rally its base – but from climate to Gaza, Keir Starmer couldn’t seem less interested.” Sunder Katwala, director of British Future, said there had been a bigger impact on Labour’s vote during the local elections than had been showing up in national polling, but there might not be much effect on its chances in a general election. “Labour’s general election plan is going very well, according to these local election results, because it’s advancing in lots of places where Labour isn’t strong,” he said. However, since council wards were a fraction of the size of constituencies, they could be more easily dominated by particular groups than parliamentary constituencies. “There are a few hundred council seats where the Muslim voter group is the majority of a council ward. But that’s true of only three Westminster constituencies,” he said. Katwala added that Palestine was unusually prominent compared with other foreign policy issues among voters’ concerns, but that there was no single bloc of Muslim voters. “People exaggerate the number of Muslim voters and the way they vote in a bloc,” he said. “These results look quite like the post-Iraq impact of 2005. It was not that Muslims were voting as a bloc, but that Muslim votes were breaking up much more than ever before.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics London mayoral election 2024 The Observer Sadiq Khan Labour Mayoral elections Local government Local politics news Share Reuse this content Khan making his victory speech in London yesterday. Photograph: Peter Nicholls/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Khan making his victory speech in London yesterday. Photograph: Peter Nicholls/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Sadiq Khan’s win ‘bucks trend’ of Muslim voters rejecting Labour over Gaza, say party figures This article is more than 1 year old Resounding victory in London mayoral race came despite media reports suggesting it would be a close contest Sadiq Khan’s election victory as London mayor has “bucked the trend” of Muslim voters turning away from Labour over the party’s stance on the war in Gaza, party figures said. The 53-year-old won a third term as the capital’s mayor on Saturday, without seeming to have lost the support of large numbers of Muslim voters – unlike Labour candidates elsewhere in England last week. But Labour candidates elsewhere in England last week saw a significant loss of Muslim voters. Richard Parker became West Midlands mayor after a knife-edge contest with Andy Street, but it would have been much easier for the Labour man had substantial numbers of voters not backed an independent candidate whose campaign focused on Gaza. Akhmed Yakoob, a criminal defence lawyer, came third with 42,923 votes in Birmingham alone, where Parker saw a major decline on Labour’s 2021 vote. In contrast, Khan defeated his Conservative rival Susan Hall by 275,828 votes, a comfortable 11% margin. “We faced a campaign of nonstop negativity, but I couldn’t be more proud that we answered fear-mongering with facts, hate with hope and attempts to divide with efforts to unite,” Khan said in his victory speech. He also thanked his family and told them: “Some of the stuff on social media, the protests at my home, the threats – it’s upsetting, it’s frightening and it’s wrong. I’m truly sorry for putting you through this.” Labour supporters had been concerned that the mayor might suffer a Gaza backlash, opposition in outer London to the ultra-low emission zone (Ulez), and a switch from a supplementary vote system to first-past-the-post, even though a YouGov poll last week put Khan on 47%, well ahead of Susan Hall, on 25%. After the votes were counted, Ulez appeared to have had little effect, but the mayor did well in the two constituencies with higher numbers of Muslim voters. In North East, which includes Waltham Forest, Khan got 127,455 votes compared with 111,359 first preferences in 2021, while in City and East, which includes Newham and Tower Hamlets, the turnout fell by 30,000, but Khan had nearly 10,000 more votes than first preferences in 2021. The emphatic win ran counter to reporting by the BBC and other media outlets, who had claimed the race was close. Torsten Bell, chief executive of the Resolution Foundation thinktank, wrote on X on Saturday: “1pm BBC news still reporting ‘evidence that London closer than expected’ despite literally zero evidence – now or at any point over the last 24hrs.” “Should have been a VERY high evidence bar for thinking this was close,” he added. Khan was among the earliest Labour figures to call for a ceasefire in Gaza, in contrast to the Labour leader, who was hit by several defections and resignations after he said last October that Israel had “the right” to withhold power and water from Gaza. There was a furious reaction from those on the left, which has continued to simmer. At the most recent Palestine Solidarity Campaign march in London last month, the most obvious political placards were demonic cut-outs of Starmer and deputy leader Angela Rayner, dubbed Starmer for Genocide and Angela of Death. Ali Milani, the national chair of the Labour Muslim Network and a former Labour councillor who stood against Boris Johnson in Uxbridge in 2021, said that many Muslim voters had felt betrayed by Labour’s stance on Gaza. “This is something I’ve been warning about for months and it’s no longer polls and speculation – it’s real-life votes,” he said. “Whether it’s Oldham or Bolton, Birmingham or Elswick in Newcastle, there’s no question now there’s a serious problem. “Sadiq is bucking the trend and there’s a reason for that. He was very early in calling for a ceasefire. He is now supporting a suspension of arms sales, as long as it’s clear that international law has been breached. So he did what we should have done and reaped the electoral rewards for that. “Unfortunately, and it pains me to say it, Muslims don’t think that the Labour party broadly values Palestinian and Muslim lives as equal to others. And nothing encapsulates that better than the message we’ve been sent around the country in other seats and constituencies and mayoralties.” At last week’s polls, this translated into a 17.9% drop in the Labour vote in areas where more than a fifth of people identified as Muslim, according to Professor Will Jennings of Southampton University. Although Labour gained control of eight councils, it lost seats and lost control of Oldham council in Greater Manchester. It failed to regain Oxford, lost ground in Blackburn with Darwen and Bradford, while the Workers Party of Britain, founded by George Galloway, unseated Manchester council’s deputy leader Luthfur Rahman. A Momentum spokesperson said the defeats should be “a wake-up call for the Labour leadership” and said Starmer should call for a suspension of arms sales to Israel. It said: “Any party which takes its core vote for granted risks disaster sooner or later. When the going gets tough, Labour will need to rally its base – but from climate to Gaza, Keir Starmer couldn’t seem less interested.” Sunder Katwala, director of British Future, said there had been a bigger impact on Labour’s vote during the local elections than had been showing up in national polling, but there might not be much effect on its chances in a general election. “Labour’s general election plan is going very well, according to these local election results, because it’s advancing in lots of places where Labour isn’t strong,” he said. However, since council wards were a fraction of the size of constituencies, they could be more easily dominated by particular groups than parliamentary constituencies. “There are a few hundred council seats where the Muslim voter group is the majority of a council ward. But that’s true of only three Westminster constituencies,” he said. Katwala added that Palestine was unusually prominent compared with other foreign policy issues among voters’ concerns, but that there was no single bloc of Muslim voters. “People exaggerate the number of Muslim voters and the way they vote in a bloc,” he said. “These results look quite like the post-Iraq impact of 2005. It was not that Muslims were voting as a bloc, but that Muslim votes were breaking up much more than ever before.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics London mayoral election 2024 The Observer Sadiq Khan Labour Mayoral elections Local government Local politics news Share Reuse this content Khan making his victory speech in London yesterday. Photograph: Peter Nicholls/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Khan making his victory speech in London yesterday. Photograph: Peter Nicholls/Getty Images Khan making his victory speech in London yesterday. Photograph: Peter Nicholls/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Khan making his victory speech in London yesterday. Photograph: Peter Nicholls/Getty Images Khan making his victory speech in London yesterday. Photograph: Peter Nicholls/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Khan making his victory speech in London yesterday. Photograph: Peter Nicholls/Getty Images Khan making his victory speech in London yesterday. Photograph: Peter Nicholls/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Khan making his victory speech in London yesterday. Photograph: Peter Nicholls/Getty Images Khan making his victory speech in London yesterday. Photograph: Peter Nicholls/Getty Images Khan making his victory speech in London yesterday. Photograph: Peter Nicholls/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Sadiq Khan’s win ‘bucks trend’ of Muslim voters rejecting Labour over Gaza, say party figures This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Sadiq Khan’s win ‘bucks trend’ of Muslim voters rejecting Labour over Gaza, say party figures This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Sadiq Khan’s win ‘bucks trend’ of Muslim voters rejecting Labour over Gaza, say party figures This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Resounding victory in London mayoral race came despite media reports suggesting it would be a close contest Resounding victory in London mayoral race came despite media reports suggesting it would be a close contest Resounding victory in London mayoral race came despite media reports suggesting it would be a close contest Sadiq Khan’s election victory as London mayor has “bucked the trend” of Muslim voters turning away from Labour over the party’s stance on the war in Gaza, party figures said. The 53-year-old won a third term as the capital’s mayor on Saturday, without seeming to have lost the support of large numbers of Muslim voters – unlike Labour candidates elsewhere in England last week. But Labour candidates elsewhere in England last week saw a significant loss of Muslim voters. Richard Parker became West Midlands mayor after a knife-edge contest with Andy Street, but it would have been much easier for the Labour man had substantial numbers of voters not backed an independent candidate whose campaign focused on Gaza. Akhmed Yakoob, a criminal defence lawyer, came third with 42,923 votes in Birmingham alone, where Parker saw a major decline on Labour’s 2021 vote. In contrast, Khan defeated his Conservative rival Susan Hall by 275,828 votes, a comfortable 11% margin. “We faced a campaign of nonstop negativity, but I couldn’t be more proud that we answered fear-mongering with facts, hate with hope and attempts to divide with efforts to unite,” Khan said in his victory speech. He also thanked his family and told them: “Some of the stuff on social media, the protests at my home, the threats – it’s upsetting, it’s frightening and it’s wrong. I’m truly sorry for putting you through this.” Labour supporters had been concerned that the mayor might suffer a Gaza backlash, opposition in outer London to the ultra-low emission zone (Ulez), and a switch from a supplementary vote system to first-past-the-post, even though a YouGov poll last week put Khan on 47%, well ahead of Susan Hall, on 25%. After the votes were counted, Ulez appeared to have had little effect, but the mayor did well in the two constituencies with higher numbers of Muslim voters. In North East, which includes Waltham Forest, Khan got 127,455 votes compared with 111,359 first preferences in 2021, while in City and East, which includes Newham and Tower Hamlets, the turnout fell by 30,000, but Khan had nearly 10,000 more votes than first preferences in 2021. The emphatic win ran counter to reporting by the BBC and other media outlets, who had claimed the race was close. Torsten Bell, chief executive of the Resolution Foundation thinktank, wrote on X on Saturday: “1pm BBC news still reporting ‘evidence that London closer than expected’ despite literally zero evidence – now or at any point over the last 24hrs.” “Should have been a VERY high evidence bar for thinking this was close,” he added. Khan was among the earliest Labour figures to call for a ceasefire in Gaza, in contrast to the Labour leader, who was hit by several defections and resignations after he said last October that Israel had “the right” to withhold power and water from Gaza. There was a furious reaction from those on the left, which has continued to simmer. At the most recent Palestine Solidarity Campaign march in London last month, the most obvious political placards were demonic cut-outs of Starmer and deputy leader Angela Rayner, dubbed Starmer for Genocide and Angela of Death. Ali Milani, the national chair of the Labour Muslim Network and a former Labour councillor who stood against Boris Johnson in Uxbridge in 2021, said that many Muslim voters had felt betrayed by Labour’s stance on Gaza. “This is something I’ve been warning about for months and it’s no longer polls and speculation – it’s real-life votes,” he said. “Whether it’s Oldham or Bolton, Birmingham or Elswick in Newcastle, there’s no question now there’s a serious problem. “Sadiq is bucking the trend and there’s a reason for that. He was very early in calling for a ceasefire. He is now supporting a suspension of arms sales, as long as it’s clear that international law has been breached. So he did what we should have done and reaped the electoral rewards for that. “Unfortunately, and it pains me to say it, Muslims don’t think that the Labour party broadly values Palestinian and Muslim lives as equal to others. And nothing encapsulates that better than the message we’ve been sent around the country in other seats and constituencies and mayoralties.” At last week’s polls, this translated into a 17.9% drop in the Labour vote in areas where more than a fifth of people identified as Muslim, according to Professor Will Jennings of Southampton University. Although Labour gained control of eight councils, it lost seats and lost control of Oldham council in Greater Manchester. It failed to regain Oxford, lost ground in Blackburn with Darwen and Bradford, while the Workers Party of Britain, founded by George Galloway, unseated Manchester council’s deputy leader Luthfur Rahman. A Momentum spokesperson said the defeats should be “a wake-up call for the Labour leadership” and said Starmer should call for a suspension of arms sales to Israel. It said: “Any party which takes its core vote for granted risks disaster sooner or later. When the going gets tough, Labour will need to rally its base – but from climate to Gaza, Keir Starmer couldn’t seem less interested.” Sunder Katwala, director of British Future, said there had been a bigger impact on Labour’s vote during the local elections than had been showing up in national polling, but there might not be much effect on its chances in a general election. “Labour’s general election plan is going very well, according to these local election results, because it’s advancing in lots of places where Labour isn’t strong,” he said. However, since council wards were a fraction of the size of constituencies, they could be more easily dominated by particular groups than parliamentary constituencies. “There are a few hundred council seats where the Muslim voter group is the majority of a council ward. But that’s true of only three Westminster constituencies,” he said. Katwala added that Palestine was unusually prominent compared with other foreign policy issues among voters’ concerns, but that there was no single bloc of Muslim voters. “People exaggerate the number of Muslim voters and the way they vote in a bloc,” he said. “These results look quite like the post-Iraq impact of 2005. It was not that Muslims were voting as a bloc, but that Muslim votes were breaking up much more than ever before.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics London mayoral election 2024 The Observer Sadiq Khan Labour Mayoral elections Local government Local politics news Share Reuse this content Sadiq Khan’s election victory as London mayor has “bucked the trend” of Muslim voters turning away from Labour over the party’s stance on the war in Gaza, party figures said. The 53-year-old won a third term as the capital’s mayor on Saturday, without seeming to have lost the support of large numbers of Muslim voters – unlike Labour candidates elsewhere in England last week. But Labour candidates elsewhere in England last week saw a significant loss of Muslim voters. Richard Parker became West Midlands mayor after a knife-edge contest with Andy Street, but it would have been much easier for the Labour man had substantial numbers of voters not backed an independent candidate whose campaign focused on Gaza. Akhmed Yakoob, a criminal defence lawyer, came third with 42,923 votes in Birmingham alone, where Parker saw a major decline on Labour’s 2021 vote. In contrast, Khan defeated his Conservative rival Susan Hall by 275,828 votes, a comfortable 11% margin. “We faced a campaign of nonstop negativity, but I couldn’t be more proud that we answered fear-mongering with facts, hate with hope and attempts to divide with efforts to unite,” Khan said in his victory speech. He also thanked his family and told them: “Some of the stuff on social media, the protests at my home, the threats – it’s upsetting, it’s frightening and it’s wrong. I’m truly sorry for putting you through this.” Labour supporters had been concerned that the mayor might suffer a Gaza backlash, opposition in outer London to the ultra-low emission zone (Ulez), and a switch from a supplementary vote system to first-past-the-post, even though a YouGov poll last week put Khan on 47%, well ahead of Susan Hall, on 25%. After the votes were counted, Ulez appeared to have had little effect, but the mayor did well in the two constituencies with higher numbers of Muslim voters. In North East, which includes Waltham Forest, Khan got 127,455 votes compared with 111,359 first preferences in 2021, while in City and East, which includes Newham and Tower Hamlets, the turnout fell by 30,000, but Khan had nearly 10,000 more votes than first preferences in 2021. The emphatic win ran counter to reporting by the BBC and other media outlets, who had claimed the race was close. Torsten Bell, chief executive of the Resolution Foundation thinktank, wrote on X on Saturday: “1pm BBC news still reporting ‘evidence that London closer than expected’ despite literally zero evidence – now or at any point over the last 24hrs.” “Should have been a VERY high evidence bar for thinking this was close,” he added. Khan was among the earliest Labour figures to call for a ceasefire in Gaza, in contrast to the Labour leader, who was hit by several defections and resignations after he said last October that Israel had “the right” to withhold power and water from Gaza. There was a furious reaction from those on the left, which has continued to simmer. At the most recent Palestine Solidarity Campaign march in London last month, the most obvious political placards were demonic cut-outs of Starmer and deputy leader Angela Rayner, dubbed Starmer for Genocide and Angela of Death. Ali Milani, the national chair of the Labour Muslim Network and a former Labour councillor who stood against Boris Johnson in Uxbridge in 2021, said that many Muslim voters had felt betrayed by Labour’s stance on Gaza. “This is something I’ve been warning about for months and it’s no longer polls and speculation – it’s real-life votes,” he said. “Whether it’s Oldham or Bolton, Birmingham or Elswick in Newcastle, there’s no question now there’s a serious problem. “Sadiq is bucking the trend and there’s a reason for that. He was very early in calling for a ceasefire. He is now supporting a suspension of arms sales, as long as it’s clear that international law has been breached. So he did what we should have done and reaped the electoral rewards for that. “Unfortunately, and it pains me to say it, Muslims don’t think that the Labour party broadly values Palestinian and Muslim lives as equal to others. And nothing encapsulates that better than the message we’ve been sent around the country in other seats and constituencies and mayoralties.” At last week’s polls, this translated into a 17.9% drop in the Labour vote in areas where more than a fifth of people identified as Muslim, according to Professor Will Jennings of Southampton University. Although Labour gained control of eight councils, it lost seats and lost control of Oldham council in Greater Manchester. It failed to regain Oxford, lost ground in Blackburn with Darwen and Bradford, while the Workers Party of Britain, founded by George Galloway, unseated Manchester council’s deputy leader Luthfur Rahman. A Momentum spokesperson said the defeats should be “a wake-up call for the Labour leadership” and said Starmer should call for a suspension of arms sales to Israel. It said: “Any party which takes its core vote for granted risks disaster sooner or later. When the going gets tough, Labour will need to rally its base – but from climate to Gaza, Keir Starmer couldn’t seem less interested.” Sunder Katwala, director of British Future, said there had been a bigger impact on Labour’s vote during the local elections than had been showing up in national polling, but there might not be much effect on its chances in a general election. “Labour’s general election plan is going very well, according to these local election results, because it’s advancing in lots of places where Labour isn’t strong,” he said. However, since council wards were a fraction of the size of constituencies, they could be more easily dominated by particular groups than parliamentary constituencies. “There are a few hundred council seats where the Muslim voter group is the majority of a council ward. But that’s true of only three Westminster constituencies,” he said. Katwala added that Palestine was unusually prominent compared with other foreign policy issues among voters’ concerns, but that there was no single bloc of Muslim voters. “People exaggerate the number of Muslim voters and the way they vote in a bloc,” he said. “These results look quite like the post-Iraq impact of 2005. It was not that Muslims were voting as a bloc, but that Muslim votes were breaking up much more than ever before.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics London mayoral election 2024 The Observer Sadiq Khan Labour Mayoral elections Local government Local politics news Share Reuse this content Sadiq Khan’s election victory as London mayor has “bucked the trend” of Muslim voters turning away from Labour over the party’s stance on the war in Gaza, party figures said. The 53-year-old won a third term as the capital’s mayor on Saturday, without seeming to have lost the support of large numbers of Muslim voters – unlike Labour candidates elsewhere in England last week. But Labour candidates elsewhere in England last week saw a significant loss of Muslim voters. Richard Parker became West Midlands mayor after a knife-edge contest with Andy Street, but it would have been much easier for the Labour man had substantial numbers of voters not backed an independent candidate whose campaign focused on Gaza. Akhmed Yakoob, a criminal defence lawyer, came third with 42,923 votes in Birmingham alone, where Parker saw a major decline on Labour’s 2021 vote. In contrast, Khan defeated his Conservative rival Susan Hall by 275,828 votes, a comfortable 11% margin. “We faced a campaign of nonstop negativity, but I couldn’t be more proud that we answered fear-mongering with facts, hate with hope and attempts to divide with efforts to unite,” Khan said in his victory speech. He also thanked his family and told them: “Some of the stuff on social media, the protests at my home, the threats – it’s upsetting, it’s frightening and it’s wrong. I’m truly sorry for putting you through this.” Labour supporters had been concerned that the mayor might suffer a Gaza backlash, opposition in outer London to the ultra-low emission zone (Ulez), and a switch from a supplementary vote system to first-past-the-post, even though a YouGov poll last week put Khan on 47%, well ahead of Susan Hall, on 25%. After the votes were counted, Ulez appeared to have had little effect, but the mayor did well in the two constituencies with higher numbers of Muslim voters. In North East, which includes Waltham Forest, Khan got 127,455 votes compared with 111,359 first preferences in 2021, while in City and East, which includes Newham and Tower Hamlets, the turnout fell by 30,000, but Khan had nearly 10,000 more votes than first preferences in 2021. The emphatic win ran counter to reporting by the BBC and other media outlets, who had claimed the race was close. Torsten Bell, chief executive of the Resolution Foundation thinktank, wrote on X on Saturday: “1pm BBC news still reporting ‘evidence that London closer than expected’ despite literally zero evidence – now or at any point over the last 24hrs.” “Should have been a VERY high evidence bar for thinking this was close,” he added. Khan was among the earliest Labour figures to call for a ceasefire in Gaza, in contrast to the Labour leader, who was hit by several defections and resignations after he said last October that Israel had “the right” to withhold power and water from Gaza. There was a furious reaction from those on the left, which has continued to simmer. At the most recent Palestine Solidarity Campaign march in London last month, the most obvious political placards were demonic cut-outs of Starmer and deputy leader Angela Rayner, dubbed Starmer for Genocide and Angela of Death. Ali Milani, the national chair of the Labour Muslim Network and a former Labour councillor who stood against Boris Johnson in Uxbridge in 2021, said that many Muslim voters had felt betrayed by Labour’s stance on Gaza. “This is something I’ve been warning about for months and it’s no longer polls and speculation – it’s real-life votes,” he said. “Whether it’s Oldham or Bolton, Birmingham or Elswick in Newcastle, there’s no question now there’s a serious problem. “Sadiq is bucking the trend and there’s a reason for that. He was very early in calling for a ceasefire. He is now supporting a suspension of arms sales, as long as it’s clear that international law has been breached. So he did what we should have done and reaped the electoral rewards for that. “Unfortunately, and it pains me to say it, Muslims don’t think that the Labour party broadly values Palestinian and Muslim lives as equal to others. And nothing encapsulates that better than the message we’ve been sent around the country in other seats and constituencies and mayoralties.” At last week’s polls, this translated into a 17.9% drop in the Labour vote in areas where more than a fifth of people identified as Muslim, according to Professor Will Jennings of Southampton University. Although Labour gained control of eight councils, it lost seats and lost control of Oldham council in Greater Manchester. It failed to regain Oxford, lost ground in Blackburn with Darwen and Bradford, while the Workers Party of Britain, founded by George Galloway, unseated Manchester council’s deputy leader Luthfur Rahman. A Momentum spokesperson said the defeats should be “a wake-up call for the Labour leadership” and said Starmer should call for a suspension of arms sales to Israel. It said: “Any party which takes its core vote for granted risks disaster sooner or later. When the going gets tough, Labour will need to rally its base – but from climate to Gaza, Keir Starmer couldn’t seem less interested.” Sunder Katwala, director of British Future, said there had been a bigger impact on Labour’s vote during the local elections than had been showing up in national polling, but there might not be much effect on its chances in a general election. “Labour’s general election plan is going very well, according to these local election results, because it’s advancing in lots of places where Labour isn’t strong,” he said. However, since council wards were a fraction of the size of constituencies, they could be more easily dominated by particular groups than parliamentary constituencies. “There are a few hundred council seats where the Muslim voter group is the majority of a council ward. But that’s true of only three Westminster constituencies,” he said. Katwala added that Palestine was unusually prominent compared with other foreign policy issues among voters’ concerns, but that there was no single bloc of Muslim voters. “People exaggerate the number of Muslim voters and the way they vote in a bloc,” he said. “These results look quite like the post-Iraq impact of 2005. It was not that Muslims were voting as a bloc, but that Muslim votes were breaking up much more than ever before.” Sadiq Khan’s election victory as London mayor has “bucked the trend” of Muslim voters turning away from Labour over the party’s stance on the war in Gaza, party figures said. The 53-year-old won a third term as the capital’s mayor on Saturday, without seeming to have lost the support of large numbers of Muslim voters – unlike Labour candidates elsewhere in England last week. But Labour candidates elsewhere in England last week saw a significant loss of Muslim voters. Richard Parker became West Midlands mayor after a knife-edge contest with Andy Street, but it would have been much easier for the Labour man had substantial numbers of voters not backed an independent candidate whose campaign focused on Gaza. Akhmed Yakoob, a criminal defence lawyer, came third with 42,923 votes in Birmingham alone, where Parker saw a major decline on Labour’s 2021 vote. In contrast, Khan defeated his Conservative rival Susan Hall by 275,828 votes, a comfortable 11% margin. “We faced a campaign of nonstop negativity, but I couldn’t be more proud that we answered fear-mongering with facts, hate with hope and attempts to divide with efforts to unite,” Khan said in his victory speech. He also thanked his family and told them: “Some of the stuff on social media, the protests at my home, the threats – it’s upsetting, it’s frightening and it’s wrong. I’m truly sorry for putting you through this.” Labour supporters had been concerned that the mayor might suffer a Gaza backlash, opposition in outer London to the ultra-low emission zone (Ulez), and a switch from a supplementary vote system to first-past-the-post, even though a YouGov poll last week put Khan on 47%, well ahead of Susan Hall, on 25%. After the votes were counted, Ulez appeared to have had little effect, but the mayor did well in the two constituencies with higher numbers of Muslim voters. In North East, which includes Waltham Forest, Khan got 127,455 votes compared with 111,359 first preferences in 2021, while in City and East, which includes Newham and Tower Hamlets, the turnout fell by 30,000, but Khan had nearly 10,000 more votes than first preferences in 2021. The emphatic win ran counter to reporting by the BBC and other media outlets, who had claimed the race was close. Torsten Bell, chief executive of the Resolution Foundation thinktank, wrote on X on Saturday: “1pm BBC news still reporting ‘evidence that London closer than expected’ despite literally zero evidence – now or at any point over the last 24hrs.” “Should have been a VERY high evidence bar for thinking this was close,” he added. Khan was among the earliest Labour figures to call for a ceasefire in Gaza, in contrast to the Labour leader, who was hit by several defections and resignations after he said last October that Israel had “the right” to withhold power and water from Gaza. There was a furious reaction from those on the left, which has continued to simmer. At the most recent Palestine Solidarity Campaign march in London last month, the most obvious political placards were demonic cut-outs of Starmer and deputy leader Angela Rayner, dubbed Starmer for Genocide and Angela of Death. Ali Milani, the national chair of the Labour Muslim Network and a former Labour councillor who stood against Boris Johnson in Uxbridge in 2021, said that many Muslim voters had felt betrayed by Labour’s stance on Gaza. “This is something I’ve been warning about for months and it’s no longer polls and speculation – it’s real-life votes,” he said. “Whether it’s Oldham or Bolton, Birmingham or Elswick in Newcastle, there’s no question now there’s a serious problem. “Sadiq is bucking the trend and there’s a reason for that. He was very early in calling for a ceasefire. He is now supporting a suspension of arms sales, as long as it’s clear that international law has been breached. So he did what we should have done and reaped the electoral rewards for that. “Unfortunately, and it pains me to say it, Muslims don’t think that the Labour party broadly values Palestinian and Muslim lives as equal to others. And nothing encapsulates that better than the message we’ve been sent around the country in other seats and constituencies and mayoralties.” At last week’s polls, this translated into a 17.9% drop in the Labour vote in areas where more than a fifth of people identified as Muslim, according to Professor Will Jennings of Southampton University. Although Labour gained control of eight councils, it lost seats and lost control of Oldham council in Greater Manchester. It failed to regain Oxford, lost ground in Blackburn with Darwen and Bradford, while the Workers Party of Britain, founded by George Galloway, unseated Manchester council’s deputy leader Luthfur Rahman. A Momentum spokesperson said the defeats should be “a wake-up call for the Labour leadership” and said Starmer should call for a suspension of arms sales to Israel. It said: “Any party which takes its core vote for granted risks disaster sooner or later. When the going gets tough, Labour will need to rally its base – but from climate to Gaza, Keir Starmer couldn’t seem less interested.” Sunder Katwala, director of British Future, said there had been a bigger impact on Labour’s vote during the local elections than had been showing up in national polling, but there might not be much effect on its chances in a general election. “Labour’s general election plan is going very well, according to these local election results, because it’s advancing in lots of places where Labour isn’t strong,” he said. However, since council wards were a fraction of the size of constituencies, they could be more easily dominated by particular groups than parliamentary constituencies. “There are a few hundred council seats where the Muslim voter group is the majority of a council ward. But that’s true of only three Westminster constituencies,” he said. Katwala added that Palestine was unusually prominent compared with other foreign policy issues among voters’ concerns, but that there was no single bloc of Muslim voters. “People exaggerate the number of Muslim voters and the way they vote in a bloc,” he said. “These results look quite like the post-Iraq impact of 2005. It was not that Muslims were voting as a bloc, but that Muslim votes were breaking up much more than ever before.” Sadiq Khan’s election victory as London mayor has “bucked the trend” of Muslim voters turning away from Labour over the party’s stance on the war in Gaza, party figures said. The 53-year-old won a third term as the capital’s mayor on Saturday, without seeming to have lost the support of large numbers of Muslim voters – unlike Labour candidates elsewhere in England last week. But Labour candidates elsewhere in England last week saw a significant loss of Muslim voters. Richard Parker became West Midlands mayor after a knife-edge contest with Andy Street, but it would have been much easier for the Labour man had substantial numbers of voters not backed an independent candidate whose campaign focused on Gaza. Akhmed Yakoob, a criminal defence lawyer, came third with 42,923 votes in Birmingham alone, where Parker saw a major decline on Labour’s 2021 vote. In contrast, Khan defeated his Conservative rival Susan Hall by 275,828 votes, a comfortable 11% margin. “We faced a campaign of nonstop negativity, but I couldn’t be more proud that we answered fear-mongering with facts, hate with hope and attempts to divide with efforts to unite,” Khan said in his victory speech. He also thanked his family and told them: “Some of the stuff on social media, the protests at my home, the threats – it’s upsetting, it’s frightening and it’s wrong. I’m truly sorry for putting you through this.” Labour supporters had been concerned that the mayor might suffer a Gaza backlash, opposition in outer London to the ultra-low emission zone (Ulez), and a switch from a supplementary vote system to first-past-the-post, even though a YouGov poll last week put Khan on 47%, well ahead of Susan Hall, on 25%. After the votes were counted, Ulez appeared to have had little effect, but the mayor did well in the two constituencies with higher numbers of Muslim voters. In North East, which includes Waltham Forest, Khan got 127,455 votes compared with 111,359 first preferences in 2021, while in City and East, which includes Newham and Tower Hamlets, the turnout fell by 30,000, but Khan had nearly 10,000 more votes than first preferences in 2021. The emphatic win ran counter to reporting by the BBC and other media outlets, who had claimed the race was close. Torsten Bell, chief executive of the Resolution Foundation thinktank, wrote on X on Saturday: “1pm BBC news still reporting ‘evidence that London closer than expected’ despite literally zero evidence – now or at any point over the last 24hrs.” “Should have been a VERY high evidence bar for thinking this was close,” he added. Khan was among the earliest Labour figures to call for a ceasefire in Gaza, in contrast to the Labour leader, who was hit by several defections and resignations after he said last October that Israel had “the right” to withhold power and water from Gaza. There was a furious reaction from those on the left, which has continued to simmer. At the most recent Palestine Solidarity Campaign march in London last month, the most obvious political placards were demonic cut-outs of Starmer and deputy leader Angela Rayner, dubbed Starmer for Genocide and Angela of Death. Ali Milani, the national chair of the Labour Muslim Network and a former Labour councillor who stood against Boris Johnson in Uxbridge in 2021, said that many Muslim voters had felt betrayed by Labour’s stance on Gaza. “This is something I’ve been warning about for months and it’s no longer polls and speculation – it’s real-life votes,” he said. “Whether it’s Oldham or Bolton, Birmingham or Elswick in Newcastle, there’s no question now there’s a serious problem. “Sadiq is bucking the trend and there’s a reason for that. He was very early in calling for a ceasefire. He is now supporting a suspension of arms sales, as long as it’s clear that international law has been breached. So he did what we should have done and reaped the electoral rewards for that. “Unfortunately, and it pains me to say it, Muslims don’t think that the Labour party broadly values Palestinian and Muslim lives as equal to others. And nothing encapsulates that better than the message we’ve been sent around the country in other seats and constituencies and mayoralties.” At last week’s polls, this translated into a 17.9% drop in the Labour vote in areas where more than a fifth of people identified as Muslim, according to Professor Will Jennings of Southampton University. Although Labour gained control of eight councils, it lost seats and lost control of Oldham council in Greater Manchester. It failed to regain Oxford, lost ground in Blackburn with Darwen and Bradford, while the Workers Party of Britain, founded by George Galloway, unseated Manchester council’s deputy leader Luthfur Rahman. A Momentum spokesperson said the defeats should be “a wake-up call for the Labour leadership” and said Starmer should call for a suspension of arms sales to Israel. It said: “Any party which takes its core vote for granted risks disaster sooner or later. When the going gets tough, Labour will need to rally its base – but from climate to Gaza, Keir Starmer couldn’t seem less interested.” Sunder Katwala, director of British Future, said there had been a bigger impact on Labour’s vote during the local elections than had been showing up in national polling, but there might not be much effect on its chances in a general election. “Labour’s general election plan is going very well, according to these local election results, because it’s advancing in lots of places where Labour isn’t strong,” he said. However, since council wards were a fraction of the size of constituencies, they could be more easily dominated by particular groups than parliamentary constituencies. “There are a few hundred council seats where the Muslim voter group is the majority of a council ward. But that’s true of only three Westminster constituencies,” he said. Katwala added that Palestine was unusually prominent compared with other foreign policy issues among voters’ concerns, but that there was no single bloc of Muslim voters. “People exaggerate the number of Muslim voters and the way they vote in a bloc,” he said. “These results look quite like the post-Iraq impact of 2005. It was not that Muslims were voting as a bloc, but that Muslim votes were breaking up much more than ever before.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics London mayoral election 2024 The Observer Sadiq Khan Labour Mayoral elections Local government Local politics news Share Reuse this content London mayoral election 2024 The Observer Sadiq Khan Labour Mayoral elections Local government Local politics news |
‘They hear a bang at the door and it’s the Home Office’: threat of being ‘disappeared’ haunts asylum seekers amid Rwanda crackdown
Protesters block a coach taking away asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer View image in fullscreen Protesters block a coach taking away asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer This article is more than 1 year old ‘They hear a bang at the door and it’s the Home Office’: threat of being ‘disappeared’ haunts asylum seekers amid Rwanda crackdown This article is more than 1 year old The Home Office last week launched a nationwide operation to round up asylum seekers, leaving many fearful and confused A t 2.37pm on Thursday, news that a man had “disappeared” rippled through London’s raid-resistance WhatsApp groups. The asylum seeker had walked into the Home Office immigration reporting centre in Hounslow, west London, for a routine appointment, as many people seeking refuge in Britain are required to do. His brother waited outside. But the man did not come out. Ten minutes passed, then 20, then an hour, then three. The brother waiting outside went in, and came out with bad news: his sibling had been detained and told he faced being deported to Rwanda . Calls for help went out on social media. “URGENT! Eaton House has news someone is detained so a van will be trying to leave WE NEED NUMBERS NOW!!” one person wrote. If they were going to stop the man being taken to an immigration removal centre – where he could be held for months before being placed on a deportation flight – protesters were needed urgently. At at hotel housing asylum seekers in Peckham, south-east London, hundreds had already gathered with a similar aim. A Home Office-contracted coach had been going to take people from the hotel to the Bibby Stockholm barge, moored in Dorset. Dozens of protesters sat in the road, arms linked. Someone reportedly punctured the coach’s tyres. After clashes between police, protestors and coach staff, 45 people were arrested . The protest achieved its aims – temporarily, at least. When the coach was eventually able to leave, seven hours after it arrived, there were no asylum seekers on board. View image in fullscreen Eaton House immigration centre in Hounslow, west London. Photograph: Maurice Savage/Alamy In Hounslow, the response on the ground was thinner. At the Eaton House immigration centre – two miles from Heathrow, and with planes constantly flying low overhead – there were two gates through which a van could take the detained man. The six people who had arrived to offer support had no choice but to split up. Three gathered outside one gate, and three outside the other. At 3pm, an unmarked van featuring no company name – only the abstract logo of the Home Office contractor Mitie – drove in. At about 4pm, it drove out again, with the asylum seeker inside, speeding through an “entrance only” gate and on to the main road. There was little the six protesters could do. “They knew there weren’t enough of us,” one of them said. In the front seats, the driver and his colleague appeared triumphant. “They were fucking laughing at us,” another of the protesters said. “To see such casual evil …” her voice trailed off. “They don’t see the people they are detaining as people.” This was a scene repeated across the UK last week , from London to Manchester, Cardiff to Glasgow. As part of a continuing “crackdown” called Operation Vector, the Home Office says it has increased detention capacity and enlisted 500 “escorts” to round up asylum seekers whom it says are eligible for removal to Rwanda. Many are people fleeing war and persecution in countries such as Iran, Sudan and Afghanistan who have already been in the UK for at least a year awaiting a decision about whether their asylum claim would be considered. Last Monday in Solihull, West Midlands, five asylum seekers were held at Sandford House immigration reporting centre after attending a routine appointment, as protesters gathered outside. The detainees included a Christian man who fled Iran for Britain two years ago, according to the Birmingham Dispatch . Then on Wednesday in Loughborough, Leicestershire, a group of men attending routine appointments were led out in handcuffs, put into a van and driven away. The Home Office has also boasted of raids at houses and hotels, posting a first video last Tuesday, set to cheerful music, showing a man being led from his home in handcuffs. View image in fullscreen Home Office immigration officers carry out an asylum seeker detention visit. Photograph: Home Office/PA Tara Wolfe, a barrister who leads the Rwanda project at the charity Bid (Bail for Immigration Detainees) , which is supporting about 15 people held as part of the plans to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda, said the detentions had caused a “lot of fear and a sense of powerlessness”. The exact number detained is not clear and deportation flights to Rwanda have yet to take off. One man was said to have been paid £3,000 as part of a voluntary removals scheme. Forced deportations are not expected to happen, if they do, until at least July. But the ramping-up of detentions – expected to continue at pace – has won praise from the rightwing press. “There’s no hiding place,” proclaimed a headline in the Sun . Lone children at risk of deportation to Rwanda after being classified as adults, says charity Read more Wolfe said those who had been detained had their smartphones and other belongings taken away and now faced a months-long wait until they knew their fate. People have been searched or handcuffed. Many have been left without robust internet or phone connections while in detention, Wolfe said, leaving them struggling to access legal advice and support from charities. “There’s just a sense of panic and desperation and people just not knowing why they’ve been detained,” she said. “It’s definitely succeeded in whipping up fear across the whole refugee community.” Detention Action , a charity that is helping another 10 people detained by the Home Office, said women were being held as well as men. At least one person who was detained and told they could be deported to Rwanda - a man from Iran who had been awaiting a decision on whether his asylum claim would be heard in the UK or not – has gone on hunger strike. Detained asylum seekers given Home Office booklet saying Rwanda is ‘generally safe’ Read more This weekend he said that he and his family were “tortured and oppressed” because of their religion in Iran and came to the UK because it is known for its human rights and safety. “But when you come, you realise there is no interview. You are left like this, in detention, like prison. My family in Iran ask: ‘What’s the difference?’” he said in an emailed statement. “I am damaging my body and my health to get help and to get my voice heard.” Ann Salter, head of clinical services in Freedom from Torture ’s north-west England region, said the detentions had been “retraumatising” even for those not likely to be affected by the Rwanda policy themselves. “We have heard accounts of people in shared housing hearing banging at the door and it’s Home Office officials coming to take people away. It’s absolutely terrifying,” she said. “Many of our clients come from a situation where they didn’t know when the knock at the door would be, or when they would be lifted from the streets. It is absolutely recreating that climate of fear.” Refugee charities say the threat of detention risks pushing people to disengage from the system. They may be less likely to report to the Home Office, as well as to access healthcare or go to the police if they are in danger, leaving them vulnerable to exploitation. There are also reports of people leaving Home Office accommodation in fear. At one hotel housing asylum seekers in Elephant and Castle, south London, 10 people were reportedly detained, according to youth worker Benny Hunter. He wrote online that he had heard from a friend staying there that some people were “so scared that they are leaving to sleep in parks”. View image in fullscreen Nazek Ramadan, director of the charity Migrant Voice, said asylum seekers were intentionally being made to feel scared and confused. Photograph: Linda Nylind/The Observer Nazek Ramadan, director of Migrant Voice , said people were being “deliberately” made to feel “scared and confused”. “The lack of communication from the Home Office means even those who in theory would not be likely to be removed to Rwanda feel that they might be,” she said. “Detaining people who are reporting to the Home Office is liable to just make people more fearful about turning up.” If they do not attend appointments – required for many as a condition of immigration bail – asylum seekers risk being arrested and cut off from financial support. Even so, for some, it is not an easy choice. Outside the Home Office reporting centre in Salford, Greater Manchester, Maggy Moyo, an organiser for the charity Right to Remain , has witnessed the impact of the policy up close. A former asylum seeker herself, she spent hours last week handing out leaflets to people going to routine appointments, with details of charities and legal projects they can call if they do end up being detained. She said some had not heard of the Rwanda scheme at all. “In asylum accommodation, there is no telly, no radio. There is also a language barrier. So if you’re not lucky enough to get people telling you: ‘Here’s a community group,’ you’re kind of clueless,” she said. Others were all too aware of the threat. “We had one guy who arrived in the UK in 2022. He knew exactly what might happen to him. He stood there for an hour crying, saying: ‘Should I go in? Or should I just jump and go under the radar?’” Moyo said. “We are looking at him and we don’t know what to say. We can’t give him our word [that he won’t be detained].” Eventually, the man, from Eritrea, went in. “Thankfully, he came back out,” Moyo said. “But when he came out he said: ‘I’m reporting next week and I’m not sure I will come back.’” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum The Observer Rwanda Home Office Migration Charities Protest Bibby Stockholm features Share Reuse this content Protesters block a coach taking away asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer View image in fullscreen Protesters block a coach taking away asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer This article is more than 1 year old ‘They hear a bang at the door and it’s the Home Office’: threat of being ‘disappeared’ haunts asylum seekers amid Rwanda crackdown This article is more than 1 year old The Home Office last week launched a nationwide operation to round up asylum seekers, leaving many fearful and confused A t 2.37pm on Thursday, news that a man had “disappeared” rippled through London’s raid-resistance WhatsApp groups. The asylum seeker had walked into the Home Office immigration reporting centre in Hounslow, west London, for a routine appointment, as many people seeking refuge in Britain are required to do. His brother waited outside. But the man did not come out. Ten minutes passed, then 20, then an hour, then three. The brother waiting outside went in, and came out with bad news: his sibling had been detained and told he faced being deported to Rwanda . Calls for help went out on social media. “URGENT! Eaton House has news someone is detained so a van will be trying to leave WE NEED NUMBERS NOW!!” one person wrote. If they were going to stop the man being taken to an immigration removal centre – where he could be held for months before being placed on a deportation flight – protesters were needed urgently. At at hotel housing asylum seekers in Peckham, south-east London, hundreds had already gathered with a similar aim. A Home Office-contracted coach had been going to take people from the hotel to the Bibby Stockholm barge, moored in Dorset. Dozens of protesters sat in the road, arms linked. Someone reportedly punctured the coach’s tyres. After clashes between police, protestors and coach staff, 45 people were arrested . The protest achieved its aims – temporarily, at least. When the coach was eventually able to leave, seven hours after it arrived, there were no asylum seekers on board. View image in fullscreen Eaton House immigration centre in Hounslow, west London. Photograph: Maurice Savage/Alamy In Hounslow, the response on the ground was thinner. At the Eaton House immigration centre – two miles from Heathrow, and with planes constantly flying low overhead – there were two gates through which a van could take the detained man. The six people who had arrived to offer support had no choice but to split up. Three gathered outside one gate, and three outside the other. At 3pm, an unmarked van featuring no company name – only the abstract logo of the Home Office contractor Mitie – drove in. At about 4pm, it drove out again, with the asylum seeker inside, speeding through an “entrance only” gate and on to the main road. There was little the six protesters could do. “They knew there weren’t enough of us,” one of them said. In the front seats, the driver and his colleague appeared triumphant. “They were fucking laughing at us,” another of the protesters said. “To see such casual evil …” her voice trailed off. “They don’t see the people they are detaining as people.” This was a scene repeated across the UK last week , from London to Manchester, Cardiff to Glasgow. As part of a continuing “crackdown” called Operation Vector, the Home Office says it has increased detention capacity and enlisted 500 “escorts” to round up asylum seekers whom it says are eligible for removal to Rwanda. Many are people fleeing war and persecution in countries such as Iran, Sudan and Afghanistan who have already been in the UK for at least a year awaiting a decision about whether their asylum claim would be considered. Last Monday in Solihull, West Midlands, five asylum seekers were held at Sandford House immigration reporting centre after attending a routine appointment, as protesters gathered outside. The detainees included a Christian man who fled Iran for Britain two years ago, according to the Birmingham Dispatch . Then on Wednesday in Loughborough, Leicestershire, a group of men attending routine appointments were led out in handcuffs, put into a van and driven away. The Home Office has also boasted of raids at houses and hotels, posting a first video last Tuesday, set to cheerful music, showing a man being led from his home in handcuffs. View image in fullscreen Home Office immigration officers carry out an asylum seeker detention visit. Photograph: Home Office/PA Tara Wolfe, a barrister who leads the Rwanda project at the charity Bid (Bail for Immigration Detainees) , which is supporting about 15 people held as part of the plans to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda, said the detentions had caused a “lot of fear and a sense of powerlessness”. The exact number detained is not clear and deportation flights to Rwanda have yet to take off. One man was said to have been paid £3,000 as part of a voluntary removals scheme. Forced deportations are not expected to happen, if they do, until at least July. But the ramping-up of detentions – expected to continue at pace – has won praise from the rightwing press. “There’s no hiding place,” proclaimed a headline in the Sun . Lone children at risk of deportation to Rwanda after being classified as adults, says charity Read more Wolfe said those who had been detained had their smartphones and other belongings taken away and now faced a months-long wait until they knew their fate. People have been searched or handcuffed. Many have been left without robust internet or phone connections while in detention, Wolfe said, leaving them struggling to access legal advice and support from charities. “There’s just a sense of panic and desperation and people just not knowing why they’ve been detained,” she said. “It’s definitely succeeded in whipping up fear across the whole refugee community.” Detention Action , a charity that is helping another 10 people detained by the Home Office, said women were being held as well as men. At least one person who was detained and told they could be deported to Rwanda - a man from Iran who had been awaiting a decision on whether his asylum claim would be heard in the UK or not – has gone on hunger strike. Detained asylum seekers given Home Office booklet saying Rwanda is ‘generally safe’ Read more This weekend he said that he and his family were “tortured and oppressed” because of their religion in Iran and came to the UK because it is known for its human rights and safety. “But when you come, you realise there is no interview. You are left like this, in detention, like prison. My family in Iran ask: ‘What’s the difference?’” he said in an emailed statement. “I am damaging my body and my health to get help and to get my voice heard.” Ann Salter, head of clinical services in Freedom from Torture ’s north-west England region, said the detentions had been “retraumatising” even for those not likely to be affected by the Rwanda policy themselves. “We have heard accounts of people in shared housing hearing banging at the door and it’s Home Office officials coming to take people away. It’s absolutely terrifying,” she said. “Many of our clients come from a situation where they didn’t know when the knock at the door would be, or when they would be lifted from the streets. It is absolutely recreating that climate of fear.” Refugee charities say the threat of detention risks pushing people to disengage from the system. They may be less likely to report to the Home Office, as well as to access healthcare or go to the police if they are in danger, leaving them vulnerable to exploitation. There are also reports of people leaving Home Office accommodation in fear. At one hotel housing asylum seekers in Elephant and Castle, south London, 10 people were reportedly detained, according to youth worker Benny Hunter. He wrote online that he had heard from a friend staying there that some people were “so scared that they are leaving to sleep in parks”. View image in fullscreen Nazek Ramadan, director of the charity Migrant Voice, said asylum seekers were intentionally being made to feel scared and confused. Photograph: Linda Nylind/The Observer Nazek Ramadan, director of Migrant Voice , said people were being “deliberately” made to feel “scared and confused”. “The lack of communication from the Home Office means even those who in theory would not be likely to be removed to Rwanda feel that they might be,” she said. “Detaining people who are reporting to the Home Office is liable to just make people more fearful about turning up.” If they do not attend appointments – required for many as a condition of immigration bail – asylum seekers risk being arrested and cut off from financial support. Even so, for some, it is not an easy choice. Outside the Home Office reporting centre in Salford, Greater Manchester, Maggy Moyo, an organiser for the charity Right to Remain , has witnessed the impact of the policy up close. A former asylum seeker herself, she spent hours last week handing out leaflets to people going to routine appointments, with details of charities and legal projects they can call if they do end up being detained. She said some had not heard of the Rwanda scheme at all. “In asylum accommodation, there is no telly, no radio. There is also a language barrier. So if you’re not lucky enough to get people telling you: ‘Here’s a community group,’ you’re kind of clueless,” she said. Others were all too aware of the threat. “We had one guy who arrived in the UK in 2022. He knew exactly what might happen to him. He stood there for an hour crying, saying: ‘Should I go in? Or should I just jump and go under the radar?’” Moyo said. “We are looking at him and we don’t know what to say. We can’t give him our word [that he won’t be detained].” Eventually, the man, from Eritrea, went in. “Thankfully, he came back out,” Moyo said. “But when he came out he said: ‘I’m reporting next week and I’m not sure I will come back.’” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum The Observer Rwanda Home Office Migration Charities Protest Bibby Stockholm features Share Reuse this content Protesters block a coach taking away asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer View image in fullscreen Protesters block a coach taking away asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer Protesters block a coach taking away asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer View image in fullscreen Protesters block a coach taking away asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer Protesters block a coach taking away asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer View image in fullscreen Protesters block a coach taking away asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer Protesters block a coach taking away asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer View image in fullscreen Protesters block a coach taking away asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer Protesters block a coach taking away asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer Protesters block a coach taking away asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south-east London. Photograph: Andy Hall/The Observer This article is more than 1 year old ‘They hear a bang at the door and it’s the Home Office’: threat of being ‘disappeared’ haunts asylum seekers amid Rwanda crackdown This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘They hear a bang at the door and it’s the Home Office’: threat of being ‘disappeared’ haunts asylum seekers amid Rwanda crackdown This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘They hear a bang at the door and it’s the Home Office’: threat of being ‘disappeared’ haunts asylum seekers amid Rwanda crackdown This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old The Home Office last week launched a nationwide operation to round up asylum seekers, leaving many fearful and confused The Home Office last week launched a nationwide operation to round up asylum seekers, leaving many fearful and confused The Home Office last week launched a nationwide operation to round up asylum seekers, leaving many fearful and confused A t 2.37pm on Thursday, news that a man had “disappeared” rippled through London’s raid-resistance WhatsApp groups. The asylum seeker had walked into the Home Office immigration reporting centre in Hounslow, west London, for a routine appointment, as many people seeking refuge in Britain are required to do. His brother waited outside. But the man did not come out. Ten minutes passed, then 20, then an hour, then three. The brother waiting outside went in, and came out with bad news: his sibling had been detained and told he faced being deported to Rwanda . Calls for help went out on social media. “URGENT! Eaton House has news someone is detained so a van will be trying to leave WE NEED NUMBERS NOW!!” one person wrote. If they were going to stop the man being taken to an immigration removal centre – where he could be held for months before being placed on a deportation flight – protesters were needed urgently. At at hotel housing asylum seekers in Peckham, south-east London, hundreds had already gathered with a similar aim. A Home Office-contracted coach had been going to take people from the hotel to the Bibby Stockholm barge, moored in Dorset. Dozens of protesters sat in the road, arms linked. Someone reportedly punctured the coach’s tyres. After clashes between police, protestors and coach staff, 45 people were arrested . The protest achieved its aims – temporarily, at least. When the coach was eventually able to leave, seven hours after it arrived, there were no asylum seekers on board. View image in fullscreen Eaton House immigration centre in Hounslow, west London. Photograph: Maurice Savage/Alamy In Hounslow, the response on the ground was thinner. At the Eaton House immigration centre – two miles from Heathrow, and with planes constantly flying low overhead – there were two gates through which a van could take the detained man. The six people who had arrived to offer support had no choice but to split up. Three gathered outside one gate, and three outside the other. At 3pm, an unmarked van featuring no company name – only the abstract logo of the Home Office contractor Mitie – drove in. At about 4pm, it drove out again, with the asylum seeker inside, speeding through an “entrance only” gate and on to the main road. There was little the six protesters could do. “They knew there weren’t enough of us,” one of them said. In the front seats, the driver and his colleague appeared triumphant. “They were fucking laughing at us,” another of the protesters said. “To see such casual evil …” her voice trailed off. “They don’t see the people they are detaining as people.” This was a scene repeated across the UK last week , from London to Manchester, Cardiff to Glasgow. As part of a continuing “crackdown” called Operation Vector, the Home Office says it has increased detention capacity and enlisted 500 “escorts” to round up asylum seekers whom it says are eligible for removal to Rwanda. Many are people fleeing war and persecution in countries such as Iran, Sudan and Afghanistan who have already been in the UK for at least a year awaiting a decision about whether their asylum claim would be considered. Last Monday in Solihull, West Midlands, five asylum seekers were held at Sandford House immigration reporting centre after attending a routine appointment, as protesters gathered outside. The detainees included a Christian man who fled Iran for Britain two years ago, according to the Birmingham Dispatch . Then on Wednesday in Loughborough, Leicestershire, a group of men attending routine appointments were led out in handcuffs, put into a van and driven away. The Home Office has also boasted of raids at houses and hotels, posting a first video last Tuesday, set to cheerful music, showing a man being led from his home in handcuffs. View image in fullscreen Home Office immigration officers carry out an asylum seeker detention visit. Photograph: Home Office/PA Tara Wolfe, a barrister who leads the Rwanda project at the charity Bid (Bail for Immigration Detainees) , which is supporting about 15 people held as part of the plans to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda, said the detentions had caused a “lot of fear and a sense of powerlessness”. The exact number detained is not clear and deportation flights to Rwanda have yet to take off. One man was said to have been paid £3,000 as part of a voluntary removals scheme. Forced deportations are not expected to happen, if they do, until at least July. But the ramping-up of detentions – expected to continue at pace – has won praise from the rightwing press. “There’s no hiding place,” proclaimed a headline in the Sun . Lone children at risk of deportation to Rwanda after being classified as adults, says charity Read more Wolfe said those who had been detained had their smartphones and other belongings taken away and now faced a months-long wait until they knew their fate. People have been searched or handcuffed. Many have been left without robust internet or phone connections while in detention, Wolfe said, leaving them struggling to access legal advice and support from charities. “There’s just a sense of panic and desperation and people just not knowing why they’ve been detained,” she said. “It’s definitely succeeded in whipping up fear across the whole refugee community.” Detention Action , a charity that is helping another 10 people detained by the Home Office, said women were being held as well as men. At least one person who was detained and told they could be deported to Rwanda - a man from Iran who had been awaiting a decision on whether his asylum claim would be heard in the UK or not – has gone on hunger strike. Detained asylum seekers given Home Office booklet saying Rwanda is ‘generally safe’ Read more This weekend he said that he and his family were “tortured and oppressed” because of their religion in Iran and came to the UK because it is known for its human rights and safety. “But when you come, you realise there is no interview. You are left like this, in detention, like prison. My family in Iran ask: ‘What’s the difference?’” he said in an emailed statement. “I am damaging my body and my health to get help and to get my voice heard.” Ann Salter, head of clinical services in Freedom from Torture ’s north-west England region, said the detentions had been “retraumatising” even for those not likely to be affected by the Rwanda policy themselves. “We have heard accounts of people in shared housing hearing banging at the door and it’s Home Office officials coming to take people away. It’s absolutely terrifying,” she said. “Many of our clients come from a situation where they didn’t know when the knock at the door would be, or when they would be lifted from the streets. It is absolutely recreating that climate of fear.” Refugee charities say the threat of detention risks pushing people to disengage from the system. They may be less likely to report to the Home Office, as well as to access healthcare or go to the police if they are in danger, leaving them vulnerable to exploitation. There are also reports of people leaving Home Office accommodation in fear. At one hotel housing asylum seekers in Elephant and Castle, south London, 10 people were reportedly detained, according to youth worker Benny Hunter. He wrote online that he had heard from a friend staying there that some people were “so scared that they are leaving to sleep in parks”. View image in fullscreen Nazek Ramadan, director of the charity Migrant Voice, said asylum seekers were intentionally being made to feel scared and confused. Photograph: Linda Nylind/The Observer Nazek Ramadan, director of Migrant Voice , said people were being “deliberately” made to feel “scared and confused”. “The lack of communication from the Home Office means even those who in theory would not be likely to be removed to Rwanda feel that they might be,” she said. “Detaining people who are reporting to the Home Office is liable to just make people more fearful about turning up.” If they do not attend appointments – required for many as a condition of immigration bail – asylum seekers risk being arrested and cut off from financial support. Even so, for some, it is not an easy choice. Outside the Home Office reporting centre in Salford, Greater Manchester, Maggy Moyo, an organiser for the charity Right to Remain , has witnessed the impact of the policy up close. A former asylum seeker herself, she spent hours last week handing out leaflets to people going to routine appointments, with details of charities and legal projects they can call if they do end up being detained. She said some had not heard of the Rwanda scheme at all. “In asylum accommodation, there is no telly, no radio. There is also a language barrier. So if you’re not lucky enough to get people telling you: ‘Here’s a community group,’ you’re kind of clueless,” she said. Others were all too aware of the threat. “We had one guy who arrived in the UK in 2022. He knew exactly what might happen to him. He stood there for an hour crying, saying: ‘Should I go in? Or should I just jump and go under the radar?’” Moyo said. “We are looking at him and we don’t know what to say. We can’t give him our word [that he won’t be detained].” Eventually, the man, from Eritrea, went in. “Thankfully, he came back out,” Moyo said. “But when he came out he said: ‘I’m reporting next week and I’m not sure I will come back.’” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum The Observer Rwanda Home Office Migration Charities Protest Bibby Stockholm features Share Reuse this content A t 2.37pm on Thursday, news that a man had “disappeared” rippled through London’s raid-resistance WhatsApp groups. The asylum seeker had walked into the Home Office immigration reporting centre in Hounslow, west London, for a routine appointment, as many people seeking refuge in Britain are required to do. His brother waited outside. But the man did not come out. Ten minutes passed, then 20, then an hour, then three. The brother waiting outside went in, and came out with bad news: his sibling had been detained and told he faced being deported to Rwanda . Calls for help went out on social media. “URGENT! Eaton House has news someone is detained so a van will be trying to leave WE NEED NUMBERS NOW!!” one person wrote. If they were going to stop the man being taken to an immigration removal centre – where he could be held for months before being placed on a deportation flight – protesters were needed urgently. At at hotel housing asylum seekers in Peckham, south-east London, hundreds had already gathered with a similar aim. A Home Office-contracted coach had been going to take people from the hotel to the Bibby Stockholm barge, moored in Dorset. Dozens of protesters sat in the road, arms linked. Someone reportedly punctured the coach’s tyres. After clashes between police, protestors and coach staff, 45 people were arrested . The protest achieved its aims – temporarily, at least. When the coach was eventually able to leave, seven hours after it arrived, there were no asylum seekers on board. View image in fullscreen Eaton House immigration centre in Hounslow, west London. Photograph: Maurice Savage/Alamy In Hounslow, the response on the ground was thinner. At the Eaton House immigration centre – two miles from Heathrow, and with planes constantly flying low overhead – there were two gates through which a van could take the detained man. The six people who had arrived to offer support had no choice but to split up. Three gathered outside one gate, and three outside the other. At 3pm, an unmarked van featuring no company name – only the abstract logo of the Home Office contractor Mitie – drove in. At about 4pm, it drove out again, with the asylum seeker inside, speeding through an “entrance only” gate and on to the main road. There was little the six protesters could do. “They knew there weren’t enough of us,” one of them said. In the front seats, the driver and his colleague appeared triumphant. “They were fucking laughing at us,” another of the protesters said. “To see such casual evil …” her voice trailed off. “They don’t see the people they are detaining as people.” This was a scene repeated across the UK last week , from London to Manchester, Cardiff to Glasgow. As part of a continuing “crackdown” called Operation Vector, the Home Office says it has increased detention capacity and enlisted 500 “escorts” to round up asylum seekers whom it says are eligible for removal to Rwanda. Many are people fleeing war and persecution in countries such as Iran, Sudan and Afghanistan who have already been in the UK for at least a year awaiting a decision about whether their asylum claim would be considered. Last Monday in Solihull, West Midlands, five asylum seekers were held at Sandford House immigration reporting centre after attending a routine appointment, as protesters gathered outside. The detainees included a Christian man who fled Iran for Britain two years ago, according to the Birmingham Dispatch . Then on Wednesday in Loughborough, Leicestershire, a group of men attending routine appointments were led out in handcuffs, put into a van and driven away. The Home Office has also boasted of raids at houses and hotels, posting a first video last Tuesday, set to cheerful music, showing a man being led from his home in handcuffs. View image in fullscreen Home Office immigration officers carry out an asylum seeker detention visit. Photograph: Home Office/PA Tara Wolfe, a barrister who leads the Rwanda project at the charity Bid (Bail for Immigration Detainees) , which is supporting about 15 people held as part of the plans to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda, said the detentions had caused a “lot of fear and a sense of powerlessness”. The exact number detained is not clear and deportation flights to Rwanda have yet to take off. One man was said to have been paid £3,000 as part of a voluntary removals scheme. Forced deportations are not expected to happen, if they do, until at least July. But the ramping-up of detentions – expected to continue at pace – has won praise from the rightwing press. “There’s no hiding place,” proclaimed a headline in the Sun . Lone children at risk of deportation to Rwanda after being classified as adults, says charity Read more Wolfe said those who had been detained had their smartphones and other belongings taken away and now faced a months-long wait until they knew their fate. People have been searched or handcuffed. Many have been left without robust internet or phone connections while in detention, Wolfe said, leaving them struggling to access legal advice and support from charities. “There’s just a sense of panic and desperation and people just not knowing why they’ve been detained,” she said. “It’s definitely succeeded in whipping up fear across the whole refugee community.” Detention Action , a charity that is helping another 10 people detained by the Home Office, said women were being held as well as men. At least one person who was detained and told they could be deported to Rwanda - a man from Iran who had been awaiting a decision on whether his asylum claim would be heard in the UK or not – has gone on hunger strike. Detained asylum seekers given Home Office booklet saying Rwanda is ‘generally safe’ Read more This weekend he said that he and his family were “tortured and oppressed” because of their religion in Iran and came to the UK because it is known for its human rights and safety. “But when you come, you realise there is no interview. You are left like this, in detention, like prison. My family in Iran ask: ‘What’s the difference?’” he said in an emailed statement. “I am damaging my body and my health to get help and to get my voice heard.” Ann Salter, head of clinical services in Freedom from Torture ’s north-west England region, said the detentions had been “retraumatising” even for those not likely to be affected by the Rwanda policy themselves. “We have heard accounts of people in shared housing hearing banging at the door and it’s Home Office officials coming to take people away. It’s absolutely terrifying,” she said. “Many of our clients come from a situation where they didn’t know when the knock at the door would be, or when they would be lifted from the streets. It is absolutely recreating that climate of fear.” Refugee charities say the threat of detention risks pushing people to disengage from the system. They may be less likely to report to the Home Office, as well as to access healthcare or go to the police if they are in danger, leaving them vulnerable to exploitation. There are also reports of people leaving Home Office accommodation in fear. At one hotel housing asylum seekers in Elephant and Castle, south London, 10 people were reportedly detained, according to youth worker Benny Hunter. He wrote online that he had heard from a friend staying there that some people were “so scared that they are leaving to sleep in parks”. View image in fullscreen Nazek Ramadan, director of the charity Migrant Voice, said asylum seekers were intentionally being made to feel scared and confused. Photograph: Linda Nylind/The Observer Nazek Ramadan, director of Migrant Voice , said people were being “deliberately” made to feel “scared and confused”. “The lack of communication from the Home Office means even those who in theory would not be likely to be removed to Rwanda feel that they might be,” she said. “Detaining people who are reporting to the Home Office is liable to just make people more fearful about turning up.” If they do not attend appointments – required for many as a condition of immigration bail – asylum seekers risk being arrested and cut off from financial support. Even so, for some, it is not an easy choice. Outside the Home Office reporting centre in Salford, Greater Manchester, Maggy Moyo, an organiser for the charity Right to Remain , has witnessed the impact of the policy up close. A former asylum seeker herself, she spent hours last week handing out leaflets to people going to routine appointments, with details of charities and legal projects they can call if they do end up being detained. She said some had not heard of the Rwanda scheme at all. “In asylum accommodation, there is no telly, no radio. There is also a language barrier. So if you’re not lucky enough to get people telling you: ‘Here’s a community group,’ you’re kind of clueless,” she said. Others were all too aware of the threat. “We had one guy who arrived in the UK in 2022. He knew exactly what might happen to him. He stood there for an hour crying, saying: ‘Should I go in? Or should I just jump and go under the radar?’” Moyo said. “We are looking at him and we don’t know what to say. We can’t give him our word [that he won’t be detained].” Eventually, the man, from Eritrea, went in. “Thankfully, he came back out,” Moyo said. “But when he came out he said: ‘I’m reporting next week and I’m not sure I will come back.’” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum The Observer Rwanda Home Office Migration Charities Protest Bibby Stockholm features Share Reuse this content A t 2.37pm on Thursday, news that a man had “disappeared” rippled through London’s raid-resistance WhatsApp groups. The asylum seeker had walked into the Home Office immigration reporting centre in Hounslow, west London, for a routine appointment, as many people seeking refuge in Britain are required to do. His brother waited outside. But the man did not come out. Ten minutes passed, then 20, then an hour, then three. The brother waiting outside went in, and came out with bad news: his sibling had been detained and told he faced being deported to Rwanda . Calls for help went out on social media. “URGENT! Eaton House has news someone is detained so a van will be trying to leave WE NEED NUMBERS NOW!!” one person wrote. If they were going to stop the man being taken to an immigration removal centre – where he could be held for months before being placed on a deportation flight – protesters were needed urgently. At at hotel housing asylum seekers in Peckham, south-east London, hundreds had already gathered with a similar aim. A Home Office-contracted coach had been going to take people from the hotel to the Bibby Stockholm barge, moored in Dorset. Dozens of protesters sat in the road, arms linked. Someone reportedly punctured the coach’s tyres. After clashes between police, protestors and coach staff, 45 people were arrested . The protest achieved its aims – temporarily, at least. When the coach was eventually able to leave, seven hours after it arrived, there were no asylum seekers on board. View image in fullscreen Eaton House immigration centre in Hounslow, west London. Photograph: Maurice Savage/Alamy In Hounslow, the response on the ground was thinner. At the Eaton House immigration centre – two miles from Heathrow, and with planes constantly flying low overhead – there were two gates through which a van could take the detained man. The six people who had arrived to offer support had no choice but to split up. Three gathered outside one gate, and three outside the other. At 3pm, an unmarked van featuring no company name – only the abstract logo of the Home Office contractor Mitie – drove in. At about 4pm, it drove out again, with the asylum seeker inside, speeding through an “entrance only” gate and on to the main road. There was little the six protesters could do. “They knew there weren’t enough of us,” one of them said. In the front seats, the driver and his colleague appeared triumphant. “They were fucking laughing at us,” another of the protesters said. “To see such casual evil …” her voice trailed off. “They don’t see the people they are detaining as people.” This was a scene repeated across the UK last week , from London to Manchester, Cardiff to Glasgow. As part of a continuing “crackdown” called Operation Vector, the Home Office says it has increased detention capacity and enlisted 500 “escorts” to round up asylum seekers whom it says are eligible for removal to Rwanda. Many are people fleeing war and persecution in countries such as Iran, Sudan and Afghanistan who have already been in the UK for at least a year awaiting a decision about whether their asylum claim would be considered. Last Monday in Solihull, West Midlands, five asylum seekers were held at Sandford House immigration reporting centre after attending a routine appointment, as protesters gathered outside. The detainees included a Christian man who fled Iran for Britain two years ago, according to the Birmingham Dispatch . Then on Wednesday in Loughborough, Leicestershire, a group of men attending routine appointments were led out in handcuffs, put into a van and driven away. The Home Office has also boasted of raids at houses and hotels, posting a first video last Tuesday, set to cheerful music, showing a man being led from his home in handcuffs. View image in fullscreen Home Office immigration officers carry out an asylum seeker detention visit. Photograph: Home Office/PA Tara Wolfe, a barrister who leads the Rwanda project at the charity Bid (Bail for Immigration Detainees) , which is supporting about 15 people held as part of the plans to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda, said the detentions had caused a “lot of fear and a sense of powerlessness”. The exact number detained is not clear and deportation flights to Rwanda have yet to take off. One man was said to have been paid £3,000 as part of a voluntary removals scheme. Forced deportations are not expected to happen, if they do, until at least July. But the ramping-up of detentions – expected to continue at pace – has won praise from the rightwing press. “There’s no hiding place,” proclaimed a headline in the Sun . Lone children at risk of deportation to Rwanda after being classified as adults, says charity Read more Wolfe said those who had been detained had their smartphones and other belongings taken away and now faced a months-long wait until they knew their fate. People have been searched or handcuffed. Many have been left without robust internet or phone connections while in detention, Wolfe said, leaving them struggling to access legal advice and support from charities. “There’s just a sense of panic and desperation and people just not knowing why they’ve been detained,” she said. “It’s definitely succeeded in whipping up fear across the whole refugee community.” Detention Action , a charity that is helping another 10 people detained by the Home Office, said women were being held as well as men. At least one person who was detained and told they could be deported to Rwanda - a man from Iran who had been awaiting a decision on whether his asylum claim would be heard in the UK or not – has gone on hunger strike. Detained asylum seekers given Home Office booklet saying Rwanda is ‘generally safe’ Read more This weekend he said that he and his family were “tortured and oppressed” because of their religion in Iran and came to the UK because it is known for its human rights and safety. “But when you come, you realise there is no interview. You are left like this, in detention, like prison. My family in Iran ask: ‘What’s the difference?’” he said in an emailed statement. “I am damaging my body and my health to get help and to get my voice heard.” Ann Salter, head of clinical services in Freedom from Torture ’s north-west England region, said the detentions had been “retraumatising” even for those not likely to be affected by the Rwanda policy themselves. “We have heard accounts of people in shared housing hearing banging at the door and it’s Home Office officials coming to take people away. It’s
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
On my radar: Andrew O’Hagan’s cultural highlights
Author Andrew O'Hagan at home in London. Photograph: Amit Lennon/The Observer View image in fullscreen Author Andrew O'Hagan at home in London. Photograph: Amit Lennon/The Observer This article is more than 1 year old On my radar: Andrew O’Hagan’s cultural highlights This article is more than 1 year old The novelist on a comedic TikTok sensation, the importance of a good suit and his favourite educational app A ndrew O’Hagan was born in Glasgow in 1968, grew up in a working-class Ayrshire family and studied English at Strathclyde University. His first book was The Missing (1995), which told the story of people who disappeared. In 2003 he was included on Granta’s list of best young British novelists. He has written 10 books, including Our Fathers and Mayflies , with three of his novels being Booker nominated. His most recent, Caledonian Road , a state-of-the-nation tale, is published by Faber. He will be talking at Hay festival on 30 May. View image in fullscreen 1. Poetry May Day by Jackie Kay At the core of this vital and wonderful book are Jackie’s activist parents, and the book is filled with marches, demos, protests, dreams of Peggy Seeger and memories of Hugh MacDiarmid pushing a pram. Here’s a beautiful writer at the top of her game and if I ran Britain I would give out copies on the NHS. It’s a sublime, joyous, pot-banging volume of genius. “Nothing like a wee latte last thing at night:/you’ll always be my wee lassie – moon bright./I’ll kiss your forehead and turn out the light.” 2. Comedy Henry Rowley View image in fullscreen Henry Rowley: ‘sends up everything’. Photograph: Dave Benett/Alan Chapman/WireImage Rowley is a TikTok sensation who will let his mind go anywhere, as minds should. He sends up everything from Harry Potter fans to posh students, and he likes his own banter, which is part of the infectious fun. I’m already signed up for his forthcoming Edinburgh fringe smash, Just Literally . 3. Fashion Ritchie Charlton Tailoring View image in fullscreen ‘Nobody in Britain is better at making men’s clothes’: Ritchie Charlton at work. Photograph: Zoe Hitchen Many men believe their car describes them, yet behave as if their body isn’t theirs and that threads don’t matter. I’d sooner have a good suit and take the bus. Nobody in Britain is better at making men’s clothes than Ritchie Charlton. Formerly of Hardy Amies, Kilgour and Alexander McQueen, he’s now out on his own and is a complete master when it comes to making sharpness look natural. 4. Music Glasgow Eyes by the Jesus and Mary Chain View image in fullscreen ‘They create their own timeless momentum’: the Jesus and Mary Chain. Photograph: Mel Butler The 80s feedback-merchants are moving up a gear. I loved them when I was a teenager and felt their Ramones meets Sex Pistols thing was everything. We used to go and watch them playing 15-minute sets with their backs to the audience and thought that was just the be-all and end-all of cool. On this new album, they prove the maxim that everything must change for things to remain the same. Glasgow Eyes is poppier, more experienced, with a driving pulse and a deep melodic fluency that recalls the Beach Boys. Like the best bands, they create their own timeless momentum and then share it. 5. App Blinkist Is life ever not revision? Isn’t every day a recap? My new favourite app gives you a series of major ideas as a more or less structured list of headlines, or “blinks”. On the edge of sleep, why lie back thinking of family grievances when you could opt instead for a quick 20 minutes of Hobbes’s Leviathan to remind you of how a social contract has to remain intact? In the morning, over the Frosties, you can listen to another political grilling on the Today programme or opt instead for a 15-minute sprint in the park with Simone de Beauvoir’s The Ethics of Ambiguit y . I’m now obsessed with it. Like most revision, its main function is not to give you knowledge but to remind you of all the things you don’t know. 6. Podcast The Run-Up View image in fullscreen Astead Herndon, presenter of The Run-Up. Photograph: Bennett Raglin/Getty Images for The New York Times The forthcoming American presidential election may prove, as advertised, to be among the greatest shitshows in the history of human affairs. I am due to be at the Republican national convention in Milwaukee in July , so I’m preparing – I hope equally – for the gravity and the comedy of it all. What will become of the anti-Trump Republicans? Who’s winning the money race? Will Robert Kennedy Jr prove to be a spoiler? And what if someone dies? Produced by the New York Times and presented by the excellent Astead Herndon, this podcast is chatty, funny and totally alarming. This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Culture On my radar Pop and rock Apps Podcasts Comedy Poetry features Share Reuse this content Author Andrew O'Hagan at home in London. Photograph: Amit Lennon/The Observer View image in fullscreen Author Andrew O'Hagan at home in London. Photograph: Amit Lennon/The Observer This article is more than 1 year old On my radar: Andrew O’Hagan’s cultural highlights This article is more than 1 year old The novelist on a comedic TikTok sensation, the importance of a good suit and his favourite educational app A ndrew O’Hagan was born in Glasgow in 1968, grew up in a working-class Ayrshire family and studied English at Strathclyde University. His first book was The Missing (1995), which told the story of people who disappeared. In 2003 he was included on Granta’s list of best young British novelists. He has written 10 books, including Our Fathers and Mayflies , with three of his novels being Booker nominated. His most recent, Caledonian Road , a state-of-the-nation tale, is published by Faber. He will be talking at Hay festival on 30 May. View image in fullscreen 1. Poetry May Day by Jackie Kay At the core of this vital and wonderful book are Jackie’s activist parents, and the book is filled with marches, demos, protests, dreams of Peggy Seeger and memories of Hugh MacDiarmid pushing a pram. Here’s a beautiful writer at the top of her game and if I ran Britain I would give out copies on the NHS. It’s a sublime, joyous, pot-banging volume of genius. “Nothing like a wee latte last thing at night:/you’ll always be my wee lassie – moon bright./I’ll kiss your forehead and turn out the light.” 2. Comedy Henry Rowley View image in fullscreen Henry Rowley: ‘sends up everything’. Photograph: Dave Benett/Alan Chapman/WireImage Rowley is a TikTok sensation who will let his mind go anywhere, as minds should. He sends up everything from Harry Potter fans to posh students, and he likes his own banter, which is part of the infectious fun. I’m already signed up for his forthcoming Edinburgh fringe smash, Just Literally . 3. Fashion Ritchie Charlton Tailoring View image in fullscreen ‘Nobody in Britain is better at making men’s clothes’: Ritchie Charlton at work. Photograph: Zoe Hitchen Many men believe their car describes them, yet behave as if their body isn’t theirs and that threads don’t matter. I’d sooner have a good suit and take the bus. Nobody in Britain is better at making men’s clothes than Ritchie Charlton. Formerly of Hardy Amies, Kilgour and Alexander McQueen, he’s now out on his own and is a complete master when it comes to making sharpness look natural. 4. Music Glasgow Eyes by the Jesus and Mary Chain View image in fullscreen ‘They create their own timeless momentum’: the Jesus and Mary Chain. Photograph: Mel Butler The 80s feedback-merchants are moving up a gear. I loved them when I was a teenager and felt their Ramones meets Sex Pistols thing was everything. We used to go and watch them playing 15-minute sets with their backs to the audience and thought that was just the be-all and end-all of cool. On this new album, they prove the maxim that everything must change for things to remain the same. Glasgow Eyes is poppier, more experienced, with a driving pulse and a deep melodic fluency that recalls the Beach Boys. Like the best bands, they create their own timeless momentum and then share it. 5. App Blinkist Is life ever not revision? Isn’t every day a recap? My new favourite app gives you a series of major ideas as a more or less structured list of headlines, or “blinks”. On the edge of sleep, why lie back thinking of family grievances when you could opt instead for a quick 20 minutes of Hobbes’s Leviathan to remind you of how a social contract has to remain intact? In the morning, over the Frosties, you can listen to another political grilling on the Today programme or opt instead for a 15-minute sprint in the park with Simone de Beauvoir’s The Ethics of Ambiguit y . I’m now obsessed with it. Like most revision, its main function is not to give you knowledge but to remind you of all the things you don’t know. 6. Podcast The Run-Up View image in fullscreen Astead Herndon, presenter of The Run-Up. Photograph: Bennett Raglin/Getty Images for The New York Times The forthcoming American presidential election may prove, as advertised, to be among the greatest shitshows in the history of human affairs. I am due to be at the Republican national convention in Milwaukee in July , so I’m preparing – I hope equally – for the gravity and the comedy of it all. What will become of the anti-Trump Republicans? Who’s winning the money race? Will Robert Kennedy Jr prove to be a spoiler? And what if someone dies? Produced by the New York Times and presented by the excellent Astead Herndon, this podcast is chatty, funny and totally alarming. This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Culture On my radar Pop and rock Apps Podcasts Comedy Poetry features Share Reuse this content Author Andrew O'Hagan at home in London. Photograph: Amit Lennon/The Observer View image in fullscreen Author Andrew O'Hagan at home in London. Photograph: Amit Lennon/The Observer Author Andrew O'Hagan at home in London. Photograph: Amit Lennon/The Observer View image in fullscreen Author Andrew O'Hagan at home in London. Photograph: Amit Lennon/The Observer Author Andrew O'Hagan at home in London. Photograph: Amit Lennon/The Observer View image in fullscreen Author Andrew O'Hagan at home in London. Photograph: Amit Lennon/The Observer Author Andrew O'Hagan at home in London. Photograph: Amit Lennon/The Observer View image in fullscreen Author Andrew O'Hagan at home in London. Photograph: Amit Lennon/The Observer Author Andrew O'Hagan at home in London. Photograph: Amit Lennon/The Observer Author Andrew O'Hagan at home in London. Photograph: Amit Lennon/The Observer This article is more than 1 year old On my radar: Andrew O’Hagan’s cultural highlights This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old On my radar: Andrew O’Hagan’s cultural highlights This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old On my radar: Andrew O’Hagan’s cultural highlights This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old The novelist on a comedic TikTok sensation, the importance of a good suit and his favourite educational app The novelist on a comedic TikTok sensation, the importance of a good suit and his favourite educational app The novelist on a comedic TikTok sensation, the importance of a good suit and his favourite educational app A ndrew O’Hagan was born in Glasgow in 1968, grew up in a working-class Ayrshire family and studied English at Strathclyde University. His first book was The Missing (1995), which told the story of people who disappeared. In 2003 he was included on Granta’s list of best young British novelists. He has written 10 books, including Our Fathers and Mayflies , with three of his novels being Booker nominated. His most recent, Caledonian Road , a state-of-the-nation tale, is published by Faber. He will be talking at Hay festival on 30 May. View image in fullscreen 1. Poetry May Day by Jackie Kay At the core of this vital and wonderful book are Jackie’s activist parents, and the book is filled with marches, demos, protests, dreams of Peggy Seeger and memories of Hugh MacDiarmid pushing a pram. Here’s a beautiful writer at the top of her game and if I ran Britain I would give out copies on the NHS. It’s a sublime, joyous, pot-banging volume of genius. “Nothing like a wee latte last thing at night:/you’ll always be my wee lassie – moon bright./I’ll kiss your forehead and turn out the light.” 2. Comedy Henry Rowley View image in fullscreen Henry Rowley: ‘sends up everything’. Photograph: Dave Benett/Alan Chapman/WireImage Rowley is a TikTok sensation who will let his mind go anywhere, as minds should. He sends up everything from Harry Potter fans to posh students, and he likes his own banter, which is part of the infectious fun. I’m already signed up for his forthcoming Edinburgh fringe smash, Just Literally . 3. Fashion Ritchie Charlton Tailoring View image in fullscreen ‘Nobody in Britain is better at making men’s clothes’: Ritchie Charlton at work. Photograph: Zoe Hitchen Many men believe their car describes them, yet behave as if their body isn’t theirs and that threads don’t matter. I’d sooner have a good suit and take the bus. Nobody in Britain is better at making men’s clothes than Ritchie Charlton. Formerly of Hardy Amies, Kilgour and Alexander McQueen, he’s now out on his own and is a complete master when it comes to making sharpness look natural. 4. Music Glasgow Eyes by the Jesus and Mary Chain View image in fullscreen ‘They create their own timeless momentum’: the Jesus and Mary Chain. Photograph: Mel Butler The 80s feedback-merchants are moving up a gear. I loved them when I was a teenager and felt their Ramones meets Sex Pistols thing was everything. We used to go and watch them playing 15-minute sets with their backs to the audience and thought that was just the be-all and end-all of cool. On this new album, they prove the maxim that everything must change for things to remain the same. Glasgow Eyes is poppier, more experienced, with a driving pulse and a deep melodic fluency that recalls the Beach Boys. Like the best bands, they create their own timeless momentum and then share it. 5. App Blinkist Is life ever not revision? Isn’t every day a recap? My new favourite app gives you a series of major ideas as a more or less structured list of headlines, or “blinks”. On the edge of sleep, why lie back thinking of family grievances when you could opt instead for a quick 20 minutes of Hobbes’s Leviathan to remind you of how a social contract has to remain intact? In the morning, over the Frosties, you can listen to another political grilling on the Today programme or opt instead for a 15-minute sprint in the park with Simone de Beauvoir’s The Ethics of Ambiguit y . I’m now obsessed with it. Like most revision, its main function is not to give you knowledge but to remind you of all the things you don’t know. 6. Podcast The Run-Up View image in fullscreen Astead Herndon, presenter of The Run-Up. Photograph: Bennett Raglin/Getty Images for The New York Times The forthcoming American presidential election may prove, as advertised, to be among the greatest shitshows in the history of human affairs. I am due to be at the Republican national convention in Milwaukee in July , so I’m preparing – I hope equally – for the gravity and the comedy of it all. What will become of the anti-Trump Republicans? Who’s winning the money race? Will Robert Kennedy Jr prove to be a spoiler? And what if someone dies? Produced by the New York Times and presented by the excellent Astead Herndon, this podcast is chatty, funny and totally alarming. This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Culture On my radar Pop and rock Apps Podcasts Comedy Poetry features Share Reuse this content A ndrew O’Hagan was born in Glasgow in 1968, grew up in a working-class Ayrshire family and studied English at Strathclyde University. His first book was The Missing (1995), which told the story of people who disappeared. In 2003 he was included on Granta’s list of best young British novelists. He has written 10 books, including Our Fathers and Mayflies , with three of his novels being Booker nominated. His most recent, Caledonian Road , a state-of-the-nation tale, is published by Faber. He will be talking at Hay festival on 30 May. View image in fullscreen 1. Poetry May Day by Jackie Kay At the core of this vital and wonderful book are Jackie’s activist parents, and the book is filled with marches, demos, protests, dreams of Peggy Seeger and memories of Hugh MacDiarmid pushing a pram. Here’s a beautiful writer at the top of her game and if I ran Britain I would give out copies on the NHS. It’s a sublime, joyous, pot-banging volume of genius. “Nothing like a wee latte last thing at night:/you’ll always be my wee lassie – moon bright./I’ll kiss your forehead and turn out the light.” 2. Comedy Henry Rowley View image in fullscreen Henry Rowley: ‘sends up everything’. Photograph: Dave Benett/Alan Chapman/WireImage Rowley is a TikTok sensation who will let his mind go anywhere, as minds should. He sends up everything from Harry Potter fans to posh students, and he likes his own banter, which is part of the infectious fun. I’m already signed up for his forthcoming Edinburgh fringe smash, Just Literally . 3. Fashion Ritchie Charlton Tailoring View image in fullscreen ‘Nobody in Britain is better at making men’s clothes’: Ritchie Charlton at work. Photograph: Zoe Hitchen Many men believe their car describes them, yet behave as if their body isn’t theirs and that threads don’t matter. I’d sooner have a good suit and take the bus. Nobody in Britain is better at making men’s clothes than Ritchie Charlton. Formerly of Hardy Amies, Kilgour and Alexander McQueen, he’s now out on his own and is a complete master when it comes to making sharpness look natural. 4. Music Glasgow Eyes by the Jesus and Mary Chain View image in fullscreen ‘They create their own timeless momentum’: the Jesus and Mary Chain. Photograph: Mel Butler The 80s feedback-merchants are moving up a gear. I loved them when I was a teenager and felt their Ramones meets Sex Pistols thing was everything. We used to go and watch them playing 15-minute sets with their backs to the audience and thought that was just the be-all and end-all of cool. On this new album, they prove the maxim that everything must change for things to remain the same. Glasgow Eyes is poppier, more experienced, with a driving pulse and a deep melodic fluency that recalls the Beach Boys. Like the best bands, they create their own timeless momentum and then share it. 5. App Blinkist Is life ever not revision? Isn’t every day a recap? My new favourite app gives you a series of major ideas as a more or less structured list of headlines, or “blinks”. On the edge of sleep, why lie back thinking of family grievances when you could opt instead for a quick 20 minutes of Hobbes’s Leviathan to remind you of how a social contract has to remain intact? In the morning, over the Frosties, you can listen to another political grilling on the Today programme or opt instead for a 15-minute sprint in the park with Simone de Beauvoir’s The Ethics of Ambiguit y . I’m now obsessed with it. Like most revision, its main function is not to give you knowledge but to remind you of all the things you don’t know. 6. Podcast The Run-Up View image in fullscreen Astead Herndon, presenter of The Run-Up. Photograph: Bennett Raglin/Getty Images for The New York Times The forthcoming American presidential election may prove, as advertised, to be among the greatest shitshows in the history of human affairs. I am due to be at the Republican national convention in Milwaukee in July , so I’m preparing – I hope equally – for the gravity and the comedy of it all. What will become of the anti-Trump Republicans? Who’s winning the money race? Will Robert Kennedy Jr prove to be a spoiler? And what if someone dies? Produced by the New York Times and presented by the excellent Astead Herndon, this podcast is chatty, funny and totally alarming. This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Culture On my radar Pop and rock Apps Podcasts Comedy Poetry features Share Reuse this content A ndrew O’Hagan was born in Glasgow in 1968, grew up in a working-class Ayrshire family and studied English at Strathclyde University. His first book was The Missing (1995), which told the story of people who disappeared. In 2003 he was included on Granta’s list of best young British novelists. He has written 10 books, including Our Fathers and Mayflies , with three of his novels being Booker nominated. His most recent, Caledonian Road , a state-of-the-nation tale, is published by Faber. He will be talking at Hay festival on 30 May. View image in fullscreen 1. Poetry May Day by Jackie Kay At the core of this vital and wonderful book are Jackie’s activist parents, and the book is filled with marches, demos, protests, dreams of Peggy Seeger and memories of Hugh MacDiarmid pushing a pram. Here’s a beautiful writer at the top of her game and if I ran Britain I would give out copies on the NHS. It’s a sublime, joyous, pot-banging volume of genius. “Nothing like a wee latte last thing at night:/you’ll always be my wee lassie – moon bright./I’ll kiss your forehead and turn out the light.” 2. Comedy Henry Rowley View image in fullscreen Henry Rowley: ‘sends up everything’. Photograph: Dave Benett/Alan Chapman/WireImage Rowley is a TikTok sensation who will let his mind go anywhere, as minds should. He sends up everything from Harry Potter fans to posh students, and he likes his own banter, which is part of the infectious fun. I’m already signed up for his forthcoming Edinburgh fringe smash, Just Literally . 3. Fashion Ritchie Charlton Tailoring View image in fullscreen ‘Nobody in Britain is better at making men’s clothes’: Ritchie Charlton at work. Photograph: Zoe Hitchen Many men believe their car describes them, yet behave as if their body isn’t theirs and that threads don’t matter. I’d sooner have a good suit and take the bus. Nobody in Britain is better at making men’s clothes than Ritchie Charlton. Formerly of Hardy Amies, Kilgour and Alexander McQueen, he’s now out on his own and is a complete master when it comes to making sharpness look natural. 4. Music Glasgow Eyes by the Jesus and Mary Chain View image in fullscreen ‘They create their own timeless momentum’: the Jesus and Mary Chain. Photograph: Mel Butler The 80s feedback-merchants are moving up a gear. I loved them when I was a teenager and felt their Ramones meets Sex Pistols thing was everything. We used to go and watch them playing 15-minute sets with their backs to the audience and thought that was just the be-all and end-all of cool. On this new album, they prove the maxim that everything must change for things to remain the same. Glasgow Eyes is poppier, more experienced, with a driving pulse and a deep melodic fluency that recalls the Beach Boys. Like the best bands, they create their own timeless momentum and then share it. 5. App Blinkist Is life ever not revision? Isn’t every day a recap? My new favourite app gives you a series of major ideas as a more or less structured list of headlines, or “blinks”. On the edge of sleep, why lie back thinking of family grievances when you could opt instead for a quick 20 minutes of Hobbes’s Leviathan to remind you of how a social contract has to remain intact? In the morning, over the Frosties, you can listen to another political grilling on the Today programme or opt instead for a 15-minute sprint in the park with Simone de Beauvoir’s The Ethics of Ambiguit y . I’m now obsessed with it. Like most revision, its main function is not to give you knowledge but to remind you of all the things you don’t know. 6. Podcast The Run-Up View image in fullscreen Astead Herndon, presenter of The Run-Up. Photograph: Bennett Raglin/Getty Images for The New York Times The forthcoming American presidential election may prove, as advertised, to be among the greatest shitshows in the history of human affairs. I am due to be at the Republican national convention in Milwaukee in July , so I’m preparing – I hope equally – for the gravity and the comedy of it all. What will become of the anti-Trump Republicans? Who’s winning the money race? Will Robert Kennedy Jr prove to be a spoiler? And what if someone dies? Produced by the New York Times and presented by the excellent Astead Herndon, this podcast is chatty, funny and totally alarming. A ndrew O’Hagan was born in Glasgow in 1968, grew up in a working-class Ayrshire family and studied English at Strathclyde University. His first book was The Missing (1995), which told the story of people who disappeared. In 2003 he was included on Granta’s list of best young British novelists. He has written 10 books, including Our Fathers and Mayflies , with three of his novels being Booker nominated. His most recent, Caledonian Road , a state-of-the-nation tale, is published by Faber. He will be talking at Hay festival on 30 May. View image in fullscreen 1. Poetry May Day by Jackie Kay At the core of this vital and wonderful book are Jackie’s activist parents, and the book is filled with marches, demos, protests, dreams of Peggy Seeger and memories of Hugh MacDiarmid pushing a pram. Here’s a beautiful writer at the top of her game and if I ran Britain I would give out copies on the NHS. It’s a sublime, joyous, pot-banging volume of genius. “Nothing like a wee latte last thing at night:/you’ll always be my wee lassie – moon bright./I’ll kiss your forehead and turn out the light.” 2. Comedy Henry Rowley View image in fullscreen Henry Rowley: ‘sends up everything’. Photograph: Dave Benett/Alan Chapman/WireImage Rowley is a TikTok sensation who will let his mind go anywhere, as minds should. He sends up everything from Harry Potter fans to posh students, and he likes his own banter, which is part of the infectious fun. I’m already signed up for his forthcoming Edinburgh fringe smash, Just Literally . 3. Fashion Ritchie Charlton Tailoring View image in fullscreen ‘Nobody in Britain is better at making men’s clothes’: Ritchie Charlton at work. Photograph: Zoe Hitchen Many men believe their car describes them, yet behave as if their body isn’t theirs and that threads don’t matter. I’d sooner have a good suit and take the bus. Nobody in Britain is better at making men’s clothes than Ritchie Charlton. Formerly of Hardy Amies, Kilgour and Alexander McQueen, he’s now out on his own and is a complete master when it comes to making sharpness look natural. 4. Music Glasgow Eyes by the Jesus and Mary Chain View image in fullscreen ‘They create their own timeless momentum’: the Jesus and Mary Chain. Photograph: Mel Butler The 80s feedback-merchants are moving up a gear. I loved them when I was a teenager and felt their Ramones meets Sex Pistols thing was everything. We used to go and watch them playing 15-minute sets with their backs to the audience and thought that was just the be-all and end-all of cool. On this new album, they prove the maxim that everything must change for things to remain the same. Glasgow Eyes is poppier, more experienced, with a driving pulse and a deep melodic fluency that recalls the Beach Boys. Like the best bands, they create their own timeless momentum and then share it. 5. App Blinkist Is life ever not revision? Isn’t every day a recap? My new favourite app gives you a series of major ideas as a more or less structured list of headlines, or “blinks”. On the edge of sleep, why lie back thinking of family grievances when you could opt instead for a quick 20 minutes of Hobbes’s Leviathan to remind you of how a social contract has to remain intact? In the morning, over the Frosties, you can listen to another political grilling on the Today programme or opt instead for a 15-minute sprint in the park with Simone de Beauvoir’s The Ethics of Ambiguit y . I’m now obsessed with it. Like most revision, its main function is not to give you knowledge but to remind you of all the things you don’t know. 6. Podcast The Run-Up View image in fullscreen Astead Herndon, presenter of The Run-Up. Photograph: Bennett Raglin/Getty Images for The New York Times The forthcoming American presidential election may prove, as advertised, to be among the greatest shitshows in the history of human affairs. I am due to be at the Republican national convention in Milwaukee in July , so I’m preparing – I hope equally – for the gravity and the comedy of it all. What will become of the anti-Trump Republicans? Who’s winning the money race? Will Robert Kennedy Jr prove to be a spoiler? And what if someone dies? Produced by the New York Times and presented by the excellent Astead Herndon, this podcast is chatty, funny and totally alarming. A ndrew O’Hagan was born in Glasgow in 1968, grew up in a working-class Ayrshire family and studied English at Strathclyde University. His first book was The Missing (1995), which told the story of people who disappeared. In 2003 he was included on Granta’s list of best young British novelists. He has written 10 books, including Our Fathers and Mayflies , with three of his novels being Booker nominated. His most recent, Caledonian Road , a state-of-the-nation tale, is published by Faber. He will be talking at Hay festival on 30 May. At the core of this vital and wonderful book are Jackie’s activist parents, and the book is filled with marches, demos, protests, dreams of Peggy Seeger and memories of Hugh MacDiarmid pushing a pram. Here’s a beautiful writer at the top of her game and if I ran Britain I would give out copies on the NHS. It’s a sublime, joyous, pot-banging volume of genius. “Nothing like a wee latte last thing at night:/you’ll always be my wee lassie – moon bright./I’ll kiss your forehead and turn out the light.” Rowley is a TikTok sensation who will let his mind go anywhere, as minds should. He sends up everything from Harry Potter fans to posh students, and he likes his own banter, which is part of the infectious fun. I’m already signed up for his forthcoming Edinburgh fringe smash, Just Literally . Many men believe their car describes them, yet behave as if their body isn’t theirs and that threads don’t matter. I’d sooner have a good suit and take the bus. Nobody in Britain is better at making men’s clothes than Ritchie Charlton. Formerly of Hardy Amies, Kilgour and Alexander McQueen, he’s now out on his own and is a complete master when it comes to making sharpness look natural. Glasgow Eyes by the Jesus and Mary Chain The 80s feedback-merchants are moving up a gear. I loved them when I was a teenager and felt their Ramones meets Sex Pistols thing was everything. We used to go and watch them playing 15-minute sets with their backs to the audience and thought that was just the be-all and end-all of cool. On this new album, they prove the maxim that everything must change for things to remain the same. Glasgow Eyes is poppier, more experienced, with a driving pulse and a deep melodic fluency that recalls the Beach Boys. Like the best bands, they create their own timeless momentum and then share it. Is life ever not revision? Isn’t every day a recap? My new favourite app gives you a series of major ideas as a more or less structured list of headlines, or “blinks”. On the edge of sleep, why lie back thinking of family grievances when you could opt instead for a quick 20 minutes of Hobbes’s Leviathan to remind you of how a social contract has to remain intact? In the morning, over the Frosties, you can listen to another political grilling on the Today programme or opt instead for a 15-minute sprint in the park with Simone de Beauvoir’s The Ethics of Ambiguit y . I’m now obsessed with it. Like most revision, its main function is not to give you knowledge but to remind you of all the things you don’t know. The forthcoming American presidential election may prove, as advertised, to be among the greatest shitshows in the history of human affairs. I am due to be at the Republican national convention in Milwaukee in July , so I’m preparing – I hope equally – for the gravity and the comedy of it all. What will become of the anti-Trump Republicans? Who’s winning the money race? Will Robert Kennedy Jr prove to be a spoiler? And what if someone dies? Produced by the New York Times and presented by the excellent Astead Herndon, this podcast is chatty, funny and totally alarming. This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Culture On my radar Pop and rock Apps Podcasts Comedy Poetry features Share Reuse this content Culture On my radar Pop and rock Apps Podcasts Comedy Poetry features |
‘I feel disgusted and ashamed’: Bristol student camp one of many protesting at university ties to Israel
A student at the Palestine solidarity camp at Bristol University last Friday. Photograph: Karen Robinson/The Observer View image in fullscreen A student at the Palestine solidarity camp at Bristol University last Friday. Photograph: Karen Robinson/The Observer This article is more than 1 year old ‘I feel disgusted and ashamed’: Bristol student camp one of many protesting at university ties to Israel This article is more than 1 year old Staff offer support to protesters as locals donate food, drink, bedding and books T he collection of 12 tents pitched in a soggy garden at the heart of Bristol university’s campus is on a much smaller scale than the Palestine solidarity encampments sweeping the US. But the outrage at what this new generation of student activists regard as the complicity of education institutions in Israel’s assault on Gaza is just as raw. “It makes me feel sick to my stomach,” said Olivia [not her real name], a second-year student at the university, outside the camp on Friday. “I feel deeply disgusted and ashamed. This protest is absolutely the least I can do for someone studying at a university that is so complicit.” Like many of the students involved in the protest, she doesn’t want to share her name. “There could be academic repercussions [for students taking part]: anything from being banned from university buildings to suspensions and expulsions,” she said. “This has happened in the UK, but not at this university so far.” At least seven similar encampments have sprung up at British universities in the past week, including Warwick, the first to pitch tents, Newcastle, Sheffield, and a “village” in Manchester, where there are more than 50 tents. All are demanding universities cut ties with companies activists claim are arming Israel. The campus protests come after a string of occupations of university buildings. Goldsmiths senior management on Friday agreed to offer scholarships to Palestinian students and will review the university’s ethical investment policy after a five-week occupation by students. The mood on British campuses remains very different from that of American universities, where officers have broken up protest camps and arrested more than 2,000 activists. The Bristol camp is opposite the university’s security services office but there is almost no security presence. “The university asked us to leave [on 2 May] but they haven’t made any other threats,” said Olivia. “The police came to look but they haven’t spoken to us.” However, the leader of the Commons, Penny Mordaunt, and Rishi Sunak’s official spokesperson have both indicated they would support action to quell disorder or harassment. Mordaunt said UK protesters should be met with an “extremely strict response” if they copied US campus tactics, which she claimed were violent. This worries some Bristol university staff backing the camp. Prof Colin Davis, who dropped by on Friday to support the students, claims the government is stoking conflict. “[Mordaunt] called on universities to respond to these protests severely. This could lead to the kinds of scenes we’ve seen in Columbia and UCLA replicated here, which is just appalling.” Davis backs the main demand of the camp. “It is feasible that research that goes on at this university helps make the weapons that are dropped on people in Gaza … it is deeply shameful.” Bristol university has longstanding links to BAE Systems, which has four sites in Bristol, including collaborating on research projects. A report by the Campaign Against Arms Trade claims BAE Systems partially manufactures F35 fighter planes, which have been used by the Israeli military in Gaza. Jewish students have expressed alarm at the rising levels of antisemitism they face. Last week, Edward Isaacs, president of the Union of Jewish Students, wrote in the Jewish Chronicle that “as Jewish students muster the resilience to begin sitting their end-of-year exams, campuses take another step forward in increased toxicity towards [them]”. He added that, although the UK was not seeing the same scenes as the US, “the rhetoric emanating from these [UK] encampments is increasing in hostility”. Isaacs called on universities to do more to stand with Jewish students: “Time and again, since 7 October, universities have been unwilling to effectively stand in allyship with their Jewish students and ensure they can be fully included in campus life. “Now is a bellwether moment for university administrations as to whether they will muster the moral courage to stand in allyship with Jewish students, and ensure campuses are places where they can study free from hatred.” The Bristol students deny claims that Gaza solidarity encampments create a toxic and hostile atmosphere for Jewish students. The organisers pointed out that some of the campers are Jewish. “We are not here to make Jewish students feel unsafe,” said . “We are here protesting the university’s complicity in the war machine that is providing Israel with the weapons to commit atrocities.” Phoebe, who has spent two nights in the camp, said she felt she had to take action: “There is an unprecedented amount of insight into this genocide. It is harrowing. I’ve cried watching videos [from Gaza]. I don’t think I would like myself if I was doing nothing about it.” The camp has been inundated with donations from other students, university staff and locals. There are bags filled with food and drinks under a gazebo, where a huddle of students are sheltering from the drizzle. Some well-wishers have brought hot food, including a bean chilli and soup. One lecturer arrives carrying bags of cutlery, bedding and books to read. “These students are doing something historic,” says a lecturer who wished to remain anonymous. “Not since the South Africa anti-apartheid movement has there been a global student movement that has demanded divestment from a settler colonial state.” Chaotic and thrilling: Columbia’s radio station is live from the student protests Read more On Friday, a rally of about 100 students and staff gathered nearby to demonstrate support for the encampment. Dr Eldin Fahmy, a lecturer, said: “We are all inspired by events we are seeing in the United States. The resistance of students [there] has been magnificent.” Paolo Gerbaudo, an academic at King’s College London, who studies social movements, suggested: “The US has a far heavier footprint in terms of its support for Israel, hence US students feel a stronger burden of responsibility for what is happening in Gaza.” A University of Bristol spokesperson said: “We fully respect the rights of our students to peacefully protest within the law. We recognise the distress and impact on all staff and students at the university of the ongoing conflict in Israel-Gaza. It is more important than ever that we sustain our shared values of mutual respect, support and compassion for each other, whatever our individual views.” BAE Systems said it operated under the tightest regulation and complied fully with all applicable defence export controls: “The ongoing violence in the Middle East is having a devastating impact on civilians in the region and we hope the parties involved find a way to end the violence as soon as possible. We respect everyone’s right to protest peacefully.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Universities The Observer Israel-Gaza war Student experience Protest University of Bristol Higher education features Share Reuse this content A student at the Palestine solidarity camp at Bristol University last Friday. Photograph: Karen Robinson/The Observer View image in fullscreen A student at the Palestine solidarity camp at Bristol University last Friday. Photograph: Karen Robinson/The Observer This article is more than 1 year old ‘I feel disgusted and ashamed’: Bristol student camp one of many protesting at university ties to Israel This article is more than 1 year old Staff offer support to protesters as locals donate food, drink, bedding and books T he collection of 12 tents pitched in a soggy garden at the heart of Bristol university’s campus is on a much smaller scale than the Palestine solidarity encampments sweeping the US. But the outrage at what this new generation of student activists regard as the complicity of education institutions in Israel’s assault on Gaza is just as raw. “It makes me feel sick to my stomach,” said Olivia [not her real name], a second-year student at the university, outside the camp on Friday. “I feel deeply disgusted and ashamed. This protest is absolutely the least I can do for someone studying at a university that is so complicit.” Like many of the students involved in the protest, she doesn’t want to share her name. “There could be academic repercussions [for students taking part]: anything from being banned from university buildings to suspensions and expulsions,” she said. “This has happened in the UK, but not at this university so far.” At least seven similar encampments have sprung up at British universities in the past week, including Warwick, the first to pitch tents, Newcastle, Sheffield, and a “village” in Manchester, where there are more than 50 tents. All are demanding universities cut ties with companies activists claim are arming Israel. The campus protests come after a string of occupations of university buildings. Goldsmiths senior management on Friday agreed to offer scholarships to Palestinian students and will review the university’s ethical investment policy after a five-week occupation by students. The mood on British campuses remains very different from that of American universities, where officers have broken up protest camps and arrested more than 2,000 activists. The Bristol camp is opposite the university’s security services office but there is almost no security presence. “The university asked us to leave [on 2 May] but they haven’t made any other threats,” said Olivia. “The police came to look but they haven’t spoken to us.” However, the leader of the Commons, Penny Mordaunt, and Rishi Sunak’s official spokesperson have both indicated they would support action to quell disorder or harassment. Mordaunt said UK protesters should be met with an “extremely strict response” if they copied US campus tactics, which she claimed were violent. This worries some Bristol university staff backing the camp. Prof Colin Davis, who dropped by on Friday to support the students, claims the government is stoking conflict. “[Mordaunt] called on universities to respond to these protests severely. This could lead to the kinds of scenes we’ve seen in Columbia and UCLA replicated here, which is just appalling.” Davis backs the main demand of the camp. “It is feasible that research that goes on at this university helps make the weapons that are dropped on people in Gaza … it is deeply shameful.” Bristol university has longstanding links to BAE Systems, which has four sites in Bristol, including collaborating on research projects. A report by the Campaign Against Arms Trade claims BAE Systems partially manufactures F35 fighter planes, which have been used by the Israeli military in Gaza. Jewish students have expressed alarm at the rising levels of antisemitism they face. Last week, Edward Isaacs, president of the Union of Jewish Students, wrote in the Jewish Chronicle that “as Jewish students muster the resilience to begin sitting their end-of-year exams, campuses take another step forward in increased toxicity towards [them]”. He added that, although the UK was not seeing the same scenes as the US, “the rhetoric emanating from these [UK] encampments is increasing in hostility”. Isaacs called on universities to do more to stand with Jewish students: “Time and again, since 7 October, universities have been unwilling to effectively stand in allyship with their Jewish students and ensure they can be fully included in campus life. “Now is a bellwether moment for university administrations as to whether they will muster the moral courage to stand in allyship with Jewish students, and ensure campuses are places where they can study free from hatred.” The Bristol students deny claims that Gaza solidarity encampments create a toxic and hostile atmosphere for Jewish students. The organisers pointed out that some of the campers are Jewish. “We are not here to make Jewish students feel unsafe,” said . “We are here protesting the university’s complicity in the war machine that is providing Israel with the weapons to commit atrocities.” Phoebe, who has spent two nights in the camp, said she felt she had to take action: “There is an unprecedented amount of insight into this genocide. It is harrowing. I’ve cried watching videos [from Gaza]. I don’t think I would like myself if I was doing nothing about it.” The camp has been inundated with donations from other students, university staff and locals. There are bags filled with food and drinks under a gazebo, where a huddle of students are sheltering from the drizzle. Some well-wishers have brought hot food, including a bean chilli and soup. One lecturer arrives carrying bags of cutlery, bedding and books to read. “These students are doing something historic,” says a lecturer who wished to remain anonymous. “Not since the South Africa anti-apartheid movement has there been a global student movement that has demanded divestment from a settler colonial state.” Chaotic and thrilling: Columbia’s radio station is live from the student protests Read more On Friday, a rally of about 100 students and staff gathered nearby to demonstrate support for the encampment. Dr Eldin Fahmy, a lecturer, said: “We are all inspired by events we are seeing in the United States. The resistance of students [there] has been magnificent.” Paolo Gerbaudo, an academic at King’s College London, who studies social movements, suggested: “The US has a far heavier footprint in terms of its support for Israel, hence US students feel a stronger burden of responsibility for what is happening in Gaza.” A University of Bristol spokesperson said: “We fully respect the rights of our students to peacefully protest within the law. We recognise the distress and impact on all staff and students at the university of the ongoing conflict in Israel-Gaza. It is more important than ever that we sustain our shared values of mutual respect, support and compassion for each other, whatever our individual views.” BAE Systems said it operated under the tightest regulation and complied fully with all applicable defence export controls: “The ongoing violence in the Middle East is having a devastating impact on civilians in the region and we hope the parties involved find a way to end the violence as soon as possible. We respect everyone’s right to protest peacefully.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Universities The Observer Israel-Gaza war Student experience Protest University of Bristol Higher education features Share Reuse this content A student at the Palestine solidarity camp at Bristol University last Friday. Photograph: Karen Robinson/The Observer View image in fullscreen A student at the Palestine solidarity camp at Bristol University last Friday. Photograph: Karen Robinson/The Observer A student at the Palestine solidarity camp at Bristol University last Friday. Photograph: Karen Robinson/The Observer View image in fullscreen A student at the Palestine solidarity camp at Bristol University last Friday. Photograph: Karen Robinson/The Observer A student at the Palestine solidarity camp at Bristol University last Friday. Photograph: Karen Robinson/The Observer View image in fullscreen A student at the Palestine solidarity camp at Bristol University last Friday. Photograph: Karen Robinson/The Observer A student at the Palestine solidarity camp at Bristol University last Friday. Photograph: Karen Robinson/The Observer View image in fullscreen A student at the Palestine solidarity camp at Bristol University last Friday. Photograph: Karen Robinson/The Observer A student at the Palestine solidarity camp at Bristol University last Friday. Photograph: Karen Robinson/The Observer A student at the Palestine solidarity camp at Bristol University last Friday. Photograph: Karen Robinson/The Observer This article is more than 1 year old ‘I feel disgusted and ashamed’: Bristol student camp one of many protesting at university ties to Israel This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘I feel disgusted and ashamed’: Bristol student camp one of many protesting at university ties to Israel This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘I feel disgusted and ashamed’: Bristol student camp one of many protesting at university ties to Israel This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Staff offer support to protesters as locals donate food, drink, bedding and books Staff offer support to protesters as locals donate food, drink, bedding and books Staff offer support to protesters as locals donate food, drink, bedding and books T he collection of 12 tents pitched in a soggy garden at the heart of Bristol university’s campus is on a much smaller scale than the Palestine solidarity encampments sweeping the US. But the outrage at what this new generation of student activists regard as the complicity of education institutions in Israel’s assault on Gaza is just as raw. “It makes me feel sick to my stomach,” said Olivia [not her real name], a second-year student at the university, outside the camp on Friday. “I feel deeply disgusted and ashamed. This protest is absolutely the least I can do for someone studying at a university that is so complicit.” Like many of the students involved in the protest, she doesn’t want to share her name. “There could be academic repercussions [for students taking part]: anything from being banned from university buildings to suspensions and expulsions,” she said. “This has happened in the UK, but not at this university so far.” At least seven similar encampments have sprung up at British universities in the past week, including Warwick, the first to pitch tents, Newcastle, Sheffield, and a “village” in Manchester, where there are more than 50 tents. All are demanding universities cut ties with companies activists claim are arming Israel. The campus protests come after a string of occupations of university buildings. Goldsmiths senior management on Friday agreed to offer scholarships to Palestinian students and will review the university’s ethical investment policy after a five-week occupation by students. The mood on British campuses remains very different from that of American universities, where officers have broken up protest camps and arrested more than 2,000 activists. The Bristol camp is opposite the university’s security services office but there is almost no security presence. “The university asked us to leave [on 2 May] but they haven’t made any other threats,” said Olivia. “The police came to look but they haven’t spoken to us.” However, the leader of the Commons, Penny Mordaunt, and Rishi Sunak’s official spokesperson have both indicated they would support action to quell disorder or harassment. Mordaunt said UK protesters should be met with an “extremely strict response” if they copied US campus tactics, which she claimed were violent. This worries some Bristol university staff backing the camp. Prof Colin Davis, who dropped by on Friday to support the students, claims the government is stoking conflict. “[Mordaunt] called on universities to respond to these protests severely. This could lead to the kinds of scenes we’ve seen in Columbia and UCLA replicated here, which is just appalling.” Davis backs the main demand of the camp. “It is feasible that research that goes on at this university helps make the weapons that are dropped on people in Gaza … it is deeply shameful.” Bristol university has longstanding links to BAE Systems, which has four sites in Bristol, including collaborating on research projects. A report by the Campaign Against Arms Trade claims BAE Systems partially manufactures F35 fighter planes, which have been used by the Israeli military in Gaza. Jewish students have expressed alarm at the rising levels of antisemitism they face. Last week, Edward Isaacs, president of the Union of Jewish Students, wrote in the Jewish Chronicle that “as Jewish students muster the resilience to begin sitting their end-of-year exams, campuses take another step forward in increased toxicity towards [them]”. He added that, although the UK was not seeing the same scenes as the US, “the rhetoric emanating from these [UK] encampments is increasing in hostility”. Isaacs called on universities to do more to stand with Jewish students: “Time and again, since 7 October, universities have been unwilling to effectively stand in allyship with their Jewish students and ensure they can be fully included in campus life. “Now is a bellwether moment for university administrations as to whether they will muster the moral courage to stand in allyship with Jewish students, and ensure campuses are places where they can study free from hatred.” The Bristol students deny claims that Gaza solidarity encampments create a toxic and hostile atmosphere for Jewish students. The organisers pointed out that some of the campers are Jewish. “We are not here to make Jewish students feel unsafe,” said . “We are here protesting the university’s complicity in the war machine that is providing Israel with the weapons to commit atrocities.” Phoebe, who has spent two nights in the camp, said she felt she had to take action: “There is an unprecedented amount of insight into this genocide. It is harrowing. I’ve cried watching videos [from Gaza]. I don’t think I would like myself if I was doing nothing about it.” The camp has been inundated with donations from other students, university staff and locals. There are bags filled with food and drinks under a gazebo, where a huddle of students are sheltering from the drizzle. Some well-wishers have brought hot food, including a bean chilli and soup. One lecturer arrives carrying bags of cutlery, bedding and books to read. “These students are doing something historic,” says a lecturer who wished to remain anonymous. “Not since the South Africa anti-apartheid movement has there been a global student movement that has demanded divestment from a settler colonial state.” Chaotic and thrilling: Columbia’s radio station is live from the student protests Read more On Friday, a rally of about 100 students and staff gathered nearby to demonstrate support for the encampment. Dr Eldin Fahmy, a lecturer, said: “We are all inspired by events we are seeing in the United States. The resistance of students [there] has been magnificent.” Paolo Gerbaudo, an academic at King’s College London, who studies social movements, suggested: “The US has a far heavier footprint in terms of its support for Israel, hence US students feel a stronger burden of responsibility for what is happening in Gaza.” A University of Bristol spokesperson said: “We fully respect the rights of our students to peacefully protest within the law. We recognise the distress and impact on all staff and students at the university of the ongoing conflict in Israel-Gaza. It is more important than ever that we sustain our shared values of mutual respect, support and compassion for each other, whatever our individual views.” BAE Systems said it operated under the tightest regulation and complied fully with all applicable defence export controls: “The ongoing violence in the Middle East is having a devastating impact on civilians in the region and we hope the parties involved find a way to end the violence as soon as possible. We respect everyone’s right to protest peacefully.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Universities The Observer Israel-Gaza war Student experience Protest University of Bristol Higher education features Share Reuse this content T he collection of 12 tents pitched in a soggy garden at the heart of Bristol university’s campus is on a much smaller scale than the Palestine solidarity encampments sweeping the US. But the outrage at what this new generation of student activists regard as the complicity of education institutions in Israel’s assault on Gaza is just as raw. “It makes me feel sick to my stomach,” said Olivia [not her real name], a second-year student at the university, outside the camp on Friday. “I feel deeply disgusted and ashamed. This protest is absolutely the least I can do for someone studying at a university that is so complicit.” Like many of the students involved in the protest, she doesn’t want to share her name. “There could be academic repercussions [for students taking part]: anything from being banned from university buildings to suspensions and expulsions,” she said. “This has happened in the UK, but not at this university so far.” At least seven similar encampments have sprung up at British universities in the past week, including Warwick, the first to pitch tents, Newcastle, Sheffield, and a “village” in Manchester, where there are more than 50 tents. All are demanding universities cut ties with companies activists claim are arming Israel. The campus protests come after a string of occupations of university buildings. Goldsmiths senior management on Friday agreed to offer scholarships to Palestinian students and will review the university’s ethical investment policy after a five-week occupation by students. The mood on British campuses remains very different from that of American universities, where officers have broken up protest camps and arrested more than 2,000 activists. The Bristol camp is opposite the university’s security services office but there is almost no security presence. “The university asked us to leave [on 2 May] but they haven’t made any other threats,” said Olivia. “The police came to look but they haven’t spoken to us.” However, the leader of the Commons, Penny Mordaunt, and Rishi Sunak’s official spokesperson have both indicated they would support action to quell disorder or harassment. Mordaunt said UK protesters should be met with an “extremely strict response” if they copied US campus tactics, which she claimed were violent. This worries some Bristol university staff backing the camp. Prof Colin Davis, who dropped by on Friday to support the students, claims the government is stoking conflict. “[Mordaunt] called on universities to respond to these protests severely. This could lead to the kinds of scenes we’ve seen in Columbia and UCLA replicated here, which is just appalling.” Davis backs the main demand of the camp. “It is feasible that research that goes on at this university helps make the weapons that are dropped on people in Gaza … it is deeply shameful.” Bristol university has longstanding links to BAE Systems, which has four sites in Bristol, including collaborating on research projects. A report by the Campaign Against Arms Trade claims BAE Systems partially manufactures F35 fighter planes, which have been used by the Israeli military in Gaza. Jewish students have expressed alarm at the rising levels of antisemitism they face. Last week, Edward Isaacs, president of the Union of Jewish Students, wrote in the Jewish Chronicle that “as Jewish students muster the resilience to begin sitting their end-of-year exams, campuses take another step forward in increased toxicity towards [them]”. He added that, although the UK was not seeing the same scenes as the US, “the rhetoric emanating from these [UK] encampments is increasing in hostility”. Isaacs called on universities to do more to stand with Jewish students: “Time and again, since 7 October, universities have been unwilling to effectively stand in allyship with their Jewish students and ensure they can be fully included in campus life. “Now is a bellwether moment for university administrations as to whether they will muster the moral courage to stand in allyship with Jewish students, and ensure campuses are places where they can study free from hatred.” The Bristol students deny claims that Gaza solidarity encampments create a toxic and hostile atmosphere for Jewish students. The organisers pointed out that some of the campers are Jewish. “We are not here to make Jewish students feel unsafe,” said . “We are here protesting the university’s complicity in the war machine that is providing Israel with the weapons to commit atrocities.” Phoebe, who has spent two nights in the camp, said she felt she had to take action: “There is an unprecedented amount of insight into this genocide. It is harrowing. I’ve cried watching videos [from Gaza]. I don’t think I would like myself if I was doing nothing about it.” The camp has been inundated with donations from other students, university staff and locals. There are bags filled with food and drinks under a gazebo, where a huddle of students are sheltering from the drizzle. Some well-wishers have brought hot food, including a bean chilli and soup. One lecturer arrives carrying bags of cutlery, bedding and books to read. “These students are doing something historic,” says a lecturer who wished to remain anonymous. “Not since the South Africa anti-apartheid movement has there been a global student movement that has demanded divestment from a settler colonial state.” Chaotic and thrilling: Columbia’s radio station is live from the student protests Read more On Friday, a rally of about 100 students and staff gathered nearby to demonstrate support for the encampment. Dr Eldin Fahmy, a lecturer, said: “We are all inspired by events we are seeing in the United States. The resistance of students [there] has been magnificent.” Paolo Gerbaudo, an academic at King’s College London, who studies social movements, suggested: “The US has a far heavier footprint in terms of its support for Israel, hence US students feel a stronger burden of responsibility for what is happening in Gaza.” A University of Bristol spokesperson said: “We fully respect the rights of our students to peacefully protest within the law. We recognise the distress and impact on all staff and students at the university of the ongoing conflict in Israel-Gaza. It is more important than ever that we sustain our shared values of mutual respect, support and compassion for each other, whatever our individual views.” BAE Systems said it operated under the tightest regulation and complied fully with all applicable defence export controls: “The ongoing violence in the Middle East is having a devastating impact on civilians in the region and we hope the parties involved find a way to end the violence as soon as possible. We respect everyone’s right to protest peacefully.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Universities The Observer Israel-Gaza war Student experience Protest University of Bristol Higher education features Share Reuse this content T he collection of 12 tents pitched in a soggy garden at the heart of Bristol university’s campus is on a much smaller scale than the Palestine solidarity encampments sweeping the US. But the outrage at what this new generation of student activists regard as the complicity of education institutions in Israel’s assault on Gaza is just as raw. “It makes me feel sick to my stomach,” said Olivia [not her real name], a second-year student at the university, outside the camp on Friday. “I feel deeply disgusted and ashamed. This protest is absolutely the least I can do for someone studying at a university that is so complicit.” Like many of the students involved in the protest, she doesn’t want to share her name. “There could be academic repercussions [for students taking part]: anything from being banned from university buildings to suspensions and expulsions,” she said. “This has happened in the UK, but not at this university so far.” At least seven similar encampments have sprung up at British universities in the past week, including Warwick, the first to pitch tents, Newcastle, Sheffield, and a “village” in Manchester, where there are more than 50 tents. All are demanding universities cut ties with companies activists claim are arming Israel. The campus protests come after a string of occupations of university buildings. Goldsmiths senior management on Friday agreed to offer scholarships to Palestinian students and will review the university’s ethical investment policy after a five-week occupation by students. The mood on British campuses remains very different from that of American universities, where officers have broken up protest camps and arrested more than 2,000 activists. The Bristol camp is opposite the university’s security services office but there is almost no security presence. “The university asked us to leave [on 2 May] but they haven’t made any other threats,” said Olivia. “The police came to look but they haven’t spoken to us.” However, the leader of the Commons, Penny Mordaunt, and Rishi Sunak’s official spokesperson have both indicated they would support action to quell disorder or harassment. Mordaunt said UK protesters should be met with an “extremely strict response” if they copied US campus tactics, which she claimed were violent. This worries some Bristol university staff backing the camp. Prof Colin Davis, who dropped by on Friday to support the students, claims the government is stoking conflict. “[Mordaunt] called on universities to respond to these protests severely. This could lead to the kinds of scenes we’ve seen in Columbia and UCLA replicated here, which is just appalling.” Davis backs the main demand of the camp. “It is feasible that research that goes on at this university helps make the weapons that are dropped on people in Gaza … it is deeply shameful.” Bristol university has longstanding links to BAE Systems, which has four sites in Bristol, including collaborating on research projects. A report by the Campaign Against Arms Trade claims BAE Systems partially manufactures F35 fighter planes, which have been used by the Israeli military in Gaza. Jewish students have expressed alarm at the rising levels of antisemitism they face. Last week, Edward Isaacs, president of the Union of Jewish Students, wrote in the Jewish Chronicle that “as Jewish students muster the resilience to begin sitting their end-of-year exams, campuses take another step forward in increased toxicity towards [them]”. He added that, although the UK was not seeing the same scenes as the US, “the rhetoric emanating from these [UK] encampments is increasing in hostility”. Isaacs called on universities to do more to stand with Jewish students: “Time and again, since 7 October, universities have been unwilling to effectively stand in allyship with their Jewish students and ensure they can be fully included in campus life. “Now is a bellwether moment for university administrations as to whether they will muster the moral courage to stand in allyship with Jewish students, and ensure campuses are places where they can study free from hatred.” The Bristol students deny claims that Gaza solidarity encampments create a toxic and hostile atmosphere for Jewish students. The organisers pointed out that some of the campers are Jewish. “We are not here to make Jewish students feel unsafe,” said . “We are here protesting the university’s complicity in the war machine that is providing Israel with the weapons to commit atrocities.” Phoebe, who has spent two nights in the camp, said she felt she had to take action: “There is an unprecedented amount of insight into this genocide. It is harrowing. I’ve cried watching videos [from Gaza]. I don’t think I would like myself if I was doing nothing about it.” The camp has been inundated with donations from other students, university staff and locals. There are bags filled with food and drinks under a gazebo, where a huddle of students are sheltering from the drizzle. Some well-wishers have brought hot food, including a bean chilli and soup. One lecturer arrives carrying bags of cutlery, bedding and books to read. “These students are doing something historic,” says a lecturer who wished to remain anonymous. “Not since the South Africa anti-apartheid movement has there been a global student movement that has demanded divestment from a settler colonial state.” Chaotic and thrilling: Columbia’s radio station is live from the student protests Read more On Friday, a rally of about 100 students and staff gathered nearby to demonstrate support for the encampment. Dr Eldin Fahmy, a lecturer, said: “We are all inspired by events we are seeing in the United States. The resistance of students [there] has been magnificent.” Paolo Gerbaudo, an academic at King’s College London, who studies social movements, suggested: “The US has a far heavier footprint in terms of its support for Israel, hence US students feel a stronger burden of responsibility for what is happening in Gaza.” A University of Bristol spokesperson said: “We fully respect the rights of our students to peacefully protest within the law. We recognise the distress and impact on all staff and students at the university of the ongoing conflict in Israel-Gaza. It is more important than ever that we sustain our shared values of mutual respect, support and compassion for each other, whatever our individual views.” BAE Systems said it operated under the tightest regulation and complied fully with all applicable defence export controls: “The ongoing violence in the Middle East is having a devastating impact on civilians in the region and we hope the parties involved find a way to end the violence as soon as possible. We respect everyone’s right to protest peacefully.” T he collection of 12 tents pitched in a soggy garden at the heart of Bristol university’s campus is on a much smaller scale than the Palestine solidarity encampments sweeping the US. But the outrage at what this new generation of student activists regard as the complicity of education institutions in Israel’s assault on Gaza is just as raw. “It makes me feel sick to my stomach,” said Olivia [not her real name], a second-year student at the university, outside the camp on Friday. “I feel deeply disgusted and ashamed. This protest is absolutely the least I can do for someone studying at a university that is so complicit.” Like many of the students involved in the protest, she doesn’t want to share her name. “There could be academic repercussions [for students taking part]: anything from being banned from university buildings to suspensions and expulsions,” she said. “This has happened in the UK, but not at this university so far.” At least seven similar encampments have sprung up at British universities in the past week, including Warwick, the first to pitch tents, Newcastle, Sheffield, and a “village” in Manchester, where there are more than 50 tents. All are demanding universities cut ties with companies activists claim are arming Israel. The campus protests come after a string of occupations of university buildings. Goldsmiths senior management on Friday agreed to offer scholarships to Palestinian students and will review the university’s ethical investment policy after a five-week occupation by students. The mood on British campuses remains very different from that of American universities, where officers have broken up protest camps and arrested more than 2,000 activists. The Bristol camp is opposite the university’s security services office but there is almost no security presence. “The university asked us to leave [on 2 May] but they haven’t made any other threats,” said Olivia. “The police came to look but they haven’t spoken to us.” However, the leader of the Commons, Penny Mordaunt, and Rishi Sunak’s official spokesperson have both indicated they would support action to quell disorder or harassment. Mordaunt said UK protesters should be met with an “extremely strict response” if they copied US campus tactics, which she claimed were violent. This worries some Bristol university staff backing the camp. Prof Colin Davis, who dropped by on Friday to support the students, claims the government is stoking conflict. “[Mordaunt] called on universities to respond to these protests severely. This could lead to the kinds of scenes we’ve seen in Columbia and UCLA replicated here, which is just appalling.” Davis backs the main demand of the camp. “It is feasible that research that goes on at this university helps make the weapons that are dropped on people in Gaza … it is deeply shameful.” Bristol university has longstanding links to BAE Systems, which has four sites in Bristol, including collaborating on research projects. A report by the Campaign Against Arms Trade claims BAE Systems partially manufactures F35 fighter planes, which have been used by the Israeli military in Gaza. Jewish students have expressed alarm at the rising levels of antisemitism they face. Last week, Edward Isaacs, president of the Union of Jewish Students, wrote in the Jewish Chronicle that “as Jewish students muster the resilience to begin sitting their end-of-year exams, campuses take another step forward in increased toxicity towards [them]”. He added that, although the UK was not seeing the same scenes as the US, “the rhetoric emanating from these [UK] encampments is increasing in hostility”. Isaacs called on universities to do more to stand with Jewish students: “Time and again, since 7 October, universities have been unwilling to effectively stand in allyship with their Jewish students and ensure they can be fully included in campus life. “Now is a bellwether moment for university administrations as to whether they will muster the moral courage to stand in allyship with Jewish students, and ensure campuses are places where they can study free from hatred.” The Bristol students deny claims that Gaza solidarity encampments create a toxic and hostile atmosphere for Jewish students. The organisers pointed out that some of the campers are Jewish. “We are not here to make Jewish students feel unsafe,” said . “We are here protesting the university’s complicity in the war machine that is providing Israel with the weapons to commit atrocities.” Phoebe, who has spent two nights in the camp, said she felt she had to take action: “There is an unprecedented amount of insight into this genocide. It is harrowing. I’ve cried watching videos [from Gaza]. I don’t think I would like myself if I was doing nothing about it.” The camp has been inundated with donations from other students, university staff and locals. There are bags filled with food and drinks under a gazebo, where a huddle of students are sheltering from the drizzle. Some well-wishers have brought hot food, including a bean chilli and soup. One lecturer arrives carrying bags of cutlery, bedding and books to read. “These students are doing something historic,” says a lecturer who wished to remain anonymous. “Not since the South Africa anti-apartheid movement has there been a global student movement that has demanded divestment from a settler colonial state.” Chaotic and thrilling: Columbia’s radio station is live from the student protests Read more On Friday, a rally of about 100 students and staff gathered nearby to demonstrate support for the encampment. Dr Eldin Fahmy, a lecturer, said: “We are all inspired by events we are seeing in the United States. The resistance of students [there] has been magnificent.” Paolo Gerbaudo, an academic at King’s College London, who studies social movements, suggested: “The US has a far heavier footprint in terms of its support for Israel, hence US students feel a stronger burden of responsibility for what is happening in Gaza.” A University of Bristol spokesperson said: “We fully respect the rights of our students to peacefully protest within the law. We recognise the distress and impact on all staff and students at the university of the ongoing conflict in Israel-Gaza. It is more important than ever that we sustain our shared values of mutual respect, support and compassion for each other, whatever our individual views.” BAE Systems said it operated under the tightest regulation and complied fully with all applicable defence export controls: “The ongoing violence in the Middle East is having a devastating impact on civilians in the region and we hope the parties involved find a way to end the violence as soon as possible. We respect everyone’s right to protest peacefully.” T he collection of 12 tents pitched in a soggy garden at the heart of Bristol university’s campus is on a much smaller scale than the Palestine solidarity encampments sweeping the US. But the outrage at what this new generation of student activists regard as the complicity of education institutions in Israel’s assault on Gaza is just as raw. “It makes me feel sick to my stomach,” said Olivia [not her real name], a second-year student at the university, outside the camp on Friday. “I feel deeply disgusted and ashamed. This protest is absolutely the least I can do for someone studying at a university that is so complicit.” Like many of the students involved in the protest, she doesn’t want to share her name. “There could be academic repercussions [for students taking part]: anything from being banned from university buildings to suspensions and expulsions,” she said. “This has happened in the UK, but not at this university so far.” At least seven similar encampments have sprung up at British universities in the past week, including Warwick, the first to pitch tents, Newcastle, Sheffield, and a “village” in Manchester, where there are more than 50 tents. All are demanding universities cut ties with companies activists claim are arming Israel. The campus protests come after a string of occupations of university buildings. Goldsmiths senior management on Friday agreed to offer scholarships to Palestinian students and will review the university’s ethical investment policy after a five-week occupation by students. The mood on British campuses remains very different from that of American universities, where officers have broken up protest camps and arrested more than 2,000 activists. The Bristol camp is opposite the university’s security services office but there is almost no security presence. “The university asked us to leave [on 2 May] but they haven’t made any other threats,” said Olivia. “The police came to look but they haven’t spoken to us.” However, the leader of the Commons, Penny Mordaunt, and Rishi Sunak’s official spokesperson have both indicated they would support action to quell disorder or harassment. Mordaunt said UK protesters should be met with an “extremely strict response” if they copied US campus tactics, which she claimed were violent. This worries some Bristol university staff backing the camp. Prof Colin Davis, who dropped by on Friday to support the students, claims the government is stoking conflict. “[Mordaunt] called on universities to respond to these protests severely. This could lead to the kinds of scenes we’ve seen in Columbia and UCLA replicated here, which is just appalling.” Davis backs the main demand of the camp. “It is feasible that research that goes on at this university helps make the weapons that are dropped on people in Gaza … it is deeply shameful.” Bristol university has longstanding links to BAE Systems, which has four sites in Bristol, including collaborating on research projects. A report by the Campaign Against Arms Trade claims BAE Systems partially manufactures F35 fighter planes, which have been used by the Israeli military in Gaza. Jewish students have expressed alarm at the rising levels of antisemitism they face. Last week, Edward Isaacs, president of the Union of Jewish Students, wrote in the Jewish Chronicle that “as Jewish students muster the resilience to begin sitting their end-of-year exams, campuses take another step forward in increased toxicity towards [them]”. He added that, although the UK was not seeing the same scenes as the US, “the rhetoric emanating from these [UK] encampments is increasing in hostility”. Isaacs called on universities to do more to stand with Jewish students: “Time and again, since 7 October, universities have been unwilling to effectively stand in allyship with their Jewish students and ensure they can be fully included in campus life. “Now is a bellwether moment for university administrations as to whether they will muster the moral courage to stand in allyship with Jewish s
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
School leaders warn of ‘full-blown’ special needs crisis in England
The general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers accused the government of treating schools as a ‘sideline’. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA View image in fullscreen The general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers accused the government of treating schools as a ‘sideline’. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA This article is more than 1 year old School leaders warn of ‘full-blown’ special needs crisis in England This article is more than 1 year old Survey by NAHT union finds funding shortages mean pupils are losing out on vital support Shortages and funding cuts are causing a “full-blown crisis” in special needs education for children and young people in England , according to school leaders who say they are struggling to give pupils the support they require. Paul Whiteman, the general secretary of the school leaders’ union the NAHT, accused the government of treating schools as a “sideline” compared with headline-grabbing issues such as immigration. “This is a full-blown crisis and bad news for children, families, schools and local authorities. Ahead of the general election, it is incumbent upon all political parties to pledge the system-wide investment needed to tackle this crisis head on,” Whiteman said. Hundreds of children with special needs wait a year for support in England Read more Leaders of both mainstream and special schools told the NAHT they were being forced to reduce the number of teaching assistants or hours worked because of financial pressures, cutting vital individual support for pupils with special education needs and disabilities (Send). The NAHT’s survey of 1,000 school leaders found that 78% said they had cut back on support staff such as teaching assistants within the last three years, and 84% said they also expected to do so within the next three years. Some leaders said they feared funding shortages meant they would be unable to keep children and staff safe, while others said they were unable to pay for speech and language therapy, mental health support or specialist training. Ian Kendal, the executive headteacher of Our Lady of Fatima trust in Essex, said the funding was insufficient and that it was “astonishing” per pupil Send funding had not increased for more than a decade. This, he said put huge pressure on dwindling school budgets. “There just isn’t capacity within special schools in our area, meaning we are supporting even more pupils with complex needs within our mainstream settings. “We believe in inclusion and are currently doing our best with the limited funds, but, put simply, it is not good enough for the children with the most complex needs – they deserve so much more than we can give them. “It should never have come to this, and we need the government to urgently put more funding into the system to ensure all children’s needs are met, especially the most vulnerable.” Funding for pupils in special schools has been frozen at £10,000 per pupil since 2013, with its value being steeply eroded in recent years by high inflation. The school leaders’ complaints come as the number of pupils with identified Send, including those with education, health and care plans (EHCPs), has ballooned. Gillian Keegan, the education secretary for England, has previously acknowledged the extent of the crisis, saying earlier this year: “All too often I hear from parents with children who have special educational needs having to fight to get the right support.” The Department for Education says the government is tackling the issue, with high needs funding for children and young people increasing above £10.5bn in 2024-25. Special educational needs in English schools in ‘crisis’, minister admits Read more The government is also allocating £850m for councils to eventually create 60,000 new places in mainstream and special schools. But Louise Gittins, the chair of the Local Government Association’s children and young people board, said: “Councils’ high needs deficits currently stand at an estimated £1.9bn, rising to £3.6bn by 2025 with no intervention. We urge the government to write off these deficits.” Whiteman told the NAHT’s annual conference on Friday that the government’s neglect of schools had been “pernicious”. “For the best part of 15 years now, schools have been treated as though they’re a sideline, a niche portfolio to be considered once all populist talk on immigration, polarised positions on trans rights, and removing the right to protest have been exhausted,” Whiteman said. “If political parties think the electorate haven’t noticed, or simply don’t care, I strongly suspect they’re all going to have a nasty shock during the election campaign.” Explore more on these topics Special educational needs School funding Schools Trade unions Teaching England news Share Reuse this content The general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers accused the government of treating schools as a ‘sideline’. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA View image in fullscreen The general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers accused the government of treating schools as a ‘sideline’. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA This article is more than 1 year old School leaders warn of ‘full-blown’ special needs crisis in England This article is more than 1 year old Survey by NAHT union finds funding shortages mean pupils are losing out on vital support Shortages and funding cuts are causing a “full-blown crisis” in special needs education for children and young people in England , according to school leaders who say they are struggling to give pupils the support they require. Paul Whiteman, the general secretary of the school leaders’ union the NAHT, accused the government of treating schools as a “sideline” compared with headline-grabbing issues such as immigration. “This is a full-blown crisis and bad news for children, families, schools and local authorities. Ahead of the general election, it is incumbent upon all political parties to pledge the system-wide investment needed to tackle this crisis head on,” Whiteman said. Hundreds of children with special needs wait a year for support in England Read more Leaders of both mainstream and special schools told the NAHT they were being forced to reduce the number of teaching assistants or hours worked because of financial pressures, cutting vital individual support for pupils with special education needs and disabilities (Send). The NAHT’s survey of 1,000 school leaders found that 78% said they had cut back on support staff such as teaching assistants within the last three years, and 84% said they also expected to do so within the next three years. Some leaders said they feared funding shortages meant they would be unable to keep children and staff safe, while others said they were unable to pay for speech and language therapy, mental health support or specialist training. Ian Kendal, the executive headteacher of Our Lady of Fatima trust in Essex, said the funding was insufficient and that it was “astonishing” per pupil Send funding had not increased for more than a decade. This, he said put huge pressure on dwindling school budgets. “There just isn’t capacity within special schools in our area, meaning we are supporting even more pupils with complex needs within our mainstream settings. “We believe in inclusion and are currently doing our best with the limited funds, but, put simply, it is not good enough for the children with the most complex needs – they deserve so much more than we can give them. “It should never have come to this, and we need the government to urgently put more funding into the system to ensure all children’s needs are met, especially the most vulnerable.” Funding for pupils in special schools has been frozen at £10,000 per pupil since 2013, with its value being steeply eroded in recent years by high inflation. The school leaders’ complaints come as the number of pupils with identified Send, including those with education, health and care plans (EHCPs), has ballooned. Gillian Keegan, the education secretary for England, has previously acknowledged the extent of the crisis, saying earlier this year: “All too often I hear from parents with children who have special educational needs having to fight to get the right support.” The Department for Education says the government is tackling the issue, with high needs funding for children and young people increasing above £10.5bn in 2024-25. Special educational needs in English schools in ‘crisis’, minister admits Read more The government is also allocating £850m for councils to eventually create 60,000 new places in mainstream and special schools. But Louise Gittins, the chair of the Local Government Association’s children and young people board, said: “Councils’ high needs deficits currently stand at an estimated £1.9bn, rising to £3.6bn by 2025 with no intervention. We urge the government to write off these deficits.” Whiteman told the NAHT’s annual conference on Friday that the government’s neglect of schools had been “pernicious”. “For the best part of 15 years now, schools have been treated as though they’re a sideline, a niche portfolio to be considered once all populist talk on immigration, polarised positions on trans rights, and removing the right to protest have been exhausted,” Whiteman said. “If political parties think the electorate haven’t noticed, or simply don’t care, I strongly suspect they’re all going to have a nasty shock during the election campaign.” Explore more on these topics Special educational needs School funding Schools Trade unions Teaching England news Share Reuse this content The general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers accused the government of treating schools as a ‘sideline’. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA View image in fullscreen The general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers accused the government of treating schools as a ‘sideline’. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA The general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers accused the government of treating schools as a ‘sideline’. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA View image in fullscreen The general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers accused the government of treating schools as a ‘sideline’. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA The general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers accused the government of treating schools as a ‘sideline’. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA View image in fullscreen The general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers accused the government of treating schools as a ‘sideline’. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA The general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers accused the government of treating schools as a ‘sideline’. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA View image in fullscreen The general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers accused the government of treating schools as a ‘sideline’. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA The general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers accused the government of treating schools as a ‘sideline’. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA The general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers accused the government of treating schools as a ‘sideline’. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA This article is more than 1 year old School leaders warn of ‘full-blown’ special needs crisis in England This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old School leaders warn of ‘full-blown’ special needs crisis in England This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old School leaders warn of ‘full-blown’ special needs crisis in England This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Survey by NAHT union finds funding shortages mean pupils are losing out on vital support Survey by NAHT union finds funding shortages mean pupils are losing out on vital support Survey by NAHT union finds funding shortages mean pupils are losing out on vital support Shortages and funding cuts are causing a “full-blown crisis” in special needs education for children and young people in England , according to school leaders who say they are struggling to give pupils the support they require. Paul Whiteman, the general secretary of the school leaders’ union the NAHT, accused the government of treating schools as a “sideline” compared with headline-grabbing issues such as immigration. “This is a full-blown crisis and bad news for children, families, schools and local authorities. Ahead of the general election, it is incumbent upon all political parties to pledge the system-wide investment needed to tackle this crisis head on,” Whiteman said. Hundreds of children with special needs wait a year for support in England Read more Leaders of both mainstream and special schools told the NAHT they were being forced to reduce the number of teaching assistants or hours worked because of financial pressures, cutting vital individual support for pupils with special education needs and disabilities (Send). The NAHT’s survey of 1,000 school leaders found that 78% said they had cut back on support staff such as teaching assistants within the last three years, and 84% said they also expected to do so within the next three years. Some leaders said they feared funding shortages meant they would be unable to keep children and staff safe, while others said they were unable to pay for speech and language therapy, mental health support or specialist training. Ian Kendal, the executive headteacher of Our Lady of Fatima trust in Essex, said the funding was insufficient and that it was “astonishing” per pupil Send funding had not increased for more than a decade. This, he said put huge pressure on dwindling school budgets. “There just isn’t capacity within special schools in our area, meaning we are supporting even more pupils with complex needs within our mainstream settings. “We believe in inclusion and are currently doing our best with the limited funds, but, put simply, it is not good enough for the children with the most complex needs – they deserve so much more than we can give them. “It should never have come to this, and we need the government to urgently put more funding into the system to ensure all children’s needs are met, especially the most vulnerable.” Funding for pupils in special schools has been frozen at £10,000 per pupil since 2013, with its value being steeply eroded in recent years by high inflation. The school leaders’ complaints come as the number of pupils with identified Send, including those with education, health and care plans (EHCPs), has ballooned. Gillian Keegan, the education secretary for England, has previously acknowledged the extent of the crisis, saying earlier this year: “All too often I hear from parents with children who have special educational needs having to fight to get the right support.” The Department for Education says the government is tackling the issue, with high needs funding for children and young people increasing above £10.5bn in 2024-25. Special educational needs in English schools in ‘crisis’, minister admits Read more The government is also allocating £850m for councils to eventually create 60,000 new places in mainstream and special schools. But Louise Gittins, the chair of the Local Government Association’s children and young people board, said: “Councils’ high needs deficits currently stand at an estimated £1.9bn, rising to £3.6bn by 2025 with no intervention. We urge the government to write off these deficits.” Whiteman told the NAHT’s annual conference on Friday that the government’s neglect of schools had been “pernicious”. “For the best part of 15 years now, schools have been treated as though they’re a sideline, a niche portfolio to be considered once all populist talk on immigration, polarised positions on trans rights, and removing the right to protest have been exhausted,” Whiteman said. “If political parties think the electorate haven’t noticed, or simply don’t care, I strongly suspect they’re all going to have a nasty shock during the election campaign.” Explore more on these topics Special educational needs School funding Schools Trade unions Teaching England news Share Reuse this content Shortages and funding cuts are causing a “full-blown crisis” in special needs education for children and young people in England , according to school leaders who say they are struggling to give pupils the support they require. Paul Whiteman, the general secretary of the school leaders’ union the NAHT, accused the government of treating schools as a “sideline” compared with headline-grabbing issues such as immigration. “This is a full-blown crisis and bad news for children, families, schools and local authorities. Ahead of the general election, it is incumbent upon all political parties to pledge the system-wide investment needed to tackle this crisis head on,” Whiteman said. Hundreds of children with special needs wait a year for support in England Read more Leaders of both mainstream and special schools told the NAHT they were being forced to reduce the number of teaching assistants or hours worked because of financial pressures, cutting vital individual support for pupils with special education needs and disabilities (Send). The NAHT’s survey of 1,000 school leaders found that 78% said they had cut back on support staff such as teaching assistants within the last three years, and 84% said they also expected to do so within the next three years. Some leaders said they feared funding shortages meant they would be unable to keep children and staff safe, while others said they were unable to pay for speech and language therapy, mental health support or specialist training. Ian Kendal, the executive headteacher of Our Lady of Fatima trust in Essex, said the funding was insufficient and that it was “astonishing” per pupil Send funding had not increased for more than a decade. This, he said put huge pressure on dwindling school budgets. “There just isn’t capacity within special schools in our area, meaning we are supporting even more pupils with complex needs within our mainstream settings. “We believe in inclusion and are currently doing our best with the limited funds, but, put simply, it is not good enough for the children with the most complex needs – they deserve so much more than we can give them. “It should never have come to this, and we need the government to urgently put more funding into the system to ensure all children’s needs are met, especially the most vulnerable.” Funding for pupils in special schools has been frozen at £10,000 per pupil since 2013, with its value being steeply eroded in recent years by high inflation. The school leaders’ complaints come as the number of pupils with identified Send, including those with education, health and care plans (EHCPs), has ballooned. Gillian Keegan, the education secretary for England, has previously acknowledged the extent of the crisis, saying earlier this year: “All too often I hear from parents with children who have special educational needs having to fight to get the right support.” The Department for Education says the government is tackling the issue, with high needs funding for children and young people increasing above £10.5bn in 2024-25. Special educational needs in English schools in ‘crisis’, minister admits Read more The government is also allocating £850m for councils to eventually create 60,000 new places in mainstream and special schools. But Louise Gittins, the chair of the Local Government Association’s children and young people board, said: “Councils’ high needs deficits currently stand at an estimated £1.9bn, rising to £3.6bn by 2025 with no intervention. We urge the government to write off these deficits.” Whiteman told the NAHT’s annual conference on Friday that the government’s neglect of schools had been “pernicious”. “For the best part of 15 years now, schools have been treated as though they’re a sideline, a niche portfolio to be considered once all populist talk on immigration, polarised positions on trans rights, and removing the right to protest have been exhausted,” Whiteman said. “If political parties think the electorate haven’t noticed, or simply don’t care, I strongly suspect they’re all going to have a nasty shock during the election campaign.” Explore more on these topics Special educational needs School funding Schools Trade unions Teaching England news Share Reuse this content Shortages and funding cuts are causing a “full-blown crisis” in special needs education for children and young people in England , according to school leaders who say they are struggling to give pupils the support they require. Paul Whiteman, the general secretary of the school leaders’ union the NAHT, accused the government of treating schools as a “sideline” compared with headline-grabbing issues such as immigration. “This is a full-blown crisis and bad news for children, families, schools and local authorities. Ahead of the general election, it is incumbent upon all political parties to pledge the system-wide investment needed to tackle this crisis head on,” Whiteman said. Hundreds of children with special needs wait a year for support in England Read more Leaders of both mainstream and special schools told the NAHT they were being forced to reduce the number of teaching assistants or hours worked because of financial pressures, cutting vital individual support for pupils with special education needs and disabilities (Send). The NAHT’s survey of 1,000 school leaders found that 78% said they had cut back on support staff such as teaching assistants within the last three years, and 84% said they also expected to do so within the next three years. Some leaders said they feared funding shortages meant they would be unable to keep children and staff safe, while others said they were unable to pay for speech and language therapy, mental health support or specialist training. Ian Kendal, the executive headteacher of Our Lady of Fatima trust in Essex, said the funding was insufficient and that it was “astonishing” per pupil Send funding had not increased for more than a decade. This, he said put huge pressure on dwindling school budgets. “There just isn’t capacity within special schools in our area, meaning we are supporting even more pupils with complex needs within our mainstream settings. “We believe in inclusion and are currently doing our best with the limited funds, but, put simply, it is not good enough for the children with the most complex needs – they deserve so much more than we can give them. “It should never have come to this, and we need the government to urgently put more funding into the system to ensure all children’s needs are met, especially the most vulnerable.” Funding for pupils in special schools has been frozen at £10,000 per pupil since 2013, with its value being steeply eroded in recent years by high inflation. The school leaders’ complaints come as the number of pupils with identified Send, including those with education, health and care plans (EHCPs), has ballooned. Gillian Keegan, the education secretary for England, has previously acknowledged the extent of the crisis, saying earlier this year: “All too often I hear from parents with children who have special educational needs having to fight to get the right support.” The Department for Education says the government is tackling the issue, with high needs funding for children and young people increasing above £10.5bn in 2024-25. Special educational needs in English schools in ‘crisis’, minister admits Read more The government is also allocating £850m for councils to eventually create 60,000 new places in mainstream and special schools. But Louise Gittins, the chair of the Local Government Association’s children and young people board, said: “Councils’ high needs deficits currently stand at an estimated £1.9bn, rising to £3.6bn by 2025 with no intervention. We urge the government to write off these deficits.” Whiteman told the NAHT’s annual conference on Friday that the government’s neglect of schools had been “pernicious”. “For the best part of 15 years now, schools have been treated as though they’re a sideline, a niche portfolio to be considered once all populist talk on immigration, polarised positions on trans rights, and removing the right to protest have been exhausted,” Whiteman said. “If political parties think the electorate haven’t noticed, or simply don’t care, I strongly suspect they’re all going to have a nasty shock during the election campaign.” Shortages and funding cuts are causing a “full-blown crisis” in special needs education for children and young people in England , according to school leaders who say they are struggling to give pupils the support they require. Paul Whiteman, the general secretary of the school leaders’ union the NAHT, accused the government of treating schools as a “sideline” compared with headline-grabbing issues such as immigration. “This is a full-blown crisis and bad news for children, families, schools and local authorities. Ahead of the general election, it is incumbent upon all political parties to pledge the system-wide investment needed to tackle this crisis head on,” Whiteman said. Hundreds of children with special needs wait a year for support in England Read more Leaders of both mainstream and special schools told the NAHT they were being forced to reduce the number of teaching assistants or hours worked because of financial pressures, cutting vital individual support for pupils with special education needs and disabilities (Send). The NAHT’s survey of 1,000 school leaders found that 78% said they had cut back on support staff such as teaching assistants within the last three years, and 84% said they also expected to do so within the next three years. Some leaders said they feared funding shortages meant they would be unable to keep children and staff safe, while others said they were unable to pay for speech and language therapy, mental health support or specialist training. Ian Kendal, the executive headteacher of Our Lady of Fatima trust in Essex, said the funding was insufficient and that it was “astonishing” per pupil Send funding had not increased for more than a decade. This, he said put huge pressure on dwindling school budgets. “There just isn’t capacity within special schools in our area, meaning we are supporting even more pupils with complex needs within our mainstream settings. “We believe in inclusion and are currently doing our best with the limited funds, but, put simply, it is not good enough for the children with the most complex needs – they deserve so much more than we can give them. “It should never have come to this, and we need the government to urgently put more funding into the system to ensure all children’s needs are met, especially the most vulnerable.” Funding for pupils in special schools has been frozen at £10,000 per pupil since 2013, with its value being steeply eroded in recent years by high inflation. The school leaders’ complaints come as the number of pupils with identified Send, including those with education, health and care plans (EHCPs), has ballooned. Gillian Keegan, the education secretary for England, has previously acknowledged the extent of the crisis, saying earlier this year: “All too often I hear from parents with children who have special educational needs having to fight to get the right support.” The Department for Education says the government is tackling the issue, with high needs funding for children and young people increasing above £10.5bn in 2024-25. Special educational needs in English schools in ‘crisis’, minister admits Read more The government is also allocating £850m for councils to eventually create 60,000 new places in mainstream and special schools. But Louise Gittins, the chair of the Local Government Association’s children and young people board, said: “Councils’ high needs deficits currently stand at an estimated £1.9bn, rising to £3.6bn by 2025 with no intervention. We urge the government to write off these deficits.” Whiteman told the NAHT’s annual conference on Friday that the government’s neglect of schools had been “pernicious”. “For the best part of 15 years now, schools have been treated as though they’re a sideline, a niche portfolio to be considered once all populist talk on immigration, polarised positions on trans rights, and removing the right to protest have been exhausted,” Whiteman said. “If political parties think the electorate haven’t noticed, or simply don’t care, I strongly suspect they’re all going to have a nasty shock during the election campaign.” Shortages and funding cuts are causing a “full-blown crisis” in special needs education for children and young people in England , according to school leaders who say they are struggling to give pupils the support they require. Paul Whiteman, the general secretary of the school leaders’ union the NAHT, accused the government of treating schools as a “sideline” compared with headline-grabbing issues such as immigration. “This is a full-blown crisis and bad news for children, families, schools and local authorities. Ahead of the general election, it is incumbent upon all political parties to pledge the system-wide investment needed to tackle this crisis head on,” Whiteman said. Hundreds of children with special needs wait a year for support in England Read more Hundreds of children with special needs wait a year for support in England Read more Hundreds of children with special needs wait a year for support in England Read more Hundreds of children with special needs wait a year for support in England Hundreds of children with special needs wait a year for support in England Leaders of both mainstream and special schools told the NAHT they were being forced to reduce the number of teaching assistants or hours worked because of financial pressures, cutting vital individual support for pupils with special education needs and disabilities (Send). The NAHT’s survey of 1,000 school leaders found that 78% said they had cut back on support staff such as teaching assistants within the last three years, and 84% said they also expected to do so within the next three years. Some leaders said they feared funding shortages meant they would be unable to keep children and staff safe, while others said they were unable to pay for speech and language therapy, mental health support or specialist training. Ian Kendal, the executive headteacher of Our Lady of Fatima trust in Essex, said the funding was insufficient and that it was “astonishing” per pupil Send funding had not increased for more than a decade. This, he said put huge pressure on dwindling school budgets. “There just isn’t capacity within special schools in our area, meaning we are supporting even more pupils with complex needs within our mainstream settings. “We believe in inclusion and are currently doing our best with the limited funds, but, put simply, it is not good enough for the children with the most complex needs – they deserve so much more than we can give them. “It should never have come to this, and we need the government to urgently put more funding into the system to ensure all children’s needs are met, especially the most vulnerable.” Funding for pupils in special schools has been frozen at £10,000 per pupil since 2013, with its value being steeply eroded in recent years by high inflation. The school leaders’ complaints come as the number of pupils with identified Send, including those with education, health and care plans (EHCPs), has ballooned. Gillian Keegan, the education secretary for England, has previously acknowledged the extent of the crisis, saying earlier this year: “All too often I hear from parents with children who have special educational needs having to fight to get the right support.” The Department for Education says the government is tackling the issue, with high needs funding for children and young people increasing above £10.5bn in 2024-25. Special educational needs in English schools in ‘crisis’, minister admits Read more Special educational needs in English schools in ‘crisis’, minister admits Read more Special educational needs in English schools in ‘crisis’, minister admits Read more Special educational needs in English schools in ‘crisis’, minister admits Special educational needs in English schools in ‘crisis’, minister admits The government is also allocating £850m for councils to eventually create 60,000 new places in mainstream and special schools. But Louise Gittins, the chair of the Local Government Association’s children and young people board, said: “Councils’ high needs deficits currently stand at an estimated £1.9bn, rising to £3.6bn by 2025 with no intervention. We urge the government to write off these deficits.” Whiteman told the NAHT’s annual conference on Friday that the government’s neglect of schools had been “pernicious”. “For the best part of 15 years now, schools have been treated as though they’re a sideline, a niche portfolio to be considered once all populist talk on immigration, polarised positions on trans rights, and removing the right to protest have been exhausted,” Whiteman said. “If political parties think the electorate haven’t noticed, or simply don’t care, I strongly suspect they’re all going to have a nasty shock during the election campaign.” Explore more on these topics Special educational needs School funding Schools Trade unions Teaching England news Share Reuse this content Special educational needs School funding Schools Trade unions Teaching England news |
Anti-monarchy group holds rally ahead of anniversary of king’s coronation
Protesters at a rally organised by the group Republic in London on Sunday. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA View image in fullscreen Protesters at a rally organised by the group Republic in London on Sunday. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA This article is more than 1 year old Anti-monarchy group holds rally ahead of anniversary of king’s coronation This article is more than 1 year old About 100 people attended Republic rally in central London, with parallel events in Edinburgh and Cardiff A 15ft dinosaur called “Chuck the Rex” was the centrepiece of a rally calling for the abolition of the monarchy ahead of the first anniversary of King Charles’s coronation. It will be a year since the king’s coronation on Monday, when gun salutes across the capital will commemorate his reign. About 100 people attended Sunday’s rally in Trafalgar Square in central London, which was organised by the campaign group Republic, alongside parallel events in Edinburgh and Cardiff. Protesters chanted “Abdicate, abdicate” in front of two large yellow banners that read “Abolish the monarchy” and “Change the country for good.” Graham Smith, the chief executive of Republic, said the group had brought the enormous puppet dinosaur to represent the anachronism of monarchy. “The fossilised remains should be in a museum where we can have a look at it and then we can enjoy actually living in a modern democracy,” he said. Smith and other Republic members were arrested last year for taking part in a pre-agreed protest on the day of the coronation. Smith was detained for 14 hours and launched a legal action against the Metropolitan police last year. He told the crowd the action was continuing. “We need to challenge the monarchy and the royals because it is a corrupt institution – they are a lazy people, they have not earned their position and they need to be kicked out,” he said. He continued: “We want a constitution and a system and a democracy that actually celebrates our very best principles and values. This won’t just be a matter of principle, it will change the way we govern ourselves and therefore change the society and the way that we see ourselves, not as subjects but as citizens.” Membership of anti-monarchy group Republic almost doubles in wake of coronation arrests Read more Smith said the public was “forced to compromise our values and principles” and compared the scrutiny of politicians to that of the monarchy. “We criticise MPs for spending thousands of pounds on second homes … but we don’t criticise [Prince] William for spending £4.5m of our money on doing up not his second home, or his third home, but his fourth,” he said. Smith told the Guardian that the first year of Charles’s reign had seen a surge in interest in the idea of abolishing the monarchy. “We have grown enormously in the last 12 months, we’ve got more money, more members, more activists. There’s no way we could have organised this two years ago. Charles is not the queen [Elizabeth]. I mean, the queen was the monarchy for a lot of people.” While polling published on Sunday suggested an increase in support for King Charles, it also indicated a rise in people believing the UK should become a republic. Ipsos polling for the Mail on Sunday found 56% believe Charles is doing a good job as king, up from 49% last year. It also found that 28% of people supported Britain becoming a republic, compared to 22% four months before Queen Elizabeth’s death in 2023. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion The human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell , who has supported Republic for decades, was one of the speakers. He told the Guardian: “Monarchy symbolises elitism, privilege and deference. It’s totally incompatible with a modern 21st-century democracy. “The royals have between them 23 palaces and residences, 700 servants and a combined personal wealth of £2bn.” Tatchell said that support for the monarchy was “slipping”, pointing to the enthusiasm for republicanism among young people. The latest Ipsos polling found a third of young people said it “would be better” if the monarchy was abolished, compared with just one in six of older people. Shortly after the rally, the archbishop of Canterbury praised King Charles’s “sense of duty” as he returned to public events following his cancer diagnosis . In a statement released to coincide with the anniversary of the coronation, Justin Welby said it had been “the privilege of a lifetime” to anoint the king and queen in the ceremony. The king attended three events last week as he resumed royal engagements with the public. His first was meeting cancer specialists and patients receiving chemotherapy at University College hospital’s cancer centre in London. Reflecting on Charles’s handling of his ill health, Welby said: “The past year has presented the king with some great personal challenges. But I have been struck by his continued sense of duty, having recently returned to royal engagements following treatment. “His openness in sharing his condition has been characteristic of his willingness to help and support others.” Explore more on these topics Republicanism King Charles III Monarchy Peter Tatchell news Share Reuse this content Protesters at a rally organised by the group Republic in London on Sunday. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA View image in fullscreen Protesters at a rally organised by the group Republic in London on Sunday. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA This article is more than 1 year old Anti-monarchy group holds rally ahead of anniversary of king’s coronation This article is more than 1 year old About 100 people attended Republic rally in central London, with parallel events in Edinburgh and Cardiff A 15ft dinosaur called “Chuck the Rex” was the centrepiece of a rally calling for the abolition of the monarchy ahead of the first anniversary of King Charles’s coronation. It will be a year since the king’s coronation on Monday, when gun salutes across the capital will commemorate his reign. About 100 people attended Sunday’s rally in Trafalgar Square in central London, which was organised by the campaign group Republic, alongside parallel events in Edinburgh and Cardiff. Protesters chanted “Abdicate, abdicate” in front of two large yellow banners that read “Abolish the monarchy” and “Change the country for good.” Graham Smith, the chief executive of Republic, said the group had brought the enormous puppet dinosaur to represent the anachronism of monarchy. “The fossilised remains should be in a museum where we can have a look at it and then we can enjoy actually living in a modern democracy,” he said. Smith and other Republic members were arrested last year for taking part in a pre-agreed protest on the day of the coronation. Smith was detained for 14 hours and launched a legal action against the Metropolitan police last year. He told the crowd the action was continuing. “We need to challenge the monarchy and the royals because it is a corrupt institution – they are a lazy people, they have not earned their position and they need to be kicked out,” he said. He continued: “We want a constitution and a system and a democracy that actually celebrates our very best principles and values. This won’t just be a matter of principle, it will change the way we govern ourselves and therefore change the society and the way that we see ourselves, not as subjects but as citizens.” Membership of anti-monarchy group Republic almost doubles in wake of coronation arrests Read more Smith said the public was “forced to compromise our values and principles” and compared the scrutiny of politicians to that of the monarchy. “We criticise MPs for spending thousands of pounds on second homes … but we don’t criticise [Prince] William for spending £4.5m of our money on doing up not his second home, or his third home, but his fourth,” he said. Smith told the Guardian that the first year of Charles’s reign had seen a surge in interest in the idea of abolishing the monarchy. “We have grown enormously in the last 12 months, we’ve got more money, more members, more activists. There’s no way we could have organised this two years ago. Charles is not the queen [Elizabeth]. I mean, the queen was the monarchy for a lot of people.” While polling published on Sunday suggested an increase in support for King Charles, it also indicated a rise in people believing the UK should become a republic. Ipsos polling for the Mail on Sunday found 56% believe Charles is doing a good job as king, up from 49% last year. It also found that 28% of people supported Britain becoming a republic, compared to 22% four months before Queen Elizabeth’s death in 2023. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion The human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell , who has supported Republic for decades, was one of the speakers. He told the Guardian: “Monarchy symbolises elitism, privilege and deference. It’s totally incompatible with a modern 21st-century democracy. “The royals have between them 23 palaces and residences, 700 servants and a combined personal wealth of £2bn.” Tatchell said that support for the monarchy was “slipping”, pointing to the enthusiasm for republicanism among young people. The latest Ipsos polling found a third of young people said it “would be better” if the monarchy was abolished, compared with just one in six of older people. Shortly after the rally, the archbishop of Canterbury praised King Charles’s “sense of duty” as he returned to public events following his cancer diagnosis . In a statement released to coincide with the anniversary of the coronation, Justin Welby said it had been “the privilege of a lifetime” to anoint the king and queen in the ceremony. The king attended three events last week as he resumed royal engagements with the public. His first was meeting cancer specialists and patients receiving chemotherapy at University College hospital’s cancer centre in London. Reflecting on Charles’s handling of his ill health, Welby said: “The past year has presented the king with some great personal challenges. But I have been struck by his continued sense of duty, having recently returned to royal engagements following treatment. “His openness in sharing his condition has been characteristic of his willingness to help and support others.” Explore more on these topics Republicanism King Charles III Monarchy Peter Tatchell news Share Reuse this content Protesters at a rally organised by the group Republic in London on Sunday. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA View image in fullscreen Protesters at a rally organised by the group Republic in London on Sunday. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA Protesters at a rally organised by the group Republic in London on Sunday. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA View image in fullscreen Protesters at a rally organised by the group Republic in London on Sunday. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA Protesters at a rally organised by the group Republic in London on Sunday. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA View image in fullscreen Protesters at a rally organised by the group Republic in London on Sunday. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA Protesters at a rally organised by the group Republic in London on Sunday. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA View image in fullscreen Protesters at a rally organised by the group Republic in London on Sunday. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA Protesters at a rally organised by the group Republic in London on Sunday. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA Protesters at a rally organised by the group Republic in London on Sunday. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA This article is more than 1 year old Anti-monarchy group holds rally ahead of anniversary of king’s coronation This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Anti-monarchy group holds rally ahead of anniversary of king’s coronation This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Anti-monarchy group holds rally ahead of anniversary of king’s coronation This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old About 100 people attended Republic rally in central London, with parallel events in Edinburgh and Cardiff About 100 people attended Republic rally in central London, with parallel events in Edinburgh and Cardiff About 100 people attended Republic rally in central London, with parallel events in Edinburgh and Cardiff A 15ft dinosaur called “Chuck the Rex” was the centrepiece of a rally calling for the abolition of the monarchy ahead of the first anniversary of King Charles’s coronation. It will be a year since the king’s coronation on Monday, when gun salutes across the capital will commemorate his reign. About 100 people attended Sunday’s rally in Trafalgar Square in central London, which was organised by the campaign group Republic, alongside parallel events in Edinburgh and Cardiff. Protesters chanted “Abdicate, abdicate” in front of two large yellow banners that read “Abolish the monarchy” and “Change the country for good.” Graham Smith, the chief executive of Republic, said the group had brought the enormous puppet dinosaur to represent the anachronism of monarchy. “The fossilised remains should be in a museum where we can have a look at it and then we can enjoy actually living in a modern democracy,” he said. Smith and other Republic members were arrested last year for taking part in a pre-agreed protest on the day of the coronation. Smith was detained for 14 hours and launched a legal action against the Metropolitan police last year. He told the crowd the action was continuing. “We need to challenge the monarchy and the royals because it is a corrupt institution – they are a lazy people, they have not earned their position and they need to be kicked out,” he said. He continued: “We want a constitution and a system and a democracy that actually celebrates our very best principles and values. This won’t just be a matter of principle, it will change the way we govern ourselves and therefore change the society and the way that we see ourselves, not as subjects but as citizens.” Membership of anti-monarchy group Republic almost doubles in wake of coronation arrests Read more Smith said the public was “forced to compromise our values and principles” and compared the scrutiny of politicians to that of the monarchy. “We criticise MPs for spending thousands of pounds on second homes … but we don’t criticise [Prince] William for spending £4.5m of our money on doing up not his second home, or his third home, but his fourth,” he said. Smith told the Guardian that the first year of Charles’s reign had seen a surge in interest in the idea of abolishing the monarchy. “We have grown enormously in the last 12 months, we’ve got more money, more members, more activists. There’s no way we could have organised this two years ago. Charles is not the queen [Elizabeth]. I mean, the queen was the monarchy for a lot of people.” While polling published on Sunday suggested an increase in support for King Charles, it also indicated a rise in people believing the UK should become a republic. Ipsos polling for the Mail on Sunday found 56% believe Charles is doing a good job as king, up from 49% last year. It also found that 28% of people supported Britain becoming a republic, compared to 22% four months before Queen Elizabeth’s death in 2023. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion The human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell , who has supported Republic for decades, was one of the speakers. He told the Guardian: “Monarchy symbolises elitism, privilege and deference. It’s totally incompatible with a modern 21st-century democracy. “The royals have between them 23 palaces and residences, 700 servants and a combined personal wealth of £2bn.” Tatchell said that support for the monarchy was “slipping”, pointing to the enthusiasm for republicanism among young people. The latest Ipsos polling found a third of young people said it “would be better” if the monarchy was abolished, compared with just one in six of older people. Shortly after the rally, the archbishop of Canterbury praised King Charles’s “sense of duty” as he returned to public events following his cancer diagnosis . In a statement released to coincide with the anniversary of the coronation, Justin Welby said it had been “the privilege of a lifetime” to anoint the king and queen in the ceremony. The king attended three events last week as he resumed royal engagements with the public. His first was meeting cancer specialists and patients receiving chemotherapy at University College hospital’s cancer centre in London. Reflecting on Charles’s handling of his ill health, Welby said: “The past year has presented the king with some great personal challenges. But I have been struck by his continued sense of duty, having recently returned to royal engagements following treatment. “His openness in sharing his condition has been characteristic of his willingness to help and support others.” Explore more on these topics Republicanism King Charles III Monarchy Peter Tatchell news Share Reuse this content A 15ft dinosaur called “Chuck the Rex” was the centrepiece of a rally calling for the abolition of the monarchy ahead of the first anniversary of King Charles’s coronation. It will be a year since the king’s coronation on Monday, when gun salutes across the capital will commemorate his reign. About 100 people attended Sunday’s rally in Trafalgar Square in central London, which was organised by the campaign group Republic, alongside parallel events in Edinburgh and Cardiff. Protesters chanted “Abdicate, abdicate” in front of two large yellow banners that read “Abolish the monarchy” and “Change the country for good.” Graham Smith, the chief executive of Republic, said the group had brought the enormous puppet dinosaur to represent the anachronism of monarchy. “The fossilised remains should be in a museum where we can have a look at it and then we can enjoy actually living in a modern democracy,” he said. Smith and other Republic members were arrested last year for taking part in a pre-agreed protest on the day of the coronation. Smith was detained for 14 hours and launched a legal action against the Metropolitan police last year. He told the crowd the action was continuing. “We need to challenge the monarchy and the royals because it is a corrupt institution – they are a lazy people, they have not earned their position and they need to be kicked out,” he said. He continued: “We want a constitution and a system and a democracy that actually celebrates our very best principles and values. This won’t just be a matter of principle, it will change the way we govern ourselves and therefore change the society and the way that we see ourselves, not as subjects but as citizens.” Membership of anti-monarchy group Republic almost doubles in wake of coronation arrests Read more Smith said the public was “forced to compromise our values and principles” and compared the scrutiny of politicians to that of the monarchy. “We criticise MPs for spending thousands of pounds on second homes … but we don’t criticise [Prince] William for spending £4.5m of our money on doing up not his second home, or his third home, but his fourth,” he said. Smith told the Guardian that the first year of Charles’s reign had seen a surge in interest in the idea of abolishing the monarchy. “We have grown enormously in the last 12 months, we’ve got more money, more members, more activists. There’s no way we could have organised this two years ago. Charles is not the queen [Elizabeth]. I mean, the queen was the monarchy for a lot of people.” While polling published on Sunday suggested an increase in support for King Charles, it also indicated a rise in people believing the UK should become a republic. Ipsos polling for the Mail on Sunday found 56% believe Charles is doing a good job as king, up from 49% last year. It also found that 28% of people supported Britain becoming a republic, compared to 22% four months before Queen Elizabeth’s death in 2023. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion The human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell , who has supported Republic for decades, was one of the speakers. He told the Guardian: “Monarchy symbolises elitism, privilege and deference. It’s totally incompatible with a modern 21st-century democracy. “The royals have between them 23 palaces and residences, 700 servants and a combined personal wealth of £2bn.” Tatchell said that support for the monarchy was “slipping”, pointing to the enthusiasm for republicanism among young people. The latest Ipsos polling found a third of young people said it “would be better” if the monarchy was abolished, compared with just one in six of older people. Shortly after the rally, the archbishop of Canterbury praised King Charles’s “sense of duty” as he returned to public events following his cancer diagnosis . In a statement released to coincide with the anniversary of the coronation, Justin Welby said it had been “the privilege of a lifetime” to anoint the king and queen in the ceremony. The king attended three events last week as he resumed royal engagements with the public. His first was meeting cancer specialists and patients receiving chemotherapy at University College hospital’s cancer centre in London. Reflecting on Charles’s handling of his ill health, Welby said: “The past year has presented the king with some great personal challenges. But I have been struck by his continued sense of duty, having recently returned to royal engagements following treatment. “His openness in sharing his condition has been characteristic of his willingness to help and support others.” Explore more on these topics Republicanism King Charles III Monarchy Peter Tatchell news Share Reuse this content A 15ft dinosaur called “Chuck the Rex” was the centrepiece of a rally calling for the abolition of the monarchy ahead of the first anniversary of King Charles’s coronation. It will be a year since the king’s coronation on Monday, when gun salutes across the capital will commemorate his reign. About 100 people attended Sunday’s rally in Trafalgar Square in central London, which was organised by the campaign group Republic, alongside parallel events in Edinburgh and Cardiff. Protesters chanted “Abdicate, abdicate” in front of two large yellow banners that read “Abolish the monarchy” and “Change the country for good.” Graham Smith, the chief executive of Republic, said the group had brought the enormous puppet dinosaur to represent the anachronism of monarchy. “The fossilised remains should be in a museum where we can have a look at it and then we can enjoy actually living in a modern democracy,” he said. Smith and other Republic members were arrested last year for taking part in a pre-agreed protest on the day of the coronation. Smith was detained for 14 hours and launched a legal action against the Metropolitan police last year. He told the crowd the action was continuing. “We need to challenge the monarchy and the royals because it is a corrupt institution – they are a lazy people, they have not earned their position and they need to be kicked out,” he said. He continued: “We want a constitution and a system and a democracy that actually celebrates our very best principles and values. This won’t just be a matter of principle, it will change the way we govern ourselves and therefore change the society and the way that we see ourselves, not as subjects but as citizens.” Membership of anti-monarchy group Republic almost doubles in wake of coronation arrests Read more Smith said the public was “forced to compromise our values and principles” and compared the scrutiny of politicians to that of the monarchy. “We criticise MPs for spending thousands of pounds on second homes … but we don’t criticise [Prince] William for spending £4.5m of our money on doing up not his second home, or his third home, but his fourth,” he said. Smith told the Guardian that the first year of Charles’s reign had seen a surge in interest in the idea of abolishing the monarchy. “We have grown enormously in the last 12 months, we’ve got more money, more members, more activists. There’s no way we could have organised this two years ago. Charles is not the queen [Elizabeth]. I mean, the queen was the monarchy for a lot of people.” While polling published on Sunday suggested an increase in support for King Charles, it also indicated a rise in people believing the UK should become a republic. Ipsos polling for the Mail on Sunday found 56% believe Charles is doing a good job as king, up from 49% last year. It also found that 28% of people supported Britain becoming a republic, compared to 22% four months before Queen Elizabeth’s death in 2023. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion The human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell , who has supported Republic for decades, was one of the speakers. He told the Guardian: “Monarchy symbolises elitism, privilege and deference. It’s totally incompatible with a modern 21st-century democracy. “The royals have between them 23 palaces and residences, 700 servants and a combined personal wealth of £2bn.” Tatchell said that support for the monarchy was “slipping”, pointing to the enthusiasm for republicanism among young people. The latest Ipsos polling found a third of young people said it “would be better” if the monarchy was abolished, compared with just one in six of older people. Shortly after the rally, the archbishop of Canterbury praised King Charles’s “sense of duty” as he returned to public events following his cancer diagnosis . In a statement released to coincide with the anniversary of the coronation, Justin Welby said it had been “the privilege of a lifetime” to anoint the king and queen in the ceremony. The king attended three events last week as he resumed royal engagements with the public. His first was meeting cancer specialists and patients receiving chemotherapy at University College hospital’s cancer centre in London. Reflecting on Charles’s handling of his ill health, Welby said: “The past year has presented the king with some great personal challenges. But I have been struck by his continued sense of duty, having recently returned to royal engagements following treatment. “His openness in sharing his condition has been characteristic of his willingness to help and support others.” A 15ft dinosaur called “Chuck the Rex” was the centrepiece of a rally calling for the abolition of the monarchy ahead of the first anniversary of King Charles’s coronation. It will be a year since the king’s coronation on Monday, when gun salutes across the capital will commemorate his reign. About 100 people attended Sunday’s rally in Trafalgar Square in central London, which was organised by the campaign group Republic, alongside parallel events in Edinburgh and Cardiff. Protesters chanted “Abdicate, abdicate” in front of two large yellow banners that read “Abolish the monarchy” and “Change the country for good.” Graham Smith, the chief executive of Republic, said the group had brought the enormous puppet dinosaur to represent the anachronism of monarchy. “The fossilised remains should be in a museum where we can have a look at it and then we can enjoy actually living in a modern democracy,” he said. Smith and other Republic members were arrested last year for taking part in a pre-agreed protest on the day of the coronation. Smith was detained for 14 hours and launched a legal action against the Metropolitan police last year. He told the crowd the action was continuing. “We need to challenge the monarchy and the royals because it is a corrupt institution – they are a lazy people, they have not earned their position and they need to be kicked out,” he said. He continued: “We want a constitution and a system and a democracy that actually celebrates our very best principles and values. This won’t just be a matter of principle, it will change the way we govern ourselves and therefore change the society and the way that we see ourselves, not as subjects but as citizens.” Membership of anti-monarchy group Republic almost doubles in wake of coronation arrests Read more Smith said the public was “forced to compromise our values and principles” and compared the scrutiny of politicians to that of the monarchy. “We criticise MPs for spending thousands of pounds on second homes … but we don’t criticise [Prince] William for spending £4.5m of our money on doing up not his second home, or his third home, but his fourth,” he said. Smith told the Guardian that the first year of Charles’s reign had seen a surge in interest in the idea of abolishing the monarchy. “We have grown enormously in the last 12 months, we’ve got more money, more members, more activists. There’s no way we could have organised this two years ago. Charles is not the queen [Elizabeth]. I mean, the queen was the monarchy for a lot of people.” While polling published on Sunday suggested an increase in support for King Charles, it also indicated a rise in people believing the UK should become a republic. Ipsos polling for the Mail on Sunday found 56% believe Charles is doing a good job as king, up from 49% last year. It also found that 28% of people supported Britain becoming a republic, compared to 22% four months before Queen Elizabeth’s death in 2023. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion The human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell , who has supported Republic for decades, was one of the speakers. He told the Guardian: “Monarchy symbolises elitism, privilege and deference. It’s totally incompatible with a modern 21st-century democracy. “The royals have between them 23 palaces and residences, 700 servants and a combined personal wealth of £2bn.” Tatchell said that support for the monarchy was “slipping”, pointing to the enthusiasm for republicanism among young people. The latest Ipsos polling found a third of young people said it “would be better” if the monarchy was abolished, compared with just one in six of older people. Shortly after the rally, the archbishop of Canterbury praised King Charles’s “sense of duty” as he returned to public events following his cancer diagnosis . In a statement released to coincide with the anniversary of the coronation, Justin Welby said it had been “the privilege of a lifetime” to anoint the king and queen in the ceremony. The king attended three events last week as he resumed royal engagements with the public. His first was meeting cancer specialists and patients receiving chemotherapy at University College hospital’s cancer centre in London. Reflecting on Charles’s handling of his ill health, Welby said: “The past year has presented the king with some great personal challenges. But I have been struck by his continued sense of duty, having recently returned to royal engagements following treatment. “His openness in sharing his condition has been characteristic of his willingness to help and support others.” A 15ft dinosaur called “Chuck the Rex” was the centrepiece of a rally calling for the abolition of the monarchy ahead of the first anniversary of King Charles’s coronation. It will be a year since the king’s coronation on Monday, when gun salutes across the capital will commemorate his reign. About 100 people attended Sunday’s rally in Trafalgar Square in central London, which was organised by the campaign group Republic, alongside parallel events in Edinburgh and Cardiff. Protesters chanted “Abdicate, abdicate” in front of two large yellow banners that read “Abolish the monarchy” and “Change the country for good.” Graham Smith, the chief executive of Republic, said the group had brought the enormous puppet dinosaur to represent the anachronism of monarchy. “The fossilised remains should be in a museum where we can have a look at it and then we can enjoy actually living in a modern democracy,” he said. Smith and other Republic members were arrested last year for taking part in a pre-agreed protest on the day of the coronation. Smith was detained for 14 hours and launched a legal action against the Metropolitan police last year. He told the crowd the action was continuing. “We need to challenge the monarchy and the royals because it is a corrupt institution – they are a lazy people, they have not earned their position and they need to be kicked out,” he said. He continued: “We want a constitution and a system and a democracy that actually celebrates our very best principles and values. This won’t just be a matter of principle, it will change the way we govern ourselves and therefore change the society and the way that we see ourselves, not as subjects but as citizens.” Membership of anti-monarchy group Republic almost doubles in wake of coronation arrests Read more Membership of anti-monarchy group Republic almost doubles in wake of coronation arrests Read more Membership of anti-monarchy group Republic almost doubles in wake of coronation arrests Read more Membership of anti-monarchy group Republic almost doubles in wake of coronation arrests Membership of anti-monarchy group Republic almost doubles in wake of coronation arrests Smith said the public was “forced to compromise our values and principles” and compared the scrutiny of politicians to that of the monarchy. “We criticise MPs for spending thousands of pounds on second homes … but we don’t criticise [Prince] William for spending £4.5m of our money on doing up not his second home, or his third home, but his fourth,” he said. Smith told the Guardian that the first year of Charles’s reign had seen a surge in interest in the idea of abolishing the monarchy. “We have grown enormously in the last 12 months, we’ve got more money, more members, more activists. There’s no way we could have organised this two years ago. Charles is not the queen [Elizabeth]. I mean, the queen was the monarchy for a lot of people.” While polling published on Sunday suggested an increase in support for King Charles, it also indicated a rise in people believing the UK should become a republic. Ipsos polling for the Mail on Sunday found 56% believe Charles is doing a good job as king, up from 49% last year. It also found that 28% of people supported Britain becoming a republic, compared to 22% four months before Queen Elizabeth’s death in 2023. The human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell , who has supported Republic for decades, was one of the speakers. He told the Guardian: “Monarchy symbolises elitism, privilege and deference. It’s totally incompatible with a modern 21st-century democracy. “The royals have between them 23 palaces and residences, 700 servants and a combined personal wealth of £2bn.” Tatchell said that support for the monarchy was “slipping”, pointing to the enthusiasm for republicanism among young people. The latest Ipsos polling found a third of young people said it “would be better” if the monarchy was abolished, compared with just one in six of older people. Shortly after the rally, the archbishop of Canterbury praised King Charles’s “sense of duty” as he returned to public events following his cancer diagnosis . In a statement released to coincide with the anniversary of the coronation, Justin Welby said it had been “the privilege of a lifetime” to anoint the king and queen in the ceremony. The king attended three events last week as he resumed royal engagements with the public. His first was meeting cancer specialists and patients receiving chemotherapy at University College hospital’s cancer centre in London. Reflecting on Charles’s handling of his ill health, Welby said: “The past year has presented the king with some great personal challenges. But I have been struck by his continued sense of duty, having recently returned to royal engagements following treatment. “His openness in sharing his condition has been characteristic of his willingness to help and support others.” Explore more on these topics Republicanism King Charles III Monarchy Peter Tatchell news Share Reuse this content Republicanism King Charles III Monarchy Peter Tatchell news |
Fix Europe’s housing crisis or risk fuelling the far-right, UN expert warns
Composite: Guardian Design/Reuters/Getty Images/Alamy View image in fullscreen Composite: Guardian Design/Reuters/Getty Images/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old Fix Europe’s housing crisis or risk fuelling the far-right, UN expert warns This article is more than 1 year old Unaffordable rents and property prices risk becoming a key political battleground across the continent Higher costs and cramped conditions: the impact of Europe’s housing crisis ‘Everything’s just … on hold’: the Netherlands’ next-level housing crisis Spiralling rents and sky-high property prices risk becoming a key battleground of European politics as far-right and populist parties start to exploit growing public anger over the continent’s housing crisis, experts have said. Weeks before European parliament elections in which far-right parties are forecast to finish first in nine EU member states and second or third in another nine, housing has the potential to become as potent a driver of far-right support as immigration. “Far-right parties prosper when they can exploit the social gaps that emerge out of underinvestment and inadequate government planning … and when they can blame outsiders,” said the UN’s special rapporteur on the right to adequate housing. “That’s the situation many EU countries are now in,” Balakrishnan Rajagopal told the Guardian. “The housing crisis is no longer affecting just low earners, migrants, single-parent families, but the middle classes. This is the social issue of the 21st century.” View image in fullscreen Protesters march on the street while carrying a small house during a housing demonstration, January 2024. Photograph: SOPA Images Limited/Alamy Shortages of affordable housing have sparked protests in Lisbon , Amsterdam , Prague, Milan and – outside the EU – London , with young people in particular raging against rents swallowing half their incomes and mortgages 10 times an average salary. The issue was a top concern for voters in last year’s Dutch elections, won by the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of the anti-Islam Geert Wilders, and it played into the rise in support for Portugal’s Chega, which almost trebled its vote share in March . “It’s a theme that ticks a lot of current boxes” for far-right parties, said Catherine Fieschi, of the European University Institute. “It’s easy to frame it as an elites-versus-the-people issue – and to claim migrants are being treated better than nationals.” Eurostat data shows that across the 27-member bloc, house prices soared by 47% between 2010 and 2022, with rents rising 18% over the same period. In some countries more than a fifth of households spend 40% or more of their net income on housing. Recent academic research has established a clear link between rising rents and votes for the far right – even without strong anti-immigration messaging. Tarik Abou-Chadi , an EU politics specialist and co-author of a study that found rising rents were reflected locally in growing support for the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party in Germany, said “fear of status loss” was a key factor. “This data shows housing is now part of a broader package of economic and social threats and insecurities fuelling anxiety,” he said. “The fear you may have to move home because you can’t afford it leads to a rise in radical-right support.” View image in fullscreen Political art protesting high rents & housing problems on building in Kreuzberg, Berlin. Rising rents are associated with increasing support for the far-right AfD in Germany, according to research. Photograph: Eden Breitz/Alamy The research combined detailed rental data with local responses to Germany’s annual Socio-Economic Panel household opinion survey to show increasing rents were associated with greater support for the far-right AfD, especially among low-income tenants. Much of the AfD’s support is in more left-behind rural regions, where rents have stayed relatively low, and the effect was even stronger in urban areas, Abou-Chadi said, providing a possible explanation for the party’s rising vote share in cities. “What’s interesting is that the relationship is there even when people’s rents may not actually have increased,” Abou-Chadi said. “It’s not just about actual hardship but also about the worry – that threat to social and economic status.” Thus far, the AfD has made little attempt to play a housing card, while in Portugal , Chega focused more on corruption than on a crisis aggravated – in cities such as Lisbon and Porto – by a huge boom in holiday lets and high-earning digital nomads. “But the scope for housing to become a highly significant factor in the far-right vote is very clearly there, and will only increase in the future,” said Vicente Valentim, a University of Oxford specialist on Europe’s far right. View image in fullscreen The squatters’ collective Mokum Kraakt has squatted a building on Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal, in late 2022. The squatters took over the building because of the housing and energy crisis. The collective believes that the municipality of Amsterdam and the government should approach the housing crisis differently. Photograph: ANP/Alamy Mainstream parties are starting to awaken to the threat. In January, big city mayors demanded an urgent focus on more affordable, qualitative and sustainable housing, while MEPs and housing ministers across the bloc called for housing – which is not an EU competence – to be made a top priority. Rajagopal, who recently reported on the Dutch housing crisis , said a first step should be to enshrine affordable, adequate and secure housing as a legal right. “EU countries have a long and laudable tradition of social protection, of welfarism,” he said. “But when it comes to recognition of housing as a legal human right, Europe is lagging behind international law. EU citizens cannot go to their national courts over housing. European countries recognise this, but are not doing anything about it.” Beyond that, the housing crisis in Europe – including the UK – was a product of “treating housing like any other commodity, to be bought and sold”, and of abandoning state planning, Rajagopal said. “Europe drank the 1980s Kool-Aid … markets were good, planning bad,” he said. “But markets only really take care of themselves. If you also abandon state planning, nobody’s supplying housing. And that’s what allows the PVV, for example, to blame migrants for the Dutch crisis when there is no evidence migrants are to blame. “If we want to stop the rise of the far right, starve it of some oxygen, things like housing have to be seen as fundamental rights.” View image in fullscreen Demonstration of movements for the right to housing in Rome, 2022. Photograph: Andrea Sabbadini/Alamy Sorcha Edwards, the secretary general of the NGO Housing Europe, agreed. “Obviously, we need to build more,” she said. “But supply isn’t the only answer. It’s what kind of housing we build, and with what kind of financing.” A market-first approach to housing – relying on private, profit-driven capital, and on charities to mop up the mess – now needed to make way for “patient, public-interest financing”, with “social conditionality and strings attached”, Edwards said. “There’s going to have to be a real cultural shift. The backbone has to be the limited profit sector. Not just municipal housing, but alternative forms of ownership, like cooperatives. We absolutely have to build with the right kind of money.” Explore more on these topics Europe Europe's housing crisis The far right Housing Communities Germany Portugal Netherlands news Share Reuse this content Composite: Guardian Design/Reuters/Getty Images/Alamy View image in fullscreen Composite: Guardian Design/Reuters/Getty Images/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old Fix Europe’s housing crisis or risk fuelling the far-right, UN expert warns This article is more than 1 year old Unaffordable rents and property prices risk becoming a key political battleground across the continent Higher costs and cramped conditions: the impact of Europe’s housing crisis ‘Everything’s just … on hold’: the Netherlands’ next-level housing crisis Spiralling rents and sky-high property prices risk becoming a key battleground of European politics as far-right and populist parties start to exploit growing public anger over the continent’s housing crisis, experts have said. Weeks before European parliament elections in which far-right parties are forecast to finish first in nine EU member states and second or third in another nine, housing has the potential to become as potent a driver of far-right support as immigration. “Far-right parties prosper when they can exploit the social gaps that emerge out of underinvestment and inadequate government planning … and when they can blame outsiders,” said the UN’s special rapporteur on the right to adequate housing. “That’s the situation many EU countries are now in,” Balakrishnan Rajagopal told the Guardian. “The housing crisis is no longer affecting just low earners, migrants, single-parent families, but the middle classes. This is the social issue of the 21st century.” View image in fullscreen Protesters march on the street while carrying a small house during a housing demonstration, January 2024. Photograph: SOPA Images Limited/Alamy Shortages of affordable housing have sparked protests in Lisbon , Amsterdam , Prague, Milan and – outside the EU – London , with young people in particular raging against rents swallowing half their incomes and mortgages 10 times an average salary. The issue was a top concern for voters in last year’s Dutch elections, won by the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of the anti-Islam Geert Wilders, and it played into the rise in support for Portugal’s Chega, which almost trebled its vote share in March . “It’s a theme that ticks a lot of current boxes” for far-right parties, said Catherine Fieschi, of the European University Institute. “It’s easy to frame it as an elites-versus-the-people issue – and to claim migrants are being treated better than nationals.” Eurostat data shows that across the 27-member bloc, house prices soared by 47% between 2010 and 2022, with rents rising 18% over the same period. In some countries more than a fifth of households spend 40% or more of their net income on housing. Recent academic research has established a clear link between rising rents and votes for the far right – even without strong anti-immigration messaging. Tarik Abou-Chadi , an EU politics specialist and co-author of a study that found rising rents were reflected locally in growing support for the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party in Germany, said “fear of status loss” was a key factor. “This data shows housing is now part of a broader package of economic and social threats and insecurities fuelling anxiety,” he said. “The fear you may have to move home because you can’t afford it leads to a rise in radical-right support.” View image in fullscreen Political art protesting high rents & housing problems on building in Kreuzberg, Berlin. Rising rents are associated with increasing support for the far-right AfD in Germany, according to research. Photograph: Eden Breitz/Alamy The research combined detailed rental data with local responses to Germany’s annual Socio-Economic Panel household opinion survey to show increasing rents were associated with greater support for the far-right AfD, especially among low-income tenants. Much of the AfD’s support is in more left-behind rural regions, where rents have stayed relatively low, and the effect was even stronger in urban areas, Abou-Chadi said, providing a possible explanation for the party’s rising vote share in cities. “What’s interesting is that the relationship is there even when people’s rents may not actually have increased,” Abou-Chadi said. “It’s not just about actual hardship but also about the worry – that threat to social and economic status.” Thus far, the AfD has made little attempt to play a housing card, while in Portugal , Chega focused more on corruption than on a crisis aggravated – in cities such as Lisbon and Porto – by a huge boom in holiday lets and high-earning digital nomads. “But the scope for housing to become a highly significant factor in the far-right vote is very clearly there, and will only increase in the future,” said Vicente Valentim, a University of Oxford specialist on Europe’s far right. View image in fullscreen The squatters’ collective Mokum Kraakt has squatted a building on Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal, in late 2022. The squatters took over the building because of the housing and energy crisis. The collective believes that the municipality of Amsterdam and the government should approach the housing crisis differently. Photograph: ANP/Alamy Mainstream parties are starting to awaken to the threat. In January, big city mayors demanded an urgent focus on more affordable, qualitative and sustainable housing, while MEPs and housing ministers across the bloc called for housing – which is not an EU competence – to be made a top priority. Rajagopal, who recently reported on the Dutch housing crisis , said a first step should be to enshrine affordable, adequate and secure housing as a legal right. “EU countries have a long and laudable tradition of social protection, of welfarism,” he said. “But when it comes to recognition of housing as a legal human right, Europe is lagging behind international law. EU citizens cannot go to their national courts over housing. European countries recognise this, but are not doing anything about it.” Beyond that, the housing crisis in Europe – including the UK – was a product of “treating housing like any other commodity, to be bought and sold”, and of abandoning state planning, Rajagopal said. “Europe drank the 1980s Kool-Aid … markets were good, planning bad,” he said. “But markets only really take care of themselves. If you also abandon state planning, nobody’s supplying housing. And that’s what allows the PVV, for example, to blame migrants for the Dutch crisis when there is no evidence migrants are to blame. “If we want to stop the rise of the far right, starve it of some oxygen, things like housing have to be seen as fundamental rights.” View image in fullscreen Demonstration of movements for the right to housing in Rome, 2022. Photograph: Andrea Sabbadini/Alamy Sorcha Edwards, the secretary general of the NGO Housing Europe, agreed. “Obviously, we need to build more,” she said. “But supply isn’t the only answer. It’s what kind of housing we build, and with what kind of financing.” A market-first approach to housing – relying on private, profit-driven capital, and on charities to mop up the mess – now needed to make way for “patient, public-interest financing”, with “social conditionality and strings attached”, Edwards said. “There’s going to have to be a real cultural shift. The backbone has to be the limited profit sector. Not just municipal housing, but alternative forms of ownership, like cooperatives. We absolutely have to build with the right kind of money.” Explore more on these topics Europe Europe's housing crisis The far right Housing Communities Germany Portugal Netherlands news Share Reuse this content Composite: Guardian Design/Reuters/Getty Images/Alamy View image in fullscreen Composite: Guardian Design/Reuters/Getty Images/Alamy Composite: Guardian Design/Reuters/Getty Images/Alamy View image in fullscreen Composite: Guardian Design/Reuters/Getty Images/Alamy Composite: Guardian Design/Reuters/Getty Images/Alamy View image in fullscreen Composite: Guardian Design/Reuters/Getty Images/Alamy Composite: Guardian Design/Reuters/Getty Images/Alamy View image in fullscreen Composite: Guardian Design/Reuters/Getty Images/Alamy Composite: Guardian Design/Reuters/Getty Images/Alamy Composite: Guardian Design/Reuters/Getty Images/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old Fix Europe’s housing crisis or risk fuelling the far-right, UN expert warns This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Fix Europe’s housing crisis or risk fuelling the far-right, UN expert warns This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Fix Europe’s housing crisis or risk fuelling the far-right, UN expert warns This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Unaffordable rents and property prices risk becoming a key political battleground across the continent Higher costs and cramped conditions: the impact of Europe’s housing crisis ‘Everything’s just … on hold’: the Netherlands’ next-level housing crisis Unaffordable rents and property prices risk becoming a key political battleground across the continent Higher costs and cramped conditions: the impact of Europe’s housing crisis ‘Everything’s just … on hold’: the Netherlands’ next-level housing crisis Unaffordable rents and property prices risk becoming a key political battleground across the continent Spiralling rents and sky-high property prices risk becoming a key battleground of European politics as far-right and populist parties start to exploit growing public anger over the continent’s housing crisis, experts have said. Weeks before European parliament elections in which far-right parties are forecast to finish first in nine EU member states and second or third in another nine, housing has the potential to become as potent a driver of far-right support as immigration. “Far-right parties prosper when they can exploit the social gaps that emerge out of underinvestment and inadequate government planning … and when they can blame outsiders,” said the UN’s special rapporteur on the right to adequate housing. “That’s the situation many EU countries are now in,” Balakrishnan Rajagopal told the Guardian. “The housing crisis is no longer affecting just low earners, migrants, single-parent families, but the middle classes. This is the social issue of the 21st century.” View image in fullscreen Protesters march on the street while carrying a small house during a housing demonstration, January 2024. Photograph: SOPA Images Limited/Alamy Shortages of affordable housing have sparked protests in Lisbon , Amsterdam , Prague, Milan and – outside the EU – London , with young people in particular raging against rents swallowing half their incomes and mortgages 10 times an average salary. The issue was a top concern for voters in last year’s Dutch elections, won by the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of the anti-Islam Geert Wilders, and it played into the rise in support for Portugal’s Chega, which almost trebled its vote share in March . “It’s a theme that ticks a lot of current boxes” for far-right parties, said Catherine Fieschi, of the European University Institute. “It’s easy to frame it as an elites-versus-the-people issue – and to claim migrants are being treated better than nationals.” Eurostat data shows that across the 27-member bloc, house prices soared by 47% between 2010 and 2022, with rents rising 18% over the same period. In some countries more than a fifth of households spend 40% or more of their net income on housing. Recent academic research has established a clear link between rising rents and votes for the far right – even without strong anti-immigration messaging. Tarik Abou-Chadi , an EU politics specialist and co-author of a study that found rising rents were reflected locally in growing support for the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party in Germany, said “fear of status loss” was a key factor. “This data shows housing is now part of a broader package of economic and social threats and insecurities fuelling anxiety,” he said. “The fear you may have to move home because you can’t afford it leads to a rise in radical-right support.” View image in fullscreen Political art protesting high rents & housing problems on building in Kreuzberg, Berlin. Rising rents are associated with increasing support for the far-right AfD in Germany, according to research. Photograph: Eden Breitz/Alamy The research combined detailed rental data with local responses to Germany’s annual Socio-Economic Panel household opinion survey to show increasing rents were associated with greater support for the far-right AfD, especially among low-income tenants. Much of the AfD’s support is in more left-behind rural regions, where rents have stayed relatively low, and the effect was even stronger in urban areas, Abou-Chadi said, providing a possible explanation for the party’s rising vote share in cities. “What’s interesting is that the relationship is there even when people’s rents may not actually have increased,” Abou-Chadi said. “It’s not just about actual hardship but also about the worry – that threat to social and economic status.” Thus far, the AfD has made little attempt to play a housing card, while in Portugal , Chega focused more on corruption than on a crisis aggravated – in cities such as Lisbon and Porto – by a huge boom in holiday lets and high-earning digital nomads. “But the scope for housing to become a highly significant factor in the far-right vote is very clearly there, and will only increase in the future,” said Vicente Valentim, a University of Oxford specialist on Europe’s far right. View image in fullscreen The squatters’ collective Mokum Kraakt has squatted a building on Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal, in late 2022. The squatters took over the building because of the housing and energy crisis. The collective believes that the municipality of Amsterdam and the government should approach the housing crisis differently. Photograph: ANP/Alamy Mainstream parties are starting to awaken to the threat. In January, big city mayors demanded an urgent focus on more affordable, qualitative and sustainable housing, while MEPs and housing ministers across the bloc called for housing – which is not an EU competence – to be made a top priority. Rajagopal, who recently reported on the Dutch housing crisis , said a first step should be to enshrine affordable, adequate and secure housing as a legal right. “EU countries have a long and laudable tradition of social protection, of welfarism,” he said. “But when it comes to recognition of housing as a legal human right, Europe is lagging behind international law. EU citizens cannot go to their national courts over housing. European countries recognise this, but are not doing anything about it.” Beyond that, the housing crisis in Europe – including the UK – was a product of “treating housing like any other commodity, to be bought and sold”, and of abandoning state planning, Rajagopal said. “Europe drank the 1980s Kool-Aid … markets were good, planning bad,” he said. “But markets only really take care of themselves. If you also abandon state planning, nobody’s supplying housing. And that’s what allows the PVV, for example, to blame migrants for the Dutch crisis when there is no evidence migrants are to blame. “If we want to stop the rise of the far right, starve it of some oxygen, things like housing have to be seen as fundamental rights.” View image in fullscreen Demonstration of movements for the right to housing in Rome, 2022. Photograph: Andrea Sabbadini/Alamy Sorcha Edwards, the secretary general of the NGO Housing Europe, agreed. “Obviously, we need to build more,” she said. “But supply isn’t the only answer. It’s what kind of housing we build, and with what kind of financing.” A market-first approach to housing – relying on private, profit-driven capital, and on charities to mop up the mess – now needed to make way for “patient, public-interest financing”, with “social conditionality and strings attached”, Edwards said. “There’s going to have to be a real cultural shift. The backbone has to be the limited profit sector. Not just municipal housing, but alternative forms of ownership, like cooperatives. We absolutely have to build with the right kind of money.” Explore more on these topics Europe Europe's housing crisis The far right Housing Communities Germany Portugal Netherlands news Share Reuse this content Spiralling rents and sky-high property prices risk becoming a key battleground of European politics as far-right and populist parties start to exploit growing public anger over the continent’s housing crisis, experts have said. Weeks before European parliament elections in which far-right parties are forecast to finish first in nine EU member states and second or third in another nine, housing has the potential to become as potent a driver of far-right support as immigration. “Far-right parties prosper when they can exploit the social gaps that emerge out of underinvestment and inadequate government planning … and when they can blame outsiders,” said the UN’s special rapporteur on the right to adequate housing. “That’s the situation many EU countries are now in,” Balakrishnan Rajagopal told the Guardian. “The housing crisis is no longer affecting just low earners, migrants, single-parent families, but the middle classes. This is the social issue of the 21st century.” View image in fullscreen Protesters march on the street while carrying a small house during a housing demonstration, January 2024. Photograph: SOPA Images Limited/Alamy Shortages of affordable housing have sparked protests in Lisbon , Amsterdam , Prague, Milan and – outside the EU – London , with young people in particular raging against rents swallowing half their incomes and mortgages 10 times an average salary. The issue was a top concern for voters in last year’s Dutch elections, won by the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of the anti-Islam Geert Wilders, and it played into the rise in support for Portugal’s Chega, which almost trebled its vote share in March . “It’s a theme that ticks a lot of current boxes” for far-right parties, said Catherine Fieschi, of the European University Institute. “It’s easy to frame it as an elites-versus-the-people issue – and to claim migrants are being treated better than nationals.” Eurostat data shows that across the 27-member bloc, house prices soared by 47% between 2010 and 2022, with rents rising 18% over the same period. In some countries more than a fifth of households spend 40% or more of their net income on housing. Recent academic research has established a clear link between rising rents and votes for the far right – even without strong anti-immigration messaging. Tarik Abou-Chadi , an EU politics specialist and co-author of a study that found rising rents were reflected locally in growing support for the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party in Germany, said “fear of status loss” was a key factor. “This data shows housing is now part of a broader package of economic and social threats and insecurities fuelling anxiety,” he said. “The fear you may have to move home because you can’t afford it leads to a rise in radical-right support.” View image in fullscreen Political art protesting high rents & housing problems on building in Kreuzberg, Berlin. Rising rents are associated with increasing support for the far-right AfD in Germany, according to research. Photograph: Eden Breitz/Alamy The research combined detailed rental data with local responses to Germany’s annual Socio-Economic Panel household opinion survey to show increasing rents were associated with greater support for the far-right AfD, especially among low-income tenants. Much of the AfD’s support is in more left-behind rural regions, where rents have stayed relatively low, and the effect was even stronger in urban areas, Abou-Chadi said, providing a possible explanation for the party’s rising vote share in cities. “What’s interesting is that the relationship is there even when people’s rents may not actually have increased,” Abou-Chadi said. “It’s not just about actual hardship but also about the worry – that threat to social and economic status.” Thus far, the AfD has made little attempt to play a housing card, while in Portugal , Chega focused more on corruption than on a crisis aggravated – in cities such as Lisbon and Porto – by a huge boom in holiday lets and high-earning digital nomads. “But the scope for housing to become a highly significant factor in the far-right vote is very clearly there, and will only increase in the future,” said Vicente Valentim, a University of Oxford specialist on Europe’s far right. View image in fullscreen The squatters’ collective Mokum Kraakt has squatted a building on Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal, in late 2022. The squatters took over the building because of the housing and energy crisis. The collective believes that the municipality of Amsterdam and the government should approach the housing crisis differently. Photograph: ANP/Alamy Mainstream parties are starting to awaken to the threat. In January, big city mayors demanded an urgent focus on more affordable, qualitative and sustainable housing, while MEPs and housing ministers across the bloc called for housing – which is not an EU competence – to be made a top priority. Rajagopal, who recently reported on the Dutch housing crisis , said a first step should be to enshrine affordable, adequate and secure housing as a legal right. “EU countries have a long and laudable tradition of social protection, of welfarism,” he said. “But when it comes to recognition of housing as a legal human right, Europe is lagging behind international law. EU citizens cannot go to their national courts over housing. European countries recognise this, but are not doing anything about it.” Beyond that, the housing crisis in Europe – including the UK – was a product of “treating housing like any other commodity, to be bought and sold”, and of abandoning state planning, Rajagopal said. “Europe drank the 1980s Kool-Aid … markets were good, planning bad,” he said. “But markets only really take care of themselves. If you also abandon state planning, nobody’s supplying housing. And that’s what allows the PVV, for example, to blame migrants for the Dutch crisis when there is no evidence migrants are to blame. “If we want to stop the rise of the far right, starve it of some oxygen, things like housing have to be seen as fundamental rights.” View image in fullscreen Demonstration of movements for the right to housing in Rome, 2022. Photograph: Andrea Sabbadini/Alamy Sorcha Edwards, the secretary general of the NGO Housing Europe, agreed. “Obviously, we need to build more,” she said. “But supply isn’t the only answer. It’s what kind of housing we build, and with what kind of financing.” A market-first approach to housing – relying on private, profit-driven capital, and on charities to mop up the mess – now needed to make way for “patient, public-interest financing”, with “social conditionality and strings attached”, Edwards said. “There’s going to have to be a real cultural shift. The backbone has to be the limited profit sector. Not just municipal housing, but alternative forms of ownership, like cooperatives. We absolutely have to build with the right kind of money.” Explore more on these topics Europe Europe's housing crisis The far right Housing Communities Germany Portugal Netherlands news Share Reuse this content Spiralling rents and sky-high property prices risk becoming a key battleground of European politics as far-right and populist parties start to exploit growing public anger over the continent’s housing crisis, experts have said. Weeks before European parliament elections in which far-right parties are forecast to finish first in nine EU member states and second or third in another nine, housing has the potential to become as potent a driver of far-right support as immigration. “Far-right parties prosper when they can exploit the social gaps that emerge out of underinvestment and inadequate government planning … and when they can blame outsiders,” said the UN’s special rapporteur on the right to adequate housing. “That’s the situation many EU countries are now in,” Balakrishnan Rajagopal told the Guardian. “The housing crisis is no longer affecting just low earners, migrants, single-parent families, but the middle classes. This is the social issue of the 21st century.” View image in fullscreen Protesters march on the street while carrying a small house during a housing demonstration, January 2024. Photograph: SOPA Images Limited/Alamy Shortages of affordable housing have sparked protests in Lisbon , Amsterdam , Prague, Milan and – outside the EU – London , with young people in particular raging against rents swallowing half their incomes and mortgages 10 times an average salary. The issue was a top concern for voters in last year’s Dutch elections, won by the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of the anti-Islam Geert Wilders, and it played into the rise in support for Portugal’s Chega, which almost trebled its vote share in March . “It’s a theme that ticks a lot of current boxes” for far-right parties, said Catherine Fieschi, of the European University Institute. “It’s easy to frame it as an elites-versus-the-people issue – and to claim migrants are being treated better than nationals.” Eurostat data shows that across the 27-member bloc, house prices soared by 47% between 2010 and 2022, with rents rising 18% over the same period. In some countries more than a fifth of households spend 40% or more of their net income on housing. Recent academic research has established a clear link between rising rents and votes for the far right – even without strong anti-immigration messaging. Tarik Abou-Chadi , an EU politics specialist and co-author of a study that found rising rents were reflected locally in growing support for the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party in Germany, said “fear of status loss” was a key factor. “This data shows housing is now part of a broader package of economic and social threats and insecurities fuelling anxiety,” he said. “The fear you may have to move home because you can’t afford it leads to a rise in radical-right support.” View image in fullscreen Political art protesting high rents & housing problems on building in Kreuzberg, Berlin. Rising rents are associated with increasing support for the far-right AfD in Germany, according to research. Photograph: Eden Breitz/Alamy The research combined detailed rental data with local responses to Germany’s annual Socio-Economic Panel household opinion survey to show increasing rents were associated with greater support for the far-right AfD, especially among low-income tenants. Much of the AfD’s support is in more left-behind rural regions, where rents have stayed relatively low, and the effect was even stronger in urban areas, Abou-Chadi said, providing a possible explanation for the party’s rising vote share in cities. “What’s interesting is that the relationship is there even when people’s rents may not actually have increased,” Abou-Chadi said. “It’s not just about actual hardship but also about the worry – that threat to social and economic status.” Thus far, the AfD has made little attempt to play a housing card, while in Portugal , Chega focused more on corruption than on a crisis aggravated – in cities such as Lisbon and Porto – by a huge boom in holiday lets and high-earning digital nomads. “But the scope for housing to become a highly significant factor in the far-right vote is very clearly there, and will only increase in the future,” said Vicente Valentim, a University of Oxford specialist on Europe’s far right. View image in fullscreen The squatters’ collective Mokum Kraakt has squatted a building on Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal, in late 2022. The squatters took over the building because of the housing and energy crisis. The collective believes that the municipality of Amsterdam and the government should approach the housing crisis differently. Photograph: ANP/Alamy Mainstream parties are starting to awaken to the threat. In January, big city mayors demanded an urgent focus on more affordable, qualitative and sustainable housing, while MEPs and housing ministers across the bloc called for housing – which is not an EU competence – to be made a top priority. Rajagopal, who recently reported on the Dutch housing crisis , said a first step should be to enshrine affordable, adequate and secure housing as a legal right. “EU countries have a long and laudable tradition of social protection, of welfarism,” he said. “But when it comes to recognition of housing as a legal human right, Europe is lagging behind international law. EU citizens cannot go to their national courts over housing. European countries recognise this, but are not doing anything about it.” Beyond that, the housing crisis in Europe – including the UK – was a product of “treating housing like any other commodity, to be bought and sold”, and of abandoning state planning, Rajagopal said. “Europe drank the 1980s Kool-Aid … markets were good, planning bad,” he said. “But markets only really take care of themselves. If you also abandon state planning, nobody’s supplying housing. And that’s what allows the PVV, for example, to blame migrants for the Dutch crisis when there is no evidence migrants are to blame. “If we want to stop the rise of the far right, starve it of some oxygen, things like housing have to be seen as fundamental rights.” View image in fullscreen Demonstration of movements for the right to housing in Rome, 2022. Photograph: Andrea Sabbadini/Alamy Sorcha Edwards, the secretary general of the NGO Housing Europe, agreed. “Obviously, we need to build more,” she said. “But supply isn’t the only answer. It’s what kind of housing we build, and with what kind of financing.” A market-first approach to housing – relying on private, profit-driven capital, and on charities to mop up the mess – now needed to make way for “patient, public-interest financing”, with “social conditionality and strings attached”, Edwards said. “There’s going to have to be a real cultural shift. The backbone has to be the limited profit sector. Not just municipal housing, but alternative forms of ownership, like cooperatives. We absolutely have to build with the right kind of money.” Spiralling rents and sky-high property prices risk becoming a key battleground of European politics as far-right and populist parties start to exploit growing public anger over the continent’s housing crisis, experts have said. Weeks before European parliament elections in which far-right parties are forecast to finish first in nine EU member states and second or third in another nine, housing has the potential to become as potent a driver of far-right support as immigration. “Far-right parties prosper when they can exploit the social gaps that emerge out of underinvestment and inadequate government planning … and when they can blame outsiders,” said the UN’s special rapporteur on the right to adequate housing. “That’s the situation many EU countries are now in,” Balakrishnan Rajagopal told the Guardian. “The housing crisis is no longer affecting just low earners, migrants, single-parent families, but the middle classes. This is the social issue of the 21st century.” View image in fullscreen Protesters march on the street while carrying a small house during a housing demonstration, January 2024. Photograph: SOPA Images Limited/Alamy Shortages of affordable housing have sparked protests in Lisbon , Amsterdam , Prague, Milan and – outside the EU – London , with young people in particular raging against rents swallowing half their incomes and mortgages 10 times an average salary. The issue was a top concern for voters in last year’s Dutch elections, won by the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of the anti-Islam Geert Wilders, and it played into the rise in support for Portugal’s Chega, which almost trebled its vote share in March . “It’s a theme that ticks a lot of current boxes” for far-right parties, said Catherine Fieschi, of the European University Institute. “It’s easy to frame it as an elites-versus-the-people issue – and to claim migrants are being treated better than nationals.” Eurostat data shows that across the 27-member bloc, house prices soared by 47% between 2010 and 2022, with rents rising 18% over the same period. In some countries more than a fifth of households spend 40% or more of their net income on housing. Recent academic research has established a clear link between rising rents and votes for the far right – even without strong anti-immigration messaging. Tarik Abou-Chadi , an EU politics specialist and co-author of a study that found rising rents were reflected locally in growing support for the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party in Germany, said “fear of status loss” was a key factor. “This data shows housing is now part of a broader package of economic and social threats and insecurities fuelling anxiety,” he said. “The fear you may have to move home because you can’t afford it leads to a rise in radical-right support.” View image in fullscreen Political art protesting high rents & housing problems on building in Kreuzberg, Berlin. Rising rents are associated with increasing support for the far-right AfD in Germany, according to research. Photograph: Eden Breitz/Alamy The research combined detailed rental data with local responses to Germany’s annual Socio-Economic Panel household opinion survey to show increasing rents were associated with greater support for the far-right AfD, especially among low-income tenants. Much of the AfD’s support is in more left-behind rural regions, where rents have stayed relatively low, and the effect was even stronger in urban areas, Abou-Chadi said, providing a possible explanation for the party’s rising vote share in cities. “What’s interesting is that the relationship is there even when people’s rents may not actually have increased,” Abou-Chadi said. “It’s not just about actual hardship but also about the worry – that threat to social and economic status.” Thus far, the AfD has made little attempt to play a housing card, while in Portugal , Chega focused more on corruption than on a crisis aggravated – in cities such as Lisbon and Porto – by a huge boom in holiday lets and high-earning digital nomads. “But the scope for housing to become a highly significant factor in the far-right vote is very clearly there, and will only increase in the future,” said Vicente Valentim, a University of Oxford specialist on Europe’s far right. View image in fullscreen The squatters’ collective Mokum Kraakt has squatted a building on Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal, in late 2022. The squatters took over the building because of the housing and energy crisis. The collective believes that the municipality of Amsterdam and the government should approach the housing crisis differently. Photograph: ANP/Alamy Mainstream parties are starting to awaken to the threat. In January, big city mayors demanded an urgent focus on more affordable, qualitative and sustainable housing, while MEPs and housing ministers across the bloc called for housing – which is not an EU competence – to be made a top priority. Rajagopal, who recently reported on the Dutch housing crisis , said a first step should be to enshrine affordable, adequate and secure housing as a legal right. “EU countries have a long and laudable tradition of social protection, of welfarism,” he said. “But when it comes to recognition of housing as a legal human right, Europe is lagging behind international law. EU citizens cannot go to their national courts over housing. European countries recognise this, but are not doing anything about it.” Beyond that, the housing crisis in Europe – including the UK – was a product of “treating housing like any other commodity, to be bought and sold”, and of abandoning state planning, Rajagopal said. “Europe drank the 1980s Kool-Aid … markets were good, planning bad,” he said. “But markets only really take care of themselves. If you also abandon state planning, nobody’s supplying housing. And that’s what allows the PVV, for example, to blame migrants for the Dutch crisis when there is no evidence migrants are to blame. “If we want to stop the rise of the far right, starve it of some oxygen, things like housing have to be seen as fundamental rights.” View image in fullscreen Demonstration of movements for the right to housing in Rome, 2022. Photograph: Andrea Sabbadini/Alamy Sorcha Edwards, the secretary general of the NGO Housing Europe, agreed. “Obviously, we need to build more,” she said. “But supply isn’t the only answer. It’s what kind of housing we build, and with what kind of financing.” A market-first approach to housing – relying on private, profit-driven capital, and on charities to mop up the mess – now needed to make way for “patient, public-interest financing”, with “social conditionality and strings attached”, Edwards said. “There’s going to have to be a real cultural shift. The backbone has to be the limited profit sector. Not just municipal housing, but alternative forms of ownership, like cooperatives. We absolutely have to build with the right kind of money.” Spiralling rents and sky-high property prices risk becoming a key battleground of European politics as far-right and populist parties start to exploit growing public anger over the continent’s housing crisis, experts have said. Weeks before European parliament elections in which far-right parties are forecast to finish first in nine EU member states and second or third in another nine, housing has the potential to become as potent a driver of far-right support as immigration. “Far-right parties prosper when they can exploit the social gaps that emerge out of underinvestment and inadequate government planning … and when they can blame outsiders,” said the UN’s special rapporteur on the right to adequate housing. “That’s the situation many EU countries are now in,” Balakrishnan Rajagopal told the Guardian. “The housing crisis is no longer affecting just low earners, migrants, single-parent families, but the middle classes. This is the social issue of the 21st century.” Shortages of affordable housing have sparked protests in Lisbon , Amsterdam , Prague, Milan and – outside the EU – London , with young people in particular raging against rents swallowing half their incomes and mortgages 10 times an average salary. The issue was a top concern for voters in last year’s Dutch elections, won by the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of the anti-Islam Geert Wilders, and it played into the rise in support for Portugal’s Chega, which almost trebled its vote share in March . “It’s a theme that ticks a lot of current boxes” for far-right parties, said Catherine Fieschi, of the European University Institute. “It’s easy to frame it as an elites-versus-the-people issue – and to claim migrants are being treated better than nationals.” Eurostat data shows that across the 27-member bloc, house prices soared by 47% between 2010 and 2022, with rents rising 18% over the same period. In some countries more than a fifth of households spend 40% or more of their net income on housing. Recent academic research has established a clear link between rising rents and votes for the far right – even without strong anti-immigration messaging. Tarik Abou-Chadi , an EU politics specialist and co-author of a study that found rising rents were reflected locally in growing support for the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party in Germany, said “fear of status loss” was a key factor. “This data shows housing is now part of a broader package of economic and social threats and insecurities fuelling anxiety,” he said. “The fear you may have to move home because you can’t afford it leads to a rise in radical-right support.” The research combined detailed rental data with local responses to Germany’s annual Socio-Economic Panel household opinion survey to show increasing rents were associated with greater support for the far-right AfD, especially among low-income tenants. Much of the AfD’s support is in more left-behind rural regions, where rents have stayed relatively low, and the effect was even stronger in urban areas, Abou-Chadi said, providing a possible explanation for the party’s rising vote share in cities. “What’s interesting is that the relationship is there even when people’s rents may not actually have increased,” Abou-Chadi said. “It’s not just about actual hardship but also about the worry – that threat to social and economic status.” Thus far, the AfD has made little attempt to play a housing card, while in Portugal , Chega focused more on corruption than on a crisis aggravated – in cities such as Lisbon and Porto – by a huge boom in holiday lets and high-earning digital nomads. “But the scope for housing to become a highly significant factor in the far-right vote is very clearly there, and will only increase in the future,” said Vicente Valentim, a University of Oxford specialist on Europe’s far right. Mainstream parties are starting to awaken to the threat. In January, big city mayors demanded an urgent focus on more affordable, qualitative and sustaina
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
‘I’ve had massive highs and deep lows’: Edward Timpson on winning for the Tories and being sacked by Liz Truss
Edward Timpson: ‘Maybe I didn’t feel I was ruthless enough.’ Photograph: Linda Nylind/The Guardian Sixteen years after he entered parliament, the former minister has had enough. He talks about fighting for children, backing austerity, and his least favourite Conservative PM By Simon Hattenstone “I do question whether I’m actually a politician,” Edward Timpson says. “It’s a bit late now, isn’t it?” I say. He laughs. “Yes, it’s a question I should have asked at the start.” Why does he question it? “Because … maybe I didn’t feel I was ruthless enough, not sharp-elbowed enough.” However much he is in denial, the Conservative MP is definitely a politician, though not for much longer. He joined parliament in 2008 as member for Crewe and Nantwich after the death of Labour’s Gwyneth Dunwoody, who had represented the area for 34 years, lost his seat by 48 votes after three recounts in 2017, and returned to parliament in 2019 representing the neighbouring seat of Eddisbury. Now a boyish 50, he’s had enough, and is standing down at the next election. Timpson is certainly no conveyor-belt MP. He is reserved, a little shy and deeply serious, with a mission to make the life of the country’s disadvantaged children better. He is also supremely fit (the week we meet he is about to run his 16th London marathon) and equally obsessed with his family and Manchester City football club. When he’s not showing me pictures of his four children and wife (“She was born on the same day as Kate Moss, though my wife is the more beautiful one”), he’s sharing photos of his mother with City players shortly before she died. When I match him with a photo of my daughter wearing a signed shirt Kevin De Bruyne gave her, he can’t contain himself. “Oh, no way. Wowzers ! Blimey. Oh my God! Wowwwww! ” We meet in a park next to the Foundling Museum in London – his choice. Timpson belongs to the Manchester shoe-repairing and key-cutting dynasty that goes back five generations. His father, John Timpson, was worth an estimated £190m in the 2020 Rich List. The Timpson Group is not just a great British success story; it’s a success story with a soul. Former offenders constitute 10% of its employees, and it offers staff free use of holiday homes, weekly bonuses for exceeding targets, and days off for birthdays, a child’s first day at school, becoming a grandparent and pet bereavements. View image in fullscreen Timpson with his wife, Julia, after winning the Crewe and Nantwich by-election in 2008. Photograph: Anthony Devlin/PA But this has little to do with Edward Timpson. The only time he worked for the family business was in his late teens, earning money to travel the world. All the Timpson kids were given work experience to see if they were suited to a career in the company. For Edward, the pain is still fresh. “I was scouring a shoe, and my thumb went into the scourer and I sliced the top of it. It was hanging off, flapping here.” He wobbles the top of his thumb, which has healed. “Slightly embarrassing. I passed out on the shop floor in front of customers. I remember thinking: ‘I don’t think this is for me.’” But the company’s values had already seeped into Timpson’s bones. As had those of his mother, Alex, a foster carer who looked after almost 90 children . He was about six years old when she started fostering. Edward, the youngest of three children, wasn’t best pleased. He responded in the only way he knew how – sulking, and retreating to his bedroom. “That was my reaction to the first children who came. They were three and five, going around on my tricycle saying: ‘Fuck fuck fuck.’ I didn’t normally cause trouble, but on that occasion I barricaded myself in the bedroom and refused to come out till they left.” He soon discovered he’d have to change his plans. “I thought they’d be gone in a few minutes, but it turned out to be quite a few weeks later.” Over time, Timpson grew to love all the foster children as much as his mother did. The house rule was that the fostered children had to be younger than him, and he soon became his mother’s assistant. “We had a lot of babies, and as Mum was so exhausted I’d say: ‘Oh, I’ll do the 10pm feed’ because then I could stay up and watch whatever was on TV.” His love of children and his desire to improve their lives have shaped everything he’s done since. As a barrister, he spent his time in the family courts, and towards the end only did cases involving children. When he went into politics he was again fuelled largely by this single issue. Timpson’s successful campaign in the 2008 byelection was a baptism of fire. The seat had always been Labour’s, and the party, then led by Gordon Brown, was desperate to hold it. Things quickly got nasty. Labour painted him as a toff who didn’t know how to relate to ordinary people. It was both unfair and foolish. The Timpsons weren’t posh; they were just successful. “I wondered what the hell I’d walked into. The ferocity of it and how they made it the central plank of their campaign was a shock to the system, particularly when you’ve never been involved in politics before.” But it backfired on Labour. “They hadn’t done their homework, so it was quite easy to push back and say, ‘Well, actually we’re cobblers from Wythenshawe in Manchester, and my parents have fostered almost 90 children; what d’you think about that?’” The irony was that his Labour rival, Tamsin Dunwoody (Gwyneth’s daughter), was in Burke’s Peerage because her maternal grandmother, Norah Phillips, had been given a life peerage in 1964. Crewe and Nantwich went Conservative for the first time. A couple of years ago he was at a Manchester City match with his fellow Tory MP and City fan Karen Bradley. She pointed out another politician sitting near them – Labour’s Alex Norris. At half-time, they all went for a beer. “He said: ‘You don’t know who I am, do you?’ I said: ‘Course I do. You’re Alex Norris, the MP for Nottingham North.’ He said: ‘No, I’m the guy who wore a top hat and tails and was following you around during the byelection in Crewe and Nantwich.’ I thought: ‘You bugger! ’” Unlike most MPs, Timpson had not spent a lifetime dabbling in party politics. In many ways he was a political virgin. Yes, he had studied politics at Durham University, but that was international politics – an academic exercise rather than a practical one. He didn’t even join a party till 2005, three years before he was elected. What makes him a Conservative? “I believe in everybody getting the best chance to be the best they can be. The philosophy of one nation is where every citizen is as good as another.” Couldn’t that just as easily be Labour or Lib Dem? “I do believe in sound money and you can’t leave debt hanging over for generations. The economic backdrop to what drives a Labour administration might be quite different, particularly on borrowing to invest. The idea you would spend money you don’t have in government isn’t one that would sit comfortably with me.” Timpson’s favourite time in government was the 2010-15 coalition. He believes it was a victory for non-tribalism and serious politics. “Although I think there were elements of the austerity programme where we got the balance wrong, as an overall approach I understood the necessity of it.” How did they get the balance wrong? “There were some things we did to save money around benefits that were targeted in the wrong areas and in hindsight could have been done in a much fairer and, dare I say it, compassionate way.” View image in fullscreen Labour activists attempt to portray Timpson as a toff during the 2008 by-election campaign. Photograph: Lorne Campbell/Guzelian From a personal point of view, he couldn’t have been happier under David Cameron’s leadership. Between 2012 and 2017 he served as undersecretary and then minister for children and families . He’s proud of what he achieved for adopted and cared-for children. “We invested in an adoption support fund that saw the number of children adopted rising significantly, reducing the time the process took, and that happened because the secretary of state, Michael Gove, let me get on with it. He was adopted himself and had a personal interest in it.” As a politician, he says, it was important for him to understand people’s lives, whether those of civil servants or cared-for children. In his department, he introduced an awards ceremony for unsung heroes. “My dad’s always believed in incentivising, and I took a leaf out of his book. See, my dad has had some influence on my life! At our pre-Christmas drinks, I got some trophies, probably from Timpson, and I asked all the team leaders who was the unsung hero on their team. It was one of the most enlightening moments in the department because suddenly they could see the point of why I was there and what we were doing.” Had nobody done it before? “No.” Why not? It’s hardly rocket science. “I don’t know.” Does he think many politicians lack emotional intelligence? “It’s easy to fall into the trap of briefings, charts and data, which can tell a story, but you have to back that up by experiencing what it’s like to walk in the shoes of the people whose lives you’re trying to improve. I had a group of care leavers I used to meet every couple of months over several years. So we got to know each other, and I got to understand their stories, their lives, and that gave me insight into the barriers stopping them getting on. It led to a change in policy. We got the DWP [Department of Work and Pensions] to flag when care leavers come into the benefits system in advance so they don’t end up with gaps in their support. If you don’t engage at that level you’ll never find out about the problems people face.” He cites this as one of his highs. As for the lows, there have been plenty. In May 2017, protesters spent three days on the roof of Timpson’s house in Cheshire. His family were terrified. “We had to leave under police protection for three days and we’d just had a baby three months before.” The protest was believed to be against forced adoption, something that Timpson had nothing to do with. A month later he was “dumped” at the general election, losing his seat to Labour. You can tell by the language he uses how painful it was, and how personally he took it. “It was devastating because it’s not just you. I had staff who had been with me since 2008 sobbing in the sports hall in Crewe. People have said: ‘Why the hell did you come back, having gone through that?’, and I thought: ‘It’s because I’ve still got something to offer.’ There aren’t many people in parliament, and particularly my own party, who’ve gathered the personal and professional experience I’ve got in children’s policy and children’s social care.” View image in fullscreen With David Cameron outside the Houses of Parliament. Photograph: Lewis Whyld/PA His second stint as an MP reached its zenith when he was appointed solicitor general in July 2022 after a mass resignation in protest at Boris Johnson’s handling of the Chris Pincher scandal. “It was the perfect mix for me because you’re part politician, part lawyer, and that’s probably what I am.” The problem was he made it clear he was championing Rishi Sunak in the leadership contest after Boris Johnson resigned. Within a day of becoming prime minister, Liz Truss sacked him. He had lasted 63 days. “Yes, I made the fatal error of uttering the words Rishi and Sunak in public during the leadership campaign.” He smiles. “The 63 days is longer than she was prime minister, so I do have that to hang on to.” It has been such a humiliating period for the Conservatives: three prime ministers over one parliament, myriad lies, scandals and resignations, and a political incoherence only matched by the populist brutality. What’s it like being in a party so at odds with many of your values? How does he feel, for example, about the DWP prosecuting carers who have made honest mistakes for benefits fraud? “There are definitely things that make me feel uncomfortable,” he says with typical understatement. One thing that saddens him is the deterioration in the tone of political discourse. “For somebody like me who is a consensus-builder, who tries to find a route through that people feel they can gravitate towards to make progress, it’s been quite a difficult period, which may explain why I haven’t had that same platform I had the first time around.” Since losing his job as solicitor general, he has been relegated to the backbenches. Has he ever felt ashamed of being part of this government? “The overwhelming sense is one of frustration that it’s a missed opportunity. The one time it was like ‘What the hell are we going to do next?’ was the night and the morning of the Liz Truss resignation; we were so far away from where we needed to be connecting with the public and demonstrating we were the answer to their problems.” How did it affect him? “It’s a hard one to swallow. The risk is that you completely disengage and lose interest. You don’t feel it’s your mission.” He says he re-engaged when Sunak took over. But he acknowledges there is plenty of work to be done to make the public trust politicians. “There’s been so much volatility since 2015. We’ve have more prime ministers in a short period of time than we’ve ever had, and that’s going to breed curiosity in some people, and contempt in others.” He has served under five Conservative prime ministers, and has no problem in ranking them. “David Cameron was for me the best. He gave me my job. He’s No 1. Then Rishi. Theresa. Boris. And finally Truss.” View image in fullscreen Timpson with other MPs before the 2017 London marathon. Photograph: Matthew Childs/Reuters Timpson is returning to his chambers to practise law and hopes to become a judge in the family courts. His two years away from politics in between 2017 and 2019 taught him that sometimes it’s easier to effect change outside parliament. Timpson is that rare creature – a politician who is backwards at coming forward. Does he wish he was leaving politics better known? He seems surprised by the question. “It depends what you’re better known for. I’m proud to be known as someone who actually achieved for children. I’ve got to be satisfied with that. I was never someone seeking the spotlight. But I did feel I had got to a point as children’s minister of state where I was capable of stepping up to the next level, and I would have loved to have had the opportunity to do that: to prove myself in cabinet – secretary of state for education or lord chancellor. So there’s a bit of regret that never happened. I say that as somebody who doesn’t blow my own trumpet – I probably haven’t done it enough – but I think I would have been quite good.” One thing puzzles me. Timpson consistently voted to send asylum seekers to Rwanda. I tell him I can’t believe that he would support a policy that the archbishop of Canterbury described as “outsourcing” our morality, and ask why he voted for it. “Loyalty,” he says simply. “I’m a team player.” Perhaps Timpson was too loyal. What does his wife, Julia, think of him leaving politics? “She feels even more than I do that I’ve been underutilised in the last four years. She feels a little bitter about that.” He reminds me that he’s only 50 and he’s got a lot of good work left in him. “I believe I’ve still got unfinished business, something significant in our country’s social policy to contribute.” So can he see a return to politics? Not as an MP, he says. A seat in the Lords? He smiles. As we head off he shows me more family photos. “I’ll quickly show you a picture of my kids and then I’ll let you go.” He looks so happy sharing his photos. So unlike a politician. We’ve talked about how disillusioned the public are with politics. Is he? “No because I’ve had massive highs and deep lows, but I’m still here and I’m moving on on my own terms. So politics has been good to me.” He pauses. “It’s also given me a slap in the face.” Explore more on these topics Goodbye to all that Conservatives Austerity features Share Reuse this content Edward Timpson: ‘Maybe I didn’t feel I was ruthless enough.’ Photograph: Linda Nylind/The Guardian Sixteen years after he entered parliament, the former minister has had enough. He talks about fighting for children, backing austerity, and his least favourite Conservative PM By Simon Hattenstone “I do question whether I’m actually a politician,” Edward Timpson says. “It’s a bit late now, isn’t it?” I say. He laughs. “Yes, it’s a question I should have asked at the start.” Why does he question it? “Because … maybe I didn’t feel I was ruthless enough, not sharp-elbowed enough.” However much he is in denial, the Conservative MP is definitely a politician, though not for much longer. He joined parliament in 2008 as member for Crewe and Nantwich after the death of Labour’s Gwyneth Dunwoody, who had represented the area for 34 years, lost his seat by 48 votes after three recounts in 2017, and returned to parliament in 2019 representing the neighbouring seat of Eddisbury. Now a boyish 50, he’s had enough, and is standing down at the next election. Timpson is certainly no conveyor-belt MP. He is reserved, a little shy and deeply serious, with a mission to make the life of the country’s disadvantaged children better. He is also supremely fit (the week we meet he is about to run his 16th London marathon) and equally obsessed with his family and Manchester City football club. When he’s not showing me pictures of his four children and wife (“She was born on the same day as Kate Moss, though my wife is the more beautiful one”), he’s sharing photos of his mother with City players shortly before she died. When I match him with a photo of my daughter wearing a signed shirt Kevin De Bruyne gave her, he can’t contain himself. “Oh, no way. Wowzers ! Blimey. Oh my God! Wowwwww! ” We meet in a park next to the Foundling Museum in London – his choice. Timpson belongs to the Manchester shoe-repairing and key-cutting dynasty that goes back five generations. His father, John Timpson, was worth an estimated £190m in the 2020 Rich List. The Timpson Group is not just a great British success story; it’s a success story with a soul. Former offenders constitute 10% of its employees, and it offers staff free use of holiday homes, weekly bonuses for exceeding targets, and days off for birthdays, a child’s first day at school, becoming a grandparent and pet bereavements. View image in fullscreen Timpson with his wife, Julia, after winning the Crewe and Nantwich by-election in 2008. Photograph: Anthony Devlin/PA But this has little to do with Edward Timpson. The only time he worked for the family business was in his late teens, earning money to travel the world. All the Timpson kids were given work experience to see if they were suited to a career in the company. For Edward, the pain is still fresh. “I was scouring a shoe, and my thumb went into the scourer and I sliced the top of it. It was hanging off, flapping here.” He wobbles the top of his thumb, which has healed. “Slightly embarrassing. I passed out on the shop floor in front of customers. I remember thinking: ‘I don’t think this is for me.’” But the company’s values had already seeped into Timpson’s bones. As had those of his mother, Alex, a foster carer who looked after almost 90 children . He was about six years old when she started fostering. Edward, the youngest of three children, wasn’t best pleased. He responded in the only way he knew how – sulking, and retreating to his bedroom. “That was my reaction to the first children who came. They were three and five, going around on my tricycle saying: ‘Fuck fuck fuck.’ I didn’t normally cause trouble, but on that occasion I barricaded myself in the bedroom and refused to come out till they left.” He soon discovered he’d have to change his plans. “I thought they’d be gone in a few minutes, but it turned out to be quite a few weeks later.” Over time, Timpson grew to love all the foster children as much as his mother did. The house rule was that the fostered children had to be younger than him, and he soon became his mother’s assistant. “We had a lot of babies, and as Mum was so exhausted I’d say: ‘Oh, I’ll do the 10pm feed’ because then I could stay up and watch whatever was on TV.” His love of children and his desire to improve their lives have shaped everything he’s done since. As a barrister, he spent his time in the family courts, and towards the end only did cases involving children. When he went into politics he was again fuelled largely by this single issue. Timpson’s successful campaign in the 2008 byelection was a baptism of fire. The seat had always been Labour’s, and the party, then led by Gordon Brown, was desperate to hold it. Things quickly got nasty. Labour painted him as a toff who didn’t know how to relate to ordinary people. It was both unfair and foolish. The Timpsons weren’t posh; they were just successful. “I wondered what the hell I’d walked into. The ferocity of it and how they made it the central plank of their campaign was a shock to the system, particularly when you’ve never been involved in politics before.” But it backfired on Labour. “They hadn’t done their homework, so it was quite easy to push back and say, ‘Well, actually we’re cobblers from Wythenshawe in Manchester, and my parents have fostered almost 90 children; what d’you think about that?’” The irony was that his Labour rival, Tamsin Dunwoody (Gwyneth’s daughter), was in Burke’s Peerage because her maternal grandmother, Norah Phillips, had been given a life peerage in 1964. Crewe and Nantwich went Conservative for the first time. A couple of years ago he was at a Manchester City match with his fellow Tory MP and City fan Karen Bradley. She pointed out another politician sitting near them – Labour’s Alex Norris. At half-time, they all went for a beer. “He said: ‘You don’t know who I am, do you?’ I said: ‘Course I do. You’re Alex Norris, the MP for Nottingham North.’ He said: ‘No, I’m the guy who wore a top hat and tails and was following you around during the byelection in Crewe and Nantwich.’ I thought: ‘You bugger! ’” Unlike most MPs, Timpson had not spent a lifetime dabbling in party politics. In many ways he was a political virgin. Yes, he had studied politics at Durham University, but that was international politics – an academic exercise rather than a practical one. He didn’t even join a party till 2005, three years before he was elected. What makes him a Conservative? “I believe in everybody getting the best chance to be the best they can be. The philosophy of one nation is where every citizen is as good as another.” Couldn’t that just as easily be Labour or Lib Dem? “I do believe in sound money and you can’t leave debt hanging over for generations. The economic backdrop to what drives a Labour administration might be quite different, particularly on borrowing to invest. The idea you would spend money you don’t have in government isn’t one that would sit comfortably with me.” Timpson’s favourite time in government was the 2010-15 coalition. He believes it was a victory for non-tribalism and serious politics. “Although I think there were elements of the austerity programme where we got the balance wrong, as an overall approach I understood the necessity of it.” How did they get the balance wrong? “There were some things we did to save money around benefits that were targeted in the wrong areas and in hindsight could have been done in a much fairer and, dare I say it, compassionate way.” View image in fullscreen Labour activists attempt to portray Timpson as a toff during the 2008 by-election campaign. Photograph: Lorne Campbell/Guzelian From a personal point of view, he couldn’t have been happier under David Cameron’s leadership. Between 2012 and 2017 he served as undersecretary and then minister for children and families . He’s proud of what he achieved for adopted and cared-for children. “We invested in an adoption support fund that saw the number of children adopted rising significantly, reducing the time the process took, and that happened because the secretary of state, Michael Gove, let me get on with it. He was adopted himself and had a personal interest in it.” As a politician, he says, it was important for him to understand people’s lives, whether those of civil servants or cared-for children. In his department, he introduced an awards ceremony for unsung heroes. “My dad’s always believed in incentivising, and I took a leaf out of his book. See, my dad has had some influence on my life! At our pre-Christmas drinks, I got some trophies, probably from Timpson, and I asked all the team leaders who was the unsung hero on their team. It was one of the most enlightening moments in the department because suddenly they could see the point of why I was there and what we were doing.” Had nobody done it before? “No.” Why not? It’s hardly rocket science. “I don’t know.” Does he think many politicians lack emotional intelligence? “It’s easy to fall into the trap of briefings, charts and data, which can tell a story, but you have to back that up by experiencing what it’s like to walk in the shoes of the people whose lives you’re trying to improve. I had a group of care leavers I used to meet every couple of months over several years. So we got to know each other, and I got to understand their stories, their lives, and that gave me insight into the barriers stopping them getting on. It led to a change in policy. We got the DWP [Department of Work and Pensions] to flag when care leavers come into the benefits system in advance so they don’t end up with gaps in their support. If you don’t engage at that level you’ll never find out about the problems people face.” He cites this as one of his highs. As for the lows, there have been plenty. In May 2017, protesters spent three days on the roof of Timpson’s house in Cheshire. His family were terrified. “We had to leave under police protection for three days and we’d just had a baby three months before.” The protest was believed to be against forced adoption, something that Timpson had nothing to do with. A month later he was “dumped” at the general election, losing his seat to Labour. You can tell by the language he uses how painful it was, and how personally he took it. “It was devastating because it’s not just you. I had staff who had been with me since 2008 sobbing in the sports hall in Crewe. People have said: ‘Why the hell did you come back, having gone through that?’, and I thought: ‘It’s because I’ve still got something to offer.’ There aren’t many people in parliament, and particularly my own party, who’ve gathered the personal and professional experience I’ve got in children’s policy and children’s social care.” View image in fullscreen With David Cameron outside the Houses of Parliament. Photograph: Lewis Whyld/PA His second stint as an MP reached its zenith when he was appointed solicitor general in July 2022 after a mass resignation in protest at Boris Johnson’s handling of the Chris Pincher scandal. “It was the perfect mix for me because you’re part politician, part lawyer, and that’s probably what I am.” The problem was he made it clear he was championing Rishi Sunak in the leadership contest after Boris Johnson resigned. Within a day of becoming prime minister, Liz Truss sacked him. He had lasted 63 days. “Yes, I made the fatal error of uttering the words Rishi and Sunak in public during the leadership campaign.” He smiles. “The 63 days is longer than she was prime minister, so I do have that to hang on to.” It has been such a humiliating period for the Conservatives: three prime ministers over one parliament, myriad lies, scandals and resignations, and a political incoherence only matched by the populist brutality. What’s it like being in a party so at odds with many of your values? How does he feel, for example, about the DWP prosecuting carers who have made honest mistakes for benefits fraud? “There are definitely things that make me feel uncomfortable,” he says with typical understatement. One thing that saddens him is the deterioration in the tone of political discourse. “For somebody like me who is a consensus-builder, who tries to find a route through that people feel they can gravitate towards to make progress, it’s been quite a difficult period, which may explain why I haven’t had that same platform I had the first time around.” Since losing his job as solicitor general, he has been relegated to the backbenches. Has he ever felt ashamed of being part of this government? “The overwhelming sense is one of frustration that it’s a missed opportunity. The one time it was like ‘What the hell are we going to do next?’ was the night and the morning of the Liz Truss resignation; we were so far away from where we needed to be connecting with the public and demonstrating we were the answer to their problems.” How did it affect him? “It’s a hard one to swallow. The risk is that you completely disengage and lose interest. You don’t feel it’s your mission.” He says he re-engaged when Sunak took over. But he acknowledges there is plenty of work to be done to make the public trust politicians. “There’s been so much volatility since 2015. We’ve have more prime ministers in a short period of time than we’ve ever had, and that’s going to breed curiosity in some people, and contempt in others.” He has served under five Conservative prime ministers, and has no problem in ranking them. “David Cameron was for me the best. He gave me my job. He’s No 1. Then Rishi. Theresa. Boris. And finally Truss.” View image in fullscreen Timpson with other MPs before the 2017 London marathon. Photograph: Matthew Childs/Reuters Timpson is returning to his chambers to practise law and hopes to become a judge in the family courts. His two years away from politics in between 2017 and 2019 taught him that sometimes it’s easier to effect change outside parliament. Timpson is that rare creature – a politician who is backwards at coming forward. Does he wish he was leaving politics better known? He seems surprised by the question. “It depends what you’re better known for. I’m proud to be known as someone who actually achieved for children. I’ve got to be satisfied with that. I was never someone seeking the spotlight. But I did feel I had got to a point as children’s minister of state where I was capable of stepping up to the next level, and I would have loved to have had the opportunity to do that: to prove myself in cabinet – secretary of state for education or lord chancellor. So there’s a bit of regret that never happened. I say that as somebody who doesn’t blow my own trumpet – I probably haven’t done it enough – but I think I would have been quite good.” One thing puzzles me. Timpson consistently voted to send asylum seekers to Rwanda. I tell him I can’t believe that he would support a policy that the archbishop of Canterbury described as “outsourcing” our morality, and ask why he voted for it. “Loyalty,” he says simply. “I’m a team player.” Perhaps Timpson was too loyal. What does his wife, Julia, think of him leaving politics? “She feels even more than I do that I’ve been underutilised in the last four years. She feels a little bitter about that.” He reminds me that he’s only 50 and he’s got a lot of good work left in him. “I believe I’ve still got unfinished business, something significant in our country’s social policy to contribute.” So can he see a return to politics? Not as an MP, he says. A seat in the Lords? He smiles. As we head off he shows me more family photos. “I’ll quickly show you a picture of my kids and then I’ll let you go.” He looks so happy sharing his photos. So unlike a politician. We’ve talked about how disillusioned the public are with politics. Is he? “No because I’ve had massive highs and deep lows, but I’m still here and I’m moving on on my own terms. So politics has been good to me.” He pauses. “It’s also given me a slap in the face.” Explore more on these topics Goodbye to all that Conservatives Austerity features Share Reuse this content Edward Timpson: ‘Maybe I didn’t feel I was ruthless enough.’ Photograph: Linda Nylind/The Guardian Sixteen years after he entered parliament, the former minister has had enough. He talks about fighting for children, backing austerity, and his least favourite Conservative PM Sixteen years after he entered parliament, the former minister has had enough. He talks about fighting for children, backing austerity, and his least favourite Conservative PM Sixteen years after he entered parliament, the former minister has had enough. He talks about fighting for children, backing austerity, and his least favourite Conservative PM “I do question whether I’m actually a politician,” Edward Timpson says. “It’s a bit late now, isn’t it?” I say. He laughs. “Yes, it’s a question I should have asked at the start.” Why does he question it? “Because … maybe I didn’t feel I was ruthless enough, not sharp-elbowed enough.” However much he is in denial, the Conservative MP is definitely a politician, though not for much longer. He joined parliament in 2008 as member for Crewe and Nantwich after the death of Labour’s Gwyneth Dunwoody, who had represented the area for 34 years, lost his seat by 48 votes after three recounts in 2017, and returned to parliament in 2019 representing the neighbouring seat of Eddisbury. Now a boyish 50, he’s had enough, and is standing down at the next election. Timpson is certainly no conveyor-belt MP. He is reserved, a little shy and deeply serious, with a mission to make the life of the country’s disadvantaged children better. He is also supremely fit (the week we meet he is about to run his 16th London marathon) and equally obsessed with his family and Manchester City football club. When he’s not showing me pictures of his four children and wife (“She was born on the same day as Kate Moss, though my wife is the more beautiful one”), he’s sharing photos of his mother with City players shortly before she died. When I match him with a photo of my daughter wearing a signed shirt Kevin De Bruyne gave her, he can’t contain himself. “Oh, no way. Wowzers ! Blimey. Oh my God! Wowwwww! ” We meet in a park next to the Foundling Museum in London – his choice. Timpson belongs to the Manchester shoe-repairing and key-cutting dynasty that goes back five generations. His father, John Timpson, was worth an estimated £190m in the 2020 Rich List. The Timpson Group is not just a great British success story; it’s a success story with a soul. Former offenders constitute 10% of its employees, and it offers staff free use of holiday homes, weekly bonuses for exceeding targets, and days off for birthdays, a child’s first day at school, becoming a grandparent and pet bereavements. View image in fullscreen Timpson with his wife, Julia, after winning the Crewe and Nantwich by-election in 2008. Photograph: Anthony Devlin/PA But this has little to do with Edward Timpson. The only time he worked for the family business was in his late teens, earning money to travel the world. All the Timpson kids were given work experience to see if they were suited to a career in the company. For Edward, the pain is still fresh. “I was scouring a shoe, and my thumb went into the scourer and I sliced the top of it. It was hanging off, flapping here.” He wobbles the top of his thumb, which has healed. “Slightly embarrassing. I passed out on the shop floor in front of customers. I remember thinking: ‘I don’t think this is for me.’” But the company’s values had already seeped into Timpson’s bones. As had those of his mother, Alex, a foster carer who looked after almost 90 children . He was about six years old when she started fostering. Edward, the youngest of three children, wasn’t best pleased. He responded in the only way he knew how – sulking, and retreating to his bedroom. “That was my reaction to the first children who came. They were three and five, going around on my tricycle saying: ‘Fuck fuck fuck.’ I didn’t normally cause trouble, but on that occasion I barricaded myself in the bedroom and refused to come out till they left.” He soon discovered he’d have to change his plans. “I thought they’d be gone in a few minutes, but it turned out to be quite a few weeks later.” Over time, Timpson grew to love all the foster children as much as his mother did. The house rule was that the fostered children had to be younger than him, and he soon became his mother’s assistant. “We had a lot of babies, and as Mum was so exhausted I’d say: ‘Oh, I’ll do the 10pm feed’ because then I could stay up and watch whatever was on TV.” His love of children and his desire to improve their lives have shaped everything he’s done since. As a barrister, he spent his time in the family courts, and towards the end only did cases involving children. When he went into politics he was again fuelled largely by this single issue. Timpson’s successful campaign in the 2008 byelection was a baptism of fire. The seat had always been Labour’s, and the party, then led by Gordon Brown, was desperate to hold it. Things quickly got nasty. Labour painted him as a toff who didn’t know how to relate to ordinary people. It was both unfair and foolish. The Timpsons weren’t posh; they were just successful. “I wondered what the hell I’d walked into. The ferocity of it and how they made it the central plank of their campaign was a shock to the system, particularly when you’ve never been involved in politics before.” But it backfired on Labour. “They hadn’t done their homework, so it was quite easy to push back and say, ‘Well, actually we’re cobblers from Wythenshawe in Manchester, and my parents have fostered almost 90 children; what d’you think about that?’” The irony was that his Labour rival, Tamsin Dunwoody (Gwyneth’s daughter), was in Burke’s Peerage because her maternal grandmother, Norah Phillips, had been given a life peerage in 1964. Crewe and Nantwich went Conservative for the first time. A couple of years ago he was at a Manchester City match with his fellow Tory MP and City fan Karen Bradley. She pointed out another politician sitting near them – Labour’s Alex Norris. At half-time, they all went for a beer. “He said: ‘You don’t know who I am, do you?’ I said: ‘Course I do. You’re Alex Norris, the MP for Nottingham North.’ He said: ‘No, I’m the guy who wore a top hat and tails and was following you around during the byelection in Crewe and Nantwich.’ I thought: ‘You bugger! ’” Unlike most MPs, Timpson had not spent a lifetime dabbling in party politics. In many ways he was a political virgin. Yes, he had studied politics at Durham University, but that was international politics – an academic exercise rather than a practical one. He didn’t even join a party till 2005, three years before he was elected. What makes him a Conservative? “I believe in everybody getting the best chance to be the best they can be. The philosophy of one nation is where every citizen is as good as another.” Couldn’t that just as easily be Labour or Lib Dem? “I do believe in sound money and you can’t leave debt hanging over for generations. The economic backdrop to what drives a Labour administration might be quite different, particularly on borrowing to invest. The idea you would spend money you don’t have in government isn’t one that would sit comfortably with me.” Timpson’s favourite time in government was the 2010-15 coalition. He believes it was a victory for non-tribalism and serious politics. “Although I think there were elements of the austerity programme where we got the balance wrong, as an overall approach I understood the necessity of it.” How did they get the balance wrong? “There were some things we did to save money around benefits that were targeted in the wrong areas and in hindsight could have been done in a much fairer and, dare I say it, compassionate way.” View image in fullscreen Labour activists attempt to portray Timpson as a toff during the 2008 by-election campaign. Photograph: Lorne Campbell/Guzelian From a personal point of view, he couldn’t have been happier under David Cameron’s leadership. Between 2012 and 2017 he served as undersecretary and then minister for children and families . He’s proud of what he achieved for adopted and cared-for children. “We invested in an adoption support fund that saw the number of children adopted rising significantly, reducing the time the process took, and that happened because the secretary of state, Michael Gove, let me get on with it. He was adopted himself and had a personal interest in it.” As a politician, he says, it was important for him to understand people’s lives, whether those of civil servants or cared-for children. In his department, he introduced an awards ceremony for unsung heroes. “My dad’s always believed in incentivising, and I took a leaf out of his book. See, my dad has had some influence on my life! At our pre-Christmas drinks, I got some trophies, probably from Timpson, and I asked all the team leaders who was the unsung hero on their team. It was one of the most enlightening moments in the department because suddenly they could see the point of why I was there and what we were doing.” Had nobody done it before? “No.” Why not? It’s hardly rocket science. “I don’t know.” Does he think many politicians lack emotional intelligence? “It’s easy to fall into the trap of briefings, charts and data, which can tell a story, but you have to back that up by experiencing what it’s like to walk in the shoes of the people whose lives you’re trying to improve. I had a group of care leavers I used to meet every couple of months over several years. So we got to know each other, and I got to understand their stories, their lives, and that gave me insight into the barriers stopping them getting on. It led to a change in policy. We got the DWP [Department of Work and Pensions] to flag when care leavers come into the benefits system in advance so they don’t end up with gaps in their support. If you don’t engage at that level you’ll never find out about the problems people face.” He cites this as one of his highs. As for the lows, there have been plenty. In May 2017, protesters spent three days on the roof of Timpson’s house in Cheshire. His family were terrified. “We had to leave under police protection for three days and we’d just had a baby three months before.” The protest was believed to be against forced adoption, something that Timpson had nothing to do with. A month later he was “dumped” at the general election, losing his seat to Labour. You can tell by the language he uses how painful it was, and how personally he took it. “It was devastating because it’s not just you. I had staff who had been with me since 2008 sobbing in the sports hall in Crewe. People have said: ‘Why the hell did you come back, having gone through that?’, and I thought: ‘It’s because I’ve still got something to offer.’ There aren’t many people in parliament, and particularly my own party, who’ve gathered the personal and professional experience I’ve got in children’s policy and children’s social care.” View image in fullscreen With David Cameron outside the Houses of Parliament. Photograph: Lewis Whyld/PA His second stint as an MP reached its zenith when he was appointed solicitor general in July 2022 after a mass resignation in protest at Boris Johnson’s handling of the Chris Pincher scandal. “It was the perfect mix for me because you’re part politician, part lawyer, and that’s probably what I am.” The problem was he made it clear he was championing Rishi Sunak in the leadership contest after Boris Johnson resigned. Within a day of becoming prime minister, Liz Truss sacked him. He had lasted 63 days. “Yes, I made the fatal error of uttering the words Rishi and Sunak in public during the leadership campaign.” He smiles. “The 63 days is longer than she was prime minister, so I do have that to hang on to.” It has been such a humiliating period for the Conservatives: three prime ministers over one parliament, myriad lies, scandals and resignations, and a political incoherence only matched by the populist brutality. What’s it like being in a party so at odds with many of your values? How does he feel, for example, about the DWP prosecuting carers who have made honest mistakes for benefits fraud? “There are definitely things that make me feel uncomfortable,” he says with typical understatement. One thing that saddens him is the deterioration in the tone of political discourse. “For somebody like me who is a consensus-builder, who tries to find a route through that people feel they can gravitate towards to make progress, it’s been quite a difficult period, which may explain why I haven’t had that same platform I had the first time around.” Since losing his job as solicitor general, he has been relegated to the backbenches. Has he ever felt ashamed of being part of this government? “The overwhelming sense is one of frustration that it’s a missed opportunity. The one time it was like ‘What the hell are we going to do next?’ was the night and the morning of the Liz Truss resignation; we were so far away from where we needed to be connecting with the public and demonstrating we were the answer to their problems.” How did it affect him? “It’s a hard one to swallow. The risk is that you completely disengage and lose interest. You don’t feel it’s your mission.” He says he re-engaged when Sunak took over. But he acknowledges there is plenty of work to be done to make the public trust politicians. “There’s been so much volatility since 2015. We’ve have more prime ministers in a short period of time than we’ve ever had, and that’s going to breed curiosity in some people, and contempt in others.” He has served under five Conservative prime ministers, and has no problem in ranking them. “David Cameron was for me the best. He gave me my job. He’s No 1. Then Rishi. Theresa. Boris. And finally Truss.” View image in fullscreen Timpson with other MPs before the 2017 London marathon. Photograph: Matthew Childs/Reuters Timpson is returning to his chambers to practise law and hopes to become a judge in the family courts. His two years away from politics in between 2017 and 2019 taught him that sometimes it’s easier to effect change outside parliament. Timpson is that rare creature – a politician who is backwards at coming forward. Does he wish he was leaving politics better known? He seems surprised by the question. “It depends what you’re better known for. I’m proud to be known as someone who actually achieved for children. I’ve got to be satisfied with that. I was never someone seeking the spotlight. But I did feel I had got to a point as children’s minister of state where I was capable of stepping up to the next level, and I would have loved to have had the opportunity to do that: to prove myself in cabinet – secretary of state for education or lord chancellor. So there’s a bit of regret that never happened. I say that as somebody who doesn’t blow my own trumpet – I probably haven’t done it enough – but I think I would have been quite good.” One thing puzzles me. Timpson consistently voted to send asylum seekers to Rwanda. I tell him I can’t believe that he would support a policy that the archbishop of Canterbury described as “outsourcing” our morality, and ask why he voted for it. “Loyalty,” he says simply. “I’m a team player.” Perhaps Timpson was too loyal. What does his wife, Julia, think of him leaving politics? “She feels even more than I do that I’ve been underutilised in the last four years. She feels a little bitter about that.” He reminds me that he’s only 50 and he’s got a lot of good work left in him. “I believe I’ve still got unfinished business, something significant in our country’s social policy to contribute.” So can he see a return to politics? Not as an MP, he says. A seat in the Lords? He smiles. As we head off he shows me more family photos. “I’ll quickly show you a picture of my kids and then I’ll let you go.” He looks so happy sharing his photos. So unlike a politician. We’ve talked about how disillusioned the public are with politics. Is he? “No because I’ve had massive highs and deep lows, but I’m still here and I’m moving on on my own terms. So politics has been good to me.” He pauses. “It’s also given me a slap in the face.” Explore more on these topics Goodbye to all that Conservatives Austerity features Share Reuse this content “I do question whether I’m actually a politician,” Edward Timpson says. “It’s a bit late now, isn’t it?” I say. He laughs. “Yes, it’s a question I should have asked at the start.” Why does he question it? “Because … maybe I didn’t feel I was ruthless enough, not sharp-elbowed enough.” However much he is in denial, the Conservative MP is definitely a politician, though not for much longer. He joined parliament in 2008 as member for Crewe and Nantwich after the death of Labour’s Gwyn
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
University bosses to visit Downing Street to discuss campus antisemitism
Students at an encampment on the grounds of the University of Cambridge on Tuesday. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA View image in fullscreen Students at an encampment on the grounds of the University of Cambridge on Tuesday. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA This article is more than 1 year old University bosses to visit Downing Street to discuss campus antisemitism This article is more than 1 year old Rishi Sunak warns of ‘unacceptable rise’ as Gaza protests escalate and 10 students vow to go on hunger strike University bosses are to attend a Downing Street summit to discuss antisemitism on campuses, as Palestinian solidarity protests continue to escalate at UK universities, with 10 students now vowing to go on hunger strike. Rishi Sunak told his cabinet on Tuesday that there had been an “unacceptable rise in antisemitism” on campuses and vice-chancellors would meet to talk about “the need for our universities to be safe for our Jewish students”. Three students at the University of Edinburgh said they had begun a hunger strike, with seven more planning to join them after months of trying to pressure their institution to divest from companies supplying arms to Israel. “What was already an urgent call for divestment has become so much more urgent all of a sudden, especially with the attack on Rafah right now,” said a fourth-year Palestinian student who did not want to be identified. The student, who said 15 members of her extended family had been killed in Gaza since the 7 October attacks, added: “We feel a hunger strike is the only way to really show the gravity and the urgency that we students feel for divestment.” There are about 14 student encampments at UK universities, following major protests at campuses in the US. The Union of Jewish Students warned last week that the UK occupations were creating a “hostile and toxic atmosphere”. View image in fullscreen Protesters at Newcastle University last week. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA But one Jewish undergraduate taking part in an occupation at the University of Sheffield said they had had a different experience. “There are various Jewish students, staff and local community members, including me, who have taken part in the Sheffield Palestine solidarity encampment as openly Jewish and have received no hate for it,” they said. Prof Peter Mathieson, the principal and vice-chancellor at the University of Edinburgh, said: “We have very recently been notified of the intention of an unknown number of students to commence a hunger strike as an indication of their strength of feeling and determination around issues related to Palestine and Israel. “Whilst we recognise their bodily autonomy, we appeal to them and others not to take risks with their own health, safety and wellbeing. We are in daily contact with the protesters to ensure they are aware of the health and wellbeing support available to them.” 1:42 Pro-Palestinian protests spread across European universities – video report A second-year Jewish Arab student taking part in the hunger strike, who wanted to remain anonymous, described students feeling ignored and “discarded”, and said they planned to continue their hunger strike for the longest period they could go on for. The hunger strike follows 35 Edinburgh students setting up encampments outside the office of a former chancellor at the university, Arthur Balfour. Balfour, the then foreign secretary, was the signatory of the 1917 Balfour Declaration that promised to help establish a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine. The prime minister’s spokesperson said: “Our university campuses should be places of rigorous debate, but they should also be tolerant places where people of all communities, particularly Jewish students at this time, are treated with respect.” Asked what his message was to students involved in the protests, he said: “The right to free speech does not include the right to harass people or incite violence. We expect university leaders to take robust action in dealing with that kind of behaviour.” Explore more on these topics Universities Antisemitism Rishi Sunak Israel-Gaza war Protest Gaza Higher education news Share Reuse this content Students at an encampment on the grounds of the University of Cambridge on Tuesday. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA View image in fullscreen Students at an encampment on the grounds of the University of Cambridge on Tuesday. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA This article is more than 1 year old University bosses to visit Downing Street to discuss campus antisemitism This article is more than 1 year old Rishi Sunak warns of ‘unacceptable rise’ as Gaza protests escalate and 10 students vow to go on hunger strike University bosses are to attend a Downing Street summit to discuss antisemitism on campuses, as Palestinian solidarity protests continue to escalate at UK universities, with 10 students now vowing to go on hunger strike. Rishi Sunak told his cabinet on Tuesday that there had been an “unacceptable rise in antisemitism” on campuses and vice-chancellors would meet to talk about “the need for our universities to be safe for our Jewish students”. Three students at the University of Edinburgh said they had begun a hunger strike, with seven more planning to join them after months of trying to pressure their institution to divest from companies supplying arms to Israel. “What was already an urgent call for divestment has become so much more urgent all of a sudden, especially with the attack on Rafah right now,” said a fourth-year Palestinian student who did not want to be identified. The student, who said 15 members of her extended family had been killed in Gaza since the 7 October attacks, added: “We feel a hunger strike is the only way to really show the gravity and the urgency that we students feel for divestment.” There are about 14 student encampments at UK universities, following major protests at campuses in the US. The Union of Jewish Students warned last week that the UK occupations were creating a “hostile and toxic atmosphere”. View image in fullscreen Protesters at Newcastle University last week. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA But one Jewish undergraduate taking part in an occupation at the University of Sheffield said they had had a different experience. “There are various Jewish students, staff and local community members, including me, who have taken part in the Sheffield Palestine solidarity encampment as openly Jewish and have received no hate for it,” they said. Prof Peter Mathieson, the principal and vice-chancellor at the University of Edinburgh, said: “We have very recently been notified of the intention of an unknown number of students to commence a hunger strike as an indication of their strength of feeling and determination around issues related to Palestine and Israel. “Whilst we recognise their bodily autonomy, we appeal to them and others not to take risks with their own health, safety and wellbeing. We are in daily contact with the protesters to ensure they are aware of the health and wellbeing support available to them.” 1:42 Pro-Palestinian protests spread across European universities – video report A second-year Jewish Arab student taking part in the hunger strike, who wanted to remain anonymous, described students feeling ignored and “discarded”, and said they planned to continue their hunger strike for the longest period they could go on for. The hunger strike follows 35 Edinburgh students setting up encampments outside the office of a former chancellor at the university, Arthur Balfour. Balfour, the then foreign secretary, was the signatory of the 1917 Balfour Declaration that promised to help establish a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine. The prime minister’s spokesperson said: “Our university campuses should be places of rigorous debate, but they should also be tolerant places where people of all communities, particularly Jewish students at this time, are treated with respect.” Asked what his message was to students involved in the protests, he said: “The right to free speech does not include the right to harass people or incite violence. We expect university leaders to take robust action in dealing with that kind of behaviour.” Explore more on these topics Universities Antisemitism Rishi Sunak Israel-Gaza war Protest Gaza Higher education news Share Reuse this content Students at an encampment on the grounds of the University of Cambridge on Tuesday. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA View image in fullscreen Students at an encampment on the grounds of the University of Cambridge on Tuesday. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA Students at an encampment on the grounds of the University of Cambridge on Tuesday. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA View image in fullscreen Students at an encampment on the grounds of the University of Cambridge on Tuesday. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA Students at an encampment on the grounds of the University of Cambridge on Tuesday. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA View image in fullscreen Students at an encampment on the grounds of the University of Cambridge on Tuesday. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA Students at an encampment on the grounds of the University of Cambridge on Tuesday. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA View image in fullscreen Students at an encampment on the grounds of the University of Cambridge on Tuesday. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA Students at an encampment on the grounds of the University of Cambridge on Tuesday. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA Students at an encampment on the grounds of the University of Cambridge on Tuesday. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA This article is more than 1 year old University bosses to visit Downing Street to discuss campus antisemitism This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old University bosses to visit Downing Street to discuss campus antisemitism This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old University bosses to visit Downing Street to discuss campus antisemitism This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Rishi Sunak warns of ‘unacceptable rise’ as Gaza protests escalate and 10 students vow to go on hunger strike Rishi Sunak warns of ‘unacceptable rise’ as Gaza protests escalate and 10 students vow to go on hunger strike Rishi Sunak warns of ‘unacceptable rise’ as Gaza protests escalate and 10 students vow to go on hunger strike University bosses are to attend a Downing Street summit to discuss antisemitism on campuses, as Palestinian solidarity protests continue to escalate at UK universities, with 10 students now vowing to go on hunger strike. Rishi Sunak told his cabinet on Tuesday that there had been an “unacceptable rise in antisemitism” on campuses and vice-chancellors would meet to talk about “the need for our universities to be safe for our Jewish students”. Three students at the University of Edinburgh said they had begun a hunger strike, with seven more planning to join them after months of trying to pressure their institution to divest from companies supplying arms to Israel. “What was already an urgent call for divestment has become so much more urgent all of a sudden, especially with the attack on Rafah right now,” said a fourth-year Palestinian student who did not want to be identified. The student, who said 15 members of her extended family had been killed in Gaza since the 7 October attacks, added: “We feel a hunger strike is the only way to really show the gravity and the urgency that we students feel for divestment.” There are about 14 student encampments at UK universities, following major protests at campuses in the US. The Union of Jewish Students warned last week that the UK occupations were creating a “hostile and toxic atmosphere”. View image in fullscreen Protesters at Newcastle University last week. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA But one Jewish undergraduate taking part in an occupation at the University of Sheffield said they had had a different experience. “There are various Jewish students, staff and local community members, including me, who have taken part in the Sheffield Palestine solidarity encampment as openly Jewish and have received no hate for it,” they said. Prof Peter Mathieson, the principal and vice-chancellor at the University of Edinburgh, said: “We have very recently been notified of the intention of an unknown number of students to commence a hunger strike as an indication of their strength of feeling and determination around issues related to Palestine and Israel. “Whilst we recognise their bodily autonomy, we appeal to them and others not to take risks with their own health, safety and wellbeing. We are in daily contact with the protesters to ensure they are aware of the health and wellbeing support available to them.” 1:42 Pro-Palestinian protests spread across European universities – video report A second-year Jewish Arab student taking part in the hunger strike, who wanted to remain anonymous, described students feeling ignored and “discarded”, and said they planned to continue their hunger strike for the longest period they could go on for. The hunger strike follows 35 Edinburgh students setting up encampments outside the office of a former chancellor at the university, Arthur Balfour. Balfour, the then foreign secretary, was the signatory of the 1917 Balfour Declaration that promised to help establish a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine. The prime minister’s spokesperson said: “Our university campuses should be places of rigorous debate, but they should also be tolerant places where people of all communities, particularly Jewish students at this time, are treated with respect.” Asked what his message was to students involved in the protests, he said: “The right to free speech does not include the right to harass people or incite violence. We expect university leaders to take robust action in dealing with that kind of behaviour.” Explore more on these topics Universities Antisemitism Rishi Sunak Israel-Gaza war Protest Gaza Higher education news Share Reuse this content University bosses are to attend a Downing Street summit to discuss antisemitism on campuses, as Palestinian solidarity protests continue to escalate at UK universities, with 10 students now vowing to go on hunger strike. Rishi Sunak told his cabinet on Tuesday that there had been an “unacceptable rise in antisemitism” on campuses and vice-chancellors would meet to talk about “the need for our universities to be safe for our Jewish students”. Three students at the University of Edinburgh said they had begun a hunger strike, with seven more planning to join them after months of trying to pressure their institution to divest from companies supplying arms to Israel. “What was already an urgent call for divestment has become so much more urgent all of a sudden, especially with the attack on Rafah right now,” said a fourth-year Palestinian student who did not want to be identified. The student, who said 15 members of her extended family had been killed in Gaza since the 7 October attacks, added: “We feel a hunger strike is the only way to really show the gravity and the urgency that we students feel for divestment.” There are about 14 student encampments at UK universities, following major protests at campuses in the US. The Union of Jewish Students warned last week that the UK occupations were creating a “hostile and toxic atmosphere”. View image in fullscreen Protesters at Newcastle University last week. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA But one Jewish undergraduate taking part in an occupation at the University of Sheffield said they had had a different experience. “There are various Jewish students, staff and local community members, including me, who have taken part in the Sheffield Palestine solidarity encampment as openly Jewish and have received no hate for it,” they said. Prof Peter Mathieson, the principal and vice-chancellor at the University of Edinburgh, said: “We have very recently been notified of the intention of an unknown number of students to commence a hunger strike as an indication of their strength of feeling and determination around issues related to Palestine and Israel. “Whilst we recognise their bodily autonomy, we appeal to them and others not to take risks with their own health, safety and wellbeing. We are in daily contact with the protesters to ensure they are aware of the health and wellbeing support available to them.” 1:42 Pro-Palestinian protests spread across European universities – video report A second-year Jewish Arab student taking part in the hunger strike, who wanted to remain anonymous, described students feeling ignored and “discarded”, and said they planned to continue their hunger strike for the longest period they could go on for. The hunger strike follows 35 Edinburgh students setting up encampments outside the office of a former chancellor at the university, Arthur Balfour. Balfour, the then foreign secretary, was the signatory of the 1917 Balfour Declaration that promised to help establish a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine. The prime minister’s spokesperson said: “Our university campuses should be places of rigorous debate, but they should also be tolerant places where people of all communities, particularly Jewish students at this time, are treated with respect.” Asked what his message was to students involved in the protests, he said: “The right to free speech does not include the right to harass people or incite violence. We expect university leaders to take robust action in dealing with that kind of behaviour.” Explore more on these topics Universities Antisemitism Rishi Sunak Israel-Gaza war Protest Gaza Higher education news Share Reuse this content University bosses are to attend a Downing Street summit to discuss antisemitism on campuses, as Palestinian solidarity protests continue to escalate at UK universities, with 10 students now vowing to go on hunger strike. Rishi Sunak told his cabinet on Tuesday that there had been an “unacceptable rise in antisemitism” on campuses and vice-chancellors would meet to talk about “the need for our universities to be safe for our Jewish students”. Three students at the University of Edinburgh said they had begun a hunger strike, with seven more planning to join them after months of trying to pressure their institution to divest from companies supplying arms to Israel. “What was already an urgent call for divestment has become so much more urgent all of a sudden, especially with the attack on Rafah right now,” said a fourth-year Palestinian student who did not want to be identified. The student, who said 15 members of her extended family had been killed in Gaza since the 7 October attacks, added: “We feel a hunger strike is the only way to really show the gravity and the urgency that we students feel for divestment.” There are about 14 student encampments at UK universities, following major protests at campuses in the US. The Union of Jewish Students warned last week that the UK occupations were creating a “hostile and toxic atmosphere”. View image in fullscreen Protesters at Newcastle University last week. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA But one Jewish undergraduate taking part in an occupation at the University of Sheffield said they had had a different experience. “There are various Jewish students, staff and local community members, including me, who have taken part in the Sheffield Palestine solidarity encampment as openly Jewish and have received no hate for it,” they said. Prof Peter Mathieson, the principal and vice-chancellor at the University of Edinburgh, said: “We have very recently been notified of the intention of an unknown number of students to commence a hunger strike as an indication of their strength of feeling and determination around issues related to Palestine and Israel. “Whilst we recognise their bodily autonomy, we appeal to them and others not to take risks with their own health, safety and wellbeing. We are in daily contact with the protesters to ensure they are aware of the health and wellbeing support available to them.” 1:42 Pro-Palestinian protests spread across European universities – video report A second-year Jewish Arab student taking part in the hunger strike, who wanted to remain anonymous, described students feeling ignored and “discarded”, and said they planned to continue their hunger strike for the longest period they could go on for. The hunger strike follows 35 Edinburgh students setting up encampments outside the office of a former chancellor at the university, Arthur Balfour. Balfour, the then foreign secretary, was the signatory of the 1917 Balfour Declaration that promised to help establish a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine. The prime minister’s spokesperson said: “Our university campuses should be places of rigorous debate, but they should also be tolerant places where people of all communities, particularly Jewish students at this time, are treated with respect.” Asked what his message was to students involved in the protests, he said: “The right to free speech does not include the right to harass people or incite violence. We expect university leaders to take robust action in dealing with that kind of behaviour.” University bosses are to attend a Downing Street summit to discuss antisemitism on campuses, as Palestinian solidarity protests continue to escalate at UK universities, with 10 students now vowing to go on hunger strike. Rishi Sunak told his cabinet on Tuesday that there had been an “unacceptable rise in antisemitism” on campuses and vice-chancellors would meet to talk about “the need for our universities to be safe for our Jewish students”. Three students at the University of Edinburgh said they had begun a hunger strike, with seven more planning to join them after months of trying to pressure their institution to divest from companies supplying arms to Israel. “What was already an urgent call for divestment has become so much more urgent all of a sudden, especially with the attack on Rafah right now,” said a fourth-year Palestinian student who did not want to be identified. The student, who said 15 members of her extended family had been killed in Gaza since the 7 October attacks, added: “We feel a hunger strike is the only way to really show the gravity and the urgency that we students feel for divestment.” There are about 14 student encampments at UK universities, following major protests at campuses in the US. The Union of Jewish Students warned last week that the UK occupations were creating a “hostile and toxic atmosphere”. View image in fullscreen Protesters at Newcastle University last week. Photograph: Owen Humphreys/PA But one Jewish undergraduate taking part in an occupation at the University of Sheffield said they had had a different experience. “There are various Jewish students, staff and local community members, including me, who have taken part in the Sheffield Palestine solidarity encampment as openly Jewish and have received no hate for it,” they said. Prof Peter Mathieson, the principal and vice-chancellor at the University of Edinburgh, said: “We have very recently been notified of the intention of an unknown number of students to commence a hunger strike as an indication of their strength of feeling and determination around issues related to Palestine and Israel. “Whilst we recognise their bodily autonomy, we appeal to them and others not to take risks with their own health, safety and wellbeing. We are in daily contact with the protesters to ensure they are aware of the health and wellbeing support available to them.” 1:42 Pro-Palestinian protests spread across European universities – video report A second-year Jewish Arab student taking part in the hunger strike, who wanted to remain anonymous, described students feeling ignored and “discarded”, and said they planned to continue their hunger strike for the longest period they could go on for. The hunger strike follows 35 Edinburgh students setting up encampments outside the office of a former chancellor at the university, Arthur Balfour. Balfour, the then foreign secretary, was the signatory of the 1917 Balfour Declaration that promised to help establish a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine. The prime minister’s spokesperson said: “Our university campuses should be places of rigorous debate, but they should also be tolerant places where people of all communities, particularly Jewish students at this time, are treated with respect.” Asked what his message was to students involved in the protests, he said: “The right to free speech does not include the right to harass people or incite violence. We expect university leaders to take robust action in dealing with that kind of behaviour.” University bosses are to attend a Downing Street summit to discuss antisemitism on campuses, as Palestinian solidarity protests continue to escalate at UK universities, with 10 students now vowing to go on hunger strike. Rishi Sunak told his cabinet on Tuesday that there had been an “unacceptable rise in antisemitism” on campuses and vice-chancellors would meet to talk about “the need for our universities to be safe for our Jewish students”. Three students at the University of Edinburgh said they had begun a hunger strike, with seven more planning to join them after months of trying to pressure their institution to divest from companies supplying arms to Israel. “What was already an urgent call for divestment has become so much more urgent all of a sudden, especially with the attack on Rafah right now,” said a fourth-year Palestinian student who did not want to be identified. The student, who said 15 members of her extended family had been killed in Gaza since the 7 October attacks, added: “We feel a hunger strike is the only way to really show the gravity and the urgency that we students feel for divestment.” There are about 14 student encampments at UK universities, following major protests at campuses in the US. The Union of Jewish Students warned last week that the UK occupations were creating a “hostile and toxic atmosphere”. But one Jewish undergraduate taking part in an occupation at the University of Sheffield said they had had a different experience. “There are various Jewish students, staff and local community members, including me, who have taken part in the Sheffield Palestine solidarity encampment as openly Jewish and have received no hate for it,” they said. Prof Peter Mathieson, the principal and vice-chancellor at the University of Edinburgh, said: “We have very recently been notified of the intention of an unknown number of students to commence a hunger strike as an indication of their strength of feeling and determination around issues related to Palestine and Israel. “Whilst we recognise their bodily autonomy, we appeal to them and others not to take risks with their own health, safety and wellbeing. We are in daily contact with the protesters to ensure they are aware of the health and wellbeing support available to them.” 1:42 Pro-Palestinian protests spread across European universities – video report A second-year Jewish Arab student taking part in the hunger strike, who wanted to remain anonymous, described students feeling ignored and “discarded”, and said they planned to continue their hunger strike for the longest period they could go on for. The hunger strike follows 35 Edinburgh students setting up encampments outside the office of a former chancellor at the university, Arthur Balfour. Balfour, the then foreign secretary, was the signatory of the 1917 Balfour Declaration that promised to help establish a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine. The prime minister’s spokesperson said: “Our university campuses should be places of rigorous debate, but they should also be tolerant places where people of all communities, particularly Jewish students at this time, are treated with respect.” Asked what his message was to students involved in the protests, he said: “The right to free speech does not include the right to harass people or incite violence. We expect university leaders to take robust action in dealing with that kind of behaviour.” Explore more on these topics Universities Antisemitism Rishi Sunak Israel-Gaza war Protest Gaza Higher education news Share Reuse this content Universities Antisemitism Rishi Sunak Israel-Gaza war Protest Gaza Higher education news |
Garrick Club votes to accept female members for first time
Garrick Club member Stephen Fry shakes hands with a well-wisher after the vote to allow women to join. Photograph: Graeme Robertson/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Garrick Club member Stephen Fry shakes hands with a well-wisher after the vote to allow women to join. Photograph: Graeme Robertson/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old Garrick Club votes to accept female members for first time This article is more than 1 year old Members back dropping men-only rule in place for 193 years, after Guardian revealed details of membership list ‘Where actors and men of refinement might meet’: Garrick Club history The men-only Garrick Club has finally voted to allow women to become members, 193 years after the London institution first opened its doors. The vote was passed with 59.98% of votes in favour at the end of a private meeting where several hundred members spent two hours debating whether to permit women to join. The meeting was closed to non-members, and a warning was made by the club’s secretary before the vote that details of the occasion were confidential and should not be discussed with non-members. However, sources revealed that 562 members had voted in favour and 375 (40.02%) voted against. The actor Stephen Fry and journalist James Naughtie were among those who gave short speeches arguing for the admission of women. “It will become a much better club with women in it,” one member said, asking not to be named. “It was a very courteous debate.” Hundreds of Garrick members, many of them wearing the club’s pink and green striped tie, had gathered inside the Connaught Rooms in Covent Garden in the late afternoon to cast a vote. Most were hoping the vote would end six weeks of intense scrutiny of the club’s inner workings triggered by the Guardian’s publication of a list of about 60 names of the club’s most influential members. The Garrick’s closely guarded membership list revealed that the club remained a bulwark of Britain’s still male-dominated establishment. Listed alongside the king were the deputy prime minister, scores of leading lawyers, dozens of members of the House of Lords and 10 MPs, as well as heads of influential thinktanks, law firms and private equity companies, academics, senior journalists and the head of the independent press standards organisation. It showed members were overwhelmingly white and the majority older than 50. Many theatre directors, producers and actors, from Benedict Cumberbatch to Brian Cox, are also members. The club’s management revealed it had received letters and emails from more than 200 members informing them that they would resign if the vote had gone against women. The musicians Sting and Mark Knopfler, along with Fry, wrote saying they would resign because “public controversy over this issue” had put them in an untenable position, jeopardising their relations with female colleagues. Campaigners for greater diversity in politics and greater representation of women in public leadership roles had responded with dismay in March to the revelation that Simon Case, who as cabinet secretary is the leader of more than half a million civil servants, and Richard Moore, the head of the Secret Intelligence Service, were members. Moore and Case had repeatedly spoken about the need for increased diversity in their workforces, and both resigned from the club days after their membership was made public. At least four judges also resigned their Garrick memberships amid intense media focus on the large number of senior lawyers who were members of a club that has previously voted on several occasions since the 1980s to block the admission of women. Women working in the arts had also expressed frustration over the past few weeks at the high numbers of their colleagues who were members of a club where women have only been allowed to visit as guests if men accompany them around the premises. Jude Kelly, the theatre director and founder of the Women of the World Foundation , described feeling “humiliated” on the occasions she had been invited to the club for theatre-related events. “I’m glad that men who were previously comfortable with the club being men-only have thought again and decided that they are now uncomfortable with that arrangement,” she said. “These clubs were created as places for people who were given superior privileges. This is not the same as having an all-girls picnic or a boys-only cricket club. This is a place that sustained male power.” The Garrick Club needs women. But try telling that to the members with the locker-room bants Read more The club is expected to propose readmitting all those members who resigned in protest on this issue in recent weeks, sources said. The decision to let in women rests on a legal technicality rather than representing a profound desire by members to associate with females. New analysis of the club’s rules by David Pannick KC, backed by senior lawyers including two former supreme court judges, concluded there was nothing to prevent women from being allowed to join, because the 1925 Law of Property Act advises that in legal documents the word “he” should also be read to mean “she”. Pro-women members have already drawn up a list of seven women they now plan to nominate for membership: the classicist Mary Beard, the former home secretary Amber Rudd, the Channel 4 News presenter Cathy Newman , the new Labour peer Ayesha Hazarika, the actor Juliet Stevenson, Margaret Casely-Hayford, who chairs the trustees of Shakespeare’s Globe and is chancellor of Coventry University, and Elizabeth Gloster, formerly an appeal court judge. The club’s admissions process is notoriously complex and slow, requiring names to be written in a red leather-bound book, seconded by two pages of signatures, before prospective members are invited in to dine at the club, and their membership is discussed by committee members, with an opportunity for unpopular nominees to be blackballed. Despite Tuesday’s vote, there may not be a radical change in the club’s membership anytime soon. Explore more on these topics Garrick Club London Women Stephen Fry Mark Knopfler news Share Reuse this content Garrick Club member Stephen Fry shakes hands with a well-wisher after the vote to allow women to join. Photograph: Graeme Robertson/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Garrick Club member Stephen Fry shakes hands with a well-wisher after the vote to allow women to join. Photograph: Graeme Robertson/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old Garrick Club votes to accept female members for first time This article is more than 1 year old Members back dropping men-only rule in place for 193 years, after Guardian revealed details of membership list ‘Where actors and men of refinement might meet’: Garrick Club history The men-only Garrick Club has finally voted to allow women to become members, 193 years after the London institution first opened its doors. The vote was passed with 59.98% of votes in favour at the end of a private meeting where several hundred members spent two hours debating whether to permit women to join. The meeting was closed to non-members, and a warning was made by the club’s secretary before the vote that details of the occasion were confidential and should not be discussed with non-members. However, sources revealed that 562 members had voted in favour and 375 (40.02%) voted against. The actor Stephen Fry and journalist James Naughtie were among those who gave short speeches arguing for the admission of women. “It will become a much better club with women in it,” one member said, asking not to be named. “It was a very courteous debate.” Hundreds of Garrick members, many of them wearing the club’s pink and green striped tie, had gathered inside the Connaught Rooms in Covent Garden in the late afternoon to cast a vote. Most were hoping the vote would end six weeks of intense scrutiny of the club’s inner workings triggered by the Guardian’s publication of a list of about 60 names of the club’s most influential members. The Garrick’s closely guarded membership list revealed that the club remained a bulwark of Britain’s still male-dominated establishment. Listed alongside the king were the deputy prime minister, scores of leading lawyers, dozens of members of the House of Lords and 10 MPs, as well as heads of influential thinktanks, law firms and private equity companies, academics, senior journalists and the head of the independent press standards organisation. It showed members were overwhelmingly white and the majority older than 50. Many theatre directors, producers and actors, from Benedict Cumberbatch to Brian Cox, are also members. The club’s management revealed it had received letters and emails from more than 200 members informing them that they would resign if the vote had gone against women. The musicians Sting and Mark Knopfler, along with Fry, wrote saying they would resign because “public controversy over this issue” had put them in an untenable position, jeopardising their relations with female colleagues. Campaigners for greater diversity in politics and greater representation of women in public leadership roles had responded with dismay in March to the revelation that Simon Case, who as cabinet secretary is the leader of more than half a million civil servants, and Richard Moore, the head of the Secret Intelligence Service, were members. Moore and Case had repeatedly spoken about the need for increased diversity in their workforces, and both resigned from the club days after their membership was made public. At least four judges also resigned their Garrick memberships amid intense media focus on the large number of senior lawyers who were members of a club that has previously voted on several occasions since the 1980s to block the admission of women. Women working in the arts had also expressed frustration over the past few weeks at the high numbers of their colleagues who were members of a club where women have only been allowed to visit as guests if men accompany them around the premises. Jude Kelly, the theatre director and founder of the Women of the World Foundation , described feeling “humiliated” on the occasions she had been invited to the club for theatre-related events. “I’m glad that men who were previously comfortable with the club being men-only have thought again and decided that they are now uncomfortable with that arrangement,” she said. “These clubs were created as places for people who were given superior privileges. This is not the same as having an all-girls picnic or a boys-only cricket club. This is a place that sustained male power.” The Garrick Club needs women. But try telling that to the members with the locker-room bants Read more The club is expected to propose readmitting all those members who resigned in protest on this issue in recent weeks, sources said. The decision to let in women rests on a legal technicality rather than representing a profound desire by members to associate with females. New analysis of the club’s rules by David Pannick KC, backed by senior lawyers including two former supreme court judges, concluded there was nothing to prevent women from being allowed to join, because the 1925 Law of Property Act advises that in legal documents the word “he” should also be read to mean “she”. Pro-women members have already drawn up a list of seven women they now plan to nominate for membership: the classicist Mary Beard, the former home secretary Amber Rudd, the Channel 4 News presenter Cathy Newman , the new Labour peer Ayesha Hazarika, the actor Juliet Stevenson, Margaret Casely-Hayford, who chairs the trustees of Shakespeare’s Globe and is chancellor of Coventry University, and Elizabeth Gloster, formerly an appeal court judge. The club’s admissions process is notoriously complex and slow, requiring names to be written in a red leather-bound book, seconded by two pages of signatures, before prospective members are invited in to dine at the club, and their membership is discussed by committee members, with an opportunity for unpopular nominees to be blackballed. Despite Tuesday’s vote, there may not be a radical change in the club’s membership anytime soon. Explore more on these topics Garrick Club London Women Stephen Fry Mark Knopfler news Share Reuse this content Garrick Club member Stephen Fry shakes hands with a well-wisher after the vote to allow women to join. Photograph: Graeme Robertson/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Garrick Club member Stephen Fry shakes hands with a well-wisher after the vote to allow women to join. Photograph: Graeme Robertson/The Guardian Garrick Club member Stephen Fry shakes hands with a well-wisher after the vote to allow women to join. Photograph: Graeme Robertson/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Garrick Club member Stephen Fry shakes hands with a well-wisher after the vote to allow women to join. Photograph: Graeme Robertson/The Guardian Garrick Club member Stephen Fry shakes hands with a well-wisher after the vote to allow women to join. Photograph: Graeme Robertson/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Garrick Club member Stephen Fry shakes hands with a well-wisher after the vote to allow women to join. Photograph: Graeme Robertson/The Guardian Garrick Club member Stephen Fry shakes hands with a well-wisher after the vote to allow women to join. Photograph: Graeme Robertson/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Garrick Club member Stephen Fry shakes hands with a well-wisher after the vote to allow women to join. Photograph: Graeme Robertson/The Guardian Garrick Club member Stephen Fry shakes hands with a well-wisher after the vote to allow women to join. Photograph: Graeme Robertson/The Guardian Garrick Club member Stephen Fry shakes hands with a well-wisher after the vote to allow women to join. Photograph: Graeme Robertson/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old Garrick Club votes to accept female members for first time This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Garrick Club votes to accept female members for first time This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Garrick Club votes to accept female members for first time This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Members back dropping men-only rule in place for 193 years, after Guardian revealed details of membership list ‘Where actors and men of refinement might meet’: Garrick Club history Members back dropping men-only rule in place for 193 years, after Guardian revealed details of membership list ‘Where actors and men of refinement might meet’: Garrick Club history Members back dropping men-only rule in place for 193 years, after Guardian revealed details of membership list The men-only Garrick Club has finally voted to allow women to become members, 193 years after the London institution first opened its doors. The vote was passed with 59.98% of votes in favour at the end of a private meeting where several hundred members spent two hours debating whether to permit women to join. The meeting was closed to non-members, and a warning was made by the club’s secretary before the vote that details of the occasion were confidential and should not be discussed with non-members. However, sources revealed that 562 members had voted in favour and 375 (40.02%) voted against. The actor Stephen Fry and journalist James Naughtie were among those who gave short speeches arguing for the admission of women. “It will become a much better club with women in it,” one member said, asking not to be named. “It was a very courteous debate.” Hundreds of Garrick members, many of them wearing the club’s pink and green striped tie, had gathered inside the Connaught Rooms in Covent Garden in the late afternoon to cast a vote. Most were hoping the vote would end six weeks of intense scrutiny of the club’s inner workings triggered by the Guardian’s publication of a list of about 60 names of the club’s most influential members. The Garrick’s closely guarded membership list revealed that the club remained a bulwark of Britain’s still male-dominated establishment. Listed alongside the king were the deputy prime minister, scores of leading lawyers, dozens of members of the House of Lords and 10 MPs, as well as heads of influential thinktanks, law firms and private equity companies, academics, senior journalists and the head of the independent press standards organisation. It showed members were overwhelmingly white and the majority older than 50. Many theatre directors, producers and actors, from Benedict Cumberbatch to Brian Cox, are also members. The club’s management revealed it had received letters and emails from more than 200 members informing them that they would resign if the vote had gone against women. The musicians Sting and Mark Knopfler, along with Fry, wrote saying they would resign because “public controversy over this issue” had put them in an untenable position, jeopardising their relations with female colleagues. Campaigners for greater diversity in politics and greater representation of women in public leadership roles had responded with dismay in March to the revelation that Simon Case, who as cabinet secretary is the leader of more than half a million civil servants, and Richard Moore, the head of the Secret Intelligence Service, were members. Moore and Case had repeatedly spoken about the need for increased diversity in their workforces, and both resigned from the club days after their membership was made public. At least four judges also resigned their Garrick memberships amid intense media focus on the large number of senior lawyers who were members of a club that has previously voted on several occasions since the 1980s to block the admission of women. Women working in the arts had also expressed frustration over the past few weeks at the high numbers of their colleagues who were members of a club where women have only been allowed to visit as guests if men accompany them around the premises. Jude Kelly, the theatre director and founder of the Women of the World Foundation , described feeling “humiliated” on the occasions she had been invited to the club for theatre-related events. “I’m glad that men who were previously comfortable with the club being men-only have thought again and decided that they are now uncomfortable with that arrangement,” she said. “These clubs were created as places for people who were given superior privileges. This is not the same as having an all-girls picnic or a boys-only cricket club. This is a place that sustained male power.” The Garrick Club needs women. But try telling that to the members with the locker-room bants Read more The club is expected to propose readmitting all those members who resigned in protest on this issue in recent weeks, sources said. The decision to let in women rests on a legal technicality rather than representing a profound desire by members to associate with females. New analysis of the club’s rules by David Pannick KC, backed by senior lawyers including two former supreme court judges, concluded there was nothing to prevent women from being allowed to join, because the 1925 Law of Property Act advises that in legal documents the word “he” should also be read to mean “she”. Pro-women members have already drawn up a list of seven women they now plan to nominate for membership: the classicist Mary Beard, the former home secretary Amber Rudd, the Channel 4 News presenter Cathy Newman , the new Labour peer Ayesha Hazarika, the actor Juliet Stevenson, Margaret Casely-Hayford, who chairs the trustees of Shakespeare’s Globe and is chancellor of Coventry University, and Elizabeth Gloster, formerly an appeal court judge. The club’s admissions process is notoriously complex and slow, requiring names to be written in a red leather-bound book, seconded by two pages of signatures, before prospective members are invited in to dine at the club, and their membership is discussed by committee members, with an opportunity for unpopular nominees to be blackballed. Despite Tuesday’s vote, there may not be a radical change in the club’s membership anytime soon. Explore more on these topics Garrick Club London Women Stephen Fry Mark Knopfler news Share Reuse this content The men-only Garrick Club has finally voted to allow women to become members, 193 years after the London institution first opened its doors. The vote was passed with 59.98% of votes in favour at the end of a private meeting where several hundred members spent two hours debating whether to permit women to join. The meeting was closed to non-members, and a warning was made by the club’s secretary before the vote that details of the occasion were confidential and should not be discussed with non-members. However, sources revealed that 562 members had voted in favour and 375 (40.02%) voted against. The actor Stephen Fry and journalist James Naughtie were among those who gave short speeches arguing for the admission of women. “It will become a much better club with women in it,” one member said, asking not to be named. “It was a very courteous debate.” Hundreds of Garrick members, many of them wearing the club’s pink and green striped tie, had gathered inside the Connaught Rooms in Covent Garden in the late afternoon to cast a vote. Most were hoping the vote would end six weeks of intense scrutiny of the club’s inner workings triggered by the Guardian’s publication of a list of about 60 names of the club’s most influential members. The Garrick’s closely guarded membership list revealed that the club remained a bulwark of Britain’s still male-dominated establishment. Listed alongside the king were the deputy prime minister, scores of leading lawyers, dozens of members of the House of Lords and 10 MPs, as well as heads of influential thinktanks, law firms and private equity companies, academics, senior journalists and the head of the independent press standards organisation. It showed members were overwhelmingly white and the majority older than 50. Many theatre directors, producers and actors, from Benedict Cumberbatch to Brian Cox, are also members. The club’s management revealed it had received letters and emails from more than 200 members informing them that they would resign if the vote had gone against women. The musicians Sting and Mark Knopfler, along with Fry, wrote saying they would resign because “public controversy over this issue” had put them in an untenable position, jeopardising their relations with female colleagues. Campaigners for greater diversity in politics and greater representation of women in public leadership roles had responded with dismay in March to the revelation that Simon Case, who as cabinet secretary is the leader of more than half a million civil servants, and Richard Moore, the head of the Secret Intelligence Service, were members. Moore and Case had repeatedly spoken about the need for increased diversity in their workforces, and both resigned from the club days after their membership was made public. At least four judges also resigned their Garrick memberships amid intense media focus on the large number of senior lawyers who were members of a club that has previously voted on several occasions since the 1980s to block the admission of women. Women working in the arts had also expressed frustration over the past few weeks at the high numbers of their colleagues who were members of a club where women have only been allowed to visit as guests if men accompany them around the premises. Jude Kelly, the theatre director and founder of the Women of the World Foundation , described feeling “humiliated” on the occasions she had been invited to the club for theatre-related events. “I’m glad that men who were previously comfortable with the club being men-only have thought again and decided that they are now uncomfortable with that arrangement,” she said. “These clubs were created as places for people who were given superior privileges. This is not the same as having an all-girls picnic or a boys-only cricket club. This is a place that sustained male power.” The Garrick Club needs women. But try telling that to the members with the locker-room bants Read more The club is expected to propose readmitting all those members who resigned in protest on this issue in recent weeks, sources said. The decision to let in women rests on a legal technicality rather than representing a profound desire by members to associate with females. New analysis of the club’s rules by David Pannick KC, backed by senior lawyers including two former supreme court judges, concluded there was nothing to prevent women from being allowed to join, because the 1925 Law of Property Act advises that in legal documents the word “he” should also be read to mean “she”. Pro-women members have already drawn up a list of seven women they now plan to nominate for membership: the classicist Mary Beard, the former home secretary Amber Rudd, the Channel 4 News presenter Cathy Newman , the new Labour peer Ayesha Hazarika, the actor Juliet Stevenson, Margaret Casely-Hayford, who chairs the trustees of Shakespeare’s Globe and is chancellor of Coventry University, and Elizabeth Gloster, formerly an appeal court judge. The club’s admissions process is notoriously complex and slow, requiring names to be written in a red leather-bound book, seconded by two pages of signatures, before prospective members are invited in to dine at the club, and their membership is discussed by committee members, with an opportunity for unpopular nominees to be blackballed. Despite Tuesday’s vote, there may not be a radical change in the club’s membership anytime soon. Explore more on these topics Garrick Club London Women Stephen Fry Mark Knopfler news Share Reuse this content The men-only Garrick Club has finally voted to allow women to become members, 193 years after the London institution first opened its doors. The vote was passed with 59.98% of votes in favour at the end of a private meeting where several hundred members spent two hours debating whether to permit women to join. The meeting was closed to non-members, and a warning was made by the club’s secretary before the vote that details of the occasion were confidential and should not be discussed with non-members. However, sources revealed that 562 members had voted in favour and 375 (40.02%) voted against. The actor Stephen Fry and journalist James Naughtie were among those who gave short speeches arguing for the admission of women. “It will become a much better club with women in it,” one member said, asking not to be named. “It was a very courteous debate.” Hundreds of Garrick members, many of them wearing the club’s pink and green striped tie, had gathered inside the Connaught Rooms in Covent Garden in the late afternoon to cast a vote. Most were hoping the vote would end six weeks of intense scrutiny of the club’s inner workings triggered by the Guardian’s publication of a list of about 60 names of the club’s most influential members. The Garrick’s closely guarded membership list revealed that the club remained a bulwark of Britain’s still male-dominated establishment. Listed alongside the king were the deputy prime minister, scores of leading lawyers, dozens of members of the House of Lords and 10 MPs, as well as heads of influential thinktanks, law firms and private equity companies, academics, senior journalists and the head of the independent press standards organisation. It showed members were overwhelmingly white and the majority older than 50. Many theatre directors, producers and actors, from Benedict Cumberbatch to Brian Cox, are also members. The club’s management revealed it had received letters and emails from more than 200 members informing them that they would resign if the vote had gone against women. The musicians Sting and Mark Knopfler, along with Fry, wrote saying they would resign because “public controversy over this issue” had put them in an untenable position, jeopardising their relations with female colleagues. Campaigners for greater diversity in politics and greater representation of women in public leadership roles had responded with dismay in March to the revelation that Simon Case, who as cabinet secretary is the leader of more than half a million civil servants, and Richard Moore, the head of the Secret Intelligence Service, were members. Moore and Case had repeatedly spoken about the need for increased diversity in their workforces, and both resigned from the club days after their membership was made public. At least four judges also resigned their Garrick memberships amid intense media focus on the large number of senior lawyers who were members of a club that has previously voted on several occasions since the 1980s to block the admission of women. Women working in the arts had also expressed frustration over the past few weeks at the high numbers of their colleagues who were members of a club where women have only been allowed to visit as guests if men accompany them around the premises. Jude Kelly, the theatre director and founder of the Women of the World Foundation , described feeling “humiliated” on the occasions she had been invited to the club for theatre-related events. “I’m glad that men who were previously comfortable with the club being men-only have thought again and decided that they are now uncomfortable with that arrangement,” she said. “These clubs were created as places for people who were given superior privileges. This is not the same as having an all-girls picnic or a boys-only cricket club. This is a place that sustained male power.” The Garrick Club needs women. But try telling that to the members with the locker-room bants Read more The club is expected to propose readmitting all those members who resigned in protest on this issue in recent weeks, sources said. The decision to let in women rests on a legal technicality rather than representing a profound desire by members to associate with females. New analysis of the club’s rules by David Pannick KC, backed by senior lawyers including two former supreme court judges, concluded there was nothing to prevent women from being allowed to join, because the 1925 Law of Property Act advises that in legal documents the word “he” should also be read to mean “she”. Pro-women members have already drawn up a list of seven women they now plan to nominate for membership: the classicist Mary Beard, the former home secretary Amber Rudd, the Channel 4 News presenter Cathy Newman , the new Labour peer Ayesha Hazarika, the actor Juliet Stevenson, Margaret Casely-Hayford, who chairs the trustees of Shakespeare’s Globe and is chancellor of Coventry University, and Elizabeth Gloster, formerly an appeal court judge. The club’s admissions process is notoriously complex and slow, requiring names to be written in a red leather-bound book, seconded by two pages of signatures, before prospective members are invited in to dine at the club, and their membership is discussed by committee members, with an opportunity for unpopular nominees to be blackballed. Despite Tuesday’s vote, there may not be a radical change in the club’s membership anytime soon. The men-only Garrick Club has finally voted to allow women to become members, 193 years after the London institution first opened its doors. The vote was passed with 59.98% of votes in favour at the end of a private meeting where several hundred members spent two hours debating whether to permit women to join. The meeting was closed to non-members, and a warning was made by the club’s secretary before the vote that details of the occasion were confidential and should not be discussed with non-members. However, sources revealed that 562 members had voted in favour and 375 (40.02%) voted against. The actor Stephen Fry and journalist James Naughtie were among those who gave short speeches arguing for the admission of women. “It will become a much better club with women in it,” one member said, asking not to be named. “It was a very courteous debate.” Hundreds of Garrick members, many of them wearing the club’s pink and green striped tie, had gathered inside the Connaught Rooms in Covent Garden in the late afternoon to cast a vote. Most were hoping the vote would end six weeks of intense scrutiny of the club’s inner workings triggered by the Guardian’s publication of a list of about 60 names of the club’s most influential members. The Garrick’s closely guarded membership list revealed that the club remained a bulwark of Britain’s still male-dominated establishment. Listed alongside the king were the deputy prime minister, scores of leading lawyers, dozens of members of the House of Lords and 10 MPs, as well as heads of influential thinktanks, law firms and private equity companies, academics, senior journalists and the head of the independent press standards organisation. It showed members were overwhelmingly white and the majority older than 50. Many theatre directors, producers and actors, from Benedict Cumberbatch to Brian Cox, are also members. The club’s management revealed it had received letters and emails from more than 200 members informing them that they would resign if the vote had gone against women. The musicians Sting and Mark Knopfler, along with Fry, wrote saying they would resign because “public controversy over this issue” had put them in an untenable position, jeopardising their relations with female colleagues. Campaigners for greater diversity in politics and greater representation of women in public leadership roles had responded with dismay in March to the revelation that Simon Case, who as cabinet secretary is the leader of more than half a million civil servants, and Richard Moore, the head of the Secret Intelligence Service, were members. Moore and Case had repeatedly spoken about the need for increased diversity in their workforces, and both resigned from the club days after their membership was made public. At least four judges also resigned their Garrick memberships amid intense media focus on the large number of senior lawyers who were members of a club that has previously voted on several occasions since the 1980s to block the admission of women. Women working in the arts had also expressed frustration over the past few weeks at the high numbers of their colleagues who were members of a club where women have only been allowed to visit as guests if men accompany them around the premises. Jude Kelly, the theatre director and founder of the Women of the World Foundation , described feeling “humiliated” on the occasions she had been invited to the club for theatre-related events. “I’m glad that men who were previously comfortable with the club being men-only have thought again and decided that they are now uncomfortable with that arrangement,” she said. “These clubs were created as places for people who were given superior privileges. This is not the same as having an all-girls picnic or a boys-only cricket club. This is a place that sustained male power.” The Garrick Club needs women. But try telling that to the members with the locker-room bants Read more The club is expected to propose readmitting all those members who resigned in protest on this issue in recent weeks, sources said. The decision to let in women rests on a legal technicality rather than representing a profound desire by members to associate with females. New analysis of the club’s rules by David Pannick KC, backed by senior lawyers including two former supreme court judges, concluded there was nothing to prevent women from being allowed to join, because the 1925 Law of Property Act advises that in legal documents the word “he” should also be read to mean “she”. Pro-women members have already drawn up a list of seven women they now plan to nominate for membership: the classicist Mary Beard, the former home secretary Amber Rudd, the Channel 4 News presenter Cathy Newman , the new Labour peer Ayesha Hazarika, the actor Juliet Stevenson, Margaret Casely-Hayford, who chairs the trustees of Shakespeare’s Globe and is chancellor of Coventry University, and Elizabeth Gloster, formerly an appeal court judge. The club’s admissions process is notoriously complex and slow, requiring names to be written in a red leather-bound book, seconded by two pages of signatures, before prospective members are invited in to dine at the club, and their membership is discussed by committee members, with an opportunity for unpopular nominees to be blackballed. Despite Tuesday’s vote, there may not be a radical change in the club’s membership anytime soon. The men-only Garrick Club has finally voted to allow women to become members, 193 years after the London institution first opened its doors. The vote was passed with 59.98% of votes in favour at the end of a private meeting where several hundred members spent two hours debating whether to permit women to join. The meeting was closed to non-members, and a warning was made by the club’s secretary before the vote that details of the occasion were confidential and should not be discussed with non-members. However, sources revealed that 562 members had voted in favour and 375 (40.02%) voted against. The actor Stephen Fry and journalist James Naughtie were among those who gave short speeches arguing for the admission of women. “It will become a much better club with women in it,” one member said, asking not to be named. “It was a very courteous debate.” Hundreds of Garrick members, many of them wearing the club’s pink and green striped tie, had gathered inside the Connaught Rooms in Covent Garden in the late afternoon to cast a vote. Most were hoping the vote would end six weeks of intense scrutiny of the club’s inner workings triggered by the Guardian’s publication of a list of about 60 names of the club’s most influential members. The Garrick’s closely guarded membership list revealed that the club remained a bulwark of Britain’s still male-dominated establishment. Listed alongside the king were the deputy prime minister, scores of leading lawyers, dozens of members of the House of Lords and 10 MPs, as well as heads of influential thinktanks, law firms and private equity companies, academics, senior journalists and the head of the independent press standards organisation. It showed members were overwhelmingly white and the majority older than 50. Many theatre directors, producers and actors, from Benedict Cumberbatch to Brian Cox, are also members. The club’s management revealed it had received letters and emails from more than 200 members informing them that they would resign if the vote had gone against women. The musicians Sting and Mark Knopfler, along with Fry, wrote saying they would resign because “public controversy over this issue” had put them in an untenable position, jeopardising their relations with female colleagues. Campaigners for greater diversity in politics and greater representation of women in public leadership roles had responded with dismay in March to the revelation that Simon Case, who as cabinet secretary is the leader of more than half a million civil servants, and Richard Moore, the head of the Secret Intelligence Service, were members. Moore and Case had repeatedly spoken about the need for increased diversity in their workforces, and both resigned from the club days after their membership was made public. At least four judges also resigned their Garrick memberships amid intense media focus on the large number of senior lawyers who were members of a club that has previously voted on several occasions since the 1980s to block the admission of women. Women working in the arts had also expressed frustration over the past few weeks at the high numbers of their colleagues who were members of a club where women have only been allowed to visit as guests if men accompany them around the premises. Jude Kelly, the theatre director and founder of the Women of the World Foundation , described feeling “humiliated” on the occasions she had been invited to the club for theatre-related events. “I’m glad that men who were previously comfortable with the club being men-only have thought again and decided that they are now uncomfortable with that arrangement,” she said. “These clubs were created as places for people who were given superior privileges. This is not the same as having an all-girls picnic or a boys-only cricket club. This is a place that sustained male power.” The Garrick Club needs women. But try telling that to the members with the locker-room bants Read more The Garrick Club needs women. But try telling that to the members with the locker-room bants Read more The Garrick Club needs women. But try telling that to the members with the locker-room bants Read more The Garrick Club needs women. But try telling that to the members with the locker-room bants The Garrick Club needs women. But try telling that to the members with the locker-room bants The club is expected to propose readmitting all those members who resigned in protest on this issue in recent weeks, sources said. The decision to let in women rests on a legal technicality rather than representing a profound desire by members to associate with females. New analysis of the club’s rules by David Pannick KC, backed by senior lawyers including two former supreme court judges, concluded there was nothing to prevent women from being allowed to join, because the 1925 Law of Property Act advises that in legal documents the word “he” should also be read to mean “she”. Pro-women members have already drawn up a list of seven women they now plan to nominate for membership: the classicist Mary Beard, the former home secretary Amber Rudd, the Channel 4 News presenter Cathy Newman , the new Labour peer Ayesha Hazarika, the actor Juliet Stevenson, Margaret Casely-Hayford, who chairs the trustees of Shakespeare’s Globe and is chancellor of Coventry University, and Elizabeth Gloster, formerly an appeal court judge. The club’s admissions process is notoriously complex and slow, requiring names to be written in a red leather-bound book, seconded by two pages of signatures, before prospective members are invited in to dine at the club, and their membership is discussed by committee members, with an opportunity for unpopular nominees to be blackballed. Despite Tuesday’s vote, there may not be a radical change in the club’s membership anytime soon. Explore more on these topics Garrick Club London Women Stephen Fry Mark Knopfler news Share Reuse this content Garrick Club London Women Stephen Fry Mark Knopfler news |
Hunger strikes for Gaza: a look inside the Princeton student protests – video
4:01 This article is more than 1 year old Hunger strikes for Gaza: a look inside the Princeton student protests – video This article is more than 1 year old Princeton University students have been protesting in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza since 25 April, their goal being to get the US university to divest from Israel. The Guardian spoke to some of the students and faculty at the encampment to hear their reasons for being there, and how they feel they have been portrayed by the media Explore more on these topics Princeton University US campus protests Israel-Gaza war Gaza US education Israel US foreign policy 4:01 This article is more than 1 year old Hunger strikes for Gaza: a look inside the Princeton student protests – video This article is more than 1 year old Princeton University students have been protesting in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza since 25 April, their goal being to get the US university to divest from Israel. The Guardian spoke to some of the students and faculty at the encampment to hear their reasons for being there, and how they feel they have been portrayed by the media Explore more on these topics Princeton University US campus protests Israel-Gaza war Gaza US education Israel US foreign policy This article is more than 1 year old Hunger strikes for Gaza: a look inside the Princeton student protests – video This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Hunger strikes for Gaza: a look inside the Princeton student protests – video This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Hunger strikes for Gaza: a look inside the Princeton student protests – video This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Princeton University students have been protesting in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza since 25 April, their goal being to get the US university to divest from Israel. The Guardian spoke to some of the students and faculty at the encampment to hear their reasons for being there, and how they feel they have been portrayed by the media Princeton University students have been protesting in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza since 25 April, their goal being to get the US university to divest from Israel. The Guardian spoke to some of the students and faculty at the encampment to hear their reasons for being there, and how they feel they have been portrayed by the media Princeton University students have been protesting in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza since 25 April, their goal being to get the US university to divest from Israel. The Guardian spoke to some of the students and faculty at the encampment to hear their reasons for being there, and how they feel they have been portrayed by the media Explore more on these topics Princeton University US campus protests Israel-Gaza war Gaza US education Israel US foreign policy Explore more on these topics Princeton University US campus protests Israel-Gaza war Gaza US education Israel US foreign policy Explore more on these topics Princeton University US campus protests Israel-Gaza war Gaza US education Israel US foreign policy Princeton University US campus protests Israel-Gaza war Gaza US education Israel US foreign policy |
Nowhere to call home. Inside the 10 May Guardian Weekly
Cover of the 10 May Guardian Weekly Photograph: Núria Garcia Traveria View image in fullscreen Cover of the 10 May Guardian Weekly Photograph: Núria Garcia Traveria This article is more than 1 year old Nowhere to call home. Inside the 10 May Guardian Weekly This article is more than 1 year old Inside Europe’s housing crisis. Plus: Spirited Away on stage Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address Elections for the European parliament are less than a month away and far-right parties are predicted to make significant gains in many of the bloc’s 27 member states. The dire shortage of housing, leading to rising rents and property prices, is becoming a unifying focus for voters’ discontent with their current political leaders. The issue has sparked protests from Amsterdam to Prague and Milan, as the Guardian’s Europe correspondent, Jon Henley , reports. The data is undeniably worrying as young Europeans spend up to 10 times an average salary on rent and mortgage payments, and big cities from the Baltic states to the Iberian peninsula have registered average property price rises of close to 50%. As a result more EU residents live with their parents for longer and put off life-decisions later into adulthood. While housing does not fall within MEPs’ remit, it is a visible locus for the sense of social unease that has beset the whole bloc and has become a pivot for the far right to turn on racialised minorities. But as European community affairs correspondent Ashifa Kassam discovers, it is those communities that are doubly penalised through discrimination from landlords who, research has shown, turn away potential renters with “foreign” surnames. The political and social ramifications of the housing crisis in Europe is mirrored elsewhere across the globe and is a subject we will return to in the Guardian Weekly in this year of elections. Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address Five essential reads in this week’s edition View image in fullscreen Ukrainian soldiers on the streets of Izium returning from the frontline. Photograph: Alessio Mamo/The Guardian 1 Spotlight | ‘I can’t kill’ As the war stretches on, there are few eager recruits and Kyiv’s armed forces are short of soldiers. Luke Harding meets the men attempting to evade conscription. 2 Spotlight | Is great ape tourism to blame for killing off chimps? Viruses that only cause common colds in humans are devastating populations of chimpanzees and gorillas, finds Rachel Nuwer . 3 Feature | The world according to Jason Why do some people get angry about Covid vaccines or worry about chemtrails or the Great Reset? George Monbiot sits down with his local conspiracy theorist to find out. 4 Opinion | How do we navigate this age of confusion? Timothy Garton Ash on what history might usefully teach us in an era of increasing global instability. 5 Culture | ‘Disability can be your power’ Arthur Hughes tells Lucy Webster about his breakthrough role as Richard III and his new screen persona as Shardlake, the late CJ Sansom’s 16th-century detective-lawyer. What else we’ve been reading With starring roles in both tennis-themed love triangle drama Challengers and magic realist fable La Chimera, Josh O’Connor is having a moment. I enjoyed Tim Lewis’ interview with the British actor – previously best known for his role as Prince Charles in The Crown – about becoming famous during lockdown, going off-grid and his love of gardening. Clare Horton, assistant editor Other highlights from the Guardian website View image in fullscreen Multi-millionaire Bassim Haidar plans to leave the UK. Photograph: BH Holdings Audio | Non-doms are threatening to leave. Should they be convinced to stay? Video | ‘The Greens are our enemy’: What is fuelling the far right in Germany? Gallery | Jumpin’ Johannesburg: Soweto’s Afropunk skaters Get in touch We’d love to hear your thoughts on the magazine: for submissions to our letters page, please email weekly.letters@theguardian.com . For anything else, it’s editorial.feedback@theguardian.com Follow us X Facebook Instagram Get the Guardian Weekly magazine delivered to your home address Explore more on these topics Europe Inside Guardian Weekly Share Reuse this content Cover of the 10 May Guardian Weekly Photograph: Núria Garcia Traveria View image in fullscreen Cover of the 10 May Guardian Weekly Photograph: Núria Garcia Traveria This article is more than 1 year old Nowhere to call home. Inside the 10 May Guardian Weekly This article is more than 1 year old Inside Europe’s housing crisis. Plus: Spirited Away on stage Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address Elections for the European parliament are less than a month away and far-right parties are predicted to make significant gains in many of the bloc’s 27 member states. The dire shortage of housing, leading to rising rents and property prices, is becoming a unifying focus for voters’ discontent with their current political leaders. The issue has sparked protests from Amsterdam to Prague and Milan, as the Guardian’s Europe correspondent, Jon Henley , reports. The data is undeniably worrying as young Europeans spend up to 10 times an average salary on rent and mortgage payments, and big cities from the Baltic states to the Iberian peninsula have registered average property price rises of close to 50%. As a result more EU residents live with their parents for longer and put off life-decisions later into adulthood. While housing does not fall within MEPs’ remit, it is a visible locus for the sense of social unease that has beset the whole bloc and has become a pivot for the far right to turn on racialised minorities. But as European community affairs correspondent Ashifa Kassam discovers, it is those communities that are doubly penalised through discrimination from landlords who, research has shown, turn away potential renters with “foreign” surnames. The political and social ramifications of the housing crisis in Europe is mirrored elsewhere across the globe and is a subject we will return to in the Guardian Weekly in this year of elections. Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address Five essential reads in this week’s edition View image in fullscreen Ukrainian soldiers on the streets of Izium returning from the frontline. Photograph: Alessio Mamo/The Guardian 1 Spotlight | ‘I can’t kill’ As the war stretches on, there are few eager recruits and Kyiv’s armed forces are short of soldiers. Luke Harding meets the men attempting to evade conscription. 2 Spotlight | Is great ape tourism to blame for killing off chimps? Viruses that only cause common colds in humans are devastating populations of chimpanzees and gorillas, finds Rachel Nuwer . 3 Feature | The world according to Jason Why do some people get angry about Covid vaccines or worry about chemtrails or the Great Reset? George Monbiot sits down with his local conspiracy theorist to find out. 4 Opinion | How do we navigate this age of confusion? Timothy Garton Ash on what history might usefully teach us in an era of increasing global instability. 5 Culture | ‘Disability can be your power’ Arthur Hughes tells Lucy Webster about his breakthrough role as Richard III and his new screen persona as Shardlake, the late CJ Sansom’s 16th-century detective-lawyer. What else we’ve been reading With starring roles in both tennis-themed love triangle drama Challengers and magic realist fable La Chimera, Josh O’Connor is having a moment. I enjoyed Tim Lewis’ interview with the British actor – previously best known for his role as Prince Charles in The Crown – about becoming famous during lockdown, going off-grid and his love of gardening. Clare Horton, assistant editor Other highlights from the Guardian website View image in fullscreen Multi-millionaire Bassim Haidar plans to leave the UK. Photograph: BH Holdings Audio | Non-doms are threatening to leave. Should they be convinced to stay? Video | ‘The Greens are our enemy’: What is fuelling the far right in Germany? Gallery | Jumpin’ Johannesburg: Soweto’s Afropunk skaters Get in touch We’d love to hear your thoughts on the magazine: for submissions to our letters page, please email weekly.letters@theguardian.com . For anything else, it’s editorial.feedback@theguardian.com Follow us X Facebook Instagram Get the Guardian Weekly magazine delivered to your home address Explore more on these topics Europe Inside Guardian Weekly Share Reuse this content Cover of the 10 May Guardian Weekly Photograph: Núria Garcia Traveria View image in fullscreen Cover of the 10 May Guardian Weekly Photograph: Núria Garcia Traveria Cover of the 10 May Guardian Weekly Photograph: Núria Garcia Traveria View image in fullscreen Cover of the 10 May Guardian Weekly Photograph: Núria Garcia Traveria Cover of the 10 May Guardian Weekly Photograph: Núria Garcia Traveria View image in fullscreen Cover of the 10 May Guardian Weekly Photograph: Núria Garcia Traveria Cover of the 10 May Guardian Weekly Photograph: Núria Garcia Traveria View image in fullscreen Cover of the 10 May Guardian Weekly Photograph: Núria Garcia Traveria Cover of the 10 May Guardian Weekly Photograph: Núria Garcia Traveria Cover of the 10 May Guardian Weekly Photograph: Núria Garcia Traveria This article is more than 1 year old Nowhere to call home. Inside the 10 May Guardian Weekly This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Nowhere to call home. Inside the 10 May Guardian Weekly This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Nowhere to call home. Inside the 10 May Guardian Weekly This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Inside Europe’s housing crisis. Plus: Spirited Away on stage Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address Inside Europe’s housing crisis. Plus: Spirited Away on stage Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address Inside Europe’s housing crisis. Plus: Spirited Away on stage Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address Elections for the European parliament are less than a month away and far-right parties are predicted to make significant gains in many of the bloc’s 27 member states. The dire shortage of housing, leading to rising rents and property prices, is becoming a unifying focus for voters’ discontent with their current political leaders. The issue has sparked protests from Amsterdam to Prague and Milan, as the Guardian’s Europe correspondent, Jon Henley , reports. The data is undeniably worrying as young Europeans spend up to 10 times an average salary on rent and mortgage payments, and big cities from the Baltic states to the Iberian peninsula have registered average property price rises of close to 50%. As a result more EU residents live with their parents for longer and put off life-decisions later into adulthood. While housing does not fall within MEPs’ remit, it is a visible locus for the sense of social unease that has beset the whole bloc and has become a pivot for the far right to turn on racialised minorities. But as European community affairs correspondent Ashifa Kassam discovers, it is those communities that are doubly penalised through discrimination from landlords who, research has shown, turn away potential renters with “foreign” surnames. The political and social ramifications of the housing crisis in Europe is mirrored elsewhere across the globe and is a subject we will return to in the Guardian Weekly in this year of elections. Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address Five essential reads in this week’s edition View image in fullscreen Ukrainian soldiers on the streets of Izium returning from the frontline. Photograph: Alessio Mamo/The Guardian 1 Spotlight | ‘I can’t kill’ As the war stretches on, there are few eager recruits and Kyiv’s armed forces are short of soldiers. Luke Harding meets the men attempting to evade conscription. 2 Spotlight | Is great ape tourism to blame for killing off chimps? Viruses that only cause common colds in humans are devastating populations of chimpanzees and gorillas, finds Rachel Nuwer . 3 Feature | The world according to Jason Why do some people get angry about Covid vaccines or worry about chemtrails or the Great Reset? George Monbiot sits down with his local conspiracy theorist to find out. 4 Opinion | How do we navigate this age of confusion? Timothy Garton Ash on what history might usefully teach us in an era of increasing global instability. 5 Culture | ‘Disability can be your power’ Arthur Hughes tells Lucy Webster about his breakthrough role as Richard III and his new screen persona as Shardlake, the late CJ Sansom’s 16th-century detective-lawyer. What else we’ve been reading With starring roles in both tennis-themed love triangle drama Challengers and magic realist fable La Chimera, Josh O’Connor is having a moment. I enjoyed Tim Lewis’ interview with the British actor – previously best known for his role as Prince Charles in The Crown – about becoming famous during lockdown, going off-grid and his love of gardening. Clare Horton, assistant editor Other highlights from the Guardian website View image in fullscreen Multi-millionaire Bassim Haidar plans to leave the UK. Photograph: BH Holdings Audio | Non-doms are threatening to leave. Should they be convinced to stay? Video | ‘The Greens are our enemy’: What is fuelling the far right in Germany? Gallery | Jumpin’ Johannesburg: Soweto’s Afropunk skaters Get in touch We’d love to hear your thoughts on the magazine: for submissions to our letters page, please email weekly.letters@theguardian.com . For anything else, it’s editorial.feedback@theguardian.com Follow us X Facebook Instagram Get the Guardian Weekly magazine delivered to your home address Explore more on these topics Europe Inside Guardian Weekly Share Reuse this content Elections for the European parliament are less than a month away and far-right parties are predicted to make significant gains in many of the bloc’s 27 member states. The dire shortage of housing, leading to rising rents and property prices, is becoming a unifying focus for voters’ discontent with their current political leaders. The issue has sparked protests from Amsterdam to Prague and Milan, as the Guardian’s Europe correspondent, Jon Henley , reports. The data is undeniably worrying as young Europeans spend up to 10 times an average salary on rent and mortgage payments, and big cities from the Baltic states to the Iberian peninsula have registered average property price rises of close to 50%. As a result more EU residents live with their parents for longer and put off life-decisions later into adulthood. While housing does not fall within MEPs’ remit, it is a visible locus for the sense of social unease that has beset the whole bloc and has become a pivot for the far right to turn on racialised minorities. But as European community affairs correspondent Ashifa Kassam discovers, it is those communities that are doubly penalised through discrimination from landlords who, research has shown, turn away potential renters with “foreign” surnames. The political and social ramifications of the housing crisis in Europe is mirrored elsewhere across the globe and is a subject we will return to in the Guardian Weekly in this year of elections. Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address Five essential reads in this week’s edition View image in fullscreen Ukrainian soldiers on the streets of Izium returning from the frontline. Photograph: Alessio Mamo/The Guardian 1 Spotlight | ‘I can’t kill’ As the war stretches on, there are few eager recruits and Kyiv’s armed forces are short of soldiers. Luke Harding meets the men attempting to evade conscription. 2 Spotlight | Is great ape tourism to blame for killing off chimps? Viruses that only cause common colds in humans are devastating populations of chimpanzees and gorillas, finds Rachel Nuwer . 3 Feature | The world according to Jason Why do some people get angry about Covid vaccines or worry about chemtrails or the Great Reset? George Monbiot sits down with his local conspiracy theorist to find out. 4 Opinion | How do we navigate this age of confusion? Timothy Garton Ash on what history might usefully teach us in an era of increasing global instability. 5 Culture | ‘Disability can be your power’ Arthur Hughes tells Lucy Webster about his breakthrough role as Richard III and his new screen persona as Shardlake, the late CJ Sansom’s 16th-century detective-lawyer. What else we’ve been reading With starring roles in both tennis-themed love triangle drama Challengers and magic realist fable La Chimera, Josh O’Connor is having a moment. I enjoyed Tim Lewis’ interview with the British actor – previously best known for his role as Prince Charles in The Crown – about becoming famous during lockdown, going off-grid and his love of gardening. Clare Horton, assistant editor Other highlights from the Guardian website View image in fullscreen Multi-millionaire Bassim Haidar plans to leave the UK. Photograph: BH Holdings Audio | Non-doms are threatening to leave. Should they be convinced to stay? Video | ‘The Greens are our enemy’: What is fuelling the far right in Germany? Gallery | Jumpin’ Johannesburg: Soweto’s Afropunk skaters Get in touch We’d love to hear your thoughts on the magazine: for submissions to our letters page, please email weekly.letters@theguardian.com . For anything else, it’s editorial.feedback@theguardian.com Follow us X Facebook Instagram Get the Guardian Weekly magazine delivered to your home address Explore more on these topics Europe Inside Guardian Weekly Share Reuse this content Elections for the European parliament are less than a month away and far-right parties are predicted to make significant gains in many of the bloc’s 27 member states. The dire shortage of housing, leading to rising rents and property prices, is becoming a unifying focus for voters’ discontent with their current political leaders. The issue has sparked protests from Amsterdam to Prague and Milan, as the Guardian’s Europe correspondent, Jon Henley , reports. The data is undeniably worrying as young Europeans spend up to 10 times an average salary on rent and mortgage payments, and big cities from the Baltic states to the Iberian peninsula have registered average property price rises of close to 50%. As a result more EU residents live with their parents for longer and put off life-decisions later into adulthood. While housing does not fall within MEPs’ remit, it is a visible locus for the sense of social unease that has beset the whole bloc and has become a pivot for the far right to turn on racialised minorities. But as European community affairs correspondent Ashifa Kassam discovers, it is those communities that are doubly penalised through discrimination from landlords who, research has shown, turn away potential renters with “foreign” surnames. The political and social ramifications of the housing crisis in Europe is mirrored elsewhere across the globe and is a subject we will return to in the Guardian Weekly in this year of elections. Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address Five essential reads in this week’s edition View image in fullscreen Ukrainian soldiers on the streets of Izium returning from the frontline. Photograph: Alessio Mamo/The Guardian 1 Spotlight | ‘I can’t kill’ As the war stretches on, there are few eager recruits and Kyiv’s armed forces are short of soldiers. Luke Harding meets the men attempting to evade conscription. 2 Spotlight | Is great ape tourism to blame for killing off chimps? Viruses that only cause common colds in humans are devastating populations of chimpanzees and gorillas, finds Rachel Nuwer . 3 Feature | The world according to Jason Why do some people get angry about Covid vaccines or worry about chemtrails or the Great Reset? George Monbiot sits down with his local conspiracy theorist to find out. 4 Opinion | How do we navigate this age of confusion? Timothy Garton Ash on what history might usefully teach us in an era of increasing global instability. 5 Culture | ‘Disability can be your power’ Arthur Hughes tells Lucy Webster about his breakthrough role as Richard III and his new screen persona as Shardlake, the late CJ Sansom’s 16th-century detective-lawyer. What else we’ve been reading With starring roles in both tennis-themed love triangle drama Challengers and magic realist fable La Chimera, Josh O’Connor is having a moment. I enjoyed Tim Lewis’ interview with the British actor – previously best known for his role as Prince Charles in The Crown – about becoming famous during lockdown, going off-grid and his love of gardening. Clare Horton, assistant editor Other highlights from the Guardian website View image in fullscreen Multi-millionaire Bassim Haidar plans to leave the UK. Photograph: BH Holdings Audio | Non-doms are threatening to leave. Should they be convinced to stay? Video | ‘The Greens are our enemy’: What is fuelling the far right in Germany? Gallery | Jumpin’ Johannesburg: Soweto’s Afropunk skaters Get in touch We’d love to hear your thoughts on the magazine: for submissions to our letters page, please email weekly.letters@theguardian.com . For anything else, it’s editorial.feedback@theguardian.com Follow us X Facebook Instagram Get the Guardian Weekly magazine delivered to your home address Elections for the European parliament are less than a month away and far-right parties are predicted to make significant gains in many of the bloc’s 27 member states. The dire shortage of housing, leading to rising rents and property prices, is becoming a unifying focus for voters’ discontent with their current political leaders. The issue has sparked protests from Amsterdam to Prague and Milan, as the Guardian’s Europe correspondent, Jon Henley , reports. The data is undeniably worrying as young Europeans spend up to 10 times an average salary on rent and mortgage payments, and big cities from the Baltic states to the Iberian peninsula have registered average property price rises of close to 50%. As a result more EU residents live with their parents for longer and put off life-decisions later into adulthood. While housing does not fall within MEPs’ remit, it is a visible locus for the sense of social unease that has beset the whole bloc and has become a pivot for the far right to turn on racialised minorities. But as European community affairs correspondent Ashifa Kassam discovers, it is those communities that are doubly penalised through discrimination from landlords who, research has shown, turn away potential renters with “foreign” surnames. The political and social ramifications of the housing crisis in Europe is mirrored elsewhere across the globe and is a subject we will return to in the Guardian Weekly in this year of elections. Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address Five essential reads in this week’s edition View image in fullscreen Ukrainian soldiers on the streets of Izium returning from the frontline. Photograph: Alessio Mamo/The Guardian 1 Spotlight | ‘I can’t kill’ As the war stretches on, there are few eager recruits and Kyiv’s armed forces are short of soldiers. Luke Harding meets the men attempting to evade conscription. 2 Spotlight | Is great ape tourism to blame for killing off chimps? Viruses that only cause common colds in humans are devastating populations of chimpanzees and gorillas, finds Rachel Nuwer . 3 Feature | The world according to Jason Why do some people get angry about Covid vaccines or worry about chemtrails or the Great Reset? George Monbiot sits down with his local conspiracy theorist to find out. 4 Opinion | How do we navigate this age of confusion? Timothy Garton Ash on what history might usefully teach us in an era of increasing global instability. 5 Culture | ‘Disability can be your power’ Arthur Hughes tells Lucy Webster about his breakthrough role as Richard III and his new screen persona as Shardlake, the late CJ Sansom’s 16th-century detective-lawyer. What else we’ve been reading With starring roles in both tennis-themed love triangle drama Challengers and magic realist fable La Chimera, Josh O’Connor is having a moment. I enjoyed Tim Lewis’ interview with the British actor – previously best known for his role as Prince Charles in The Crown – about becoming famous during lockdown, going off-grid and his love of gardening. Clare Horton, assistant editor Other highlights from the Guardian website View image in fullscreen Multi-millionaire Bassim Haidar plans to leave the UK. Photograph: BH Holdings Audio | Non-doms are threatening to leave. Should they be convinced to stay? Video | ‘The Greens are our enemy’: What is fuelling the far right in Germany? Gallery | Jumpin’ Johannesburg: Soweto’s Afropunk skaters Get in touch We’d love to hear your thoughts on the magazine: for submissions to our letters page, please email weekly.letters@theguardian.com . For anything else, it’s editorial.feedback@theguardian.com Follow us X Facebook Instagram Get the Guardian Weekly magazine delivered to your home address Elections for the European parliament are less than a month away and far-right parties are predicted to make significant gains in many of the bloc’s 27 member states. The dire shortage of housing, leading to rising rents and property prices, is becoming a unifying focus for voters’ discontent with their current political leaders. The issue has sparked protests from Amsterdam to Prague and Milan, as the Guardian’s Europe correspondent, Jon Henley , reports. The data is undeniably worrying as young Europeans spend up to 10 times an average salary on rent and mortgage payments, and big cities from the Baltic states to the Iberian peninsula have registered average property price rises of close to 50%. As a result more EU residents live with their parents for longer and put off life-decisions later into adulthood. While housing does not fall within MEPs’ remit, it is a visible locus for the sense of social unease that has beset the whole bloc and has become a pivot for the far right to turn on racialised minorities. But as European community affairs correspondent Ashifa Kassam discovers, it is those communities that are doubly penalised through discrimination from landlords who, research has shown, turn away potential renters with “foreign” surnames. The political and social ramifications of the housing crisis in Europe is mirrored elsewhere across the globe and is a subject we will return to in the Guardian Weekly in this year of elections. Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address 1 Spotlight | ‘I can’t kill’ As the war stretches on, there are few eager recruits and Kyiv’s armed forces are short of soldiers. Luke Harding meets the men attempting to evade conscription. 2 Spotlight | Is great ape tourism to blame for killing off chimps? Viruses that only cause common colds in humans are devastating populations of chimpanzees and gorillas, finds Rachel Nuwer . 3 Feature | The world according to Jason Why do some people get angry about Covid vaccines or worry about chemtrails or the Great Reset? George Monbiot sits down with his local conspiracy theorist to find out. 4 Opinion | How do we navigate this age of confusion? Timothy Garton Ash on what history might usefully teach us in an era of increasing global instability. 5 Culture | ‘Disability can be your power’ Arthur Hughes tells Lucy Webster about his breakthrough role as Richard III and his new screen persona as Shardlake, the late CJ Sansom’s 16th-century detective-lawyer. With starring roles in both tennis-themed love triangle drama Challengers and magic realist fable La Chimera, Josh O’Connor is having a moment. I enjoyed Tim Lewis’ interview with the British actor – previously best known for his role as Prince Charles in The Crown – about becoming famous during lockdown, going off-grid and his love of gardening. Clare Horton, assistant editor Audio | Non-doms are threatening to leave. Should they be convinced to stay? Video | ‘The Greens are our enemy’: What is fuelling the far right in Germany? Gallery | Jumpin’ Johannesburg: Soweto’s Afropunk skaters We’d love to hear your thoughts on the magazine: for submissions to our letters page, please email weekly.letters@theguardian.com . For anything else, it’s editorial.feedback@theguardian.com Get the Guardian Weekly magazine delivered to your home address Explore more on these topics Europe Inside Guardian Weekly Share Reuse this content |
David Lammy tells US Republicans he can find ‘common cause’ with Trump
Lammy, who has called Trump a ‘Nazi sympathiser’, spoke at a thinktank and met with Republican politicians in Washington DC. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA View image in fullscreen Lammy, who has called Trump a ‘Nazi sympathiser’, spoke at a thinktank and met with Republican politicians in Washington DC. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA This article is more than 1 year old David Lammy tells US Republicans he can find ‘common cause’ with Trump This article is more than 1 year old In Washington DC speech, shadow foreign secretary says Labour ‘will always work with US, whoever wins’ David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary, has set out in a Washington DC speech his credentials as a British foreign secretary capable of working with a Trump presidency, saying he “gets the agenda that drives America First”, and insisting he would seek to find “common cause” with Donald Trump . He vowed a Labour government “will always work with the United States, whatever the weather and whoever wins” and in government he said he would work in the national interest. Speaking at the Hudson Institute, a right-of-centre thinktank, Lammy also said Trump’s demands to see higher European defence spending had been effective and driven by geo-political reality, though he said he found the way Trump expressed that view “shocking”. Lammy, known for his strong links with leading Democrats, is trying to redress a perceived imbalance by making a concentrated if risky push to woo US Republicans , including by meeting a group of Republican politicians in Washington. He claimed Trump’s attitude to European security is often misunderstood. “I do not believe that he is arguing that the US should abandon Europe. He wants Europeans to do more to ensure a better defended Europe,” he said. “Were his words in office shocking? Yes, they were. Would we have used them? No. But US spending on European defence actually grew under President Trump, as did the defence spending of the wider alliance, during his tenure.” Lammy pointed out that when Trump began his campaign, only four countries were spending 2% of GDP on defence. The number was 10 by the time he left office and it is 18 today, he said. He urged European partners not to personalise the debate about defence spending, saying it is driven as much by the US’s need to shift its focus to the Indo-Pacific region. Asked about his own remarks in 2017 that Trump was a “racist Ku Klux Klan and Nazi sympathiser”, and that he vowed to “chain myself to the door of No 10” if the UK welcomed the US president on a state visit to the UK, Lammy said he had made those remarks as a backbencher. He added: “You are going to struggle to find any politician in the western world who has not had things to say about Donald Trump.” Asked about the protests on campuses over the Israeli treatment of Palestinians in Gaza, he said: “There is a difference between peaceful protest of the kind Mandela would have advocated, and violence and rioting.” He added that he was concerned that the bandwidth of western democracies was growing slimmer. “I am outraged at what is happening to ordinary folk in Sudan, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, in Yemen, in Haiti. Why are we really not up in arms about these issues as well? “I say gently to those who concentrate singly on a very ancient and terrible, terrible war that is taking place in Gaza: but let us not crowd out a lot of people suffering in our world today and underlining that the US and UK have to stand firm on so many fronts today.” Stressing his personal background as someone who had been helped to Harvard Law School through Jewish sponsors, Lammy said the lowest point of his political life had been Labour’s failure to tackle antisemitism under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn. He said struggling working-class communities in middle England and middle America were demanding their politicians attend to basic issues such as inflation and public services. He said: “That means domestic is everything. You win and lose on that basis. I get the agenda that drives America First.” David Miliband condemns ‘absurd’ lack of cooperation between EU and UK Read more Lammy gently urged Trump to shift away from his heavy use of social media, saying: “I hope we are moving away from the tendency to talk about absolutely everything in the moment, and we are a little bit more conscious how opponents are really winding up the system in relation to that. “There will be tensions, but in the end the nature of our shared intelligence capability and our military endeavour – and we saw that recently above the skies of Israel and Jordan – and our shared interest in pushing back against this authoritarian cabal that is coming together, means that I think we will survive the wrinkles when they appear. He also called on the US and the UK to stand firm in alliance with the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia to confront Iran and Russia. He urged China to recognise that it was not in Beijing’s interest to forge an alliance with Moscow, Tehran and Pyongyang. Explore more on these topics Labour David Lammy Donald Trump Republicans Defence policy news Share Reuse this content Lammy, who has called Trump a ‘Nazi sympathiser’, spoke at a thinktank and met with Republican politicians in Washington DC. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA View image in fullscreen Lammy, who has called Trump a ‘Nazi sympathiser’, spoke at a thinktank and met with Republican politicians in Washington DC. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA This article is more than 1 year old David Lammy tells US Republicans he can find ‘common cause’ with Trump This article is more than 1 year old In Washington DC speech, shadow foreign secretary says Labour ‘will always work with US, whoever wins’ David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary, has set out in a Washington DC speech his credentials as a British foreign secretary capable of working with a Trump presidency, saying he “gets the agenda that drives America First”, and insisting he would seek to find “common cause” with Donald Trump . He vowed a Labour government “will always work with the United States, whatever the weather and whoever wins” and in government he said he would work in the national interest. Speaking at the Hudson Institute, a right-of-centre thinktank, Lammy also said Trump’s demands to see higher European defence spending had been effective and driven by geo-political reality, though he said he found the way Trump expressed that view “shocking”. Lammy, known for his strong links with leading Democrats, is trying to redress a perceived imbalance by making a concentrated if risky push to woo US Republicans , including by meeting a group of Republican politicians in Washington. He claimed Trump’s attitude to European security is often misunderstood. “I do not believe that he is arguing that the US should abandon Europe. He wants Europeans to do more to ensure a better defended Europe,” he said. “Were his words in office shocking? Yes, they were. Would we have used them? No. But US spending on European defence actually grew under President Trump, as did the defence spending of the wider alliance, during his tenure.” Lammy pointed out that when Trump began his campaign, only four countries were spending 2% of GDP on defence. The number was 10 by the time he left office and it is 18 today, he said. He urged European partners not to personalise the debate about defence spending, saying it is driven as much by the US’s need to shift its focus to the Indo-Pacific region. Asked about his own remarks in 2017 that Trump was a “racist Ku Klux Klan and Nazi sympathiser”, and that he vowed to “chain myself to the door of No 10” if the UK welcomed the US president on a state visit to the UK, Lammy said he had made those remarks as a backbencher. He added: “You are going to struggle to find any politician in the western world who has not had things to say about Donald Trump.” Asked about the protests on campuses over the Israeli treatment of Palestinians in Gaza, he said: “There is a difference between peaceful protest of the kind Mandela would have advocated, and violence and rioting.” He added that he was concerned that the bandwidth of western democracies was growing slimmer. “I am outraged at what is happening to ordinary folk in Sudan, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, in Yemen, in Haiti. Why are we really not up in arms about these issues as well? “I say gently to those who concentrate singly on a very ancient and terrible, terrible war that is taking place in Gaza: but let us not crowd out a lot of people suffering in our world today and underlining that the US and UK have to stand firm on so many fronts today.” Stressing his personal background as someone who had been helped to Harvard Law School through Jewish sponsors, Lammy said the lowest point of his political life had been Labour’s failure to tackle antisemitism under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn. He said struggling working-class communities in middle England and middle America were demanding their politicians attend to basic issues such as inflation and public services. He said: “That means domestic is everything. You win and lose on that basis. I get the agenda that drives America First.” David Miliband condemns ‘absurd’ lack of cooperation between EU and UK Read more Lammy gently urged Trump to shift away from his heavy use of social media, saying: “I hope we are moving away from the tendency to talk about absolutely everything in the moment, and we are a little bit more conscious how opponents are really winding up the system in relation to that. “There will be tensions, but in the end the nature of our shared intelligence capability and our military endeavour – and we saw that recently above the skies of Israel and Jordan – and our shared interest in pushing back against this authoritarian cabal that is coming together, means that I think we will survive the wrinkles when they appear. He also called on the US and the UK to stand firm in alliance with the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia to confront Iran and Russia. He urged China to recognise that it was not in Beijing’s interest to forge an alliance with Moscow, Tehran and Pyongyang. Explore more on these topics Labour David Lammy Donald Trump Republicans Defence policy news Share Reuse this content Lammy, who has called Trump a ‘Nazi sympathiser’, spoke at a thinktank and met with Republican politicians in Washington DC. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA View image in fullscreen Lammy, who has called Trump a ‘Nazi sympathiser’, spoke at a thinktank and met with Republican politicians in Washington DC. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA Lammy, who has called Trump a ‘Nazi sympathiser’, spoke at a thinktank and met with Republican politicians in Washington DC. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA View image in fullscreen Lammy, who has called Trump a ‘Nazi sympathiser’, spoke at a thinktank and met with Republican politicians in Washington DC. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA Lammy, who has called Trump a ‘Nazi sympathiser’, spoke at a thinktank and met with Republican politicians in Washington DC. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA View image in fullscreen Lammy, who has called Trump a ‘Nazi sympathiser’, spoke at a thinktank and met with Republican politicians in Washington DC. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA Lammy, who has called Trump a ‘Nazi sympathiser’, spoke at a thinktank and met with Republican politicians in Washington DC. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA View image in fullscreen Lammy, who has called Trump a ‘Nazi sympathiser’, spoke at a thinktank and met with Republican politicians in Washington DC. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA Lammy, who has called Trump a ‘Nazi sympathiser’, spoke at a thinktank and met with Republican politicians in Washington DC. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA Lammy, who has called Trump a ‘Nazi sympathiser’, spoke at a thinktank and met with Republican politicians in Washington DC. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA This article is more than 1 year old David Lammy tells US Republicans he can find ‘common cause’ with Trump This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old David Lammy tells US Republicans he can find ‘common cause’ with Trump This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old David Lammy tells US Republicans he can find ‘common cause’ with Trump This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old In Washington DC speech, shadow foreign secretary says Labour ‘will always work with US, whoever wins’ In Washington DC speech, shadow foreign secretary says Labour ‘will always work with US, whoever wins’ In Washington DC speech, shadow foreign secretary says Labour ‘will always work with US, whoever wins’ David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary, has set out in a Washington DC speech his credentials as a British foreign secretary capable of working with a Trump presidency, saying he “gets the agenda that drives America First”, and insisting he would seek to find “common cause” with Donald Trump . He vowed a Labour government “will always work with the United States, whatever the weather and whoever wins” and in government he said he would work in the national interest. Speaking at the Hudson Institute, a right-of-centre thinktank, Lammy also said Trump’s demands to see higher European defence spending had been effective and driven by geo-political reality, though he said he found the way Trump expressed that view “shocking”. Lammy, known for his strong links with leading Democrats, is trying to redress a perceived imbalance by making a concentrated if risky push to woo US Republicans , including by meeting a group of Republican politicians in Washington. He claimed Trump’s attitude to European security is often misunderstood. “I do not believe that he is arguing that the US should abandon Europe. He wants Europeans to do more to ensure a better defended Europe,” he said. “Were his words in office shocking? Yes, they were. Would we have used them? No. But US spending on European defence actually grew under President Trump, as did the defence spending of the wider alliance, during his tenure.” Lammy pointed out that when Trump began his campaign, only four countries were spending 2% of GDP on defence. The number was 10 by the time he left office and it is 18 today, he said. He urged European partners not to personalise the debate about defence spending, saying it is driven as much by the US’s need to shift its focus to the Indo-Pacific region. Asked about his own remarks in 2017 that Trump was a “racist Ku Klux Klan and Nazi sympathiser”, and that he vowed to “chain myself to the door of No 10” if the UK welcomed the US president on a state visit to the UK, Lammy said he had made those remarks as a backbencher. He added: “You are going to struggle to find any politician in the western world who has not had things to say about Donald Trump.” Asked about the protests on campuses over the Israeli treatment of Palestinians in Gaza, he said: “There is a difference between peaceful protest of the kind Mandela would have advocated, and violence and rioting.” He added that he was concerned that the bandwidth of western democracies was growing slimmer. “I am outraged at what is happening to ordinary folk in Sudan, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, in Yemen, in Haiti. Why are we really not up in arms about these issues as well? “I say gently to those who concentrate singly on a very ancient and terrible, terrible war that is taking place in Gaza: but let us not crowd out a lot of people suffering in our world today and underlining that the US and UK have to stand firm on so many fronts today.” Stressing his personal background as someone who had been helped to Harvard Law School through Jewish sponsors, Lammy said the lowest point of his political life had been Labour’s failure to tackle antisemitism under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn. He said struggling working-class communities in middle England and middle America were demanding their politicians attend to basic issues such as inflation and public services. He said: “That means domestic is everything. You win and lose on that basis. I get the agenda that drives America First.” David Miliband condemns ‘absurd’ lack of cooperation between EU and UK Read more Lammy gently urged Trump to shift away from his heavy use of social media, saying: “I hope we are moving away from the tendency to talk about absolutely everything in the moment, and we are a little bit more conscious how opponents are really winding up the system in relation to that. “There will be tensions, but in the end the nature of our shared intelligence capability and our military endeavour – and we saw that recently above the skies of Israel and Jordan – and our shared interest in pushing back against this authoritarian cabal that is coming together, means that I think we will survive the wrinkles when they appear. He also called on the US and the UK to stand firm in alliance with the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia to confront Iran and Russia. He urged China to recognise that it was not in Beijing’s interest to forge an alliance with Moscow, Tehran and Pyongyang. Explore more on these topics Labour David Lammy Donald Trump Republicans Defence policy news Share Reuse this content David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary, has set out in a Washington DC speech his credentials as a British foreign secretary capable of working with a Trump presidency, saying he “gets the agenda that drives America First”, and insisting he would seek to find “common cause” with Donald Trump . He vowed a Labour government “will always work with the United States, whatever the weather and whoever wins” and in government he said he would work in the national interest. Speaking at the Hudson Institute, a right-of-centre thinktank, Lammy also said Trump’s demands to see higher European defence spending had been effective and driven by geo-political reality, though he said he found the way Trump expressed that view “shocking”. Lammy, known for his strong links with leading Democrats, is trying to redress a perceived imbalance by making a concentrated if risky push to woo US Republicans , including by meeting a group of Republican politicians in Washington. He claimed Trump’s attitude to European security is often misunderstood. “I do not believe that he is arguing that the US should abandon Europe. He wants Europeans to do more to ensure a better defended Europe,” he said. “Were his words in office shocking? Yes, they were. Would we have used them? No. But US spending on European defence actually grew under President Trump, as did the defence spending of the wider alliance, during his tenure.” Lammy pointed out that when Trump began his campaign, only four countries were spending 2% of GDP on defence. The number was 10 by the time he left office and it is 18 today, he said. He urged European partners not to personalise the debate about defence spending, saying it is driven as much by the US’s need to shift its focus to the Indo-Pacific region. Asked about his own remarks in 2017 that Trump was a “racist Ku Klux Klan and Nazi sympathiser”, and that he vowed to “chain myself to the door of No 10” if the UK welcomed the US president on a state visit to the UK, Lammy said he had made those remarks as a backbencher. He added: “You are going to struggle to find any politician in the western world who has not had things to say about Donald Trump.” Asked about the protests on campuses over the Israeli treatment of Palestinians in Gaza, he said: “There is a difference between peaceful protest of the kind Mandela would have advocated, and violence and rioting.” He added that he was concerned that the bandwidth of western democracies was growing slimmer. “I am outraged at what is happening to ordinary folk in Sudan, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, in Yemen, in Haiti. Why are we really not up in arms about these issues as well? “I say gently to those who concentrate singly on a very ancient and terrible, terrible war that is taking place in Gaza: but let us not crowd out a lot of people suffering in our world today and underlining that the US and UK have to stand firm on so many fronts today.” Stressing his personal background as someone who had been helped to Harvard Law School through Jewish sponsors, Lammy said the lowest point of his political life had been Labour’s failure to tackle antisemitism under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn. He said struggling working-class communities in middle England and middle America were demanding their politicians attend to basic issues such as inflation and public services. He said: “That means domestic is everything. You win and lose on that basis. I get the agenda that drives America First.” David Miliband condemns ‘absurd’ lack of cooperation between EU and UK Read more Lammy gently urged Trump to shift away from his heavy use of social media, saying: “I hope we are moving away from the tendency to talk about absolutely everything in the moment, and we are a little bit more conscious how opponents are really winding up the system in relation to that. “There will be tensions, but in the end the nature of our shared intelligence capability and our military endeavour – and we saw that recently above the skies of Israel and Jordan – and our shared interest in pushing back against this authoritarian cabal that is coming together, means that I think we will survive the wrinkles when they appear. He also called on the US and the UK to stand firm in alliance with the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia to confront Iran and Russia. He urged China to recognise that it was not in Beijing’s interest to forge an alliance with Moscow, Tehran and Pyongyang. Explore more on these topics Labour David Lammy Donald Trump Republicans Defence policy news Share Reuse this content David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary, has set out in a Washington DC speech his credentials as a British foreign secretary capable of working with a Trump presidency, saying he “gets the agenda that drives America First”, and insisting he would seek to find “common cause” with Donald Trump . He vowed a Labour government “will always work with the United States, whatever the weather and whoever wins” and in government he said he would work in the national interest. Speaking at the Hudson Institute, a right-of-centre thinktank, Lammy also said Trump’s demands to see higher European defence spending had been effective and driven by geo-political reality, though he said he found the way Trump expressed that view “shocking”. Lammy, known for his strong links with leading Democrats, is trying to redress a perceived imbalance by making a concentrated if risky push to woo US Republicans , including by meeting a group of Republican politicians in Washington. He claimed Trump’s attitude to European security is often misunderstood. “I do not believe that he is arguing that the US should abandon Europe. He wants Europeans to do more to ensure a better defended Europe,” he said. “Were his words in office shocking? Yes, they were. Would we have used them? No. But US spending on European defence actually grew under President Trump, as did the defence spending of the wider alliance, during his tenure.” Lammy pointed out that when Trump began his campaign, only four countries were spending 2% of GDP on defence. The number was 10 by the time he left office and it is 18 today, he said. He urged European partners not to personalise the debate about defence spending, saying it is driven as much by the US’s need to shift its focus to the Indo-Pacific region. Asked about his own remarks in 2017 that Trump was a “racist Ku Klux Klan and Nazi sympathiser”, and that he vowed to “chain myself to the door of No 10” if the UK welcomed the US president on a state visit to the UK, Lammy said he had made those remarks as a backbencher. He added: “You are going to struggle to find any politician in the western world who has not had things to say about Donald Trump.” Asked about the protests on campuses over the Israeli treatment of Palestinians in Gaza, he said: “There is a difference between peaceful protest of the kind Mandela would have advocated, and violence and rioting.” He added that he was concerned that the bandwidth of western democracies was growing slimmer. “I am outraged at what is happening to ordinary folk in Sudan, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, in Yemen, in Haiti. Why are we really not up in arms about these issues as well? “I say gently to those who concentrate singly on a very ancient and terrible, terrible war that is taking place in Gaza: but let us not crowd out a lot of people suffering in our world today and underlining that the US and UK have to stand firm on so many fronts today.” Stressing his personal background as someone who had been helped to Harvard Law School through Jewish sponsors, Lammy said the lowest point of his political life had been Labour’s failure to tackle antisemitism under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn. He said struggling working-class communities in middle England and middle America were demanding their politicians attend to basic issues such as inflation and public services. He said: “That means domestic is everything. You win and lose on that basis. I get the agenda that drives America First.” David Miliband condemns ‘absurd’ lack of cooperation between EU and UK Read more Lammy gently urged Trump to shift away from his heavy use of social media, saying: “I hope we are moving away from the tendency to talk about absolutely everything in the moment, and we are a little bit more conscious how opponents are really winding up the system in relation to that. “There will be tensions, but in the end the nature of our shared intelligence capability and our military endeavour – and we saw that recently above the skies of Israel and Jordan – and our shared interest in pushing back against this authoritarian cabal that is coming together, means that I think we will survive the wrinkles when they appear. He also called on the US and the UK to stand firm in alliance with the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia to confront Iran and Russia. He urged China to recognise that it was not in Beijing’s interest to forge an alliance with Moscow, Tehran and Pyongyang. David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary, has set out in a Washington DC speech his credentials as a British foreign secretary capable of working with a Trump presidency, saying he “gets the agenda that drives America First”, and insisting he would seek to find “common cause” with Donald Trump . He vowed a Labour government “will always work with the United States, whatever the weather and whoever wins” and in government he said he would work in the national interest. Speaking at the Hudson Institute, a right-of-centre thinktank, Lammy also said Trump’s demands to see higher European defence spending had been effective and driven by geo-political reality, though he said he found the way Trump expressed that view “shocking”. Lammy, known for his strong links with leading Democrats, is trying to redress a perceived imbalance by making a concentrated if risky push to woo US Republicans , including by meeting a group of Republican politicians in Washington. He claimed Trump’s attitude to European security is often misunderstood. “I do not believe that he is arguing that the US should abandon Europe. He wants Europeans to do more to ensure a better defended Europe,” he said. “Were his words in office shocking? Yes, they were. Would we have used them? No. But US spending on European defence actually grew under President Trump, as did the defence spending of the wider alliance, during his tenure.” Lammy pointed out that when Trump began his campaign, only four countries were spending 2% of GDP on defence. The number was 10 by the time he left office and it is 18 today, he said. He urged European partners not to personalise the debate about defence spending, saying it is driven as much by the US’s need to shift its focus to the Indo-Pacific region. Asked about his own remarks in 2017 that Trump was a “racist Ku Klux Klan and Nazi sympathiser”, and that he vowed to “chain myself to the door of No 10” if the UK welcomed the US president on a state visit to the UK, Lammy said he had made those remarks as a backbencher. He added: “You are going to struggle to find any politician in the western world who has not had things to say about Donald Trump.” Asked about the protests on campuses over the Israeli treatment of Palestinians in Gaza, he said: “There is a difference between peaceful protest of the kind Mandela would have advocated, and violence and rioting.” He added that he was concerned that the bandwidth of western democracies was growing slimmer. “I am outraged at what is happening to ordinary folk in Sudan, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, in Yemen, in Haiti. Why are we really not up in arms about these issues as well? “I say gently to those who concentrate singly on a very ancient and terrible, terrible war that is taking place in Gaza: but let us not crowd out a lot of people suffering in our world today and underlining that the US and UK have to stand firm on so many fronts today.” Stressing his personal background as someone who had been helped to Harvard Law School through Jewish sponsors, Lammy said the lowest point of his political life had been Labour’s failure to tackle antisemitism under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn. He said struggling working-class communities in middle England and middle America were demanding their politicians attend to basic issues such as inflation and public services. He said: “That means domestic is everything. You win and lose on that basis. I get the agenda that drives America First.” David Miliband condemns ‘absurd’ lack of cooperation between EU and UK Read more Lammy gently urged Trump to shift away from his heavy use of social media, saying: “I hope we are moving away from the tendency to talk about absolutely everything in the moment, and we are a little bit more conscious how opponents are really winding up the system in relation to that. “There will be tensions, but in the end the nature of our shared intelligence capability and our military endeavour – and we saw that recently above the skies of Israel and Jordan – and our shared interest in pushing back against this authoritarian cabal that is coming together, means that I think we will survive the wrinkles when they appear. He also called on the US and the UK to stand firm in alliance with the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia to confront Iran and Russia. He urged China to recognise that it was not in Beijing’s interest to forge an alliance with Moscow, Tehran and Pyongyang. David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary, has set out in a Washington DC speech his credentials as a British foreign secretary capable of working with a Trump presidency, saying he “gets the agenda that drives America First”, and insisting he would seek to find “common cause” with Donald Trump . He vowed a Labour government “will always work with the United States, whatever the weather and whoever wins” and in government he said he would work in the national interest. Speaking at the Hudson Institute, a right-of-centre thinktank, Lammy also said Trump’s demands to see higher European defence spending had been effective and driven by geo-political reality, though he said he found the way Trump expressed that view “shocking”. Lammy, known for his strong links with leading Democrats, is trying to redress a perceived imbalance by making a concentrated if risky push to woo US Republicans , including by meeting a group of Republican politicians in Washington. He claimed Trump’s attitude to European security is often misunderstood. “I do not believe that he is arguing that the US should abandon Europe. He wants Europeans to do more to ensure a better defended Europe,” he said. “Were his words in office shocking? Yes, they were. Would we have used them? No. But US spending on European defence actually grew under President Trump, as did the defence spending of the wider alliance, during his tenure.” Lammy pointed out that when Trump began his campaign, only four countries were spending 2% of GDP on defence. The number was 10 by the time he left office and it is 18 today, he said. He urged European partners not to personalise the debate about defence spending, saying it is driven as much by the US’s need to shift its focus to the Indo-Pacific region. Asked about his own remarks in 2017 that Trump was a “racist Ku Klux Klan and Nazi sympathiser”, and that he vowed to “chain myself to the door of No 10” if the UK welcomed the US president on a state visit to the UK, Lammy said he had made those remarks as a backbencher. He added: “You are going to struggle to find any politician in the western world who has not had things to say about Donald Trump.” Asked about the protests on campuses over the Israeli treatment of Palestinians in Gaza, he said: “There is a difference between peaceful protest of the kind Mandela would have advocated, and violence and rioting.” He added that he was concerned that the bandwidth of western democracies was growing slimmer. “I am outraged at what is happening to ordinary folk in Sudan, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, in Yemen, in Haiti. Why are we really not up in arms about these issues as well? “I say gently to those who concentrate singly on a very ancient and terrible, terrible war that is taking place in Gaza: but let us not crowd out a lot of people suffering in our world today and underlining that the US and UK have to stand firm on so many fronts today.” Stressing his personal background as someone who had been helped to Harvard Law School through Jewish sponsors, Lammy said the lowest point of his political life had been Labour’s failure to tackle antisemitism under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn. He said struggling working-class communities in middle England and middle America were demanding their politicians attend to basic issues such as inflation and public services. He said: “That means domestic is everything. You win and lose on that basis. I get the agenda that drives America First.” David Miliband condemns ‘absurd’ lack of cooperation between EU and UK Read more David Miliband condemns ‘absurd’ lack of cooperation between EU and UK Read more David Miliband condemns ‘absurd’ lack of cooperation between EU and UK Read more David Miliband condemns ‘absurd’ lack of cooperation between EU and UK David Miliband condemns ‘absurd’ lack of cooperation between EU and UK Lammy gently urged Trump to shift away from his heavy use of social media, saying: “I hope we are moving away from the tendency to talk about absolutely everything in the moment, and we are a little bit more conscious how opponents are really winding up the system in relation to that. “There will be tensions, but in the end the nature of our shared intelligence capability and our military endeavour – and we saw that recently above the skies of Israel and Jordan – and our shared interest in pushing back against this authoritarian cabal that is coming together, means that I think we will survive the wrinkles when they appear. He also called on the US and the UK to stand firm in alliance with the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia to confront Iran and Russia. He urged China to recognise that it was not in Beijing’s interest to forge an alliance with Moscow, Tehran and Pyongyang. Explore more on these topics Labour David Lammy Donald Trump Republicans Defence policy news Share Reuse this content Labour David Lammy Donald Trump Republicans Defence policy news |
Post Office deceived barrister reviewing Horizon conviction, inquiry hears
Simon Clarke was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra, a branch operator who was seeking to have her 2010 conviction overturned. Photograph: Post Office Horizon IT inquiry/PA View image in fullscreen Simon Clarke was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra, a branch operator who was seeking to have her 2010 conviction overturned. Photograph: Post Office Horizon IT inquiry/PA This article is more than 1 year old Post Office deceived barrister reviewing Horizon conviction, inquiry hears This article is more than 1 year old Simon Clarke, who advised postal firm to stop prosecutions decade ago, says key document was ‘deliberately withheld’ from him A barrister who advised the Post Office to stop prosecuting branch owner-operators told a public inquiry he was “now sure” that the state-owned company “must have deceived” him because it failed to provide him with “highly relevant material”. Simon Clarke, who worked for the law firm Cartwright King when it was advising the Post Office, was being questioned on Thursday as part of the judge-led hearings looking into the Horizon IT scandal. The inquiry is examining the wrongful prosecution of hundreds of branch owner-operators who were hounded by the Post Office because of financial shortfalls in their branch accounts that turned out to be caused by IT bugs in the Horizon computer system. Clarke said in his witness statement that in hindsight: “I am now sure that POL [Post Office Ltd] must have deceived both me and CK [Cartwright King]; I say this because it is now obvious to me that highly relevant material was not provided to me either at all, or when it should have been provided. I conclude that this failure to properly inform me was a decision taken by those in a position to do [and] act as they did.” He told the inquiry he felt the Post Office had “deliberately withheld” a key document from him when he was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra , a branch operator who had been wrongly convicted in 2010 and who was seeking to overturn her conviction. Misra was sentenced to 15 months in prison for theft and was jailed on her son’s 10th birthday while eight weeks pregnant. She was among those exonerated by the court of appeal in 2021. Clarke said that when he began to review Misra’s case, he was told the Post Office’s prosecution file was not available. He told the inquiry he now believed it was “deliberately withheld” from him. “That is now my view, he said, adding: “It crystallises my view that I was misled and deceived.” He said he also felt “misled and deceived” in general. “Post Office repeated their protestations that since day dot there was nothing wrong with Horizon when clearly they knew there were issues,” he told the hearing. Clarke wrote the key legal advice for the Post Office in July 2013 that made it clear there was a problem with its past prosecutions because the state-owned company had relied on testimony from the expert witness Gareth Jenkins, who was an engineer at Fujitsu, the company that developed the IT system. The barrister concluded in his legal advice that Jenkins was an “unreliable witness” who may have breached his duties to the court by failing to disclose information he knew about bugs in the Horizon software to defendants who could have used it to challenge their convictions. Clarke said prosecutions of branch owner-operators effectively stopped after he had produced his 2013 advice and he said in his witness statement that he was now “professionally and personally proud” of that fact. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion By 2015, the internal view at Cartwright King was that the law firm “had been mis-instructed” by the Post Office about whether the IT system could be accessed remotely by Fujitsu staff, he said. “By this time, we were coming to the realisation that something was seriously wrong with POL’s corporate culture when dealing with Horizon-related issues whether in a criminal or civil arena,” he added. The inquiry continues. Explore more on these topics Post Office Horizon scandal Post Office news Share Reuse this content Simon Clarke was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra, a branch operator who was seeking to have her 2010 conviction overturned. Photograph: Post Office Horizon IT inquiry/PA View image in fullscreen Simon Clarke was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra, a branch operator who was seeking to have her 2010 conviction overturned. Photograph: Post Office Horizon IT inquiry/PA This article is more than 1 year old Post Office deceived barrister reviewing Horizon conviction, inquiry hears This article is more than 1 year old Simon Clarke, who advised postal firm to stop prosecutions decade ago, says key document was ‘deliberately withheld’ from him A barrister who advised the Post Office to stop prosecuting branch owner-operators told a public inquiry he was “now sure” that the state-owned company “must have deceived” him because it failed to provide him with “highly relevant material”. Simon Clarke, who worked for the law firm Cartwright King when it was advising the Post Office, was being questioned on Thursday as part of the judge-led hearings looking into the Horizon IT scandal. The inquiry is examining the wrongful prosecution of hundreds of branch owner-operators who were hounded by the Post Office because of financial shortfalls in their branch accounts that turned out to be caused by IT bugs in the Horizon computer system. Clarke said in his witness statement that in hindsight: “I am now sure that POL [Post Office Ltd] must have deceived both me and CK [Cartwright King]; I say this because it is now obvious to me that highly relevant material was not provided to me either at all, or when it should have been provided. I conclude that this failure to properly inform me was a decision taken by those in a position to do [and] act as they did.” He told the inquiry he felt the Post Office had “deliberately withheld” a key document from him when he was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra , a branch operator who had been wrongly convicted in 2010 and who was seeking to overturn her conviction. Misra was sentenced to 15 months in prison for theft and was jailed on her son’s 10th birthday while eight weeks pregnant. She was among those exonerated by the court of appeal in 2021. Clarke said that when he began to review Misra’s case, he was told the Post Office’s prosecution file was not available. He told the inquiry he now believed it was “deliberately withheld” from him. “That is now my view, he said, adding: “It crystallises my view that I was misled and deceived.” He said he also felt “misled and deceived” in general. “Post Office repeated their protestations that since day dot there was nothing wrong with Horizon when clearly they knew there were issues,” he told the hearing. Clarke wrote the key legal advice for the Post Office in July 2013 that made it clear there was a problem with its past prosecutions because the state-owned company had relied on testimony from the expert witness Gareth Jenkins, who was an engineer at Fujitsu, the company that developed the IT system. The barrister concluded in his legal advice that Jenkins was an “unreliable witness” who may have breached his duties to the court by failing to disclose information he knew about bugs in the Horizon software to defendants who could have used it to challenge their convictions. Clarke said prosecutions of branch owner-operators effectively stopped after he had produced his 2013 advice and he said in his witness statement that he was now “professionally and personally proud” of that fact. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion By 2015, the internal view at Cartwright King was that the law firm “had been mis-instructed” by the Post Office about whether the IT system could be accessed remotely by Fujitsu staff, he said. “By this time, we were coming to the realisation that something was seriously wrong with POL’s corporate culture when dealing with Horizon-related issues whether in a criminal or civil arena,” he added. The inquiry continues. Explore more on these topics Post Office Horizon scandal Post Office news Share Reuse this content Simon Clarke was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra, a branch operator who was seeking to have her 2010 conviction overturned. Photograph: Post Office Horizon IT inquiry/PA View image in fullscreen Simon Clarke was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra, a branch operator who was seeking to have her 2010 conviction overturned. Photograph: Post Office Horizon IT inquiry/PA Simon Clarke was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra, a branch operator who was seeking to have her 2010 conviction overturned. Photograph: Post Office Horizon IT inquiry/PA View image in fullscreen Simon Clarke was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra, a branch operator who was seeking to have her 2010 conviction overturned. Photograph: Post Office Horizon IT inquiry/PA Simon Clarke was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra, a branch operator who was seeking to have her 2010 conviction overturned. Photograph: Post Office Horizon IT inquiry/PA View image in fullscreen Simon Clarke was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra, a branch operator who was seeking to have her 2010 conviction overturned. Photograph: Post Office Horizon IT inquiry/PA Simon Clarke was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra, a branch operator who was seeking to have her 2010 conviction overturned. Photograph: Post Office Horizon IT inquiry/PA View image in fullscreen Simon Clarke was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra, a branch operator who was seeking to have her 2010 conviction overturned. Photograph: Post Office Horizon IT inquiry/PA Simon Clarke was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra, a branch operator who was seeking to have her 2010 conviction overturned. Photograph: Post Office Horizon IT inquiry/PA Simon Clarke was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra, a branch operator who was seeking to have her 2010 conviction overturned. Photograph: Post Office Horizon IT inquiry/PA This article is more than 1 year old Post Office deceived barrister reviewing Horizon conviction, inquiry hears This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Post Office deceived barrister reviewing Horizon conviction, inquiry hears This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Post Office deceived barrister reviewing Horizon conviction, inquiry hears This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Simon Clarke, who advised postal firm to stop prosecutions decade ago, says key document was ‘deliberately withheld’ from him Simon Clarke, who advised postal firm to stop prosecutions decade ago, says key document was ‘deliberately withheld’ from him Simon Clarke, who advised postal firm to stop prosecutions decade ago, says key document was ‘deliberately withheld’ from him A barrister who advised the Post Office to stop prosecuting branch owner-operators told a public inquiry he was “now sure” that the state-owned company “must have deceived” him because it failed to provide him with “highly relevant material”. Simon Clarke, who worked for the law firm Cartwright King when it was advising the Post Office, was being questioned on Thursday as part of the judge-led hearings looking into the Horizon IT scandal. The inquiry is examining the wrongful prosecution of hundreds of branch owner-operators who were hounded by the Post Office because of financial shortfalls in their branch accounts that turned out to be caused by IT bugs in the Horizon computer system. Clarke said in his witness statement that in hindsight: “I am now sure that POL [Post Office Ltd] must have deceived both me and CK [Cartwright King]; I say this because it is now obvious to me that highly relevant material was not provided to me either at all, or when it should have been provided. I conclude that this failure to properly inform me was a decision taken by those in a position to do [and] act as they did.” He told the inquiry he felt the Post Office had “deliberately withheld” a key document from him when he was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra , a branch operator who had been wrongly convicted in 2010 and who was seeking to overturn her conviction. Misra was sentenced to 15 months in prison for theft and was jailed on her son’s 10th birthday while eight weeks pregnant. She was among those exonerated by the court of appeal in 2021. Clarke said that when he began to review Misra’s case, he was told the Post Office’s prosecution file was not available. He told the inquiry he now believed it was “deliberately withheld” from him. “That is now my view, he said, adding: “It crystallises my view that I was misled and deceived.” He said he also felt “misled and deceived” in general. “Post Office repeated their protestations that since day dot there was nothing wrong with Horizon when clearly they knew there were issues,” he told the hearing. Clarke wrote the key legal advice for the Post Office in July 2013 that made it clear there was a problem with its past prosecutions because the state-owned company had relied on testimony from the expert witness Gareth Jenkins, who was an engineer at Fujitsu, the company that developed the IT system. The barrister concluded in his legal advice that Jenkins was an “unreliable witness” who may have breached his duties to the court by failing to disclose information he knew about bugs in the Horizon software to defendants who could have used it to challenge their convictions. Clarke said prosecutions of branch owner-operators effectively stopped after he had produced his 2013 advice and he said in his witness statement that he was now “professionally and personally proud” of that fact. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion By 2015, the internal view at Cartwright King was that the law firm “had been mis-instructed” by the Post Office about whether the IT system could be accessed remotely by Fujitsu staff, he said. “By this time, we were coming to the realisation that something was seriously wrong with POL’s corporate culture when dealing with Horizon-related issues whether in a criminal or civil arena,” he added. The inquiry continues. Explore more on these topics Post Office Horizon scandal Post Office news Share Reuse this content A barrister who advised the Post Office to stop prosecuting branch owner-operators told a public inquiry he was “now sure” that the state-owned company “must have deceived” him because it failed to provide him with “highly relevant material”. Simon Clarke, who worked for the law firm Cartwright King when it was advising the Post Office, was being questioned on Thursday as part of the judge-led hearings looking into the Horizon IT scandal. The inquiry is examining the wrongful prosecution of hundreds of branch owner-operators who were hounded by the Post Office because of financial shortfalls in their branch accounts that turned out to be caused by IT bugs in the Horizon computer system. Clarke said in his witness statement that in hindsight: “I am now sure that POL [Post Office Ltd] must have deceived both me and CK [Cartwright King]; I say this because it is now obvious to me that highly relevant material was not provided to me either at all, or when it should have been provided. I conclude that this failure to properly inform me was a decision taken by those in a position to do [and] act as they did.” He told the inquiry he felt the Post Office had “deliberately withheld” a key document from him when he was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra , a branch operator who had been wrongly convicted in 2010 and who was seeking to overturn her conviction. Misra was sentenced to 15 months in prison for theft and was jailed on her son’s 10th birthday while eight weeks pregnant. She was among those exonerated by the court of appeal in 2021. Clarke said that when he began to review Misra’s case, he was told the Post Office’s prosecution file was not available. He told the inquiry he now believed it was “deliberately withheld” from him. “That is now my view, he said, adding: “It crystallises my view that I was misled and deceived.” He said he also felt “misled and deceived” in general. “Post Office repeated their protestations that since day dot there was nothing wrong with Horizon when clearly they knew there were issues,” he told the hearing. Clarke wrote the key legal advice for the Post Office in July 2013 that made it clear there was a problem with its past prosecutions because the state-owned company had relied on testimony from the expert witness Gareth Jenkins, who was an engineer at Fujitsu, the company that developed the IT system. The barrister concluded in his legal advice that Jenkins was an “unreliable witness” who may have breached his duties to the court by failing to disclose information he knew about bugs in the Horizon software to defendants who could have used it to challenge their convictions. Clarke said prosecutions of branch owner-operators effectively stopped after he had produced his 2013 advice and he said in his witness statement that he was now “professionally and personally proud” of that fact. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion By 2015, the internal view at Cartwright King was that the law firm “had been mis-instructed” by the Post Office about whether the IT system could be accessed remotely by Fujitsu staff, he said. “By this time, we were coming to the realisation that something was seriously wrong with POL’s corporate culture when dealing with Horizon-related issues whether in a criminal or civil arena,” he added. The inquiry continues. Explore more on these topics Post Office Horizon scandal Post Office news Share Reuse this content A barrister who advised the Post Office to stop prosecuting branch owner-operators told a public inquiry he was “now sure” that the state-owned company “must have deceived” him because it failed to provide him with “highly relevant material”. Simon Clarke, who worked for the law firm Cartwright King when it was advising the Post Office, was being questioned on Thursday as part of the judge-led hearings looking into the Horizon IT scandal. The inquiry is examining the wrongful prosecution of hundreds of branch owner-operators who were hounded by the Post Office because of financial shortfalls in their branch accounts that turned out to be caused by IT bugs in the Horizon computer system. Clarke said in his witness statement that in hindsight: “I am now sure that POL [Post Office Ltd] must have deceived both me and CK [Cartwright King]; I say this because it is now obvious to me that highly relevant material was not provided to me either at all, or when it should have been provided. I conclude that this failure to properly inform me was a decision taken by those in a position to do [and] act as they did.” He told the inquiry he felt the Post Office had “deliberately withheld” a key document from him when he was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra , a branch operator who had been wrongly convicted in 2010 and who was seeking to overturn her conviction. Misra was sentenced to 15 months in prison for theft and was jailed on her son’s 10th birthday while eight weeks pregnant. She was among those exonerated by the court of appeal in 2021. Clarke said that when he began to review Misra’s case, he was told the Post Office’s prosecution file was not available. He told the inquiry he now believed it was “deliberately withheld” from him. “That is now my view, he said, adding: “It crystallises my view that I was misled and deceived.” He said he also felt “misled and deceived” in general. “Post Office repeated their protestations that since day dot there was nothing wrong with Horizon when clearly they knew there were issues,” he told the hearing. Clarke wrote the key legal advice for the Post Office in July 2013 that made it clear there was a problem with its past prosecutions because the state-owned company had relied on testimony from the expert witness Gareth Jenkins, who was an engineer at Fujitsu, the company that developed the IT system. The barrister concluded in his legal advice that Jenkins was an “unreliable witness” who may have breached his duties to the court by failing to disclose information he knew about bugs in the Horizon software to defendants who could have used it to challenge their convictions. Clarke said prosecutions of branch owner-operators effectively stopped after he had produced his 2013 advice and he said in his witness statement that he was now “professionally and personally proud” of that fact. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion By 2015, the internal view at Cartwright King was that the law firm “had been mis-instructed” by the Post Office about whether the IT system could be accessed remotely by Fujitsu staff, he said. “By this time, we were coming to the realisation that something was seriously wrong with POL’s corporate culture when dealing with Horizon-related issues whether in a criminal or civil arena,” he added. The inquiry continues. A barrister who advised the Post Office to stop prosecuting branch owner-operators told a public inquiry he was “now sure” that the state-owned company “must have deceived” him because it failed to provide him with “highly relevant material”. Simon Clarke, who worked for the law firm Cartwright King when it was advising the Post Office, was being questioned on Thursday as part of the judge-led hearings looking into the Horizon IT scandal. The inquiry is examining the wrongful prosecution of hundreds of branch owner-operators who were hounded by the Post Office because of financial shortfalls in their branch accounts that turned out to be caused by IT bugs in the Horizon computer system. Clarke said in his witness statement that in hindsight: “I am now sure that POL [Post Office Ltd] must have deceived both me and CK [Cartwright King]; I say this because it is now obvious to me that highly relevant material was not provided to me either at all, or when it should have been provided. I conclude that this failure to properly inform me was a decision taken by those in a position to do [and] act as they did.” He told the inquiry he felt the Post Office had “deliberately withheld” a key document from him when he was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra , a branch operator who had been wrongly convicted in 2010 and who was seeking to overturn her conviction. Misra was sentenced to 15 months in prison for theft and was jailed on her son’s 10th birthday while eight weeks pregnant. She was among those exonerated by the court of appeal in 2021. Clarke said that when he began to review Misra’s case, he was told the Post Office’s prosecution file was not available. He told the inquiry he now believed it was “deliberately withheld” from him. “That is now my view, he said, adding: “It crystallises my view that I was misled and deceived.” He said he also felt “misled and deceived” in general. “Post Office repeated their protestations that since day dot there was nothing wrong with Horizon when clearly they knew there were issues,” he told the hearing. Clarke wrote the key legal advice for the Post Office in July 2013 that made it clear there was a problem with its past prosecutions because the state-owned company had relied on testimony from the expert witness Gareth Jenkins, who was an engineer at Fujitsu, the company that developed the IT system. The barrister concluded in his legal advice that Jenkins was an “unreliable witness” who may have breached his duties to the court by failing to disclose information he knew about bugs in the Horizon software to defendants who could have used it to challenge their convictions. Clarke said prosecutions of branch owner-operators effectively stopped after he had produced his 2013 advice and he said in his witness statement that he was now “professionally and personally proud” of that fact. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion By 2015, the internal view at Cartwright King was that the law firm “had been mis-instructed” by the Post Office about whether the IT system could be accessed remotely by Fujitsu staff, he said. “By this time, we were coming to the realisation that something was seriously wrong with POL’s corporate culture when dealing with Horizon-related issues whether in a criminal or civil arena,” he added. The inquiry continues. A barrister who advised the Post Office to stop prosecuting branch owner-operators told a public inquiry he was “now sure” that the state-owned company “must have deceived” him because it failed to provide him with “highly relevant material”. Simon Clarke, who worked for the law firm Cartwright King when it was advising the Post Office, was being questioned on Thursday as part of the judge-led hearings looking into the Horizon IT scandal. The inquiry is examining the wrongful prosecution of hundreds of branch owner-operators who were hounded by the Post Office because of financial shortfalls in their branch accounts that turned out to be caused by IT bugs in the Horizon computer system. Clarke said in his witness statement that in hindsight: “I am now sure that POL [Post Office Ltd] must have deceived both me and CK [Cartwright King]; I say this because it is now obvious to me that highly relevant material was not provided to me either at all, or when it should have been provided. I conclude that this failure to properly inform me was a decision taken by those in a position to do [and] act as they did.” He told the inquiry he felt the Post Office had “deliberately withheld” a key document from him when he was asked in 2014 to review the case of Seema Misra , a branch operator who had been wrongly convicted in 2010 and who was seeking to overturn her conviction. Misra was sentenced to 15 months in prison for theft and was jailed on her son’s 10th birthday while eight weeks pregnant. She was among those exonerated by the court of appeal in 2021. Clarke said that when he began to review Misra’s case, he was told the Post Office’s prosecution file was not available. He told the inquiry he now believed it was “deliberately withheld” from him. “That is now my view, he said, adding: “It crystallises my view that I was misled and deceived.” He said he also felt “misled and deceived” in general. “Post Office repeated their protestations that since day dot there was nothing wrong with Horizon when clearly they knew there were issues,” he told the hearing. Clarke wrote the key legal advice for the Post Office in July 2013 that made it clear there was a problem with its past prosecutions because the state-owned company had relied on testimony from the expert witness Gareth Jenkins, who was an engineer at Fujitsu, the company that developed the IT system. The barrister concluded in his legal advice that Jenkins was an “unreliable witness” who may have breached his duties to the court by failing to disclose information he knew about bugs in the Horizon software to defendants who could have used it to challenge their convictions. Clarke said prosecutions of branch owner-operators effectively stopped after he had produced his 2013 advice and he said in his witness statement that he was now “professionally and personally proud” of that fact. By 2015, the internal view at Cartwright King was that the law firm “had been mis-instructed” by the Post Office about whether the IT system could be accessed remotely by Fujitsu staff, he said. “By this time, we were coming to the realisation that something was seriously wrong with POL’s corporate culture when dealing with Horizon-related issues whether in a criminal or civil arena,” he added. Explore more on these topics Post Office Horizon scandal Post Office news Share Reuse this content Post Office Horizon scandal Post Office news |
Rising protests among UK asylum seekers held for deportation to Rwanda
Street protest with placards supporting refugees in London this week. Photograph: Cal Ford/Zuma/RexShutterstock View image in fullscreen Street protest with placards supporting refugees in London this week. Photograph: Cal Ford/Zuma/RexShutterstock This article is more than 1 year old Rising protests among UK asylum seekers held for deportation to Rwanda This article is more than 1 year old Lawyers helping detainees say they have been told that dozens have gone on hunger strike in detention centre near Heathrow UK politics live – latest updates Protests and hunger strikes among asylum seekers held in detention centres in preparation for deportation to Rwanda are increasing, the Guardian has learned. Approximately 55 detainees, including Afghans, Iranians and Kurds, are believed to have staged a 10-hour peaceful protest in the exercise yard at Brook House immigration removal centre, near Gatwick airport, from 6pm on Tuesday until 4am on Wednesday. The Home Office contractor at the centre, Serco, and Home Office sources, confirmed the protest. An Afghan asylum seeker involved in the protest told the Guardian the detainees refused to go back to their cells, fearful of being sent to Rwanda and not understanding why the Home Office had targeted them for forced removal to the east African country. Home Office faces fallout from Rwanda roundup as asylum seekers hide or flee Read more “Everyone here who has received notices for Rwanda is very scared,” the man said. “We keep asking the Home Office why they are sending us to Rwanda but we get no answers. “The Home Office tell us to speak to our solicitors or to Home Office caseworkers but we are not getting any answers. We are being pushed from person to person like a football. We staged the protest because we are frightened about our situation and want some answers from the Home Office.” He said he estimated that about 30% of those protesting were Afghans. “Why is the Home Office sending Afghans to Rwanda? Many of us helped the British when they were in Afghanistan. We don’t understand why this is happening to us.” The man said that everyone locked up was feeling very stressed and that many could not eat or sleep. “I have been here for eight days now and I’m not getting help from the doctors or the staff. Every few minutes I hear the sound of planes flying in and out of Gatwick and I think to myself: ‘Tomorrow the Home Office might put me on one of those planes to send me to Rwanda.’” NGOs and lawyers working to support Rwanda detainees said they had received reports that dozens in Colnbrook immigration removal centre, near Heathrow, had gone on hunger strike. Along with Afghans, Iranians and Kurds, other nationalities known to have been detained for removal to Rwanda include Syrians, Eritreans, Egyptians, Sudanese, Turks, and Kuwaiti Bidoons. Anna Pincus, the director of Gatwick Detainees Welfare Group, said of the situation in Brook House: “We are extremely concerned for the wellbeing of people now held in detention with the threat of removal to Rwanda. They are experiencing high levels of desperation and anxiety in a system that has already been proven to be struggling. We will continue to visit and support people but have huge concerns for their wellbeing.” A spokesperson for Serco, which has the Home Office contract to manage Brook House, said: “There was a non-violent protest in Brook House immigration removal centre on Tuesday night. It was peacefully resolved, nobody was hurt and the centre is operating normally.” A Home Office spokesperson said: “The first illegal migrants set to be removed to Rwanda have now been detained by highly trained teams, following a series of nationwide operations. We will get flights off the ground to Rwanda in the next eight to 10 weeks, creating the deterrent effect to help break up the people-smuggling business model and stop the boats.” Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum Home Office Refugees news Share Reuse this content Street protest with placards supporting refugees in London this week. Photograph: Cal Ford/Zuma/RexShutterstock View image in fullscreen Street protest with placards supporting refugees in London this week. Photograph: Cal Ford/Zuma/RexShutterstock This article is more than 1 year old Rising protests among UK asylum seekers held for deportation to Rwanda This article is more than 1 year old Lawyers helping detainees say they have been told that dozens have gone on hunger strike in detention centre near Heathrow UK politics live – latest updates Protests and hunger strikes among asylum seekers held in detention centres in preparation for deportation to Rwanda are increasing, the Guardian has learned. Approximately 55 detainees, including Afghans, Iranians and Kurds, are believed to have staged a 10-hour peaceful protest in the exercise yard at Brook House immigration removal centre, near Gatwick airport, from 6pm on Tuesday until 4am on Wednesday. The Home Office contractor at the centre, Serco, and Home Office sources, confirmed the protest. An Afghan asylum seeker involved in the protest told the Guardian the detainees refused to go back to their cells, fearful of being sent to Rwanda and not understanding why the Home Office had targeted them for forced removal to the east African country. Home Office faces fallout from Rwanda roundup as asylum seekers hide or flee Read more “Everyone here who has received notices for Rwanda is very scared,” the man said. “We keep asking the Home Office why they are sending us to Rwanda but we get no answers. “The Home Office tell us to speak to our solicitors or to Home Office caseworkers but we are not getting any answers. We are being pushed from person to person like a football. We staged the protest because we are frightened about our situation and want some answers from the Home Office.” He said he estimated that about 30% of those protesting were Afghans. “Why is the Home Office sending Afghans to Rwanda? Many of us helped the British when they were in Afghanistan. We don’t understand why this is happening to us.” The man said that everyone locked up was feeling very stressed and that many could not eat or sleep. “I have been here for eight days now and I’m not getting help from the doctors or the staff. Every few minutes I hear the sound of planes flying in and out of Gatwick and I think to myself: ‘Tomorrow the Home Office might put me on one of those planes to send me to Rwanda.’” NGOs and lawyers working to support Rwanda detainees said they had received reports that dozens in Colnbrook immigration removal centre, near Heathrow, had gone on hunger strike. Along with Afghans, Iranians and Kurds, other nationalities known to have been detained for removal to Rwanda include Syrians, Eritreans, Egyptians, Sudanese, Turks, and Kuwaiti Bidoons. Anna Pincus, the director of Gatwick Detainees Welfare Group, said of the situation in Brook House: “We are extremely concerned for the wellbeing of people now held in detention with the threat of removal to Rwanda. They are experiencing high levels of desperation and anxiety in a system that has already been proven to be struggling. We will continue to visit and support people but have huge concerns for their wellbeing.” A spokesperson for Serco, which has the Home Office contract to manage Brook House, said: “There was a non-violent protest in Brook House immigration removal centre on Tuesday night. It was peacefully resolved, nobody was hurt and the centre is operating normally.” A Home Office spokesperson said: “The first illegal migrants set to be removed to Rwanda have now been detained by highly trained teams, following a series of nationwide operations. We will get flights off the ground to Rwanda in the next eight to 10 weeks, creating the deterrent effect to help break up the people-smuggling business model and stop the boats.” Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum Home Office Refugees news Share Reuse this content Street protest with placards supporting refugees in London this week. Photograph: Cal Ford/Zuma/RexShutterstock View image in fullscreen Street protest with placards supporting refugees in London this week. Photograph: Cal Ford/Zuma/RexShutterstock Street protest with placards supporting refugees in London this week. Photograph: Cal Ford/Zuma/RexShutterstock View image in fullscreen Street protest with placards supporting refugees in London this week. Photograph: Cal Ford/Zuma/RexShutterstock Street protest with placards supporting refugees in London this week. Photograph: Cal Ford/Zuma/RexShutterstock View image in fullscreen Street protest with placards supporting refugees in London this week. Photograph: Cal Ford/Zuma/RexShutterstock Street protest with placards supporting refugees in London this week. Photograph: Cal Ford/Zuma/RexShutterstock View image in fullscreen Street protest with placards supporting refugees in London this week. Photograph: Cal Ford/Zuma/RexShutterstock Street protest with placards supporting refugees in London this week. Photograph: Cal Ford/Zuma/RexShutterstock Street protest with placards supporting refugees in London this week. Photograph: Cal Ford/Zuma/RexShutterstock This article is more than 1 year old Rising protests among UK asylum seekers held for deportation to Rwanda This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Rising protests among UK asylum seekers held for deportation to Rwanda This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Rising protests among UK asylum seekers held for deportation to Rwanda This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Lawyers helping detainees say they have been told that dozens have gone on hunger strike in detention centre near Heathrow UK politics live – latest updates Lawyers helping detainees say they have been told that dozens have gone on hunger strike in detention centre near Heathrow UK politics live – latest updates Lawyers helping detainees say they have been told that dozens have gone on hunger strike in detention centre near Heathrow Protests and hunger strikes among asylum seekers held in detention centres in preparation for deportation to Rwanda are increasing, the Guardian has learned. Approximately 55 detainees, including Afghans, Iranians and Kurds, are believed to have staged a 10-hour peaceful protest in the exercise yard at Brook House immigration removal centre, near Gatwick airport, from 6pm on Tuesday until 4am on Wednesday. The Home Office contractor at the centre, Serco, and Home Office sources, confirmed the protest. An Afghan asylum seeker involved in the protest told the Guardian the detainees refused to go back to their cells, fearful of being sent to Rwanda and not understanding why the Home Office had targeted them for forced removal to the east African country. Home Office faces fallout from Rwanda roundup as asylum seekers hide or flee Read more “Everyone here who has received notices for Rwanda is very scared,” the man said. “We keep asking the Home Office why they are sending us to Rwanda but we get no answers. “The Home Office tell us to speak to our solicitors or to Home Office caseworkers but we are not getting any answers. We are being pushed from person to person like a football. We staged the protest because we are frightened about our situation and want some answers from the Home Office.” He said he estimated that about 30% of those protesting were Afghans. “Why is the Home Office sending Afghans to Rwanda? Many of us helped the British when they were in Afghanistan. We don’t understand why this is happening to us.” The man said that everyone locked up was feeling very stressed and that many could not eat or sleep. “I have been here for eight days now and I’m not getting help from the doctors or the staff. Every few minutes I hear the sound of planes flying in and out of Gatwick and I think to myself: ‘Tomorrow the Home Office might put me on one of those planes to send me to Rwanda.’” NGOs and lawyers working to support Rwanda detainees said they had received reports that dozens in Colnbrook immigration removal centre, near Heathrow, had gone on hunger strike. Along with Afghans, Iranians and Kurds, other nationalities known to have been detained for removal to Rwanda include Syrians, Eritreans, Egyptians, Sudanese, Turks, and Kuwaiti Bidoons. Anna Pincus, the director of Gatwick Detainees Welfare Group, said of the situation in Brook House: “We are extremely concerned for the wellbeing of people now held in detention with the threat of removal to Rwanda. They are experiencing high levels of desperation and anxiety in a system that has already been proven to be struggling. We will continue to visit and support people but have huge concerns for their wellbeing.” A spokesperson for Serco, which has the Home Office contract to manage Brook House, said: “There was a non-violent protest in Brook House immigration removal centre on Tuesday night. It was peacefully resolved, nobody was hurt and the centre is operating normally.” A Home Office spokesperson said: “The first illegal migrants set to be removed to Rwanda have now been detained by highly trained teams, following a series of nationwide operations. We will get flights off the ground to Rwanda in the next eight to 10 weeks, creating the deterrent effect to help break up the people-smuggling business model and stop the boats.” Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum Home Office Refugees news Share Reuse this content Protests and hunger strikes among asylum seekers held in detention centres in preparation for deportation to Rwanda are increasing, the Guardian has learned. Approximately 55 detainees, including Afghans, Iranians and Kurds, are believed to have staged a 10-hour peaceful protest in the exercise yard at Brook House immigration removal centre, near Gatwick airport, from 6pm on Tuesday until 4am on Wednesday. The Home Office contractor at the centre, Serco, and Home Office sources, confirmed the protest. An Afghan asylum seeker involved in the protest told the Guardian the detainees refused to go back to their cells, fearful of being sent to Rwanda and not understanding why the Home Office had targeted them for forced removal to the east African country. Home Office faces fallout from Rwanda roundup as asylum seekers hide or flee Read more “Everyone here who has received notices for Rwanda is very scared,” the man said. “We keep asking the Home Office why they are sending us to Rwanda but we get no answers. “The Home Office tell us to speak to our solicitors or to Home Office caseworkers but we are not getting any answers. We are being pushed from person to person like a football. We staged the protest because we are frightened about our situation and want some answers from the Home Office.” He said he estimated that about 30% of those protesting were Afghans. “Why is the Home Office sending Afghans to Rwanda? Many of us helped the British when they were in Afghanistan. We don’t understand why this is happening to us.” The man said that everyone locked up was feeling very stressed and that many could not eat or sleep. “I have been here for eight days now and I’m not getting help from the doctors or the staff. Every few minutes I hear the sound of planes flying in and out of Gatwick and I think to myself: ‘Tomorrow the Home Office might put me on one of those planes to send me to Rwanda.’” NGOs and lawyers working to support Rwanda detainees said they had received reports that dozens in Colnbrook immigration removal centre, near Heathrow, had gone on hunger strike. Along with Afghans, Iranians and Kurds, other nationalities known to have been detained for removal to Rwanda include Syrians, Eritreans, Egyptians, Sudanese, Turks, and Kuwaiti Bidoons. Anna Pincus, the director of Gatwick Detainees Welfare Group, said of the situation in Brook House: “We are extremely concerned for the wellbeing of people now held in detention with the threat of removal to Rwanda. They are experiencing high levels of desperation and anxiety in a system that has already been proven to be struggling. We will continue to visit and support people but have huge concerns for their wellbeing.” A spokesperson for Serco, which has the Home Office contract to manage Brook House, said: “There was a non-violent protest in Brook House immigration removal centre on Tuesday night. It was peacefully resolved, nobody was hurt and the centre is operating normally.” A Home Office spokesperson said: “The first illegal migrants set to be removed to Rwanda have now been detained by highly trained teams, following a series of nationwide operations. We will get flights off the ground to Rwanda in the next eight to 10 weeks, creating the deterrent effect to help break up the people-smuggling business model and stop the boats.” Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum Home Office Refugees news Share Reuse this content Protests and hunger strikes among asylum seekers held in detention centres in preparation for deportation to Rwanda are increasing, the Guardian has learned. Approximately 55 detainees, including Afghans, Iranians and Kurds, are believed to have staged a 10-hour peaceful protest in the exercise yard at Brook House immigration removal centre, near Gatwick airport, from 6pm on Tuesday until 4am on Wednesday. The Home Office contractor at the centre, Serco, and Home Office sources, confirmed the protest. An Afghan asylum seeker involved in the protest told the Guardian the detainees refused to go back to their cells, fearful of being sent to Rwanda and not understanding why the Home Office had targeted them for forced removal to the east African country. Home Office faces fallout from Rwanda roundup as asylum seekers hide or flee Read more “Everyone here who has received notices for Rwanda is very scared,” the man said. “We keep asking the Home Office why they are sending us to Rwanda but we get no answers. “The Home Office tell us to speak to our solicitors or to Home Office caseworkers but we are not getting any answers. We are being pushed from person to person like a football. We staged the protest because we are frightened about our situation and want some answers from the Home Office.” He said he estimated that about 30% of those protesting were Afghans. “Why is the Home Office sending Afghans to Rwanda? Many of us helped the British when they were in Afghanistan. We don’t understand why this is happening to us.” The man said that everyone locked up was feeling very stressed and that many could not eat or sleep. “I have been here for eight days now and I’m not getting help from the doctors or the staff. Every few minutes I hear the sound of planes flying in and out of Gatwick and I think to myself: ‘Tomorrow the Home Office might put me on one of those planes to send me to Rwanda.’” NGOs and lawyers working to support Rwanda detainees said they had received reports that dozens in Colnbrook immigration removal centre, near Heathrow, had gone on hunger strike. Along with Afghans, Iranians and Kurds, other nationalities known to have been detained for removal to Rwanda include Syrians, Eritreans, Egyptians, Sudanese, Turks, and Kuwaiti Bidoons. Anna Pincus, the director of Gatwick Detainees Welfare Group, said of the situation in Brook House: “We are extremely concerned for the wellbeing of people now held in detention with the threat of removal to Rwanda. They are experiencing high levels of desperation and anxiety in a system that has already been proven to be struggling. We will continue to visit and support people but have huge concerns for their wellbeing.” A spokesperson for Serco, which has the Home Office contract to manage Brook House, said: “There was a non-violent protest in Brook House immigration removal centre on Tuesday night. It was peacefully resolved, nobody was hurt and the centre is operating normally.” A Home Office spokesperson said: “The first illegal migrants set to be removed to Rwanda have now been detained by highly trained teams, following a series of nationwide operations. We will get flights off the ground to Rwanda in the next eight to 10 weeks, creating the deterrent effect to help break up the people-smuggling business model and stop the boats.” Protests and hunger strikes among asylum seekers held in detention centres in preparation for deportation to Rwanda are increasing, the Guardian has learned. Approximately 55 detainees, including Afghans, Iranians and Kurds, are believed to have staged a 10-hour peaceful protest in the exercise yard at Brook House immigration removal centre, near Gatwick airport, from 6pm on Tuesday until 4am on Wednesday. The Home Office contractor at the centre, Serco, and Home Office sources, confirmed the protest. An Afghan asylum seeker involved in the protest told the Guardian the detainees refused to go back to their cells, fearful of being sent to Rwanda and not understanding why the Home Office had targeted them for forced removal to the east African country. Home Office faces fallout from Rwanda roundup as asylum seekers hide or flee Read more “Everyone here who has received notices for Rwanda is very scared,” the man said. “We keep asking the Home Office why they are sending us to Rwanda but we get no answers. “The Home Office tell us to speak to our solicitors or to Home Office caseworkers but we are not getting any answers. We are being pushed from person to person like a football. We staged the protest because we are frightened about our situation and want some answers from the Home Office.” He said he estimated that about 30% of those protesting were Afghans. “Why is the Home Office sending Afghans to Rwanda? Many of us helped the British when they were in Afghanistan. We don’t understand why this is happening to us.” The man said that everyone locked up was feeling very stressed and that many could not eat or sleep. “I have been here for eight days now and I’m not getting help from the doctors or the staff. Every few minutes I hear the sound of planes flying in and out of Gatwick and I think to myself: ‘Tomorrow the Home Office might put me on one of those planes to send me to Rwanda.’” NGOs and lawyers working to support Rwanda detainees said they had received reports that dozens in Colnbrook immigration removal centre, near Heathrow, had gone on hunger strike. Along with Afghans, Iranians and Kurds, other nationalities known to have been detained for removal to Rwanda include Syrians, Eritreans, Egyptians, Sudanese, Turks, and Kuwaiti Bidoons. Anna Pincus, the director of Gatwick Detainees Welfare Group, said of the situation in Brook House: “We are extremely concerned for the wellbeing of people now held in detention with the threat of removal to Rwanda. They are experiencing high levels of desperation and anxiety in a system that has already been proven to be struggling. We will continue to visit and support people but have huge concerns for their wellbeing.” A spokesperson for Serco, which has the Home Office contract to manage Brook House, said: “There was a non-violent protest in Brook House immigration removal centre on Tuesday night. It was peacefully resolved, nobody was hurt and the centre is operating normally.” A Home Office spokesperson said: “The first illegal migrants set to be removed to Rwanda have now been detained by highly trained teams, following a series of nationwide operations. We will get flights off the ground to Rwanda in the next eight to 10 weeks, creating the deterrent effect to help break up the people-smuggling business model and stop the boats.” Protests and hunger strikes among asylum seekers held in detention centres in preparation for deportation to Rwanda are increasing, the Guardian has learned. Approximately 55 detainees, including Afghans, Iranians and Kurds, are believed to have staged a 10-hour peaceful protest in the exercise yard at Brook House immigration removal centre, near Gatwick airport, from 6pm on Tuesday until 4am on Wednesday. The Home Office contractor at the centre, Serco, and Home Office sources, confirmed the protest. An Afghan asylum seeker involved in the protest told the Guardian the detainees refused to go back to their cells, fearful of being sent to Rwanda and not understanding why the Home Office had targeted them for forced removal to the east African country. Home Office faces fallout from Rwanda roundup as asylum seekers hide or flee Read more Home Office faces fallout from Rwanda roundup as asylum seekers hide or flee Read more Home Office faces fallout from Rwanda roundup as asylum seekers hide or flee Read more Home Office faces fallout from Rwanda roundup as asylum seekers hide or flee Home Office faces fallout from Rwanda roundup as asylum seekers hide or flee “Everyone here who has received notices for Rwanda is very scared,” the man said. “We keep asking the Home Office why they are sending us to Rwanda but we get no answers. “The Home Office tell us to speak to our solicitors or to Home Office caseworkers but we are not getting any answers. We are being pushed from person to person like a football. We staged the protest because we are frightened about our situation and want some answers from the Home Office.” He said he estimated that about 30% of those protesting were Afghans. “Why is the Home Office sending Afghans to Rwanda? Many of us helped the British when they were in Afghanistan. We don’t understand why this is happening to us.” The man said that everyone locked up was feeling very stressed and that many could not eat or sleep. “I have been here for eight days now and I’m not getting help from the doctors or the staff. Every few minutes I hear the sound of planes flying in and out of Gatwick and I think to myself: ‘Tomorrow the Home Office might put me on one of those planes to send me to Rwanda.’” NGOs and lawyers working to support Rwanda detainees said they had received reports that dozens in Colnbrook immigration removal centre, near Heathrow, had gone on hunger strike. Along with Afghans, Iranians and Kurds, other nationalities known to have been detained for removal to Rwanda include Syrians, Eritreans, Egyptians, Sudanese, Turks, and Kuwaiti Bidoons. Anna Pincus, the director of Gatwick Detainees Welfare Group, said of the situation in Brook House: “We are extremely concerned for the wellbeing of people now held in detention with the threat of removal to Rwanda. They are experiencing high levels of desperation and anxiety in a system that has already been proven to be struggling. We will continue to visit and support people but have huge concerns for their wellbeing.” A spokesperson for Serco, which has the Home Office contract to manage Brook House, said: “There was a non-violent protest in Brook House immigration removal centre on Tuesday night. It was peacefully resolved, nobody was hurt and the centre is operating normally.” A Home Office spokesperson said: “The first illegal migrants set to be removed to Rwanda have now been detained by highly trained teams, following a series of nationwide operations. We will get flights off the ground to Rwanda in the next eight to 10 weeks, creating the deterrent effect to help break up the people-smuggling business model and stop the boats.” Explore more on these topics Immigration and asylum Home Office Refugees news Share Reuse this content Immigration and asylum Home Office Refugees news |
What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? The expert view
The top answer given by the experts was to vote for politicians who pledge strong climate actions. Illustration: Guardian Design View image in fullscreen The top answer given by the experts was to vote for politicians who pledge strong climate actions. Illustration: Guardian Design This article is more than 1 year old Explainer What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? The expert view This article is more than 1 year old Voting tops the list for the world’s leading climate scientists in a year when billions of voters go to the polls Climate scientists expect global heating to blast past 1.5C target ‘Hopeless and broken’: why the scientists are in despair Many people, faced with the worsening impacts of the climate emergency, want to know what they can do personally to fight global heating. The Guardian asked hundreds of the world’s top climate scientists for their views. What is the most effective action individuals can take? Most experts (76%) backed voting for politicians who pledge strong climate measures, where fair elections take place . The recommendation is powerful in a year when voters in countries including the US, UK, India, the EU, Mexico and South Africa and more all go to the polls. “I feel the reason behind the lack of response to date is the nervousness of politicians,” said Prof Bill Collins, at the University of Reading in the UK. “Polls suggest voters are actually more willing for governments to take stronger climate action.” Another expert highlighted the danger of a second Donald Trump presidency to climate action. The survey sought the view of every contactable lead author and review editor of reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change since 2018, with 380 of 843 responding. Overall the scientists were extremely pessimistic about the prospects of holding global temperature rises below internationally agreed targets. “The science is there, but the lack of will of politicians worldwide is retarding climate change [action],” said Prof Alexander Milner, at the University of Birmingham in the UK. What about reducing flying? The second choice for most effective individual action, according to the experts, was reducing flying and fossil-fuel powered transport in favour of electric and public transport. This was backed by 56%, and two-thirds said they had cut their own number of flights. Flying is the most polluting activity an individual can undertake and makes up a large part of the carbon footprint of the rich. Globally it is a small minority of people who drive aviation emissions, with only about one in 10 flying at all . Frequent-flying “super emitters” who represent just 1% of the world’s population cause half of aviation’s carbon emissions, with US air passengers having by far the biggest carbon footprint among rich countries. Can eating less meat help? Meat production has a huge impact on the environment . Most people in wealthy countries already eat more meat than is healthy for them and more than 60% of the scientists said they had cut their own meat consumption. Almost 30% of the experts said eating less meat was the most effective climate action, while a similar proportion backed cutting emissions from heating or cooling homes, by installing heat pumps, for example. Is protesting an effective form of climate action? Almost a quarter of the scientists said they had participated in climate protests, as citizens who are deeply worried about global heating. This included scientists from every continent, including those from the US, Argentina, Germany, Bangladesh, Kenya and Australia. What else? Having fewer children was backed by 12% of the experts but many made further suggestions. Everyone should “talk about climate as the leading existential threat to societal stability”, said one. Shifting savings or pension funds away from fossil fuel investments and towards green ones was also mentioned by multiple experts. Prof Vanesa Castán Broto, at the University of Sheffield in the UK, suggested a blunt action for one particular group: “Stop working for the fossil fuel industry.” And a scientist from Cameroon advocated avoiding products responsible for deforestation, such as some beef, timber and cocoa. Can individual action really help? Many of the experts were clear on the limits. “It can only go so far. Deep, rapid cuts in carbon emissions from oil and gas, as well as other sectors such as transport, are needed, which are outside the control of the average individual,” said Dr Shobha Maharaj, a climate impacts scientist from Trinidad and Tobago. “Individual action can only amount to a drop in the bucket – only systemic changes will be sufficient,” said Prof David Wrathall, at Oregon State University in the US. But Prof Hiroyuki Enomoto, at Japan’s National Institute of Polar Research, said that while individual actions have a small impact, they are important in increasing collective awareness of the problem. Are the scientists walking the talk themselves? Yes. Many foresee catastrophic levels of global heating and are shifting their focus away from the physics of the climate system towards action that slows global heating and work that protects people against the climate impacts they now see as unstoppable. “I work more on projects with vulnerable communities so they improve their adaptation to climate change, whose impacts we already experience and which will increase in the future,” said Prof Carolina Vera at the University of Buenos Aires in Argentina. Numerous scientists said they had given their time as expert witnesses in legal cases on climate change and others said they were helping groups to develop new climate policies. Maharaj now chooses to spend at least half her time turning science into action, as the science director of a company implementing responsible reforestation. “There are so many people on the ground who care and who want to make a difference; that is truly encouraging and really drives me,” she said. Explore more on these topics Ethical and green living Climate crisis Climate science Environmental activism Greenhouse gas emissions explainers Share Reuse this content The top answer given by the experts was to vote for politicians who pledge strong climate actions. Illustration: Guardian Design View image in fullscreen The top answer given by the experts was to vote for politicians who pledge strong climate actions. Illustration: Guardian Design This article is more than 1 year old Explainer What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? The expert view This article is more than 1 year old Voting tops the list for the world’s leading climate scientists in a year when billions of voters go to the polls Climate scientists expect global heating to blast past 1.5C target ‘Hopeless and broken’: why the scientists are in despair Many people, faced with the worsening impacts of the climate emergency, want to know what they can do personally to fight global heating. The Guardian asked hundreds of the world’s top climate scientists for their views. What is the most effective action individuals can take? Most experts (76%) backed voting for politicians who pledge strong climate measures, where fair elections take place . The recommendation is powerful in a year when voters in countries including the US, UK, India, the EU, Mexico and South Africa and more all go to the polls. “I feel the reason behind the lack of response to date is the nervousness of politicians,” said Prof Bill Collins, at the University of Reading in the UK. “Polls suggest voters are actually more willing for governments to take stronger climate action.” Another expert highlighted the danger of a second Donald Trump presidency to climate action. The survey sought the view of every contactable lead author and review editor of reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change since 2018, with 380 of 843 responding. Overall the scientists were extremely pessimistic about the prospects of holding global temperature rises below internationally agreed targets. “The science is there, but the lack of will of politicians worldwide is retarding climate change [action],” said Prof Alexander Milner, at the University of Birmingham in the UK. What about reducing flying? The second choice for most effective individual action, according to the experts, was reducing flying and fossil-fuel powered transport in favour of electric and public transport. This was backed by 56%, and two-thirds said they had cut their own number of flights. Flying is the most polluting activity an individual can undertake and makes up a large part of the carbon footprint of the rich. Globally it is a small minority of people who drive aviation emissions, with only about one in 10 flying at all . Frequent-flying “super emitters” who represent just 1% of the world’s population cause half of aviation’s carbon emissions, with US air passengers having by far the biggest carbon footprint among rich countries. Can eating less meat help? Meat production has a huge impact on the environment . Most people in wealthy countries already eat more meat than is healthy for them and more than 60% of the scientists said they had cut their own meat consumption. Almost 30% of the experts said eating less meat was the most effective climate action, while a similar proportion backed cutting emissions from heating or cooling homes, by installing heat pumps, for example. Is protesting an effective form of climate action? Almost a quarter of the scientists said they had participated in climate protests, as citizens who are deeply worried about global heating. This included scientists from every continent, including those from the US, Argentina, Germany, Bangladesh, Kenya and Australia. What else? Having fewer children was backed by 12% of the experts but many made further suggestions. Everyone should “talk about climate as the leading existential threat to societal stability”, said one. Shifting savings or pension funds away from fossil fuel investments and towards green ones was also mentioned by multiple experts. Prof Vanesa Castán Broto, at the University of Sheffield in the UK, suggested a blunt action for one particular group: “Stop working for the fossil fuel industry.” And a scientist from Cameroon advocated avoiding products responsible for deforestation, such as some beef, timber and cocoa. Can individual action really help? Many of the experts were clear on the limits. “It can only go so far. Deep, rapid cuts in carbon emissions from oil and gas, as well as other sectors such as transport, are needed, which are outside the control of the average individual,” said Dr Shobha Maharaj, a climate impacts scientist from Trinidad and Tobago. “Individual action can only amount to a drop in the bucket – only systemic changes will be sufficient,” said Prof David Wrathall, at Oregon State University in the US. But Prof Hiroyuki Enomoto, at Japan’s National Institute of Polar Research, said that while individual actions have a small impact, they are important in increasing collective awareness of the problem. Are the scientists walking the talk themselves? Yes. Many foresee catastrophic levels of global heating and are shifting their focus away from the physics of the climate system towards action that slows global heating and work that protects people against the climate impacts they now see as unstoppable. “I work more on projects with vulnerable communities so they improve their adaptation to climate change, whose impacts we already experience and which will increase in the future,” said Prof Carolina Vera at the University of Buenos Aires in Argentina. Numerous scientists said they had given their time as expert witnesses in legal cases on climate change and others said they were helping groups to develop new climate policies. Maharaj now chooses to spend at least half her time turning science into action, as the science director of a company implementing responsible reforestation. “There are so many people on the ground who care and who want to make a difference; that is truly encouraging and really drives me,” she said. Explore more on these topics Ethical and green living Climate crisis Climate science Environmental activism Greenhouse gas emissions explainers Share Reuse this content The top answer given by the experts was to vote for politicians who pledge strong climate actions. Illustration: Guardian Design View image in fullscreen The top answer given by the experts was to vote for politicians who pledge strong climate actions. Illustration: Guardian Design The top answer given by the experts was to vote for politicians who pledge strong climate actions. Illustration: Guardian Design View image in fullscreen The top answer given by the experts was to vote for politicians who pledge strong climate actions. Illustration: Guardian Design The top answer given by the experts was to vote for politicians who pledge strong climate actions. Illustration: Guardian Design View image in fullscreen The top answer given by the experts was to vote for politicians who pledge strong climate actions. Illustration: Guardian Design The top answer given by the experts was to vote for politicians who pledge strong climate actions. Illustration: Guardian Design View image in fullscreen The top answer given by the experts was to vote for politicians who pledge strong climate actions. Illustration: Guardian Design The top answer given by the experts was to vote for politicians who pledge strong climate actions. Illustration: Guardian Design The top answer given by the experts was to vote for politicians who pledge strong climate actions. Illustration: Guardian Design This article is more than 1 year old Explainer What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? The expert view This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Explainer What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? The expert view This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Explainer What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? The expert view This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Voting tops the list for the world’s leading climate scientists in a year when billions of voters go to the polls Climate scientists expect global heating to blast past 1.5C target ‘Hopeless and broken’: why the scientists are in despair Voting tops the list for the world’s leading climate scientists in a year when billions of voters go to the polls Climate scientists expect global heating to blast past 1.5C target ‘Hopeless and broken’: why the scientists are in despair Voting tops the list for the world’s leading climate scientists in a year when billions of voters go to the polls Many people, faced with the worsening impacts of the climate emergency, want to know what they can do personally to fight global heating. The Guardian asked hundreds of the world’s top climate scientists for their views. What is the most effective action individuals can take? Most experts (76%) backed voting for politicians who pledge strong climate measures, where fair elections take place . The recommendation is powerful in a year when voters in countries including the US, UK, India, the EU, Mexico and South Africa and more all go to the polls. “I feel the reason behind the lack of response to date is the nervousness of politicians,” said Prof Bill Collins, at the University of Reading in the UK. “Polls suggest voters are actually more willing for governments to take stronger climate action.” Another expert highlighted the danger of a second Donald Trump presidency to climate action. The survey sought the view of every contactable lead author and review editor of reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change since 2018, with 380 of 843 responding. Overall the scientists were extremely pessimistic about the prospects of holding global temperature rises below internationally agreed targets. “The science is there, but the lack of will of politicians worldwide is retarding climate change [action],” said Prof Alexander Milner, at the University of Birmingham in the UK. What about reducing flying? The second choice for most effective individual action, according to the experts, was reducing flying and fossil-fuel powered transport in favour of electric and public transport. This was backed by 56%, and two-thirds said they had cut their own number of flights. Flying is the most polluting activity an individual can undertake and makes up a large part of the carbon footprint of the rich. Globally it is a small minority of people who drive aviation emissions, with only about one in 10 flying at all . Frequent-flying “super emitters” who represent just 1% of the world’s population cause half of aviation’s carbon emissions, with US air passengers having by far the biggest carbon footprint among rich countries. Can eating less meat help? Meat production has a huge impact on the environment . Most people in wealthy countries already eat more meat than is healthy for them and more than 60% of the scientists said they had cut their own meat consumption. Almost 30% of the experts said eating less meat was the most effective climate action, while a similar proportion backed cutting emissions from heating or cooling homes, by installing heat pumps, for example. Is protesting an effective form of climate action? Almost a quarter of the scientists said they had participated in climate protests, as citizens who are deeply worried about global heating. This included scientists from every continent, including those from the US, Argentina, Germany, Bangladesh, Kenya and Australia. What else? Having fewer children was backed by 12% of the experts but many made further suggestions. Everyone should “talk about climate as the leading existential threat to societal stability”, said one. Shifting savings or pension funds away from fossil fuel investments and towards green ones was also mentioned by multiple experts. Prof Vanesa Castán Broto, at the University of Sheffield in the UK, suggested a blunt action for one particular group: “Stop working for the fossil fuel industry.” And a scientist from Cameroon advocated avoiding products responsible for deforestation, such as some beef, timber and cocoa. Can individual action really help? Many of the experts were clear on the limits. “It can only go so far. Deep, rapid cuts in carbon emissions from oil and gas, as well as other sectors such as transport, are needed, which are outside the control of the average individual,” said Dr Shobha Maharaj, a climate impacts scientist from Trinidad and Tobago. “Individual action can only amount to a drop in the bucket – only systemic changes will be sufficient,” said Prof David Wrathall, at Oregon State University in the US. But Prof Hiroyuki Enomoto, at Japan’s National Institute of Polar Research, said that while individual actions have a small impact, they are important in increasing collective awareness of the problem. Are the scientists walking the talk themselves? Yes. Many foresee catastrophic levels of global heating and are shifting their focus away from the physics of the climate system towards action that slows global heating and work that protects people against the climate impacts they now see as unstoppable. “I work more on projects with vulnerable communities so they improve their adaptation to climate change, whose impacts we already experience and which will increase in the future,” said Prof Carolina Vera at the University of Buenos Aires in Argentina. Numerous scientists said they had given their time as expert witnesses in legal cases on climate change and others said they were helping groups to develop new climate policies. Maharaj now chooses to spend at least half her time turning science into action, as the science director of a company implementing responsible reforestation. “There are so many people on the ground who care and who want to make a difference; that is truly encouraging and really drives me,” she said. Explore more on these topics Ethical and green living Climate crisis Climate science Environmental activism Greenhouse gas emissions explainers Share Reuse this content Many people, faced with the worsening impacts of the climate emergency, want to know what they can do personally to fight global heating. The Guardian asked hundreds of the world’s top climate scientists for their views. What is the most effective action individuals can take? Most experts (76%) backed voting for politicians who pledge strong climate measures, where fair elections take place . The recommendation is powerful in a year when voters in countries including the US, UK, India, the EU, Mexico and South Africa and more all go to the polls. “I feel the reason behind the lack of response to date is the nervousness of politicians,” said Prof Bill Collins, at the University of Reading in the UK. “Polls suggest voters are actually more willing for governments to take stronger climate action.” Another expert highlighted the danger of a second Donald Trump presidency to climate action. The survey sought the view of every contactable lead author and review editor of reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change since 2018, with 380 of 843 responding. Overall the scientists were extremely pessimistic about the prospects of holding global temperature rises below internationally agreed targets. “The science is there, but the lack of will of politicians worldwide is retarding climate change [action],” said Prof Alexander Milner, at the University of Birmingham in the UK. What about reducing flying? The second choice for most effective individual action, according to the experts, was reducing flying and fossil-fuel powered transport in favour of electric and public transport. This was backed by 56%, and two-thirds said they had cut their own number of flights. Flying is the most polluting activity an individual can undertake and makes up a large part of the carbon footprint of the rich. Globally it is a small minority of people who drive aviation emissions, with only about one in 10 flying at all . Frequent-flying “super emitters” who represent just 1% of the world’s population cause half of aviation’s carbon emissions, with US air passengers having by far the biggest carbon footprint among rich countries. Can eating less meat help? Meat production has a huge impact on the environment . Most people in wealthy countries already eat more meat than is healthy for them and more than 60% of the scientists said they had cut their own meat consumption. Almost 30% of the experts said eating less meat was the most effective climate action, while a similar proportion backed cutting emissions from heating or cooling homes, by installing heat pumps, for example. Is protesting an effective form of climate action? Almost a quarter of the scientists said they had participated in climate protests, as citizens who are deeply worried about global heating. This included scientists from every continent, including those from the US, Argentina, Germany, Bangladesh, Kenya and Australia. What else? Having fewer children was backed by 12% of the experts but many made further suggestions. Everyone should “talk about climate as the leading existential threat to societal stability”, said one. Shifting savings or pension funds away from fossil fuel investments and towards green ones was also mentioned by multiple experts. Prof Vanesa Castán Broto, at the University of Sheffield in the UK, suggested a blunt action for one particular group: “Stop working for the fossil fuel industry.” And a scientist from Cameroon advocated avoiding products responsible for deforestation, such as some beef, timber and cocoa. Can individual action really help? Many of the experts were clear on the limits. “It can only go so far. Deep, rapid cuts in carbon emissions from oil and gas, as well as other sectors such as transport, are needed, which are outside the control of the average individual,” said Dr Shobha Maharaj, a climate impacts scientist from Trinidad and Tobago. “Individual action can only amount to a drop in the bucket – only systemic changes will be sufficient,” said Prof David Wrathall, at Oregon State University in the US. But Prof Hiroyuki Enomoto, at Japan’s National Institute of Polar Research, said that while individual actions have a small impact, they are important in increasing collective awareness of the problem. Are the scientists walking the talk themselves? Yes. Many foresee catastrophic levels of global heating and are shifting their focus away from the physics of the climate system towards action that slows global heating and work that protects people against the climate impacts they now see as unstoppable. “I work more on projects with vulnerable communities so they improve their adaptation to climate change, whose impacts we already experience and which will increase in the future,” said Prof Carolina Vera at the University of Buenos Aires in Argentina. Numerous scientists said they had given their time as expert witnesses in legal cases on climate change and others said they were helping groups to develop new climate policies. Maharaj now chooses to spend at least half her time turning science into action, as the science director of a company implementing responsible reforestation. “There are so many people on the ground who care and who want to make a difference; that is truly encouraging and really drives me,” she said. Explore more on these topics Ethical and green living Climate crisis Climate science Environmental activism Greenhouse gas emissions explainers Share Reuse this content Many people, faced with the worsening impacts of the climate emergency, want to know what they can do personally to fight global heating. The Guardian asked hundreds of the world’s top climate scientists for their views. What is the most effective action individuals can take? Most experts (76%) backed voting for politicians who pledge strong climate measures, where fair elections take place . The recommendation is powerful in a year when voters in countries including the US, UK, India, the EU, Mexico and South Africa and more all go to the polls. “I feel the reason behind the lack of response to date is the nervousness of politicians,” said Prof Bill Collins, at the University of Reading in the UK. “Polls suggest voters are actually more willing for governments to take stronger climate action.” Another expert highlighted the danger of a second Donald Trump presidency to climate action. The survey sought the view of every contactable lead author and review editor of reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change since 2018, with 380 of 843 responding. Overall the scientists were extremely pessimistic about the prospects of holding global temperature rises below internationally agreed targets. “The science is there, but the lack of will of politicians worldwide is retarding climate change [action],” said Prof Alexander Milner, at the University of Birmingham in the UK. What about reducing flying? The second choice for most effective individual action, according to the experts, was reducing flying and fossil-fuel powered transport in favour of electric and public transport. This was backed by 56%, and two-thirds said they had cut their own number of flights. Flying is the most polluting activity an individual can undertake and makes up a large part of the carbon footprint of the rich. Globally it is a small minority of people who drive aviation emissions, with only about one in 10 flying at all . Frequent-flying “super emitters” who represent just 1% of the world’s population cause half of aviation’s carbon emissions, with US air passengers having by far the biggest carbon footprint among rich countries. Can eating less meat help? Meat production has a huge impact on the environment . Most people in wealthy countries already eat more meat than is healthy for them and more than 60% of the scientists said they had cut their own meat consumption. Almost 30% of the experts said eating less meat was the most effective climate action, while a similar proportion backed cutting emissions from heating or cooling homes, by installing heat pumps, for example. Is protesting an effective form of climate action? Almost a quarter of the scientists said they had participated in climate protests, as citizens who are deeply worried about global heating. This included scientists from every continent, including those from the US, Argentina, Germany, Bangladesh, Kenya and Australia. What else? Having fewer children was backed by 12% of the experts but many made further suggestions. Everyone should “talk about climate as the leading existential threat to societal stability”, said one. Shifting savings or pension funds away from fossil fuel investments and towards green ones was also mentioned by multiple experts. Prof Vanesa Castán Broto, at the University of Sheffield in the UK, suggested a blunt action for one particular group: “Stop working for the fossil fuel industry.” And a scientist from Cameroon advocated avoiding products responsible for deforestation, such as some beef, timber and cocoa. Can individual action really help? Many of the experts were clear on the limits. “It can only go so far. Deep, rapid cuts in carbon emissions from oil and gas, as well as other sectors such as transport, are needed, which are outside the control of the average individual,” said Dr Shobha Maharaj, a climate impacts scientist from Trinidad and Tobago. “Individual action can only amount to a drop in the bucket – only systemic changes will be sufficient,” said Prof David Wrathall, at Oregon State University in the US. But Prof Hiroyuki Enomoto, at Japan’s National Institute of Polar Research, said that while individual actions have a small impact, they are important in increasing collective awareness of the problem. Are the scientists walking the talk themselves? Yes. Many foresee catastrophic levels of global heating and are shifting their focus away from the physics of the climate system towards action that slows global heating and work that protects people against the climate impacts they now see as unstoppable. “I work more on projects with vulnerable communities so they improve their adaptation to climate change, whose impacts we already experience and which will increase in the future,” said Prof Carolina Vera at the University of Buenos Aires in Argentina. Numerous scientists said they had given their time as expert witnesses in legal cases on climate change and others said they were helping groups to develop new climate policies. Maharaj now chooses to spend at least half her time turning science into action, as the science director of a company implementing responsible reforestation. “There are so many people on the ground who care and who want to make a difference; that is truly encouraging and really drives me,” she said. Many people, faced with the worsening impacts of the climate emergency, want to know what they can do personally to fight global heating. The Guardian asked hundreds of the world’s top climate scientists for their views. What is the most effective action individuals can take? Most experts (76%) backed voting for politicians who pledge strong climate measures, where fair elections take place . The recommendation is powerful in a year when voters in countries including the US, UK, India, the EU, Mexico and South Africa and more all go to the polls. “I feel the reason behind the lack of response to date is the nervousness of politicians,” said Prof Bill Collins, at the University of Reading in the UK. “Polls suggest voters are actually more willing for governments to take stronger climate action.” Another expert highlighted the danger of a second Donald Trump presidency to climate action. The survey sought the view of every contactable lead author and review editor of reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change since 2018, with 380 of 843 responding. Overall the scientists were extremely pessimistic about the prospects of holding global temperature rises below internationally agreed targets. “The science is there, but the lack of will of politicians worldwide is retarding climate change [action],” said Prof Alexander Milner, at the University of Birmingham in the UK. What about reducing flying? The second choice for most effective individual action, according to the experts, was reducing flying and fossil-fuel powered transport in favour of electric and public transport. This was backed by 56%, and two-thirds said they had cut their own number of flights. Flying is the most polluting activity an individual can undertake and makes up a large part of the carbon footprint of the rich. Globally it is a small minority of people who drive aviation emissions, with only about one in 10 flying at all . Frequent-flying “super emitters” who represent just 1% of the world’s population cause half of aviation’s carbon emissions, with US air passengers having by far the biggest carbon footprint among rich countries. Can eating less meat help? Meat production has a huge impact on the environment . Most people in wealthy countries already eat more meat than is healthy for them and more than 60% of the scientists said they had cut their own meat consumption. Almost 30% of the experts said eating less meat was the most effective climate action, while a similar proportion backed cutting emissions from heating or cooling homes, by installing heat pumps, for example. Is protesting an effective form of climate action? Almost a quarter of the scientists said they had participated in climate protests, as citizens who are deeply worried about global heating. This included scientists from every continent, including those from the US, Argentina, Germany, Bangladesh, Kenya and Australia. What else? Having fewer children was backed by 12% of the experts but many made further suggestions. Everyone should “talk about climate as the leading existential threat to societal stability”, said one. Shifting savings or pension funds away from fossil fuel investments and towards green ones was also mentioned by multiple experts. Prof Vanesa Castán Broto, at the University of Sheffield in the UK, suggested a blunt action for one particular group: “Stop working for the fossil fuel industry.” And a scientist from Cameroon advocated avoiding products responsible for deforestation, such as some beef, timber and cocoa. Can individual action really help? Many of the experts were clear on the limits. “It can only go so far. Deep, rapid cuts in carbon emissions from oil and gas, as well as other sectors such as transport, are needed, which are outside the control of the average individual,” said Dr Shobha Maharaj, a climate impacts scientist from Trinidad and Tobago. “Individual action can only amount to a drop in the bucket – only systemic changes will be sufficient,” said Prof David Wrathall, at Oregon State University in the US. But Prof Hiroyuki Enomoto, at Japan’s National Institute of Polar Research, said that while individual actions have a small impact, they are important in increasing collective awareness of the problem. Are the scientists walking the talk themselves? Yes. Many foresee catastrophic levels of global heating and are shifting their focus away from the physics of the climate system towards action that slows global heating and work that protects people against the climate impacts they now see as unstoppable. “I work more on projects with vulnerable communities so they improve their adaptation to climate change, whose impacts we already experience and which will increase in the future,” said Prof Carolina Vera at the University of Buenos Aires in Argentina. Numerous scientists said they had given their time as expert witnesses in legal cases on climate change and others said they were helping groups to develop new climate policies. Maharaj now chooses to spend at least half her time turning science into action, as the science director of a company implementing responsible reforestation. “There are so many people on the ground who care and who want to make a difference; that is truly encouraging and really drives me,” she said. Many people, faced with the worsening impacts of the climate emergency, want to know what they can do personally to fight global heating. The Guardian asked hundreds of the world’s top climate scientists for their views. What is the most effective action individuals can take? Most experts (76%) backed voting for politicians who pledge strong climate measures, where fair elections take place . The recommendation is powerful in a year when voters in countries including the US, UK, India, the EU, Mexico and South Africa and more all go to the polls. “I feel the reason behind the lack of response to date is the nervousness of politicians,” said Prof Bill Collins, at the University of Reading in the UK. “Polls suggest voters are actually more willing for governments to take stronger climate action.” Another expert highlighted the danger of a second Donald Trump presidency to climate action. The survey sought the view of every contactable lead author and review editor of reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change since 2018, with 380 of 843 responding. Overall the scientists were extremely pessimistic about the prospects of holding global temperature rises below internationally agreed targets. “The science is there, but the lack of will of politicians worldwide is retarding climate change [action],” said Prof Alexander Milner, at the University of Birmingham in the UK. Most experts (76%) backed voting for politicians who pledge strong climate measures, where fair elections take place . The recommendation is powerful in a year when voters in countries including the US, UK, India, the EU, Mexico and South Africa and more all go to the polls. “I feel the reason behind the lack of response to date is the nervousness of politicians,” said Prof Bill Collins, at the University of Reading in the UK. “Polls suggest voters are actually more willing for governments to take stronger climate action.” Another expert highlighted the danger of a second Donald Trump presidency to climate action. The survey sought the view of every contactable lead author and review editor of reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change since 2018, with 380 of 843 responding. Overall the scientists were extremely pessimistic about the prospects of holding global temperature rises below internationally agreed targets. “The science is there, but the lack of will of politicians worldwide is retarding climate change [action],” said Prof Alexander Milner, at the University of Birmingham in the UK. What about reducing flying? The second choice for most effective individual action, according to the experts, was reducing flying and fossil-fuel powered transport in favour of electric and public transport. This was backed by 56%, and two-thirds said they had cut their own number of flights. Flying is the most polluting activity an individual can undertake and makes up a large part of the carbon footprint of the rich. Globally it is a small minority of people who drive aviation emissions, with only about one in 10 flying at all . Frequent-flying “super emitters” who represent just 1% of the world’s population cause half of aviation’s carbon emissions, with US air passengers having by far the biggest carbon footprint among rich countries. The second choice for most effective individual action, according to the experts, was reducing flying and fossil-fuel powered transport in favour of electric and public transport. This was backed by 56%, and two-thirds said they had cut their own number of flights. Flying is the most polluting activity an individual can undertake and makes up a large part of the carbon footprint of the rich. Globally it is a small minority of people who drive aviation emissions, with only about one in 10 flying at all . Frequent-flying “super emitters” who represent just 1% of the world’s population cause half of aviation’s carbon emissions, with US air passengers having by far the biggest carbon footprint among rich countries. Can eating less meat help? Meat production has a huge impact on the environment . Most people in wealthy countries already eat more meat than is healthy for them and more than 60% of the scientists said they had cut their own meat consumption. Almost 30% of the experts said eating less meat was the most effective climate action, while a similar proportion backed cutting emissions from heating or cooling homes, by installing heat pumps, for example. Meat production has a huge impact on the environment . Most people in wealthy countries already eat more meat than is healthy for them and more than 60% of the scientists said they had cut their own meat consumption. Almost 30% of the experts said eating less meat was the most effective climate action, while a similar proportion backed cutting emissions from heating or cooling homes, by installing heat pumps, for example. Is protesting an effective form of climate action? Almost a quarter of the scientists said they had participated in climate protests, as citizens who are deeply worried about global heating. This included scientists from every continent, including those from the US, Argentina, Germany, Bangladesh, Kenya and Australia. Almost a quarter of the scientists said they had participated in climate protests, as citizens who are deeply worried about global heating. This included scientists from every continent, including those from the US, Argentina, Germany, Bangladesh, Kenya and Australia. What else? Having fewer children was backed by 12% of the experts but many made further suggestions. Everyone should “talk about climate as the leading existential threat to societal stability”, said one. Shifting savings or pension funds away from fossil fuel investments and towards green ones was also mentioned by multiple experts. Prof Vanesa Castán Broto, at the University of Sheffield in the UK, suggested a blunt action for one particular group: “Stop working for the fossil fuel industry.” And a scientist from Cameroon advocated avoiding products responsible for deforestation, such as some beef, timber and cocoa. Having fewer children was backed by 12% of the experts but many made further suggestions. Everyone should “talk about climate as the leading existential threat to societal stability”, said one. Shifting savings or pension funds away from fossil fuel investments and towards green ones was also mentioned by multiple experts. Prof Vanesa Castán Broto, at the University of Sheffield in the UK, suggested a blunt action for one particular group: “Stop working for the fossil fuel industry.” And a scientist from Cameroon advocated avoiding products responsible for deforestation, such as some beef, timber and cocoa. Can individual action really help? Many of the experts were clear on the limits. “It can only go so far. Deep, rapid cuts in carbon emissions from oil and gas, as well as other sectors such as transport, are needed, which are outside the control of the average individual,” said Dr Shobha Maharaj, a climate impacts scientist from Trinidad and Tobago. “Individual action can only amount to a drop in the bucket – only systemic changes will be sufficient,” said Prof David Wrathall, at Oregon State University in the US. But Prof Hiroyuki Enomoto, at Japan’s National Institute of Polar Research, said that while individual actions have a small impact, they are important in increasing collective awareness of the problem. Many of the experts were clear on the limits. “It can only go so far. Deep, rapid cuts in carbon emissions from oil and gas, as well as other sectors such as transport, are needed, which are outside the control of the average individual,” said Dr Shobha Maharaj, a climate impacts scientist from Trinidad and Tobago. “Individual action can only amount to a drop in the bucket – only systemic changes will be sufficient,” said Prof David Wrathall, at Oregon State University in the US. But Prof Hiroyuki Enomoto, at Japan’s National Institute of Polar Research, said that while individual actions have a small impact, they are important in increasing collective awareness of the problem. Are the scientists walking the talk themselves? Yes. Many foresee catastrophic levels of global heating and are shifting their focus away from the physics of the climate system towards action that slows global heating and work that protects people against the climate impacts they now see as unstoppable. “I work more on projects with vulnerable communities so they improve their adaptation to climate change, whose impacts we already experience and which will increase in the future,” said Prof Carolina Vera at the University of Buenos Aires in Argentina. Numerous scientists said they had given their time as expert witnesses in legal cases on climate change and others said they were helping groups to develop new climate policies. Maharaj now chooses to spend at least half her time turning science into action, as the science director of a company implementing responsible reforestation. “There are so many people on the ground who care and who want to make a difference; that is truly encouraging and really drives me,” she said. Yes. Many foresee catastrophic levels of global heating and are shifting their focus away from the physics of the climate system towards action that slows global heating and work that protects people against the climate impacts they now see as unstoppable. “I work more on projects with vulnerable communities so they improve their adaptation to climate change, whose impacts we already experience and which will increase in the future,” said Prof Carolina Vera at the University of Buenos Aires in Argentina. Numerous scientists said they had given their time as expert witnesses in legal cases on climate change and others said they were helping groups to develop new climate policies. Maharaj now chooses to spend at least half her time turning science into action, as the science director of a company implementing responsible reforestation. “There are so many people on the ground who care and who want to make a difference; that is truly encouraging and really drives me,” she said. Explore more on these topics Ethical and green living Climate crisis Climate science Environmental activism Greenhouse gas emissions explainers Share Reuse this content Ethical and green living Climate crisis Climate science Environmental activism Greenhouse gas emissions explainers |
University leaders must take ‘personal’ care to protect Jewish students, Sunak says
The president of the Union of Jewish Students says there has been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism”. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA View image in fullscreen The president of the Union of Jewish Students says there has been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism”. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA This article is more than 1 year old University leaders must take ‘personal’ care to protect Jewish students, Sunak says This article is more than 1 year old Encampments at 15 institutions protesting Israel’s war in Gaza lead to concern for safety of Jewish students University leaders should take “personal responsibility” for protecting Jewish students on campus, Rishi Sunak said to vice-chancellors during an antisemitism roundtable hosted at Downing Street. Sunak told the meeting of 17 higher education institutions from England and Scotland, along with Jewish student and community groups, that it was imperative for universities to “remain bastions of tolerance, where debate takes place with respect for others and where every student feels safe”. The meeting was convened by the prime minister after the proliferation of student encampments in protest at the fighting in Gaza, with concerns that Jewish students could be intimidated or harassed. Students stage pro-Palestine occupations at five more UK universities Read more Edward Isaacs, president of the Union of Jewish Students (UJS), told the roundtable there had been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism” since Hamas’s attacks on Israel on 7 October last year, describing it as “a year like no other” for Jewish students. “This truly has been the worst antisemitism crisis on campus that we have seen for a generation, and its impacts run deep throughout the Jewish student population,” Isaacs said, detailing the hundreds of calls received by the UJS’s welfare hotline . Isaacs said campus leaders “have often felt unable to stand in allyship with Jewish students, and this has only been compounded by universities often failing to singularly condemn instances of antisemitism, making Jewish students feel alone, marginalised and vulnerable on campus”. Vice-chancellors attending the Downing Street meeting described it as positive, with Sunak praising universities as one of the UK’s greatest assets. “It was constructive, friendly and based on an understanding that there is a shared problem in combating antisemitism and extremism,” said one. Downing Street said the discussions covered the importance of using disciplinary procedures against students who were inciting hatred or violence, as well as concerns over non-students joining the campus protests, and the role of the police. Vivienne Stern, chief executive of Universities UK, which represents vice-chancellors, said: “Universities have taken the rise in antisemitism on campuses since October 7 very seriously and will continue to work hard to ensure the safety of Jewish staff and students. “The current conflict has raised tensions across many communities and we have been clear there is no place for intolerance on our campuses.” “In line with the sector’s clear commitment to freedom of speech, it is important that universities allow and support students and staff to debate and discuss this crisis, and the challenging issues it raises, but within the law and with respect and tolerance.” Protest encampments are taking place at 15 institutions, with Isaacs warning that campus relations will only be improved “when university leaders are clear with students on red lines” such as protesters’ calls to “globalise the intifada”. Isaacs said: “It is a direct call to spread the sort of violence seen in Israel in the late 1990s and early 2000s which saw random acts of terror against civilians at innocuous locations. Universities have to make this red line clear.” The numbers of students taking part in the encampments remain small so far compared to those in the US. With teaching over for the year, many students have already left campus or are engaged with exams or assessments. Why have student protests against Israel’s war in Gaza gone global? Read more Writing in the Times , Sunak claimed the UJS had been “subject to a shameful attempt to get their organisation kicked out of the National Union of Students purely because of their support for the principle of a Jewish state”. Sunak’s comment referred to the NUS’s annual conference last month, where some delegates attempted to debate cutting the NUS’s ties to the UJS over its support for Israel. The attempt was blocked by NUS officials. A spokesperson for the NUS said: “The UJS is the representative body of Jewish students on our campuses, with a history older than NUS, and is recognised by NUS as an associate member. If Jewish students don’t agree with the political positions of UJS, that’s a conversation for Jewish students to have within UJS.” Explore more on these topics Universities Israel-Gaza war Antisemitism Students Higher education Rishi Sunak University leadership news Share Reuse this content The president of the Union of Jewish Students says there has been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism”. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA View image in fullscreen The president of the Union of Jewish Students says there has been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism”. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA This article is more than 1 year old University leaders must take ‘personal’ care to protect Jewish students, Sunak says This article is more than 1 year old Encampments at 15 institutions protesting Israel’s war in Gaza lead to concern for safety of Jewish students University leaders should take “personal responsibility” for protecting Jewish students on campus, Rishi Sunak said to vice-chancellors during an antisemitism roundtable hosted at Downing Street. Sunak told the meeting of 17 higher education institutions from England and Scotland, along with Jewish student and community groups, that it was imperative for universities to “remain bastions of tolerance, where debate takes place with respect for others and where every student feels safe”. The meeting was convened by the prime minister after the proliferation of student encampments in protest at the fighting in Gaza, with concerns that Jewish students could be intimidated or harassed. Students stage pro-Palestine occupations at five more UK universities Read more Edward Isaacs, president of the Union of Jewish Students (UJS), told the roundtable there had been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism” since Hamas’s attacks on Israel on 7 October last year, describing it as “a year like no other” for Jewish students. “This truly has been the worst antisemitism crisis on campus that we have seen for a generation, and its impacts run deep throughout the Jewish student population,” Isaacs said, detailing the hundreds of calls received by the UJS’s welfare hotline . Isaacs said campus leaders “have often felt unable to stand in allyship with Jewish students, and this has only been compounded by universities often failing to singularly condemn instances of antisemitism, making Jewish students feel alone, marginalised and vulnerable on campus”. Vice-chancellors attending the Downing Street meeting described it as positive, with Sunak praising universities as one of the UK’s greatest assets. “It was constructive, friendly and based on an understanding that there is a shared problem in combating antisemitism and extremism,” said one. Downing Street said the discussions covered the importance of using disciplinary procedures against students who were inciting hatred or violence, as well as concerns over non-students joining the campus protests, and the role of the police. Vivienne Stern, chief executive of Universities UK, which represents vice-chancellors, said: “Universities have taken the rise in antisemitism on campuses since October 7 very seriously and will continue to work hard to ensure the safety of Jewish staff and students. “The current conflict has raised tensions across many communities and we have been clear there is no place for intolerance on our campuses.” “In line with the sector’s clear commitment to freedom of speech, it is important that universities allow and support students and staff to debate and discuss this crisis, and the challenging issues it raises, but within the law and with respect and tolerance.” Protest encampments are taking place at 15 institutions, with Isaacs warning that campus relations will only be improved “when university leaders are clear with students on red lines” such as protesters’ calls to “globalise the intifada”. Isaacs said: “It is a direct call to spread the sort of violence seen in Israel in the late 1990s and early 2000s which saw random acts of terror against civilians at innocuous locations. Universities have to make this red line clear.” The numbers of students taking part in the encampments remain small so far compared to those in the US. With teaching over for the year, many students have already left campus or are engaged with exams or assessments. Why have student protests against Israel’s war in Gaza gone global? Read more Writing in the Times , Sunak claimed the UJS had been “subject to a shameful attempt to get their organisation kicked out of the National Union of Students purely because of their support for the principle of a Jewish state”. Sunak’s comment referred to the NUS’s annual conference last month, where some delegates attempted to debate cutting the NUS’s ties to the UJS over its support for Israel. The attempt was blocked by NUS officials. A spokesperson for the NUS said: “The UJS is the representative body of Jewish students on our campuses, with a history older than NUS, and is recognised by NUS as an associate member. If Jewish students don’t agree with the political positions of UJS, that’s a conversation for Jewish students to have within UJS.” Explore more on these topics Universities Israel-Gaza war Antisemitism Students Higher education Rishi Sunak University leadership news Share Reuse this content The president of the Union of Jewish Students says there has been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism”. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA View image in fullscreen The president of the Union of Jewish Students says there has been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism”. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA The president of the Union of Jewish Students says there has been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism”. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA View image in fullscreen The president of the Union of Jewish Students says there has been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism”. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA The president of the Union of Jewish Students says there has been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism”. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA View image in fullscreen The president of the Union of Jewish Students says there has been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism”. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA The president of the Union of Jewish Students says there has been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism”. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA View image in fullscreen The president of the Union of Jewish Students says there has been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism”. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA The president of the Union of Jewish Students says there has been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism”. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA The president of the Union of Jewish Students says there has been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism”. Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA This article is more than 1 year old University leaders must take ‘personal’ care to protect Jewish students, Sunak says This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old University leaders must take ‘personal’ care to protect Jewish students, Sunak says This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old University leaders must take ‘personal’ care to protect Jewish students, Sunak says This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Encampments at 15 institutions protesting Israel’s war in Gaza lead to concern for safety of Jewish students Encampments at 15 institutions protesting Israel’s war in Gaza lead to concern for safety of Jewish students Encampments at 15 institutions protesting Israel’s war in Gaza lead to concern for safety of Jewish students University leaders should take “personal responsibility” for protecting Jewish students on campus, Rishi Sunak said to vice-chancellors during an antisemitism roundtable hosted at Downing Street. Sunak told the meeting of 17 higher education institutions from England and Scotland, along with Jewish student and community groups, that it was imperative for universities to “remain bastions of tolerance, where debate takes place with respect for others and where every student feels safe”. The meeting was convened by the prime minister after the proliferation of student encampments in protest at the fighting in Gaza, with concerns that Jewish students could be intimidated or harassed. Students stage pro-Palestine occupations at five more UK universities Read more Edward Isaacs, president of the Union of Jewish Students (UJS), told the roundtable there had been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism” since Hamas’s attacks on Israel on 7 October last year, describing it as “a year like no other” for Jewish students. “This truly has been the worst antisemitism crisis on campus that we have seen for a generation, and its impacts run deep throughout the Jewish student population,” Isaacs said, detailing the hundreds of calls received by the UJS’s welfare hotline . Isaacs said campus leaders “have often felt unable to stand in allyship with Jewish students, and this has only been compounded by universities often failing to singularly condemn instances of antisemitism, making Jewish students feel alone, marginalised and vulnerable on campus”. Vice-chancellors attending the Downing Street meeting described it as positive, with Sunak praising universities as one of the UK’s greatest assets. “It was constructive, friendly and based on an understanding that there is a shared problem in combating antisemitism and extremism,” said one. Downing Street said the discussions covered the importance of using disciplinary procedures against students who were inciting hatred or violence, as well as concerns over non-students joining the campus protests, and the role of the police. Vivienne Stern, chief executive of Universities UK, which represents vice-chancellors, said: “Universities have taken the rise in antisemitism on campuses since October 7 very seriously and will continue to work hard to ensure the safety of Jewish staff and students. “The current conflict has raised tensions across many communities and we have been clear there is no place for intolerance on our campuses.” “In line with the sector’s clear commitment to freedom of speech, it is important that universities allow and support students and staff to debate and discuss this crisis, and the challenging issues it raises, but within the law and with respect and tolerance.” Protest encampments are taking place at 15 institutions, with Isaacs warning that campus relations will only be improved “when university leaders are clear with students on red lines” such as protesters’ calls to “globalise the intifada”. Isaacs said: “It is a direct call to spread the sort of violence seen in Israel in the late 1990s and early 2000s which saw random acts of terror against civilians at innocuous locations. Universities have to make this red line clear.” The numbers of students taking part in the encampments remain small so far compared to those in the US. With teaching over for the year, many students have already left campus or are engaged with exams or assessments. Why have student protests against Israel’s war in Gaza gone global? Read more Writing in the Times , Sunak claimed the UJS had been “subject to a shameful attempt to get their organisation kicked out of the National Union of Students purely because of their support for the principle of a Jewish state”. Sunak’s comment referred to the NUS’s annual conference last month, where some delegates attempted to debate cutting the NUS’s ties to the UJS over its support for Israel. The attempt was blocked by NUS officials. A spokesperson for the NUS said: “The UJS is the representative body of Jewish students on our campuses, with a history older than NUS, and is recognised by NUS as an associate member. If Jewish students don’t agree with the political positions of UJS, that’s a conversation for Jewish students to have within UJS.” Explore more on these topics Universities Israel-Gaza war Antisemitism Students Higher education Rishi Sunak University leadership news Share Reuse this content University leaders should take “personal responsibility” for protecting Jewish students on campus, Rishi Sunak said to vice-chancellors during an antisemitism roundtable hosted at Downing Street. Sunak told the meeting of 17 higher education institutions from England and Scotland, along with Jewish student and community groups, that it was imperative for universities to “remain bastions of tolerance, where debate takes place with respect for others and where every student feels safe”. The meeting was convened by the prime minister after the proliferation of student encampments in protest at the fighting in Gaza, with concerns that Jewish students could be intimidated or harassed. Students stage pro-Palestine occupations at five more UK universities Read more Edward Isaacs, president of the Union of Jewish Students (UJS), told the roundtable there had been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism” since Hamas’s attacks on Israel on 7 October last year, describing it as “a year like no other” for Jewish students. “This truly has been the worst antisemitism crisis on campus that we have seen for a generation, and its impacts run deep throughout the Jewish student population,” Isaacs said, detailing the hundreds of calls received by the UJS’s welfare hotline . Isaacs said campus leaders “have often felt unable to stand in allyship with Jewish students, and this has only been compounded by universities often failing to singularly condemn instances of antisemitism, making Jewish students feel alone, marginalised and vulnerable on campus”. Vice-chancellors attending the Downing Street meeting described it as positive, with Sunak praising universities as one of the UK’s greatest assets. “It was constructive, friendly and based on an understanding that there is a shared problem in combating antisemitism and extremism,” said one. Downing Street said the discussions covered the importance of using disciplinary procedures against students who were inciting hatred or violence, as well as concerns over non-students joining the campus protests, and the role of the police. Vivienne Stern, chief executive of Universities UK, which represents vice-chancellors, said: “Universities have taken the rise in antisemitism on campuses since October 7 very seriously and will continue to work hard to ensure the safety of Jewish staff and students. “The current conflict has raised tensions across many communities and we have been clear there is no place for intolerance on our campuses.” “In line with the sector’s clear commitment to freedom of speech, it is important that universities allow and support students and staff to debate and discuss this crisis, and the challenging issues it raises, but within the law and with respect and tolerance.” Protest encampments are taking place at 15 institutions, with Isaacs warning that campus relations will only be improved “when university leaders are clear with students on red lines” such as protesters’ calls to “globalise the intifada”. Isaacs said: “It is a direct call to spread the sort of violence seen in Israel in the late 1990s and early 2000s which saw random acts of terror against civilians at innocuous locations. Universities have to make this red line clear.” The numbers of students taking part in the encampments remain small so far compared to those in the US. With teaching over for the year, many students have already left campus or are engaged with exams or assessments. Why have student protests against Israel’s war in Gaza gone global? Read more Writing in the Times , Sunak claimed the UJS had been “subject to a shameful attempt to get their organisation kicked out of the National Union of Students purely because of their support for the principle of a Jewish state”. Sunak’s comment referred to the NUS’s annual conference last month, where some delegates attempted to debate cutting the NUS’s ties to the UJS over its support for Israel. The attempt was blocked by NUS officials. A spokesperson for the NUS said: “The UJS is the representative body of Jewish students on our campuses, with a history older than NUS, and is recognised by NUS as an associate member. If Jewish students don’t agree with the political positions of UJS, that’s a conversation for Jewish students to have within UJS.” Explore more on these topics Universities Israel-Gaza war Antisemitism Students Higher education Rishi Sunak University leadership news Share Reuse this content University leaders should take “personal responsibility” for protecting Jewish students on campus, Rishi Sunak said to vice-chancellors during an antisemitism roundtable hosted at Downing Street. Sunak told the meeting of 17 higher education institutions from England and Scotland, along with Jewish student and community groups, that it was imperative for universities to “remain bastions of tolerance, where debate takes place with respect for others and where every student feels safe”. The meeting was convened by the prime minister after the proliferation of student encampments in protest at the fighting in Gaza, with concerns that Jewish students could be intimidated or harassed. Students stage pro-Palestine occupations at five more UK universities Read more Edward Isaacs, president of the Union of Jewish Students (UJS), told the roundtable there had been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism” since Hamas’s attacks on Israel on 7 October last year, describing it as “a year like no other” for Jewish students. “This truly has been the worst antisemitism crisis on campus that we have seen for a generation, and its impacts run deep throughout the Jewish student population,” Isaacs said, detailing the hundreds of calls received by the UJS’s welfare hotline . Isaacs said campus leaders “have often felt unable to stand in allyship with Jewish students, and this has only been compounded by universities often failing to singularly condemn instances of antisemitism, making Jewish students feel alone, marginalised and vulnerable on campus”. Vice-chancellors attending the Downing Street meeting described it as positive, with Sunak praising universities as one of the UK’s greatest assets. “It was constructive, friendly and based on an understanding that there is a shared problem in combating antisemitism and extremism,” said one. Downing Street said the discussions covered the importance of using disciplinary procedures against students who were inciting hatred or violence, as well as concerns over non-students joining the campus protests, and the role of the police. Vivienne Stern, chief executive of Universities UK, which represents vice-chancellors, said: “Universities have taken the rise in antisemitism on campuses since October 7 very seriously and will continue to work hard to ensure the safety of Jewish staff and students. “The current conflict has raised tensions across many communities and we have been clear there is no place for intolerance on our campuses.” “In line with the sector’s clear commitment to freedom of speech, it is important that universities allow and support students and staff to debate and discuss this crisis, and the challenging issues it raises, but within the law and with respect and tolerance.” Protest encampments are taking place at 15 institutions, with Isaacs warning that campus relations will only be improved “when university leaders are clear with students on red lines” such as protesters’ calls to “globalise the intifada”. Isaacs said: “It is a direct call to spread the sort of violence seen in Israel in the late 1990s and early 2000s which saw random acts of terror against civilians at innocuous locations. Universities have to make this red line clear.” The numbers of students taking part in the encampments remain small so far compared to those in the US. With teaching over for the year, many students have already left campus or are engaged with exams or assessments. Why have student protests against Israel’s war in Gaza gone global? Read more Writing in the Times , Sunak claimed the UJS had been “subject to a shameful attempt to get their organisation kicked out of the National Union of Students purely because of their support for the principle of a Jewish state”. Sunak’s comment referred to the NUS’s annual conference last month, where some delegates attempted to debate cutting the NUS’s ties to the UJS over its support for Israel. The attempt was blocked by NUS officials. A spokesperson for the NUS said: “The UJS is the representative body of Jewish students on our campuses, with a history older than NUS, and is recognised by NUS as an associate member. If Jewish students don’t agree with the political positions of UJS, that’s a conversation for Jewish students to have within UJS.” University leaders should take “personal responsibility” for protecting Jewish students on campus, Rishi Sunak said to vice-chancellors during an antisemitism roundtable hosted at Downing Street. Sunak told the meeting of 17 higher education institutions from England and Scotland, along with Jewish student and community groups, that it was imperative for universities to “remain bastions of tolerance, where debate takes place with respect for others and where every student feels safe”. The meeting was convened by the prime minister after the proliferation of student encampments in protest at the fighting in Gaza, with concerns that Jewish students could be intimidated or harassed. Students stage pro-Palestine occupations at five more UK universities Read more Edward Isaacs, president of the Union of Jewish Students (UJS), told the roundtable there had been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism” since Hamas’s attacks on Israel on 7 October last year, describing it as “a year like no other” for Jewish students. “This truly has been the worst antisemitism crisis on campus that we have seen for a generation, and its impacts run deep throughout the Jewish student population,” Isaacs said, detailing the hundreds of calls received by the UJS’s welfare hotline . Isaacs said campus leaders “have often felt unable to stand in allyship with Jewish students, and this has only been compounded by universities often failing to singularly condemn instances of antisemitism, making Jewish students feel alone, marginalised and vulnerable on campus”. Vice-chancellors attending the Downing Street meeting described it as positive, with Sunak praising universities as one of the UK’s greatest assets. “It was constructive, friendly and based on an understanding that there is a shared problem in combating antisemitism and extremism,” said one. Downing Street said the discussions covered the importance of using disciplinary procedures against students who were inciting hatred or violence, as well as concerns over non-students joining the campus protests, and the role of the police. Vivienne Stern, chief executive of Universities UK, which represents vice-chancellors, said: “Universities have taken the rise in antisemitism on campuses since October 7 very seriously and will continue to work hard to ensure the safety of Jewish staff and students. “The current conflict has raised tensions across many communities and we have been clear there is no place for intolerance on our campuses.” “In line with the sector’s clear commitment to freedom of speech, it is important that universities allow and support students and staff to debate and discuss this crisis, and the challenging issues it raises, but within the law and with respect and tolerance.” Protest encampments are taking place at 15 institutions, with Isaacs warning that campus relations will only be improved “when university leaders are clear with students on red lines” such as protesters’ calls to “globalise the intifada”. Isaacs said: “It is a direct call to spread the sort of violence seen in Israel in the late 1990s and early 2000s which saw random acts of terror against civilians at innocuous locations. Universities have to make this red line clear.” The numbers of students taking part in the encampments remain small so far compared to those in the US. With teaching over for the year, many students have already left campus or are engaged with exams or assessments. Why have student protests against Israel’s war in Gaza gone global? Read more Writing in the Times , Sunak claimed the UJS had been “subject to a shameful attempt to get their organisation kicked out of the National Union of Students purely because of their support for the principle of a Jewish state”. Sunak’s comment referred to the NUS’s annual conference last month, where some delegates attempted to debate cutting the NUS’s ties to the UJS over its support for Israel. The attempt was blocked by NUS officials. A spokesperson for the NUS said: “The UJS is the representative body of Jewish students on our campuses, with a history older than NUS, and is recognised by NUS as an associate member. If Jewish students don’t agree with the political positions of UJS, that’s a conversation for Jewish students to have within UJS.” University leaders should take “personal responsibility” for protecting Jewish students on campus, Rishi Sunak said to vice-chancellors during an antisemitism roundtable hosted at Downing Street. Sunak told the meeting of 17 higher education institutions from England and Scotland, along with Jewish student and community groups, that it was imperative for universities to “remain bastions of tolerance, where debate takes place with respect for others and where every student feels safe”. The meeting was convened by the prime minister after the proliferation of student encampments in protest at the fighting in Gaza, with concerns that Jewish students could be intimidated or harassed. Students stage pro-Palestine occupations at five more UK universities Read more Students stage pro-Palestine occupations at five more UK universities Read more Students stage pro-Palestine occupations at five more UK universities Read more Students stage pro-Palestine occupations at five more UK universities Students stage pro-Palestine occupations at five more UK universities Edward Isaacs, president of the Union of Jewish Students (UJS), told the roundtable there had been an “unprecedented rise in campus antisemitism” since Hamas’s attacks on Israel on 7 October last year, describing it as “a year like no other” for Jewish students. “This truly has been the worst antisemitism crisis on campus that we have seen for a generation, and its impacts run deep throughout the Jewish student population,” Isaacs said, detailing the hundreds of calls received by the UJS’s welfare hotline . Isaacs said campus leaders “have often felt unable to stand in allyship with Jewish students, and this has only been compounded by universities often failing to singularly condemn instances of antisemitism, making Jewish students feel alone, marginalised and vulnerable on campus”. Vice-chancellors attending the Downing Street meeting described it as positive, with Sunak praising universities as one of the UK’s greatest assets. “It was constructive, friendly and based on an understanding that there is a shared problem in combating antisemitism and extremism,” said one. Downing Street said the discussions covered the importance of using disciplinary procedures against students who were inciting hatred or violence, as well as concerns over non-students joining the campus protests, and the role of the police. Vivienne Stern, chief executive of Universities UK, which represents vice-chancellors, said: “Universities have taken the rise in antisemitism on campuses since October 7 very seriously and will continue to work hard to ensure the safety of Jewish staff and students. “The current conflict has raised tensions across many communities and we have been clear there is no place for intolerance on our campuses.” “In line with the sector’s clear commitment to freedom of speech, it is important that universities allow and support students and staff to debate and discuss this crisis, and the challenging issues it raises, but within the law and with respect and tolerance.” Protest encampments are taking place at 15 institutions, with Isaacs warning that campus relations will only be improved “when university leaders are clear with students on red lines” such as protesters’ calls to “globalise the intifada”. Isaacs said: “It is a direct call to spread the sort of violence seen in Israel in the late 1990s and early 2000s which saw random acts of terror against civilians at innocuous locations. Universities have to make this red line clear.” The numbers of students taking part in the encampments remain small so far compared to those in the US. With teaching over for the year, many students have already left campus or are engaged with exams or assessments. Why have student protests against Israel’s war in Gaza gone global? Read more Why have student protests against Israel’s war in Gaza gone global? Read more Why have student protests against Israel’s war in Gaza gone global? Read more Why have student protests against Israel’s war in Gaza gone global? Why have student protests against Israel’s war in Gaza gone global? Writing in the Times , Sunak claimed the UJS had been “subject to a shameful attempt to get their organisation kicked out of the National Union of Students purely because of their support for the principle of a Jewish state”. Sunak’s comment referred to the NUS’s annual conference last month, where some delegates attempted to debate cutting the NUS’s ties to the UJS over its support for Israel. The attempt was blocked by NUS officials. A spokesperson for the NUS said: “The UJS is the representative body of Jewish students on our campuses, with a history older than NUS, and is recognised by NUS as an associate member. If Jewish students don’t agree with the political positions of UJS, that’s a conversation for Jewish students to have within UJS.” Explore more on these topics Universities Israel-Gaza war Antisemitism Students Higher education Rishi Sunak University leadership news Share Reuse this content Universities Israel-Gaza war Antisemitism Students Higher education Rishi Sunak University leadership news |
UK politics: Tory defector Natalie Elphicke apologises for comments about women who were sexually assaulted by her ex-husband – as it happened
Natalie Elphicke, who defected to Labour from the Conservatives yesterday, has apologised for comments she made supporting her ex-husband after he was convicted of sexual assault. The comments, made after Charlie Elphicke, her predecessor as MP for Dover, was sentenced to two years in jail for three counts of sexual assault against two women, have been cited by Labour MPs as a particularly powerful reason why she should not be welcome in the party. In an interview with the Sun in 2020, after her husband’s conviction, Elphicke dismissed the claims of his accusers and said that he was being punished for being “charming, wealthy, charismatic and successful – attractive, and attracted to, women”. Last night the Labour MP Jess Phillips told ITV’s Peston programme that what Elphicke said at the time was “very painful” to the victims, and that she needed to apologise. In a statement today Elphicke said: My decision to join the Labour party is not one I have taken lightly but one I made because I am convinced that this country needs a new government led by Keir Starmer to fix the problems we see from housing to small boats. I always knew that this decision would put a spotlight on the prosecution of my ex-husband and I want to address some of the commentary around this head on. The period of 2017 - 2020 was an incredibly stressful and difficult one for me as I learned more about the person I thought I knew. I know it was far harder for the women who had to relive their experiences and give evidence against him. I have previously, and do, condemn his behaviour towards other women and towards me. It was right that he was prosecuted and I’m sorry for the comments that I made about his victims. It is vital that women can have confidence in the criminal justice system and our rates of prosecution and conviction are far too low as a country. Keir Starmer’s mission to halve male violence against women and girls is critical and I wanted to take the opportunity to express my explicit support for Labour colleagues working to realise it. Natalie Elphicke ‘sorry’ for defending ex-husband jailed for sexual assault Read more Natalie Elphicke ‘sorry’ for defending ex-husband jailed for sexual assault Read more Natalie Elphicke ‘sorry’ for defending ex-husband jailed for sexual assault Read more Natalie Elphicke ‘sorry’ for defending ex-husband jailed for sexual assault Natalie Elphicke ‘sorry’ for defending ex-husband jailed for sexual assault |
Germany: police clash with hundreds of climate protesters trying to storm Tesla plant – video
0:36 This article is more than 1 year old Germany: police clash with hundreds of climate protesters trying to storm Tesla plant – video This article is more than 1 year old Protesters opposed to expansion of the US electric vehicle maker Tesla's plant in Grünheide near Berlin clashed with police as some of them attempted to storm the facility. More than 800 people took part in the protest, according to the organising group Disrupt Tesla, which claims the expansion would damage the environment. Footage shows people wearing blue caps and masks coming from a nearby wooded area and attempting to storm the company's premises with police officers trying to prevent them Eight hundred protesters attempt to storm German Tesla factory Explore more on these topics Tesla Germany Europe 0:36 This article is more than 1 year old Germany: police clash with hundreds of climate protesters trying to storm Tesla plant – video This article is more than 1 year old Protesters opposed to expansion of the US electric vehicle maker Tesla's plant in Grünheide near Berlin clashed with police as some of them attempted to storm the facility. More than 800 people took part in the protest, according to the organising group Disrupt Tesla, which claims the expansion would damage the environment. Footage shows people wearing blue caps and masks coming from a nearby wooded area and attempting to storm the company's premises with police officers trying to prevent them Eight hundred protesters attempt to storm German Tesla factory Explore more on these topics Tesla Germany Europe This article is more than 1 year old Germany: police clash with hundreds of climate protesters trying to storm Tesla plant – video This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Germany: police clash with hundreds of climate protesters trying to storm Tesla plant – video This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Germany: police clash with hundreds of climate protesters trying to storm Tesla plant – video This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Protesters opposed to expansion of the US electric vehicle maker Tesla's plant in Grünheide near Berlin clashed with police as some of them attempted to storm the facility. More than 800 people took part in the protest, according to the organising group Disrupt Tesla, which claims the expansion would damage the environment. Footage shows people wearing blue caps and masks coming from a nearby wooded area and attempting to storm the company's premises with police officers trying to prevent them Eight hundred protesters attempt to storm German Tesla factory Protesters opposed to expansion of the US electric vehicle maker Tesla's plant in Grünheide near Berlin clashed with police as some of them attempted to storm the facility. More than 800 people took part in the protest, according to the organising group Disrupt Tesla, which claims the expansion would damage the environment. Footage shows people wearing blue caps and masks coming from a nearby wooded area and attempting to storm the company's premises with police officers trying to prevent them Eight hundred protesters attempt to storm German Tesla factory Protesters opposed to expansion of the US electric vehicle maker Tesla's plant in Grünheide near Berlin clashed with police as some of them attempted to storm the facility. More than 800 people took part in the protest, according to the organising group Disrupt Tesla, which claims the expansion would damage the environment. Footage shows people wearing blue caps and masks coming from a nearby wooded area and attempting to storm the company's premises with police officers trying to prevent them Eight hundred protesters attempt to storm German Tesla factory Explore more on these topics Tesla Germany Europe Explore more on these topics Tesla Germany Europe Explore more on these topics Tesla Germany Europe |
Eight hundred protesters attempt to storm German Tesla factory
0:36 Germany: police clash with hundreds of climate protesters trying to storm Tesla plant – video This article is more than 1 year old Eight hundred protesters attempt to storm German Tesla factory This article is more than 1 year old Demonstrators opposed to expansion of factory near Berlin claim it would damage environment Hundreds of protesters opposed to the expansion of a Tesla plant in Grünheide, near Berlin, clashed with police on Friday as some of them attempted to storm the electric vehicle manufacturing facility. About 800 people took part in the protest, according to the organizing group Disrupt Tesla, which claims the expansion would damage the environment. Tesla has attracted intense backlash since the company opened the factory in March 2022, and later announced plans to expand into a nearby forest to increase its production capability. In February, the town where the factory is located voted against the plans in a referendum that was not legally binding. Since then, protesters have been stationed in an encampment nearby in protest. The same facility was shut down for a week in March after suspected arson disabled its power. A separate protest collective called Volcano Group claimed responsibility for the fire, calling for the “complete destruction of the gigafactory”. Video of Friday’s action showed dozens of people wearing blue caps and masks coming from a nearby wooded area and attempting to storm the company’s premises with police officers trying to prevent them, including by force. At least one protester was detained. “Why do the police let the leftwing protestors off so easily?” the Tesla CEO, Elon Musk , wrote on his social medial platform X, adding that the demonstrators did not manage to break through. Tesla, which dissolved its press department in 2020, did not respond to request for comment. Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Read more The group also wants to highlight environmental destruction in countries such as Argentina or Bolivia brought about by lithium mining, according to a Disrupt Tesla spokesperson, Ole Becker. Lithium is a key resource for electric vehicle batteries. “We are here today to draw attention to the Tesla factory in Grünheide for the environmental destruction here,” Becker told Reuters. The police confirmed that the protesters tried to enter the plant’s premises, but were stopped, with several people taken into custody, and that it received a few reports of injuries. “We protect the freedom of assembly,” said a Brandenburg police spokesperson, Mario Heinemann, “but we are also responsible for public order and safety. That means we will also intervene when necessary.” Some of the demonstrators damaged a few Tesla cars using pyrotechnics and paint at a nearby car storage site, the police spokesperson added. Tesla earlier this week said it would shut the factory for one day on Friday, without specifying a reason. Explore more on these topics Tesla Germany Elon Musk Europe Environmental activism Protest news Share Reuse this content 0:36 Germany: police clash with hundreds of climate protesters trying to storm Tesla plant – video This article is more than 1 year old Eight hundred protesters attempt to storm German Tesla factory This article is more than 1 year old Demonstrators opposed to expansion of factory near Berlin claim it would damage environment Hundreds of protesters opposed to the expansion of a Tesla plant in Grünheide, near Berlin, clashed with police on Friday as some of them attempted to storm the electric vehicle manufacturing facility. About 800 people took part in the protest, according to the organizing group Disrupt Tesla, which claims the expansion would damage the environment. Tesla has attracted intense backlash since the company opened the factory in March 2022, and later announced plans to expand into a nearby forest to increase its production capability. In February, the town where the factory is located voted against the plans in a referendum that was not legally binding. Since then, protesters have been stationed in an encampment nearby in protest. The same facility was shut down for a week in March after suspected arson disabled its power. A separate protest collective called Volcano Group claimed responsibility for the fire, calling for the “complete destruction of the gigafactory”. Video of Friday’s action showed dozens of people wearing blue caps and masks coming from a nearby wooded area and attempting to storm the company’s premises with police officers trying to prevent them, including by force. At least one protester was detained. “Why do the police let the leftwing protestors off so easily?” the Tesla CEO, Elon Musk , wrote on his social medial platform X, adding that the demonstrators did not manage to break through. Tesla, which dissolved its press department in 2020, did not respond to request for comment. Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Read more The group also wants to highlight environmental destruction in countries such as Argentina or Bolivia brought about by lithium mining, according to a Disrupt Tesla spokesperson, Ole Becker. Lithium is a key resource for electric vehicle batteries. “We are here today to draw attention to the Tesla factory in Grünheide for the environmental destruction here,” Becker told Reuters. The police confirmed that the protesters tried to enter the plant’s premises, but were stopped, with several people taken into custody, and that it received a few reports of injuries. “We protect the freedom of assembly,” said a Brandenburg police spokesperson, Mario Heinemann, “but we are also responsible for public order and safety. That means we will also intervene when necessary.” Some of the demonstrators damaged a few Tesla cars using pyrotechnics and paint at a nearby car storage site, the police spokesperson added. Tesla earlier this week said it would shut the factory for one day on Friday, without specifying a reason. Explore more on these topics Tesla Germany Elon Musk Europe Environmental activism Protest news Share Reuse this content 0:36 Germany: police clash with hundreds of climate protesters trying to storm Tesla plant – video 0:36 Germany: police clash with hundreds of climate protesters trying to storm Tesla plant – video 0:36 Germany: police clash with hundreds of climate protesters trying to storm Tesla plant – video 0:36 Germany: police clash with hundreds of climate protesters trying to storm Tesla plant – video This article is more than 1 year old Eight hundred protesters attempt to storm German Tesla factory This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Eight hundred protesters attempt to storm German Tesla factory This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Eight hundred protesters attempt to storm German Tesla factory This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Demonstrators opposed to expansion of factory near Berlin claim it would damage environment Demonstrators opposed to expansion of factory near Berlin claim it would damage environment Demonstrators opposed to expansion of factory near Berlin claim it would damage environment Hundreds of protesters opposed to the expansion of a Tesla plant in Grünheide, near Berlin, clashed with police on Friday as some of them attempted to storm the electric vehicle manufacturing facility. About 800 people took part in the protest, according to the organizing group Disrupt Tesla, which claims the expansion would damage the environment. Tesla has attracted intense backlash since the company opened the factory in March 2022, and later announced plans to expand into a nearby forest to increase its production capability. In February, the town where the factory is located voted against the plans in a referendum that was not legally binding. Since then, protesters have been stationed in an encampment nearby in protest. The same facility was shut down for a week in March after suspected arson disabled its power. A separate protest collective called Volcano Group claimed responsibility for the fire, calling for the “complete destruction of the gigafactory”. Video of Friday’s action showed dozens of people wearing blue caps and masks coming from a nearby wooded area and attempting to storm the company’s premises with police officers trying to prevent them, including by force. At least one protester was detained. “Why do the police let the leftwing protestors off so easily?” the Tesla CEO, Elon Musk , wrote on his social medial platform X, adding that the demonstrators did not manage to break through. Tesla, which dissolved its press department in 2020, did not respond to request for comment. Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Read more The group also wants to highlight environmental destruction in countries such as Argentina or Bolivia brought about by lithium mining, according to a Disrupt Tesla spokesperson, Ole Becker. Lithium is a key resource for electric vehicle batteries. “We are here today to draw attention to the Tesla factory in Grünheide for the environmental destruction here,” Becker told Reuters. The police confirmed that the protesters tried to enter the plant’s premises, but were stopped, with several people taken into custody, and that it received a few reports of injuries. “We protect the freedom of assembly,” said a Brandenburg police spokesperson, Mario Heinemann, “but we are also responsible for public order and safety. That means we will also intervene when necessary.” Some of the demonstrators damaged a few Tesla cars using pyrotechnics and paint at a nearby car storage site, the police spokesperson added. Tesla earlier this week said it would shut the factory for one day on Friday, without specifying a reason. Explore more on these topics Tesla Germany Elon Musk Europe Environmental activism Protest news Share Reuse this content Hundreds of protesters opposed to the expansion of a Tesla plant in Grünheide, near Berlin, clashed with police on Friday as some of them attempted to storm the electric vehicle manufacturing facility. About 800 people took part in the protest, according to the organizing group Disrupt Tesla, which claims the expansion would damage the environment. Tesla has attracted intense backlash since the company opened the factory in March 2022, and later announced plans to expand into a nearby forest to increase its production capability. In February, the town where the factory is located voted against the plans in a referendum that was not legally binding. Since then, protesters have been stationed in an encampment nearby in protest. The same facility was shut down for a week in March after suspected arson disabled its power. A separate protest collective called Volcano Group claimed responsibility for the fire, calling for the “complete destruction of the gigafactory”. Video of Friday’s action showed dozens of people wearing blue caps and masks coming from a nearby wooded area and attempting to storm the company’s premises with police officers trying to prevent them, including by force. At least one protester was detained. “Why do the police let the leftwing protestors off so easily?” the Tesla CEO, Elon Musk , wrote on his social medial platform X, adding that the demonstrators did not manage to break through. Tesla, which dissolved its press department in 2020, did not respond to request for comment. Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Read more The group also wants to highlight environmental destruction in countries such as Argentina or Bolivia brought about by lithium mining, according to a Disrupt Tesla spokesperson, Ole Becker. Lithium is a key resource for electric vehicle batteries. “We are here today to draw attention to the Tesla factory in Grünheide for the environmental destruction here,” Becker told Reuters. The police confirmed that the protesters tried to enter the plant’s premises, but were stopped, with several people taken into custody, and that it received a few reports of injuries. “We protect the freedom of assembly,” said a Brandenburg police spokesperson, Mario Heinemann, “but we are also responsible for public order and safety. That means we will also intervene when necessary.” Some of the demonstrators damaged a few Tesla cars using pyrotechnics and paint at a nearby car storage site, the police spokesperson added. Tesla earlier this week said it would shut the factory for one day on Friday, without specifying a reason. Explore more on these topics Tesla Germany Elon Musk Europe Environmental activism Protest news Share Reuse this content Hundreds of protesters opposed to the expansion of a Tesla plant in Grünheide, near Berlin, clashed with police on Friday as some of them attempted to storm the electric vehicle manufacturing facility. About 800 people took part in the protest, according to the organizing group Disrupt Tesla, which claims the expansion would damage the environment. Tesla has attracted intense backlash since the company opened the factory in March 2022, and later announced plans to expand into a nearby forest to increase its production capability. In February, the town where the factory is located voted against the plans in a referendum that was not legally binding. Since then, protesters have been stationed in an encampment nearby in protest. The same facility was shut down for a week in March after suspected arson disabled its power. A separate protest collective called Volcano Group claimed responsibility for the fire, calling for the “complete destruction of the gigafactory”. Video of Friday’s action showed dozens of people wearing blue caps and masks coming from a nearby wooded area and attempting to storm the company’s premises with police officers trying to prevent them, including by force. At least one protester was detained. “Why do the police let the leftwing protestors off so easily?” the Tesla CEO, Elon Musk , wrote on his social medial platform X, adding that the demonstrators did not manage to break through. Tesla, which dissolved its press department in 2020, did not respond to request for comment. Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Read more The group also wants to highlight environmental destruction in countries such as Argentina or Bolivia brought about by lithium mining, according to a Disrupt Tesla spokesperson, Ole Becker. Lithium is a key resource for electric vehicle batteries. “We are here today to draw attention to the Tesla factory in Grünheide for the environmental destruction here,” Becker told Reuters. The police confirmed that the protesters tried to enter the plant’s premises, but were stopped, with several people taken into custody, and that it received a few reports of injuries. “We protect the freedom of assembly,” said a Brandenburg police spokesperson, Mario Heinemann, “but we are also responsible for public order and safety. That means we will also intervene when necessary.” Some of the demonstrators damaged a few Tesla cars using pyrotechnics and paint at a nearby car storage site, the police spokesperson added. Tesla earlier this week said it would shut the factory for one day on Friday, without specifying a reason. Hundreds of protesters opposed to the expansion of a Tesla plant in Grünheide, near Berlin, clashed with police on Friday as some of them attempted to storm the electric vehicle manufacturing facility. About 800 people took part in the protest, according to the organizing group Disrupt Tesla, which claims the expansion would damage the environment. Tesla has attracted intense backlash since the company opened the factory in March 2022, and later announced plans to expand into a nearby forest to increase its production capability. In February, the town where the factory is located voted against the plans in a referendum that was not legally binding. Since then, protesters have been stationed in an encampment nearby in protest. The same facility was shut down for a week in March after suspected arson disabled its power. A separate protest collective called Volcano Group claimed responsibility for the fire, calling for the “complete destruction of the gigafactory”. Video of Friday’s action showed dozens of people wearing blue caps and masks coming from a nearby wooded area and attempting to storm the company’s premises with police officers trying to prevent them, including by force. At least one protester was detained. “Why do the police let the leftwing protestors off so easily?” the Tesla CEO, Elon Musk , wrote on his social medial platform X, adding that the demonstrators did not manage to break through. Tesla, which dissolved its press department in 2020, did not respond to request for comment. Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Read more The group also wants to highlight environmental destruction in countries such as Argentina or Bolivia brought about by lithium mining, according to a Disrupt Tesla spokesperson, Ole Becker. Lithium is a key resource for electric vehicle batteries. “We are here today to draw attention to the Tesla factory in Grünheide for the environmental destruction here,” Becker told Reuters. The police confirmed that the protesters tried to enter the plant’s premises, but were stopped, with several people taken into custody, and that it received a few reports of injuries. “We protect the freedom of assembly,” said a Brandenburg police spokesperson, Mario Heinemann, “but we are also responsible for public order and safety. That means we will also intervene when necessary.” Some of the demonstrators damaged a few Tesla cars using pyrotechnics and paint at a nearby car storage site, the police spokesperson added. Tesla earlier this week said it would shut the factory for one day on Friday, without specifying a reason. Hundreds of protesters opposed to the expansion of a Tesla plant in Grünheide, near Berlin, clashed with police on Friday as some of them attempted to storm the electric vehicle manufacturing facility. About 800 people took part in the protest, according to the organizing group Disrupt Tesla, which claims the expansion would damage the environment. Tesla has attracted intense backlash since the company opened the factory in March 2022, and later announced plans to expand into a nearby forest to increase its production capability. In February, the town where the factory is located voted against the plans in a referendum that was not legally binding. Since then, protesters have been stationed in an encampment nearby in protest. The same facility was shut down for a week in March after suspected arson disabled its power. A separate protest collective called Volcano Group claimed responsibility for the fire, calling for the “complete destruction of the gigafactory”. Video of Friday’s action showed dozens of people wearing blue caps and masks coming from a nearby wooded area and attempting to storm the company’s premises with police officers trying to prevent them, including by force. At least one protester was detained. “Why do the police let the leftwing protestors off so easily?” the Tesla CEO, Elon Musk , wrote on his social medial platform X, adding that the demonstrators did not manage to break through. Tesla, which dissolved its press department in 2020, did not respond to request for comment. Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Read more Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Read more Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Read more Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? The group also wants to highlight environmental destruction in countries such as Argentina or Bolivia brought about by lithium mining, according to a Disrupt Tesla spokesperson, Ole Becker. Lithium is a key resource for electric vehicle batteries. “We are here today to draw attention to the Tesla factory in Grünheide for the environmental destruction here,” Becker told Reuters. The police confirmed that the protesters tried to enter the plant’s premises, but were stopped, with several people taken into custody, and that it received a few reports of injuries. “We protect the freedom of assembly,” said a Brandenburg police spokesperson, Mario Heinemann, “but we are also responsible for public order and safety. That means we will also intervene when necessary.” Some of the demonstrators damaged a few Tesla cars using pyrotechnics and paint at a nearby car storage site, the police spokesperson added. Tesla earlier this week said it would shut the factory for one day on Friday, without specifying a reason. Explore more on these topics Tesla Germany Elon Musk Europe Environmental activism Protest news Share Reuse this content Tesla Germany Elon Musk Europe Environmental activism Protest news |
‘No alternative’: EU climate chief urges MEPs not to use crisis as political tool
Verden, north-west Germany, December 2023. Hoekstra cited the recent floods in Germany as an example of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was taking. Photograph: Fabian Bimmer/Reuters View image in fullscreen Verden, north-west Germany, December 2023. Hoekstra cited the recent floods in Germany as an example of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was taking. Photograph: Fabian Bimmer/Reuters This article is more than 1 year old ‘No alternative’: EU climate chief urges MEPs not to use crisis as political tool This article is more than 1 year old Exclusive: Wopke Hoekstra says EU must press ahead with cutting greenhouse gases and use policy to bring about economic benefits Europe’s climate chief has warned against politicians trying to use the climate crisis as a wedge issue in the forthcoming EU parliament elections , calling instead for climate policy that will bring wider economic benefits. Wopke Hoekstra, the EU commissioner for climate action, said Europe had no choice but to press ahead with strong measures to cut greenhouse gases , whoever was in power, but added that more attention was needed to help businesses thrive in a low-carbon world. He said: “There is no alternative than to continue with climate action. We need to continue in the direction of travel we have set. We need to speed up our pace.” Rightwing parties are forecast in polls to do well in the election , to be held from 6 to 9 June, largely at the expense of the Greens and socialist parties. Protests by farmers in EU capitals have attacked climate policies , and some rightwing parties have stepped up anti-green rhetoric . Hoekstra maintained that policies to tackle the climate crisis must be a key focus, and were needed for Europe to thrive economically. “That is what the next commission should be all about: continued climate action, mitigation [of greenhouse gases], but I think also, more than in the past, about adaptation [to extreme weather] and a just transition [to a low-carbon economy].” View image in fullscreen Wopke Hoekstra said Europe needed to speed up the pace of change. Photograph: Ronald Wittek/EPA He cited recent extreme weather events, including floods in eastern Europe and Germany , as examples of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was already taking, which must be tackled, and said Europe also needed to forge ahead in the global economic race to create low-carbon technology. “To those who might have reservations on climate action, how needed it is, [I say] it is not only a matter of nature, it also a matter of geopolitics and, in the end, finance.” Hoekstra said he did not see the backlash against climate action in Europe that some on the right have tried to claim. “Eighty per cent of EU citizens articulate that they have significant worries about what is happening to our climate,” he said. What are the EU elections and why do they matter? Read more He denied that Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, was turning away from climate action , as some critics have claimed. “I would say it’s rather the contrary. I don’t know a single example in the domain of climate where we have watered anything down.” He added that greater emphasis was needed on the economic consequences of policies to phase out fossil fuels, for instance on energy prices, jobs and industrial competitiveness. “We have three pillars to this part of our future: climate action; competitiveness for our companies; and a just transition for our people. What we need to acknowledge is that we cannot have one without the others … a one-dimensional solution will not do.” To be successful, said Hoekstra, politicians would have to ensure that people could see the benefits of cutting emissions, by providing retraining to those whose jobs in fossil fuel-dependent industries would disappear, and to spread the benefits of low-carbon technology. “We can make sure that there is a bright future for Europe, that there is employability, that there is re-schooling, that there is a stake in the future for everyone, particularly those who might see significant change on the work floor.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Hoekstra also signalled he was willing to get tough with other countries, including China , which are still increasing their greenhouse gas emissions. “I can only commend the Chinese for the renewables transition in their own country. I’m way less enthusiastic about their idea to build new coal plants. As you can imagine, that is an understatement.” China has been accused of destroying the solar panel manufacturing industries in the EU and US by generating a surplus of products that are then dumped cheaply on international markets . Hoekstra stopped short of criticising China for this directly, but said: “There is broad recognition in Europe that we need to do more to defend what is one of the cornerstones of European policy, and that is a level playing field. The European solar industry, which was among the most innovative and the most advanced and had a huge footprint, has suffered significantly in the last couple of years. This is a dialogue we need to have also with the Chinese.” One of the remedies on which the EU has been working is a green tariff that would be charged on imports of certain high-carbon goods , such as cement, fertilisers and some metals. This would penalise imports from countries that are dependent on coal and have high emissions, with the aim of deterring companies from moving abroad to take advantage of lax climate rules in other countries, a process known as “carbon leakage”. The first stages of this carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) are in place, though companies are not yet being charged. Hoekstra said: “It is not geared to any country or company in particular. What we want to do is make sure that we don’t see any carbon leakage, and create a level playing field. “I think that is only fair. We ask European companies to take significant action to lower their carbon footprint. But we’re living in a global world and it would be deeply unhelpful, for European companies and citizens and for the climate, if companies in Europe either go bust or leave this continent because the rules are more relaxed outside.” Though the CBAM will not be in full operation until 2026, Hoekstra said it was already having “anticipatory” impact. “It’s amazing how in my conversations with the Chinese, but also with some of our friends in Latin America and Africa, it’s carbon markets full and centre. And how this will be a tool that sets the world more on the right pace.” Explore more on these topics Climate crisis European elections European Union Europe Green economy Greenhouse gas emissions Extreme weather news Share Reuse this content Verden, north-west Germany, December 2023. Hoekstra cited the recent floods in Germany as an example of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was taking. Photograph: Fabian Bimmer/Reuters View image in fullscreen Verden, north-west Germany, December 2023. Hoekstra cited the recent floods in Germany as an example of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was taking. Photograph: Fabian Bimmer/Reuters This article is more than 1 year old ‘No alternative’: EU climate chief urges MEPs not to use crisis as political tool This article is more than 1 year old Exclusive: Wopke Hoekstra says EU must press ahead with cutting greenhouse gases and use policy to bring about economic benefits Europe’s climate chief has warned against politicians trying to use the climate crisis as a wedge issue in the forthcoming EU parliament elections , calling instead for climate policy that will bring wider economic benefits. Wopke Hoekstra, the EU commissioner for climate action, said Europe had no choice but to press ahead with strong measures to cut greenhouse gases , whoever was in power, but added that more attention was needed to help businesses thrive in a low-carbon world. He said: “There is no alternative than to continue with climate action. We need to continue in the direction of travel we have set. We need to speed up our pace.” Rightwing parties are forecast in polls to do well in the election , to be held from 6 to 9 June, largely at the expense of the Greens and socialist parties. Protests by farmers in EU capitals have attacked climate policies , and some rightwing parties have stepped up anti-green rhetoric . Hoekstra maintained that policies to tackle the climate crisis must be a key focus, and were needed for Europe to thrive economically. “That is what the next commission should be all about: continued climate action, mitigation [of greenhouse gases], but I think also, more than in the past, about adaptation [to extreme weather] and a just transition [to a low-carbon economy].” View image in fullscreen Wopke Hoekstra said Europe needed to speed up the pace of change. Photograph: Ronald Wittek/EPA He cited recent extreme weather events, including floods in eastern Europe and Germany , as examples of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was already taking, which must be tackled, and said Europe also needed to forge ahead in the global economic race to create low-carbon technology. “To those who might have reservations on climate action, how needed it is, [I say] it is not only a matter of nature, it also a matter of geopolitics and, in the end, finance.” Hoekstra said he did not see the backlash against climate action in Europe that some on the right have tried to claim. “Eighty per cent of EU citizens articulate that they have significant worries about what is happening to our climate,” he said. What are the EU elections and why do they matter? Read more He denied that Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, was turning away from climate action , as some critics have claimed. “I would say it’s rather the contrary. I don’t know a single example in the domain of climate where we have watered anything down.” He added that greater emphasis was needed on the economic consequences of policies to phase out fossil fuels, for instance on energy prices, jobs and industrial competitiveness. “We have three pillars to this part of our future: climate action; competitiveness for our companies; and a just transition for our people. What we need to acknowledge is that we cannot have one without the others … a one-dimensional solution will not do.” To be successful, said Hoekstra, politicians would have to ensure that people could see the benefits of cutting emissions, by providing retraining to those whose jobs in fossil fuel-dependent industries would disappear, and to spread the benefits of low-carbon technology. “We can make sure that there is a bright future for Europe, that there is employability, that there is re-schooling, that there is a stake in the future for everyone, particularly those who might see significant change on the work floor.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Hoekstra also signalled he was willing to get tough with other countries, including China , which are still increasing their greenhouse gas emissions. “I can only commend the Chinese for the renewables transition in their own country. I’m way less enthusiastic about their idea to build new coal plants. As you can imagine, that is an understatement.” China has been accused of destroying the solar panel manufacturing industries in the EU and US by generating a surplus of products that are then dumped cheaply on international markets . Hoekstra stopped short of criticising China for this directly, but said: “There is broad recognition in Europe that we need to do more to defend what is one of the cornerstones of European policy, and that is a level playing field. The European solar industry, which was among the most innovative and the most advanced and had a huge footprint, has suffered significantly in the last couple of years. This is a dialogue we need to have also with the Chinese.” One of the remedies on which the EU has been working is a green tariff that would be charged on imports of certain high-carbon goods , such as cement, fertilisers and some metals. This would penalise imports from countries that are dependent on coal and have high emissions, with the aim of deterring companies from moving abroad to take advantage of lax climate rules in other countries, a process known as “carbon leakage”. The first stages of this carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) are in place, though companies are not yet being charged. Hoekstra said: “It is not geared to any country or company in particular. What we want to do is make sure that we don’t see any carbon leakage, and create a level playing field. “I think that is only fair. We ask European companies to take significant action to lower their carbon footprint. But we’re living in a global world and it would be deeply unhelpful, for European companies and citizens and for the climate, if companies in Europe either go bust or leave this continent because the rules are more relaxed outside.” Though the CBAM will not be in full operation until 2026, Hoekstra said it was already having “anticipatory” impact. “It’s amazing how in my conversations with the Chinese, but also with some of our friends in Latin America and Africa, it’s carbon markets full and centre. And how this will be a tool that sets the world more on the right pace.” Explore more on these topics Climate crisis European elections European Union Europe Green economy Greenhouse gas emissions Extreme weather news Share Reuse this content Verden, north-west Germany, December 2023. Hoekstra cited the recent floods in Germany as an example of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was taking. Photograph: Fabian Bimmer/Reuters View image in fullscreen Verden, north-west Germany, December 2023. Hoekstra cited the recent floods in Germany as an example of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was taking. Photograph: Fabian Bimmer/Reuters Verden, north-west Germany, December 2023. Hoekstra cited the recent floods in Germany as an example of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was taking. Photograph: Fabian Bimmer/Reuters View image in fullscreen Verden, north-west Germany, December 2023. Hoekstra cited the recent floods in Germany as an example of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was taking. Photograph: Fabian Bimmer/Reuters Verden, north-west Germany, December 2023. Hoekstra cited the recent floods in Germany as an example of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was taking. Photograph: Fabian Bimmer/Reuters View image in fullscreen Verden, north-west Germany, December 2023. Hoekstra cited the recent floods in Germany as an example of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was taking. Photograph: Fabian Bimmer/Reuters Verden, north-west Germany, December 2023. Hoekstra cited the recent floods in Germany as an example of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was taking. Photograph: Fabian Bimmer/Reuters View image in fullscreen Verden, north-west Germany, December 2023. Hoekstra cited the recent floods in Germany as an example of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was taking. Photograph: Fabian Bimmer/Reuters Verden, north-west Germany, December 2023. Hoekstra cited the recent floods in Germany as an example of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was taking. Photograph: Fabian Bimmer/Reuters Verden, north-west Germany, December 2023. Hoekstra cited the recent floods in Germany as an example of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was taking. Photograph: Fabian Bimmer/Reuters This article is more than 1 year old ‘No alternative’: EU climate chief urges MEPs not to use crisis as political tool This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘No alternative’: EU climate chief urges MEPs not to use crisis as political tool This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘No alternative’: EU climate chief urges MEPs not to use crisis as political tool This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Exclusive: Wopke Hoekstra says EU must press ahead with cutting greenhouse gases and use policy to bring about economic benefits Exclusive: Wopke Hoekstra says EU must press ahead with cutting greenhouse gases and use policy to bring about economic benefits Exclusive: Wopke Hoekstra says EU must press ahead with cutting greenhouse gases and use policy to bring about economic benefits Europe’s climate chief has warned against politicians trying to use the climate crisis as a wedge issue in the forthcoming EU parliament elections , calling instead for climate policy that will bring wider economic benefits. Wopke Hoekstra, the EU commissioner for climate action, said Europe had no choice but to press ahead with strong measures to cut greenhouse gases , whoever was in power, but added that more attention was needed to help businesses thrive in a low-carbon world. He said: “There is no alternative than to continue with climate action. We need to continue in the direction of travel we have set. We need to speed up our pace.” Rightwing parties are forecast in polls to do well in the election , to be held from 6 to 9 June, largely at the expense of the Greens and socialist parties. Protests by farmers in EU capitals have attacked climate policies , and some rightwing parties have stepped up anti-green rhetoric . Hoekstra maintained that policies to tackle the climate crisis must be a key focus, and were needed for Europe to thrive economically. “That is what the next commission should be all about: continued climate action, mitigation [of greenhouse gases], but I think also, more than in the past, about adaptation [to extreme weather] and a just transition [to a low-carbon economy].” View image in fullscreen Wopke Hoekstra said Europe needed to speed up the pace of change. Photograph: Ronald Wittek/EPA He cited recent extreme weather events, including floods in eastern Europe and Germany , as examples of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was already taking, which must be tackled, and said Europe also needed to forge ahead in the global economic race to create low-carbon technology. “To those who might have reservations on climate action, how needed it is, [I say] it is not only a matter of nature, it also a matter of geopolitics and, in the end, finance.” Hoekstra said he did not see the backlash against climate action in Europe that some on the right have tried to claim. “Eighty per cent of EU citizens articulate that they have significant worries about what is happening to our climate,” he said. What are the EU elections and why do they matter? Read more He denied that Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, was turning away from climate action , as some critics have claimed. “I would say it’s rather the contrary. I don’t know a single example in the domain of climate where we have watered anything down.” He added that greater emphasis was needed on the economic consequences of policies to phase out fossil fuels, for instance on energy prices, jobs and industrial competitiveness. “We have three pillars to this part of our future: climate action; competitiveness for our companies; and a just transition for our people. What we need to acknowledge is that we cannot have one without the others … a one-dimensional solution will not do.” To be successful, said Hoekstra, politicians would have to ensure that people could see the benefits of cutting emissions, by providing retraining to those whose jobs in fossil fuel-dependent industries would disappear, and to spread the benefits of low-carbon technology. “We can make sure that there is a bright future for Europe, that there is employability, that there is re-schooling, that there is a stake in the future for everyone, particularly those who might see significant change on the work floor.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Hoekstra also signalled he was willing to get tough with other countries, including China , which are still increasing their greenhouse gas emissions. “I can only commend the Chinese for the renewables transition in their own country. I’m way less enthusiastic about their idea to build new coal plants. As you can imagine, that is an understatement.” China has been accused of destroying the solar panel manufacturing industries in the EU and US by generating a surplus of products that are then dumped cheaply on international markets . Hoekstra stopped short of criticising China for this directly, but said: “There is broad recognition in Europe that we need to do more to defend what is one of the cornerstones of European policy, and that is a level playing field. The European solar industry, which was among the most innovative and the most advanced and had a huge footprint, has suffered significantly in the last couple of years. This is a dialogue we need to have also with the Chinese.” One of the remedies on which the EU has been working is a green tariff that would be charged on imports of certain high-carbon goods , such as cement, fertilisers and some metals. This would penalise imports from countries that are dependent on coal and have high emissions, with the aim of deterring companies from moving abroad to take advantage of lax climate rules in other countries, a process known as “carbon leakage”. The first stages of this carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) are in place, though companies are not yet being charged. Hoekstra said: “It is not geared to any country or company in particular. What we want to do is make sure that we don’t see any carbon leakage, and create a level playing field. “I think that is only fair. We ask European companies to take significant action to lower their carbon footprint. But we’re living in a global world and it would be deeply unhelpful, for European companies and citizens and for the climate, if companies in Europe either go bust or leave this continent because the rules are more relaxed outside.” Though the CBAM will not be in full operation until 2026, Hoekstra said it was already having “anticipatory” impact. “It’s amazing how in my conversations with the Chinese, but also with some of our friends in Latin America and Africa, it’s carbon markets full and centre. And how this will be a tool that sets the world more on the right pace.” Explore more on these topics Climate crisis European elections European Union Europe Green economy Greenhouse gas emissions Extreme weather news Share Reuse this content Europe’s climate chief has warned against politicians trying to use the climate crisis as a wedge issue in the forthcoming EU parliament elections , calling instead for climate policy that will bring wider economic benefits. Wopke Hoekstra, the EU commissioner for climate action, said Europe had no choice but to press ahead with strong measures to cut greenhouse gases , whoever was in power, but added that more attention was needed to help businesses thrive in a low-carbon world. He said: “There is no alternative than to continue with climate action. We need to continue in the direction of travel we have set. We need to speed up our pace.” Rightwing parties are forecast in polls to do well in the election , to be held from 6 to 9 June, largely at the expense of the Greens and socialist parties. Protests by farmers in EU capitals have attacked climate policies , and some rightwing parties have stepped up anti-green rhetoric . Hoekstra maintained that policies to tackle the climate crisis must be a key focus, and were needed for Europe to thrive economically. “That is what the next commission should be all about: continued climate action, mitigation [of greenhouse gases], but I think also, more than in the past, about adaptation [to extreme weather] and a just transition [to a low-carbon economy].” View image in fullscreen Wopke Hoekstra said Europe needed to speed up the pace of change. Photograph: Ronald Wittek/EPA He cited recent extreme weather events, including floods in eastern Europe and Germany , as examples of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was already taking, which must be tackled, and said Europe also needed to forge ahead in the global economic race to create low-carbon technology. “To those who might have reservations on climate action, how needed it is, [I say] it is not only a matter of nature, it also a matter of geopolitics and, in the end, finance.” Hoekstra said he did not see the backlash against climate action in Europe that some on the right have tried to claim. “Eighty per cent of EU citizens articulate that they have significant worries about what is happening to our climate,” he said. What are the EU elections and why do they matter? Read more He denied that Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, was turning away from climate action , as some critics have claimed. “I would say it’s rather the contrary. I don’t know a single example in the domain of climate where we have watered anything down.” He added that greater emphasis was needed on the economic consequences of policies to phase out fossil fuels, for instance on energy prices, jobs and industrial competitiveness. “We have three pillars to this part of our future: climate action; competitiveness for our companies; and a just transition for our people. What we need to acknowledge is that we cannot have one without the others … a one-dimensional solution will not do.” To be successful, said Hoekstra, politicians would have to ensure that people could see the benefits of cutting emissions, by providing retraining to those whose jobs in fossil fuel-dependent industries would disappear, and to spread the benefits of low-carbon technology. “We can make sure that there is a bright future for Europe, that there is employability, that there is re-schooling, that there is a stake in the future for everyone, particularly those who might see significant change on the work floor.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Hoekstra also signalled he was willing to get tough with other countries, including China , which are still increasing their greenhouse gas emissions. “I can only commend the Chinese for the renewables transition in their own country. I’m way less enthusiastic about their idea to build new coal plants. As you can imagine, that is an understatement.” China has been accused of destroying the solar panel manufacturing industries in the EU and US by generating a surplus of products that are then dumped cheaply on international markets . Hoekstra stopped short of criticising China for this directly, but said: “There is broad recognition in Europe that we need to do more to defend what is one of the cornerstones of European policy, and that is a level playing field. The European solar industry, which was among the most innovative and the most advanced and had a huge footprint, has suffered significantly in the last couple of years. This is a dialogue we need to have also with the Chinese.” One of the remedies on which the EU has been working is a green tariff that would be charged on imports of certain high-carbon goods , such as cement, fertilisers and some metals. This would penalise imports from countries that are dependent on coal and have high emissions, with the aim of deterring companies from moving abroad to take advantage of lax climate rules in other countries, a process known as “carbon leakage”. The first stages of this carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) are in place, though companies are not yet being charged. Hoekstra said: “It is not geared to any country or company in particular. What we want to do is make sure that we don’t see any carbon leakage, and create a level playing field. “I think that is only fair. We ask European companies to take significant action to lower their carbon footprint. But we’re living in a global world and it would be deeply unhelpful, for European companies and citizens and for the climate, if companies in Europe either go bust or leave this continent because the rules are more relaxed outside.” Though the CBAM will not be in full operation until 2026, Hoekstra said it was already having “anticipatory” impact. “It’s amazing how in my conversations with the Chinese, but also with some of our friends in Latin America and Africa, it’s carbon markets full and centre. And how this will be a tool that sets the world more on the right pace.” Explore more on these topics Climate crisis European elections European Union Europe Green economy Greenhouse gas emissions Extreme weather news Share Reuse this content Europe’s climate chief has warned against politicians trying to use the climate crisis as a wedge issue in the forthcoming EU parliament elections , calling instead for climate policy that will bring wider economic benefits. Wopke Hoekstra, the EU commissioner for climate action, said Europe had no choice but to press ahead with strong measures to cut greenhouse gases , whoever was in power, but added that more attention was needed to help businesses thrive in a low-carbon world. He said: “There is no alternative than to continue with climate action. We need to continue in the direction of travel we have set. We need to speed up our pace.” Rightwing parties are forecast in polls to do well in the election , to be held from 6 to 9 June, largely at the expense of the Greens and socialist parties. Protests by farmers in EU capitals have attacked climate policies , and some rightwing parties have stepped up anti-green rhetoric . Hoekstra maintained that policies to tackle the climate crisis must be a key focus, and were needed for Europe to thrive economically. “That is what the next commission should be all about: continued climate action, mitigation [of greenhouse gases], but I think also, more than in the past, about adaptation [to extreme weather] and a just transition [to a low-carbon economy].” View image in fullscreen Wopke Hoekstra said Europe needed to speed up the pace of change. Photograph: Ronald Wittek/EPA He cited recent extreme weather events, including floods in eastern Europe and Germany , as examples of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was already taking, which must be tackled, and said Europe also needed to forge ahead in the global economic race to create low-carbon technology. “To those who might have reservations on climate action, how needed it is, [I say] it is not only a matter of nature, it also a matter of geopolitics and, in the end, finance.” Hoekstra said he did not see the backlash against climate action in Europe that some on the right have tried to claim. “Eighty per cent of EU citizens articulate that they have significant worries about what is happening to our climate,” he said. What are the EU elections and why do they matter? Read more He denied that Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, was turning away from climate action , as some critics have claimed. “I would say it’s rather the contrary. I don’t know a single example in the domain of climate where we have watered anything down.” He added that greater emphasis was needed on the economic consequences of policies to phase out fossil fuels, for instance on energy prices, jobs and industrial competitiveness. “We have three pillars to this part of our future: climate action; competitiveness for our companies; and a just transition for our people. What we need to acknowledge is that we cannot have one without the others … a one-dimensional solution will not do.” To be successful, said Hoekstra, politicians would have to ensure that people could see the benefits of cutting emissions, by providing retraining to those whose jobs in fossil fuel-dependent industries would disappear, and to spread the benefits of low-carbon technology. “We can make sure that there is a bright future for Europe, that there is employability, that there is re-schooling, that there is a stake in the future for everyone, particularly those who might see significant change on the work floor.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Hoekstra also signalled he was willing to get tough with other countries, including China , which are still increasing their greenhouse gas emissions. “I can only commend the Chinese for the renewables transition in their own country. I’m way less enthusiastic about their idea to build new coal plants. As you can imagine, that is an understatement.” China has been accused of destroying the solar panel manufacturing industries in the EU and US by generating a surplus of products that are then dumped cheaply on international markets . Hoekstra stopped short of criticising China for this directly, but said: “There is broad recognition in Europe that we need to do more to defend what is one of the cornerstones of European policy, and that is a level playing field. The European solar industry, which was among the most innovative and the most advanced and had a huge footprint, has suffered significantly in the last couple of years. This is a dialogue we need to have also with the Chinese.” One of the remedies on which the EU has been working is a green tariff that would be charged on imports of certain high-carbon goods , such as cement, fertilisers and some metals. This would penalise imports from countries that are dependent on coal and have high emissions, with the aim of deterring companies from moving abroad to take advantage of lax climate rules in other countries, a process known as “carbon leakage”. The first stages of this carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) are in place, though companies are not yet being charged. Hoekstra said: “It is not geared to any country or company in particular. What we want to do is make sure that we don’t see any carbon leakage, and create a level playing field. “I think that is only fair. We ask European companies to take significant action to lower their carbon footprint. But we’re living in a global world and it would be deeply unhelpful, for European companies and citizens and for the climate, if companies in Europe either go bust or leave this continent because the rules are more relaxed outside.” Though the CBAM will not be in full operation until 2026, Hoekstra said it was already having “anticipatory” impact. “It’s amazing how in my conversations with the Chinese, but also with some of our friends in Latin America and Africa, it’s carbon markets full and centre. And how this will be a tool that sets the world more on the right pace.” Europe’s climate chief has warned against politicians trying to use the climate crisis as a wedge issue in the forthcoming EU parliament elections , calling instead for climate policy that will bring wider economic benefits. Wopke Hoekstra, the EU commissioner for climate action, said Europe had no choice but to press ahead with strong measures to cut greenhouse gases , whoever was in power, but added that more attention was needed to help businesses thrive in a low-carbon world. He said: “There is no alternative than to continue with climate action. We need to continue in the direction of travel we have set. We need to speed up our pace.” Rightwing parties are forecast in polls to do well in the election , to be held from 6 to 9 June, largely at the expense of the Greens and socialist parties. Protests by farmers in EU capitals have attacked climate policies , and some rightwing parties have stepped up anti-green rhetoric . Hoekstra maintained that policies to tackle the climate crisis must be a key focus, and were needed for Europe to thrive economically. “That is what the next commission should be all about: continued climate action, mitigation [of greenhouse gases], but I think also, more than in the past, about adaptation [to extreme weather] and a just transition [to a low-carbon economy].” View image in fullscreen Wopke Hoekstra said Europe needed to speed up the pace of change. Photograph: Ronald Wittek/EPA He cited recent extreme weather events, including floods in eastern Europe and Germany , as examples of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was already taking, which must be tackled, and said Europe also needed to forge ahead in the global economic race to create low-carbon technology. “To those who might have reservations on climate action, how needed it is, [I say] it is not only a matter of nature, it also a matter of geopolitics and, in the end, finance.” Hoekstra said he did not see the backlash against climate action in Europe that some on the right have tried to claim. “Eighty per cent of EU citizens articulate that they have significant worries about what is happening to our climate,” he said. What are the EU elections and why do they matter? Read more He denied that Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, was turning away from climate action , as some critics have claimed. “I would say it’s rather the contrary. I don’t know a single example in the domain of climate where we have watered anything down.” He added that greater emphasis was needed on the economic consequences of policies to phase out fossil fuels, for instance on energy prices, jobs and industrial competitiveness. “We have three pillars to this part of our future: climate action; competitiveness for our companies; and a just transition for our people. What we need to acknowledge is that we cannot have one without the others … a one-dimensional solution will not do.” To be successful, said Hoekstra, politicians would have to ensure that people could see the benefits of cutting emissions, by providing retraining to those whose jobs in fossil fuel-dependent industries would disappear, and to spread the benefits of low-carbon technology. “We can make sure that there is a bright future for Europe, that there is employability, that there is re-schooling, that there is a stake in the future for everyone, particularly those who might see significant change on the work floor.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Hoekstra also signalled he was willing to get tough with other countries, including China , which are still increasing their greenhouse gas emissions. “I can only commend the Chinese for the renewables transition in their own country. I’m way less enthusiastic about their idea to build new coal plants. As you can imagine, that is an understatement.” China has been accused of destroying the solar panel manufacturing industries in the EU and US by generating a surplus of products that are then dumped cheaply on international markets . Hoekstra stopped short of criticising China for this directly, but said: “There is broad recognition in Europe that we need to do more to defend what is one of the cornerstones of European policy, and that is a level playing field. The European solar industry, which was among the most innovative and the most advanced and had a huge footprint, has suffered significantly in the last couple of years. This is a dialogue we need to have also with the Chinese.” One of the remedies on which the EU has been working is a green tariff that would be charged on imports of certain high-carbon goods , such as cement, fertilisers and some metals. This would penalise imports from countries that are dependent on coal and have high emissions, with the aim of deterring companies from moving abroad to take advantage of lax climate rules in other countries, a process known as “carbon leakage”. The first stages of this carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) are in place, though companies are not yet being charged. Hoekstra said: “It is not geared to any country or company in particular. What we want to do is make sure that we don’t see any carbon leakage, and create a level playing field. “I think that is only fair. We ask European companies to take significant action to lower their carbon footprint. But we’re living in a global world and it would be deeply unhelpful, for European companies and citizens and for the climate, if companies in Europe either go bust or leave this continent because the rules are more relaxed outside.” Though the CBAM will not be in full operation until 2026, Hoekstra said it was already having “anticipatory” impact. “It’s amazing how in my conversations with the Chinese, but also with some of our friends in Latin America and Africa, it’s carbon markets full and centre. And how this will be a tool that sets the world more on the right pace.” Europe’s climate chief has warned against politicians trying to use the climate crisis as a wedge issue in the forthcoming EU parliament elections , calling instead for climate policy that will bring wider economic benefits. Wopke Hoekstra, the EU commissioner for climate action, said Europe had no choice but to press ahead with strong measures to cut greenhouse gases , whoever was in power, but added that more attention was needed to help businesses thrive in a low-carbon world. He said: “There is no alternative than to continue with climate action. We need to continue in the direction of travel we have set. We need to speed up our pace.” Rightwing parties are forecast in polls to do well in the election , to be held from 6 to 9 June, largely at the expense of the Greens and socialist parties. Protests by farmers in EU capitals have attacked climate policies , and some rightwing parties have stepped up anti-green rhetoric . Hoekstra maintained that policies to tackle the climate crisis must be a key focus, and were needed for Europe to thrive economically. “That is what the next commission should be all about: continued climate action, mitigation [of greenhouse gases], but I think also, more than in the past, about adaptation [to extreme weather] and a just transition [to a low-carbon economy].” He cited recent extreme weather events, including floods in eastern Europe and Germany , as examples of the human and economic tolls the climate crisis was already taking, which must be tackled, and said Europe also needed to forge ahead in the global economic race to create low-carbon technology. “To those who might have reservations on climate action, how needed it is, [I say] it is not only a matter of nature, it also a matter of geopolitics and, in the end, finance.” Hoekstra said he did not see the backlash against climate action in Europe that some on the right have tried to claim. “Eighty per cent of EU citizens articulate that they have significant worries about what is happening to our climate,” he said. What are the EU elections and why do they matter? Read more What are the EU elections and why do they matter? Read more What are the EU elections and why do they matter? Read more What are the EU elections and why do they matter? What are the EU elections and why do they matter? He denied that Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, was turning away from climate action , as some critics have claimed. “I would say it’s rather the contrary. I don’t know a single example in the domain of climate where we have watered anything down.” He added that greater emphasis was needed on the economic consequences of policies to phase out fossil fuels, for instance on energy prices, jobs and industrial competitiveness. “We have three pillars to this part of our future: climate action; competitiveness for our companies; and a just transition for our people. What we need to acknowledge is that we cannot have one without the others … a one-dimensional solution will not do.” To be successful, said Hoekstra, politicians would have to ensure that people could see the benefits of cutting emissions, by providing retraining to those whose jobs in fossil fuel-dependent industries would disappear, and to spread the benefits of low-carbon technology. “We can make sure that there is a bright future for Europe, that there is employability, that there is re-schooling, that there is a stake in the future for everyone, particularly those who might see significant change on the work floor.” Hoekstra also signalled he was willing to get tough with other countries, including China , which are still increasing their greenhouse gas emissions. “I can only commend the Chinese for the renewables transition in their own country. I’m way less enthusiastic about their idea to build new coal plants. As you can imagine, that is an understatement.” China has been accused of destroying the solar panel manufacturing industries in the EU and US by generating a surplus of products that are then dumped cheaply on international markets . Hoekstra stopped short of criticising China for this directly, but said: “There is broad recognition in Europe that we need to do more to defend what is one of the cornerstones of European policy, and that is a level playing field. The European solar industry, which was among the most innovative and the most advanced and had a huge footprint, has suffered significantly in the last couple of years. This is a dialogue we need to have also with the Chinese.” One of the remedies on which the EU has been working is a green tariff that would be charged on imports of certain high-carbon goods , such as cement, fertilisers and some metals. This would penalise imports from countries that are dependent on coal and have high emissions, with the aim of deterring companies from moving abroad to take advantage of lax climate rules in other countries, a process known as “carbon leakage”. The first stages of this carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) are in place, though companies are not yet being charged. Hoekstra said: “It is not geared to any country or company in particular. What we want to do is make sure that we don’t see any carbon leakage, and create a level playing field. “I think that is only fair. We ask European companies to take significant action to lower their carbon footprint. But we’re living in a global world and it would be deeply unhelpful, for European companies and citizens and for the climate, if companies in Europe either go bust or leave this continent because the rules are more relaxed outside.” Though the CBAM will not be in full operation until 2026, Hoekstra said it was already having “anticipatory” impact. “It’s amazing how in my conversations with the Chinese, but also with some of our friends in Latin America and Africa, it’s carbon markets full and centre. And how this will be a tool that sets the world more on the right pace.” Explore more on these topics Climate crisis European elections European Union Europe Green economy Greenhouse gas emissions Extreme weather news Share Reuse this content Climate crisis European elections European Union Europe Green economy Greenhouse gas emissions Extreme weather news |
Two Just Stop Oil protesters attack Magna Carta’s glass case
1:23 Just Stop Oil protesters target Magna Carta – video This article is more than 1 year old Two Just Stop Oil protesters attack Magna Carta’s glass case This article is more than 1 year old Group says two women in their 80s took hammer and chisel to protective glass at British Library Two Just Stop Oil protesters have smashed the glass around Magna Carta at the British Library . The Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, and Judy Bruce, 85, a retired biology teacher, targeted the protective enclosure with a hammer and chisel on Friday morning. Just Stop Oil said the pair then held up a sign reading “The government is breaking the law” and glued themselves to the display. The Metropolitan police said two people had been arrested on suspicion of criminal damage and were in custody. View image in fullscreen The two women used a hammer and chisel. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/Reuters Parfitt said: “The Magna Carta is rightly revered, being of great importance to our history, to our freedoms and to our laws. But there will be no freedom, no lawfulness, no rights, if we allow climate breakdown to become the catastrophe that is now threatened. “We must get things in proportion. The abundance of life on Earth, the climate stability that allows civilisation to continue, is what must be revered and protected above all else, even above our most precious artefacts.” Bruce said: “This week 400 respected scientists – contributors to IPCC reports, are saying we are ‘woefully unprepared’ for what’s coming: 2.5 or more degrees of heating above pre-industrial levels. Instead of acting, our dysfunctional government is like the three monkeys: ‘see nothing, hear nothing, say nothing,’ pretend we’ve got 25 years. We haven’t. We must get off our addiction to oil and gas by 2030 – starting now.” Bruce was referring to a Guardian survey published on Wednesday that showed hundreds of leading climate scientists expect global temperatures to rise to at least 2.5C (4.5F) above pre-industrial levels this century. ‘The stakes could not be higher’: world is on edge of climate abyss, UN warns Read more Almost 80% of the respondents, all from the authoritative Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), foresee at least 2.5C of global heating, and almost half anticipate at least 3C (5.4F). Only 6% thought the internationally agreed 1.5C (2.7F) limit would be achieved. The Guardian approached every contactable lead author or review editor of IPCC reports since 2018. Almost half replied – 380 out of 843. The IPCC’s reports are the gold-standard assessments of climate change, approved by all governments and produced by experts in physical and social sciences. Numerous experts said in the survey that they had been left feeling hopeless, infuriated and scared by the failure of governments to act despite the clear scientific evidence provided. Explore more on these topics Just Stop Oil Environmental activism London British Library Climate crisis news Share Reuse this content 1:23 Just Stop Oil protesters target Magna Carta – video This article is more than 1 year old Two Just Stop Oil protesters attack Magna Carta’s glass case This article is more than 1 year old Group says two women in their 80s took hammer and chisel to protective glass at British Library Two Just Stop Oil protesters have smashed the glass around Magna Carta at the British Library . The Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, and Judy Bruce, 85, a retired biology teacher, targeted the protective enclosure with a hammer and chisel on Friday morning. Just Stop Oil said the pair then held up a sign reading “The government is breaking the law” and glued themselves to the display. The Metropolitan police said two people had been arrested on suspicion of criminal damage and were in custody. View image in fullscreen The two women used a hammer and chisel. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/Reuters Parfitt said: “The Magna Carta is rightly revered, being of great importance to our history, to our freedoms and to our laws. But there will be no freedom, no lawfulness, no rights, if we allow climate breakdown to become the catastrophe that is now threatened. “We must get things in proportion. The abundance of life on Earth, the climate stability that allows civilisation to continue, is what must be revered and protected above all else, even above our most precious artefacts.” Bruce said: “This week 400 respected scientists – contributors to IPCC reports, are saying we are ‘woefully unprepared’ for what’s coming: 2.5 or more degrees of heating above pre-industrial levels. Instead of acting, our dysfunctional government is like the three monkeys: ‘see nothing, hear nothing, say nothing,’ pretend we’ve got 25 years. We haven’t. We must get off our addiction to oil and gas by 2030 – starting now.” Bruce was referring to a Guardian survey published on Wednesday that showed hundreds of leading climate scientists expect global temperatures to rise to at least 2.5C (4.5F) above pre-industrial levels this century. ‘The stakes could not be higher’: world is on edge of climate abyss, UN warns Read more Almost 80% of the respondents, all from the authoritative Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), foresee at least 2.5C of global heating, and almost half anticipate at least 3C (5.4F). Only 6% thought the internationally agreed 1.5C (2.7F) limit would be achieved. The Guardian approached every contactable lead author or review editor of IPCC reports since 2018. Almost half replied – 380 out of 843. The IPCC’s reports are the gold-standard assessments of climate change, approved by all governments and produced by experts in physical and social sciences. Numerous experts said in the survey that they had been left feeling hopeless, infuriated and scared by the failure of governments to act despite the clear scientific evidence provided. Explore more on these topics Just Stop Oil Environmental activism London British Library Climate crisis news Share Reuse this content 1:23 Just Stop Oil protesters target Magna Carta – video 1:23 Just Stop Oil protesters target Magna Carta – video 1:23 Just Stop Oil protesters target Magna Carta – video 1:23 Just Stop Oil protesters target Magna Carta – video This article is more than 1 year old Two Just Stop Oil protesters attack Magna Carta’s glass case This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Two Just Stop Oil protesters attack Magna Carta’s glass case This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Two Just Stop Oil protesters attack Magna Carta’s glass case This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Group says two women in their 80s took hammer and chisel to protective glass at British Library Group says two women in their 80s took hammer and chisel to protective glass at British Library Group says two women in their 80s took hammer and chisel to protective glass at British Library Two Just Stop Oil protesters have smashed the glass around Magna Carta at the British Library . The Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, and Judy Bruce, 85, a retired biology teacher, targeted the protective enclosure with a hammer and chisel on Friday morning. Just Stop Oil said the pair then held up a sign reading “The government is breaking the law” and glued themselves to the display. The Metropolitan police said two people had been arrested on suspicion of criminal damage and were in custody. View image in fullscreen The two women used a hammer and chisel. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/Reuters Parfitt said: “The Magna Carta is rightly revered, being of great importance to our history, to our freedoms and to our laws. But there will be no freedom, no lawfulness, no rights, if we allow climate breakdown to become the catastrophe that is now threatened. “We must get things in proportion. The abundance of life on Earth, the climate stability that allows civilisation to continue, is what must be revered and protected above all else, even above our most precious artefacts.” Bruce said: “This week 400 respected scientists – contributors to IPCC reports, are saying we are ‘woefully unprepared’ for what’s coming: 2.5 or more degrees of heating above pre-industrial levels. Instead of acting, our dysfunctional government is like the three monkeys: ‘see nothing, hear nothing, say nothing,’ pretend we’ve got 25 years. We haven’t. We must get off our addiction to oil and gas by 2030 – starting now.” Bruce was referring to a Guardian survey published on Wednesday that showed hundreds of leading climate scientists expect global temperatures to rise to at least 2.5C (4.5F) above pre-industrial levels this century. ‘The stakes could not be higher’: world is on edge of climate abyss, UN warns Read more Almost 80% of the respondents, all from the authoritative Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), foresee at least 2.5C of global heating, and almost half anticipate at least 3C (5.4F). Only 6% thought the internationally agreed 1.5C (2.7F) limit would be achieved. The Guardian approached every contactable lead author or review editor of IPCC reports since 2018. Almost half replied – 380 out of 843. The IPCC’s reports are the gold-standard assessments of climate change, approved by all governments and produced by experts in physical and social sciences. Numerous experts said in the survey that they had been left feeling hopeless, infuriated and scared by the failure of governments to act despite the clear scientific evidence provided. Explore more on these topics Just Stop Oil Environmental activism London British Library Climate crisis news Share Reuse this content Two Just Stop Oil protesters have smashed the glass around Magna Carta at the British Library . The Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, and Judy Bruce, 85, a retired biology teacher, targeted the protective enclosure with a hammer and chisel on Friday morning. Just Stop Oil said the pair then held up a sign reading “The government is breaking the law” and glued themselves to the display. The Metropolitan police said two people had been arrested on suspicion of criminal damage and were in custody. View image in fullscreen The two women used a hammer and chisel. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/Reuters Parfitt said: “The Magna Carta is rightly revered, being of great importance to our history, to our freedoms and to our laws. But there will be no freedom, no lawfulness, no rights, if we allow climate breakdown to become the catastrophe that is now threatened. “We must get things in proportion. The abundance of life on Earth, the climate stability that allows civilisation to continue, is what must be revered and protected above all else, even above our most precious artefacts.” Bruce said: “This week 400 respected scientists – contributors to IPCC reports, are saying we are ‘woefully unprepared’ for what’s coming: 2.5 or more degrees of heating above pre-industrial levels. Instead of acting, our dysfunctional government is like the three monkeys: ‘see nothing, hear nothing, say nothing,’ pretend we’ve got 25 years. We haven’t. We must get off our addiction to oil and gas by 2030 – starting now.” Bruce was referring to a Guardian survey published on Wednesday that showed hundreds of leading climate scientists expect global temperatures to rise to at least 2.5C (4.5F) above pre-industrial levels this century. ‘The stakes could not be higher’: world is on edge of climate abyss, UN warns Read more Almost 80% of the respondents, all from the authoritative Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), foresee at least 2.5C of global heating, and almost half anticipate at least 3C (5.4F). Only 6% thought the internationally agreed 1.5C (2.7F) limit would be achieved. The Guardian approached every contactable lead author or review editor of IPCC reports since 2018. Almost half replied – 380 out of 843. The IPCC’s reports are the gold-standard assessments of climate change, approved by all governments and produced by experts in physical and social sciences. Numerous experts said in the survey that they had been left feeling hopeless, infuriated and scared by the failure of governments to act despite the clear scientific evidence provided. Explore more on these topics Just Stop Oil Environmental activism London British Library Climate crisis news Share Reuse this content Two Just Stop Oil protesters have smashed the glass around Magna Carta at the British Library . The Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, and Judy Bruce, 85, a retired biology teacher, targeted the protective enclosure with a hammer and chisel on Friday morning. Just Stop Oil said the pair then held up a sign reading “The government is breaking the law” and glued themselves to the display. The Metropolitan police said two people had been arrested on suspicion of criminal damage and were in custody. View image in fullscreen The two women used a hammer and chisel. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/Reuters Parfitt said: “The Magna Carta is rightly revered, being of great importance to our history, to our freedoms and to our laws. But there will be no freedom, no lawfulness, no rights, if we allow climate breakdown to become the catastrophe that is now threatened. “We must get things in proportion. The abundance of life on Earth, the climate stability that allows civilisation to continue, is what must be revered and protected above all else, even above our most precious artefacts.” Bruce said: “This week 400 respected scientists – contributors to IPCC reports, are saying we are ‘woefully unprepared’ for what’s coming: 2.5 or more degrees of heating above pre-industrial levels. Instead of acting, our dysfunctional government is like the three monkeys: ‘see nothing, hear nothing, say nothing,’ pretend we’ve got 25 years. We haven’t. We must get off our addiction to oil and gas by 2030 – starting now.” Bruce was referring to a Guardian survey published on Wednesday that showed hundreds of leading climate scientists expect global temperatures to rise to at least 2.5C (4.5F) above pre-industrial levels this century. ‘The stakes could not be higher’: world is on edge of climate abyss, UN warns Read more Almost 80% of the respondents, all from the authoritative Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), foresee at least 2.5C of global heating, and almost half anticipate at least 3C (5.4F). Only 6% thought the internationally agreed 1.5C (2.7F) limit would be achieved. The Guardian approached every contactable lead author or review editor of IPCC reports since 2018. Almost half replied – 380 out of 843. The IPCC’s reports are the gold-standard assessments of climate change, approved by all governments and produced by experts in physical and social sciences. Numerous experts said in the survey that they had been left feeling hopeless, infuriated and scared by the failure of governments to act despite the clear scientific evidence provided. Two Just Stop Oil protesters have smashed the glass around Magna Carta at the British Library . The Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, and Judy Bruce, 85, a retired biology teacher, targeted the protective enclosure with a hammer and chisel on Friday morning. Just Stop Oil said the pair then held up a sign reading “The government is breaking the law” and glued themselves to the display. The Metropolitan police said two people had been arrested on suspicion of criminal damage and were in custody. View image in fullscreen The two women used a hammer and chisel. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/Reuters Parfitt said: “The Magna Carta is rightly revered, being of great importance to our history, to our freedoms and to our laws. But there will be no freedom, no lawfulness, no rights, if we allow climate breakdown to become the catastrophe that is now threatened. “We must get things in proportion. The abundance of life on Earth, the climate stability that allows civilisation to continue, is what must be revered and protected above all else, even above our most precious artefacts.” Bruce said: “This week 400 respected scientists – contributors to IPCC reports, are saying we are ‘woefully unprepared’ for what’s coming: 2.5 or more degrees of heating above pre-industrial levels. Instead of acting, our dysfunctional government is like the three monkeys: ‘see nothing, hear nothing, say nothing,’ pretend we’ve got 25 years. We haven’t. We must get off our addiction to oil and gas by 2030 – starting now.” Bruce was referring to a Guardian survey published on Wednesday that showed hundreds of leading climate scientists expect global temperatures to rise to at least 2.5C (4.5F) above pre-industrial levels this century. ‘The stakes could not be higher’: world is on edge of climate abyss, UN warns Read more Almost 80% of the respondents, all from the authoritative Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), foresee at least 2.5C of global heating, and almost half anticipate at least 3C (5.4F). Only 6% thought the internationally agreed 1.5C (2.7F) limit would be achieved. The Guardian approached every contactable lead author or review editor of IPCC reports since 2018. Almost half replied – 380 out of 843. The IPCC’s reports are the gold-standard assessments of climate change, approved by all governments and produced by experts in physical and social sciences. Numerous experts said in the survey that they had been left feeling hopeless, infuriated and scared by the failure of governments to act despite the clear scientific evidence provided. Two Just Stop Oil protesters have smashed the glass around Magna Carta at the British Library . The Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, and Judy Bruce, 85, a retired biology teacher, targeted the protective enclosure with a hammer and chisel on Friday morning. Just Stop Oil said the pair then held up a sign reading “The government is breaking the law” and glued themselves to the display. The Metropolitan police said two people had been arrested on suspicion of criminal damage and were in custody. Parfitt said: “The Magna Carta is rightly revered, being of great importance to our history, to our freedoms and to our laws. But there will be no freedom, no lawfulness, no rights, if we allow climate breakdown to become the catastrophe that is now threatened. “We must get things in proportion. The abundance of life on Earth, the climate stability that allows civilisation to continue, is what must be revered and protected above all else, even above our most precious artefacts.” Bruce said: “This week 400 respected scientists – contributors to IPCC reports, are saying we are ‘woefully unprepared’ for what’s coming: 2.5 or more degrees of heating above pre-industrial levels. Instead of acting, our dysfunctional government is like the three monkeys: ‘see nothing, hear nothing, say nothing,’ pretend we’ve got 25 years. We haven’t. We must get off our addiction to oil and gas by 2030 – starting now.” Bruce was referring to a Guardian survey published on Wednesday that showed hundreds of leading climate scientists expect global temperatures to rise to at least 2.5C (4.5F) above pre-industrial levels this century. ‘The stakes could not be higher’: world is on edge of climate abyss, UN warns Read more ‘The stakes could not be higher’: world is on edge of climate abyss, UN warns Read more ‘The stakes could not be higher’: world is on edge of climate abyss, UN warns Read more ‘The stakes could not be higher’: world is on edge of climate abyss, UN warns ‘The stakes could not be higher’: world is on edge of climate abyss, UN warns Almost 80% of the respondents, all from the authoritative Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), foresee at least 2.5C of global heating, and almost half anticipate at least 3C (5.4F). Only 6% thought the internationally agreed 1.5C (2.7F) limit would be achieved. The Guardian approached every contactable lead author or review editor of IPCC reports since 2018. Almost half replied – 380 out of 843. The IPCC’s reports are the gold-standard assessments of climate change, approved by all governments and produced by experts in physical and social sciences. Numerous experts said in the survey that they had been left feeling hopeless, infuriated and scared by the failure of governments to act despite the clear scientific evidence provided. Explore more on these topics Just Stop Oil Environmental activism London British Library Climate crisis news Share Reuse this content Just Stop Oil Environmental activism London British Library Climate crisis news |
‘It was an act of desperation’: Irish singer on his housing crisis protest anthem
Leahy performs outside the Dáil in Dublin every Thursday at 1pm. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Leahy performs outside the Dáil in Dublin every Thursday at 1pm. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old ‘It was an act of desperation’: Irish singer on his housing crisis protest anthem This article is more than 1 year old Martin Leahy has performed Everyone Should Have a Home outside parliament every week for two years. After 100 performances, he is pessimistic about change When Martin Leahy received an eviction notice in 2022 he found himself tumbling into Ireland ’s housing crisis – where nothing was affordable. The musician had moved to the west Cork village of Ballinadee a decade earlier to live cheaply, but even in this remote area rents had rocketed. Leahy channelled his anxiety into writing a song – Everyone Should Have a Home – then took a bus to Dublin, walked to the gates of parliament, unpacked his guitar and sang it. The next week Leahy made another trek to the capital and performed the song again in an hour-long loop outside the Dáil. The week after that he did it again, and again, and again, every Thursday at 1pm. Ireland’s housing crisis is a disaster for its people – and a gift to far-right fearmongers | Rory Hearne Read more Two years later the 48-year-old has passed his 100th performance and finds himself the bard of Ireland’s cry for affordable housing. The one-time backing musician, who had written only a handful of songs before his housing anthem, has made headlines and acquired a social media following – a stumble into fame as the guy who gave the crisis a soundtrack, and doesn’t give up. “There was no real plan. I didn’t know what to do with the song. It was an act of desperation,” Leahy said recently, fresh off the bus for another stint outside parliament. “I’d never been to the Dáil before or engaged in political activism. This is all new to me. It’s weird.” Leahy is low-key, even shy, and he found his first performance on Kildare Street “nerve-racking”. In contrast to his soft-spoken nature, the song is a plaintive, angry denunciation of an economic and political system that enriches property owners and punishes the rest. “Everyone should have a home, in this world, in this life, it’s a basic human right, to have a dignified place you call your own,” goes the chorus. “Safe and warm where you belong, everyone should have a home.” Catchy and direct, it struck a chord with passersby who recorded and uploaded clips a few weeks into Leahy’s solitary performances. Word spread, interviews followed and Leahy became a new voice for an issue that affects swathes of society and could oust Ireland’s centre-right government in an election due within a year. Schoolteachers leading class tours to the Dáil have paused at the gates and told their students to listen to Leahy’s lyrics. “They said what was happening here was just as important as what was happening inside,” he said. Leahy’s persistence reflects the intractable shortage of affordable homes, a consequence of the Celtic tiger crash, warped financial incentives, population growth, interest rates and construction bottlenecks, among other factors. There are more than 18,000 houses to rent on Airbnb versus just 2,000 on Daft.ie, Ireland’s main property search site, according to Lorcan Sirr , who lectures in housing at Technological University Dublin. Rents have doubled since 2013 and are near the top of global league tables. Nearly a third of new tenancies have a rent ofmore than €2,000 a month. The number of homeless people has spiralled. Last month there was widespread mourning for Ann Delaney, a former nurse found dead in a sleeping bag on a pavement not far from parliament. This has coincided with an unprecedented influx of refugees from Ukraine and other countries that has filled accommodation centres and hotels, fuelling a nativist narrative about foreigners swamping Ireland. Rioters in Dublin last October chanted “Ireland is full”. Policy failures have created an opening for xenophobes, said Leahy. “The government has created a gap for the far right to fill.” View image in fullscreen Leahy blames the Irish government, not refugees, for the housing crisis. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian The accidental troubadour of the crisis has enjoyed some unexpected luck. The eviction order that prompted his song has been suspended, allowing him to remain in his home in Ballinadee, albeit in limbo, with the risk of a renewed eviction order. “Living in a state of anxiety that affects your whole being feels so unnecessary and unfair,” he said. Talks with academics, activists and politicians have made Leahy aware that many of Ireland’s property travails are replicated across Europe . A conversation with an Irish ruling party legislator did not leave him optimistic about the crisis. “He told me to keep protesting,” Leahy recalled. “I guess that means he doesn’t have a plan to fix it.” Explore more on these topics Ireland Europe's housing crisis Housing Homelessness Europe Protest features Share Reuse this content Leahy performs outside the Dáil in Dublin every Thursday at 1pm. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Leahy performs outside the Dáil in Dublin every Thursday at 1pm. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old ‘It was an act of desperation’: Irish singer on his housing crisis protest anthem This article is more than 1 year old Martin Leahy has performed Everyone Should Have a Home outside parliament every week for two years. After 100 performances, he is pessimistic about change When Martin Leahy received an eviction notice in 2022 he found himself tumbling into Ireland ’s housing crisis – where nothing was affordable. The musician had moved to the west Cork village of Ballinadee a decade earlier to live cheaply, but even in this remote area rents had rocketed. Leahy channelled his anxiety into writing a song – Everyone Should Have a Home – then took a bus to Dublin, walked to the gates of parliament, unpacked his guitar and sang it. The next week Leahy made another trek to the capital and performed the song again in an hour-long loop outside the Dáil. The week after that he did it again, and again, and again, every Thursday at 1pm. Ireland’s housing crisis is a disaster for its people – and a gift to far-right fearmongers | Rory Hearne Read more Two years later the 48-year-old has passed his 100th performance and finds himself the bard of Ireland’s cry for affordable housing. The one-time backing musician, who had written only a handful of songs before his housing anthem, has made headlines and acquired a social media following – a stumble into fame as the guy who gave the crisis a soundtrack, and doesn’t give up. “There was no real plan. I didn’t know what to do with the song. It was an act of desperation,” Leahy said recently, fresh off the bus for another stint outside parliament. “I’d never been to the Dáil before or engaged in political activism. This is all new to me. It’s weird.” Leahy is low-key, even shy, and he found his first performance on Kildare Street “nerve-racking”. In contrast to his soft-spoken nature, the song is a plaintive, angry denunciation of an economic and political system that enriches property owners and punishes the rest. “Everyone should have a home, in this world, in this life, it’s a basic human right, to have a dignified place you call your own,” goes the chorus. “Safe and warm where you belong, everyone should have a home.” Catchy and direct, it struck a chord with passersby who recorded and uploaded clips a few weeks into Leahy’s solitary performances. Word spread, interviews followed and Leahy became a new voice for an issue that affects swathes of society and could oust Ireland’s centre-right government in an election due within a year. Schoolteachers leading class tours to the Dáil have paused at the gates and told their students to listen to Leahy’s lyrics. “They said what was happening here was just as important as what was happening inside,” he said. Leahy’s persistence reflects the intractable shortage of affordable homes, a consequence of the Celtic tiger crash, warped financial incentives, population growth, interest rates and construction bottlenecks, among other factors. There are more than 18,000 houses to rent on Airbnb versus just 2,000 on Daft.ie, Ireland’s main property search site, according to Lorcan Sirr , who lectures in housing at Technological University Dublin. Rents have doubled since 2013 and are near the top of global league tables. Nearly a third of new tenancies have a rent ofmore than €2,000 a month. The number of homeless people has spiralled. Last month there was widespread mourning for Ann Delaney, a former nurse found dead in a sleeping bag on a pavement not far from parliament. This has coincided with an unprecedented influx of refugees from Ukraine and other countries that has filled accommodation centres and hotels, fuelling a nativist narrative about foreigners swamping Ireland. Rioters in Dublin last October chanted “Ireland is full”. Policy failures have created an opening for xenophobes, said Leahy. “The government has created a gap for the far right to fill.” View image in fullscreen Leahy blames the Irish government, not refugees, for the housing crisis. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian The accidental troubadour of the crisis has enjoyed some unexpected luck. The eviction order that prompted his song has been suspended, allowing him to remain in his home in Ballinadee, albeit in limbo, with the risk of a renewed eviction order. “Living in a state of anxiety that affects your whole being feels so unnecessary and unfair,” he said. Talks with academics, activists and politicians have made Leahy aware that many of Ireland’s property travails are replicated across Europe . A conversation with an Irish ruling party legislator did not leave him optimistic about the crisis. “He told me to keep protesting,” Leahy recalled. “I guess that means he doesn’t have a plan to fix it.” Explore more on these topics Ireland Europe's housing crisis Housing Homelessness Europe Protest features Share Reuse this content Leahy performs outside the Dáil in Dublin every Thursday at 1pm. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Leahy performs outside the Dáil in Dublin every Thursday at 1pm. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian Leahy performs outside the Dáil in Dublin every Thursday at 1pm. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Leahy performs outside the Dáil in Dublin every Thursday at 1pm. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian Leahy performs outside the Dáil in Dublin every Thursday at 1pm. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Leahy performs outside the Dáil in Dublin every Thursday at 1pm. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian Leahy performs outside the Dáil in Dublin every Thursday at 1pm. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Leahy performs outside the Dáil in Dublin every Thursday at 1pm. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian Leahy performs outside the Dáil in Dublin every Thursday at 1pm. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian Leahy performs outside the Dáil in Dublin every Thursday at 1pm. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old ‘It was an act of desperation’: Irish singer on his housing crisis protest anthem This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘It was an act of desperation’: Irish singer on his housing crisis protest anthem This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘It was an act of desperation’: Irish singer on his housing crisis protest anthem This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Martin Leahy has performed Everyone Should Have a Home outside parliament every week for two years. After 100 performances, he is pessimistic about change Martin Leahy has performed Everyone Should Have a Home outside parliament every week for two years. After 100 performances, he is pessimistic about change Martin Leahy has performed Everyone Should Have a Home outside parliament every week for two years. After 100 performances, he is pessimistic about change When Martin Leahy received an eviction notice in 2022 he found himself tumbling into Ireland ’s housing crisis – where nothing was affordable. The musician had moved to the west Cork village of Ballinadee a decade earlier to live cheaply, but even in this remote area rents had rocketed. Leahy channelled his anxiety into writing a song – Everyone Should Have a Home – then took a bus to Dublin, walked to the gates of parliament, unpacked his guitar and sang it. The next week Leahy made another trek to the capital and performed the song again in an hour-long loop outside the Dáil. The week after that he did it again, and again, and again, every Thursday at 1pm. Ireland’s housing crisis is a disaster for its people – and a gift to far-right fearmongers | Rory Hearne Read more Two years later the 48-year-old has passed his 100th performance and finds himself the bard of Ireland’s cry for affordable housing. The one-time backing musician, who had written only a handful of songs before his housing anthem, has made headlines and acquired a social media following – a stumble into fame as the guy who gave the crisis a soundtrack, and doesn’t give up. “There was no real plan. I didn’t know what to do with the song. It was an act of desperation,” Leahy said recently, fresh off the bus for another stint outside parliament. “I’d never been to the Dáil before or engaged in political activism. This is all new to me. It’s weird.” Leahy is low-key, even shy, and he found his first performance on Kildare Street “nerve-racking”. In contrast to his soft-spoken nature, the song is a plaintive, angry denunciation of an economic and political system that enriches property owners and punishes the rest. “Everyone should have a home, in this world, in this life, it’s a basic human right, to have a dignified place you call your own,” goes the chorus. “Safe and warm where you belong, everyone should have a home.” Catchy and direct, it struck a chord with passersby who recorded and uploaded clips a few weeks into Leahy’s solitary performances. Word spread, interviews followed and Leahy became a new voice for an issue that affects swathes of society and could oust Ireland’s centre-right government in an election due within a year. Schoolteachers leading class tours to the Dáil have paused at the gates and told their students to listen to Leahy’s lyrics. “They said what was happening here was just as important as what was happening inside,” he said. Leahy’s persistence reflects the intractable shortage of affordable homes, a consequence of the Celtic tiger crash, warped financial incentives, population growth, interest rates and construction bottlenecks, among other factors. There are more than 18,000 houses to rent on Airbnb versus just 2,000 on Daft.ie, Ireland’s main property search site, according to Lorcan Sirr , who lectures in housing at Technological University Dublin. Rents have doubled since 2013 and are near the top of global league tables. Nearly a third of new tenancies have a rent ofmore than €2,000 a month. The number of homeless people has spiralled. Last month there was widespread mourning for Ann Delaney, a former nurse found dead in a sleeping bag on a pavement not far from parliament. This has coincided with an unprecedented influx of refugees from Ukraine and other countries that has filled accommodation centres and hotels, fuelling a nativist narrative about foreigners swamping Ireland. Rioters in Dublin last October chanted “Ireland is full”. Policy failures have created an opening for xenophobes, said Leahy. “The government has created a gap for the far right to fill.” View image in fullscreen Leahy blames the Irish government, not refugees, for the housing crisis. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian The accidental troubadour of the crisis has enjoyed some unexpected luck. The eviction order that prompted his song has been suspended, allowing him to remain in his home in Ballinadee, albeit in limbo, with the risk of a renewed eviction order. “Living in a state of anxiety that affects your whole being feels so unnecessary and unfair,” he said. Talks with academics, activists and politicians have made Leahy aware that many of Ireland’s property travails are replicated across Europe . A conversation with an Irish ruling party legislator did not leave him optimistic about the crisis. “He told me to keep protesting,” Leahy recalled. “I guess that means he doesn’t have a plan to fix it.” Explore more on these topics Ireland Europe's housing crisis Housing Homelessness Europe Protest features Share Reuse this content When Martin Leahy received an eviction notice in 2022 he found himself tumbling into Ireland ’s housing crisis – where nothing was affordable. The musician had moved to the west Cork village of Ballinadee a decade earlier to live cheaply, but even in this remote area rents had rocketed. Leahy channelled his anxiety into writing a song – Everyone Should Have a Home – then took a bus to Dublin, walked to the gates of parliament, unpacked his guitar and sang it. The next week Leahy made another trek to the capital and performed the song again in an hour-long loop outside the Dáil. The week after that he did it again, and again, and again, every Thursday at 1pm. Ireland’s housing crisis is a disaster for its people – and a gift to far-right fearmongers | Rory Hearne Read more Two years later the 48-year-old has passed his 100th performance and finds himself the bard of Ireland’s cry for affordable housing. The one-time backing musician, who had written only a handful of songs before his housing anthem, has made headlines and acquired a social media following – a stumble into fame as the guy who gave the crisis a soundtrack, and doesn’t give up. “There was no real plan. I didn’t know what to do with the song. It was an act of desperation,” Leahy said recently, fresh off the bus for another stint outside parliament. “I’d never been to the Dáil before or engaged in political activism. This is all new to me. It’s weird.” Leahy is low-key, even shy, and he found his first performance on Kildare Street “nerve-racking”. In contrast to his soft-spoken nature, the song is a plaintive, angry denunciation of an economic and political system that enriches property owners and punishes the rest. “Everyone should have a home, in this world, in this life, it’s a basic human right, to have a dignified place you call your own,” goes the chorus. “Safe and warm where you belong, everyone should have a home.” Catchy and direct, it struck a chord with passersby who recorded and uploaded clips a few weeks into Leahy’s solitary performances. Word spread, interviews followed and Leahy became a new voice for an issue that affects swathes of society and could oust Ireland’s centre-right government in an election due within a year. Schoolteachers leading class tours to the Dáil have paused at the gates and told their students to listen to Leahy’s lyrics. “They said what was happening here was just as important as what was happening inside,” he said. Leahy’s persistence reflects the intractable shortage of affordable homes, a consequence of the Celtic tiger crash, warped financial incentives, population growth, interest rates and construction bottlenecks, among other factors. There are more than 18,000 houses to rent on Airbnb versus just 2,000 on Daft.ie, Ireland’s main property search site, according to Lorcan Sirr , who lectures in housing at Technological University Dublin. Rents have doubled since 2013 and are near the top of global league tables. Nearly a third of new tenancies have a rent ofmore than €2,000 a month. The number of homeless people has spiralled. Last month there was widespread mourning for Ann Delaney, a former nurse found dead in a sleeping bag on a pavement not far from parliament. This has coincided with an unprecedented influx of refugees from Ukraine and other countries that has filled accommodation centres and hotels, fuelling a nativist narrative about foreigners swamping Ireland. Rioters in Dublin last October chanted “Ireland is full”. Policy failures have created an opening for xenophobes, said Leahy. “The government has created a gap for the far right to fill.” View image in fullscreen Leahy blames the Irish government, not refugees, for the housing crisis. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian The accidental troubadour of the crisis has enjoyed some unexpected luck. The eviction order that prompted his song has been suspended, allowing him to remain in his home in Ballinadee, albeit in limbo, with the risk of a renewed eviction order. “Living in a state of anxiety that affects your whole being feels so unnecessary and unfair,” he said. Talks with academics, activists and politicians have made Leahy aware that many of Ireland’s property travails are replicated across Europe . A conversation with an Irish ruling party legislator did not leave him optimistic about the crisis. “He told me to keep protesting,” Leahy recalled. “I guess that means he doesn’t have a plan to fix it.” Explore more on these topics Ireland Europe's housing crisis Housing Homelessness Europe Protest features Share Reuse this content When Martin Leahy received an eviction notice in 2022 he found himself tumbling into Ireland ’s housing crisis – where nothing was affordable. The musician had moved to the west Cork village of Ballinadee a decade earlier to live cheaply, but even in this remote area rents had rocketed. Leahy channelled his anxiety into writing a song – Everyone Should Have a Home – then took a bus to Dublin, walked to the gates of parliament, unpacked his guitar and sang it. The next week Leahy made another trek to the capital and performed the song again in an hour-long loop outside the Dáil. The week after that he did it again, and again, and again, every Thursday at 1pm. Ireland’s housing crisis is a disaster for its people – and a gift to far-right fearmongers | Rory Hearne Read more Two years later the 48-year-old has passed his 100th performance and finds himself the bard of Ireland’s cry for affordable housing. The one-time backing musician, who had written only a handful of songs before his housing anthem, has made headlines and acquired a social media following – a stumble into fame as the guy who gave the crisis a soundtrack, and doesn’t give up. “There was no real plan. I didn’t know what to do with the song. It was an act of desperation,” Leahy said recently, fresh off the bus for another stint outside parliament. “I’d never been to the Dáil before or engaged in political activism. This is all new to me. It’s weird.” Leahy is low-key, even shy, and he found his first performance on Kildare Street “nerve-racking”. In contrast to his soft-spoken nature, the song is a plaintive, angry denunciation of an economic and political system that enriches property owners and punishes the rest. “Everyone should have a home, in this world, in this life, it’s a basic human right, to have a dignified place you call your own,” goes the chorus. “Safe and warm where you belong, everyone should have a home.” Catchy and direct, it struck a chord with passersby who recorded and uploaded clips a few weeks into Leahy’s solitary performances. Word spread, interviews followed and Leahy became a new voice for an issue that affects swathes of society and could oust Ireland’s centre-right government in an election due within a year. Schoolteachers leading class tours to the Dáil have paused at the gates and told their students to listen to Leahy’s lyrics. “They said what was happening here was just as important as what was happening inside,” he said. Leahy’s persistence reflects the intractable shortage of affordable homes, a consequence of the Celtic tiger crash, warped financial incentives, population growth, interest rates and construction bottlenecks, among other factors. There are more than 18,000 houses to rent on Airbnb versus just 2,000 on Daft.ie, Ireland’s main property search site, according to Lorcan Sirr , who lectures in housing at Technological University Dublin. Rents have doubled since 2013 and are near the top of global league tables. Nearly a third of new tenancies have a rent ofmore than €2,000 a month. The number of homeless people has spiralled. Last month there was widespread mourning for Ann Delaney, a former nurse found dead in a sleeping bag on a pavement not far from parliament. This has coincided with an unprecedented influx of refugees from Ukraine and other countries that has filled accommodation centres and hotels, fuelling a nativist narrative about foreigners swamping Ireland. Rioters in Dublin last October chanted “Ireland is full”. Policy failures have created an opening for xenophobes, said Leahy. “The government has created a gap for the far right to fill.” View image in fullscreen Leahy blames the Irish government, not refugees, for the housing crisis. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian The accidental troubadour of the crisis has enjoyed some unexpected luck. The eviction order that prompted his song has been suspended, allowing him to remain in his home in Ballinadee, albeit in limbo, with the risk of a renewed eviction order. “Living in a state of anxiety that affects your whole being feels so unnecessary and unfair,” he said. Talks with academics, activists and politicians have made Leahy aware that many of Ireland’s property travails are replicated across Europe . A conversation with an Irish ruling party legislator did not leave him optimistic about the crisis. “He told me to keep protesting,” Leahy recalled. “I guess that means he doesn’t have a plan to fix it.” When Martin Leahy received an eviction notice in 2022 he found himself tumbling into Ireland ’s housing crisis – where nothing was affordable. The musician had moved to the west Cork village of Ballinadee a decade earlier to live cheaply, but even in this remote area rents had rocketed. Leahy channelled his anxiety into writing a song – Everyone Should Have a Home – then took a bus to Dublin, walked to the gates of parliament, unpacked his guitar and sang it. The next week Leahy made another trek to the capital and performed the song again in an hour-long loop outside the Dáil. The week after that he did it again, and again, and again, every Thursday at 1pm. Ireland’s housing crisis is a disaster for its people – and a gift to far-right fearmongers | Rory Hearne Read more Two years later the 48-year-old has passed his 100th performance and finds himself the bard of Ireland’s cry for affordable housing. The one-time backing musician, who had written only a handful of songs before his housing anthem, has made headlines and acquired a social media following – a stumble into fame as the guy who gave the crisis a soundtrack, and doesn’t give up. “There was no real plan. I didn’t know what to do with the song. It was an act of desperation,” Leahy said recently, fresh off the bus for another stint outside parliament. “I’d never been to the Dáil before or engaged in political activism. This is all new to me. It’s weird.” Leahy is low-key, even shy, and he found his first performance on Kildare Street “nerve-racking”. In contrast to his soft-spoken nature, the song is a plaintive, angry denunciation of an economic and political system that enriches property owners and punishes the rest. “Everyone should have a home, in this world, in this life, it’s a basic human right, to have a dignified place you call your own,” goes the chorus. “Safe and warm where you belong, everyone should have a home.” Catchy and direct, it struck a chord with passersby who recorded and uploaded clips a few weeks into Leahy’s solitary performances. Word spread, interviews followed and Leahy became a new voice for an issue that affects swathes of society and could oust Ireland’s centre-right government in an election due within a year. Schoolteachers leading class tours to the Dáil have paused at the gates and told their students to listen to Leahy’s lyrics. “They said what was happening here was just as important as what was happening inside,” he said. Leahy’s persistence reflects the intractable shortage of affordable homes, a consequence of the Celtic tiger crash, warped financial incentives, population growth, interest rates and construction bottlenecks, among other factors. There are more than 18,000 houses to rent on Airbnb versus just 2,000 on Daft.ie, Ireland’s main property search site, according to Lorcan Sirr , who lectures in housing at Technological University Dublin. Rents have doubled since 2013 and are near the top of global league tables. Nearly a third of new tenancies have a rent ofmore than €2,000 a month. The number of homeless people has spiralled. Last month there was widespread mourning for Ann Delaney, a former nurse found dead in a sleeping bag on a pavement not far from parliament. This has coincided with an unprecedented influx of refugees from Ukraine and other countries that has filled accommodation centres and hotels, fuelling a nativist narrative about foreigners swamping Ireland. Rioters in Dublin last October chanted “Ireland is full”. Policy failures have created an opening for xenophobes, said Leahy. “The government has created a gap for the far right to fill.” View image in fullscreen Leahy blames the Irish government, not refugees, for the housing crisis. Photograph: Patrick Bolger/The Guardian The accidental troubadour of the crisis has enjoyed some unexpected luck. The eviction order that prompted his song has been suspended, allowing him to remain in his home in Ballinadee, albeit in limbo, with the risk of a renewed eviction order. “Living in a state of anxiety that affects your whole being feels so unnecessary and unfair,” he said. Talks with academics, activists and politicians have made Leahy aware that many of Ireland’s property travails are replicated across Europe . A conversation with an Irish ruling party legislator did not leave him optimistic about the crisis. “He told me to keep protesting,” Leahy recalled. “I guess that means he doesn’t have a plan to fix it.” When Martin Leahy received an eviction notice in 2022 he found himself tumbling into Ireland ’s housing crisis – where nothing was affordable. The musician had moved to the west Cork village of Ballinadee a decade earlier to live cheaply, but even in this remote area rents had rocketed. Leahy channelled his anxiety into writing a song – Everyone Should Have a Home – then took a bus to Dublin, walked to the gates of parliament, unpacked his guitar and sang it. The next week Leahy made another trek to the capital and performed the song again in an hour-long loop outside the Dáil. The week after that he did it again, and again, and again, every Thursday at 1pm. Ireland’s housing crisis is a disaster for its people – and a gift to far-right fearmongers | Rory Hearne Read more Ireland’s housing crisis is a disaster for its people – and a gift to far-right fearmongers | Rory Hearne Read more Ireland’s housing crisis is a disaster for its people – and a gift to far-right fearmongers | Rory Hearne Read more Ireland’s housing crisis is a disaster for its people – and a gift to far-right fearmongers | Rory Hearne Ireland’s housing crisis is a disaster for its people – and a gift to far-right fearmongers | Rory Hearne Two years later the 48-year-old has passed his 100th performance and finds himself the bard of Ireland’s cry for affordable housing. The one-time backing musician, who had written only a handful of songs before his housing anthem, has made headlines and acquired a social media following – a stumble into fame as the guy who gave the crisis a soundtrack, and doesn’t give up. “There was no real plan. I didn’t know what to do with the song. It was an act of desperation,” Leahy said recently, fresh off the bus for another stint outside parliament. “I’d never been to the Dáil before or engaged in political activism. This is all new to me. It’s weird.” Leahy is low-key, even shy, and he found his first performance on Kildare Street “nerve-racking”. In contrast to his soft-spoken nature, the song is a plaintive, angry denunciation of an economic and political system that enriches property owners and punishes the rest. “Everyone should have a home, in this world, in this life, it’s a basic human right, to have a dignified place you call your own,” goes the chorus. “Safe and warm where you belong, everyone should have a home.” Catchy and direct, it struck a chord with passersby who recorded and uploaded clips a few weeks into Leahy’s solitary performances. Word spread, interviews followed and Leahy became a new voice for an issue that affects swathes of society and could oust Ireland’s centre-right government in an election due within a year. Schoolteachers leading class tours to the Dáil have paused at the gates and told their students to listen to Leahy’s lyrics. “They said what was happening here was just as important as what was happening inside,” he said. Leahy’s persistence reflects the intractable shortage of affordable homes, a consequence of the Celtic tiger crash, warped financial incentives, population growth, interest rates and construction bottlenecks, among other factors. There are more than 18,000 houses to rent on Airbnb versus just 2,000 on Daft.ie, Ireland’s main property search site, according to Lorcan Sirr , who lectures in housing at Technological University Dublin. Rents have doubled since 2013 and are near the top of global league tables. Nearly a third of new tenancies have a rent ofmore than €2,000 a month. The number of homeless people has spiralled. Last month there was widespread mourning for Ann Delaney, a former nurse found dead in a sleeping bag on a pavement not far from parliament. This has coincided with an unprecedented influx of refugees from Ukraine and other countries that has filled accommodation centres and hotels, fuelling a nativist narrative about foreigners swamping Ireland. Rioters in Dublin last October chanted “Ireland is full”. Policy failures have created an opening for xenophobes, said Leahy. “The government has created a gap for the far right to fill.” The accidental troubadour of the crisis has enjoyed some unexpected luck. The eviction order that prompted his song has been suspended, allowing him to remain in his home in Ballinadee, albeit in limbo, with the risk of a renewed eviction order. “Living in a state of anxiety that affects your whole being feels so unnecessary and unfair,” he said. Talks with academics, activists and politicians have made Leahy aware that many of Ireland’s property travails are replicated across Europe . A conversation with an Irish ruling party legislator did not leave him optimistic about the crisis. “He told me to keep protesting,” Leahy recalled. “I guess that means he doesn’t have a plan to fix it.” Explore more on these topics Ireland Europe's housing crisis Housing Homelessness Europe Protest features Share Reuse this content Ireland Europe's housing crisis Housing Homelessness Europe Protest features |
Two women charged over Magna Carta protest in London
Judy Bruce, 85, left, from Swansea, and the Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, protesting at the British Library in London. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/PA View image in fullscreen Judy Bruce, 85, left, from Swansea, and the Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, protesting at the British Library in London. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/PA This article is more than 1 year old Two women charged over Magna Carta protest in London This article is more than 1 year old Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, and Judith Bruce, 85, target enclosure around historic document with hammer and chisel at British Library Two women in their 80s have been charged with criminal damage after the glass around Magna Carta at the British Library was attacked. The Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, and Judith Bruce, 85, from Swansea, were arrested on Friday morning and have been charged with criminal damage, the Metropolitan police said. The two protesters targeted the protective enclosure around the historic document with a hammer and chisel on Friday morning. Just Stop Oil said the pair then held up a sign reading “the government is breaking the law” before glueing themselves to the display. A statement from the British Library said its security team “intervened to prevent further damage to the case, which was minimal” and “Magna Carta itself remains undamaged”. The gallery housing the display is closed until further notice, it added. The two women were released on bail and are due to appear at Westminster magistrates court on 20 June. This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics UK news The Observer news Share Reuse this content Judy Bruce, 85, left, from Swansea, and the Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, protesting at the British Library in London. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/PA View image in fullscreen Judy Bruce, 85, left, from Swansea, and the Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, protesting at the British Library in London. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/PA This article is more than 1 year old Two women charged over Magna Carta protest in London This article is more than 1 year old Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, and Judith Bruce, 85, target enclosure around historic document with hammer and chisel at British Library Two women in their 80s have been charged with criminal damage after the glass around Magna Carta at the British Library was attacked. The Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, and Judith Bruce, 85, from Swansea, were arrested on Friday morning and have been charged with criminal damage, the Metropolitan police said. The two protesters targeted the protective enclosure around the historic document with a hammer and chisel on Friday morning. Just Stop Oil said the pair then held up a sign reading “the government is breaking the law” before glueing themselves to the display. A statement from the British Library said its security team “intervened to prevent further damage to the case, which was minimal” and “Magna Carta itself remains undamaged”. The gallery housing the display is closed until further notice, it added. The two women were released on bail and are due to appear at Westminster magistrates court on 20 June. This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics UK news The Observer news Share Reuse this content Judy Bruce, 85, left, from Swansea, and the Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, protesting at the British Library in London. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/PA View image in fullscreen Judy Bruce, 85, left, from Swansea, and the Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, protesting at the British Library in London. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/PA Judy Bruce, 85, left, from Swansea, and the Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, protesting at the British Library in London. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/PA View image in fullscreen Judy Bruce, 85, left, from Swansea, and the Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, protesting at the British Library in London. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/PA Judy Bruce, 85, left, from Swansea, and the Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, protesting at the British Library in London. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/PA View image in fullscreen Judy Bruce, 85, left, from Swansea, and the Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, protesting at the British Library in London. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/PA Judy Bruce, 85, left, from Swansea, and the Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, protesting at the British Library in London. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/PA View image in fullscreen Judy Bruce, 85, left, from Swansea, and the Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, protesting at the British Library in London. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/PA Judy Bruce, 85, left, from Swansea, and the Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, protesting at the British Library in London. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/PA Judy Bruce, 85, left, from Swansea, and the Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, protesting at the British Library in London. Photograph: Just Stop Oil/PA This article is more than 1 year old Two women charged over Magna Carta protest in London This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Two women charged over Magna Carta protest in London This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Two women charged over Magna Carta protest in London This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, and Judith Bruce, 85, target enclosure around historic document with hammer and chisel at British Library Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, and Judith Bruce, 85, target enclosure around historic document with hammer and chisel at British Library Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, and Judith Bruce, 85, target enclosure around historic document with hammer and chisel at British Library Two women in their 80s have been charged with criminal damage after the glass around Magna Carta at the British Library was attacked. The Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, and Judith Bruce, 85, from Swansea, were arrested on Friday morning and have been charged with criminal damage, the Metropolitan police said. The two protesters targeted the protective enclosure around the historic document with a hammer and chisel on Friday morning. Just Stop Oil said the pair then held up a sign reading “the government is breaking the law” before glueing themselves to the display. A statement from the British Library said its security team “intervened to prevent further damage to the case, which was minimal” and “Magna Carta itself remains undamaged”. The gallery housing the display is closed until further notice, it added. The two women were released on bail and are due to appear at Westminster magistrates court on 20 June. This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics UK news The Observer news Share Reuse this content Two women in their 80s have been charged with criminal damage after the glass around Magna Carta at the British Library was attacked. The Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, and Judith Bruce, 85, from Swansea, were arrested on Friday morning and have been charged with criminal damage, the Metropolitan police said. The two protesters targeted the protective enclosure around the historic document with a hammer and chisel on Friday morning. Just Stop Oil said the pair then held up a sign reading “the government is breaking the law” before glueing themselves to the display. A statement from the British Library said its security team “intervened to prevent further damage to the case, which was minimal” and “Magna Carta itself remains undamaged”. The gallery housing the display is closed until further notice, it added. The two women were released on bail and are due to appear at Westminster magistrates court on 20 June. This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics UK news The Observer news Share Reuse this content Two women in their 80s have been charged with criminal damage after the glass around Magna Carta at the British Library was attacked. The Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, and Judith Bruce, 85, from Swansea, were arrested on Friday morning and have been charged with criminal damage, the Metropolitan police said. The two protesters targeted the protective enclosure around the historic document with a hammer and chisel on Friday morning. Just Stop Oil said the pair then held up a sign reading “the government is breaking the law” before glueing themselves to the display. A statement from the British Library said its security team “intervened to prevent further damage to the case, which was minimal” and “Magna Carta itself remains undamaged”. The gallery housing the display is closed until further notice, it added. The two women were released on bail and are due to appear at Westminster magistrates court on 20 June. Two women in their 80s have been charged with criminal damage after the glass around Magna Carta at the British Library was attacked. The Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, and Judith Bruce, 85, from Swansea, were arrested on Friday morning and have been charged with criminal damage, the Metropolitan police said. The two protesters targeted the protective enclosure around the historic document with a hammer and chisel on Friday morning. Just Stop Oil said the pair then held up a sign reading “the government is breaking the law” before glueing themselves to the display. A statement from the British Library said its security team “intervened to prevent further damage to the case, which was minimal” and “Magna Carta itself remains undamaged”. The gallery housing the display is closed until further notice, it added. The two women were released on bail and are due to appear at Westminster magistrates court on 20 June. Two women in their 80s have been charged with criminal damage after the glass around Magna Carta at the British Library was attacked. The Rev Sue Parfitt, 82, from Bristol, and Judith Bruce, 85, from Swansea, were arrested on Friday morning and have been charged with criminal damage, the Metropolitan police said. The two protesters targeted the protective enclosure around the historic document with a hammer and chisel on Friday morning. Just Stop Oil said the pair then held up a sign reading “the government is breaking the law” before glueing themselves to the display. A statement from the British Library said its security team “intervened to prevent further damage to the case, which was minimal” and “Magna Carta itself remains undamaged”. The gallery housing the display is closed until further notice, it added. The two women were released on bail and are due to appear at Westminster magistrates court on 20 June. This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics UK news The Observer news Share Reuse this content |
Rishi Sunak accused of scaremongering over UK students’ Gaza protest camps
The student protest camp at King’s College, Cambridge, one of 15 that have been established across England and Scotland. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images View image in fullscreen The student protest camp at King’s College, Cambridge, one of 15 that have been established across England and Scotland. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Rishi Sunak accused of scaremongering over UK students’ Gaza protest camps This article is more than 1 year old Academics call for government to avoid inflaming situation but Jewish students say they want to feel safe Academics have called on the government to avoid “inflaming” the situation on British campuses, as students protest against the war in Gaza and their universities’ links to Israel. Some senior staff accused Rishi Sunak of “scaremongering” by summoning vice-chancellors to Downing Street last Thursday to urge them to “take personal responsibility” for protecting Jewish students. There are now 15 student protest encampments across England and Scotland, although vice-chancellors and academics say they are overwhelmingly peaceful, unlike the dramatic scenes on US college campuses, where hundreds of students and faculty members have been arrested. Prof Steve West, former president of Universities UK who is vice-chancellor of the University of the West of England in Bristol, said there was “no evidence” student protests in the UK were getting out of hand. He said: “I would say to the government: please work with us to make sure we don’t inadvertently inflame a situation that is currently being managed well.” West told the Observer : “We are trying to straddle complex and nuanced issues and manage tensions with an understanding of our own university environment, our staff and our students. I would argue that we are better placed to manage that than any member of government.” A growing number of academics have backed students’ demands that their universities cut ties with companies supplying arms to Israel. Hundreds of staff at universities including Cambridge , Oxford and Edinburgh have signed open letters expressing solidarity with the students camping out in tents and accusing their universities of complicity in Israeli attacks on Palestinians in Gaza. Staff are also giving food, sleeping bags and hot water bottles. Members of the University and Colleges Union at Leeds University have called for academics to organise talks or “teach outs” alongside the tents. Vice-chancellors insist they have no desire to quell challenge or stop difficult discussions on their campuses, arguing that this is part of the core purpose of a university. But the Union of Jewish Students (UJS) has called on them to ensure that Jewish students feel safe. View image in fullscreen Protesters gather around tents at the King’s College protest camp. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images Oxford professor Naomi Waltham-Smith, who has signed the Oxford pro-Palestinian solidarity letter, said: “One might say the prime minister’s actions this week were an attempt to scaremonger that we might see unlawful actions. I think it is irresponsible to raise anxieties among students.” She argued that students’ “sense of security” was threatened far more by “other issues the government isn’t addressing”, including funding of universities, the cost of living crisis and the “crisis of productivity” that students would graduate into. Waltham-Smith described the atmosphere at the Oxford encampment she visited this week as peaceful and “more like an extension of a tutorial”. I overheard students chatting in some depth about geopolitical issues and disagreeing but in reasoned intellectual conversations,” she said. Edward Isaacs, the president of the UJS, told a round table hosted by the prime minister on Friday that they were in the middle of “the worst antisemitism crisis on campus that we have seen for a generation”. He cited hundreds of calls to the UJS’s welfare hotline, and told the 17 vice-chancellors present that Jewish students felt “alone, marginalised and vulnerable ”. Downing Street said the discussions on Thursday covered the importance of using disciplinary procedures to crack down on any students who incited hatred or violence, as well as concerns over non-students joining campus protests and the role of the police. Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute thinktank, said: “Vice-chancellors are definitely right not to invite police on to campus. That is something you regret for decades as the images live on in people’s minds.” Academic freedom gave university staff more “room to manoeuvre” than employees in many other professions. But Hillman added: “It is reasonable to ask, as an academic, whether some of your students will feel less safe as a result of you signing this letter.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Students The Observer Israel-Gaza war Higher education Protest Universities Rishi Sunak Judaism news Share Reuse this content The student protest camp at King’s College, Cambridge, one of 15 that have been established across England and Scotland. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images View image in fullscreen The student protest camp at King’s College, Cambridge, one of 15 that have been established across England and Scotland. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Rishi Sunak accused of scaremongering over UK students’ Gaza protest camps This article is more than 1 year old Academics call for government to avoid inflaming situation but Jewish students say they want to feel safe Academics have called on the government to avoid “inflaming” the situation on British campuses, as students protest against the war in Gaza and their universities’ links to Israel. Some senior staff accused Rishi Sunak of “scaremongering” by summoning vice-chancellors to Downing Street last Thursday to urge them to “take personal responsibility” for protecting Jewish students. There are now 15 student protest encampments across England and Scotland, although vice-chancellors and academics say they are overwhelmingly peaceful, unlike the dramatic scenes on US college campuses, where hundreds of students and faculty members have been arrested. Prof Steve West, former president of Universities UK who is vice-chancellor of the University of the West of England in Bristol, said there was “no evidence” student protests in the UK were getting out of hand. He said: “I would say to the government: please work with us to make sure we don’t inadvertently inflame a situation that is currently being managed well.” West told the Observer : “We are trying to straddle complex and nuanced issues and manage tensions with an understanding of our own university environment, our staff and our students. I would argue that we are better placed to manage that than any member of government.” A growing number of academics have backed students’ demands that their universities cut ties with companies supplying arms to Israel. Hundreds of staff at universities including Cambridge , Oxford and Edinburgh have signed open letters expressing solidarity with the students camping out in tents and accusing their universities of complicity in Israeli attacks on Palestinians in Gaza. Staff are also giving food, sleeping bags and hot water bottles. Members of the University and Colleges Union at Leeds University have called for academics to organise talks or “teach outs” alongside the tents. Vice-chancellors insist they have no desire to quell challenge or stop difficult discussions on their campuses, arguing that this is part of the core purpose of a university. But the Union of Jewish Students (UJS) has called on them to ensure that Jewish students feel safe. View image in fullscreen Protesters gather around tents at the King’s College protest camp. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images Oxford professor Naomi Waltham-Smith, who has signed the Oxford pro-Palestinian solidarity letter, said: “One might say the prime minister’s actions this week were an attempt to scaremonger that we might see unlawful actions. I think it is irresponsible to raise anxieties among students.” She argued that students’ “sense of security” was threatened far more by “other issues the government isn’t addressing”, including funding of universities, the cost of living crisis and the “crisis of productivity” that students would graduate into. Waltham-Smith described the atmosphere at the Oxford encampment she visited this week as peaceful and “more like an extension of a tutorial”. I overheard students chatting in some depth about geopolitical issues and disagreeing but in reasoned intellectual conversations,” she said. Edward Isaacs, the president of the UJS, told a round table hosted by the prime minister on Friday that they were in the middle of “the worst antisemitism crisis on campus that we have seen for a generation”. He cited hundreds of calls to the UJS’s welfare hotline, and told the 17 vice-chancellors present that Jewish students felt “alone, marginalised and vulnerable ”. Downing Street said the discussions on Thursday covered the importance of using disciplinary procedures to crack down on any students who incited hatred or violence, as well as concerns over non-students joining campus protests and the role of the police. Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute thinktank, said: “Vice-chancellors are definitely right not to invite police on to campus. That is something you regret for decades as the images live on in people’s minds.” Academic freedom gave university staff more “room to manoeuvre” than employees in many other professions. But Hillman added: “It is reasonable to ask, as an academic, whether some of your students will feel less safe as a result of you signing this letter.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Students The Observer Israel-Gaza war Higher education Protest Universities Rishi Sunak Judaism news Share Reuse this content The student protest camp at King’s College, Cambridge, one of 15 that have been established across England and Scotland. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images View image in fullscreen The student protest camp at King’s College, Cambridge, one of 15 that have been established across England and Scotland. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images The student protest camp at King’s College, Cambridge, one of 15 that have been established across England and Scotland. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images View image in fullscreen The student protest camp at King’s College, Cambridge, one of 15 that have been established across England and Scotland. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images The student protest camp at King’s College, Cambridge, one of 15 that have been established across England and Scotland. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images View image in fullscreen The student protest camp at King’s College, Cambridge, one of 15 that have been established across England and Scotland. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images The student protest camp at King’s College, Cambridge, one of 15 that have been established across England and Scotland. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images View image in fullscreen The student protest camp at King’s College, Cambridge, one of 15 that have been established across England and Scotland. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images The student protest camp at King’s College, Cambridge, one of 15 that have been established across England and Scotland. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images The student protest camp at King’s College, Cambridge, one of 15 that have been established across England and Scotland. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Rishi Sunak accused of scaremongering over UK students’ Gaza protest camps This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Rishi Sunak accused of scaremongering over UK students’ Gaza protest camps This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Rishi Sunak accused of scaremongering over UK students’ Gaza protest camps This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Academics call for government to avoid inflaming situation but Jewish students say they want to feel safe Academics call for government to avoid inflaming situation but Jewish students say they want to feel safe Academics call for government to avoid inflaming situation but Jewish students say they want to feel safe Academics have called on the government to avoid “inflaming” the situation on British campuses, as students protest against the war in Gaza and their universities’ links to Israel. Some senior staff accused Rishi Sunak of “scaremongering” by summoning vice-chancellors to Downing Street last Thursday to urge them to “take personal responsibility” for protecting Jewish students. There are now 15 student protest encampments across England and Scotland, although vice-chancellors and academics say they are overwhelmingly peaceful, unlike the dramatic scenes on US college campuses, where hundreds of students and faculty members have been arrested. Prof Steve West, former president of Universities UK who is vice-chancellor of the University of the West of England in Bristol, said there was “no evidence” student protests in the UK were getting out of hand. He said: “I would say to the government: please work with us to make sure we don’t inadvertently inflame a situation that is currently being managed well.” West told the Observer : “We are trying to straddle complex and nuanced issues and manage tensions with an understanding of our own university environment, our staff and our students. I would argue that we are better placed to manage that than any member of government.” A growing number of academics have backed students’ demands that their universities cut ties with companies supplying arms to Israel. Hundreds of staff at universities including Cambridge , Oxford and Edinburgh have signed open letters expressing solidarity with the students camping out in tents and accusing their universities of complicity in Israeli attacks on Palestinians in Gaza. Staff are also giving food, sleeping bags and hot water bottles. Members of the University and Colleges Union at Leeds University have called for academics to organise talks or “teach outs” alongside the tents. Vice-chancellors insist they have no desire to quell challenge or stop difficult discussions on their campuses, arguing that this is part of the core purpose of a university. But the Union of Jewish Students (UJS) has called on them to ensure that Jewish students feel safe. View image in fullscreen Protesters gather around tents at the King’s College protest camp. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images Oxford professor Naomi Waltham-Smith, who has signed the Oxford pro-Palestinian solidarity letter, said: “One might say the prime minister’s actions this week were an attempt to scaremonger that we might see unlawful actions. I think it is irresponsible to raise anxieties among students.” She argued that students’ “sense of security” was threatened far more by “other issues the government isn’t addressing”, including funding of universities, the cost of living crisis and the “crisis of productivity” that students would graduate into. Waltham-Smith described the atmosphere at the Oxford encampment she visited this week as peaceful and “more like an extension of a tutorial”. I overheard students chatting in some depth about geopolitical issues and disagreeing but in reasoned intellectual conversations,” she said. Edward Isaacs, the president of the UJS, told a round table hosted by the prime minister on Friday that they were in the middle of “the worst antisemitism crisis on campus that we have seen for a generation”. He cited hundreds of calls to the UJS’s welfare hotline, and told the 17 vice-chancellors present that Jewish students felt “alone, marginalised and vulnerable ”. Downing Street said the discussions on Thursday covered the importance of using disciplinary procedures to crack down on any students who incited hatred or violence, as well as concerns over non-students joining campus protests and the role of the police. Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute thinktank, said: “Vice-chancellors are definitely right not to invite police on to campus. That is something you regret for decades as the images live on in people’s minds.” Academic freedom gave university staff more “room to manoeuvre” than employees in many other professions. But Hillman added: “It is reasonable to ask, as an academic, whether some of your students will feel less safe as a result of you signing this letter.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Students The Observer Israel-Gaza war Higher education Protest Universities Rishi Sunak Judaism news Share Reuse this content Academics have called on the government to avoid “inflaming” the situation on British campuses, as students protest against the war in Gaza and their universities’ links to Israel. Some senior staff accused Rishi Sunak of “scaremongering” by summoning vice-chancellors to Downing Street last Thursday to urge them to “take personal responsibility” for protecting Jewish students. There are now 15 student protest encampments across England and Scotland, although vice-chancellors and academics say they are overwhelmingly peaceful, unlike the dramatic scenes on US college campuses, where hundreds of students and faculty members have been arrested. Prof Steve West, former president of Universities UK who is vice-chancellor of the University of the West of England in Bristol, said there was “no evidence” student protests in the UK were getting out of hand. He said: “I would say to the government: please work with us to make sure we don’t inadvertently inflame a situation that is currently being managed well.” West told the Observer : “We are trying to straddle complex and nuanced issues and manage tensions with an understanding of our own university environment, our staff and our students. I would argue that we are better placed to manage that than any member of government.” A growing number of academics have backed students’ demands that their universities cut ties with companies supplying arms to Israel. Hundreds of staff at universities including Cambridge , Oxford and Edinburgh have signed open letters expressing solidarity with the students camping out in tents and accusing their universities of complicity in Israeli attacks on Palestinians in Gaza. Staff are also giving food, sleeping bags and hot water bottles. Members of the University and Colleges Union at Leeds University have called for academics to organise talks or “teach outs” alongside the tents. Vice-chancellors insist they have no desire to quell challenge or stop difficult discussions on their campuses, arguing that this is part of the core purpose of a university. But the Union of Jewish Students (UJS) has called on them to ensure that Jewish students feel safe. View image in fullscreen Protesters gather around tents at the King’s College protest camp. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images Oxford professor Naomi Waltham-Smith, who has signed the Oxford pro-Palestinian solidarity letter, said: “One might say the prime minister’s actions this week were an attempt to scaremonger that we might see unlawful actions. I think it is irresponsible to raise anxieties among students.” She argued that students’ “sense of security” was threatened far more by “other issues the government isn’t addressing”, including funding of universities, the cost of living crisis and the “crisis of productivity” that students would graduate into. Waltham-Smith described the atmosphere at the Oxford encampment she visited this week as peaceful and “more like an extension of a tutorial”. I overheard students chatting in some depth about geopolitical issues and disagreeing but in reasoned intellectual conversations,” she said. Edward Isaacs, the president of the UJS, told a round table hosted by the prime minister on Friday that they were in the middle of “the worst antisemitism crisis on campus that we have seen for a generation”. He cited hundreds of calls to the UJS’s welfare hotline, and told the 17 vice-chancellors present that Jewish students felt “alone, marginalised and vulnerable ”. Downing Street said the discussions on Thursday covered the importance of using disciplinary procedures to crack down on any students who incited hatred or violence, as well as concerns over non-students joining campus protests and the role of the police. Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute thinktank, said: “Vice-chancellors are definitely right not to invite police on to campus. That is something you regret for decades as the images live on in people’s minds.” Academic freedom gave university staff more “room to manoeuvre” than employees in many other professions. But Hillman added: “It is reasonable to ask, as an academic, whether some of your students will feel less safe as a result of you signing this letter.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Students The Observer Israel-Gaza war Higher education Protest Universities Rishi Sunak Judaism news Share Reuse this content Academics have called on the government to avoid “inflaming” the situation on British campuses, as students protest against the war in Gaza and their universities’ links to Israel. Some senior staff accused Rishi Sunak of “scaremongering” by summoning vice-chancellors to Downing Street last Thursday to urge them to “take personal responsibility” for protecting Jewish students. There are now 15 student protest encampments across England and Scotland, although vice-chancellors and academics say they are overwhelmingly peaceful, unlike the dramatic scenes on US college campuses, where hundreds of students and faculty members have been arrested. Prof Steve West, former president of Universities UK who is vice-chancellor of the University of the West of England in Bristol, said there was “no evidence” student protests in the UK were getting out of hand. He said: “I would say to the government: please work with us to make sure we don’t inadvertently inflame a situation that is currently being managed well.” West told the Observer : “We are trying to straddle complex and nuanced issues and manage tensions with an understanding of our own university environment, our staff and our students. I would argue that we are better placed to manage that than any member of government.” A growing number of academics have backed students’ demands that their universities cut ties with companies supplying arms to Israel. Hundreds of staff at universities including Cambridge , Oxford and Edinburgh have signed open letters expressing solidarity with the students camping out in tents and accusing their universities of complicity in Israeli attacks on Palestinians in Gaza. Staff are also giving food, sleeping bags and hot water bottles. Members of the University and Colleges Union at Leeds University have called for academics to organise talks or “teach outs” alongside the tents. Vice-chancellors insist they have no desire to quell challenge or stop difficult discussions on their campuses, arguing that this is part of the core purpose of a university. But the Union of Jewish Students (UJS) has called on them to ensure that Jewish students feel safe. View image in fullscreen Protesters gather around tents at the King’s College protest camp. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images Oxford professor Naomi Waltham-Smith, who has signed the Oxford pro-Palestinian solidarity letter, said: “One might say the prime minister’s actions this week were an attempt to scaremonger that we might see unlawful actions. I think it is irresponsible to raise anxieties among students.” She argued that students’ “sense of security” was threatened far more by “other issues the government isn’t addressing”, including funding of universities, the cost of living crisis and the “crisis of productivity” that students would graduate into. Waltham-Smith described the atmosphere at the Oxford encampment she visited this week as peaceful and “more like an extension of a tutorial”. I overheard students chatting in some depth about geopolitical issues and disagreeing but in reasoned intellectual conversations,” she said. Edward Isaacs, the president of the UJS, told a round table hosted by the prime minister on Friday that they were in the middle of “the worst antisemitism crisis on campus that we have seen for a generation”. He cited hundreds of calls to the UJS’s welfare hotline, and told the 17 vice-chancellors present that Jewish students felt “alone, marginalised and vulnerable ”. Downing Street said the discussions on Thursday covered the importance of using disciplinary procedures to crack down on any students who incited hatred or violence, as well as concerns over non-students joining campus protests and the role of the police. Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute thinktank, said: “Vice-chancellors are definitely right not to invite police on to campus. That is something you regret for decades as the images live on in people’s minds.” Academic freedom gave university staff more “room to manoeuvre” than employees in many other professions. But Hillman added: “It is reasonable to ask, as an academic, whether some of your students will feel less safe as a result of you signing this letter.” Academics have called on the government to avoid “inflaming” the situation on British campuses, as students protest against the war in Gaza and their universities’ links to Israel. Some senior staff accused Rishi Sunak of “scaremongering” by summoning vice-chancellors to Downing Street last Thursday to urge them to “take personal responsibility” for protecting Jewish students. There are now 15 student protest encampments across England and Scotland, although vice-chancellors and academics say they are overwhelmingly peaceful, unlike the dramatic scenes on US college campuses, where hundreds of students and faculty members have been arrested. Prof Steve West, former president of Universities UK who is vice-chancellor of the University of the West of England in Bristol, said there was “no evidence” student protests in the UK were getting out of hand. He said: “I would say to the government: please work with us to make sure we don’t inadvertently inflame a situation that is currently being managed well.” West told the Observer : “We are trying to straddle complex and nuanced issues and manage tensions with an understanding of our own university environment, our staff and our students. I would argue that we are better placed to manage that than any member of government.” A growing number of academics have backed students’ demands that their universities cut ties with companies supplying arms to Israel. Hundreds of staff at universities including Cambridge , Oxford and Edinburgh have signed open letters expressing solidarity with the students camping out in tents and accusing their universities of complicity in Israeli attacks on Palestinians in Gaza. Staff are also giving food, sleeping bags and hot water bottles. Members of the University and Colleges Union at Leeds University have called for academics to organise talks or “teach outs” alongside the tents. Vice-chancellors insist they have no desire to quell challenge or stop difficult discussions on their campuses, arguing that this is part of the core purpose of a university. But the Union of Jewish Students (UJS) has called on them to ensure that Jewish students feel safe. View image in fullscreen Protesters gather around tents at the King’s College protest camp. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images Oxford professor Naomi Waltham-Smith, who has signed the Oxford pro-Palestinian solidarity letter, said: “One might say the prime minister’s actions this week were an attempt to scaremonger that we might see unlawful actions. I think it is irresponsible to raise anxieties among students.” She argued that students’ “sense of security” was threatened far more by “other issues the government isn’t addressing”, including funding of universities, the cost of living crisis and the “crisis of productivity” that students would graduate into. Waltham-Smith described the atmosphere at the Oxford encampment she visited this week as peaceful and “more like an extension of a tutorial”. I overheard students chatting in some depth about geopolitical issues and disagreeing but in reasoned intellectual conversations,” she said. Edward Isaacs, the president of the UJS, told a round table hosted by the prime minister on Friday that they were in the middle of “the worst antisemitism crisis on campus that we have seen for a generation”. He cited hundreds of calls to the UJS’s welfare hotline, and told the 17 vice-chancellors present that Jewish students felt “alone, marginalised and vulnerable ”. Downing Street said the discussions on Thursday covered the importance of using disciplinary procedures to crack down on any students who incited hatred or violence, as well as concerns over non-students joining campus protests and the role of the police. Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute thinktank, said: “Vice-chancellors are definitely right not to invite police on to campus. That is something you regret for decades as the images live on in people’s minds.” Academic freedom gave university staff more “room to manoeuvre” than employees in many other professions. But Hillman added: “It is reasonable to ask, as an academic, whether some of your students will feel less safe as a result of you signing this letter.” Academics have called on the government to avoid “inflaming” the situation on British campuses, as students protest against the war in Gaza and their universities’ links to Israel. Some senior staff accused Rishi Sunak of “scaremongering” by summoning vice-chancellors to Downing Street last Thursday to urge them to “take personal responsibility” for protecting Jewish students. There are now 15 student protest encampments across England and Scotland, although vice-chancellors and academics say they are overwhelmingly peaceful, unlike the dramatic scenes on US college campuses, where hundreds of students and faculty members have been arrested. Prof Steve West, former president of Universities UK who is vice-chancellor of the University of the West of England in Bristol, said there was “no evidence” student protests in the UK were getting out of hand. He said: “I would say to the government: please work with us to make sure we don’t inadvertently inflame a situation that is currently being managed well.” West told the Observer : “We are trying to straddle complex and nuanced issues and manage tensions with an understanding of our own university environment, our staff and our students. I would argue that we are better placed to manage that than any member of government.” A growing number of academics have backed students’ demands that their universities cut ties with companies supplying arms to Israel. Hundreds of staff at universities including Cambridge , Oxford and Edinburgh have signed open letters expressing solidarity with the students camping out in tents and accusing their universities of complicity in Israeli attacks on Palestinians in Gaza. Staff are also giving food, sleeping bags and hot water bottles. Members of the University and Colleges Union at Leeds University have called for academics to organise talks or “teach outs” alongside the tents. Vice-chancellors insist they have no desire to quell challenge or stop difficult discussions on their campuses, arguing that this is part of the core purpose of a university. But the Union of Jewish Students (UJS) has called on them to ensure that Jewish students feel safe. Oxford professor Naomi Waltham-Smith, who has signed the Oxford pro-Palestinian solidarity letter, said: “One might say the prime minister’s actions this week were an attempt to scaremonger that we might see unlawful actions. I think it is irresponsible to raise anxieties among students.” She argued that students’ “sense of security” was threatened far more by “other issues the government isn’t addressing”, including funding of universities, the cost of living crisis and the “crisis of productivity” that students would graduate into. Waltham-Smith described the atmosphere at the Oxford encampment she visited this week as peaceful and “more like an extension of a tutorial”. I overheard students chatting in some depth about geopolitical issues and disagreeing but in reasoned intellectual conversations,” she said. Edward Isaacs, the president of the UJS, told a round table hosted by the prime minister on Friday that they were in the middle of “the worst antisemitism crisis on campus that we have seen for a generation”. He cited hundreds of calls to the UJS’s welfare hotline, and told the 17 vice-chancellors present that Jewish students felt “alone, marginalised and vulnerable ”. Downing Street said the discussions on Thursday covered the importance of using disciplinary procedures to crack down on any students who incited hatred or violence, as well as concerns over non-students joining campus protests and the role of the police. Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute thinktank, said: “Vice-chancellors are definitely right not to invite police on to campus. That is something you regret for decades as the images live on in people’s minds.” Academic freedom gave university staff more “room to manoeuvre” than employees in many other professions. But Hillman added: “It is reasonable to ask, as an academic, whether some of your students will feel less safe as a result of you signing this letter.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Students The Observer Israel-Gaza war Higher education Protest Universities Rishi Sunak Judaism news Share Reuse this content Students The Observer Israel-Gaza war Higher education Protest Universities Rishi Sunak Judaism news |
Labour could lose a wide range of voters over Gaza, not just Muslim ones
Keir Starmer and his wife, Victoria, leave a polling station in London after voting in local elections on 2 May. Photograph: Benjamin Cremel/AFP/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Keir Starmer and his wife, Victoria, leave a polling station in London after voting in local elections on 2 May. Photograph: Benjamin Cremel/AFP/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Letters Labour could lose a wide range of voters over Gaza, not just Muslim ones This article is more than 1 year old Readers say the party has alienated many people beyond Muslim and leftwing voters, and may struggle to get them back Miqdaad Versi’s article about Labour and the Muslim community was interesting ( There is a way for Starmer’s Labour to fix the big rift with Muslim voters – if it has the will, 6 May ). However, while older Muslims tended to support the Labour party in the past and were loyal, younger generations have become extremely savvy and knowledgeable about local and world politics. They will not blindly follow politicians. The hegemony enjoyed by the two main parties is slowly disintegrating, and many are now considering smaller parties. Therefore I am not sure the Labour party will gain the trust and support of the community in the future, and I would be extremely surprised if it does. In my area, five independent candidates defeated Labour’s candidates in the local elections . Baser Akoodie Batley, West Yorkshire Great to hear the disenfranchised Labour-leaning Muslim voice in Britain, thanks to Miqdaad Versi. His point about Labour “core values of human rights, justice and international law” is important. But the exclusive focus on Muslim voters in relation to Labour is misleading. Experts were doing the same thing after the local elections, talking about this portion of the electorate as if it were the only demographic that Labour’s disgraceful policies on Gaza and Israel had alienated. Implying that only Muslim votes were lost because of this is at best simplistic and at worst a wilful manipulation of the truth. One effect of the campus protests in the US has been to allow students in other countries to realise that they aren’t alone. Paul Gander London Labour’s response to losing Muslim votes in recent local elections misses the point ( Labour ‘working to get support back’ after losing votes over Gaza stance, 5 May ). To say “the better lives that people want for the Palestinian people is something the Labour leadership shares” is a wholly inadequate response to what many people see in Gaza. People want a stop to the slaughter and destruction of the Palestinian people and their society. And they want the actions of the Israeli government and army to be condemned. To call for “better lives” in the face of 35,000 deaths, destitution and the rising threat of famine suggests that the Labour leadership does not understand or care about the depth of feeling of many people in this country, not just Muslims. Geoff Skinner Kensal Green, London Martin Kettle is right to question the assumption that discontent with our politicians’ response to Gaza comes only from “the Muslim vote”, or “the left” ( If Keir Starmer isn’t careful, Gaza could do for him what the Iraq war did for Blair, 9 May ). There are many who are neither Muslim nor left, but react with horror and disgust to the spectacle of a civilised, articulate people reduced to clustering around tiny body bags and moving from one rubble heap to another to escape merciless bombardment. We would feel – did feel, on 7 October – this disgust whether the victims were Palestinian, Jewish or anyone else. Accusations of antisemitism are misplaced. Our disgust encompasses Hamas too, but we had perhaps hoped for better from Israel, and from politicians claiming to speak for us. Peter Millen Huddersfield, West Yorkshire Explore more on these topics Labour Gaza Israel-Gaza war Keir Starmer Local elections Local elections 2024 Local politics letters Share Reuse this content Keir Starmer and his wife, Victoria, leave a polling station in London after voting in local elections on 2 May. Photograph: Benjamin Cremel/AFP/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Keir Starmer and his wife, Victoria, leave a polling station in London after voting in local elections on 2 May. Photograph: Benjamin Cremel/AFP/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Letters Labour could lose a wide range of voters over Gaza, not just Muslim ones This article is more than 1 year old Readers say the party has alienated many people beyond Muslim and leftwing voters, and may struggle to get them back Miqdaad Versi’s article about Labour and the Muslim community was interesting ( There is a way for Starmer’s Labour to fix the big rift with Muslim voters – if it has the will, 6 May ). However, while older Muslims tended to support the Labour party in the past and were loyal, younger generations have become extremely savvy and knowledgeable about local and world politics. They will not blindly follow politicians. The hegemony enjoyed by the two main parties is slowly disintegrating, and many are now considering smaller parties. Therefore I am not sure the Labour party will gain the trust and support of the community in the future, and I would be extremely surprised if it does. In my area, five independent candidates defeated Labour’s candidates in the local elections . Baser Akoodie Batley, West Yorkshire Great to hear the disenfranchised Labour-leaning Muslim voice in Britain, thanks to Miqdaad Versi. His point about Labour “core values of human rights, justice and international law” is important. But the exclusive focus on Muslim voters in relation to Labour is misleading. Experts were doing the same thing after the local elections, talking about this portion of the electorate as if it were the only demographic that Labour’s disgraceful policies on Gaza and Israel had alienated. Implying that only Muslim votes were lost because of this is at best simplistic and at worst a wilful manipulation of the truth. One effect of the campus protests in the US has been to allow students in other countries to realise that they aren’t alone. Paul Gander London Labour’s response to losing Muslim votes in recent local elections misses the point ( Labour ‘working to get support back’ after losing votes over Gaza stance, 5 May ). To say “the better lives that people want for the Palestinian people is something the Labour leadership shares” is a wholly inadequate response to what many people see in Gaza. People want a stop to the slaughter and destruction of the Palestinian people and their society. And they want the actions of the Israeli government and army to be condemned. To call for “better lives” in the face of 35,000 deaths, destitution and the rising threat of famine suggests that the Labour leadership does not understand or care about the depth of feeling of many people in this country, not just Muslims. Geoff Skinner Kensal Green, London Martin Kettle is right to question the assumption that discontent with our politicians’ response to Gaza comes only from “the Muslim vote”, or “the left” ( If Keir Starmer isn’t careful, Gaza could do for him what the Iraq war did for Blair, 9 May ). There are many who are neither Muslim nor left, but react with horror and disgust to the spectacle of a civilised, articulate people reduced to clustering around tiny body bags and moving from one rubble heap to another to escape merciless bombardment. We would feel – did feel, on 7 October – this disgust whether the victims were Palestinian, Jewish or anyone else. Accusations of antisemitism are misplaced. Our disgust encompasses Hamas too, but we had perhaps hoped for better from Israel, and from politicians claiming to speak for us. Peter Millen Huddersfield, West Yorkshire Explore more on these topics Labour Gaza Israel-Gaza war Keir Starmer Local elections Local elections 2024 Local politics letters Share Reuse this content Keir Starmer and his wife, Victoria, leave a polling station in London after voting in local elections on 2 May. Photograph: Benjamin Cremel/AFP/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Keir Starmer and his wife, Victoria, leave a polling station in London after voting in local elections on 2 May. Photograph: Benjamin Cremel/AFP/Getty Images Keir Starmer and his wife, Victoria, leave a polling station in London after voting in local elections on 2 May. Photograph: Benjamin Cremel/AFP/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Keir Starmer and his wife, Victoria, leave a polling station in London after voting in local elections on 2 May. Photograph: Benjamin Cremel/AFP/Getty Images Keir Starmer and his wife, Victoria, leave a polling station in London after voting in local elections on 2 May. Photograph: Benjamin Cremel/AFP/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Keir Starmer and his wife, Victoria, leave a polling station in London after voting in local elections on 2 May. Photograph: Benjamin Cremel/AFP/Getty Images Keir Starmer and his wife, Victoria, leave a polling station in London after voting in local elections on 2 May. Photograph: Benjamin Cremel/AFP/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Keir Starmer and his wife, Victoria, leave a polling station in London after voting in local elections on 2 May. Photograph: Benjamin Cremel/AFP/Getty Images Keir Starmer and his wife, Victoria, leave a polling station in London after voting in local elections on 2 May. Photograph: Benjamin Cremel/AFP/Getty Images Keir Starmer and his wife, Victoria, leave a polling station in London after voting in local elections on 2 May. Photograph: Benjamin Cremel/AFP/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Letters Labour could lose a wide range of voters over Gaza, not just Muslim ones This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Letters Labour could lose a wide range of voters over Gaza, not just Muslim ones This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Letters Labour could lose a wide range of voters over Gaza, not just Muslim ones This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Letters Labour could lose a wide range of voters over Gaza, not just Muslim ones This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Readers say the party has alienated many people beyond Muslim and leftwing voters, and may struggle to get them back Readers say the party has alienated many people beyond Muslim and leftwing voters, and may struggle to get them back Readers say the party has alienated many people beyond Muslim and leftwing voters, and may struggle to get them back Miqdaad Versi’s article about Labour and the Muslim community was interesting ( There is a way for Starmer’s Labour to fix the big rift with Muslim voters – if it has the will, 6 May ). However, while older Muslims tended to support the Labour party in the past and were loyal, younger generations have become extremely savvy and knowledgeable about local and world politics. They will not blindly follow politicians. The hegemony enjoyed by the two main parties is slowly disintegrating, and many are now considering smaller parties. Therefore I am not sure the Labour party will gain the trust and support of the community in the future, and I would be extremely surprised if it does. In my area, five independent candidates defeated Labour’s candidates in the local elections . Baser Akoodie Batley, West Yorkshire Great to hear the disenfranchised Labour-leaning Muslim voice in Britain, thanks to Miqdaad Versi. His point about Labour “core values of human rights, justice and international law” is important. But the exclusive focus on Muslim voters in relation to Labour is misleading. Experts were doing the same thing after the local elections, talking about this portion of the electorate as if it were the only demographic that Labour’s disgraceful policies on Gaza and Israel had alienated. Implying that only Muslim votes were lost because of this is at best simplistic and at worst a wilful manipulation of the truth. One effect of the campus protests in the US has been to allow students in other countries to realise that they aren’t alone. Paul Gander London Labour’s response to losing Muslim votes in recent local elections misses the point ( Labour ‘working to get support back’ after losing votes over Gaza stance, 5 May ). To say “the better lives that people want for the Palestinian people is something the Labour leadership shares” is a wholly inadequate response to what many people see in Gaza. People want a stop to the slaughter and destruction of the Palestinian people and their society. And they want the actions of the Israeli government and army to be condemned. To call for “better lives” in the face of 35,000 deaths, destitution and the rising threat of famine suggests that the Labour leadership does not understand or care about the depth of feeling of many people in this country, not just Muslims. Geoff Skinner Kensal Green, London Martin Kettle is right to question the assumption that discontent with our politicians’ response to Gaza comes only from “the Muslim vote”, or “the left” ( If Keir Starmer isn’t careful, Gaza could do for him what the Iraq war did for Blair, 9 May ). There are many who are neither Muslim nor left, but react with horror and disgust to the spectacle of a civilised, articulate people reduced to clustering around tiny body bags and moving from one rubble heap to another to escape merciless bombardment. We would feel – did feel, on 7 October – this disgust whether the victims were Palestinian, Jewish or anyone else. Accusations of antisemitism are misplaced. Our disgust encompasses Hamas too, but we had perhaps hoped for better from Israel, and from politicians claiming to speak for us. Peter Millen Huddersfield, West Yorkshire Explore more on these topics Labour Gaza Israel-Gaza war Keir Starmer Local elections Local elections 2024 Local politics letters Share Reuse this content Miqdaad Versi’s article about Labour and the Muslim community was interesting ( There is a way for Starmer’s Labour to fix the big rift with Muslim voters – if it has the will, 6 May ). However, while older Muslims tended to support the Labour party in the past and were loyal, younger generations have become extremely savvy and knowledgeable about local and world politics. They will not blindly follow politicians. The hegemony enjoyed by the two main parties is slowly disintegrating, and many are now considering smaller parties. Therefore I am not sure the Labour party will gain the trust and support of the community in the future, and I would be extremely surprised if it does. In my area, five independent candidates defeated Labour’s candidates in the local elections . Baser Akoodie Batley, West Yorkshire Great to hear the disenfranchised Labour-leaning Muslim voice in Britain, thanks to Miqdaad Versi. His point about Labour “core values of human rights, justice and international law” is important. But the exclusive focus on Muslim voters in relation to Labour is misleading. Experts were doing the same thing after the local elections, talking about this portion of the electorate as if it were the only demographic that Labour’s disgraceful policies on Gaza and Israel had alienated. Implying that only Muslim votes were lost because of this is at best simplistic and at worst a wilful manipulation of the truth. One effect of the campus protests in the US has been to allow students in other countries to realise that they aren’t alone. Paul Gander London Labour’s response to losing Muslim votes in recent local elections misses the point ( Labour ‘working to get support back’ after losing votes over Gaza stance, 5 May ). To say “the better lives that people want for the Palestinian people is something the Labour leadership shares” is a wholly inadequate response to what many people see in Gaza. People want a stop to the slaughter and destruction of the Palestinian people and their society. And they want the actions of the Israeli government and army to be condemned. To call for “better lives” in the face of 35,000 deaths, destitution and the rising threat of famine suggests that the Labour leadership does not understand or care about the depth of feeling of many people in this country, not just Muslims. Geoff Skinner Kensal Green, London Martin Kettle is right to question the assumption that discontent with our politicians’ response to Gaza comes only from “the Muslim vote”, or “the left” ( If Keir Starmer isn’t careful, Gaza could do for him what the Iraq war did for Blair, 9 May ). There are many who are neither Muslim nor left, but react with horror and disgust to the spectacle of a civilised, articulate people reduced to clustering around tiny body bags and moving from one rubble heap to another to escape merciless bombardment. We would feel – did feel, on 7 October – this disgust whether the victims were Palestinian, Jewish or anyone else. Accusations of antisemitism are misplaced. Our disgust encompasses Hamas too, but we had perhaps hoped for better from Israel, and from politicians claiming to speak for us. Peter Millen Huddersfield, West Yorkshire Explore more on these topics Labour Gaza Israel-Gaza war Keir Starmer Local elections Local elections 2024 Local politics letters Share Reuse this content Miqdaad Versi’s article about Labour and the Muslim community was interesting ( There is a way for Starmer’s Labour to fix the big rift with Muslim voters – if it has the will, 6 May ). However, while older Muslims tended to support the Labour party in the past and were loyal, younger generations have become extremely savvy and knowledgeable about local and world politics. They will not blindly follow politicians. The hegemony enjoyed by the two main parties is slowly disintegrating, and many are now considering smaller parties. Therefore I am not sure the Labour party will gain the trust and support of the community in the future, and I would be extremely surprised if it does. In my area, five independent candidates defeated Labour’s candidates in the local elections . Baser Akoodie Batley, West Yorkshire Great to hear the disenfranchised Labour-leaning Muslim voice in Britain, thanks to Miqdaad Versi. His point about Labour “core values of human rights, justice and international law” is important. But the exclusive focus on Muslim voters in relation to Labour is misleading. Experts were doing the same thing after the local elections, talking about this portion of the electorate as if it were the only demographic that Labour’s disgraceful policies on Gaza and Israel had alienated. Implying that only Muslim votes were lost because of this is at best simplistic and at worst a wilful manipulation of the truth. One effect of the campus protests in the US has been to allow students in other countries to realise that they aren’t alone. Paul Gander London Labour’s response to losing Muslim votes in recent local elections misses the point ( Labour ‘working to get support back’ after losing votes over Gaza stance, 5 May ). To say “the better lives that people want for the Palestinian people is something the Labour leadership shares” is a wholly inadequate response to what many people see in Gaza. People want a stop to the slaughter and destruction of the Palestinian people and their society. And they want the actions of the Israeli government and army to be condemned. To call for “better lives” in the face of 35,000 deaths, destitution and the rising threat of famine suggests that the Labour leadership does not understand or care about the depth of feeling of many people in this country, not just Muslims. Geoff Skinner Kensal Green, London Martin Kettle is right to question the assumption that discontent with our politicians’ response to Gaza comes only from “the Muslim vote”, or “the left” ( If Keir Starmer isn’t careful, Gaza could do for him what the Iraq war did for Blair, 9 May ). There are many who are neither Muslim nor left, but react with horror and disgust to the spectacle of a civilised, articulate people reduced to clustering around tiny body bags and moving from one rubble heap to another to escape merciless bombardment. We would feel – did feel, on 7 October – this disgust whether the victims were Palestinian, Jewish or anyone else. Accusations of antisemitism are misplaced. Our disgust encompasses Hamas too, but we had perhaps hoped for better from Israel, and from politicians claiming to speak for us. Peter Millen Huddersfield, West Yorkshire Explore more on these topics Labour Gaza Israel-Gaza war Keir Starmer Local elections Local elections 2024 Local politics letters Share Reuse this content Miqdaad Versi’s article about Labour and the Muslim community was interesting ( There is a way for Starmer’s Labour to fix the big rift with Muslim voters – if it has the will, 6 May ). However, while older Muslims tended to support the Labour party in the past and were loyal, younger generations have become extremely savvy and knowledgeable about local and world politics. They will not blindly follow politicians. The hegemony enjoyed by the two main parties is slowly disintegrating, and many are now considering smaller parties. Therefore I am not sure the Labour party will gain the trust and support of the community in the future, and I would be extremely surprised if it does. In my area, five independent candidates defeated Labour’s candidates in the local elections . Baser Akoodie Batley, West Yorkshire Great to hear the disenfranchised Labour-leaning Muslim voice in Britain, thanks to Miqdaad Versi. His point about Labour “core values of human rights, justice and international law” is important. But the exclusive focus on Muslim voters in relation to Labour is misleading. Experts were doing the same thing after the local elections, talking about this portion of the electorate as if it were the only demographic that Labour’s disgraceful policies on Gaza and Israel had alienated. Implying that only Muslim votes were lost because of this is at best simplistic and at worst a wilful manipulation of the truth. One effect of the campus protests in the US has been to allow students in other countries to realise that they aren’t alone. Paul Gander London Labour’s response to losing Muslim votes in recent local elections misses the point ( Labour ‘working to get support back’ after losing votes over Gaza stance, 5 May ). To say “the better lives that people want for the Palestinian people is something the Labour leadership shares” is a wholly inadequate response to what many people see in Gaza. People want a stop to the slaughter and destruction of the Palestinian people and their society. And they want the actions of the Israeli government and army to be condemned. To call for “better lives” in the face of 35,000 deaths, destitution and the rising threat of famine suggests that the Labour leadership does not understand or care about the depth of feeling of many people in this country, not just Muslims. Geoff Skinner Kensal Green, London Martin Kettle is right to question the assumption that discontent with our politicians’ response to Gaza comes only from “the Muslim vote”, or “the left” ( If Keir Starmer isn’t careful, Gaza could do for him what the Iraq war did for Blair, 9 May ). There are many who are neither Muslim nor left, but react with horror and disgust to the spectacle of a civilised, articulate people reduced to clustering around tiny body bags and moving from one rubble heap to another to escape merciless bombardment. We would feel – did feel, on 7 October – this disgust whether the victims were Palestinian, Jewish or anyone else. Accusations of antisemitism are misplaced. Our disgust encompasses Hamas too, but we had perhaps hoped for better from Israel, and from politicians claiming to speak for us. Peter Millen Huddersfield, West Yorkshire Miqdaad Versi’s article about Labour and the Muslim community was interesting ( There is a way for Starmer’s Labour to fix the big rift with Muslim voters – if it has the will, 6 May ). However, while older Muslims tended to support the Labour party in the past and were loyal, younger generations have become extremely savvy and knowledgeable about local and world politics. They will not blindly follow politicians. The hegemony enjoyed by the two main parties is slowly disintegrating, and many are now considering smaller parties. Therefore I am not sure the Labour party will gain the trust and support of the community in the future, and I would be extremely surprised if it does. In my area, five independent candidates defeated Labour’s candidates in the local elections . Baser Akoodie Batley, West Yorkshire Great to hear the disenfranchised Labour-leaning Muslim voice in Britain, thanks to Miqdaad Versi. His point about Labour “core values of human rights, justice and international law” is important. But the exclusive focus on Muslim voters in relation to Labour is misleading. Experts were doing the same thing after the local elections, talking about this portion of the electorate as if it were the only demographic that Labour’s disgraceful policies on Gaza and Israel had alienated. Implying that only Muslim votes were lost because of this is at best simplistic and at worst a wilful manipulation of the truth. One effect of the campus protests in the US has been to allow students in other countries to realise that they aren’t alone. Paul Gander London Labour’s response to losing Muslim votes in recent local elections misses the point ( Labour ‘working to get support back’ after losing votes over Gaza stance, 5 May ). To say “the better lives that people want for the Palestinian people is something the Labour leadership shares” is a wholly inadequate response to what many people see in Gaza. People want a stop to the slaughter and destruction of the Palestinian people and their society. And they want the actions of the Israeli government and army to be condemned. To call for “better lives” in the face of 35,000 deaths, destitution and the rising threat of famine suggests that the Labour leadership does not understand or care about the depth of feeling of many people in this country, not just Muslims. Geoff Skinner Kensal Green, London Martin Kettle is right to question the assumption that discontent with our politicians’ response to Gaza comes only from “the Muslim vote”, or “the left” ( If Keir Starmer isn’t careful, Gaza could do for him what the Iraq war did for Blair, 9 May ). There are many who are neither Muslim nor left, but react with horror and disgust to the spectacle of a civilised, articulate people reduced to clustering around tiny body bags and moving from one rubble heap to another to escape merciless bombardment. We would feel – did feel, on 7 October – this disgust whether the victims were Palestinian, Jewish or anyone else. Accusations of antisemitism are misplaced. Our disgust encompasses Hamas too, but we had perhaps hoped for better from Israel, and from politicians claiming to speak for us. Peter Millen Huddersfield, West Yorkshire Miqdaad Versi’s article about Labour and the Muslim community was interesting ( There is a way for Starmer’s Labour to fix the big rift with Muslim voters – if it has the will, 6 May ). However, while older Muslims tended to support the Labour party in the past and were loyal, younger generations have become extremely savvy and knowledgeable about local and world politics. They will not blindly follow politicians. The hegemony enjoyed by the two main parties is slowly disintegrating, and many are now considering smaller parties. Therefore I am not sure the Labour party will gain the trust and support of the community in the future, and I would be extremely surprised if it does. In my area, five independent candidates defeated Labour’s candidates in the local elections . Baser Akoodie Batley, West Yorkshire Great to hear the disenfranchised Labour-leaning Muslim voice in Britain, thanks to Miqdaad Versi. His point about Labour “core values of human rights, justice and international law” is important. But the exclusive focus on Muslim voters in relation to Labour is misleading. Experts were doing the same thing after the local elections, talking about this portion of the electorate as if it were the only demographic that Labour’s disgraceful policies on Gaza and Israel had alienated. Implying that only Muslim votes were lost because of this is at best simplistic and at worst a wilful manipulation of the truth. One effect of the campus protests in the US has been to allow students in other countries to realise that they aren’t alone. Paul Gander London Labour’s response to losing Muslim votes in recent local elections misses the point ( Labour ‘working to get support back’ after losing votes over Gaza stance, 5 May ). To say “the better lives that people want for the Palestinian people is something the Labour leadership shares” is a wholly inadequate response to what many people see in Gaza. People want a stop to the slaughter and destruction of the Palestinian people and their society. And they want the actions of the Israeli government and army to be condemned. To call for “better lives” in the face of 35,000 deaths, destitution and the rising threat of famine suggests that the Labour leadership does not understand or care about the depth of feeling of many people in this country, not just Muslims. Geoff Skinner Kensal Green, London Martin Kettle is right to question the assumption that discontent with our politicians’ response to Gaza comes only from “the Muslim vote”, or “the left” ( If Keir Starmer isn’t careful, Gaza could do for him what the Iraq war did for Blair, 9 May ). There are many who are neither Muslim nor left, but react with horror and disgust to the spectacle of a civilised, articulate people reduced to clustering around tiny body bags and moving from one rubble heap to another to escape merciless bombardment. We would feel – did feel, on 7 October – this disgust whether the victims were Palestinian, Jewish or anyone else. Accusations of antisemitism are misplaced. Our disgust encompasses Hamas too, but we had perhaps hoped for better from Israel, and from politicians claiming to speak for us. Peter Millen Huddersfield, West Yorkshire Explore more on these topics Labour Gaza Israel-Gaza war Keir Starmer Local elections Local elections 2024 Local politics letters Share Reuse this content Labour Gaza Israel-Gaza war Keir Starmer Local elections Local elections 2024 Local politics letters |
BAME people about 70% of those held at UK ports under terror laws, data shows
The police figures also show that fewer than one in five people stopped under the same laws were logged as being white. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images View image in fullscreen The police figures also show that fewer than one in five people stopped under the same laws were logged as being white. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old BAME people about 70% of those held at UK ports under terror laws, data shows This article is more than 1 year old Campaigners say logs since 2021 show disproportionate targeting of people from black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds About 70% of the thousands of people stopped at UK ports under anti-terrorism laws since 2021 were from black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds, according to figures, which have fuelled concerns that counter-terrorist policing is institutionally racist. The figures from police logs released to the Guardian under freedom of information laws also show that fewer than one in five people who were stopped under the same laws in this period were recorded as being white. Campaigners say the figures are evidence that counter-terrorism laws are disproportionately affecting black and minority ethnic groups. They also say the data calls into question assertions by police leaders that counter-terrorism officers are tackling the growing threat of violence from white far-right extremists. The figures show that of the 8,095 people stopped at UK ports in the last three years under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, 5,619 (69.4%) people were recorded as being from BAME backgrounds. In the same period, 1,585 (19.6%) people stopped under schedule 7 were recorded as white British, white Irish or white other. The ethnicity was not recorded in 891 (11%) of cases, reflecting the fact that it is not a legal requirement for police to record the ethnicity of those stopped. The police monitoring group Netpol said the ethnicity breakdown suggested that counter-terrorist officers were underestimating the threat of far-right extremism. Kevin Blowe, its campaigns coordinator, said the figures also challenged a controversial government review by Sir William Shawcross that said the counter-terrorist programme Prevent was too focused on far-right extremism . Blowe pointed out that 41% of counter-terrorism arrests in 2021 were of extreme rightwing suspects. The new figures reveal that in 2021-22 only 17.2% of those stopped at ports under schedule 7 were recorded as white. However, security services data shows that between 2018 and 2023 far-right extremism made up about one-quarter of MI5’s caseload . Blowe said: “The figures from the logs certainly appear not to reflect counter-terrorism’s insistence on a rapidly growing threat of violence from the far right, which has seemingly led to no significant change in the ethnicity of people stopped at ports of entry. “If there had been a greater level of attention on the far right, you would expect to see a shift in the number of white people who are stopped, but they have been pretty consistent over the years. “Schedule 7 powers are broad and intrusive, and decisions about how they are used, without the need for reasonable suspicion, are overwhelmingly made by white counter-terrorism officers. A lack of scrutiny and accountability means the obligation lies with the police to demonstrate the use of these powers does not lead to unlawful discrimination. Our view is, their repeated failure to do so is the result of state surveillance mechanisms that are institutionally racist. It is time these powers were abolished.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Met police to pay ‘five-figure sum’ to French publisher arrested under anti-terror laws Read more Last month the Guardian revealed that the Metropolitan police paid a five-figure sum in damages to the French publisher Ernest Moret after he was stopped in London on his way to a book fair. Moret, who was questioned by UK counter-terrorism officers about whether he had taken part in anti-government protests in France, was one of 4,525 foreign nationals to be stopped under schedule 7 at UK ports between 2020 and 2023. Blowe said: “What these figures demonstrate is that Moret was far from typical: schedule 7 powers have always been used to disproportionately target people from BAME communities, both British and EU nationals.” Anas Mustapha, the head of public advocacy at the campaign group Cage International, urged the police to record the religious backgrounds of those stopped under the Terrorism Act. He said: “This new data reaffirms what we already know about its racist and Islamophobic impact. However, despite evidence demonstrating that the majority of those stopped are Muslim and that forces record data on religion, the government has resisted calls to produce a religious breakdown of those harassed at the borders. “Schedule 7 is one of the most intrusive and discriminatory of all police powers. We’ve supported hundreds of British holidaymakers impacted by the policy and it’s clear that the power is abused and must be repealed.” A Counter Terrorism Policing spokesperson said: “Schedule 7 is a vital tool for policing and has been instrumental in securing evidence to support the conviction of terrorists, gathering intelligence to detect terrorist threats and deterring hostile activity in the UK. “The use of schedule 7 powers regularly features in some of our most complex and high-risk investigations and prosecutions. We face an enduring terrorist threat from overseas, and whilst we are seeing a much greater prevalence of online activity, travel remains an element of terrorist methodology that provides us with potentially crucial opportunities to act. “Where the powers are used, there are a range of robust safeguards and measures in place to ensure appropriate usage.” Explore more on these topics UK security and counter-terrorism Police Race news Share Reuse this content The police figures also show that fewer than one in five people stopped under the same laws were logged as being white. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images View image in fullscreen The police figures also show that fewer than one in five people stopped under the same laws were logged as being white. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old BAME people about 70% of those held at UK ports under terror laws, data shows This article is more than 1 year old Campaigners say logs since 2021 show disproportionate targeting of people from black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds About 70% of the thousands of people stopped at UK ports under anti-terrorism laws since 2021 were from black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds, according to figures, which have fuelled concerns that counter-terrorist policing is institutionally racist. The figures from police logs released to the Guardian under freedom of information laws also show that fewer than one in five people who were stopped under the same laws in this period were recorded as being white. Campaigners say the figures are evidence that counter-terrorism laws are disproportionately affecting black and minority ethnic groups. They also say the data calls into question assertions by police leaders that counter-terrorism officers are tackling the growing threat of violence from white far-right extremists. The figures show that of the 8,095 people stopped at UK ports in the last three years under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, 5,619 (69.4%) people were recorded as being from BAME backgrounds. In the same period, 1,585 (19.6%) people stopped under schedule 7 were recorded as white British, white Irish or white other. The ethnicity was not recorded in 891 (11%) of cases, reflecting the fact that it is not a legal requirement for police to record the ethnicity of those stopped. The police monitoring group Netpol said the ethnicity breakdown suggested that counter-terrorist officers were underestimating the threat of far-right extremism. Kevin Blowe, its campaigns coordinator, said the figures also challenged a controversial government review by Sir William Shawcross that said the counter-terrorist programme Prevent was too focused on far-right extremism . Blowe pointed out that 41% of counter-terrorism arrests in 2021 were of extreme rightwing suspects. The new figures reveal that in 2021-22 only 17.2% of those stopped at ports under schedule 7 were recorded as white. However, security services data shows that between 2018 and 2023 far-right extremism made up about one-quarter of MI5’s caseload . Blowe said: “The figures from the logs certainly appear not to reflect counter-terrorism’s insistence on a rapidly growing threat of violence from the far right, which has seemingly led to no significant change in the ethnicity of people stopped at ports of entry. “If there had been a greater level of attention on the far right, you would expect to see a shift in the number of white people who are stopped, but they have been pretty consistent over the years. “Schedule 7 powers are broad and intrusive, and decisions about how they are used, without the need for reasonable suspicion, are overwhelmingly made by white counter-terrorism officers. A lack of scrutiny and accountability means the obligation lies with the police to demonstrate the use of these powers does not lead to unlawful discrimination. Our view is, their repeated failure to do so is the result of state surveillance mechanisms that are institutionally racist. It is time these powers were abolished.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Met police to pay ‘five-figure sum’ to French publisher arrested under anti-terror laws Read more Last month the Guardian revealed that the Metropolitan police paid a five-figure sum in damages to the French publisher Ernest Moret after he was stopped in London on his way to a book fair. Moret, who was questioned by UK counter-terrorism officers about whether he had taken part in anti-government protests in France, was one of 4,525 foreign nationals to be stopped under schedule 7 at UK ports between 2020 and 2023. Blowe said: “What these figures demonstrate is that Moret was far from typical: schedule 7 powers have always been used to disproportionately target people from BAME communities, both British and EU nationals.” Anas Mustapha, the head of public advocacy at the campaign group Cage International, urged the police to record the religious backgrounds of those stopped under the Terrorism Act. He said: “This new data reaffirms what we already know about its racist and Islamophobic impact. However, despite evidence demonstrating that the majority of those stopped are Muslim and that forces record data on religion, the government has resisted calls to produce a religious breakdown of those harassed at the borders. “Schedule 7 is one of the most intrusive and discriminatory of all police powers. We’ve supported hundreds of British holidaymakers impacted by the policy and it’s clear that the power is abused and must be repealed.” A Counter Terrorism Policing spokesperson said: “Schedule 7 is a vital tool for policing and has been instrumental in securing evidence to support the conviction of terrorists, gathering intelligence to detect terrorist threats and deterring hostile activity in the UK. “The use of schedule 7 powers regularly features in some of our most complex and high-risk investigations and prosecutions. We face an enduring terrorist threat from overseas, and whilst we are seeing a much greater prevalence of online activity, travel remains an element of terrorist methodology that provides us with potentially crucial opportunities to act. “Where the powers are used, there are a range of robust safeguards and measures in place to ensure appropriate usage.” Explore more on these topics UK security and counter-terrorism Police Race news Share Reuse this content The police figures also show that fewer than one in five people stopped under the same laws were logged as being white. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images View image in fullscreen The police figures also show that fewer than one in five people stopped under the same laws were logged as being white. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images The police figures also show that fewer than one in five people stopped under the same laws were logged as being white. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images View image in fullscreen The police figures also show that fewer than one in five people stopped under the same laws were logged as being white. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images The police figures also show that fewer than one in five people stopped under the same laws were logged as being white. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images View image in fullscreen The police figures also show that fewer than one in five people stopped under the same laws were logged as being white. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images The police figures also show that fewer than one in five people stopped under the same laws were logged as being white. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images View image in fullscreen The police figures also show that fewer than one in five people stopped under the same laws were logged as being white. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images The police figures also show that fewer than one in five people stopped under the same laws were logged as being white. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images The police figures also show that fewer than one in five people stopped under the same laws were logged as being white. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old BAME people about 70% of those held at UK ports under terror laws, data shows This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old BAME people about 70% of those held at UK ports under terror laws, data shows This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old BAME people about 70% of those held at UK ports under terror laws, data shows This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Campaigners say logs since 2021 show disproportionate targeting of people from black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds Campaigners say logs since 2021 show disproportionate targeting of people from black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds Campaigners say logs since 2021 show disproportionate targeting of people from black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds About 70% of the thousands of people stopped at UK ports under anti-terrorism laws since 2021 were from black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds, according to figures, which have fuelled concerns that counter-terrorist policing is institutionally racist. The figures from police logs released to the Guardian under freedom of information laws also show that fewer than one in five people who were stopped under the same laws in this period were recorded as being white. Campaigners say the figures are evidence that counter-terrorism laws are disproportionately affecting black and minority ethnic groups. They also say the data calls into question assertions by police leaders that counter-terrorism officers are tackling the growing threat of violence from white far-right extremists. The figures show that of the 8,095 people stopped at UK ports in the last three years under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, 5,619 (69.4%) people were recorded as being from BAME backgrounds. In the same period, 1,585 (19.6%) people stopped under schedule 7 were recorded as white British, white Irish or white other. The ethnicity was not recorded in 891 (11%) of cases, reflecting the fact that it is not a legal requirement for police to record the ethnicity of those stopped. The police monitoring group Netpol said the ethnicity breakdown suggested that counter-terrorist officers were underestimating the threat of far-right extremism. Kevin Blowe, its campaigns coordinator, said the figures also challenged a controversial government review by Sir William Shawcross that said the counter-terrorist programme Prevent was too focused on far-right extremism . Blowe pointed out that 41% of counter-terrorism arrests in 2021 were of extreme rightwing suspects. The new figures reveal that in 2021-22 only 17.2% of those stopped at ports under schedule 7 were recorded as white. However, security services data shows that between 2018 and 2023 far-right extremism made up about one-quarter of MI5’s caseload . Blowe said: “The figures from the logs certainly appear not to reflect counter-terrorism’s insistence on a rapidly growing threat of violence from the far right, which has seemingly led to no significant change in the ethnicity of people stopped at ports of entry. “If there had been a greater level of attention on the far right, you would expect to see a shift in the number of white people who are stopped, but they have been pretty consistent over the years. “Schedule 7 powers are broad and intrusive, and decisions about how they are used, without the need for reasonable suspicion, are overwhelmingly made by white counter-terrorism officers. A lack of scrutiny and accountability means the obligation lies with the police to demonstrate the use of these powers does not lead to unlawful discrimination. Our view is, their repeated failure to do so is the result of state surveillance mechanisms that are institutionally racist. It is time these powers were abolished.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Met police to pay ‘five-figure sum’ to French publisher arrested under anti-terror laws Read more Last month the Guardian revealed that the Metropolitan police paid a five-figure sum in damages to the French publisher Ernest Moret after he was stopped in London on his way to a book fair. Moret, who was questioned by UK counter-terrorism officers about whether he had taken part in anti-government protests in France, was one of 4,525 foreign nationals to be stopped under schedule 7 at UK ports between 2020 and 2023. Blowe said: “What these figures demonstrate is that Moret was far from typical: schedule 7 powers have always been used to disproportionately target people from BAME communities, both British and EU nationals.” Anas Mustapha, the head of public advocacy at the campaign group Cage International, urged the police to record the religious backgrounds of those stopped under the Terrorism Act. He said: “This new data reaffirms what we already know about its racist and Islamophobic impact. However, despite evidence demonstrating that the majority of those stopped are Muslim and that forces record data on religion, the government has resisted calls to produce a religious breakdown of those harassed at the borders. “Schedule 7 is one of the most intrusive and discriminatory of all police powers. We’ve supported hundreds of British holidaymakers impacted by the policy and it’s clear that the power is abused and must be repealed.” A Counter Terrorism Policing spokesperson said: “Schedule 7 is a vital tool for policing and has been instrumental in securing evidence to support the conviction of terrorists, gathering intelligence to detect terrorist threats and deterring hostile activity in the UK. “The use of schedule 7 powers regularly features in some of our most complex and high-risk investigations and prosecutions. We face an enduring terrorist threat from overseas, and whilst we are seeing a much greater prevalence of online activity, travel remains an element of terrorist methodology that provides us with potentially crucial opportunities to act. “Where the powers are used, there are a range of robust safeguards and measures in place to ensure appropriate usage.” Explore more on these topics UK security and counter-terrorism Police Race news Share Reuse this content About 70% of the thousands of people stopped at UK ports under anti-terrorism laws since 2021 were from black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds, according to figures, which have fuelled concerns that counter-terrorist policing is institutionally racist. The figures from police logs released to the Guardian under freedom of information laws also show that fewer than one in five people who were stopped under the same laws in this period were recorded as being white. Campaigners say the figures are evidence that counter-terrorism laws are disproportionately affecting black and minority ethnic groups. They also say the data calls into question assertions by police leaders that counter-terrorism officers are tackling the growing threat of violence from white far-right extremists. The figures show that of the 8,095 people stopped at UK ports in the last three years under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, 5,619 (69.4%) people were recorded as being from BAME backgrounds. In the same period, 1,585 (19.6%) people stopped under schedule 7 were recorded as white British, white Irish or white other. The ethnicity was not recorded in 891 (11%) of cases, reflecting the fact that it is not a legal requirement for police to record the ethnicity of those stopped. The police monitoring group Netpol said the ethnicity breakdown suggested that counter-terrorist officers were underestimating the threat of far-right extremism. Kevin Blowe, its campaigns coordinator, said the figures also challenged a controversial government review by Sir William Shawcross that said the counter-terrorist programme Prevent was too focused on far-right extremism . Blowe pointed out that 41% of counter-terrorism arrests in 2021 were of extreme rightwing suspects. The new figures reveal that in 2021-22 only 17.2% of those stopped at ports under schedule 7 were recorded as white. However, security services data shows that between 2018 and 2023 far-right extremism made up about one-quarter of MI5’s caseload . Blowe said: “The figures from the logs certainly appear not to reflect counter-terrorism’s insistence on a rapidly growing threat of violence from the far right, which has seemingly led to no significant change in the ethnicity of people stopped at ports of entry. “If there had been a greater level of attention on the far right, you would expect to see a shift in the number of white people who are stopped, but they have been pretty consistent over the years. “Schedule 7 powers are broad and intrusive, and decisions about how they are used, without the need for reasonable suspicion, are overwhelmingly made by white counter-terrorism officers. A lack of scrutiny and accountability means the obligation lies with the police to demonstrate the use of these powers does not lead to unlawful discrimination. Our view is, their repeated failure to do so is the result of state surveillance mechanisms that are institutionally racist. It is time these powers were abolished.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Met police to pay ‘five-figure sum’ to French publisher arrested under anti-terror laws Read more Last month the Guardian revealed that the Metropolitan police paid a five-figure sum in damages to the French publisher Ernest Moret after he was stopped in London on his way to a book fair. Moret, who was questioned by UK counter-terrorism officers about whether he had taken part in anti-government protests in France, was one of 4,525 foreign nationals to be stopped under schedule 7 at UK ports between 2020 and 2023. Blowe said: “What these figures demonstrate is that Moret was far from typical: schedule 7 powers have always been used to disproportionately target people from BAME communities, both British and EU nationals.” Anas Mustapha, the head of public advocacy at the campaign group Cage International, urged the police to record the religious backgrounds of those stopped under the Terrorism Act. He said: “This new data reaffirms what we already know about its racist and Islamophobic impact. However, despite evidence demonstrating that the majority of those stopped are Muslim and that forces record data on religion, the government has resisted calls to produce a religious breakdown of those harassed at the borders. “Schedule 7 is one of the most intrusive and discriminatory of all police powers. We’ve supported hundreds of British holidaymakers impacted by the policy and it’s clear that the power is abused and must be repealed.” A Counter Terrorism Policing spokesperson said: “Schedule 7 is a vital tool for policing and has been instrumental in securing evidence to support the conviction of terrorists, gathering intelligence to detect terrorist threats and deterring hostile activity in the UK. “The use of schedule 7 powers regularly features in some of our most complex and high-risk investigations and prosecutions. We face an enduring terrorist threat from overseas, and whilst we are seeing a much greater prevalence of online activity, travel remains an element of terrorist methodology that provides us with potentially crucial opportunities to act. “Where the powers are used, there are a range of robust safeguards and measures in place to ensure appropriate usage.” Explore more on these topics UK security and counter-terrorism Police Race news Share Reuse this content About 70% of the thousands of people stopped at UK ports under anti-terrorism laws since 2021 were from black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds, according to figures, which have fuelled concerns that counter-terrorist policing is institutionally racist. The figures from police logs released to the Guardian under freedom of information laws also show that fewer than one in five people who were stopped under the same laws in this period were recorded as being white. Campaigners say the figures are evidence that counter-terrorism laws are disproportionately affecting black and minority ethnic groups. They also say the data calls into question assertions by police leaders that counter-terrorism officers are tackling the growing threat of violence from white far-right extremists. The figures show that of the 8,095 people stopped at UK ports in the last three years under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, 5,619 (69.4%) people were recorded as being from BAME backgrounds. In the same period, 1,585 (19.6%) people stopped under schedule 7 were recorded as white British, white Irish or white other. The ethnicity was not recorded in 891 (11%) of cases, reflecting the fact that it is not a legal requirement for police to record the ethnicity of those stopped. The police monitoring group Netpol said the ethnicity breakdown suggested that counter-terrorist officers were underestimating the threat of far-right extremism. Kevin Blowe, its campaigns coordinator, said the figures also challenged a controversial government review by Sir William Shawcross that said the counter-terrorist programme Prevent was too focused on far-right extremism . Blowe pointed out that 41% of counter-terrorism arrests in 2021 were of extreme rightwing suspects. The new figures reveal that in 2021-22 only 17.2% of those stopped at ports under schedule 7 were recorded as white. However, security services data shows that between 2018 and 2023 far-right extremism made up about one-quarter of MI5’s caseload . Blowe said: “The figures from the logs certainly appear not to reflect counter-terrorism’s insistence on a rapidly growing threat of violence from the far right, which has seemingly led to no significant change in the ethnicity of people stopped at ports of entry. “If there had been a greater level of attention on the far right, you would expect to see a shift in the number of white people who are stopped, but they have been pretty consistent over the years. “Schedule 7 powers are broad and intrusive, and decisions about how they are used, without the need for reasonable suspicion, are overwhelmingly made by white counter-terrorism officers. A lack of scrutiny and accountability means the obligation lies with the police to demonstrate the use of these powers does not lead to unlawful discrimination. Our view is, their repeated failure to do so is the result of state surveillance mechanisms that are institutionally racist. It is time these powers were abolished.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Met police to pay ‘five-figure sum’ to French publisher arrested under anti-terror laws Read more Last month the Guardian revealed that the Metropolitan police paid a five-figure sum in damages to the French publisher Ernest Moret after he was stopped in London on his way to a book fair. Moret, who was questioned by UK counter-terrorism officers about whether he had taken part in anti-government protests in France, was one of 4,525 foreign nationals to be stopped under schedule 7 at UK ports between 2020 and 2023. Blowe said: “What these figures demonstrate is that Moret was far from typical: schedule 7 powers have always been used to disproportionately target people from BAME communities, both British and EU nationals.” Anas Mustapha, the head of public advocacy at the campaign group Cage International, urged the police to record the religious backgrounds of those stopped under the Terrorism Act. He said: “This new data reaffirms what we already know about its racist and Islamophobic impact. However, despite evidence demonstrating that the majority of those stopped are Muslim and that forces record data on religion, the government has resisted calls to produce a religious breakdown of those harassed at the borders. “Schedule 7 is one of the most intrusive and discriminatory of all police powers. We’ve supported hundreds of British holidaymakers impacted by the policy and it’s clear that the power is abused and must be repealed.” A Counter Terrorism Policing spokesperson said: “Schedule 7 is a vital tool for policing and has been instrumental in securing evidence to support the conviction of terrorists, gathering intelligence to detect terrorist threats and deterring hostile activity in the UK. “The use of schedule 7 powers regularly features in some of our most complex and high-risk investigations and prosecutions. We face an enduring terrorist threat from overseas, and whilst we are seeing a much greater prevalence of online activity, travel remains an element of terrorist methodology that provides us with potentially crucial opportunities to act. “Where the powers are used, there are a range of robust safeguards and measures in place to ensure appropriate usage.” About 70% of the thousands of people stopped at UK ports under anti-terrorism laws since 2021 were from black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds, according to figures, which have fuelled concerns that counter-terrorist policing is institutionally racist. The figures from police logs released to the Guardian under freedom of information laws also show that fewer than one in five people who were stopped under the same laws in this period were recorded as being white. Campaigners say the figures are evidence that counter-terrorism laws are disproportionately affecting black and minority ethnic groups. They also say the data calls into question assertions by police leaders that counter-terrorism officers are tackling the growing threat of violence from white far-right extremists. The figures show that of the 8,095 people stopped at UK ports in the last three years under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, 5,619 (69.4%) people were recorded as being from BAME backgrounds. In the same period, 1,585 (19.6%) people stopped under schedule 7 were recorded as white British, white Irish or white other. The ethnicity was not recorded in 891 (11%) of cases, reflecting the fact that it is not a legal requirement for police to record the ethnicity of those stopped. The police monitoring group Netpol said the ethnicity breakdown suggested that counter-terrorist officers were underestimating the threat of far-right extremism. Kevin Blowe, its campaigns coordinator, said the figures also challenged a controversial government review by Sir William Shawcross that said the counter-terrorist programme Prevent was too focused on far-right extremism . Blowe pointed out that 41% of counter-terrorism arrests in 2021 were of extreme rightwing suspects. The new figures reveal that in 2021-22 only 17.2% of those stopped at ports under schedule 7 were recorded as white. However, security services data shows that between 2018 and 2023 far-right extremism made up about one-quarter of MI5’s caseload . Blowe said: “The figures from the logs certainly appear not to reflect counter-terrorism’s insistence on a rapidly growing threat of violence from the far right, which has seemingly led to no significant change in the ethnicity of people stopped at ports of entry. “If there had been a greater level of attention on the far right, you would expect to see a shift in the number of white people who are stopped, but they have been pretty consistent over the years. “Schedule 7 powers are broad and intrusive, and decisions about how they are used, without the need for reasonable suspicion, are overwhelmingly made by white counter-terrorism officers. A lack of scrutiny and accountability means the obligation lies with the police to demonstrate the use of these powers does not lead to unlawful discrimination. Our view is, their repeated failure to do so is the result of state surveillance mechanisms that are institutionally racist. It is time these powers were abolished.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Met police to pay ‘five-figure sum’ to French publisher arrested under anti-terror laws Read more Last month the Guardian revealed that the Metropolitan police paid a five-figure sum in damages to the French publisher Ernest Moret after he was stopped in London on his way to a book fair. Moret, who was questioned by UK counter-terrorism officers about whether he had taken part in anti-government protests in France, was one of 4,525 foreign nationals to be stopped under schedule 7 at UK ports between 2020 and 2023. Blowe said: “What these figures demonstrate is that Moret was far from typical: schedule 7 powers have always been used to disproportionately target people from BAME communities, both British and EU nationals.” Anas Mustapha, the head of public advocacy at the campaign group Cage International, urged the police to record the religious backgrounds of those stopped under the Terrorism Act. He said: “This new data reaffirms what we already know about its racist and Islamophobic impact. However, despite evidence demonstrating that the majority of those stopped are Muslim and that forces record data on religion, the government has resisted calls to produce a religious breakdown of those harassed at the borders. “Schedule 7 is one of the most intrusive and discriminatory of all police powers. We’ve supported hundreds of British holidaymakers impacted by the policy and it’s clear that the power is abused and must be repealed.” A Counter Terrorism Policing spokesperson said: “Schedule 7 is a vital tool for policing and has been instrumental in securing evidence to support the conviction of terrorists, gathering intelligence to detect terrorist threats and deterring hostile activity in the UK. “The use of schedule 7 powers regularly features in some of our most complex and high-risk investigations and prosecutions. We face an enduring terrorist threat from overseas, and whilst we are seeing a much greater prevalence of online activity, travel remains an element of terrorist methodology that provides us with potentially crucial opportunities to act. “Where the powers are used, there are a range of robust safeguards and measures in place to ensure appropriate usage.” About 70% of the thousands of people stopped at UK ports under anti-terrorism laws since 2021 were from black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds, according to figures, which have fuelled concerns that counter-terrorist policing is institutionally racist. The figures from police logs released to the Guardian under freedom of information laws also show that fewer than one in five people who were stopped under the same laws in this period were recorded as being white. Campaigners say the figures are evidence that counter-terrorism laws are disproportionately affecting black and minority ethnic groups. They also say the data calls into question assertions by police leaders that counter-terrorism officers are tackling the growing threat of violence from white far-right extremists. The figures show that of the 8,095 people stopped at UK ports in the last three years under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, 5,619 (69.4%) people were recorded as being from BAME backgrounds. In the same period, 1,585 (19.6%) people stopped under schedule 7 were recorded as white British, white Irish or white other. The ethnicity was not recorded in 891 (11%) of cases, reflecting the fact that it is not a legal requirement for police to record the ethnicity of those stopped. The police monitoring group Netpol said the ethnicity breakdown suggested that counter-terrorist officers were underestimating the threat of far-right extremism. Kevin Blowe, its campaigns coordinator, said the figures also challenged a controversial government review by Sir William Shawcross that said the counter-terrorist programme Prevent was too focused on far-right extremism . Blowe pointed out that 41% of counter-terrorism arrests in 2021 were of extreme rightwing suspects. The new figures reveal that in 2021-22 only 17.2% of those stopped at ports under schedule 7 were recorded as white. However, security services data shows that between 2018 and 2023 far-right extremism made up about one-quarter of MI5’s caseload . Blowe said: “The figures from the logs certainly appear not to reflect counter-terrorism’s insistence on a rapidly growing threat of violence from the far right, which has seemingly led to no significant change in the ethnicity of people stopped at ports of entry. “If there had been a greater level of attention on the far right, you would expect to see a shift in the number of white people who are stopped, but they have been pretty consistent over the years. “Schedule 7 powers are broad and intrusive, and decisions about how they are used, without the need for reasonable suspicion, are overwhelmingly made by white counter-terrorism officers. A lack of scrutiny and accountability means the obligation lies with the police to demonstrate the use of these powers does not lead to unlawful discrimination. Our view is, their repeated failure to do so is the result of state surveillance mechanisms that are institutionally racist. It is time these powers were abolished.” Met police to pay ‘five-figure sum’ to French publisher arrested under anti-terror laws Read more Met police to pay ‘five-figure sum’ to French publisher arrested under anti-terror laws Read more Met police to pay ‘five-figure sum’ to French publisher arrested under anti-terror laws Read more Met police to pay ‘five-figure sum’ to French publisher arrested under anti-terror laws Met police to pay ‘five-figure sum’ to French publisher arrested under anti-terror laws Last month the Guardian revealed that the Metropolitan police paid a five-figure sum in damages to the French publisher Ernest Moret after he was stopped in London on his way to a book fair. Moret, who was questioned by UK counter-terrorism officers about whether he had taken part in anti-government protests in France, was one of 4,525 foreign nationals to be stopped under schedule 7 at UK ports between 2020 and 2023. Blowe said: “What these figures demonstrate is that Moret was far from typical: schedule 7 powers have always been used to disproportionately target people from BAME communities, both British and EU nationals.” Anas Mustapha, the head of public advocacy at the campaign group Cage International, urged the police to record the religious backgrounds of those stopped under the Terrorism Act. He said: “This new data reaffirms what we already know about its racist and Islamophobic impact. However, despite evidence demonstrating that the majority of those stopped are Muslim and that forces record data on religion, the government has resisted calls to produce a religious breakdown of those harassed at the borders. “Schedule 7 is one of the most intrusive and discriminatory of all police powers. We’ve supported hundreds of British holidaymakers impacted by the policy and it’s clear that the power is abused and must be repealed.” A Counter Terrorism Policing spokesperson said: “Schedule 7 is a vital tool for policing and has been instrumental in securing evidence to support the conviction of terrorists, gathering intelligence to detect terrorist threats and deterring hostile activity in the UK. “The use of schedule 7 powers regularly features in some of our most complex and high-risk investigations and prosecutions. We face an enduring terrorist threat from overseas, and whilst we are seeing a much greater prevalence of online activity, travel remains an element of terrorist methodology that provides us with potentially crucial opportunities to act. “Where the powers are used, there are a range of robust safeguards and measures in place to ensure appropriate usage.” Explore more on these topics UK security and counter-terrorism Police Race news Share Reuse this content UK security and counter-terrorism Police Race news |
Jon Ronson: ‘A society that stops caring about facts is a society where anything can happen’
Jon Ronson photographed in New York City by Mike McGregor for the Observer New Review, May 2024. View image in fullscreen Jon Ronson photographed in New York City by Mike McGregor for the Observer New Review, May 2024. This article is more than 1 year old Interview Jon Ronson: ‘A society that stops caring about facts is a society where anything can happen’ This article is more than 1 year old Andrew Anthony The second series of Things Fell Apart, the writer and broadcaster’s podcast series exploring conspiracy theories and the culture wars, topped the charts earlier this year. He explains why journalistic values such as evidence and fairness are needed more than ever J ust turned 57, Jon Ronson has had a number of successes in his multi-platform career, with books such as 2011’s The Psychopath Test and documentaries such as Stanley Kubrick’s Boxes . But perhaps none of his works has resonated quite so powerfully with audiences as the podcast Things Fell Apart – in particular the second series released by the BBC in January. Later this month he is due to discuss the show as a star guest at Sheffield’s podcast festival. Like the first series, it traces the origins of a number of conflagrations in the so-called culture wars, but it ingeniously sews together these disparate events and disagreements, tying them all to the early days of lockdown, so that listeners don’t so much hear about, as be transported into, a complex world of outrageous claims and counter-claims. Among other stories, he looks at how a bogus medical syndrome known as “excited delirium” was instrumental in guiding the Minneapolis police’s lethal treatment of George Floyd; the way that an Oxford traffic filter scheme and a futuristic think piece published by the World Economic Forum were falsely presented as a global conspiracy to control human movement and rob people of their property; and the dissemination of the idea that Covid-19 was created for big pharma profits. The eight episodes are characterised by compelling interviews with culture warriors, conspiracy theorists and their targets, which were notable for their curiosity, restraint and understanding. Given that some of the people Ronson speaks to seem to have lost all contact with objective reality, his questioning comes across as an impressive feat of empathy and toleration. Ronson, who grew up in Cardiff, now lives with his wife between a small apartment in Manhattan and a house in upstate New York. In a Zoom conversation, I ask him if it was difficult to withhold derision when dealing with people who spoke demonstrable untruths. “I think it comes with maturity and realising your own biases and stupidities,” he says. “I’m not very confrontational and sometimes you do need to be if someone is behaving in a way that is hurting people or doing something dangerous, like spreading medical misinformation. But in general, when does confrontation work?” One reason his technique is so effective is that the interviews are contextualised with Ronson’s reassuring, though often wry, factual commentary, which sounds like the fruit of deep research – unlike, it must be said, the vast majority of podcasts. How long did he spend on it? “The series took me 10 months,” he says. He’s aware that this kind of highly produced documentary approach is increasingly crowded out by cheaper, more personality-driven productions, but he remains a fan of both genres. “I like both sorts,” he says. “I like just two people chatting to each other, as long as they’re good. Most are terrible and responsible for the podcast glut, which means it’s impossible to know what to listen to. But when that chat between two people is good, it can be really good.” It was not until towards the end of the Things Fell Apart production schedule that he came up with the idea of the concluding episode , Mikki’s Hero’s Journey, which brings together many of the themes and events of the previous seven. It focuses on Mikki Willis, a former model and failed Hollywood actor who turns to producing conspiracy theory videos with ever more extreme and unfounded assertions. Willis’s launch success was the first video in his “Plandemic” trilogy , a May 2020 viral shock-doc that promoted the idea that vaccines are a profit-making enterprise that cause medical harm. From there his conspiracies expanded to include everything from Black Lives Matter to the World Economic Forum and antifa. “It was a eureka moment late on,” says Ronson, of his realisation that Willis was the unifying factor. “I thought it would make a nice bookend, because we hear Willis in an early episode interviewing Judy Mikovits for Plandemic, but he’s just a voice.” He decided to focus on him: “I wandered around for days listening to every interview he ever gave. When he mentioned being inspired by Joseph Campbell’s hero’s journey, I kind of stopped in my tracks, because that felt so intriguing and unexpected – and very illuminating. And then , when I watched all his documentaries, I noticed that he had turned everything we covered through the series into one uber-conspiracy.” Images of Judy Mikovits working in a lab and a group of protesters on a boardwalk in Huntington Beach, California It’s an utterly absorbing conclusion, both in terms of psychological insight and narrative satisfaction, and it also features a rare moment of confrontation, when Ronson tells Willis that he doesn’t think his claim about millions dying from the Covid vaccine is true. It’s not angry or aggressive, and Willis barely responds, but the effect is a refreshing raindrop of sanity in a desert of falsification. Paradoxically, though, in tying so many of the strands of the story to Willis, Ronson mirrors the join-the-dots approach of the conspiracy theorists, albeit with a far more painstaking and rational thesis. This is the occupational hazard of wading into these muddied and heavily disputed waters. Whatever you do, and however carefully you do it, you can lay yourself open to accusations of demonising one side, and supporting the other. Ronson is ever vigilant to this danger, and goes out of his way to balance competing voices, showing the flaws of rightwing anti-antifa protesters, but also of antifa supporters themselves; or the false allegations about encouraging transgender children in Florida schools, but also the blinkered dogmatism of some trans activists. None of that has prevented him from being subject to claims of bias. A number of prominent online activists have taken him to task for an episode in the BBC’s first series of Things Fell Apart , in 2021, that looked at the rise of third-wave feminism and the plight of Camp Trans, a protest against the exclusion of trans women from the all-female musical festival Michfest that ran in Michigan from 1976 to 2015. His critics accuse him of ignoring the murder by Dana Rivers, a Camp Trans participant, of a lesbian couple and their son in 2016. He points out that he was interested in Camp Trans’s formation in the 1990s, and that the murder took place two decades later and more than 2,000 miles away. “The reason I didn’t mention the murders is that Dana Rivers hadn’t gone to trial by the time my programme went out. And when she did go to trial, Michfest and Camp Trans were not brought up at all in court by either the defence or the prosecution. So I don’t think that criticism was fair.” View image in fullscreen Jon Ronson with Thom Robb, national director of the Knights of the KKK, for his 1999 Channel 4 documentary New Klan. Photograph: Channel 4 The polarising effects of these weaponised debates appears to be spreading through political systems and cultural institutions across the world. Is there a way out of such an antagonistic discourse? “It feels to me that for great numbers of people – journalists, documentary-makers, social media users – ideology and activism have started to matter more than facts and evidence,” he says. “And that’s happening in different ways across the spectrum. The right tell these big, baroque, almost mythological lies, like QAnon or pizzagate . With the left it’s more subtle, like labelling gun-loving anti-government militia people as dangerous white supremacists actively conspiring to kickstart an ethnic-based civil war.” His remedy may sound a bit old-fashioned to some, but it involves reasserting the importance of some reportorial values that are under threat. “The fact that ideology-led nonfiction storytelling is happening everywhere feels worrying, because a society that stops caring about facts is a society where anything can happen. I think the way out of it is to treat people as complicated grey areas, rather than magnificent heroes or sickening villains. And to stick to the nuanced truth, rather than flattening it to make ideological points.” He’s quick to add a qualification: “That doesn’t mean I’m against activist journalism – it’s obviously done a lot of good. But the old rules of journalism – evidence, fairness – still need to apply.” Although he’s now known for his in-depth investigative pieces, Ronson originally started out as more of a comic writer. Initially working with bands in Manchester, he began contributing to the city’s listings magazine, then moved to London’s Time Out , and on to the Guardian , while building up a reputation for his humorously deadpan documentaries and books. ‘You’re going to call me a Holocaust denier now, are you?’: George Monbiot comes face to face with his local conspiracy theorist Read more Not untypical was the film Tottenham Ayatollah in 1997, whose story also featured in his 2001 book Them: Adventures With Extremists . Influenced, he acknowledges, by The Leader, His Driver and the Driver’s Wife , Nick Broomfield’s film about the white nationalist Afrikaner leader Eugène Terre’Blanche , it focused on Omar Bakri Mohammed, a rotund Islamist cleric portrayed as a slightly hapless figure given to absurd pronouncements. Yet it would later emerge that he would inspire terrorists. Was that a salutary experience? He says he was warned at the time by someone from the Board of Deputies of British Jews that the world hadn’t woken up to the fact that militant Islam was not a joke. “He was clearly proven right about that,” he says. “But I do think the comic absurdity of Omar Bakri’s story was valid because it’s the truth. Both things can be true: you can be absurd and also capable of inspiring terrorism.” His work, he agrees, has matured, as his style has become less overtly comic and more concerned with the most effective way to tell a story. With Things Fell Apart his storytelling succeeded in marrying gripping narrative to moral and psychological nuance. Who knows, he might even have helped bring a much-needed interest in unaligned reporting back into fashion. Things Fell Apart is available on BBC Sounds. Jon Ronson is speaking at Crossed Wires festival , Sheffield, 31 May and Union Chapel, London N1 , 3 June This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Jon Ronson The Observer Podcasts Radio 4 Radio BBC interviews Share Reuse this content Jon Ronson photographed in New York City by Mike McGregor for the Observer New Review, May 2024. View image in fullscreen Jon Ronson photographed in New York City by Mike McGregor for the Observer New Review, May 2024. This article is more than 1 year old Interview Jon Ronson: ‘A society that stops caring about facts is a society where anything can happen’ This article is more than 1 year old Andrew Anthony The second series of Things Fell Apart, the writer and broadcaster’s podcast series exploring conspiracy theories and the culture wars, topped the charts earlier this year. He explains why journalistic values such as evidence and fairness are needed more than ever J ust turned 57, Jon Ronson has had a number of successes in his multi-platform career, with books such as 2011’s The Psychopath Test and documentaries such as Stanley Kubrick’s Boxes . But perhaps none of his works has resonated quite so powerfully with audiences as the podcast Things Fell Apart – in particular the second series released by the BBC in January. Later this month he is due to discuss the show as a star guest at Sheffield’s podcast festival. Like the first series, it traces the origins of a number of conflagrations in the so-called culture wars, but it ingeniously sews together these disparate events and disagreements, tying them all to the early days of lockdown, so that listeners don’t so much hear about, as be transported into, a complex world of outrageous claims and counter-claims. Among other stories, he looks at how a bogus medical syndrome known as “excited delirium” was instrumental in guiding the Minneapolis police’s lethal treatment of George Floyd; the way that an Oxford traffic filter scheme and a futuristic think piece published by the World Economic Forum were falsely presented as a global conspiracy to control human movement and rob people of their property; and the dissemination of the idea that Covid-19 was created for big pharma profits. The eight episodes are characterised by compelling interviews with culture warriors, conspiracy theorists and their targets, which were notable for their curiosity, restraint and understanding. Given that some of the people Ronson speaks to seem to have lost all contact with objective reality, his questioning comes across as an impressive feat of empathy and toleration. Ronson, who grew up in Cardiff, now lives with his wife between a small apartment in Manhattan and a house in upstate New York. In a Zoom conversation, I ask him if it was difficult to withhold derision when dealing with people who spoke demonstrable untruths. “I think it comes with maturity and realising your own biases and stupidities,” he says. “I’m not very confrontational and sometimes you do need to be if someone is behaving in a way that is hurting people or doing something dangerous, like spreading medical misinformation. But in general, when does confrontation work?” One reason his technique is so effective is that the interviews are contextualised with Ronson’s reassuring, though often wry, factual commentary, which sounds like the fruit of deep research – unlike, it must be said, the vast majority of podcasts. How long did he spend on it? “The series took me 10 months,” he says. He’s aware that this kind of highly produced documentary approach is increasingly crowded out by cheaper, more personality-driven productions, but he remains a fan of both genres. “I like both sorts,” he says. “I like just two people chatting to each other, as long as they’re good. Most are terrible and responsible for the podcast glut, which means it’s impossible to know what to listen to. But when that chat between two people is good, it can be really good.” It was not until towards the end of the Things Fell Apart production schedule that he came up with the idea of the concluding episode , Mikki’s Hero’s Journey, which brings together many of the themes and events of the previous seven. It focuses on Mikki Willis, a former model and failed Hollywood actor who turns to producing conspiracy theory videos with ever more extreme and unfounded assertions. Willis’s launch success was the first video in his “Plandemic” trilogy , a May 2020 viral shock-doc that promoted the idea that vaccines are a profit-making enterprise that cause medical harm. From there his conspiracies expanded to include everything from Black Lives Matter to the World Economic Forum and antifa. “It was a eureka moment late on,” says Ronson, of his realisation that Willis was the unifying factor. “I thought it would make a nice bookend, because we hear Willis in an early episode interviewing Judy Mikovits for Plandemic, but he’s just a voice.” He decided to focus on him: “I wandered around for days listening to every interview he ever gave. When he mentioned being inspired by Joseph Campbell’s hero’s journey, I kind of stopped in my tracks, because that felt so intriguing and unexpected – and very illuminating. And then , when I watched all his documentaries, I noticed that he had turned everything we covered through the series into one uber-conspiracy.” Images of Judy Mikovits working in a lab and a group of protesters on a boardwalk in Huntington Beach, California It’s an utterly absorbing conclusion, both in terms of psychological insight and narrative satisfaction, and it also features a rare moment of confrontation, when Ronson tells Willis that he doesn’t think his claim about millions dying from the Covid vaccine is true. It’s not angry or aggressive, and Willis barely responds, but the effect is a refreshing raindrop of sanity in a desert of falsification. Paradoxically, though, in tying so many of the strands of the story to Willis, Ronson mirrors the join-the-dots approach of the conspiracy theorists, albeit with a far more painstaking and rational thesis. This is the occupational hazard of wading into these muddied and heavily disputed waters. Whatever you do, and however carefully you do it, you can lay yourself open to accusations of demonising one side, and supporting the other. Ronson is ever vigilant to this danger, and goes out of his way to balance competing voices, showing the flaws of rightwing anti-antifa protesters, but also of antifa supporters themselves; or the false allegations about encouraging transgender children in Florida schools, but also the blinkered dogmatism of some trans activists. None of that has prevented him from being subject to claims of bias. A number of prominent online activists have taken him to task for an episode in the BBC’s first series of Things Fell Apart , in 2021, that looked at the rise of third-wave feminism and the plight of Camp Trans, a protest against the exclusion of trans women from the all-female musical festival Michfest that ran in Michigan from 1976 to 2015. His critics accuse him of ignoring the murder by Dana Rivers, a Camp Trans participant, of a lesbian couple and their son in 2016. He points out that he was interested in Camp Trans’s formation in the 1990s, and that the murder took place two decades later and more than 2,000 miles away. “The reason I didn’t mention the murders is that Dana Rivers hadn’t gone to trial by the time my programme went out. And when she did go to trial, Michfest and Camp Trans were not brought up at all in court by either the defence or the prosecution. So I don’t think that criticism was fair.” View image in fullscreen Jon Ronson with Thom Robb, national director of the Knights of the KKK, for his 1999 Channel 4 documentary New Klan. Photograph: Channel 4 The polarising effects of these weaponised debates appears to be spreading through political systems and cultural institutions across the world. Is there a way out of such an antagonistic discourse? “It feels to me that for great numbers of people – journalists, documentary-makers, social media users – ideology and activism have started to matter more than facts and evidence,” he says. “And that’s happening in different ways across the spectrum. The right tell these big, baroque, almost mythological lies, like QAnon or pizzagate . With the left it’s more subtle, like labelling gun-loving anti-government militia people as dangerous white supremacists actively conspiring to kickstart an ethnic-based civil war.” His remedy may sound a bit old-fashioned to some, but it involves reasserting the importance of some reportorial values that are under threat. “The fact that ideology-led nonfiction storytelling is happening everywhere feels worrying, because a society that stops caring about facts is a society where anything can happen. I think the way out of it is to treat people as complicated grey areas, rather than magnificent heroes or sickening villains. And to stick to the nuanced truth, rather than flattening it to make ideological points.” He’s quick to add a qualification: “That doesn’t mean I’m against activist journalism – it’s obviously done a lot of good. But the old rules of journalism – evidence, fairness – still need to apply.” Although he’s now known for his in-depth investigative pieces, Ronson originally started out as more of a comic writer. Initially working with bands in Manchester, he began contributing to the city’s listings magazine, then moved to London’s Time Out , and on to the Guardian , while building up a reputation for his humorously deadpan documentaries and books. ‘You’re going to call me a Holocaust denier now, are you?’: George Monbiot comes face to face with his local conspiracy theorist Read more Not untypical was the film Tottenham Ayatollah in 1997, whose story also featured in his 2001 book Them: Adventures With Extremists . Influenced, he acknowledges, by The Leader, His Driver and the Driver’s Wife , Nick Broomfield’s film about the white nationalist Afrikaner leader Eugène Terre’Blanche , it focused on Omar Bakri Mohammed, a rotund Islamist cleric portrayed as a slightly hapless figure given to absurd pronouncements. Yet it would later emerge that he would inspire terrorists. Was that a salutary experience? He says he was warned at the time by someone from the Board of Deputies of British Jews that the world hadn’t woken up to the fact that militant Islam was not a joke. “He was clearly proven right about that,” he says. “But I do think the comic absurdity of Omar Bakri’s story was valid because it’s the truth. Both things can be true: you can be absurd and also capable of inspiring terrorism.” His work, he agrees, has matured, as his style has become less overtly comic and more concerned with the most effective way to tell a story. With Things Fell Apart his storytelling succeeded in marrying gripping narrative to moral and psychological nuance. Who knows, he might even have helped bring a much-needed interest in unaligned reporting back into fashion. Things Fell Apart is available on BBC Sounds. Jon Ronson is speaking at Crossed Wires festival , Sheffield, 31 May and Union Chapel, London N1 , 3 June This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Jon Ronson The Observer Podcasts Radio 4 Radio BBC interviews Share Reuse this content Jon Ronson photographed in New York City by Mike McGregor for the Observer New Review, May 2024. View image in fullscreen Jon Ronson photographed in New York City by Mike McGregor for the Observer New Review, May 2024. Jon Ronson photographed in New York City by Mike McGregor for the Observer New Review, May 2024. View image in fullscreen Jon Ronson photographed in New York City by Mike McGregor for the Observer New Review, May 2024. Jon Ronson photographed in New York City by Mike McGregor for the Observer New Review, May 2024. View image in fullscreen Jon Ronson photographed in New York City by Mike McGregor for the Observer New Review, May 2024. Jon Ronson photographed in New York City by Mike McGregor for the Observer New Review, May 2024. View image in fullscreen Jon Ronson photographed in New York City by Mike McGregor for the Observer New Review, May 2024. Jon Ronson photographed in New York City by Mike McGregor for the Observer New Review, May 2024. Jon Ronson photographed in New York City by Mike McGregor for the Observer New Review, May 2024. This article is more than 1 year old Interview Jon Ronson: ‘A society that stops caring about facts is a society where anything can happen’ This article is more than 1 year old Andrew Anthony This article is more than 1 year old Interview Jon Ronson: ‘A society that stops caring about facts is a society where anything can happen’ This article is more than 1 year old Andrew Anthony This article is more than 1 year old Interview Jon Ronson: ‘A society that stops caring about facts is a society where anything can happen’ This article is more than 1 year old Andrew Anthony This article is more than 1 year old Interview Jon Ronson: ‘A society that stops caring about facts is a society where anything can happen’ This article is more than 1 year old Andrew Anthony This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old The second series of Things Fell Apart, the writer and broadcaster’s podcast series exploring conspiracy theories and the culture wars, topped the charts earlier this year. He explains why journalistic values such as evidence and fairness are needed more than ever The second series of Things Fell Apart, the writer and broadcaster’s podcast series exploring conspiracy theories and the culture wars, topped the charts earlier this year. He explains why journalistic values such as evidence and fairness are needed more than ever The second series of Things Fell Apart, the writer and broadcaster’s podcast series exploring conspiracy theories and the culture wars, topped the charts earlier this year. He explains why journalistic values such as evidence and fairness are needed more than ever J ust turned 57, Jon Ronson has had a number of successes in his multi-platform career, with books such as 2011’s The Psychopath Test and documentaries such as Stanley Kubrick’s Boxes . But perhaps none of his works has resonated quite so powerfully with audiences as the podcast Things Fell Apart – in particular the second series released by the BBC in January. Later this month he is due to discuss the show as a star guest at Sheffield’s podcast festival. Like the first series, it traces the origins of a number of conflagrations in the so-called culture wars, but it ingeniously sews together these disparate events and disagreements, tying them all to the early days of lockdown, so that listeners don’t so much hear about, as be transported into, a complex world of outrageous claims and counter-claims. Among other stories, he looks at how a bogus medical syndrome known as “excited delirium” was instrumental in guiding the Minneapolis police’s lethal treatment of George Floyd; the way that an Oxford traffic filter scheme and a futuristic think piece published by the World Economic Forum were falsely presented as a global conspiracy to control human movement and rob people of their property; and the dissemination of the idea that Covid-19 was created for big pharma profits. The eight episodes are characterised by compelling interviews with culture warriors, conspiracy theorists and their targets, which were notable for their curiosity, restraint and understanding. Given that some of the people Ronson speaks to seem to have lost all contact with objective reality, his questioning comes across as an impressive feat of empathy and toleration. Ronson, who grew up in Cardiff, now lives with his wife between a small apartment in Manhattan and a house in upstate New York. In a Zoom conversation, I ask him if it was difficult to withhold derision when dealing with people who spoke demonstrable untruths. “I think it comes with maturity and realising your own biases and stupidities,” he says. “I’m not very confrontational and sometimes you do need to be if someone is behaving in a way that is hurting people or doing something dangerous, like spreading medical misinformation. But in general, when does confrontation work?” One reason his technique is so effective is that the interviews are contextualised with Ronson’s reassuring, though often wry, factual commentary, which sounds like the fruit of deep research – unlike, it must be said, the vast majority of podcasts. How long did he spend on it? “The series took me 10 months,” he says. He’s aware that this kind of highly produced documentary approach is increasingly crowded out by cheaper, more personality-driven productions, but he remains a fan of both genres. “I like both sorts,” he says. “I like just two people chatting to each other, as long as they’re good. Most are terrible and responsible for the podcast glut, which means it’s impossible to know what to listen to. But when that chat between two people is good, it can be really good.” It was not until towards the end of the Things Fell Apart production schedule that he came up with the idea of the concluding episode , Mikki’s Hero’s Journey, which brings together many of the themes and events of the previous seven. It focuses on Mikki Willis, a former model and failed Hollywood actor who turns to producing conspiracy theory videos with ever more extreme and unfounded assertions. Willis’s launch success was the first video in his “Plandemic” trilogy , a May 2020 viral shock-doc that promoted the idea that vaccines are a profit-making enterprise that cause medical harm. From there his conspiracies expanded to include everything from Black Lives Matter to the World Economic Forum and antifa. “It was a eureka moment late on,” says Ronson, of his realisation that Willis was the unifying factor. “I thought it would make a nice bookend, because we hear Willis in an early episode interviewing Judy Mikovits for Plandemic, but he’s just a voice.” He decided to focus on him: “I wandered around for days listening to every interview he ever gave. When he mentioned being inspired by Joseph Campbell’s hero’s journey, I kind of stopped in my tracks, because that felt so intriguing and unexpected – and very illuminating. And then , when I watched all his documentaries, I noticed that he had turned everything we covered through the series into one uber-conspiracy.” Images of Judy Mikovits working in a lab and a group of protesters on a boardwalk in Huntington Beach, California It’s an utterly absorbing conclusion, both in terms of psychological insight and narrative satisfaction, and it also features a rare moment of confrontation, when Ronson tells Willis that he doesn’t think his claim about millions dying from the Covid vaccine is true. It’s not angry or aggressive, and Willis barely responds, but the effect is a refreshing raindrop of sanity in a desert of falsification. Paradoxically, though, in tying so many of the strands of the story to Willis, Ronson mirrors the join-the-dots approach of the conspiracy theorists, albeit with a far more painstaking and rational thesis. This is the occupational hazard of wading into these muddied and heavily disputed waters. Whatever you do, and however carefully you do it, you can lay yourself open to accusations of demonising one side, and supporting the other. Ronson is ever vigilant to this danger, and goes out of his way to balance competing voices, showing the flaws of rightwing anti-antifa protesters, but also of antifa supporters themselves; or the false allegations about encouraging transgender children in Florida schools, but also the blinkered dogmatism of some trans activists. None of that has prevented him from being subject to claims of bias. A number of prominent online activists have taken him to task for an episode in the BBC’s first series of Things Fell Apart , in 2021, that looked at the rise of third-wave feminism and the plight of Camp Trans, a protest against the exclusion of trans women from the all-female musical festival Michfest that ran in Michigan from 1976 to 2015. His critics accuse him of ignoring the murder by Dana Rivers, a Camp Trans participant, of a lesbian couple and their son in 2016. He points out that he was interested in Camp Trans’s formation in the 1990s, and that the murder took place two decades later and more than 2,000 miles away. “The reason I didn’t mention the murders is that Dana Rivers hadn’t gone to trial by the time my programme went out. And when she did go to trial, Michfest and Camp Trans were not brought up at all in court by either the defence or the prosecution. So I don’t think that criticism was fair.” View image in fullscreen Jon Ronson with Thom Robb, national director of the Knights of the KKK, for his 1999 Channel 4 documentary New Klan. Photograph: Channel 4 The polarising effects of these weaponised debates appears to be spreading through political systems and cultural institutions across the world. Is there a way out of such an antagonistic discourse? “It feels to me that for great numbers of people – journalists, documentary-makers, social media users – ideology and activism have started to matter more than facts and evidence,” he says. “And that’s happening in different ways across the spectrum. The right tell these big, baroque, almost mythological lies, like QAnon or pizzagate . With the left it’s more subtle, like labelling gun-loving anti-government militia people as dangerous white supremacists actively conspiring to kickstart an ethnic-based civil war.” His remedy may sound a bit old-fashioned to some, but it involves reasserting the importance of some reportorial values that are under threat. “The fact that ideology-led nonfiction storytelling is happening everywhere feels worrying, because a society that stops caring about facts is a society where anything can happen. I think the way out of it is to treat people as complicated grey areas, rather than magnificent heroes or sickening villains. And to stick to the nuanced truth, rather than flattening it to make ideological points.” He’s quick to add a qualification: “That doesn’t mean I’m against activist journalism – it’s obviously done a lot of good. But the old rules of journalism – evidence, fairness – still need to apply.” Although he’s now known for his in-depth investigative pieces, Ronson originally started out as more of a comic writer. Initially working with bands in Manchester, he began contributing to the city’s listings magazine, then moved to London’s Time Out , and on to the Guardian , while building up a reputation for his humorously deadpan documentaries and books. ‘You’re going to call me a Holocaust denier now, are you?’: George Monbiot comes face to face with his local conspiracy theorist Read more Not untypical was the film Tottenham Ayatollah in 1997, whose story also featured in his 2001 book Them: Adventures With Extremists . Influenced, he acknowledges, by The Leader, His Driver and the Driver’s Wife , Nick Broomfield’s film about the white nationalist Afrikaner leader Eugène Terre’Blanche , it focused on Omar Bakri Mohammed, a rotund Islamist cleric portrayed as a slightly hapless figure given to absurd pronouncements. Yet it would later emerge that he would inspire terrorists. Was that a salutary experience? He says he was warned at the time by someone from the Board of Deputies of British Jews that the world hadn’t woken up to the fact that militant Islam was not a joke. “He was clearly proven right about that,” he says. “But I do think the comic absurdity of Omar Bakri’s story was valid because it’s the truth. Both things can be true: you can be absurd and also capable of inspiring terrorism.” His work, he agrees, has matured, as his style has become less overtly comic and more concerned with the most effective way to tell a story. With Things Fell Apart his storytelling succeeded in marrying gripping narrative to moral and psychological nuance. Who knows, he might even have helped bring a much-needed interest in unaligned reporting back into fashion. Things Fell Apart is available on BBC Sounds. Jon Ronson is speaking at Crossed Wires festival , Sheffield, 31 May and Union Chapel, London N1 , 3 June This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Jon Ronson The Observer Podcasts Radio 4 Radio BBC interviews Share Reuse this content J ust turned 57, Jon Ronson has had a number of successes in his multi-platform career, with books such as 2011’s The Psychopath Test and documentaries such as Stanley Kubrick’s Boxes . But perhaps none of his works has resonated quite so powerfully with audiences as the podcast Things Fell Apart – in particular the second series released by the BBC in January. Later this month he is due to discuss the show as a star guest at Sheffield’s podcast festival. Like the first series, it traces the origins of a number of conflagrations in the so-called culture wars, but it ingeniously sews together these disparate events and disagreements, tying them all to the early days of lockdown, so that listeners don’t so much hear about, as be transported into, a complex world of outrageous claims and counter-claims. Among other stories, he looks at how a bogus medical syndrome known as “excited delirium” was instrumental in guiding the Minneapolis police’s lethal treatment of George Floyd; the way that an Oxford traffic filter scheme and a futuristic think piece published by the World Economic Forum were falsely presented as a global conspiracy to control human movement and rob people of their property; and the dissemination of the idea that Covid-19 was created for big pharma profits. The eight episodes are characterised by compelling interviews with culture warriors, conspiracy theorists and their targets, which were notable for their curiosity, restraint and understanding. Given that some of the people Ronson speaks to seem to have lost all contact with objective reality, his questioning comes across as an impressive feat of empathy and toleration. Ronson, who grew up in Cardiff, now lives with his wife between a small apartment in Manhattan and a house in upstate New York. In a Zoom conversation, I ask him if it was difficult to withhold derision when dealing with people who spoke demonstrable untruths. “I think it comes with maturity and realising your own biases and stupidities,” he says. “I’m not very confrontational and sometimes you do need to be if someone is behaving in a way that is hurting people or doing something dangerous, like spreading medical misinformation. But in general, when does confrontation work?” One reason his technique is so effective is that the interviews are contextualised with Ronson’s reassuring, though often wry, factual commentary, which sounds like the fruit of deep research – unlike, it must be said, the vast majority of podcasts. How long did he spend on it? “The series took me 10 months,” he says. He’s aware that this kind of highly produced documentary approach is increasingly crowded out by cheaper, more personality-driven productions, but he remains a fan of both genres. “I like both sorts,” he says. “I like just two people chatting to each other, as long as they’re good. Most are terrible and responsible for the podcast glut, which means it’s impossible to know what to listen to. But when that chat between two people is good, it can be really good.” It was not until towards the end of the Things Fell Apart production schedule that he came up with the idea of the concluding episode , Mikki’s Hero’s Journey, which brings together many of the themes and events of the previous seven. It focuses on Mikki Willis, a former model and failed Hollywood actor who turns to producing conspiracy theory videos with ever more extreme and unfounded assertions. Willis’s launch success was the first video in his “Plandemic” trilogy , a May 2020 viral shock-doc that promoted the idea that vaccines are a profit-making enterprise that cause medical harm. From there his conspiracies expanded to include everything from Black Lives Matter to the World Economic Forum and antifa. “It was a eureka moment late on,” says Ronson, of his realisation that Willis was the unifying factor. “I thought it would make a nice bookend, because we hear Willis in an early episode interviewing Judy Mikovits for Plandemic, but he’s just a voice.” He decided to focus on him: “I wandered around for days listening to every interview he ever gave. When he mentioned being inspired by Joseph Campbell’s hero’s journey, I kind of stopped in my tracks, because that felt so intriguing and unexpected – and very illuminating. And then , when I watched all his documentaries, I noticed that he had turned everything we covered through the series into one uber-conspiracy.” Images of Judy Mikovits working in a lab and a group of protesters on a boardwalk in Huntington Beach, California It’s an utterly absorbing conclusion, both in terms of psychological insight and narrative satisfaction, and it also features a rare moment of confrontation, when Ronson tells Willis that he doesn’t think his claim about millions dying from the Covid vaccine is true. It’s not angry or aggressive, and Willis barely responds, but the effect is a refreshing raindrop of sanity in a desert of falsification. Paradoxically, though, in tying so many of the strands of the story to Willis, Ronson mirrors the join-the-dots approach of the conspiracy theorists, albeit with a far more painstaking and rational thesis. This is the occupational hazard of wading into these muddied and heavily disputed waters. Whatever you do, and however carefully you do it, you can lay yourself open to accusations of demonising one side, and supporting the other. Ronson is ever vigilant to this danger, and goes out of his way to balance competing voices, showing the flaws of rightwing anti-antifa protesters, but also of antifa supporters themselves; or the false allegations about encouraging transgender children in Florida schools, but also the blinkered dogmatism of some trans activists. None of that has prevented him from being subject to claims of bias. A number of prominent online activists have taken him to task for an episode in the BBC’s first series of Things Fell Apart , in 2021, that looked at the rise of third-wave feminism and the plight of Camp Trans, a protest against the exclusion of trans women from the all-female musical festival Michfest that ran in Michigan from 1976 to 2015. His critics accuse him of ignoring the murder by Dana Rivers, a Camp Trans participant, of a lesbian couple and their son in 2016. He points out that he was interested in Camp Trans’s formation in the 1990s, and that the murder took place two decades later and more than 2,000 miles away. “The reason I didn’t mention the murders is that Dana Rivers hadn’t gone to trial by the time my programme went out. And when she did go to trial, Michfest and Camp Trans were not brought up at all in court by either the defence or the prosecution. So I don’t think that criticism was fair.” View image in fullscreen Jon Ronson with Thom Robb, national director of the Knights of the KKK, for his 1999 Channel 4 documentary New Klan. Photograph: Channel 4 The polarising effects of these weaponised debates appears to be spreading through political systems and cultural institutions across the world. Is there a way out of such an antagonistic discourse? “It feels to me that for great numbers of people – journalists, documentary-makers, social media users – ideology and activism have started to matter more than facts and evidence,” he says. “And that’s happening in different ways across the spectrum. The right tell these big, baroque, almost mythological lies, like QAnon or pizzagate . With the left it’s more subtle, like labelling gun-loving anti-government militia people as dangerous white supremacists actively conspiring to kickstart an ethnic-based civil war.” His remedy may sound a bit old-fashioned to some, but it involves reasserting the importance of some reportorial values that are under threat. “The fact that ideology-led nonfiction storytelling is happening everywhere feels worrying, because a society that stops caring about facts is a society where anything can happen. I think the way out of it is to treat people as complicated grey areas, rather than magnificent heroes or sickening villains. And to stick to the nuanced truth, rather than flattening it to make ideological points.” He’s quick to add a qualification: “That doesn’t mean I’m against activist journalism – it’s obviously done a lot of good. But the old rules of journalism – evidence, fairness – still need to apply.” Although he’s now known for his in-depth investigative pieces, Ronson originally started out as more of a comic writer. Initially working with bands in Manchester, he began contributing to the city’s listings magazine, then moved to London’s Time Out , and on to the Guardian , while building up a reputation for his humorously deadpan documentaries and books. ‘You’re going to call me a Holocaust denier now, are you?’: George Monbiot comes face to face with his local conspiracy theorist Read more Not untypical was the film Tottenham Ayatollah in 1997, whose story also featured in his 2001 book Them: Adventures With Extremists . Influenced, he acknowledges, by The Leader, His Driver and the Driver’s Wife , Nick Broomfield’s film about the white nationalist Afrikaner leader Eugène Terre’Blanche , it focused on Omar Bakri Mohammed, a rotund Islamist cleric portrayed as a slightly hapless figure given to absurd pronouncements. Yet it would later emerge that he would inspire terrorists. Was that a salutary experience? He says he was warned at the time by someone from the Board of Deputies of British Jews that the world hadn’t woken up to the fact that militant Islam was not a joke. “He was clearly proven right about that,” he says. “But I do think the comic absurdity of Omar Bakri’s story was valid because it’s the truth. Both things can be true: you can be absurd and also capable of inspiring terrorism.” His work, he agrees, has matured, as his style has become less overtly comic and more concerned with the most effective way to tell a story. With Things Fell Apart his storytelling succeeded in marrying gripping narrative to moral and psychological nuance. Who knows, he might even have helped bring a much-needed interest in unaligned reporting back into fashion. Things Fell Apart is available on BBC Sounds. Jon Ronson is speaking at Crossed Wires festival , Sheffield, 31 May and Union Chapel, London N1 , 3 June This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Jon Ronson The Observer Podcasts Radio 4 Radio BBC interviews Share Reuse this content J ust turned 57, Jon Ronson has had a number of successes in his multi-platform career, with books such as 2011’s The Psychopath Test and documentaries such as Stanley Kubrick’s Boxes . But perhaps none of his works has resonated quite so powerfully with audiences as the podcast Things Fell Apart – in particular the second series released by the BBC in January. Later this month he is due to discuss the show as a star guest at Sheffield’s podcast festival. Like the first series, it traces the origins of a number of conflagrations in the so-called culture wars, but it ingeniously sews together these disparate events and disagreements, tying them all to the early days of lockdown, so that listeners don’t so much hear about, as be transported into, a complex world of outrageous claims and counter-claims. Among other stories, he looks at how a bogus medical syndrome known as “excited delirium” was instrumental in guiding the Minneapolis police’s lethal treatment of George Floyd; the way that an Oxford traffic filter scheme and a futuristic think piece published by the World Economic Forum were falsely presented as a global conspiracy to control human movement and rob people of their property; and the dissemination of the idea that Covid-19 was created for big pharma profits. The eight episodes are characterised by compelling interviews with culture warriors, conspiracy theorists and their targets, which were notable for their curiosity, restraint and understanding. Given that some of the people Ronson speaks to seem to have lost all contact with objective reality, his questioning comes across as an impressive feat of empathy and toleration. Ronson, who grew up in Cardiff, now lives with his wife between a small apartment in Manhattan and a house in upstate New York. In a Zoom conversation, I ask him if it was difficult to withhold derision when dealing with people who spoke demonstrable untruths. “I think it comes with maturity and realising your own biases and stupidities,” he says. “I’m not very confrontational and sometimes you do need to be if someone is behaving in a way that is hurting people or doing something dangerous, like spreading medical misinformation. But in general, when does confrontation work?” One reason his technique is so effective is that the interviews are contextualised with Ronson’s reassuring, though often wry, factual commentary, which sounds like the fruit of deep research – unlike, it must be said, the vast majority of podcasts. How long did he spend on it? “The series took me 10 months,” he says. He’s aware that this kind of highly produced documentary approach is increasingly crowded out by cheaper, more personality-driven productions, but he remains a fan of both genres. “I like both sorts,” he says. “I like just two people chatting to each other, as long as they’re good. Most are terrible and responsible for the podcast glut, which
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
The growing tensions over immigration in Ireland
This article is more than 1 year old The growing tensions over immigration in Ireland This article is more than 1 year old 00:00:00 00:00:00 Rory Carroll, the Guardian’s Ireland correspondent, looks at what is fuelling anti-immigrant anger in the Republic of Ireland Immigration has increasingly become a point of tension in Ireland . Recently, the Irish government said the threat of deportation to Rwanda had partly fuelled a surge in arrivals entering Ireland via the land border with Northern Ireland, a route that it says now accounts for more than 80% of asylum seekers in the republic. The Irish Refugee Council and other advocacy groups have questioned the figure. On Monday a judge in Belfast ruled that large parts of the UK government’s illegal migration act should not apply in Northern Ireland because they breach human rights laws; the UK government has said it will appeal the ruling. Today in Focus host Hannah Moore talks to Rory Carroll, the Guardian’s Ireland correspondent, about immigration policy in Ireland. He tells Hannah that a changing population, a housing crisis and social and economic inequalities have led to rising anti-immigrant sentiment in Ireland. In November, riots broke out after a stabbing in Dublin. Social media commentators outed the alleged assailant as a foreigner – in fact, he was a naturalised Irish citizen, reportedly from Algeria – and a violent protest ensued. Hundreds of people rampaged through central Dublin, targeting property and police. Leon Diop , co-founder of Black & Irish, says the riots were a watershed moment and that he feels racism has become supercharged in Ireland. Previously, he says: “I didn’t really feel like I could be physically attacked. There have been incidents now, in Ireland, where people have been killed because they didn’t speak English.” Archive: Channel 4 News; YouTube Photograph: Clodagh Kilcoyne/Reuters Explore more on these topics Ireland Today in Focus This article is more than 1 year old The growing tensions over immigration in Ireland This article is more than 1 year old 00:00:00 00:00:00 Rory Carroll, the Guardian’s Ireland correspondent, looks at what is fuelling anti-immigrant anger in the Republic of Ireland Immigration has increasingly become a point of tension in Ireland . Recently, the Irish government said the threat of deportation to Rwanda had partly fuelled a surge in arrivals entering Ireland via the land border with Northern Ireland, a route that it says now accounts for more than 80% of asylum seekers in the republic. The Irish Refugee Council and other advocacy groups have questioned the figure. On Monday a judge in Belfast ruled that large parts of the UK government’s illegal migration act should not apply in Northern Ireland because they breach human rights laws; the UK government has said it will appeal the ruling. Today in Focus host Hannah Moore talks to Rory Carroll, the Guardian’s Ireland correspondent, about immigration policy in Ireland. He tells Hannah that a changing population, a housing crisis and social and economic inequalities have led to rising anti-immigrant sentiment in Ireland. In November, riots broke out after a stabbing in Dublin. Social media commentators outed the alleged assailant as a foreigner – in fact, he was a naturalised Irish citizen, reportedly from Algeria – and a violent protest ensued. Hundreds of people rampaged through central Dublin, targeting property and police. Leon Diop , co-founder of Black & Irish, says the riots were a watershed moment and that he feels racism has become supercharged in Ireland. Previously, he says: “I didn’t really feel like I could be physically attacked. There have been incidents now, in Ireland, where people have been killed because they didn’t speak English.” Archive: Channel 4 News; YouTube Photograph: Clodagh Kilcoyne/Reuters Explore more on these topics Ireland Today in Focus This article is more than 1 year old The growing tensions over immigration in Ireland This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old The growing tensions over immigration in Ireland This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old The growing tensions over immigration in Ireland This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Rory Carroll, the Guardian’s Ireland correspondent, looks at what is fuelling anti-immigrant anger in the Republic of Ireland Rory Carroll, the Guardian’s Ireland correspondent, looks at what is fuelling anti-immigrant anger in the Republic of Ireland Rory Carroll, the Guardian’s Ireland correspondent, looks at what is fuelling anti-immigrant anger in the Republic of Ireland Immigration has increasingly become a point of tension in Ireland . Recently, the Irish government said the threat of deportation to Rwanda had partly fuelled a surge in arrivals entering Ireland via the land border with Northern Ireland, a route that it says now accounts for more than 80% of asylum seekers in the republic. The Irish Refugee Council and other advocacy groups have questioned the figure. On Monday a judge in Belfast ruled that large parts of the UK government’s illegal migration act should not apply in Northern Ireland because they breach human rights laws; the UK government has said it will appeal the ruling. Today in Focus host Hannah Moore talks to Rory Carroll, the Guardian’s Ireland correspondent, about immigration policy in Ireland. He tells Hannah that a changing population, a housing crisis and social and economic inequalities have led to rising anti-immigrant sentiment in Ireland. In November, riots broke out after a stabbing in Dublin. Social media commentators outed the alleged assailant as a foreigner – in fact, he was a naturalised Irish citizen, reportedly from Algeria – and a violent protest ensued. Hundreds of people rampaged through central Dublin, targeting property and police. Leon Diop , co-founder of Black & Irish, says the riots were a watershed moment and that he feels racism has become supercharged in Ireland. Previously, he says: “I didn’t really feel like I could be physically attacked. There have been incidents now, in Ireland, where people have been killed because they didn’t speak English.” Archive: Channel 4 News; YouTube Photograph: Clodagh Kilcoyne/Reuters Explore more on these topics Ireland Today in Focus Immigration has increasingly become a point of tension in Ireland . Recently, the Irish government said the threat of deportation to Rwanda had partly fuelled a surge in arrivals entering Ireland via the land border with Northern Ireland, a route that it says now accounts for more than 80% of asylum seekers in the republic. The Irish Refugee Council and other advocacy groups have questioned the figure. On Monday a judge in Belfast ruled that large parts of the UK government’s illegal migration act should not apply in Northern Ireland because they breach human rights laws; the UK government has said it will appeal the ruling. Today in Focus host Hannah Moore talks to Rory Carroll, the Guardian’s Ireland correspondent, about immigration policy in Ireland. He tells Hannah that a changing population, a housing crisis and social and economic inequalities have led to rising anti-immigrant sentiment in Ireland. In November, riots broke out after a stabbing in Dublin. Social media commentators outed the alleged assailant as a foreigner – in fact, he was a naturalised Irish citizen, reportedly from Algeria – and a violent protest ensued. Hundreds of people rampaged through central Dublin, targeting property and police. Leon Diop , co-founder of Black & Irish, says the riots were a watershed moment and that he feels racism has become supercharged in Ireland. Previously, he says: “I didn’t really feel like I could be physically attacked. There have been incidents now, in Ireland, where people have been killed because they didn’t speak English.” Archive: Channel 4 News; YouTube Photograph: Clodagh Kilcoyne/Reuters Explore more on these topics Ireland Today in Focus Immigration has increasingly become a point of tension in Ireland . Recently, the Irish government said the threat of deportation to Rwanda had partly fuelled a surge in arrivals entering Ireland via the land border with Northern Ireland, a route that it says now accounts for more than 80% of asylum seekers in the republic. The Irish Refugee Council and other advocacy groups have questioned the figure. On Monday a judge in Belfast ruled that large parts of the UK government’s illegal migration act should not apply in Northern Ireland because they breach human rights laws; the UK government has said it will appeal the ruling. Today in Focus host Hannah Moore talks to Rory Carroll, the Guardian’s Ireland correspondent, about immigration policy in Ireland. He tells Hannah that a changing population, a housing crisis and social and economic inequalities have led to rising anti-immigrant sentiment in Ireland. In November, riots broke out after a stabbing in Dublin. Social media commentators outed the alleged assailant as a foreigner – in fact, he was a naturalised Irish citizen, reportedly from Algeria – and a violent protest ensued. Hundreds of people rampaged through central Dublin, targeting property and police. Leon Diop , co-founder of Black & Irish, says the riots were a watershed moment and that he feels racism has become supercharged in Ireland. Previously, he says: “I didn’t really feel like I could be physically attacked. There have been incidents now, in Ireland, where people have been killed because they didn’t speak English.” Archive: Channel 4 News; YouTube Photograph: Clodagh Kilcoyne/Reuters Immigration has increasingly become a point of tension in Ireland . Recently, the Irish government said the threat of deportation to Rwanda had partly fuelled a surge in arrivals entering Ireland via the land border with Northern Ireland, a route that it says now accounts for more than 80% of asylum seekers in the republic. The Irish Refugee Council and other advocacy groups have questioned the figure. On Monday a judge in Belfast ruled that large parts of the UK government’s illegal migration act should not apply in Northern Ireland because they breach human rights laws; the UK government has said it will appeal the ruling. Today in Focus host Hannah Moore talks to Rory Carroll, the Guardian’s Ireland correspondent, about immigration policy in Ireland. He tells Hannah that a changing population, a housing crisis and social and economic inequalities have led to rising anti-immigrant sentiment in Ireland. In November, riots broke out after a stabbing in Dublin. Social media commentators outed the alleged assailant as a foreigner – in fact, he was a naturalised Irish citizen, reportedly from Algeria – and a violent protest ensued. Hundreds of people rampaged through central Dublin, targeting property and police. Leon Diop , co-founder of Black & Irish, says the riots were a watershed moment and that he feels racism has become supercharged in Ireland. Previously, he says: “I didn’t really feel like I could be physically attacked. There have been incidents now, in Ireland, where people have been killed because they didn’t speak English.” Archive: Channel 4 News; YouTube Photograph: Clodagh Kilcoyne/Reuters Immigration has increasingly become a point of tension in Ireland . Recently, the Irish government said the threat of deportation to Rwanda had partly fuelled a surge in arrivals entering Ireland via the land border with Northern Ireland, a route that it says now accounts for more than 80% of asylum seekers in the republic. The Irish Refugee Council and other advocacy groups have questioned the figure. On Monday a judge in Belfast ruled that large parts of the UK government’s illegal migration act should not apply in Northern Ireland because they breach human rights laws; the UK government has said it will appeal the ruling. Today in Focus host Hannah Moore talks to Rory Carroll, the Guardian’s Ireland correspondent, about immigration policy in Ireland. He tells Hannah that a changing population, a housing crisis and social and economic inequalities have led to rising anti-immigrant sentiment in Ireland. In November, riots broke out after a stabbing in Dublin. Social media commentators outed the alleged assailant as a foreigner – in fact, he was a naturalised Irish citizen, reportedly from Algeria – and a violent protest ensued. Hundreds of people rampaged through central Dublin, targeting property and police. Leon Diop , co-founder of Black & Irish, says the riots were a watershed moment and that he feels racism has become supercharged in Ireland. Previously, he says: “I didn’t really feel like I could be physically attacked. There have been incidents now, in Ireland, where people have been killed because they didn’t speak English.” Archive: Channel 4 News; YouTube Explore more on these topics Ireland Today in Focus |
Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest – video
0:53 This article is more than 1 year old Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest – video This article is more than 1 year old Dozens of students walked out of a commencement ceremony on Sunday at Duke University, North Carolina , to protest against the presence of the comedian Jerry Seinfeld , who has supported Israel throughout the war in Gaza. Figures in robes and caps, some waving Palestinian flags, filed out of the ceremony held on the grass in the university’s football stadium, and several people left the viewing stands. Others in the crowd shouted, “Jerry! Jerry!” as the actor received an honorary degree. Seinfeld delivered his speech without major interruptions Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest Israel-Gaza war – live updates Explore more on these topics Jerry Seinfeld US campus protests Israel-Gaza war North Carolina US universities Protest 0:53 This article is more than 1 year old Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest – video This article is more than 1 year old Dozens of students walked out of a commencement ceremony on Sunday at Duke University, North Carolina , to protest against the presence of the comedian Jerry Seinfeld , who has supported Israel throughout the war in Gaza. Figures in robes and caps, some waving Palestinian flags, filed out of the ceremony held on the grass in the university’s football stadium, and several people left the viewing stands. Others in the crowd shouted, “Jerry! Jerry!” as the actor received an honorary degree. Seinfeld delivered his speech without major interruptions Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest Israel-Gaza war – live updates Explore more on these topics Jerry Seinfeld US campus protests Israel-Gaza war North Carolina US universities Protest This article is more than 1 year old Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest – video This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest – video This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest – video This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Dozens of students walked out of a commencement ceremony on Sunday at Duke University, North Carolina , to protest against the presence of the comedian Jerry Seinfeld , who has supported Israel throughout the war in Gaza. Figures in robes and caps, some waving Palestinian flags, filed out of the ceremony held on the grass in the university’s football stadium, and several people left the viewing stands. Others in the crowd shouted, “Jerry! Jerry!” as the actor received an honorary degree. Seinfeld delivered his speech without major interruptions Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest Israel-Gaza war – live updates Dozens of students walked out of a commencement ceremony on Sunday at Duke University, North Carolina , to protest against the presence of the comedian Jerry Seinfeld , who has supported Israel throughout the war in Gaza. Figures in robes and caps, some waving Palestinian flags, filed out of the ceremony held on the grass in the university’s football stadium, and several people left the viewing stands. Others in the crowd shouted, “Jerry! Jerry!” as the actor received an honorary degree. Seinfeld delivered his speech without major interruptions Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest Israel-Gaza war – live updates Dozens of students walked out of a commencement ceremony on Sunday at Duke University, North Carolina , to protest against the presence of the comedian Jerry Seinfeld , who has supported Israel throughout the war in Gaza. Figures in robes and caps, some waving Palestinian flags, filed out of the ceremony held on the grass in the university’s football stadium, and several people left the viewing stands. Others in the crowd shouted, “Jerry! Jerry!” as the actor received an honorary degree. Seinfeld delivered his speech without major interruptions Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest Explore more on these topics Jerry Seinfeld US campus protests Israel-Gaza war North Carolina US universities Protest Explore more on these topics Jerry Seinfeld US campus protests Israel-Gaza war North Carolina US universities Protest Explore more on these topics Jerry Seinfeld US campus protests Israel-Gaza war North Carolina US universities Protest Jerry Seinfeld US campus protests Israel-Gaza war North Carolina US universities Protest |
‘Who do you trust to keep you safe?’: Sunak to fight next election on UK’s security
Rishi Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history. Photograph: Carl Court/AP View image in fullscreen Rishi Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history. Photograph: Carl Court/AP This article is more than 1 year old ‘Who do you trust to keep you safe?’: Sunak to fight next election on UK’s security This article is more than 1 year old Prime minister says in speech he will frame Tories as party of the future, while Labour has negative agenda Rishi Sunak has vowed to fight the next election on the UK’s security, attacking Labour and Keir Starmer in a fiercely political speech in which he said: “The choice at the next election is: who do you trust to keep you safe?” The prime minister said in his speech he would frame the Conservatives as the party of the future, but also defended the party’s record over the past 14 years, and said Starmer’s “past actions” meant the Labour leader would not be able to keep the country safe. The attacks drew a rebuff from Starmer: “This is the seventh reset in 18 months. I know first-hand the importance of national security … but in order for that to happen you need a credible plan. What’s his record? He’s hollowed out our armed forces, he’s wasted billions of pounds on procurement.” In his wide-ranging speech at the Policy Exchange thinktank, Sunak rejected the opportunity to name an election date, but said he would debate Starmer “as many times as he likes” during the campaign. “Keir Starmer’s gone from embracing Jeremy Corbyn to Natalie Elphicke, all in the cynical pursuit of power at any price,” Sunak said. Rishi Sunak to face pressure to shift right after disastrous election results Read more The speech comes at the end of a difficult fortnight for the prime minister after a series of defeats at the local elections including losing the Conservative mayor of the West Midlands, Andy Street, as well as the defection of Elphicke , one of his backbench MPs, who joined Labour to criticise his failure to tackle migrant arrivals on small boats. Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history, with threats from “an axis of authoritarian states like Russia, Iran, North Korea and China”, as well as the challenges of illegal migration, divisive cultural issues and the transformational consequences of artificial intelligence. “Extremists are also exploiting these global conflicts to divide us. People are abusing our liberal democratic values – the freedom of speech and right of protest – to intimidate, threaten and assault others, to sing antisemitic chants on our streets,” he said. “And from gender activists hijacking children’s sex education to cancel culture, vocal and aggressive fringe groups are trying to impose their views on the rest of us.” But the prime minister said he was optimistic about the future, and he would frame the next election as a choice between parties with a plan for the future versus dwelling on the past. He said the Conservatives had plans on a broad range of issues, from a smoking ban and cancer diagnostics to extending maths to all 18-year-olds. Acknowledging the dire position of his own party in the polls, Sunak said the Labour party was fighting the election with a purely negative agenda. “I’m clear-eyed enough to admit that yes, maybe they can depress their way to victory with all their talk of doom loops and gaslighting and scaremongering about pensions. But I don’t think it will work,” he said. “Labour have no ideas. What they did have they’ve U-turned on. They have just one thing: a calculation that they can make you feel so bad about your country that you won’t have the energy to ask what they might do with the incredible power that they seek to wield.” In a shift from his party conference speech when he said he would end the “30 years of status quo”, Sunak launched into a defence of his party’s record in government. He named the creation of 4 million jobs, delivering the Covid vaccine rollout, NHS funding, pensions triple lock, universal credit and cutting carbon emissions as key achievements. Explore more on these topics Rishi Sunak Conservatives General elections Keir Starmer Defence policy Military news Share Reuse this content Rishi Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history. Photograph: Carl Court/AP View image in fullscreen Rishi Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history. Photograph: Carl Court/AP This article is more than 1 year old ‘Who do you trust to keep you safe?’: Sunak to fight next election on UK’s security This article is more than 1 year old Prime minister says in speech he will frame Tories as party of the future, while Labour has negative agenda Rishi Sunak has vowed to fight the next election on the UK’s security, attacking Labour and Keir Starmer in a fiercely political speech in which he said: “The choice at the next election is: who do you trust to keep you safe?” The prime minister said in his speech he would frame the Conservatives as the party of the future, but also defended the party’s record over the past 14 years, and said Starmer’s “past actions” meant the Labour leader would not be able to keep the country safe. The attacks drew a rebuff from Starmer: “This is the seventh reset in 18 months. I know first-hand the importance of national security … but in order for that to happen you need a credible plan. What’s his record? He’s hollowed out our armed forces, he’s wasted billions of pounds on procurement.” In his wide-ranging speech at the Policy Exchange thinktank, Sunak rejected the opportunity to name an election date, but said he would debate Starmer “as many times as he likes” during the campaign. “Keir Starmer’s gone from embracing Jeremy Corbyn to Natalie Elphicke, all in the cynical pursuit of power at any price,” Sunak said. Rishi Sunak to face pressure to shift right after disastrous election results Read more The speech comes at the end of a difficult fortnight for the prime minister after a series of defeats at the local elections including losing the Conservative mayor of the West Midlands, Andy Street, as well as the defection of Elphicke , one of his backbench MPs, who joined Labour to criticise his failure to tackle migrant arrivals on small boats. Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history, with threats from “an axis of authoritarian states like Russia, Iran, North Korea and China”, as well as the challenges of illegal migration, divisive cultural issues and the transformational consequences of artificial intelligence. “Extremists are also exploiting these global conflicts to divide us. People are abusing our liberal democratic values – the freedom of speech and right of protest – to intimidate, threaten and assault others, to sing antisemitic chants on our streets,” he said. “And from gender activists hijacking children’s sex education to cancel culture, vocal and aggressive fringe groups are trying to impose their views on the rest of us.” But the prime minister said he was optimistic about the future, and he would frame the next election as a choice between parties with a plan for the future versus dwelling on the past. He said the Conservatives had plans on a broad range of issues, from a smoking ban and cancer diagnostics to extending maths to all 18-year-olds. Acknowledging the dire position of his own party in the polls, Sunak said the Labour party was fighting the election with a purely negative agenda. “I’m clear-eyed enough to admit that yes, maybe they can depress their way to victory with all their talk of doom loops and gaslighting and scaremongering about pensions. But I don’t think it will work,” he said. “Labour have no ideas. What they did have they’ve U-turned on. They have just one thing: a calculation that they can make you feel so bad about your country that you won’t have the energy to ask what they might do with the incredible power that they seek to wield.” In a shift from his party conference speech when he said he would end the “30 years of status quo”, Sunak launched into a defence of his party’s record in government. He named the creation of 4 million jobs, delivering the Covid vaccine rollout, NHS funding, pensions triple lock, universal credit and cutting carbon emissions as key achievements. Explore more on these topics Rishi Sunak Conservatives General elections Keir Starmer Defence policy Military news Share Reuse this content Rishi Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history. Photograph: Carl Court/AP View image in fullscreen Rishi Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history. Photograph: Carl Court/AP Rishi Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history. Photograph: Carl Court/AP View image in fullscreen Rishi Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history. Photograph: Carl Court/AP Rishi Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history. Photograph: Carl Court/AP View image in fullscreen Rishi Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history. Photograph: Carl Court/AP Rishi Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history. Photograph: Carl Court/AP View image in fullscreen Rishi Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history. Photograph: Carl Court/AP Rishi Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history. Photograph: Carl Court/AP Rishi Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history. Photograph: Carl Court/AP This article is more than 1 year old ‘Who do you trust to keep you safe?’: Sunak to fight next election on UK’s security This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Who do you trust to keep you safe?’: Sunak to fight next election on UK’s security This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Who do you trust to keep you safe?’: Sunak to fight next election on UK’s security This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Prime minister says in speech he will frame Tories as party of the future, while Labour has negative agenda Prime minister says in speech he will frame Tories as party of the future, while Labour has negative agenda Prime minister says in speech he will frame Tories as party of the future, while Labour has negative agenda Rishi Sunak has vowed to fight the next election on the UK’s security, attacking Labour and Keir Starmer in a fiercely political speech in which he said: “The choice at the next election is: who do you trust to keep you safe?” The prime minister said in his speech he would frame the Conservatives as the party of the future, but also defended the party’s record over the past 14 years, and said Starmer’s “past actions” meant the Labour leader would not be able to keep the country safe. The attacks drew a rebuff from Starmer: “This is the seventh reset in 18 months. I know first-hand the importance of national security … but in order for that to happen you need a credible plan. What’s his record? He’s hollowed out our armed forces, he’s wasted billions of pounds on procurement.” In his wide-ranging speech at the Policy Exchange thinktank, Sunak rejected the opportunity to name an election date, but said he would debate Starmer “as many times as he likes” during the campaign. “Keir Starmer’s gone from embracing Jeremy Corbyn to Natalie Elphicke, all in the cynical pursuit of power at any price,” Sunak said. Rishi Sunak to face pressure to shift right after disastrous election results Read more The speech comes at the end of a difficult fortnight for the prime minister after a series of defeats at the local elections including losing the Conservative mayor of the West Midlands, Andy Street, as well as the defection of Elphicke , one of his backbench MPs, who joined Labour to criticise his failure to tackle migrant arrivals on small boats. Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history, with threats from “an axis of authoritarian states like Russia, Iran, North Korea and China”, as well as the challenges of illegal migration, divisive cultural issues and the transformational consequences of artificial intelligence. “Extremists are also exploiting these global conflicts to divide us. People are abusing our liberal democratic values – the freedom of speech and right of protest – to intimidate, threaten and assault others, to sing antisemitic chants on our streets,” he said. “And from gender activists hijacking children’s sex education to cancel culture, vocal and aggressive fringe groups are trying to impose their views on the rest of us.” But the prime minister said he was optimistic about the future, and he would frame the next election as a choice between parties with a plan for the future versus dwelling on the past. He said the Conservatives had plans on a broad range of issues, from a smoking ban and cancer diagnostics to extending maths to all 18-year-olds. Acknowledging the dire position of his own party in the polls, Sunak said the Labour party was fighting the election with a purely negative agenda. “I’m clear-eyed enough to admit that yes, maybe they can depress their way to victory with all their talk of doom loops and gaslighting and scaremongering about pensions. But I don’t think it will work,” he said. “Labour have no ideas. What they did have they’ve U-turned on. They have just one thing: a calculation that they can make you feel so bad about your country that you won’t have the energy to ask what they might do with the incredible power that they seek to wield.” In a shift from his party conference speech when he said he would end the “30 years of status quo”, Sunak launched into a defence of his party’s record in government. He named the creation of 4 million jobs, delivering the Covid vaccine rollout, NHS funding, pensions triple lock, universal credit and cutting carbon emissions as key achievements. Explore more on these topics Rishi Sunak Conservatives General elections Keir Starmer Defence policy Military news Share Reuse this content Rishi Sunak has vowed to fight the next election on the UK’s security, attacking Labour and Keir Starmer in a fiercely political speech in which he said: “The choice at the next election is: who do you trust to keep you safe?” The prime minister said in his speech he would frame the Conservatives as the party of the future, but also defended the party’s record over the past 14 years, and said Starmer’s “past actions” meant the Labour leader would not be able to keep the country safe. The attacks drew a rebuff from Starmer: “This is the seventh reset in 18 months. I know first-hand the importance of national security … but in order for that to happen you need a credible plan. What’s his record? He’s hollowed out our armed forces, he’s wasted billions of pounds on procurement.” In his wide-ranging speech at the Policy Exchange thinktank, Sunak rejected the opportunity to name an election date, but said he would debate Starmer “as many times as he likes” during the campaign. “Keir Starmer’s gone from embracing Jeremy Corbyn to Natalie Elphicke, all in the cynical pursuit of power at any price,” Sunak said. Rishi Sunak to face pressure to shift right after disastrous election results Read more The speech comes at the end of a difficult fortnight for the prime minister after a series of defeats at the local elections including losing the Conservative mayor of the West Midlands, Andy Street, as well as the defection of Elphicke , one of his backbench MPs, who joined Labour to criticise his failure to tackle migrant arrivals on small boats. Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history, with threats from “an axis of authoritarian states like Russia, Iran, North Korea and China”, as well as the challenges of illegal migration, divisive cultural issues and the transformational consequences of artificial intelligence. “Extremists are also exploiting these global conflicts to divide us. People are abusing our liberal democratic values – the freedom of speech and right of protest – to intimidate, threaten and assault others, to sing antisemitic chants on our streets,” he said. “And from gender activists hijacking children’s sex education to cancel culture, vocal and aggressive fringe groups are trying to impose their views on the rest of us.” But the prime minister said he was optimistic about the future, and he would frame the next election as a choice between parties with a plan for the future versus dwelling on the past. He said the Conservatives had plans on a broad range of issues, from a smoking ban and cancer diagnostics to extending maths to all 18-year-olds. Acknowledging the dire position of his own party in the polls, Sunak said the Labour party was fighting the election with a purely negative agenda. “I’m clear-eyed enough to admit that yes, maybe they can depress their way to victory with all their talk of doom loops and gaslighting and scaremongering about pensions. But I don’t think it will work,” he said. “Labour have no ideas. What they did have they’ve U-turned on. They have just one thing: a calculation that they can make you feel so bad about your country that you won’t have the energy to ask what they might do with the incredible power that they seek to wield.” In a shift from his party conference speech when he said he would end the “30 years of status quo”, Sunak launched into a defence of his party’s record in government. He named the creation of 4 million jobs, delivering the Covid vaccine rollout, NHS funding, pensions triple lock, universal credit and cutting carbon emissions as key achievements. Explore more on these topics Rishi Sunak Conservatives General elections Keir Starmer Defence policy Military news Share Reuse this content Rishi Sunak has vowed to fight the next election on the UK’s security, attacking Labour and Keir Starmer in a fiercely political speech in which he said: “The choice at the next election is: who do you trust to keep you safe?” The prime minister said in his speech he would frame the Conservatives as the party of the future, but also defended the party’s record over the past 14 years, and said Starmer’s “past actions” meant the Labour leader would not be able to keep the country safe. The attacks drew a rebuff from Starmer: “This is the seventh reset in 18 months. I know first-hand the importance of national security … but in order for that to happen you need a credible plan. What’s his record? He’s hollowed out our armed forces, he’s wasted billions of pounds on procurement.” In his wide-ranging speech at the Policy Exchange thinktank, Sunak rejected the opportunity to name an election date, but said he would debate Starmer “as many times as he likes” during the campaign. “Keir Starmer’s gone from embracing Jeremy Corbyn to Natalie Elphicke, all in the cynical pursuit of power at any price,” Sunak said. Rishi Sunak to face pressure to shift right after disastrous election results Read more The speech comes at the end of a difficult fortnight for the prime minister after a series of defeats at the local elections including losing the Conservative mayor of the West Midlands, Andy Street, as well as the defection of Elphicke , one of his backbench MPs, who joined Labour to criticise his failure to tackle migrant arrivals on small boats. Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history, with threats from “an axis of authoritarian states like Russia, Iran, North Korea and China”, as well as the challenges of illegal migration, divisive cultural issues and the transformational consequences of artificial intelligence. “Extremists are also exploiting these global conflicts to divide us. People are abusing our liberal democratic values – the freedom of speech and right of protest – to intimidate, threaten and assault others, to sing antisemitic chants on our streets,” he said. “And from gender activists hijacking children’s sex education to cancel culture, vocal and aggressive fringe groups are trying to impose their views on the rest of us.” But the prime minister said he was optimistic about the future, and he would frame the next election as a choice between parties with a plan for the future versus dwelling on the past. He said the Conservatives had plans on a broad range of issues, from a smoking ban and cancer diagnostics to extending maths to all 18-year-olds. Acknowledging the dire position of his own party in the polls, Sunak said the Labour party was fighting the election with a purely negative agenda. “I’m clear-eyed enough to admit that yes, maybe they can depress their way to victory with all their talk of doom loops and gaslighting and scaremongering about pensions. But I don’t think it will work,” he said. “Labour have no ideas. What they did have they’ve U-turned on. They have just one thing: a calculation that they can make you feel so bad about your country that you won’t have the energy to ask what they might do with the incredible power that they seek to wield.” In a shift from his party conference speech when he said he would end the “30 years of status quo”, Sunak launched into a defence of his party’s record in government. He named the creation of 4 million jobs, delivering the Covid vaccine rollout, NHS funding, pensions triple lock, universal credit and cutting carbon emissions as key achievements. Rishi Sunak has vowed to fight the next election on the UK’s security, attacking Labour and Keir Starmer in a fiercely political speech in which he said: “The choice at the next election is: who do you trust to keep you safe?” The prime minister said in his speech he would frame the Conservatives as the party of the future, but also defended the party’s record over the past 14 years, and said Starmer’s “past actions” meant the Labour leader would not be able to keep the country safe. The attacks drew a rebuff from Starmer: “This is the seventh reset in 18 months. I know first-hand the importance of national security … but in order for that to happen you need a credible plan. What’s his record? He’s hollowed out our armed forces, he’s wasted billions of pounds on procurement.” In his wide-ranging speech at the Policy Exchange thinktank, Sunak rejected the opportunity to name an election date, but said he would debate Starmer “as many times as he likes” during the campaign. “Keir Starmer’s gone from embracing Jeremy Corbyn to Natalie Elphicke, all in the cynical pursuit of power at any price,” Sunak said. Rishi Sunak to face pressure to shift right after disastrous election results Read more The speech comes at the end of a difficult fortnight for the prime minister after a series of defeats at the local elections including losing the Conservative mayor of the West Midlands, Andy Street, as well as the defection of Elphicke , one of his backbench MPs, who joined Labour to criticise his failure to tackle migrant arrivals on small boats. Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history, with threats from “an axis of authoritarian states like Russia, Iran, North Korea and China”, as well as the challenges of illegal migration, divisive cultural issues and the transformational consequences of artificial intelligence. “Extremists are also exploiting these global conflicts to divide us. People are abusing our liberal democratic values – the freedom of speech and right of protest – to intimidate, threaten and assault others, to sing antisemitic chants on our streets,” he said. “And from gender activists hijacking children’s sex education to cancel culture, vocal and aggressive fringe groups are trying to impose their views on the rest of us.” But the prime minister said he was optimistic about the future, and he would frame the next election as a choice between parties with a plan for the future versus dwelling on the past. He said the Conservatives had plans on a broad range of issues, from a smoking ban and cancer diagnostics to extending maths to all 18-year-olds. Acknowledging the dire position of his own party in the polls, Sunak said the Labour party was fighting the election with a purely negative agenda. “I’m clear-eyed enough to admit that yes, maybe they can depress their way to victory with all their talk of doom loops and gaslighting and scaremongering about pensions. But I don’t think it will work,” he said. “Labour have no ideas. What they did have they’ve U-turned on. They have just one thing: a calculation that they can make you feel so bad about your country that you won’t have the energy to ask what they might do with the incredible power that they seek to wield.” In a shift from his party conference speech when he said he would end the “30 years of status quo”, Sunak launched into a defence of his party’s record in government. He named the creation of 4 million jobs, delivering the Covid vaccine rollout, NHS funding, pensions triple lock, universal credit and cutting carbon emissions as key achievements. Rishi Sunak has vowed to fight the next election on the UK’s security, attacking Labour and Keir Starmer in a fiercely political speech in which he said: “The choice at the next election is: who do you trust to keep you safe?” The prime minister said in his speech he would frame the Conservatives as the party of the future, but also defended the party’s record over the past 14 years, and said Starmer’s “past actions” meant the Labour leader would not be able to keep the country safe. The attacks drew a rebuff from Starmer: “This is the seventh reset in 18 months. I know first-hand the importance of national security … but in order for that to happen you need a credible plan. What’s his record? He’s hollowed out our armed forces, he’s wasted billions of pounds on procurement.” In his wide-ranging speech at the Policy Exchange thinktank, Sunak rejected the opportunity to name an election date, but said he would debate Starmer “as many times as he likes” during the campaign. “Keir Starmer’s gone from embracing Jeremy Corbyn to Natalie Elphicke, all in the cynical pursuit of power at any price,” Sunak said. Rishi Sunak to face pressure to shift right after disastrous election results Read more Rishi Sunak to face pressure to shift right after disastrous election results Read more Rishi Sunak to face pressure to shift right after disastrous election results Read more Rishi Sunak to face pressure to shift right after disastrous election results Rishi Sunak to face pressure to shift right after disastrous election results The speech comes at the end of a difficult fortnight for the prime minister after a series of defeats at the local elections including losing the Conservative mayor of the West Midlands, Andy Street, as well as the defection of Elphicke , one of his backbench MPs, who joined Labour to criticise his failure to tackle migrant arrivals on small boats. Sunak said the next five years would be some of the most difficult and dangerous in the UK’s history, with threats from “an axis of authoritarian states like Russia, Iran, North Korea and China”, as well as the challenges of illegal migration, divisive cultural issues and the transformational consequences of artificial intelligence. “Extremists are also exploiting these global conflicts to divide us. People are abusing our liberal democratic values – the freedom of speech and right of protest – to intimidate, threaten and assault others, to sing antisemitic chants on our streets,” he said. “And from gender activists hijacking children’s sex education to cancel culture, vocal and aggressive fringe groups are trying to impose their views on the rest of us.” But the prime minister said he was optimistic about the future, and he would frame the next election as a choice between parties with a plan for the future versus dwelling on the past. He said the Conservatives had plans on a broad range of issues, from a smoking ban and cancer diagnostics to extending maths to all 18-year-olds. Acknowledging the dire position of his own party in the polls, Sunak said the Labour party was fighting the election with a purely negative agenda. “I’m clear-eyed enough to admit that yes, maybe they can depress their way to victory with all their talk of doom loops and gaslighting and scaremongering about pensions. But I don’t think it will work,” he said. “Labour have no ideas. What they did have they’ve U-turned on. They have just one thing: a calculation that they can make you feel so bad about your country that you won’t have the energy to ask what they might do with the incredible power that they seek to wield.” In a shift from his party conference speech when he said he would end the “30 years of status quo”, Sunak launched into a defence of his party’s record in government. He named the creation of 4 million jobs, delivering the Covid vaccine rollout, NHS funding, pensions triple lock, universal credit and cutting carbon emissions as key achievements. Explore more on these topics Rishi Sunak Conservatives General elections Keir Starmer Defence policy Military news Share Reuse this content Rishi Sunak Conservatives General elections Keir Starmer Defence policy Military news |
‘George Davis is innocent OK’: Londoner recalls campaign to free him in new TV series
George Davis appearing on The Guilty Innocent on Sky History, with Christopher Eccleston narrating. Photograph: Sky TV George Davis appearing on The Guilty Innocent on Sky History, with Christopher Eccleston narrating. Photograph: Sky TV This article is more than 1 year old ‘George Davis is innocent OK’: Londoner recalls campaign to free him in new TV series This article is more than 1 year old Davis was released after stunts including scuppering of Ashes Test – but later landed back inside for crime he actually committed It is nearly half a century since the 1975 Ashes Test between England and Australia at Headingley in Leeds was abandoned after the pitch was dug up overnight and splattered with oil. A hand-painted message at the ground spelled out an apology – “Sorry, it had to [be] done” – and a justification: “George Davis Is Innocent.” The stunt was carried out by friends of the east Londoner to protest his innocence of an armed robbery in Essex for which he was serving a 20-year sentence. The campaign, publicised by the ubiquitous graffiti, was led by his wife, Rose, and his loyal friend Peter Chappell, who both knew he was innocent. To catch the media’s attention, Chappell had already driven a lorry into the front of the Daily Mirror and three other newspapers and the gates of Buckingham Palace. It all paid off when the then home secretary, Roy Jenkins, granted Davis a royal pardon in 1976. But within two years he was back inside, this time for a crime he actually had committed, an attempt to rob a bank in north London, and he was jailed for 11 years. Now he is talking about both cases in a Sky History television series, The Guilty Innocent, about miscarriages of justice, narrated by Christopher Eccleston. Why did Davis agree to go public after all these years? “It was to set the record straight,” he told the Guardian. “Even though we eventually got the original conviction overturned (in 2011, at the court of appeal, after it was referred back by the Criminal Cases Review Commission), there are still people who think that I’m guilty. And I wanted to thank all those people who had campaigned for me.” View image in fullscreen Police and officials inspect the vandalised pitch at Headingley in 1975. Photograph: PA The targeting of the Headingley Test was the most spectacular event in the campaign. Davis was in Albany prison at the time and was about to watch the cricket with a friend on a black and white TV. “My friend said ‘have you heard the latest? They’ve dug the cricket pitch up.’ I said ‘you’re joking! It’s them Aussies, they just don’t want to get beat!’. The commentator was saying ‘it’s a sad, sad day for cricket, the perpetrators have dug up the wicket … looks like it’s supporters of the Free George Davis campaign – he said it very quick. Majority verdicts facilitated 56 miscarriages of justice in England and Wales, charity says Read more “There was a screw from Leeds there and we were all laughing and he said ‘I don’t think that’s funny’ … I did think it may well be a little too strong but I think it worked … Afterwards, Rose sent a letter to apologise to both captains. Tony Greig didn’t reply but Ian Chappell, the Aussie captain, sent a letter saying ‘I’m so sorry about your husband’.” Did Davis regret getting involved in an actual robbery? “I knew what I was doing but you don’t ever think you’ll get caught – that’s why people do these things. We pleaded guilty. Someone asked me ‘well, did you think of anyone else?’ and I had to say no. I didn’t think of my family and especially Rose, the children, my mum and dad, who were still alive. It was quite selfish of me.” View image in fullscreen Rose Davis, photographed in 1975. Photograph: Evening Standard/Getty Images Peter Chappell, who was in prison for the Headingley stunt when Davis was freed, remained a friend but for Rose the conviction was a heavy blow, as she recounted in her memoir, The Wars of Rosie, published in 2009, the year she died. They were never reconciled. “She did not speak to me, she barred me from her funeral,” Davis said. Davis will be 83 this year. He lives in Muswell Hill in north London, is married to the daughter of a police officer and is a great-grandfather, with a granddaughter who has a master’s in criminology and a great-grandson studying to be a solicitor. There will be no memoir. “People have suggested it but it would be a case of naming names and I wouldn’t feel comfortable doing that.” He served time in Wormwood Scrubs with three of the Birmingham Six, who had to wait many more years to be freed, and is aware of others still fighting to have their names cleared. Would a similar campaign as his work today? “I think it was of its time,” he said. It kept his spirits up while he was in jail – and for many years afterwards he he would still see a sign saying “George Davis is innocent OK” while driving through the Rotherhithe tunnel. And the same faded slogan can still occasionally be seen on bridges or underpasses in parts of east London to this day. The Guilty Innocent starts on Sky History at 9pm on Tuesday 14 May. Explore more on these topics UK criminal justice Documentary news Share Reuse this content George Davis appearing on The Guilty Innocent on Sky History, with Christopher Eccleston narrating. Photograph: Sky TV George Davis appearing on The Guilty Innocent on Sky History, with Christopher Eccleston narrating. Photograph: Sky TV This article is more than 1 year old ‘George Davis is innocent OK’: Londoner recalls campaign to free him in new TV series This article is more than 1 year old Davis was released after stunts including scuppering of Ashes Test – but later landed back inside for crime he actually committed It is nearly half a century since the 1975 Ashes Test between England and Australia at Headingley in Leeds was abandoned after the pitch was dug up overnight and splattered with oil. A hand-painted message at the ground spelled out an apology – “Sorry, it had to [be] done” – and a justification: “George Davis Is Innocent.” The stunt was carried out by friends of the east Londoner to protest his innocence of an armed robbery in Essex for which he was serving a 20-year sentence. The campaign, publicised by the ubiquitous graffiti, was led by his wife, Rose, and his loyal friend Peter Chappell, who both knew he was innocent. To catch the media’s attention, Chappell had already driven a lorry into the front of the Daily Mirror and three other newspapers and the gates of Buckingham Palace. It all paid off when the then home secretary, Roy Jenkins, granted Davis a royal pardon in 1976. But within two years he was back inside, this time for a crime he actually had committed, an attempt to rob a bank in north London, and he was jailed for 11 years. Now he is talking about both cases in a Sky History television series, The Guilty Innocent, about miscarriages of justice, narrated by Christopher Eccleston. Why did Davis agree to go public after all these years? “It was to set the record straight,” he told the Guardian. “Even though we eventually got the original conviction overturned (in 2011, at the court of appeal, after it was referred back by the Criminal Cases Review Commission), there are still people who think that I’m guilty. And I wanted to thank all those people who had campaigned for me.” View image in fullscreen Police and officials inspect the vandalised pitch at Headingley in 1975. Photograph: PA The targeting of the Headingley Test was the most spectacular event in the campaign. Davis was in Albany prison at the time and was about to watch the cricket with a friend on a black and white TV. “My friend said ‘have you heard the latest? They’ve dug the cricket pitch up.’ I said ‘you’re joking! It’s them Aussies, they just don’t want to get beat!’. The commentator was saying ‘it’s a sad, sad day for cricket, the perpetrators have dug up the wicket … looks like it’s supporters of the Free George Davis campaign – he said it very quick. Majority verdicts facilitated 56 miscarriages of justice in England and Wales, charity says Read more “There was a screw from Leeds there and we were all laughing and he said ‘I don’t think that’s funny’ … I did think it may well be a little too strong but I think it worked … Afterwards, Rose sent a letter to apologise to both captains. Tony Greig didn’t reply but Ian Chappell, the Aussie captain, sent a letter saying ‘I’m so sorry about your husband’.” Did Davis regret getting involved in an actual robbery? “I knew what I was doing but you don’t ever think you’ll get caught – that’s why people do these things. We pleaded guilty. Someone asked me ‘well, did you think of anyone else?’ and I had to say no. I didn’t think of my family and especially Rose, the children, my mum and dad, who were still alive. It was quite selfish of me.” View image in fullscreen Rose Davis, photographed in 1975. Photograph: Evening Standard/Getty Images Peter Chappell, who was in prison for the Headingley stunt when Davis was freed, remained a friend but for Rose the conviction was a heavy blow, as she recounted in her memoir, The Wars of Rosie, published in 2009, the year she died. They were never reconciled. “She did not speak to me, she barred me from her funeral,” Davis said. Davis will be 83 this year. He lives in Muswell Hill in north London, is married to the daughter of a police officer and is a great-grandfather, with a granddaughter who has a master’s in criminology and a great-grandson studying to be a solicitor. There will be no memoir. “People have suggested it but it would be a case of naming names and I wouldn’t feel comfortable doing that.” He served time in Wormwood Scrubs with three of the Birmingham Six, who had to wait many more years to be freed, and is aware of others still fighting to have their names cleared. Would a similar campaign as his work today? “I think it was of its time,” he said. It kept his spirits up while he was in jail – and for many years afterwards he he would still see a sign saying “George Davis is innocent OK” while driving through the Rotherhithe tunnel. And the same faded slogan can still occasionally be seen on bridges or underpasses in parts of east London to this day. The Guilty Innocent starts on Sky History at 9pm on Tuesday 14 May. Explore more on these topics UK criminal justice Documentary news Share Reuse this content George Davis appearing on The Guilty Innocent on Sky History, with Christopher Eccleston narrating. Photograph: Sky TV George Davis appearing on The Guilty Innocent on Sky History, with Christopher Eccleston narrating. Photograph: Sky TV George Davis appearing on The Guilty Innocent on Sky History, with Christopher Eccleston narrating. Photograph: Sky TV George Davis appearing on The Guilty Innocent on Sky History, with Christopher Eccleston narrating. Photograph: Sky TV George Davis appearing on The Guilty Innocent on Sky History, with Christopher Eccleston narrating. Photograph: Sky TV George Davis appearing on The Guilty Innocent on Sky History, with Christopher Eccleston narrating. Photograph: Sky TV George Davis appearing on The Guilty Innocent on Sky History, with Christopher Eccleston narrating. Photograph: Sky TV George Davis appearing on The Guilty Innocent on Sky History, with Christopher Eccleston narrating. Photograph: Sky TV George Davis appearing on The Guilty Innocent on Sky History, with Christopher Eccleston narrating. Photograph: Sky TV George Davis appearing on The Guilty Innocent on Sky History, with Christopher Eccleston narrating. Photograph: Sky TV This article is more than 1 year old ‘George Davis is innocent OK’: Londoner recalls campaign to free him in new TV series This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘George Davis is innocent OK’: Londoner recalls campaign to free him in new TV series This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘George Davis is innocent OK’: Londoner recalls campaign to free him in new TV series This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Davis was released after stunts including scuppering of Ashes Test – but later landed back inside for crime he actually committed Davis was released after stunts including scuppering of Ashes Test – but later landed back inside for crime he actually committed Davis was released after stunts including scuppering of Ashes Test – but later landed back inside for crime he actually committed It is nearly half a century since the 1975 Ashes Test between England and Australia at Headingley in Leeds was abandoned after the pitch was dug up overnight and splattered with oil. A hand-painted message at the ground spelled out an apology – “Sorry, it had to [be] done” – and a justification: “George Davis Is Innocent.” The stunt was carried out by friends of the east Londoner to protest his innocence of an armed robbery in Essex for which he was serving a 20-year sentence. The campaign, publicised by the ubiquitous graffiti, was led by his wife, Rose, and his loyal friend Peter Chappell, who both knew he was innocent. To catch the media’s attention, Chappell had already driven a lorry into the front of the Daily Mirror and three other newspapers and the gates of Buckingham Palace. It all paid off when the then home secretary, Roy Jenkins, granted Davis a royal pardon in 1976. But within two years he was back inside, this time for a crime he actually had committed, an attempt to rob a bank in north London, and he was jailed for 11 years. Now he is talking about both cases in a Sky History television series, The Guilty Innocent, about miscarriages of justice, narrated by Christopher Eccleston. Why did Davis agree to go public after all these years? “It was to set the record straight,” he told the Guardian. “Even though we eventually got the original conviction overturned (in 2011, at the court of appeal, after it was referred back by the Criminal Cases Review Commission), there are still people who think that I’m guilty. And I wanted to thank all those people who had campaigned for me.” View image in fullscreen Police and officials inspect the vandalised pitch at Headingley in 1975. Photograph: PA The targeting of the Headingley Test was the most spectacular event in the campaign. Davis was in Albany prison at the time and was about to watch the cricket with a friend on a black and white TV. “My friend said ‘have you heard the latest? They’ve dug the cricket pitch up.’ I said ‘you’re joking! It’s them Aussies, they just don’t want to get beat!’. The commentator was saying ‘it’s a sad, sad day for cricket, the perpetrators have dug up the wicket … looks like it’s supporters of the Free George Davis campaign – he said it very quick. Majority verdicts facilitated 56 miscarriages of justice in England and Wales, charity says Read more “There was a screw from Leeds there and we were all laughing and he said ‘I don’t think that’s funny’ … I did think it may well be a little too strong but I think it worked … Afterwards, Rose sent a letter to apologise to both captains. Tony Greig didn’t reply but Ian Chappell, the Aussie captain, sent a letter saying ‘I’m so sorry about your husband’.” Did Davis regret getting involved in an actual robbery? “I knew what I was doing but you don’t ever think you’ll get caught – that’s why people do these things. We pleaded guilty. Someone asked me ‘well, did you think of anyone else?’ and I had to say no. I didn’t think of my family and especially Rose, the children, my mum and dad, who were still alive. It was quite selfish of me.” View image in fullscreen Rose Davis, photographed in 1975. Photograph: Evening Standard/Getty Images Peter Chappell, who was in prison for the Headingley stunt when Davis was freed, remained a friend but for Rose the conviction was a heavy blow, as she recounted in her memoir, The Wars of Rosie, published in 2009, the year she died. They were never reconciled. “She did not speak to me, she barred me from her funeral,” Davis said. Davis will be 83 this year. He lives in Muswell Hill in north London, is married to the daughter of a police officer and is a great-grandfather, with a granddaughter who has a master’s in criminology and a great-grandson studying to be a solicitor. There will be no memoir. “People have suggested it but it would be a case of naming names and I wouldn’t feel comfortable doing that.” He served time in Wormwood Scrubs with three of the Birmingham Six, who had to wait many more years to be freed, and is aware of others still fighting to have their names cleared. Would a similar campaign as his work today? “I think it was of its time,” he said. It kept his spirits up while he was in jail – and for many years afterwards he he would still see a sign saying “George Davis is innocent OK” while driving through the Rotherhithe tunnel. And the same faded slogan can still occasionally be seen on bridges or underpasses in parts of east London to this day. The Guilty Innocent starts on Sky History at 9pm on Tuesday 14 May. Explore more on these topics UK criminal justice Documentary news Share Reuse this content It is nearly half a century since the 1975 Ashes Test between England and Australia at Headingley in Leeds was abandoned after the pitch was dug up overnight and splattered with oil. A hand-painted message at the ground spelled out an apology – “Sorry, it had to [be] done” – and a justification: “George Davis Is Innocent.” The stunt was carried out by friends of the east Londoner to protest his innocence of an armed robbery in Essex for which he was serving a 20-year sentence. The campaign, publicised by the ubiquitous graffiti, was led by his wife, Rose, and his loyal friend Peter Chappell, who both knew he was innocent. To catch the media’s attention, Chappell had already driven a lorry into the front of the Daily Mirror and three other newspapers and the gates of Buckingham Palace. It all paid off when the then home secretary, Roy Jenkins, granted Davis a royal pardon in 1976. But within two years he was back inside, this time for a crime he actually had committed, an attempt to rob a bank in north London, and he was jailed for 11 years. Now he is talking about both cases in a Sky History television series, The Guilty Innocent, about miscarriages of justice, narrated by Christopher Eccleston. Why did Davis agree to go public after all these years? “It was to set the record straight,” he told the Guardian. “Even though we eventually got the original conviction overturned (in 2011, at the court of appeal, after it was referred back by the Criminal Cases Review Commission), there are still people who think that I’m guilty. And I wanted to thank all those people who had campaigned for me.” View image in fullscreen Police and officials inspect the vandalised pitch at Headingley in 1975. Photograph: PA The targeting of the Headingley Test was the most spectacular event in the campaign. Davis was in Albany prison at the time and was about to watch the cricket with a friend on a black and white TV. “My friend said ‘have you heard the latest? They’ve dug the cricket pitch up.’ I said ‘you’re joking! It’s them Aussies, they just don’t want to get beat!’. The commentator was saying ‘it’s a sad, sad day for cricket, the perpetrators have dug up the wicket … looks like it’s supporters of the Free George Davis campaign – he said it very quick. Majority verdicts facilitated 56 miscarriages of justice in England and Wales, charity says Read more “There was a screw from Leeds there and we were all laughing and he said ‘I don’t think that’s funny’ … I did think it may well be a little too strong but I think it worked … Afterwards, Rose sent a letter to apologise to both captains. Tony Greig didn’t reply but Ian Chappell, the Aussie captain, sent a letter saying ‘I’m so sorry about your husband’.” Did Davis regret getting involved in an actual robbery? “I knew what I was doing but you don’t ever think you’ll get caught – that’s why people do these things. We pleaded guilty. Someone asked me ‘well, did you think of anyone else?’ and I had to say no. I didn’t think of my family and especially Rose, the children, my mum and dad, who were still alive. It was quite selfish of me.” View image in fullscreen Rose Davis, photographed in 1975. Photograph: Evening Standard/Getty Images Peter Chappell, who was in prison for the Headingley stunt when Davis was freed, remained a friend but for Rose the conviction was a heavy blow, as she recounted in her memoir, The Wars of Rosie, published in 2009, the year she died. They were never reconciled. “She did not speak to me, she barred me from her funeral,” Davis said. Davis will be 83 this year. He lives in Muswell Hill in north London, is married to the daughter of a police officer and is a great-grandfather, with a granddaughter who has a master’s in criminology and a great-grandson studying to be a solicitor. There will be no memoir. “People have suggested it but it would be a case of naming names and I wouldn’t feel comfortable doing that.” He served time in Wormwood Scrubs with three of the Birmingham Six, who had to wait many more years to be freed, and is aware of others still fighting to have their names cleared. Would a similar campaign as his work today? “I think it was of its time,” he said. It kept his spirits up while he was in jail – and for many years afterwards he he would still see a sign saying “George Davis is innocent OK” while driving through the Rotherhithe tunnel. And the same faded slogan can still occasionally be seen on bridges or underpasses in parts of east London to this day. The Guilty Innocent starts on Sky History at 9pm on Tuesday 14 May. Explore more on these topics UK criminal justice Documentary news Share Reuse this content It is nearly half a century since the 1975 Ashes Test between England and Australia at Headingley in Leeds was abandoned after the pitch was dug up overnight and splattered with oil. A hand-painted message at the ground spelled out an apology – “Sorry, it had to [be] done” – and a justification: “George Davis Is Innocent.” The stunt was carried out by friends of the east Londoner to protest his innocence of an armed robbery in Essex for which he was serving a 20-year sentence. The campaign, publicised by the ubiquitous graffiti, was led by his wife, Rose, and his loyal friend Peter Chappell, who both knew he was innocent. To catch the media’s attention, Chappell had already driven a lorry into the front of the Daily Mirror and three other newspapers and the gates of Buckingham Palace. It all paid off when the then home secretary, Roy Jenkins, granted Davis a royal pardon in 1976. But within two years he was back inside, this time for a crime he actually had committed, an attempt to rob a bank in north London, and he was jailed for 11 years. Now he is talking about both cases in a Sky History television series, The Guilty Innocent, about miscarriages of justice, narrated by Christopher Eccleston. Why did Davis agree to go public after all these years? “It was to set the record straight,” he told the Guardian. “Even though we eventually got the original conviction overturned (in 2011, at the court of appeal, after it was referred back by the Criminal Cases Review Commission), there are still people who think that I’m guilty. And I wanted to thank all those people who had campaigned for me.” View image in fullscreen Police and officials inspect the vandalised pitch at Headingley in 1975. Photograph: PA The targeting of the Headingley Test was the most spectacular event in the campaign. Davis was in Albany prison at the time and was about to watch the cricket with a friend on a black and white TV. “My friend said ‘have you heard the latest? They’ve dug the cricket pitch up.’ I said ‘you’re joking! It’s them Aussies, they just don’t want to get beat!’. The commentator was saying ‘it’s a sad, sad day for cricket, the perpetrators have dug up the wicket … looks like it’s supporters of the Free George Davis campaign – he said it very quick. Majority verdicts facilitated 56 miscarriages of justice in England and Wales, charity says Read more “There was a screw from Leeds there and we were all laughing and he said ‘I don’t think that’s funny’ … I did think it may well be a little too strong but I think it worked … Afterwards, Rose sent a letter to apologise to both captains. Tony Greig didn’t reply but Ian Chappell, the Aussie captain, sent a letter saying ‘I’m so sorry about your husband’.” Did Davis regret getting involved in an actual robbery? “I knew what I was doing but you don’t ever think you’ll get caught – that’s why people do these things. We pleaded guilty. Someone asked me ‘well, did you think of anyone else?’ and I had to say no. I didn’t think of my family and especially Rose, the children, my mum and dad, who were still alive. It was quite selfish of me.” View image in fullscreen Rose Davis, photographed in 1975. Photograph: Evening Standard/Getty Images Peter Chappell, who was in prison for the Headingley stunt when Davis was freed, remained a friend but for Rose the conviction was a heavy blow, as she recounted in her memoir, The Wars of Rosie, published in 2009, the year she died. They were never reconciled. “She did not speak to me, she barred me from her funeral,” Davis said. Davis will be 83 this year. He lives in Muswell Hill in north London, is married to the daughter of a police officer and is a great-grandfather, with a granddaughter who has a master’s in criminology and a great-grandson studying to be a solicitor. There will be no memoir. “People have suggested it but it would be a case of naming names and I wouldn’t feel comfortable doing that.” He served time in Wormwood Scrubs with three of the Birmingham Six, who had to wait many more years to be freed, and is aware of others still fighting to have their names cleared. Would a similar campaign as his work today? “I think it was of its time,” he said. It kept his spirits up while he was in jail – and for many years afterwards he he would still see a sign saying “George Davis is innocent OK” while driving through the Rotherhithe tunnel. And the same faded slogan can still occasionally be seen on bridges or underpasses in parts of east London to this day. The Guilty Innocent starts on Sky History at 9pm on Tuesday 14 May. It is nearly half a century since the 1975 Ashes Test between England and Australia at Headingley in Leeds was abandoned after the pitch was dug up overnight and splattered with oil. A hand-painted message at the ground spelled out an apology – “Sorry, it had to [be] done” – and a justification: “George Davis Is Innocent.” The stunt was carried out by friends of the east Londoner to protest his innocence of an armed robbery in Essex for which he was serving a 20-year sentence. The campaign, publicised by the ubiquitous graffiti, was led by his wife, Rose, and his loyal friend Peter Chappell, who both knew he was innocent. To catch the media’s attention, Chappell had already driven a lorry into the front of the Daily Mirror and three other newspapers and the gates of Buckingham Palace. It all paid off when the then home secretary, Roy Jenkins, granted Davis a royal pardon in 1976. But within two years he was back inside, this time for a crime he actually had committed, an attempt to rob a bank in north London, and he was jailed for 11 years. Now he is talking about both cases in a Sky History television series, The Guilty Innocent, about miscarriages of justice, narrated by Christopher Eccleston. Why did Davis agree to go public after all these years? “It was to set the record straight,” he told the Guardian. “Even though we eventually got the original conviction overturned (in 2011, at the court of appeal, after it was referred back by the Criminal Cases Review Commission), there are still people who think that I’m guilty. And I wanted to thank all those people who had campaigned for me.” View image in fullscreen Police and officials inspect the vandalised pitch at Headingley in 1975. Photograph: PA The targeting of the Headingley Test was the most spectacular event in the campaign. Davis was in Albany prison at the time and was about to watch the cricket with a friend on a black and white TV. “My friend said ‘have you heard the latest? They’ve dug the cricket pitch up.’ I said ‘you’re joking! It’s them Aussies, they just don’t want to get beat!’. The commentator was saying ‘it’s a sad, sad day for cricket, the perpetrators have dug up the wicket … looks like it’s supporters of the Free George Davis campaign – he said it very quick. Majority verdicts facilitated 56 miscarriages of justice in England and Wales, charity says Read more “There was a screw from Leeds there and we were all laughing and he said ‘I don’t think that’s funny’ … I did think it may well be a little too strong but I think it worked … Afterwards, Rose sent a letter to apologise to both captains. Tony Greig didn’t reply but Ian Chappell, the Aussie captain, sent a letter saying ‘I’m so sorry about your husband’.” Did Davis regret getting involved in an actual robbery? “I knew what I was doing but you don’t ever think you’ll get caught – that’s why people do these things. We pleaded guilty. Someone asked me ‘well, did you think of anyone else?’ and I had to say no. I didn’t think of my family and especially Rose, the children, my mum and dad, who were still alive. It was quite selfish of me.” View image in fullscreen Rose Davis, photographed in 1975. Photograph: Evening Standard/Getty Images Peter Chappell, who was in prison for the Headingley stunt when Davis was freed, remained a friend but for Rose the conviction was a heavy blow, as she recounted in her memoir, The Wars of Rosie, published in 2009, the year she died. They were never reconciled. “She did not speak to me, she barred me from her funeral,” Davis said. Davis will be 83 this year. He lives in Muswell Hill in north London, is married to the daughter of a police officer and is a great-grandfather, with a granddaughter who has a master’s in criminology and a great-grandson studying to be a solicitor. There will be no memoir. “People have suggested it but it would be a case of naming names and I wouldn’t feel comfortable doing that.” He served time in Wormwood Scrubs with three of the Birmingham Six, who had to wait many more years to be freed, and is aware of others still fighting to have their names cleared. Would a similar campaign as his work today? “I think it was of its time,” he said. It kept his spirits up while he was in jail – and for many years afterwards he he would still see a sign saying “George Davis is innocent OK” while driving through the Rotherhithe tunnel. And the same faded slogan can still occasionally be seen on bridges or underpasses in parts of east London to this day. The Guilty Innocent starts on Sky History at 9pm on Tuesday 14 May. It is nearly half a century since the 1975 Ashes Test between England and Australia at Headingley in Leeds was abandoned after the pitch was dug up overnight and splattered with oil. A hand-painted message at the ground spelled out an apology – “Sorry, it had to [be] done” – and a justification: “George Davis Is Innocent.” The stunt was carried out by friends of the east Londoner to protest his innocence of an armed robbery in Essex for which he was serving a 20-year sentence. The campaign, publicised by the ubiquitous graffiti, was led by his wife, Rose, and his loyal friend Peter Chappell, who both knew he was innocent. To catch the media’s attention, Chappell had already driven a lorry into the front of the Daily Mirror and three other newspapers and the gates of Buckingham Palace. It all paid off when the then home secretary, Roy Jenkins, granted Davis a royal pardon in 1976. But within two years he was back inside, this time for a crime he actually had committed, an attempt to rob a bank in north London, and he was jailed for 11 years. Now he is talking about both cases in a Sky History television series, The Guilty Innocent, about miscarriages of justice, narrated by Christopher Eccleston. Why did Davis agree to go public after all these years? “It was to set the record straight,” he told the Guardian. “Even though we eventually got the original conviction overturned (in 2011, at the court of appeal, after it was referred back by the Criminal Cases Review Commission), there are still people who think that I’m guilty. And I wanted to thank all those people who had campaigned for me.” The targeting of the Headingley Test was the most spectacular event in the campaign. Davis was in Albany prison at the time and was about to watch the cricket with a friend on a black and white TV. “My friend said ‘have you heard the latest? They’ve dug the cricket pitch up.’ I said ‘you’re joking! It’s them Aussies, they just don’t want to get beat!’. The commentator was saying ‘it’s a sad, sad day for cricket, the perpetrators have dug up the wicket … looks like it’s supporters of the Free George Davis campaign – he said it very quick. Majority verdicts facilitated 56 miscarriages of justice in England and Wales, charity says Read more Majority verdicts facilitated 56 miscarriages of justice in England and Wales, charity says Read more Majority verdicts facilitated 56 miscarriages of justice in England and Wales, charity says Read more Majority verdicts facilitated 56 miscarriages of justice in England and Wales, charity says Majority verdicts facilitated 56 miscarriages of justice in England and Wales, charity says “There was a screw from Leeds there and we were all laughing and he said ‘I don’t think that’s funny’ … I did think it may well be a little too strong but I think it worked … Afterwards, Rose sent a letter to apologise to both captains. Tony Greig didn’t reply but Ian Chappell, the Aussie captain, sent a letter saying ‘I’m so sorry about your husband’.” Did Davis regret getting involved in an actual robbery? “I knew what I was doing but you don’t ever think you’ll get caught – that’s why people do these things. We pleaded guilty. Someone asked me ‘well, did you think of anyone else?’ and I had to say no. I didn’t think of my family and especially Rose, the children, my mum and dad, who were still alive. It was quite selfish of me.” Peter Chappell, who was in prison for the Headingley stunt when Davis was freed, remained a friend but for Rose the conviction was a heavy blow, as she recounted in her memoir, The Wars of Rosie, published in 2009, the year she died. They were never reconciled. “She did not speak to me, she barred me from her funeral,” Davis said. Davis will be 83 this year. He lives in Muswell Hill in north London, is married to the daughter of a police officer and is a great-grandfather, with a granddaughter who has a master’s in criminology and a great-grandson studying to be a solicitor. There will be no memoir. “People have suggested it but it would be a case of naming names and I wouldn’t feel comfortable doing that.” He served time in Wormwood Scrubs with three of the Birmingham Six, who had to wait many more years to be freed, and is aware of others still fighting to have their names cleared. Would a similar campaign as his work today? “I think it was of its time,” he said. It kept his spirits up while he was in jail – and for many years afterwards he he would still see a sign saying “George Davis is innocent OK” while driving through the Rotherhithe tunnel. And the same faded slogan can still occasionally be seen on bridges or underpasses in parts of east London to this day. The Guilty Innocent starts on Sky History at 9pm on Tuesday 14 May. Explore more on these topics UK criminal justice Documentary news Share Reuse this content UK criminal justice Documentary news |
The 'foreign agents' law that has set off mass protests in Georgia
This article is more than 1 year old The ‘foreign agents’ law that has set off mass protests in Georgia This article is more than 1 year old 00:00:00 00:00:00 The bill requires any civil society organisation that receives more than 20% of its funds from abroad to register as being under foreign influence. Daniel Boffey reports On the face of it the bill could sound innocuous: any civil society organisation that receives more than 20% of its funds from abroad must register as an organisation under foreign influence. Yet the new law Georgia’s parliament passed yesterday has sparked outrage and demonstrations in the capital, Tbilisi. Critics claim the bill is “Kremlin-inspired” as Putin passed a similar law in 2012, which they say has had a chilling effect on civil society. Demonstrators think it is a way to redirect Georgia towards Russia . The Guardian’s chief reporter, Daniel Boffey , has been speaking to young protesters – often schoolchildren – about why they are so incensed. He tells Michael Safi , how, for years, Georgia has been walking a tightrope between keeping European and Russian powers happy. It has been granted accession status by the EU. Yet one of the country’s most powerful people, the oligarch and politician Bidzina Ivanishvili, is championing the new law, which could threaten the closer ties with Europe. And the shadow of the war in Ukraine is being held up as an example of what could happen if Russia is angered. Yet the protesters say they will not back down. Photograph: Zurab Tsertsvadze/AP Explore more on these topics Georgia Today in Focus Russia This article is more than 1 year old The ‘foreign agents’ law that has set off mass protests in Georgia This article is more than 1 year old 00:00:00 00:00:00 The bill requires any civil society organisation that receives more than 20% of its funds from abroad to register as being under foreign influence. Daniel Boffey reports On the face of it the bill could sound innocuous: any civil society organisation that receives more than 20% of its funds from abroad must register as an organisation under foreign influence. Yet the new law Georgia’s parliament passed yesterday has sparked outrage and demonstrations in the capital, Tbilisi. Critics claim the bill is “Kremlin-inspired” as Putin passed a similar law in 2012, which they say has had a chilling effect on civil society. Demonstrators think it is a way to redirect Georgia towards Russia . The Guardian’s chief reporter, Daniel Boffey , has been speaking to young protesters – often schoolchildren – about why they are so incensed. He tells Michael Safi , how, for years, Georgia has been walking a tightrope between keeping European and Russian powers happy. It has been granted accession status by the EU. Yet one of the country’s most powerful people, the oligarch and politician Bidzina Ivanishvili, is championing the new law, which could threaten the closer ties with Europe. And the shadow of the war in Ukraine is being held up as an example of what could happen if Russia is angered. Yet the protesters say they will not back down. Photograph: Zurab Tsertsvadze/AP Explore more on these topics Georgia Today in Focus Russia This article is more than 1 year old The ‘foreign agents’ law that has set off mass protests in Georgia This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old The ‘foreign agents’ law that has set off mass protests in Georgia This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old The ‘foreign agents’ law that has set off mass protests in Georgia This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old The bill requires any civil society organisation that receives more than 20% of its funds from abroad to register as being under foreign influence. Daniel Boffey reports The bill requires any civil society organisation that receives more than 20% of its funds from abroad to register as being under foreign influence. Daniel Boffey reports The bill requires any civil society organisation that receives more than 20% of its funds from abroad to register as being under foreign influence. Daniel Boffey reports On the face of it the bill could sound innocuous: any civil society organisation that receives more than 20% of its funds from abroad must register as an organisation under foreign influence. Yet the new law Georgia’s parliament passed yesterday has sparked outrage and demonstrations in the capital, Tbilisi. Critics claim the bill is “Kremlin-inspired” as Putin passed a similar law in 2012, which they say has had a chilling effect on civil society. Demonstrators think it is a way to redirect Georgia towards Russia . The Guardian’s chief reporter, Daniel Boffey , has been speaking to young protesters – often schoolchildren – about why they are so incensed. He tells Michael Safi , how, for years, Georgia has been walking a tightrope between keeping European and Russian powers happy. It has been granted accession status by the EU. Yet one of the country’s most powerful people, the oligarch and politician Bidzina Ivanishvili, is championing the new law, which could threaten the closer ties with Europe. And the shadow of the war in Ukraine is being held up as an example of what could happen if Russia is angered. Yet the protesters say they will not back down. Photograph: Zurab Tsertsvadze/AP Explore more on these topics Georgia Today in Focus Russia On the face of it the bill could sound innocuous: any civil society organisation that receives more than 20% of its funds from abroad must register as an organisation under foreign influence. Yet the new law Georgia’s parliament passed yesterday has sparked outrage and demonstrations in the capital, Tbilisi. Critics claim the bill is “Kremlin-inspired” as Putin passed a similar law in 2012, which they say has had a chilling effect on civil society. Demonstrators think it is a way to redirect Georgia towards Russia . The Guardian’s chief reporter, Daniel Boffey , has been speaking to young protesters – often schoolchildren – about why they are so incensed. He tells Michael Safi , how, for years, Georgia has been walking a tightrope between keeping European and Russian powers happy. It has been granted accession status by the EU. Yet one of the country’s most powerful people, the oligarch and politician Bidzina Ivanishvili, is championing the new law, which could threaten the closer ties with Europe. And the shadow of the war in Ukraine is being held up as an example of what could happen if Russia is angered. Yet the protesters say they will not back down. Photograph: Zurab Tsertsvadze/AP Explore more on these topics Georgia Today in Focus Russia On the face of it the bill could sound innocuous: any civil society organisation that receives more than 20% of its funds from abroad must register as an organisation under foreign influence. Yet the new law Georgia’s parliament passed yesterday has sparked outrage and demonstrations in the capital, Tbilisi. Critics claim the bill is “Kremlin-inspired” as Putin passed a similar law in 2012, which they say has had a chilling effect on civil society. Demonstrators think it is a way to redirect Georgia towards Russia . The Guardian’s chief reporter, Daniel Boffey , has been speaking to young protesters – often schoolchildren – about why they are so incensed. He tells Michael Safi , how, for years, Georgia has been walking a tightrope between keeping European and Russian powers happy. It has been granted accession status by the EU. Yet one of the country’s most powerful people, the oligarch and politician Bidzina Ivanishvili, is championing the new law, which could threaten the closer ties with Europe. And the shadow of the war in Ukraine is being held up as an example of what could happen if Russia is angered. Yet the protesters say they will not back down. Photograph: Zurab Tsertsvadze/AP On the face of it the bill could sound innocuous: any civil society organisation that receives more than 20% of its funds from abroad must register as an organisation under foreign influence. Yet the new law Georgia’s parliament passed yesterday has sparked outrage and demonstrations in the capital, Tbilisi. Critics claim the bill is “Kremlin-inspired” as Putin passed a similar law in 2012, which they say has had a chilling effect on civil society. Demonstrators think it is a way to redirect Georgia towards Russia . The Guardian’s chief reporter, Daniel Boffey , has been speaking to young protesters – often schoolchildren – about why they are so incensed. He tells Michael Safi , how, for years, Georgia has been walking a tightrope between keeping European and Russian powers happy. It has been granted accession status by the EU. Yet one of the country’s most powerful people, the oligarch and politician Bidzina Ivanishvili, is championing the new law, which could threaten the closer ties with Europe. And the shadow of the war in Ukraine is being held up as an example of what could happen if Russia is angered. Yet the protesters say they will not back down. Photograph: Zurab Tsertsvadze/AP On the face of it the bill could sound innocuous: any civil society organisation that receives more than 20% of its funds from abroad must register as an organisation under foreign influence. Yet the new law Georgia’s parliament passed yesterday has sparked outrage and demonstrations in the capital, Tbilisi. Critics claim the bill is “Kremlin-inspired” as Putin passed a similar law in 2012, which they say has had a chilling effect on civil society. Demonstrators think it is a way to redirect Georgia towards Russia . The Guardian’s chief reporter, Daniel Boffey , has been speaking to young protesters – often schoolchildren – about why they are so incensed. He tells Michael Safi , how, for years, Georgia has been walking a tightrope between keeping European and Russian powers happy. It has been granted accession status by the EU. Yet one of the country’s most powerful people, the oligarch and politician Bidzina Ivanishvili, is championing the new law, which could threaten the closer ties with Europe. And the shadow of the war in Ukraine is being held up as an example of what could happen if Russia is angered. Yet the protesters say they will not back down. Explore more on these topics Georgia Today in Focus Russia |
‘So much death and upset’: the nurses quitting the NHS after Covid – a photo essay
Nurse Natasha used to play the cello to the Covid patients. Photograph: Hannah Grace Deller Working as a nurse in the NHS through the Covid pandemic gave Hannah Grace Deller a unique perspective on the hardship faced by her profession. She has photographed several nurses as they decided post-Covid to leave the service By Esther Addley ; Photographs by Hannah Grace Deller H annah Grace Deller works as a paediatric matron at St Mary’s hospital in Paddington, central London. She is also a trained photographer, and during the Covid crisis she began to photograph the conditions in which she and her nursing colleagues were working. Some of her images were published widely and exhibited at the time, earning praise from Grayson Perry, Martin Parr and others, and inspiring an album by Chris Difford, of Squeeze. She has now published a book, Working on the Frontline , documenting the experiences of nurses and the reaction of the public during the crisis and since. View image in fullscreen Hannah Grace Deller and her team. Before the pandemic, I had never really taken photographs at work – just a few snaps if someone was leaving to say goodbye, that kind of thing. I had never really looked at my job in that way at all. Work was work, and my camera came out when I left the hospital as my way to relax. It’s like a form of meditation for me. A frontline worker trapped in a hospital: Hannah Grace Deller’s best photograph Read more Then one day at the start of the pandemic, I was responding to a bleep when I saw a cleaner, in full PPE, trapped behind a door, and asked to take his picture . After that I thought, something is beginning here. We didn’t know how long it would last, I thought maybe a month. But, with permission from my colleagues, I thought I would document what was happening. I didn’t bring in a camera, that wouldn’t have been appropriate; I’d just take pictures on my phone and use my real camera outside work to document everything else. View image in fullscreen The photographs, including this of nurse Steffie, are the first taken by Deller inside a hospital. This was around the time that people were clapping for NHS workers, and that was sweet – though most nurses didn’t get out of work before 8pm to hear it. As time went on, I think lots of nurses began to wonder how much that goodwill was worth. Nurses started protesting about pay and recognition during the pandemic. At one fair pay protest I started chatting with a nurse who said: “I’ve had enough, I’m going”. We’d had a pay offer of 1% and she said: “Surely, after everything, we are worth more than 1%.” View image in fullscreen Thousands of nurses protested on 29 July 2020 to call for a pay rise, saying workers had been ‘on their knees’ during the pandemic. I’ve always had an interest in photographing protests. It’s that spirit that you see in people, regardless of whether I agree with what they are protesting about. But with the nursing protests, it felt a bit different. I began talking to other nurses on the protests, from all different hospitals, who had had enough. One of the people I spoke to was Camille, who is French but had lived in Britain for ever. With Brexit and then the pandemic, it was like a double insult to her, and she told me she was leaving nursing completely. View image in fullscreen Nurse Camille moved to France post-Covid. She said: ‘What with Brexit, Covid and the lack of appreciation in the UK for nurses from the government, I’m done.’ She now runs an Airbnb in France with her wife and son. We arranged that after taking her picture I would take her uniforms back as she had moved out of London, but when I got to her house, she had decided to burn them; she said it felt really therapeutic. There is a lot of trauma that can be held in clothing. A lot of the stains you just can’t get out of the uniforms, no matter how hot you wash them. As she was turning them she said: “There’s a lot of blood, sweat and tears in that fire.” View image in fullscreen Nurse Anna left the NHS and moved to New Zealand. She wanted to fold her uniform and bring it back to her workplace to say goodbye. View image in fullscreen Nurse Natasha used to play the cello to the Covid patients. Nurse Natasha left after the pandemic because of burnout and disappointment around the pay dispute with the government. She decided to travel with her husband. She washed her uniforms and hung them on the line as if for the last time. Natasha used to play her instrument to the Covid patients and sometimes when someone was dying she would play music on the ward. View image in fullscreen Nurse Mila hangs her ‘RIP’ nursing dress. There was also Mila – she wrote “RIP nursing” on the back of her dress. She now works on Portobello Road, in London, selling jewellery. Ellie also worked through the pandemic but had had enough; I took a few pictures of her handing her nursing uniform back. She was in her 20s and she said: “I’m just too young to experience this, so much death and upset. I just want to go to Australia and lie on the beach.” There are so many untold stories like this. View image in fullscreen View image in fullscreen Nurse Ellie brought her uniform to her job and handed it back to be put in the bin. There is an image of nurses in which we are expected to be submissive and sweet, never raising our voices, just getting on with the job. We are not supposed to get angry, to speak up. But there is a lot of anger in these photographs. View image in fullscreen Nurses throw their uniforms outside No 10 Downing Street to protest against the vaccine mandates in January 2022. ‘Clapped and sacked’ was the mantra; many felt they wanted to make their own decisions around vaccines. Of course I feel that way too sometimes, but if I’m ever upset, or feel that I want to leave, I’ll often just go round and chat to the patients on the ward. And then I’ll remember, ah, that’s why I’m here. Hannah Grace Deller was speaking to Esther Addley Working on the Front Line is published by Image and Reality, and can be ordered through Kickstarter . Explore more on these topics The Guardian picture essay Nursing NHS Health Coronavirus Public services policy Public sector pay features Share Reuse this content Nurse Natasha used to play the cello to the Covid patients. Photograph: Hannah Grace Deller Working as a nurse in the NHS through the Covid pandemic gave Hannah Grace Deller a unique perspective on the hardship faced by her profession. She has photographed several nurses as they decided post-Covid to leave the service By Esther Addley ; Photographs by Hannah Grace Deller H annah Grace Deller works as a paediatric matron at St Mary’s hospital in Paddington, central London. She is also a trained photographer, and during the Covid crisis she began to photograph the conditions in which she and her nursing colleagues were working. Some of her images were published widely and exhibited at the time, earning praise from Grayson Perry, Martin Parr and others, and inspiring an album by Chris Difford, of Squeeze. She has now published a book, Working on the Frontline , documenting the experiences of nurses and the reaction of the public during the crisis and since. View image in fullscreen Hannah Grace Deller and her team. Before the pandemic, I had never really taken photographs at work – just a few snaps if someone was leaving to say goodbye, that kind of thing. I had never really looked at my job in that way at all. Work was work, and my camera came out when I left the hospital as my way to relax. It’s like a form of meditation for me. A frontline worker trapped in a hospital: Hannah Grace Deller’s best photograph Read more Then one day at the start of the pandemic, I was responding to a bleep when I saw a cleaner, in full PPE, trapped behind a door, and asked to take his picture . After that I thought, something is beginning here. We didn’t know how long it would last, I thought maybe a month. But, with permission from my colleagues, I thought I would document what was happening. I didn’t bring in a camera, that wouldn’t have been appropriate; I’d just take pictures on my phone and use my real camera outside work to document everything else. View image in fullscreen The photographs, including this of nurse Steffie, are the first taken by Deller inside a hospital. This was around the time that people were clapping for NHS workers, and that was sweet – though most nurses didn’t get out of work before 8pm to hear it. As time went on, I think lots of nurses began to wonder how much that goodwill was worth. Nurses started protesting about pay and recognition during the pandemic. At one fair pay protest I started chatting with a nurse who said: “I’ve had enough, I’m going”. We’d had a pay offer of 1% and she said: “Surely, after everything, we are worth more than 1%.” View image in fullscreen Thousands of nurses protested on 29 July 2020 to call for a pay rise, saying workers had been ‘on their knees’ during the pandemic. I’ve always had an interest in photographing protests. It’s that spirit that you see in people, regardless of whether I agree with what they are protesting about. But with the nursing protests, it felt a bit different. I began talking to other nurses on the protests, from all different hospitals, who had had enough. One of the people I spoke to was Camille, who is French but had lived in Britain for ever. With Brexit and then the pandemic, it was like a double insult to her, and she told me she was leaving nursing completely. View image in fullscreen Nurse Camille moved to France post-Covid. She said: ‘What with Brexit, Covid and the lack of appreciation in the UK for nurses from the government, I’m done.’ She now runs an Airbnb in France with her wife and son. We arranged that after taking her picture I would take her uniforms back as she had moved out of London, but when I got to her house, she had decided to burn them; she said it felt really therapeutic. There is a lot of trauma that can be held in clothing. A lot of the stains you just can’t get out of the uniforms, no matter how hot you wash them. As she was turning them she said: “There’s a lot of blood, sweat and tears in that fire.” View image in fullscreen Nurse Anna left the NHS and moved to New Zealand. She wanted to fold her uniform and bring it back to her workplace to say goodbye. View image in fullscreen Nurse Natasha used to play the cello to the Covid patients. Nurse Natasha left after the pandemic because of burnout and disappointment around the pay dispute with the government. She decided to travel with her husband. She washed her uniforms and hung them on the line as if for the last time. Natasha used to play her instrument to the Covid patients and sometimes when someone was dying she would play music on the ward. View image in fullscreen Nurse Mila hangs her ‘RIP’ nursing dress. There was also Mila – she wrote “RIP nursing” on the back of her dress. She now works on Portobello Road, in London, selling jewellery. Ellie also worked through the pandemic but had had enough; I took a few pictures of her handing her nursing uniform back. She was in her 20s and she said: “I’m just too young to experience this, so much death and upset. I just want to go to Australia and lie on the beach.” There are so many untold stories like this. View image in fullscreen View image in fullscreen Nurse Ellie brought her uniform to her job and handed it back to be put in the bin. There is an image of nurses in which we are expected to be submissive and sweet, never raising our voices, just getting on with the job. We are not supposed to get angry, to speak up. But there is a lot of anger in these photographs. View image in fullscreen Nurses throw their uniforms outside No 10 Downing Street to protest against the vaccine mandates in January 2022. ‘Clapped and sacked’ was the mantra; many felt they wanted to make their own decisions around vaccines. Of course I feel that way too sometimes, but if I’m ever upset, or feel that I want to leave, I’ll often just go round and chat to the patients on the ward. And then I’ll remember, ah, that’s why I’m here. Hannah Grace Deller was speaking to Esther Addley Working on the Front Line is published by Image and Reality, and can be ordered through Kickstarter . Explore more on these topics The Guardian picture essay Nursing NHS Health Coronavirus Public services policy Public sector pay features Share Reuse this content Nurse Natasha used to play the cello to the Covid patients. Photograph: Hannah Grace Deller Working as a nurse in the NHS through the Covid pandemic gave Hannah Grace Deller a unique perspective on the hardship faced by her profession. She has photographed several nurses as they decided post-Covid to leave the service Working as a nurse in the NHS through the Covid pandemic gave Hannah Grace Deller a unique perspective on the hardship faced by her profession. She has photographed several nurses as they decided post-Covid to leave the service Working as a nurse in the NHS through the Covid pandemic gave Hannah Grace Deller a unique perspective on the hardship faced by her profession. She has photographed several nurses as they decided post-Covid to leave the service By Esther Addley ; Photographs by Hannah Grace Deller By Esther Addley ; Photographs by Hannah Grace Deller H annah Grace Deller works as a paediatric matron at St Mary’s hospital in Paddington, central London. She is also a trained photographer, and during the Covid crisis she began to photograph the conditions in which she and her nursing colleagues were working. Some of her images were published widely and exhibited at the time, earning praise from Grayson Perry, Martin Parr and others, and inspiring an album by Chris Difford, of Squeeze. She has now published a book, Working on the Frontline , documenting the experiences of nurses and the reaction of the public during the crisis and since. View image in fullscreen Hannah Grace Deller and her team. Before the pandemic, I had never really taken photographs at work – just a few snaps if someone was leaving to say goodbye, that kind of thing. I had never really looked at my job in that way at all. Work was work, and my camera came out when I left the hospital as my way to relax. It’s like a form of meditation for me. A frontline worker trapped in a hospital: Hannah Grace Deller’s best photograph Read more Then one day at the start of the pandemic, I was responding to a bleep when I saw a cleaner, in full PPE, trapped behind a door, and asked to take his picture . After that I thought, something is beginning here. We didn’t know how long it would last, I thought maybe a month. But, with permission from my colleagues, I thought I would document what was happening. I didn’t bring in a camera, that wouldn’t have been appropriate; I’d just take pictures on my phone and use my real camera outside work to document everything else. View image in fullscreen The photographs, including this of nurse Steffie, are the first taken by Deller inside a hospital. This was around the time that people were clapping for NHS workers, and that was sweet – though most nurses didn’t get out of work before 8pm to hear it. As time went on, I think lots of nurses began to wonder how much that goodwill was worth. Nurses started protesting about pay and recognition during the pandemic. At one fair pay protest I started chatting with a nurse who said: “I’ve had enough, I’m going”. We’d had a pay offer of 1% and she said: “Surely, after everything, we are worth more than 1%.” View image in fullscreen Thousands of nurses protested on 29 July 2020 to call for a pay rise, saying workers had been ‘on their knees’ during the pandemic. I’ve always had an interest in photographing protests. It’s that spirit that you see in people, regardless of whether I agree with what they are protesting about. But with the nursing protests, it felt a bit different. I began talking to other nurses on the protests, from all different hospitals, who had had enough. One of the people I spoke to was Camille, who is French but had lived in Britain for ever. With Brexit and then the pandemic, it was like a double insult to her, and she told me she was leaving nursing completely. View image in fullscreen Nurse Camille moved to France post-Covid. She said: ‘What with Brexit, Covid and the lack of appreciation in the UK for nurses from the government, I’m done.’ She now runs an Airbnb in France with her wife and son. We arranged that after taking her picture I would take her uniforms back as she had moved out of London, but when I got to her house, she had decided to burn them; she said it felt really therapeutic. There is a lot of trauma that can be held in clothing. A lot of the stains you just can’t get out of the uniforms, no matter how hot you wash them. As she was turning them she said: “There’s a lot of blood, sweat and tears in that fire.” View image in fullscreen Nurse Anna left the NHS and moved to New Zealand. She wanted to fold her uniform and bring it back to her workplace to say goodbye. View image in fullscreen Nurse Natasha used to play the cello to the Covid patients. Nurse Natasha left after the pandemic because of burnout and disappointment around the pay dispute with the government. She decided to travel with her husband. She washed her uniforms and hung them on the line as if for the last time. Natasha used to play her instrument to the Covid patients and sometimes when someone was dying she would play music on the ward. View image in fullscreen Nurse Mila hangs her ‘RIP’ nursing dress. There was also Mila – she wrote “RIP nursing” on the back of her dress. She now works on Portobello Road, in London, selling jewellery. Ellie also worked through the pandemic but had had enough; I took a few pictures of her handing her nursing uniform back. She was in her 20s and she said: “I’m just too young to experience this, so much death and upset. I just want to go to Australia and lie on the beach.” There are so many untold stories like this. View image in fullscreen View image in fullscreen Nurse Ellie brought her uniform to her job and handed it back to be put in the bin. There is an image of nurses in which we are expected to be submissive and sweet, never raising our voices, just getting on with the job. We are not supposed to get angry, to speak up. But there is a lot of anger in these photographs. View image in fullscreen Nurses throw their uniforms outside No 10 Downing Street to protest against the vaccine mandates in January 2022. ‘Clapped and sacked’ was the mantra; many felt they wanted to make their own decisions around vaccines. Of course I feel that way too sometimes, but if I’m ever upset, or feel that I want to leave, I’ll often just go round and chat to the patients on the ward. And then I’ll remember, ah, that’s why I’m here. Hannah Grace Deller was speaking to Esther Addley Working on the Front Line is published by Image and Reality, and can be ordered through Kickstarter . Explore more on these topics The Guardian picture essay Nursing NHS Health Coronavirus Public services policy Public sector pay features Share Reuse this content H annah Grace Deller works as a paediatric matron at St Mary’s hospital in Paddington, central London. She is also a trained photographer, and during the Covid crisis she began to photograph the conditions in which she and her nursing colleagues were working. Some of her images were published widely and exhibited at the time, earning praise from Grayson Perry, Martin Parr and others, and inspiring an album by Chris Difford, of Squeeze. She has now published a book, Working on the Frontline , documenting the experiences of nurses and the reaction of the public during the crisis and since. View image in fullscreen Hannah Grace Deller and her team. Before the pandemic, I had never really taken photographs at work – just a few snaps if someone was leaving to say goodbye, that kind of thing. I had never really looked at my job in that way at all. Work was work, and my camera came out when I left the hospital as my way to relax. It’s like a form of meditation for me. A frontline worker trapped in a hospital: Hannah Grace Deller’s best photograph Read more Then one day at the start of the pandemic, I was responding to a bleep when I saw a cleaner, in full PPE, trapped behind a door, and asked to take his picture . After that I thought, something is beginning here. We didn’t know how long it would last, I thought maybe a month. But, with permission from my colleagues, I thought I would document what was happening. I didn’t bring in a camera, that wouldn’t have been appropriate; I’d just take pictures on my phone and use my real camera outside work to document everything else. View image in fullscreen The photographs, including this of nurse Steffie, are the first taken by Deller inside a hospital. This was around the time that people were clapping for NHS workers, and that was sweet – though most nurses didn’t get out of work before 8pm to hear it. As time went on, I think lots of nurses began to wonder how much that goodwill was worth. Nurses started protesting about pay and recognition during the pandemic. At one fair pay protest I started chatting with a nurse who said: “I’ve had enough, I’m going”. We’d had a pay offer of 1% and she said: “Surely, after everything, we are worth more than 1%.” View image in fullscreen Thousands of nurses protested on 29 July 2020 to call for a pay rise, saying workers had been ‘on their knees’ during the pandemic. I’ve always had an interest in photographing protests. It’s that spirit that you see in people, regardless of whether I agree with what they are protesting about. But with the nursing protests, it felt a bit different. I began talking to other nurses on the protests, from all different hospitals, who had had enough. One of the people I spoke to was Camille, who is French but had lived in Britain for ever. With Brexit and then the pandemic, it was like a double insult to her, and she told me she was leaving nursing completely. View image in fullscreen Nurse Camille moved to France post-Covid. She said: ‘What with Brexit, Covid and the lack of appreciation in the UK for nurses from the government, I’m done.’ She now runs an Airbnb in France with her wife and son. We arranged that after taking her picture I would take her uniforms back as she had moved out of London, but when I got to her house, she had decided to burn them; she said it felt really therapeutic. There is a lot of trauma that can be held in clothing. A lot of the stains you just can’t get out of the uniforms, no matter how hot you wash them. As she was turning them she said: “There’s a lot of blood, sweat and tears in that fire.” View image in fullscreen Nurse Anna left the NHS and moved to New Zealand. She wanted to fold her uniform and bring it back to her workplace to say goodbye. View image in fullscreen Nurse Natasha used to play the cello to the Covid patients. Nurse Natasha left after the pandemic because of burnout and disappointment around the pay dispute with the government. She decided to travel with her husband. She washed her uniforms and hung them on the line as if for the last time. Natasha used to play her instrument to the Covid patients and sometimes when someone was dying she would play music on the ward. View image in fullscreen Nurse Mila hangs her ‘RIP’ nursing dress. There was also Mila – she wrote “RIP nursing” on the back of her dress. She now works on Portobello Road, in London, selling jewellery. Ellie also worked through the pandemic but had had enough; I took a few pictures of her handing her nursing uniform back. She was in her 20s and she said: “I’m just too young to experience this, so much death and upset. I just want to go to Australia and lie on the beach.” There are so many untold stories like this. View image in fullscreen View image in fullscreen Nurse Ellie brought her uniform to her job and handed it back to be put in the bin. There is an image of nurses in which we are expected to be submissive and sweet, never raising our voices, just getting on with the job. We are not supposed to get angry, to speak up. But there is a lot of anger in these photographs. View image in fullscreen Nurses throw their uniforms outside No 10 Downing Street to protest against the vaccine mandates in January 2022. ‘Clapped and sacked’ was the mantra; many felt they wanted to make their own decisions around vaccines. Of course I feel that way too sometimes, but if I’m ever upset, or feel that I want to leave, I’ll often just go round and chat to the patients on the ward. And then I’ll remember, ah, that’s why I’m here. Hannah Grace Deller was speaking to Esther Addley Working on the Front Line is published by Image and Reality, and can be ordered through Kickstarter . Explore more on these topics The Guardian picture essay Nursing NHS Health Coronavirus Public services policy Public sector pay features Share Reuse this content H annah Grace Deller works as a paediatric matron at St Mary’s hospital in Paddington, central London. She is also a trained photographer, and during the Covid crisis she began to photograph the conditions in which she and her nursing colleagues were working. Some of her images were published widely and exhibited at the time, earning praise from Grayson Perry, Martin Parr and others, and inspiring an album by Chris Difford, of Squeeze. She has now published a book, Working on the Frontline , documenting the experiences of nurses and the reaction of the public during the crisis and since. View image in fullscreen Hannah Grace Deller and her team. Before the pandemic, I had never really taken photographs at work – just a few snaps if someone was leaving to say goodbye, that kind of thing. I had never really looked at my job in that way at all. Work was work, and my camera came out when I left the hospital as my way to relax. It’s like a form of meditation for me. A frontline worker trapped in a hospital: Hannah Grace Deller’s best photograph Read more Then one day at the start of the pandemic, I was responding to a bleep when I saw a cleaner, in full PPE, trapped behind a door, and asked to take his picture . After that I thought, something is beginning here. We didn’t know how long it would last, I thought maybe a month. But, with permission from my colleagues, I thought I would document what was happening. I didn’t bring in a camera, that wouldn’t have been appropriate; I’d just take pictures on my phone and use my real camera outside work to document everything else. View image in fullscreen The photographs, including this of nurse Steffie, are the first taken by Deller inside a hospital. This was around the time that people were clapping for NHS workers, and that was sweet – though most nurses didn’t get out of work before 8pm to hear it. As time went on, I think lots of nurses began to wonder how much that goodwill was worth. Nurses started protesting about pay and recognition during the pandemic. At one fair pay protest I started chatting with a nurse who said: “I’ve had enough, I’m going”. We’d had a pay offer of 1% and she said: “Surely, after everything, we are worth more than 1%.” View image in fullscreen Thousands of nurses protested on 29 July 2020 to call for a pay rise, saying workers had been ‘on their knees’ during the pandemic. I’ve always had an interest in photographing protests. It’s that spirit that you see in people, regardless of whether I agree with what they are protesting about. But with the nursing protests, it felt a bit different. I began talking to other nurses on the protests, from all different hospitals, who had had enough. One of the people I spoke to was Camille, who is French but had lived in Britain for ever. With Brexit and then the pandemic, it was like a double insult to her, and she told me she was leaving nursing completely. View image in fullscreen Nurse Camille moved to France post-Covid. She said: ‘What with Brexit, Covid and the lack of appreciation in the UK for nurses from the government, I’m done.’ She now runs an Airbnb in France with her wife and son. We arranged that after taking her picture I would take her uniforms back as she had moved out of London, but when I got to her house, she had decided to burn them; she said it felt really therapeutic. There is a lot of trauma that can be held in clothing. A lot of the stains you just can’t get out of the uniforms, no matter how hot you wash them. As she was turning them she said: “There’s a lot of blood, sweat and tears in that fire.” View image in fullscreen Nurse Anna left the NHS and moved to New Zealand. She wanted to fold her uniform and bring it back to her workplace to say goodbye. View image in fullscreen Nurse Natasha used to play the cello to the Covid patients. Nurse Natasha left after the pandemic because of burnout and disappointment around the pay dispute with the government. She decided to travel with her husband. She washed her uniforms and hung them on the line as if for the last time. Natasha used to play her instrument to the Covid patients and sometimes when someone was dying she would play music on the ward. View image in fullscreen Nurse Mila hangs her ‘RIP’ nursing dress. There was also Mila – she wrote “RIP nursing” on the back of her dress. She now works on Portobello Road, in London, selling jewellery. Ellie also worked through the pandemic but had had enough; I took a few pictures of her handing her nursing uniform back. She was in her 20s and she said: “I’m just too young to experience this, so much death and upset. I just want to go to Australia and lie on the beach.” There are so many untold stories like this. View image in fullscreen View image in fullscreen Nurse Ellie brought her uniform to her job and handed it back to be put in the bin. There is an image of nurses in which we are expected to be submissive and sweet, never raising our voices, just getting on with the job. We are not supposed to get angry, to speak up. But there is a lot of anger in these photographs. View image in fullscreen Nurses throw their uniforms outside No 10 Downing Street to protest against the vaccine mandates in January 2022. ‘Clapped and sacked’ was the mantra; many felt they wanted to make their own decisions around vaccines. Of course I feel that way too sometimes, but if I’m ever upset, or feel that I want to leave, I’ll often just go round and chat to the patients on the ward. And then I’ll remember, ah, that’s why I’m here. Hannah Grace Deller was speaking to Esther Addley Working on the Front Line is published by Image and Reality, and can be ordered through Kickstarter . H annah Grace Deller works as a paediatric matron at St Mary’s hospital in Paddington, central London. She is also a trained photographer, and during the Covid crisis she began to photograph the conditions in which she and her nursing colleagues were working. Some of her images were published widely and exhibited at the time, earning praise from Grayson Perry, Martin Parr and others, and inspiring an album by Chris Difford, of Squeeze. She has now published a book, Working on the Frontline , documenting the experiences of nurses and the reaction of the public during the crisis and since. View image in fullscreen Hannah Grace Deller and her team. Before the pandemic, I had never really taken photographs at work – just a few snaps if someone was leaving to say goodbye, that kind of thing. I had never really looked at my job in that way at all. Work was work, and my camera came out when I left the hospital as my way to relax. It’s like a form of meditation for me. A frontline worker trapped in a hospital: Hannah Grace Deller’s best photograph Read more Then one day at the start of the pandemic, I was responding to a bleep when I saw a cleaner, in full PPE, trapped behind a door, and asked to take his picture . After that I thought, something is beginning here. We didn’t know how long it would last, I thought maybe a month. But, with permission from my colleagues, I thought I would document what was happening. I didn’t bring in a camera, that wouldn’t have been appropriate; I’d just take pictures on my phone and use my real camera outside work to document everything else. View image in fullscreen The photographs, including this of nurse Steffie, are the first taken by Deller inside a hospital. This was around the time that people were clapping for NHS workers, and that was sweet – though most nurses didn’t get out of work before 8pm to hear it. As time went on, I think lots of nurses began to wonder how much that goodwill was worth. Nurses started protesting about pay and recognition during the pandemic. At one fair pay protest I started chatting with a nurse who said: “I’ve had enough, I’m going”. We’d had a pay offer of 1% and she said: “Surely, after everything, we are worth more than 1%.” View image in fullscreen Thousands of nurses protested on 29 July 2020 to call for a pay rise, saying workers had been ‘on their knees’ during the pandemic. I’ve always had an interest in photographing protests. It’s that spirit that you see in people, regardless of whether I agree with what they are protesting about. But with the nursing protests, it felt a bit different. I began talking to other nurses on the protests, from all different hospitals, who had had enough. One of the people I spoke to was Camille, who is French but had lived in Britain for ever. With Brexit and then the pandemic, it was like a double insult to her, and she told me she was leaving nursing completely. View image in fullscreen Nurse Camille moved to France post-Covid. She said: ‘What with Brexit, Covid and the lack of appreciation in the UK for nurses from the government, I’m done.’ She now runs an Airbnb in France with her wife and son. We arranged that after taking her picture I would take her uniforms back as she had moved out of London, but when I got to her house, she had decided to burn them; she said it felt really therapeutic. There is a lot of trauma that can be held in clothing. A lot of the stains you just can’t get out of the uniforms, no matter how hot you wash them. As she was turning them she said: “There’s a lot of blood, sweat and tears in that fire.” View image in fullscreen Nurse Anna left the NHS and moved to New Zealand. She wanted to fold her uniform and bring it back to her workplace to say goodbye. View image in fullscreen Nurse Natasha used to play the cello to the Covid patients. Nurse Natasha left after the pandemic because of burnout and disappointment around the pay dispute with the government. She decided to travel with her husband. She washed her uniforms and hung them on the line as if for the last time. Natasha used to play her instrument to the Covid patients and sometimes when someone was dying she would play music on the ward. View image in fullscreen Nurse Mila hangs her ‘RIP’ nursing dress. There was also Mila – she wrote “RIP nursing” on the back of her dress. She now works on Portobello Road, in London, selling jewellery. Ellie also worked through the pandemic but had had enough; I took a few pictures of her handing her nursing uniform back. She was in her 20s and she said: “I’m just too young to experience this, so much death and upset. I just want to go to Australia and lie on the beach.” There are so many untold stories like this. View image in fullscreen View image in fullscreen Nurse Ellie brought her uniform to her job and handed it back to be put in the bin. There is an image of nurses in which we are expected to be submissive and sweet, never raising our voices, just getting on with the job. We are not supposed to get angry, to speak up. But there is a lot of anger in these photographs. View image in fullscreen Nurses throw their uniforms outside No 10 Downing Street to protest against the vaccine mandates in January 2022. ‘Clapped and sacked’ was the mantra; many felt they wanted to make their own decisions around vaccines. Of course I feel that way too sometimes, but if I’m ever upset, or feel that I want to leave, I’ll often just go round and chat to the patients on the ward. And then I’ll remember, ah, that’s why I’m here. Hannah Grace Deller was speaking to Esther Addley Working on the Front Line is published by Image and Reality, and can be ordered through Kickstarter . H annah Grace Deller works as a paediatric matron at St Mary’s hospital in Paddington, central London. She is also a trained photographer, and during the Covid crisis she began to photograph the conditions in which she and her nursing colleagues were working. Some of her images were published widely and exhibited at the time, earning praise from Grayson Perry, Martin Parr and others, and inspiring an album by Chris Difford, of Squeeze. She has now published a book, Working on the Frontline , documenting the experiences of nurses and the reaction of the public during the crisis and since. Hannah Grace Deller and her team. Before the pandemic, I had never really taken photographs at work – just a few snaps if someone was leaving to say goodbye, that kind of thing. I had never really looked at my job in that way at all. Work was work, and my camera came out when I left the hospital as my way to relax. It’s like a form of meditation for me. A frontline worker trapped in a hospital: Hannah Grace Deller’s best photograph Read more A frontline worker trapped in a hospital: Hannah Grace Deller’s best photograph Read more A frontline worker trapped in a hospital: Hannah Grace Deller’s best photograph Read more A frontline worker trapped in a hospital: Hannah Grace Deller’s best photograph A frontline worker trapped in a hospital: Hannah Grace Deller’s best photograph Then one day at the start of the pandemic, I was responding to a bleep when I saw a cleaner, in full PPE, trapped behind a door, and asked to take his picture . After that I thought, something is beginning here. We didn’t know how long it would last, I thought maybe a month. But, with permission from my colleagues, I thought I would document what was happening. I didn’t bring in a camera, that wouldn’t have been appropriate; I’d just take pictures on my phone and use my real camera outside work to document everything else. The photographs, including this of nurse Steffie, are the first taken by Deller inside a hospital. This was around the time that people were clapping for NHS workers, and that was sweet – though most nurses didn’t get out of work before 8pm to hear it. As time went on, I think lots of nurses began to wonder how much that goodwill was worth. Nurses started protesting about pay and recognition during the pandemic. At one fair pay protest I started chatting with a nurse who said: “I’ve had enough, I’m going”. We’d had a pay offer of 1% and she said: “Surely, after everything, we are worth more than 1%.” Thousands of nurses protested on 29 July 2020 to call for a pay rise, saying workers had been ‘on their knees’ during the pandemic. I’ve always had an interest in photographing protests. It’s that spirit that you see in people, regardless of whether I agree with what they are protesting about. But with the nursing protests, it felt a bit different. I began talking to other nurses on the protests, from all different hospitals, who had had enough. One of the people I spoke to was Camille, who is French but had lived in Britain for ever. With Brexit and then the pandemic, it was like a double insult to her, and she told me she was leaving nursing completely. Nurse Camille moved to France post-Covid. She said: ‘What with Brexit, Covid and the lack of appreciation in the UK for nurses from the government, I’m done.’ She now runs an Airbnb in France with her wife and son. We arranged that after taking her picture I would take her uniforms back as she had moved out of London, but when I got to her house, she had decided to burn them; she said it felt really therapeutic. There is a lot of trauma that can be held in clothing. A lot of the stains you just can’t get out of the uniforms, no matter how hot you wash them. As she was turning them she said: “There’s a lot of blood, sweat and tears in that fire.” Nurse Anna left the NHS and moved to New Zealand. She wanted to fold her uniform and bring it back to her workplace to say goodbye. Nurse Natasha used to play the cello to the Covid patients. Nurse Natasha left after the pandemic because of burnout and disappointment around the pay dispute with the government. She decided to travel with her husband. She washed her uniforms and hung them on the line as if for the last time. Natasha used to play her instrument to the Covid patients and sometimes when someone was dying she would play music on the ward. Nurse Mila hangs her ‘RIP’ nursing dress. There was also Mila – she wrote “RIP nursing” on the back of her dress. She now works on Portobello Road, in London, selling jewellery. Ellie also worked through the pandemic but had had enough; I took a few pictures of her handing her nursing uniform back. She was in her 20s and she said: “I’m just too young to experience this, so much death and upset. I just want to go to Australia and lie on the beach.” There are so many untold stories like this. View image in fullscreen View image in fullscreen Nurse Ellie brought her uniform to her job and handed it back to be put in the bin. View image in fullscreen View image in fullscreen Nurse Ellie brought her uniform to her job and handed it back to be put in the bin. There is an image of nurses in which we are expected to be submissive and sweet, never raising our voices, just getting on with the job. We are not supposed to get angry, to speak up. But there is a lot of anger in these photographs. Nurses throw their uniforms outside No 10 Downing Street to protest against the vaccine mandates in January 2022. ‘Clapped and sacked’ was the mantra; many felt they wanted to make their own decisions around vaccines. Of course I feel that way too sometimes, but if I’m ever upset, or feel that I want to leave, I’ll often just go round and chat to the patients on the ward. And then I’ll remember, ah, that’s why I’m here. Hannah Grace Deller was speaking to Esther Addley Working on the Front Line is published by Image and Reality, and can be ordered through Kickstarter . Explore more on these topics The Guardian picture essay Nursing NHS Health Coronavirus Public services policy Public sector pay features Share Reuse this content The Guardian picture essay Nursing NHS Health Coronavirus Public services policy Public sector pay features |
Harvard’s Gaza encampment ends after administration agrees to meet
The pro-Palestinian encampment at Harvard University on 25 April 2024. Photograph: Brian Snyder/Reuters View image in fullscreen The pro-Palestinian encampment at Harvard University on 25 April 2024. Photograph: Brian Snyder/Reuters This article is more than 1 year old Harvard’s Gaza encampment ends after administration agrees to meet This article is more than 1 year old After nearly three weeks, students dismantle tents amid demands including disclosure of school’s financial ties to Israel Harvard’s Gaza solidarity encampment has peacefully ended after university administrators agreed to meet with protesters about their demands surrounding divestment from Israel. After nearly three weeks, students protesting against Israel’s invasion of Gaza voluntarily dismantled their tents at the Ivy League college in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest Read more Some other protests across the US saw colleges crack down on the encampments, resulting in suspensions, mass arrests and incidents of police brutality as law enforcement was called on to campuses. The decision came after Harvard’s interim president, Alan Garber, agreed to a meeting between university officials – such as Hopi Hoekstra, dean of the faculty of arts and sciences, and representatives from the university’s endowment manager, Harvard Management Company – to discuss the protesters’ demands. Some of the demands are disclosure of financial ties to Israel, divestment from those ties and the creation of a Center for Palestine Studies. Harvard reiterated in a statement “that the endowment will not be used as a tool for political means” and that the university resisted calls for divestment. Harvard has the world’s largest academic endowment , valued at roughly $50bn. Protesters also demand that the suspensions of more than 20 students and student workers be retracted and that no disciplinary action be taken against 60 others, to which the university agreed. Harvard Out of Occupied Palestine (Hoop), the group of students leading the encampment protest, said while the encampment was coming down, it was not an end to the movement. “We are under no illusions: we do not believe these meetings are divestment wins. These side-deals are intended to pacify us away from full disclosure & divestment. Rest assured, they will not,” the group said on Instagram . Hoop added it did not measure the success of the encampment in meetings, “but rather in organizing capacity and consciousness”. Harvard’s encampment protest was born out of the one started by students at Columbia University in New York City in April. Since then, more than 80 universities across the US, and several more around the world, started encampment protests against Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land and in support of the more than 35,000 Palestinians killed by Israeli forces in the war. Israel launched its military assault on Gaza in response to Hamas fighters attacking Israel on 7 October 2023, killing roughly 1,200 people and taking about 250 hostage. Israel’s response has triggered what the UN calls “full-blown famine” in parts of Gaza and triggered widespread outrage around the world, though the US remains a staunch ally of the country. Explore more on these topics Harvard University US campus protests Protest Israel-Gaza war US universities news Share Reuse this content The pro-Palestinian encampment at Harvard University on 25 April 2024. Photograph: Brian Snyder/Reuters View image in fullscreen The pro-Palestinian encampment at Harvard University on 25 April 2024. Photograph: Brian Snyder/Reuters This article is more than 1 year old Harvard’s Gaza encampment ends after administration agrees to meet This article is more than 1 year old After nearly three weeks, students dismantle tents amid demands including disclosure of school’s financial ties to Israel Harvard’s Gaza solidarity encampment has peacefully ended after university administrators agreed to meet with protesters about their demands surrounding divestment from Israel. After nearly three weeks, students protesting against Israel’s invasion of Gaza voluntarily dismantled their tents at the Ivy League college in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest Read more Some other protests across the US saw colleges crack down on the encampments, resulting in suspensions, mass arrests and incidents of police brutality as law enforcement was called on to campuses. The decision came after Harvard’s interim president, Alan Garber, agreed to a meeting between university officials – such as Hopi Hoekstra, dean of the faculty of arts and sciences, and representatives from the university’s endowment manager, Harvard Management Company – to discuss the protesters’ demands. Some of the demands are disclosure of financial ties to Israel, divestment from those ties and the creation of a Center for Palestine Studies. Harvard reiterated in a statement “that the endowment will not be used as a tool for political means” and that the university resisted calls for divestment. Harvard has the world’s largest academic endowment , valued at roughly $50bn. Protesters also demand that the suspensions of more than 20 students and student workers be retracted and that no disciplinary action be taken against 60 others, to which the university agreed. Harvard Out of Occupied Palestine (Hoop), the group of students leading the encampment protest, said while the encampment was coming down, it was not an end to the movement. “We are under no illusions: we do not believe these meetings are divestment wins. These side-deals are intended to pacify us away from full disclosure & divestment. Rest assured, they will not,” the group said on Instagram . Hoop added it did not measure the success of the encampment in meetings, “but rather in organizing capacity and consciousness”. Harvard’s encampment protest was born out of the one started by students at Columbia University in New York City in April. Since then, more than 80 universities across the US, and several more around the world, started encampment protests against Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land and in support of the more than 35,000 Palestinians killed by Israeli forces in the war. Israel launched its military assault on Gaza in response to Hamas fighters attacking Israel on 7 October 2023, killing roughly 1,200 people and taking about 250 hostage. Israel’s response has triggered what the UN calls “full-blown famine” in parts of Gaza and triggered widespread outrage around the world, though the US remains a staunch ally of the country. Explore more on these topics Harvard University US campus protests Protest Israel-Gaza war US universities news Share Reuse this content The pro-Palestinian encampment at Harvard University on 25 April 2024. Photograph: Brian Snyder/Reuters View image in fullscreen The pro-Palestinian encampment at Harvard University on 25 April 2024. Photograph: Brian Snyder/Reuters The pro-Palestinian encampment at Harvard University on 25 April 2024. Photograph: Brian Snyder/Reuters View image in fullscreen The pro-Palestinian encampment at Harvard University on 25 April 2024. Photograph: Brian Snyder/Reuters The pro-Palestinian encampment at Harvard University on 25 April 2024. Photograph: Brian Snyder/Reuters View image in fullscreen The pro-Palestinian encampment at Harvard University on 25 April 2024. Photograph: Brian Snyder/Reuters The pro-Palestinian encampment at Harvard University on 25 April 2024. Photograph: Brian Snyder/Reuters View image in fullscreen The pro-Palestinian encampment at Harvard University on 25 April 2024. Photograph: Brian Snyder/Reuters The pro-Palestinian encampment at Harvard University on 25 April 2024. Photograph: Brian Snyder/Reuters The pro-Palestinian encampment at Harvard University on 25 April 2024. Photograph: Brian Snyder/Reuters This article is more than 1 year old Harvard’s Gaza encampment ends after administration agrees to meet This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Harvard’s Gaza encampment ends after administration agrees to meet This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Harvard’s Gaza encampment ends after administration agrees to meet This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old After nearly three weeks, students dismantle tents amid demands including disclosure of school’s financial ties to Israel After nearly three weeks, students dismantle tents amid demands including disclosure of school’s financial ties to Israel After nearly three weeks, students dismantle tents amid demands including disclosure of school’s financial ties to Israel Harvard’s Gaza solidarity encampment has peacefully ended after university administrators agreed to meet with protesters about their demands surrounding divestment from Israel. After nearly three weeks, students protesting against Israel’s invasion of Gaza voluntarily dismantled their tents at the Ivy League college in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest Read more Some other protests across the US saw colleges crack down on the encampments, resulting in suspensions, mass arrests and incidents of police brutality as law enforcement was called on to campuses. The decision came after Harvard’s interim president, Alan Garber, agreed to a meeting between university officials – such as Hopi Hoekstra, dean of the faculty of arts and sciences, and representatives from the university’s endowment manager, Harvard Management Company – to discuss the protesters’ demands. Some of the demands are disclosure of financial ties to Israel, divestment from those ties and the creation of a Center for Palestine Studies. Harvard reiterated in a statement “that the endowment will not be used as a tool for political means” and that the university resisted calls for divestment. Harvard has the world’s largest academic endowment , valued at roughly $50bn. Protesters also demand that the suspensions of more than 20 students and student workers be retracted and that no disciplinary action be taken against 60 others, to which the university agreed. Harvard Out of Occupied Palestine (Hoop), the group of students leading the encampment protest, said while the encampment was coming down, it was not an end to the movement. “We are under no illusions: we do not believe these meetings are divestment wins. These side-deals are intended to pacify us away from full disclosure & divestment. Rest assured, they will not,” the group said on Instagram . Hoop added it did not measure the success of the encampment in meetings, “but rather in organizing capacity and consciousness”. Harvard’s encampment protest was born out of the one started by students at Columbia University in New York City in April. Since then, more than 80 universities across the US, and several more around the world, started encampment protests against Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land and in support of the more than 35,000 Palestinians killed by Israeli forces in the war. Israel launched its military assault on Gaza in response to Hamas fighters attacking Israel on 7 October 2023, killing roughly 1,200 people and taking about 250 hostage. Israel’s response has triggered what the UN calls “full-blown famine” in parts of Gaza and triggered widespread outrage around the world, though the US remains a staunch ally of the country. Explore more on these topics Harvard University US campus protests Protest Israel-Gaza war US universities news Share Reuse this content Harvard’s Gaza solidarity encampment has peacefully ended after university administrators agreed to meet with protesters about their demands surrounding divestment from Israel. After nearly three weeks, students protesting against Israel’s invasion of Gaza voluntarily dismantled their tents at the Ivy League college in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest Read more Some other protests across the US saw colleges crack down on the encampments, resulting in suspensions, mass arrests and incidents of police brutality as law enforcement was called on to campuses. The decision came after Harvard’s interim president, Alan Garber, agreed to a meeting between university officials – such as Hopi Hoekstra, dean of the faculty of arts and sciences, and representatives from the university’s endowment manager, Harvard Management Company – to discuss the protesters’ demands. Some of the demands are disclosure of financial ties to Israel, divestment from those ties and the creation of a Center for Palestine Studies. Harvard reiterated in a statement “that the endowment will not be used as a tool for political means” and that the university resisted calls for divestment. Harvard has the world’s largest academic endowment , valued at roughly $50bn. Protesters also demand that the suspensions of more than 20 students and student workers be retracted and that no disciplinary action be taken against 60 others, to which the university agreed. Harvard Out of Occupied Palestine (Hoop), the group of students leading the encampment protest, said while the encampment was coming down, it was not an end to the movement. “We are under no illusions: we do not believe these meetings are divestment wins. These side-deals are intended to pacify us away from full disclosure & divestment. Rest assured, they will not,” the group said on Instagram . Hoop added it did not measure the success of the encampment in meetings, “but rather in organizing capacity and consciousness”. Harvard’s encampment protest was born out of the one started by students at Columbia University in New York City in April. Since then, more than 80 universities across the US, and several more around the world, started encampment protests against Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land and in support of the more than 35,000 Palestinians killed by Israeli forces in the war. Israel launched its military assault on Gaza in response to Hamas fighters attacking Israel on 7 October 2023, killing roughly 1,200 people and taking about 250 hostage. Israel’s response has triggered what the UN calls “full-blown famine” in parts of Gaza and triggered widespread outrage around the world, though the US remains a staunch ally of the country. Explore more on these topics Harvard University US campus protests Protest Israel-Gaza war US universities news Share Reuse this content Harvard’s Gaza solidarity encampment has peacefully ended after university administrators agreed to meet with protesters about their demands surrounding divestment from Israel. After nearly three weeks, students protesting against Israel’s invasion of Gaza voluntarily dismantled their tents at the Ivy League college in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest Read more Some other protests across the US saw colleges crack down on the encampments, resulting in suspensions, mass arrests and incidents of police brutality as law enforcement was called on to campuses. The decision came after Harvard’s interim president, Alan Garber, agreed to a meeting between university officials – such as Hopi Hoekstra, dean of the faculty of arts and sciences, and representatives from the university’s endowment manager, Harvard Management Company – to discuss the protesters’ demands. Some of the demands are disclosure of financial ties to Israel, divestment from those ties and the creation of a Center for Palestine Studies. Harvard reiterated in a statement “that the endowment will not be used as a tool for political means” and that the university resisted calls for divestment. Harvard has the world’s largest academic endowment , valued at roughly $50bn. Protesters also demand that the suspensions of more than 20 students and student workers be retracted and that no disciplinary action be taken against 60 others, to which the university agreed. Harvard Out of Occupied Palestine (Hoop), the group of students leading the encampment protest, said while the encampment was coming down, it was not an end to the movement. “We are under no illusions: we do not believe these meetings are divestment wins. These side-deals are intended to pacify us away from full disclosure & divestment. Rest assured, they will not,” the group said on Instagram . Hoop added it did not measure the success of the encampment in meetings, “but rather in organizing capacity and consciousness”. Harvard’s encampment protest was born out of the one started by students at Columbia University in New York City in April. Since then, more than 80 universities across the US, and several more around the world, started encampment protests against Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land and in support of the more than 35,000 Palestinians killed by Israeli forces in the war. Israel launched its military assault on Gaza in response to Hamas fighters attacking Israel on 7 October 2023, killing roughly 1,200 people and taking about 250 hostage. Israel’s response has triggered what the UN calls “full-blown famine” in parts of Gaza and triggered widespread outrage around the world, though the US remains a staunch ally of the country. Harvard’s Gaza solidarity encampment has peacefully ended after university administrators agreed to meet with protesters about their demands surrounding divestment from Israel. After nearly three weeks, students protesting against Israel’s invasion of Gaza voluntarily dismantled their tents at the Ivy League college in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest Read more Some other protests across the US saw colleges crack down on the encampments, resulting in suspensions, mass arrests and incidents of police brutality as law enforcement was called on to campuses. The decision came after Harvard’s interim president, Alan Garber, agreed to a meeting between university officials – such as Hopi Hoekstra, dean of the faculty of arts and sciences, and representatives from the university’s endowment manager, Harvard Management Company – to discuss the protesters’ demands. Some of the demands are disclosure of financial ties to Israel, divestment from those ties and the creation of a Center for Palestine Studies. Harvard reiterated in a statement “that the endowment will not be used as a tool for political means” and that the university resisted calls for divestment. Harvard has the world’s largest academic endowment , valued at roughly $50bn. Protesters also demand that the suspensions of more than 20 students and student workers be retracted and that no disciplinary action be taken against 60 others, to which the university agreed. Harvard Out of Occupied Palestine (Hoop), the group of students leading the encampment protest, said while the encampment was coming down, it was not an end to the movement. “We are under no illusions: we do not believe these meetings are divestment wins. These side-deals are intended to pacify us away from full disclosure & divestment. Rest assured, they will not,” the group said on Instagram . Hoop added it did not measure the success of the encampment in meetings, “but rather in organizing capacity and consciousness”. Harvard’s encampment protest was born out of the one started by students at Columbia University in New York City in April. Since then, more than 80 universities across the US, and several more around the world, started encampment protests against Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land and in support of the more than 35,000 Palestinians killed by Israeli forces in the war. Israel launched its military assault on Gaza in response to Hamas fighters attacking Israel on 7 October 2023, killing roughly 1,200 people and taking about 250 hostage. Israel’s response has triggered what the UN calls “full-blown famine” in parts of Gaza and triggered widespread outrage around the world, though the US remains a staunch ally of the country. Harvard’s Gaza solidarity encampment has peacefully ended after university administrators agreed to meet with protesters about their demands surrounding divestment from Israel. After nearly three weeks, students protesting against Israel’s invasion of Gaza voluntarily dismantled their tents at the Ivy League college in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest Read more Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest Read more Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest Read more Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld graduation speech in Gaza protest Some other protests across the US saw colleges crack down on the encampments, resulting in suspensions, mass arrests and incidents of police brutality as law enforcement was called on to campuses. The decision came after Harvard’s interim president, Alan Garber, agreed to a meeting between university officials – such as Hopi Hoekstra, dean of the faculty of arts and sciences, and representatives from the university’s endowment manager, Harvard Management Company – to discuss the protesters’ demands. Some of the demands are disclosure of financial ties to Israel, divestment from those ties and the creation of a Center for Palestine Studies. Harvard reiterated in a statement “that the endowment will not be used as a tool for political means” and that the university resisted calls for divestment. Harvard has the world’s largest academic endowment , valued at roughly $50bn. Protesters also demand that the suspensions of more than 20 students and student workers be retracted and that no disciplinary action be taken against 60 others, to which the university agreed. Harvard Out of Occupied Palestine (Hoop), the group of students leading the encampment protest, said while the encampment was coming down, it was not an end to the movement. “We are under no illusions: we do not believe these meetings are divestment wins. These side-deals are intended to pacify us away from full disclosure & divestment. Rest assured, they will not,” the group said on Instagram . Hoop added it did not measure the success of the encampment in meetings, “but rather in organizing capacity and consciousness”. Harvard’s encampment protest was born out of the one started by students at Columbia University in New York City in April. Since then, more than 80 universities across the US, and several more around the world, started encampment protests against Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land and in support of the more than 35,000 Palestinians killed by Israeli forces in the war. Israel launched its military assault on Gaza in response to Hamas fighters attacking Israel on 7 October 2023, killing roughly 1,200 people and taking about 250 hostage. Israel’s response has triggered what the UN calls “full-blown famine” in parts of Gaza and triggered widespread outrage around the world, though the US remains a staunch ally of the country. Explore more on these topics Harvard University US campus protests Protest Israel-Gaza war US universities news Share Reuse this content Harvard University US campus protests Protest Israel-Gaza war US universities news |
As a teenager, John was jailed for assaulting someone and stealing their bike. That was 17 years ago – will he ever be released?
Artwork by Yann Kebbi View image in fullscreen Artwork by Yann Kebbi This article is more than 1 year old As a teenager, John was jailed for assaulting someone and stealing their bike. That was 17 years ago – will he ever be released? This article is more than 1 year old Indeterminate sentences are devastating to mental health, but prisoners with mental illness are less likely to be released. The result is a vicious cycle whereby the most vulnerable inmates often have the least chance of getting out – as John’s case shows More on this series: The IPP Scandal A t 16, John Wright was the way a lot of teenagers can be: one person at school, another person at home. At school, he was quiet, kept to himself. Behind closed doors, he was playful and chatty. He’d do backflips or cartwheels on the sofa while watching TV, or make silly noises at awkward moments to make his three siblings laugh. He was creative: he loved rapping, making his own beats, he played the guitar, liked drawing. The family would play basketball together, near the sleepy cul-de-sac where they lived. Those basketball games are the part that John’s mum, Lynn, remembers now – that and driving her kids around, windows down, Motown pumping out of the speakers, and all of them singing along. At school, John was a bit of a target. It probably didn’t help that he stood out – he was tall for his age, skinny. In the years his school friend Jamie knew John, he never once saw him initiate anything. He never picked on anyone, made fun of anyone, started fights. But if anyone took the piss out of John, he wouldn’t back down. He was the one who usually got punished if anything kicked off. His sister, Joanna, worried about him. Anyone who said, “Oh, John, do this”, he would go and do it. That was his way of making friends. So when, as a 14-year-old, he fell in with a group of boys who kept getting into trouble, the family grew concerned. Best of 2024: As a teenager, John was jailed for assaulting someone and stealing their bike. That was 17 years ago – will he ever be released? – podcast Read more At a certain point, Lynn wondered if there was something she was missing about her son, some deeper reason why he was struggling socially. She took him to the doctor and he was referred to a psychologist for a six-week assessment. At the end the psychologist told her there was nothing wrong with him. He was just a rebellious teenager. In 2003, John’s older brother, Daniel, who was then 16, was sentenced to three months in a young offender institution, for taking part in a high-speed car chase. The family would visit him, and 13-year-old John seemed impressed. He said a couple of times how cool prison seemed. When Daniel tried to set him straight, it felt as if John wasn’t really taking it in. Daniel felt his little brother didn’t listen to him like he used to. When he was 16, John was arrested for a street robbery or burglary (Daniel can’t remember exactly which; this was almost two decades ago, and so much has happened since). What Daniel does remember is John telling him that he had made a deal with the police. They told him: the more crimes you admit to, the less time we’ll give you. They had a list of crimes that had happened in the area, and John went through them. He told Daniel later that out of the ones he had admitted to, four were genuine. The rest – there were dozens – were all crimes he hadn’t done. It seemed like a good deal at the time. When John got out, he didn’t talk much about his time in the young offender institution, but Daniel thought he seemed different. He was a lot bigger; he’d gone to the gym a lot inside. He also had this attitude that he hadn’t had before. From his own experience inside, Daniel knew that prison required you to constantly protect yourself. It soured you. John started meeting with a man named Alex Walker, who worked for the children’s charity Barnardo’s and had helped Daniel get his life back on track after his own stint in prison. Walker only worked with John for about six months, but there were promising signs, just small things. Even though John didn’t talk a lot, he consistently showed up for their meetings. He started to come home earlier, started apologising for things at home, stopped answering back so much. It was subtle, but the family were picking up on it. Walker fed this back to John: “Guess what your mum said – don’t say nothing, but she did say you come in, and big respect to you and all that.” And John didn’t say anything, but Walker knew it resonated with him. He’d notice a slight smirk, not a smile, just the tiniest flicker. And then he was back to himself. But Walker would think: “Ah, saw you. Got you.” Walker knew from experience that change isn’t perfectly linear. It’s something that takes time and patience. Walker sometimes worked with the same young person for up to five years. He still believes he could have helped John, if they had worked together longer. On the evening of 21 April 2007, Lynn got a phone call from the police. John had stolen a 15-year-old boy’s bike in a park. He had asked the boy if he wanted to sell his bike, and when the boy refused, had head-butted him in the face before punching him several times. He tried to ride off on the boy’s bike, but was caught by a policeman who was on patrol in the park. John was charged with robbery and given a court date for the following month. The family were upset, but they understood that John would do some time inside. A few years, at the most, they thought. Instead, at the age of 17, for assaulting someone and stealing their bike, John would receive a potentially never-ending sentence. Seventeen years later, he is still in jail. T o understand the nightmare John found himself in, you have to go back seven years. In July 2000, eight-year-old Sarah Payne was abducted from a sleepy village in West Sussex and murdered by a man named Roy Whiting. Five years earlier, Whiting had been convicted for abducting and sexually assaulting another little girl. He was released from prison after serving just under two and a half years. When Whiting’s history came to light, the press and public were outraged. Labour ministers came to believe that such cases demanded a new sort of sentence, one that would protect the public from offenders whose crimes might not be sufficient to warrant a life sentence, but who might still be considered particularly dangerous. “What struck me at the time,” David Blunkett, who was home secretary from 2001 to 2004, told me recently, “was that all we were doing, we were parking people rather than attempting to do something about ensuring that when they came out they wouldn’t commit the same offences again.” In 2002, the government white paper Justice for All suggested creating a new indeterminate sentence to “ensure that dangerous violent and sexual offenders stay in custody for as long as they present a risk to society”. One year later, the Criminal Justice Act 2003 created the imprisonment for public protection sentence (IPP). This new type of sentence, which began to be used in April 2005, gave offenders a minimum term – known as a tariff – that they had to spend in prison. On completing their tariff, they could then apply to the Parole Board for release. If unsuccessful, they would remain in prison until the Parole Board was satisfied. In practice, this meant that they could be detained indefinitely. It was “better safe than sorry” in legislative form. Even if granted release, the prisoner would remain under “life licence” – effectively a minimum 10-year parole period, during which they ran the risk of being recalled to prison for even minor breaches of the conditions of their release. If they were recalled, the process would start from the beginning. They could expect to wait up to two years before their next parole hearing to seek release. There were two conditions under which an IPP could be given. First, if a person had committed an offence that carried a maximum sentence of 10 years or more. Second, if the court believed that there was a significant risk of the public being seriously harmed by the same person carrying out “further specified offences” – a list that amounted to more than 100 crimes. Prof Harry Annison, who has written an authoritative account of the history of the IPP sentence, notes that it essentially applied the structure of a life sentence – a minimum term, after which the prisoner is eligible for parole – to a vastly expanded number of crimes. When I spoke to Pete Weatherby KC, a barrister who has represented many IPP offenders, he pointed out how an offence such as robbery is so broadly defined that it can encompass even relatively minor wrongdoing. He cited the 2007 case of a man sentenced to IPP having been charged with robbery for his involvement in a bag-snatch case. On 23 May 2007, John was given an indeterminate sentence of detention for public protection, the IPP equivalent given to those under 18. All the crimes John had previously told police he had committed (whether he had or not) spoke against him. The judge described his criminal record as “atrocious” – it suggested he had carried out 44 offences between July 2003 and August 2006. The judge also referred to the fact that John was on parole from his previous prison sentence when he committed this latest crime. For him, this was evidence that a determinate sentence would not adequately protect the public from further harm. The minimum time he would serve in prison – his “tariff” – was one year and 350 days. John’s family do not recall anyone at court explaining what the judgment meant, so they assumed the tariff was the full sentence. In other words, what they took to be the maximum amount of time John could serve was, in fact, the minimum. They have no memory of anyone explaining that John could, in theory, be detained for the rest of his life. This does not sound like an anomaly. I spoke to Andrew Morris, an IPP holder who is now out on licence. He was incarcerated in 2007 for false imprisonment and threats to kill. At the time he was sentenced, he says he did not understand the nature of his sentence. He only learned what an IPP sentence was from other prisoners and from articles in Inside Time, the newspaper distributed throughout the prison system. Just as in John’s case, he claimed that nobody properly explained to his family what IPP was, either. J ohn began his sentence in a young offender institution not far from the family home. At the time, one of John’s cousins was also serving a sentence in the same prison. He remembers John often inviting him into his cell for some instant noodles, which were piled up in stacks. According to the cousin, John was the same as usual – kind and quiet – but kept getting into fights. IPP inmates were easy targets for other prisoners. If you, a fixed-sentence prisoner, had a fight with someone sentenced to IPP and you both got caught, it might not mean much for you. After all, you had a definite release date. But for an IPP inmate, it could mean they would get turned down for release at their next parole hearing, and it would go on their record and keep counting against them in the future. The stakes for the IPP prisoner were higher, which made them less likely to fight back, which made them vulnerable to being coerced into doing other prisoners’ dirty work, such as drug dealing. Housing these two types of prisoners together was just one of the ways IPP sentences had been poorly conceived. John was initially “on basic” – the level assigned to prisoners who haven’t abided by the behaviour principles of the prison. It meant he wasn’t allowed any extras such as a TV or a radio. His cousin tried to motivate him, and eventually he was upgraded to the standard level. He reckoned John had struck upon the right path because he still had hope. As the two-year point – the end of his tariff – drew closer, John got excited, and so did his family. With six months to go, they started psychologically preparing for him to come home. But like any other IPP inmate, when his tariff expired, on 8 May 2009, John wasn’t automatically released. He had to go before the Parole Board, which would grant release only if they were “satisfied that it is no longer necessary for the protection of the public” that John continue to be locked up. At these hearings, which take place face-to-face in prison or via video link, the prisoner must answer questions put to them by the board. (Prisoners are encouraged to have legal representation, but this isn’t compulsory.) The onus is on the prisoner to prove that they are not dangerous, which is easier said than done. Largely, the way prisoners achieve this – besides good behaviour and demonstrating a decent post-prison plan for accommodation and work – is by completing offender behaviour programmes. These generally use cognitive behavioural therapy principles to try to encourage more constructive thinking and better behaviour. Morris told me that, during his time in prison, he had waited about four years to get a place on the Healthy Relationships programme, though he didn’t remember a great deal of what he had learned. John seems not to have understood the importance of completing courses for his chances of release. After his parole hearing, he was told he hadn’t done enough rehabilitation work. He would have to stay in prison at least two more years, or until the Parole Board decided he was no longer a risk to the public. J ohn’s family were gobsmacked when they heard he’d been knocked back. They didn’t know what to make of it. But John resolved to do everything he could to secure his release at his next hearing, in two years’ time. When he saw other IPP prisoners get knocked back after their tariff expired, he doubled down on completing the offender behaviour courses. He started going to the gym regularly, he enrolled on a mechanics course, he even had a hobby – woodwork , Lynn told me wonderingly. He got a job inside as a cleaner to make a bit of money for cigarettes. He did his utmost to show that he had reformed. He told his brother not to worry, that his solicitor was sorting everything out, that he’d get out soon enough. Over the next few years, John kept getting moved from prison to prison. It had been easy visiting regularly when he was not far from the family home, but as he was sent to increasingly distant locations, it grew harder. At certain points, Daniel had to rally the family and try to organise a schedule so John would get a weekly visit from someone. Every time he was moved, it felt like the prison was further away. To his family, it felt like the system was deliberately trying to erode their relationship with John. By 2012, John was 23, and in a tough men’s prison in Nottinghamshire, where the synthetic cannabinoid spice was readily available. One day John was passed a cigarette. John claimed that, unbeknown to him, it was spiked with spice. He’d never tried the drug before, and had told his brother he’d never touch the stuff. After smoking it, he passed out. This meant he got caught: another black mark for his record. In December 2012, the IPP sentence was abolished. By this point, the sentence was largely believed to be a failure. Far more IPP sentences had been handed out than had ever been intended. At the time IPP sentences were introduced, Hilary Benn, then prisons minister, estimated that an average of about 900 people would be serving IPP sentences at any given time. By the time the sentence was abolished, there were roughly 6,000 prisoners serving IPP sentences. This imposed a considerable strain on a system already wounded by constant budget cuts from 2008 onwards. “The IPP sentence contributed to a radical reshaping of the English prison population,” says Annison. In making the case for abolishing IPP sentences, the then justice secretary, Ken Clarke, described them as “unjust to the people in question and completely inconsistent with the policy of punishment, reform and rehabilitation”. Yet when the change in law came, it did not apply to those who had already received IPP sentences. All of these prisoners would continue to serve indeterminate sentences under exactly the same arrangement under which they were convicted. For prisoners still serving IPPs, including John, the abolition of the sentence meant nothing. I n 2015, the Parole Board once again turned John down for release: he had been involved in violence and he had taken spice, so they weren’t satisfied. John’s mum couldn’t believe it: she didn’t understand how they could knock him back when he’d been trying so hard. By this point, it was almost a decade after John had committed the crime for which he had been jailed. John became increasingly disheartened. When the family visited shortly after his 2015 parole rejection, he seemed spaced out and barely spoke to them. A few years earlier, his cousin had thought that John would make it through because he had hope. Now, the inverse began to seem true. His behaviour became erratic: he had blackouts, violent episodes, he would defecate or urinate in the cell without using the toilet. He stopped coming out of his cell for association, for gym and for meals, and stopped mixing with the other prisoners. John’s family grew increasingly worried. He kept telling his brother that he was going to do something and that Daniel wouldn’t understand it right away, but that he’d understand later. Daniel wondered if he was talking about protest, or something darker. In a succession of phone calls with his sister, Joanna, John seemed to believe he was a different person each time. He stopped eating. He told his family that the prison guards were spitting in his food or looking at him through the cell door and laughing at him. His family didn’t know what to make of these claims, but having been inside himself, Daniel knew that prison officers didn’t tend to do well with prisoners with mental health issues. Blackouts, disobedience and dirty protests all meant extra work for them. He remembered how brutal the guards could be if they wanted to. The jail prescribed John a high dosage of the antidepressant mirtazapine. The medication caused him to fall asleep at random, lose his temper easily and slur his words. In July 2017, Daniel visited John. “Went to see John today,” he wrote in an email to a friend. “He’s been put on high dose of mirtazapine for depression as he has no drive and is having suicidal thoughts. Probation have told him not to be depressed and not to tell anyone because it will harm his chance of release :S ” The following month, John told Daniel he tried to go to the mental health worker in the prison for advice. When he visited his office and blurted out that he was ready to kill himself, the man told John he was busy, and to come back in 10 minutes. Immediately after, John got into a fight with an inmate and was put into solitary confinement for three and a half weeks. At some point towards the end of 2017, he was moved to another prison, half an hour’s drive away. According to an email from John’s father, Isaac, to his MP at the time, they weren’t able to coordinate visits with John at the new prison until “he was settled in”. While he had once phoned every day, now there was a long period of silence. On 12 April 2018, John was found in a catatonic state in his cell: conscious but unresponsive. He was transferred to a mental health hospital in Staffordshire, where he was diagnosed with schizophrenia. The hospital phoned the family to explain that John had lost a lot of weight, but was still refusing to eat. They were concerned he might die, and urged his family to come and visit as soon as they could. The first time the family visited him there, they were shocked. The last time they’d seen him had been six months earlier. John had gone from a big, strong man to just bones: the T-shirt he was wearing looked like a dress on him. Joanna remembers the way he was looking back at her, as if he was looking into her soul. A doctor at the hospital told John’s mum in confidence that he believed the IPP sentence had done this to him. T he “uncertainty inherent in the sentence” is one major reason why IPPs are so psychologically damaging, noted a 2022 justice committee report . “Due to release being conditional on parole,” it continued, “there is no way for a prisoner to know when, if ever, they will be released.” In 2015, the Prison Reform Trust reported that the incidence of self-harm was more than twice as high for IPP prisoners than for prisoners serving a life sentence. Last year, a UN torture expert, Alice Jill Edwards, wrote an open letter to the UK government in which she equated the sentence with torture. As a psychologist noted in the justice committee report, the IPP sentence creates a vicious circle. There’s plenty of evidence that the IPP sentence significantly worsens your mental health – but if you demonstrate mental illness, you’re less likely to be released, since parole boards see mental illness as a risk factor. At the institution in Staffordshire, John’s mental health continued to deteriorate. Because he was so thin, during one of her visits, his mum asked if he was eating. He shook his head. “He didn’t murder food,” he said. What did he mean? “Well, when you eat an apple,” John explained, “that apple was quite happy running about in a field till you killed it.” It was then that Lynn knew she’d lost him, she told me. Once a week, the hospital gave him electroconvulsive therapy, a treatment for schizophrenia that felt like another form of punishment. He would call Joanna or Lynn on a weekly basis and scream or cry down the phone, begging them to help. He claimed the hospital staff would come and put him in a wheelchair, and strap him down against his wishes. Daniel felt the treatment fundamentally changed his brother’s personality. It made him calmer, but that playfulness that had always been such a key part of him had gone. His taste in music changed, too. Previously, he’d loved rap and hip-hop: Tupac, Mobb Deep, Dr Dre. Now he’d get Daniel to play this one melancholy song to him over and over down the phone, Happier, by Marshmello. Previously, John had opted for his family to be able to see his medical records, but after a while, the clinical team told the family that they wouldn’t be able to communicate anything medically confidential – “in line with his wishes”. As the hospital gave John more medication, his family thought he seemed increasingly paranoid. There were now periods where John didn’t want to be in touch with them. A few months into his stay, Lynn had been pushing for power of attorney. If John permitted them to make decisions on his behalf, they would be able to work with a solicitor to fight his case. John refused, and claimed that the solicitors were trying to kill him. He also told his family he believed the solicitors were the ones that had sent him to the mental hospital. After this, he ceased contact with almost all of the family for about a year and a half. Even with Daniel, whom he still seemed to trust, he would frequently go quiet for weeks at a time. I n May 2019, during a period when John was out of contact with his family, his father, Isaac, was diagnosed with cancer. By April 2020, Isaac was close to death. The family was ringing the psychiatric hospital over and over. Isaac wanted to say goodbye to John. Each time they rang, the staff said something different: John was asleep, or he didn’t wish to speak to his father, or something else. Eventually they told Joanna that if she let them know when Isaac died, they would tell John. When Isaac passed away two days later, she asked the hospital to tell John that his dad was proud of him and that he would get out, and Joanna promised she would continue fighting for him. A week later, John called his sister. “Why are you lying to me?” he said. “Dad’s not dead.” Joanna confirmed that he was. “Nah, he’s still there,” John said. “He’s going to beat me up, isn’t he?” Isaac had been big on discipline, and sometimes he had been harsh to his children, but Joanna didn’t think he had been as bad as John seemed to think. John invited Joanna to visit him, but when they met, the happiness of seeing him for the first time in a year was soured: he still didn’t believe her about their father’s death. By January 2021, John seemed increasingly paranoid. At the end of the month he fired off a number of messages to his brother: “ Where r u now”, he texted. “At work. What’s happening?” Daniel texted back. “When can u ring” “Important shit” “You OK?” Daniel replied later. “You can text me, I’m out and about. What’s going on” “Just wanna talk” “Am ok just thinkin” Then later: “Just been thinkin wanna sort a visit for tuesday wanna get some stuff off my chest it is very important bro mum and joanna r comin to hope it can happen please ” But Daniel had to work, so they arranged a video call instead. In the call, John told his brother he knew he’d done something really bad, because why else would he have been incarcerated for almost 14 years? “You all know what I’ve done,” he said. “Just tell me – it can’t just be for taking a bike.” He wanted to talk about their childhood: John claimed that he had been punished more than his siblings because there had been something wrong with him. He must have been evil, growing up, he said. Before they finished the call, John said something that troubled his brother: “I love you but I can’t do it any more. If something happens to me soon, just know that I love you.” T he conversation with John was disturbing, but in one way, he was right. He hadn’t been incarcerated for almost 14 years for assault and stealing a bike. He had completed his time in prison for that crime more than a decade earlier. Now he was serving time for crimes the Parole Board thought he might be capable of if he were released. In a debate in the House of Lords in November 2021, Lord Brown, a former justice of the supreme court, put it this way: “IPPs are being punished for what they might do in future.” This kind of sentence was, he said, “preventive detention” and as such “alien and inimical to our system of law”. In the summer of 2021, John’s mum and Joanna were sitting in the park when he phoned. “I’ve got to go now,” John told Lynn. Assuming he was being moved again, she asked where he was being transferred to. “No, I’ve had enough,” he told her. “I’ve got to do it now because my life’s finished anyway.” He was going to kill himself, he said. At this, Lynn looked pointedly at Joanna and repeated John’s words: “You’re going to kill yourself? You’ve got a weapon?” Joanna began dialling the number for the hospital. According to the staff, they were able to intervene. John called his mum back a few days later and swore down the phone at her. She’d betrayed his trust, he said. That was the last she ever heard from him. He cut off all contact with her and the rest of the family. In October 2023, Joanna called the hospital, hoping he might decide to come to the phone that day. “John who?” said the woman on the phone. “My brother,” she said. “He’s been in your hospital for years.” The woman hesitated. Let me speak to a manager, she said. Joanna waited for 10 minutes, full of dread. Instead, when the woman returned, she said John had gone back to prison. How can he have gone back to prison? Joanna demanded. He’s not well, he’s been on 24-hour watch for years. “Oh, well,” the woman on the phone said. “John was in agreement, so we sent him back. That’s all we can tell you.” She wouldn’t say what prison he was at. J ohn’s story is one of thousands. According to the latest government statistics, there are currently 2,796 prisoners serving IPP sentences and about 3,000 out on licence. Yet, even being granted licence is no end to the horror of IPP, given the low threshold for being recalled to prison. In January 2023, 43-year-old IPP offender Francis Williams was out on licence when he lost his place in a hostel. One of the conditions of the licence is to have steady accommodation, and he realised he could face recall to prison. He told his probation officer he would take his own life if that happened. The probation officer alerted Sussex police that Williams was a suicide risk but the following day his body was found in Bognor Regis . (With regard to the licence, there is some hope for reform: the victims and prisoners bill, which is working its way through parliament, proposes reducing this parole period to a maximum of five years, with the possibility of review after three years.) In September 2022, the justice committee concluded its year-long inquiry and argued that IPP sentences were “irredeemably flawed”. The main recommendation of its subsequent report was for the resentencing of all people serving IPP, something it argued could be done in a staggered and practical way. Yet successive justice secretaries have avoided measures that would lead to the direct release of IPP prisoners, most likely owing to fears about seeming to put the public at risk. The political risk is just too high. “By drafting legislation addressing ‘dangerous offenders’, the government responsible for it created a sentence that writes its own tabloid headlines,” said Prof Annison. In a statement, a Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: “We have reduced the number of unreleased IPP prisoners by three-quarters since we scrapped the sentence in 2012, and continue to help those still in custody to progress towards release – including improving access to rehabilitation programmes and mental health support. The number of IPP prisoners has fallen 12% in the last year alone.” Blunkett has been working to correct what he set in motion with the IPP. For the past 12 years, he has been regularly corresponding with IPP prisoners, visiting them and endeavouring to make changes in the law. “I got it wrong [on IPPs]. The government now have the chance to get it right,” he said during a 2021 committee stage debate about the police, crime, sentencing and courts bill. He recently told the Guardian that the introduction of the IPP sentence was his “ biggest regret ” from his time in government. Marc Conway risked his life to stop the London Bridge terror attack. Why did he fear being sent to prison for it? Read more John Wright has now been inside for 17 years – half of his life – for making a mistake as a teenager. After confirming rumours of his location with a member of staff at the prison he’s incarcerated in, I wrote to him multiple times for this story. I did not receive a reply. At the time of reporting, he does not seem to be in contact with anyone outside of prison. His mum told me she feels she’s been robbed of her son. She’s angry that she never got to know him as an adult. It’s something that’s with her all the time. She thinks about how Isaac died without knowing if his son would ever get out, and how he wasn’t able to say goodbye to him. She worries about getting a phone call from prison, imagining asking the person on the other end if he’s still alive. It’s like living in a nightmare. When I visited Joanna at her home late last year, she was holding a wriggling French bulldog in her lap as we spoke. She has two daughters, and she hopes one day John could get to know his nieces better. Her oldest daughter reminds her so much of him. John always loved animals, she tells me, and he’d like her pets. He used to like chatting to his niece on the phone. She still holds out hope her family might get him back. She thinks he could be happy back in the world outside prison. The names of John, his family, schoolfriend and youth worker have been changed to protect John’s anonymity In the UK and Ireland, Samaritans can be contacted on freephone 116 123, or you can email jo@samaritans.org or jo@samaritans.ie . In the US, you can call or text the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline on 988, chat on 988lifeline.org , or text HOME to 741741 to connect with a crisis counselor. In Australia, the crisis support service Lifeline is 13 11 14. Other international helplines can be found at befrienders.org Explore more on these topics Prisons and probation The long read Mental health Sentencing UK criminal justice features Share Reuse this content Artwork by Yann Kebbi View image in fullscreen Artwork by Yann Kebbi This article is more than 1 year old As a teenager, John was jailed for assaulting someone and stealing their bike. That was 17 years ago – will he ever be released? This article is more than 1 year old Indeterminate sentences are devastating to mental health, but prisoners with mental illness are less likely to be released. The result is a vicious cycle whereby the most vulnerable inmates often have the least chance of getting out – as John’s case shows More on this series: The IPP Scandal A t 16, John Wright was the way a lot of teenagers can be: one person at school, another person at home. At school, he was quiet, kept to himself. Behind closed doors, he was playful and chatty. He’d do backflips or cartwheels on the sofa while watching TV, or make silly noises at awkward moments to make his three siblings laugh. He was creative: he loved rapping, making his own beats, he played the guitar, liked drawing. The family would play basketball together, near the sleepy cul-de-sac where they lived. Those basketball games are the part that John’s mum, Lynn, remembers now – that and driving her kids around, windows down, Motown pumping out of the speakers, and all of them singing along. At school, John was a bit of a target. It probably didn’t help that he stood out – he was tall for his age, skinny. In the years his school friend Jamie knew John, he never once saw him initiate anything. He never picked on anyone, made fun of anyone, started fights. But if anyone took the piss out of John, he wouldn’t back down. He was the one who usually got punished if anything kicked off. His sister, Joanna, worried about him. Anyone who said, “Oh, John, do this”, he would go and do it. That was his way of making friends. So when, as a 14-year-old, he fell in with a group of boys who kept getting into trouble, the family grew concerned. Best of 2024: As a teenager, John was jailed for assaulting someone and stealing their bike. That was 17 years ago – will he ever be released? – podcast Read more At a certain point, Lynn wondered if there was something she was missing about her son, some deeper reason why he was struggling socially. She took him to the doctor and he was referred to a psychologist for a six-week assessment. At the end the psychologist told her there was nothing wrong with him. He was just a rebellious teenager. In 2003, John’s older brother, Daniel, who was then 16, was sentenced to three months in a young offender institution, for taking part in a high-speed car chase. The family would visit him, and 13-year-old John seemed impressed. He said a couple of times how cool prison seemed. When Daniel tried to set him straight, it felt as if John wasn’t really taking it in. Daniel felt his little brother didn’t listen to him like he used to. When he was 16, John was arrested for a street robbery or burglary (Daniel can’t remember exactly which; this was almost two decades ago, and so much has happened since). What Daniel does remember is John telling him that he had made a deal with the police. They told him: the more crimes you admit to, the less time we’ll give you. They had a list of crimes that had happened in the area, and John went through them. He told Daniel later that out of the ones he had admitted to, four were genuine. The rest – there were dozens – were all crimes he hadn’t done. It seemed like a good deal at the time. When John got out, he didn’t talk much about his time in the young offender institution, but Daniel thought he seemed different. He was a lot bigger; he’d gone to the gym a lot inside. He also had this attitude that he hadn’t had before. From his own experience inside, Daniel knew that prison required you to constantly protect yourself. It soured you. John started meeting with a man named Alex Walker, who worked for the children’s charity Barnardo’s and had helped Daniel get his life back on track after his own stint in prison. Walker only worked with John for about six months, but there were promising signs, just small things. Even though John didn’t talk a lot, he consistently showed up for their meetings. He started to come home earlier, started apologising for things at home, stopped answering back so much. It was subtle, but the family were picking up on it. Walker fed this back to John: “Guess what your mum said – don’t say nothing, but she did say you come in, and big respect to you and all that.” And John didn’t say anything, but Walker knew it resonated with him. He’d notice a slight smirk, not a smile, just the tiniest flicker. And then he was back to himself. But Walker would think: “Ah, saw you. Got you.” Walker knew from experience that change isn’t perfectly linear. It’s something that takes time and patience. Walker sometimes worked with the same young person for up to five years. He still believes he could have helped John, if they had worked together longer. On the evening of 21 April 2007, Lynn got a phone call from the police. John had stolen a 15-year-old boy’s bike in a park. He had asked the boy if he wanted to sell his bike, and when the boy refused, had head-butted him in the face before punching him several times. He tried to ride off on the boy’s bike, but was caught by a policeman who was on patrol in the park. John was charged with robbery and given a court date for the following month. The family were upset, but they understood that John would do some time inside. A few years, at the most, they thought. Instead, at the age of 17, for assaulting someone and stealing their bike, John would receive a potentially never-ending sentence. Seventeen years later, he is still in jail. T o understand the nightmare John found himself in, you have to go back seven years. In July 2000, eight-year-old Sarah Payne was abducted from a sleepy village in West Sussex and murdered by a man named Roy Whiting. Five years earlier, Whiting had been convicted for abducting and sexually assaulting another little girl. He was released from prison after serving just under two and a half years. When Whiting’s history came to light, the press and public were outraged. Labour ministers came to believe that such cases demanded a new sort of sentence, one that would protect the public from offenders whose crimes might not be sufficient to warrant a life sentence, but who might still be considered particularly dangerous. “What struck me at the time,” David Blunkett, who was home secretary from 2001 to 2004, told me recently, “was that all we were doing, we were parking people rather than attempting to do something about ensuring that when they came out they wouldn’t commit the same offences again.” In 2002, the government white paper Justice for All suggested creating a new indeterminate sentence to “ensure that dangerous violent and sexual offenders stay in custody for as long as they present a risk to society”. One year later, the Criminal Justice Act 2003 created the imprisonment for public protection sentence (IPP). This new type of sentence, which began to be used in April 2005, gave offenders a minimum term – known as a tariff – that they had to spend in prison. On completing their tariff, they could then apply to the Parole Board for release. If unsuccessful, they would remain in prison until the Parole Board was satisfied. In practice, this meant that they could be detained indefinitely. It was “better safe than sorry” in legislative form. Even if granted release, the prisoner would remain under “life licence” – effectively a minimum 10-year parole period, during which they ran the risk of being recalled to prison for even minor breaches of the conditions of their release. If they were recalled, the process would start from the beginning. They could expect to wait up to two years before their next parole hearing to seek release. There were two conditions under which an IPP could be given. First, if a person had committed an offence that carried a maximum sentence of 10 years or more. Second, if the court believed that there was a significant risk of the public being seriously harmed by the same person carrying out “further specified offences” – a list that amounted to more than 100 crimes. Prof Harry Annison, who has written an authoritative account of the history of the IPP sentence, notes that it essentially applied the structure of a life sentence – a minimum term, after which the prisoner is eligible for parole – to a vastly expanded number of crimes. When I spoke to Pete Weatherby KC, a barrister who has represented many IPP offenders, he pointed out how an offence such as robbery is so broadly defined that it can encompass even relatively minor wrongdoing. He cited the 2007 case of a man sentenced to IPP having been charged with robbery for his involvement in a bag-snatch case. On 23 May 2007, John was given an indeterminate sentence of detention for public protection, the IPP equivalent given to those under 18. All the crimes John had previously told police he had committed (whether he had or not) spoke against him. The judge described his criminal record as “atrocious” – it suggested he had carried out 44 offences between July 2003 and August 2006. The judge also referred to the fact that John was on parole from his previous prison sentence when he committed this latest crime. For him, this was evidence that a determinate sentence would not adequately protect the public from further harm. The minimum time he would serve in prison – his “tariff” – was one year and 350 days. John’s family do not recall anyone at court explaining what the judgment meant, so they assumed the tariff was the full sentence. In other words, what they took to be the maximum amount of time John could serve was, in fact, the minimum. They have no memory of anyone explaining that John could, in theory, be detained for the rest of his life. This does not sound like an anomaly. I spoke to Andrew Morris, an IPP holder who is now out on licence. He was incarcerated in 2007 for false imprisonment and threats to kill. At the time he was sentenced, he says he did not understand the nature of his sentence. He only learned what an IPP sentence was from other prisoners and from articles in Inside Time, the newspaper distributed throughout the prison system. Just as in John’s case, he claimed that nobody properly explained to his family what IPP was, either. J ohn began his sentence in a young offender institution not far from the family home. At the time, one of John’s cousins was also serving a sentence in the same prison. He remembers John often inviting him into his cell for some instant noodles, which were piled up in stacks. According to the cousin, John was the same as usual – kind and quiet – but kept getting into fights. IPP inmates were easy targets for other prisoners. If you, a fixed-sentence prisoner, had a fight with someone sentenced to IPP and you both got caught, it might not mean much for you. After all, you had a definite release date. But for an IPP inmate, it could mean they would get turned down for release at their next parole hearing, and it would go on their record and keep counting against them in the future. The stakes for the IPP prisoner were higher, which made them less likely to fight back, which made them vulnerable to being coerced into doing other prisoners’ dirty work, such as drug dealing. Housing these two types of prisoners together was just one of the ways IPP sentences had been poorly conceived. John was initially “on basic” – the level assigned to prisoners who haven’t abided by the behaviour principles of the prison. It meant he wasn’t allowed any extras such as a TV or a radio. His cousin tried to motivate him, and eventually he was upgraded to the standard level. He reckoned John had struck upon the right path because he still had hope. As the two-year point – the end of his tariff – drew closer, John got excited, and so did his family. With six months to go, they started psychologically preparing for him to come home. But like any other IPP inmate, when his tariff expired, on 8 May 2009, John wasn’t automatically released. He had to go before the Parole Board, which would grant release only if they were “satisfied that it is no longer necessary for the protection of the public” that John continue to be locked up. At these hearings, which take place face-to-face in prison or via video link, the prisoner must answer questions put to them by the board. (Prisoners are encouraged to have legal representation, but this isn’t compulsory.) The onus is on the prisoner to prove that they are not dangerous, which is easier said than done. Largely, the way prisoners achieve this – besides good behaviour and demonstrating a decent post-prison plan for accommodation and work – is by completing offender behaviour programmes. These generally use cognitive behavioural therapy principles to try to encourage more constructive thinking and better behaviour. Morris told me that, during his time in prison, he had waited about four years to get a place on the Healthy Relationships programme, though he didn’t remember a great deal of what he had learned. John seems not to have understood the importance of completing courses for his chances of release. After his parole hearing, he was told he hadn’t done enough rehabilitation work. He would have to stay in prison at least two more years, or until the Parole Board decided he was no longer a risk to the public. J ohn’s family were gobsmacked when they heard he’d been knocked back. They didn’t know what to make of it. But John resolved to do everything he could to secure his release at his next hearing, in two years’ time. When he saw other IPP prisoners get knocked back after their tariff expired, he doubled down on completing the offender behaviour courses. He started going to the gym regularly, he enrolled on a mechanics course, he even had a hobby – woodwork , Lynn told me wonderingly. He got a job inside as a cleaner to make a bit of money for cigarettes. He did his utmost to show that he had reformed. He told his brother not to worry, that his solicitor was sorting everything out, that he’d get out soon enough. Over the next few years, John kept getting moved from prison to prison. It had been easy visiting regularly when he was not far from the family home, but as he was sent to increasingly distant locations, it grew harder. At certain points, Daniel had to rally the family and try to organise a schedule so John would get a weekly visit from someone. Every time he was moved, it felt like the prison was further away. To his family, it felt like the system was deliberately trying to erode their relationship with John. By 2012, John was 23, and in a tough men’s prison in Nottinghamshire, where the synthetic cannabinoid spice was readily available. One day John was passed a cigarette. John claimed that, unbeknown to him, it was spiked with spice. He’d never tried the drug before, and had told his brother he’d never touch the stuff. After smoking it, he passed out. This meant he got caught: another black mark for his record. In December 2012, the IPP sentence was abolished. By this point, the sentence was largely believed to be a failure. Far more IPP sentences had been handed out than had ever been intended. At the time IPP sentences were introduced, Hilary Benn, then prisons minister, estimated that an average of about 900 people would be serving IPP sentences at any given time. By the time the sentence was abolished, there were roughly 6,000 prisoners serving IPP sentences. This imposed a considerable strain on a system already wounded by constant budget cuts from 2008 onwards. “The IPP sentence contributed to a radical reshaping of the English prison population,” says Annison. In making the case for abolishing IPP sentences, the then justice secretary, Ken Clarke, described them as “unjust to the people in question and completely inconsistent with the policy of punishment, reform and rehabilitation”. Yet when the change in law came, it did not apply to those who had already received IPP sentences. All of these prisoners would continue to serve indeterminate sentences under exactly the same arrangement under which they were convicted. For prisoners still serving IPPs, including John, the abolition of the sentence meant nothing. I n 2015, the Parole Board once again turned John down for release: he had been involved in violence and he had taken spice, so they weren’t satisfied. John’s mum couldn’t believe it: she didn’t understand how they could knock him back when he’d been trying so hard. By this point, it was almost a decad
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
Gaza protesters block entrance to Google conference over Israel contracts
Pro-Palestinian protesters rally outside the Google I/O conference in Mountain View, California, on 14 May 2024. Photograph: Kari Paul/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Pro-Palestinian protesters rally outside the Google I/O conference in Mountain View, California, on 14 May 2024. Photograph: Kari Paul/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old Gaza protesters block entrance to Google conference over Israel contracts This article is more than 1 year old Google I/O attendees were redirected to another entrance as protesters denounced company’s ties to Israeli military projects Hundreds of pro-Palestinian protesters chained themselves together in front of the entrance to Google’s annual developer conference on Tuesday in protest of the tech company’s ties to Israeli military projects. Thousands of attendees waiting to enter Google I/O were redirected to another entrance, and the event started on time. Groups including the No Tech for Genocide coalition and other groups from across the Bay Area held a sign reading “Google stop fueling genocide”. They chanted “we won’t stop til Nimbus gets dropped,” referencing a $1.2bn project supported by Amazon and Google that provides provides artificial intelligence and cloud computing services to the Israeli government. Speaking before the crowd, a protester said people have gathered in Mountain View to attend Google’s highly anticipated annual conference, but that protesters were there to share “the real story”. Google is slated to announce major updates to its products at the conference today, most of them focused on AI. Workers accuse Google of ‘tantrum’ after 50 fired over Israel contract protest Read more “What you will not be hearing from today’s speakers is that right now, as I stand here before you, the state of Israel is using Google technology to execute history’s first AI-powered genocide,” they said. A number of attendees were current and former employees of the company, including Ariel Koren, a former Google worker who says she was pushed out of the company in 2022 for speaking out against Project Nimbus. She said contracts like Project Nimbus have enabled “history’s first ever AI-enabled genocide”. Protesters oppose such technology, which they say is being tested in Gaza, but is likely to be replicated elsewhere in the future. “We are here to say that we cannot stand by while this company fuels this genocide and profits off of it,” she said. “[Google] not only creates the infrastructure for the Israeli military to scale out their crimes against humanity, but these tools are being tested and trained in Palestine to be exported out to militaries around the world, who can then commit the same types of violence,” she said. “We might be seeing the world’s first AI-enabled genocide. But what Google is trying to do is to ensure that this is not the world’s last.” Dozens of additional protesters gathered further down the streets leading to the event, chanting: “Google you can’t hide, you’re committing genocide.” They handed out pamphlets targeting Google employees, persuading them to speak out against the company’s military contracts. Last month, Google fired over 50 workers for participating in a pro-Palestinian protest that saw them occupy Google campuses in New York City and Sunnyvale, California. In 2018, the company saw mass employee walkouts over its handling of sexual harassment. Explore more on these topics Google Alphabet Israel Palestine news Share Reuse this content Pro-Palestinian protesters rally outside the Google I/O conference in Mountain View, California, on 14 May 2024. Photograph: Kari Paul/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Pro-Palestinian protesters rally outside the Google I/O conference in Mountain View, California, on 14 May 2024. Photograph: Kari Paul/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old Gaza protesters block entrance to Google conference over Israel contracts This article is more than 1 year old Google I/O attendees were redirected to another entrance as protesters denounced company’s ties to Israeli military projects Hundreds of pro-Palestinian protesters chained themselves together in front of the entrance to Google’s annual developer conference on Tuesday in protest of the tech company’s ties to Israeli military projects. Thousands of attendees waiting to enter Google I/O were redirected to another entrance, and the event started on time. Groups including the No Tech for Genocide coalition and other groups from across the Bay Area held a sign reading “Google stop fueling genocide”. They chanted “we won’t stop til Nimbus gets dropped,” referencing a $1.2bn project supported by Amazon and Google that provides provides artificial intelligence and cloud computing services to the Israeli government. Speaking before the crowd, a protester said people have gathered in Mountain View to attend Google’s highly anticipated annual conference, but that protesters were there to share “the real story”. Google is slated to announce major updates to its products at the conference today, most of them focused on AI. Workers accuse Google of ‘tantrum’ after 50 fired over Israel contract protest Read more “What you will not be hearing from today’s speakers is that right now, as I stand here before you, the state of Israel is using Google technology to execute history’s first AI-powered genocide,” they said. A number of attendees were current and former employees of the company, including Ariel Koren, a former Google worker who says she was pushed out of the company in 2022 for speaking out against Project Nimbus. She said contracts like Project Nimbus have enabled “history’s first ever AI-enabled genocide”. Protesters oppose such technology, which they say is being tested in Gaza, but is likely to be replicated elsewhere in the future. “We are here to say that we cannot stand by while this company fuels this genocide and profits off of it,” she said. “[Google] not only creates the infrastructure for the Israeli military to scale out their crimes against humanity, but these tools are being tested and trained in Palestine to be exported out to militaries around the world, who can then commit the same types of violence,” she said. “We might be seeing the world’s first AI-enabled genocide. But what Google is trying to do is to ensure that this is not the world’s last.” Dozens of additional protesters gathered further down the streets leading to the event, chanting: “Google you can’t hide, you’re committing genocide.” They handed out pamphlets targeting Google employees, persuading them to speak out against the company’s military contracts. Last month, Google fired over 50 workers for participating in a pro-Palestinian protest that saw them occupy Google campuses in New York City and Sunnyvale, California. In 2018, the company saw mass employee walkouts over its handling of sexual harassment. Explore more on these topics Google Alphabet Israel Palestine news Share Reuse this content Pro-Palestinian protesters rally outside the Google I/O conference in Mountain View, California, on 14 May 2024. Photograph: Kari Paul/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Pro-Palestinian protesters rally outside the Google I/O conference in Mountain View, California, on 14 May 2024. Photograph: Kari Paul/The Guardian Pro-Palestinian protesters rally outside the Google I/O conference in Mountain View, California, on 14 May 2024. Photograph: Kari Paul/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Pro-Palestinian protesters rally outside the Google I/O conference in Mountain View, California, on 14 May 2024. Photograph: Kari Paul/The Guardian Pro-Palestinian protesters rally outside the Google I/O conference in Mountain View, California, on 14 May 2024. Photograph: Kari Paul/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Pro-Palestinian protesters rally outside the Google I/O conference in Mountain View, California, on 14 May 2024. Photograph: Kari Paul/The Guardian Pro-Palestinian protesters rally outside the Google I/O conference in Mountain View, California, on 14 May 2024. Photograph: Kari Paul/The Guardian View image in fullscreen Pro-Palestinian protesters rally outside the Google I/O conference in Mountain View, California, on 14 May 2024. Photograph: Kari Paul/The Guardian Pro-Palestinian protesters rally outside the Google I/O conference in Mountain View, California, on 14 May 2024. Photograph: Kari Paul/The Guardian Pro-Palestinian protesters rally outside the Google I/O conference in Mountain View, California, on 14 May 2024. Photograph: Kari Paul/The Guardian This article is more than 1 year old Gaza protesters block entrance to Google conference over Israel contracts This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Gaza protesters block entrance to Google conference over Israel contracts This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Gaza protesters block entrance to Google conference over Israel contracts This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Google I/O attendees were redirected to another entrance as protesters denounced company’s ties to Israeli military projects Google I/O attendees were redirected to another entrance as protesters denounced company’s ties to Israeli military projects Google I/O attendees were redirected to another entrance as protesters denounced company’s ties to Israeli military projects Hundreds of pro-Palestinian protesters chained themselves together in front of the entrance to Google’s annual developer conference on Tuesday in protest of the tech company’s ties to Israeli military projects. Thousands of attendees waiting to enter Google I/O were redirected to another entrance, and the event started on time. Groups including the No Tech for Genocide coalition and other groups from across the Bay Area held a sign reading “Google stop fueling genocide”. They chanted “we won’t stop til Nimbus gets dropped,” referencing a $1.2bn project supported by Amazon and Google that provides provides artificial intelligence and cloud computing services to the Israeli government. Speaking before the crowd, a protester said people have gathered in Mountain View to attend Google’s highly anticipated annual conference, but that protesters were there to share “the real story”. Google is slated to announce major updates to its products at the conference today, most of them focused on AI. Workers accuse Google of ‘tantrum’ after 50 fired over Israel contract protest Read more “What you will not be hearing from today’s speakers is that right now, as I stand here before you, the state of Israel is using Google technology to execute history’s first AI-powered genocide,” they said. A number of attendees were current and former employees of the company, including Ariel Koren, a former Google worker who says she was pushed out of the company in 2022 for speaking out against Project Nimbus. She said contracts like Project Nimbus have enabled “history’s first ever AI-enabled genocide”. Protesters oppose such technology, which they say is being tested in Gaza, but is likely to be replicated elsewhere in the future. “We are here to say that we cannot stand by while this company fuels this genocide and profits off of it,” she said. “[Google] not only creates the infrastructure for the Israeli military to scale out their crimes against humanity, but these tools are being tested and trained in Palestine to be exported out to militaries around the world, who can then commit the same types of violence,” she said. “We might be seeing the world’s first AI-enabled genocide. But what Google is trying to do is to ensure that this is not the world’s last.” Dozens of additional protesters gathered further down the streets leading to the event, chanting: “Google you can’t hide, you’re committing genocide.” They handed out pamphlets targeting Google employees, persuading them to speak out against the company’s military contracts. Last month, Google fired over 50 workers for participating in a pro-Palestinian protest that saw them occupy Google campuses in New York City and Sunnyvale, California. In 2018, the company saw mass employee walkouts over its handling of sexual harassment. Explore more on these topics Google Alphabet Israel Palestine news Share Reuse this content Hundreds of pro-Palestinian protesters chained themselves together in front of the entrance to Google’s annual developer conference on Tuesday in protest of the tech company’s ties to Israeli military projects. Thousands of attendees waiting to enter Google I/O were redirected to another entrance, and the event started on time. Groups including the No Tech for Genocide coalition and other groups from across the Bay Area held a sign reading “Google stop fueling genocide”. They chanted “we won’t stop til Nimbus gets dropped,” referencing a $1.2bn project supported by Amazon and Google that provides provides artificial intelligence and cloud computing services to the Israeli government. Speaking before the crowd, a protester said people have gathered in Mountain View to attend Google’s highly anticipated annual conference, but that protesters were there to share “the real story”. Google is slated to announce major updates to its products at the conference today, most of them focused on AI. Workers accuse Google of ‘tantrum’ after 50 fired over Israel contract protest Read more “What you will not be hearing from today’s speakers is that right now, as I stand here before you, the state of Israel is using Google technology to execute history’s first AI-powered genocide,” they said. A number of attendees were current and former employees of the company, including Ariel Koren, a former Google worker who says she was pushed out of the company in 2022 for speaking out against Project Nimbus. She said contracts like Project Nimbus have enabled “history’s first ever AI-enabled genocide”. Protesters oppose such technology, which they say is being tested in Gaza, but is likely to be replicated elsewhere in the future. “We are here to say that we cannot stand by while this company fuels this genocide and profits off of it,” she said. “[Google] not only creates the infrastructure for the Israeli military to scale out their crimes against humanity, but these tools are being tested and trained in Palestine to be exported out to militaries around the world, who can then commit the same types of violence,” she said. “We might be seeing the world’s first AI-enabled genocide. But what Google is trying to do is to ensure that this is not the world’s last.” Dozens of additional protesters gathered further down the streets leading to the event, chanting: “Google you can’t hide, you’re committing genocide.” They handed out pamphlets targeting Google employees, persuading them to speak out against the company’s military contracts. Last month, Google fired over 50 workers for participating in a pro-Palestinian protest that saw them occupy Google campuses in New York City and Sunnyvale, California. In 2018, the company saw mass employee walkouts over its handling of sexual harassment. Explore more on these topics Google Alphabet Israel Palestine news Share Reuse this content Hundreds of pro-Palestinian protesters chained themselves together in front of the entrance to Google’s annual developer conference on Tuesday in protest of the tech company’s ties to Israeli military projects. Thousands of attendees waiting to enter Google I/O were redirected to another entrance, and the event started on time. Groups including the No Tech for Genocide coalition and other groups from across the Bay Area held a sign reading “Google stop fueling genocide”. They chanted “we won’t stop til Nimbus gets dropped,” referencing a $1.2bn project supported by Amazon and Google that provides provides artificial intelligence and cloud computing services to the Israeli government. Speaking before the crowd, a protester said people have gathered in Mountain View to attend Google’s highly anticipated annual conference, but that protesters were there to share “the real story”. Google is slated to announce major updates to its products at the conference today, most of them focused on AI. Workers accuse Google of ‘tantrum’ after 50 fired over Israel contract protest Read more “What you will not be hearing from today’s speakers is that right now, as I stand here before you, the state of Israel is using Google technology to execute history’s first AI-powered genocide,” they said. A number of attendees were current and former employees of the company, including Ariel Koren, a former Google worker who says she was pushed out of the company in 2022 for speaking out against Project Nimbus. She said contracts like Project Nimbus have enabled “history’s first ever AI-enabled genocide”. Protesters oppose such technology, which they say is being tested in Gaza, but is likely to be replicated elsewhere in the future. “We are here to say that we cannot stand by while this company fuels this genocide and profits off of it,” she said. “[Google] not only creates the infrastructure for the Israeli military to scale out their crimes against humanity, but these tools are being tested and trained in Palestine to be exported out to militaries around the world, who can then commit the same types of violence,” she said. “We might be seeing the world’s first AI-enabled genocide. But what Google is trying to do is to ensure that this is not the world’s last.” Dozens of additional protesters gathered further down the streets leading to the event, chanting: “Google you can’t hide, you’re committing genocide.” They handed out pamphlets targeting Google employees, persuading them to speak out against the company’s military contracts. Last month, Google fired over 50 workers for participating in a pro-Palestinian protest that saw them occupy Google campuses in New York City and Sunnyvale, California. In 2018, the company saw mass employee walkouts over its handling of sexual harassment. Hundreds of pro-Palestinian protesters chained themselves together in front of the entrance to Google’s annual developer conference on Tuesday in protest of the tech company’s ties to Israeli military projects. Thousands of attendees waiting to enter Google I/O were redirected to another entrance, and the event started on time. Groups including the No Tech for Genocide coalition and other groups from across the Bay Area held a sign reading “Google stop fueling genocide”. They chanted “we won’t stop til Nimbus gets dropped,” referencing a $1.2bn project supported by Amazon and Google that provides provides artificial intelligence and cloud computing services to the Israeli government. Speaking before the crowd, a protester said people have gathered in Mountain View to attend Google’s highly anticipated annual conference, but that protesters were there to share “the real story”. Google is slated to announce major updates to its products at the conference today, most of them focused on AI. Workers accuse Google of ‘tantrum’ after 50 fired over Israel contract protest Read more “What you will not be hearing from today’s speakers is that right now, as I stand here before you, the state of Israel is using Google technology to execute history’s first AI-powered genocide,” they said. A number of attendees were current and former employees of the company, including Ariel Koren, a former Google worker who says she was pushed out of the company in 2022 for speaking out against Project Nimbus. She said contracts like Project Nimbus have enabled “history’s first ever AI-enabled genocide”. Protesters oppose such technology, which they say is being tested in Gaza, but is likely to be replicated elsewhere in the future. “We are here to say that we cannot stand by while this company fuels this genocide and profits off of it,” she said. “[Google] not only creates the infrastructure for the Israeli military to scale out their crimes against humanity, but these tools are being tested and trained in Palestine to be exported out to militaries around the world, who can then commit the same types of violence,” she said. “We might be seeing the world’s first AI-enabled genocide. But what Google is trying to do is to ensure that this is not the world’s last.” Dozens of additional protesters gathered further down the streets leading to the event, chanting: “Google you can’t hide, you’re committing genocide.” They handed out pamphlets targeting Google employees, persuading them to speak out against the company’s military contracts. Last month, Google fired over 50 workers for participating in a pro-Palestinian protest that saw them occupy Google campuses in New York City and Sunnyvale, California. In 2018, the company saw mass employee walkouts over its handling of sexual harassment. Hundreds of pro-Palestinian protesters chained themselves together in front of the entrance to Google’s annual developer conference on Tuesday in protest of the tech company’s ties to Israeli military projects. Thousands of attendees waiting to enter Google I/O were redirected to another entrance, and the event started on time. Groups including the No Tech for Genocide coalition and other groups from across the Bay Area held a sign reading “Google stop fueling genocide”. They chanted “we won’t stop til Nimbus gets dropped,” referencing a $1.2bn project supported by Amazon and Google that provides provides artificial intelligence and cloud computing services to the Israeli government. Speaking before the crowd, a protester said people have gathered in Mountain View to attend Google’s highly anticipated annual conference, but that protesters were there to share “the real story”. Google is slated to announce major updates to its products at the conference today, most of them focused on AI. Workers accuse Google of ‘tantrum’ after 50 fired over Israel contract protest Read more Workers accuse Google of ‘tantrum’ after 50 fired over Israel contract protest Read more Workers accuse Google of ‘tantrum’ after 50 fired over Israel contract protest Read more Workers accuse Google of ‘tantrum’ after 50 fired over Israel contract protest Workers accuse Google of ‘tantrum’ after 50 fired over Israel contract protest “What you will not be hearing from today’s speakers is that right now, as I stand here before you, the state of Israel is using Google technology to execute history’s first AI-powered genocide,” they said. A number of attendees were current and former employees of the company, including Ariel Koren, a former Google worker who says she was pushed out of the company in 2022 for speaking out against Project Nimbus. She said contracts like Project Nimbus have enabled “history’s first ever AI-enabled genocide”. Protesters oppose such technology, which they say is being tested in Gaza, but is likely to be replicated elsewhere in the future. “We are here to say that we cannot stand by while this company fuels this genocide and profits off of it,” she said. “[Google] not only creates the infrastructure for the Israeli military to scale out their crimes against humanity, but these tools are being tested and trained in Palestine to be exported out to militaries around the world, who can then commit the same types of violence,” she said. “We might be seeing the world’s first AI-enabled genocide. But what Google is trying to do is to ensure that this is not the world’s last.” Dozens of additional protesters gathered further down the streets leading to the event, chanting: “Google you can’t hide, you’re committing genocide.” They handed out pamphlets targeting Google employees, persuading them to speak out against the company’s military contracts. Last month, Google fired over 50 workers for participating in a pro-Palestinian protest that saw them occupy Google campuses in New York City and Sunnyvale, California. In 2018, the company saw mass employee walkouts over its handling of sexual harassment. Explore more on these topics Google Alphabet Israel Palestine news Share Reuse this content Google Alphabet Israel Palestine news |
Antisemitism in Europe leading some to hide Jewish identity, says leading rabbi
Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the European Rabbinical Conference, delivers a speech after receiving an award in Germany last week. Photograph: Henning Kaiser/AP View image in fullscreen Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the European Rabbinical Conference, delivers a speech after receiving an award in Germany last week. Photograph: Henning Kaiser/AP This article is more than 1 year old Antisemitism in Europe leading some to hide Jewish identity, says leading rabbi This article is more than 1 year old Pinchas Goldschmidt warns ‘situation in the streets’ since 7 October Hamas attack is destabilising societies A leading rabbi has warned that threats and harassment are leading some Europeans to hide their Jewish identities, cautioning that the rise in antisemitism could destabilise European societies. Jewish communities across Europe have been grappling with an increase in hate speech, vandalism, harassment and threats since Hamas’s 7 October attack on Israel and the ensuing war in Gaza. “The statistics speak of a rise of hundreds of percentages all over Europe,” said Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the Conference of European Rabbis, an Orthodox rabbinical alliance. In an interview with the Guardian in Brussels, Goldschmidt said that “many Jews are trying to hide their Jewishness”. “One of the most asked questions to the rabbis since October 7 is if you can take off the mezuzah [a religious parchment in a case] off your door,” he said, adding: “This says a lot.” Other precautions some people were taking included wearing hats instead of the traditional kippah in the street and “when they go into Ubers not speaking Hebrew”, the rabbi said. “There used to be a red line between anti-Zionism and antisemitism,” Goldschmidt said. “We have seen this red line disappear.” Watchdogs have pointed to a dramatic increase in incidents since October. Rias, which monitors antisemitism in Germany, documented a 320% increase in incidents in the month after 7 October. The Council of Jewish Institutions in France (CRIF) has said that in the three months following Hamas attacks, antisemitic incidents were equivalent in number to those in the previous three years combined. Asked if he feared that threats and harassment would cross more into the realm of violence, Goldschmidt said: “It never stops with words.” In recent weeks, Warsaw’s main synagogue was attacked with firebombs and the president of the Belgian union of Jewish students was assaulted in Brussels. Within the Jewish community, there are growing concerns about the safety of students on European campuses. Emma Hallali, the president of the European Union of Jewish Students, said: “Jewish students on campuses are standing at the frontlines; they are the ones having to face the wave of antisemitic violence amid protests and encampments on campuses. “Universities are not doing enough to protect Jewish students, with some students leaving the campuses and preferring to work from home.” Hallali added: “Jewish students will not and should not tolerate nor accept when some students are calling for the death of Jews, excluding them from entering their campuses, or beating them up because they are wearing a star of David, holding an Israeli flag, or speaking Hebrew.” Goldschmidt, who is the exiled chief rabbi of Moscow and left Russia after refusing to back the invasion of Ukraine, said antisemitism was not only a matter for the Jewish community. “I think that, at the end of the day, this is not a problem of the Jewish community. At the end of the day, this is a major problem for Europe,” he said. “This situation in the streets is destabilising our societies,” he added, saying he believed ongoing “turbulence” could drive voters away from establishment parties. Goldschmidt also warned about the impact of misinformation and suggested looking at “who are the beneficiaries of this turbulence, which countries are interested in the weakening of the European project, of democracy in Europe”. In a message to European leaders, he said: “It is as much your problem as it is our problem.” Explore more on these topics Antisemitism Europe Judaism Belgium Israel-Gaza war news Share Reuse this content Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the European Rabbinical Conference, delivers a speech after receiving an award in Germany last week. Photograph: Henning Kaiser/AP View image in fullscreen Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the European Rabbinical Conference, delivers a speech after receiving an award in Germany last week. Photograph: Henning Kaiser/AP This article is more than 1 year old Antisemitism in Europe leading some to hide Jewish identity, says leading rabbi This article is more than 1 year old Pinchas Goldschmidt warns ‘situation in the streets’ since 7 October Hamas attack is destabilising societies A leading rabbi has warned that threats and harassment are leading some Europeans to hide their Jewish identities, cautioning that the rise in antisemitism could destabilise European societies. Jewish communities across Europe have been grappling with an increase in hate speech, vandalism, harassment and threats since Hamas’s 7 October attack on Israel and the ensuing war in Gaza. “The statistics speak of a rise of hundreds of percentages all over Europe,” said Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the Conference of European Rabbis, an Orthodox rabbinical alliance. In an interview with the Guardian in Brussels, Goldschmidt said that “many Jews are trying to hide their Jewishness”. “One of the most asked questions to the rabbis since October 7 is if you can take off the mezuzah [a religious parchment in a case] off your door,” he said, adding: “This says a lot.” Other precautions some people were taking included wearing hats instead of the traditional kippah in the street and “when they go into Ubers not speaking Hebrew”, the rabbi said. “There used to be a red line between anti-Zionism and antisemitism,” Goldschmidt said. “We have seen this red line disappear.” Watchdogs have pointed to a dramatic increase in incidents since October. Rias, which monitors antisemitism in Germany, documented a 320% increase in incidents in the month after 7 October. The Council of Jewish Institutions in France (CRIF) has said that in the three months following Hamas attacks, antisemitic incidents were equivalent in number to those in the previous three years combined. Asked if he feared that threats and harassment would cross more into the realm of violence, Goldschmidt said: “It never stops with words.” In recent weeks, Warsaw’s main synagogue was attacked with firebombs and the president of the Belgian union of Jewish students was assaulted in Brussels. Within the Jewish community, there are growing concerns about the safety of students on European campuses. Emma Hallali, the president of the European Union of Jewish Students, said: “Jewish students on campuses are standing at the frontlines; they are the ones having to face the wave of antisemitic violence amid protests and encampments on campuses. “Universities are not doing enough to protect Jewish students, with some students leaving the campuses and preferring to work from home.” Hallali added: “Jewish students will not and should not tolerate nor accept when some students are calling for the death of Jews, excluding them from entering their campuses, or beating them up because they are wearing a star of David, holding an Israeli flag, or speaking Hebrew.” Goldschmidt, who is the exiled chief rabbi of Moscow and left Russia after refusing to back the invasion of Ukraine, said antisemitism was not only a matter for the Jewish community. “I think that, at the end of the day, this is not a problem of the Jewish community. At the end of the day, this is a major problem for Europe,” he said. “This situation in the streets is destabilising our societies,” he added, saying he believed ongoing “turbulence” could drive voters away from establishment parties. Goldschmidt also warned about the impact of misinformation and suggested looking at “who are the beneficiaries of this turbulence, which countries are interested in the weakening of the European project, of democracy in Europe”. In a message to European leaders, he said: “It is as much your problem as it is our problem.” Explore more on these topics Antisemitism Europe Judaism Belgium Israel-Gaza war news Share Reuse this content Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the European Rabbinical Conference, delivers a speech after receiving an award in Germany last week. Photograph: Henning Kaiser/AP View image in fullscreen Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the European Rabbinical Conference, delivers a speech after receiving an award in Germany last week. Photograph: Henning Kaiser/AP Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the European Rabbinical Conference, delivers a speech after receiving an award in Germany last week. Photograph: Henning Kaiser/AP View image in fullscreen Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the European Rabbinical Conference, delivers a speech after receiving an award in Germany last week. Photograph: Henning Kaiser/AP Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the European Rabbinical Conference, delivers a speech after receiving an award in Germany last week. Photograph: Henning Kaiser/AP View image in fullscreen Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the European Rabbinical Conference, delivers a speech after receiving an award in Germany last week. Photograph: Henning Kaiser/AP Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the European Rabbinical Conference, delivers a speech after receiving an award in Germany last week. Photograph: Henning Kaiser/AP View image in fullscreen Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the European Rabbinical Conference, delivers a speech after receiving an award in Germany last week. Photograph: Henning Kaiser/AP Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the European Rabbinical Conference, delivers a speech after receiving an award in Germany last week. Photograph: Henning Kaiser/AP Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the European Rabbinical Conference, delivers a speech after receiving an award in Germany last week. Photograph: Henning Kaiser/AP This article is more than 1 year old Antisemitism in Europe leading some to hide Jewish identity, says leading rabbi This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Antisemitism in Europe leading some to hide Jewish identity, says leading rabbi This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Antisemitism in Europe leading some to hide Jewish identity, says leading rabbi This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Pinchas Goldschmidt warns ‘situation in the streets’ since 7 October Hamas attack is destabilising societies Pinchas Goldschmidt warns ‘situation in the streets’ since 7 October Hamas attack is destabilising societies Pinchas Goldschmidt warns ‘situation in the streets’ since 7 October Hamas attack is destabilising societies A leading rabbi has warned that threats and harassment are leading some Europeans to hide their Jewish identities, cautioning that the rise in antisemitism could destabilise European societies. Jewish communities across Europe have been grappling with an increase in hate speech, vandalism, harassment and threats since Hamas’s 7 October attack on Israel and the ensuing war in Gaza. “The statistics speak of a rise of hundreds of percentages all over Europe,” said Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the Conference of European Rabbis, an Orthodox rabbinical alliance. In an interview with the Guardian in Brussels, Goldschmidt said that “many Jews are trying to hide their Jewishness”. “One of the most asked questions to the rabbis since October 7 is if you can take off the mezuzah [a religious parchment in a case] off your door,” he said, adding: “This says a lot.” Other precautions some people were taking included wearing hats instead of the traditional kippah in the street and “when they go into Ubers not speaking Hebrew”, the rabbi said. “There used to be a red line between anti-Zionism and antisemitism,” Goldschmidt said. “We have seen this red line disappear.” Watchdogs have pointed to a dramatic increase in incidents since October. Rias, which monitors antisemitism in Germany, documented a 320% increase in incidents in the month after 7 October. The Council of Jewish Institutions in France (CRIF) has said that in the three months following Hamas attacks, antisemitic incidents were equivalent in number to those in the previous three years combined. Asked if he feared that threats and harassment would cross more into the realm of violence, Goldschmidt said: “It never stops with words.” In recent weeks, Warsaw’s main synagogue was attacked with firebombs and the president of the Belgian union of Jewish students was assaulted in Brussels. Within the Jewish community, there are growing concerns about the safety of students on European campuses. Emma Hallali, the president of the European Union of Jewish Students, said: “Jewish students on campuses are standing at the frontlines; they are the ones having to face the wave of antisemitic violence amid protests and encampments on campuses. “Universities are not doing enough to protect Jewish students, with some students leaving the campuses and preferring to work from home.” Hallali added: “Jewish students will not and should not tolerate nor accept when some students are calling for the death of Jews, excluding them from entering their campuses, or beating them up because they are wearing a star of David, holding an Israeli flag, or speaking Hebrew.” Goldschmidt, who is the exiled chief rabbi of Moscow and left Russia after refusing to back the invasion of Ukraine, said antisemitism was not only a matter for the Jewish community. “I think that, at the end of the day, this is not a problem of the Jewish community. At the end of the day, this is a major problem for Europe,” he said. “This situation in the streets is destabilising our societies,” he added, saying he believed ongoing “turbulence” could drive voters away from establishment parties. Goldschmidt also warned about the impact of misinformation and suggested looking at “who are the beneficiaries of this turbulence, which countries are interested in the weakening of the European project, of democracy in Europe”. In a message to European leaders, he said: “It is as much your problem as it is our problem.” Explore more on these topics Antisemitism Europe Judaism Belgium Israel-Gaza war news Share Reuse this content A leading rabbi has warned that threats and harassment are leading some Europeans to hide their Jewish identities, cautioning that the rise in antisemitism could destabilise European societies. Jewish communities across Europe have been grappling with an increase in hate speech, vandalism, harassment and threats since Hamas’s 7 October attack on Israel and the ensuing war in Gaza. “The statistics speak of a rise of hundreds of percentages all over Europe,” said Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the Conference of European Rabbis, an Orthodox rabbinical alliance. In an interview with the Guardian in Brussels, Goldschmidt said that “many Jews are trying to hide their Jewishness”. “One of the most asked questions to the rabbis since October 7 is if you can take off the mezuzah [a religious parchment in a case] off your door,” he said, adding: “This says a lot.” Other precautions some people were taking included wearing hats instead of the traditional kippah in the street and “when they go into Ubers not speaking Hebrew”, the rabbi said. “There used to be a red line between anti-Zionism and antisemitism,” Goldschmidt said. “We have seen this red line disappear.” Watchdogs have pointed to a dramatic increase in incidents since October. Rias, which monitors antisemitism in Germany, documented a 320% increase in incidents in the month after 7 October. The Council of Jewish Institutions in France (CRIF) has said that in the three months following Hamas attacks, antisemitic incidents were equivalent in number to those in the previous three years combined. Asked if he feared that threats and harassment would cross more into the realm of violence, Goldschmidt said: “It never stops with words.” In recent weeks, Warsaw’s main synagogue was attacked with firebombs and the president of the Belgian union of Jewish students was assaulted in Brussels. Within the Jewish community, there are growing concerns about the safety of students on European campuses. Emma Hallali, the president of the European Union of Jewish Students, said: “Jewish students on campuses are standing at the frontlines; they are the ones having to face the wave of antisemitic violence amid protests and encampments on campuses. “Universities are not doing enough to protect Jewish students, with some students leaving the campuses and preferring to work from home.” Hallali added: “Jewish students will not and should not tolerate nor accept when some students are calling for the death of Jews, excluding them from entering their campuses, or beating them up because they are wearing a star of David, holding an Israeli flag, or speaking Hebrew.” Goldschmidt, who is the exiled chief rabbi of Moscow and left Russia after refusing to back the invasion of Ukraine, said antisemitism was not only a matter for the Jewish community. “I think that, at the end of the day, this is not a problem of the Jewish community. At the end of the day, this is a major problem for Europe,” he said. “This situation in the streets is destabilising our societies,” he added, saying he believed ongoing “turbulence” could drive voters away from establishment parties. Goldschmidt also warned about the impact of misinformation and suggested looking at “who are the beneficiaries of this turbulence, which countries are interested in the weakening of the European project, of democracy in Europe”. In a message to European leaders, he said: “It is as much your problem as it is our problem.” Explore more on these topics Antisemitism Europe Judaism Belgium Israel-Gaza war news Share Reuse this content A leading rabbi has warned that threats and harassment are leading some Europeans to hide their Jewish identities, cautioning that the rise in antisemitism could destabilise European societies. Jewish communities across Europe have been grappling with an increase in hate speech, vandalism, harassment and threats since Hamas’s 7 October attack on Israel and the ensuing war in Gaza. “The statistics speak of a rise of hundreds of percentages all over Europe,” said Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the Conference of European Rabbis, an Orthodox rabbinical alliance. In an interview with the Guardian in Brussels, Goldschmidt said that “many Jews are trying to hide their Jewishness”. “One of the most asked questions to the rabbis since October 7 is if you can take off the mezuzah [a religious parchment in a case] off your door,” he said, adding: “This says a lot.” Other precautions some people were taking included wearing hats instead of the traditional kippah in the street and “when they go into Ubers not speaking Hebrew”, the rabbi said. “There used to be a red line between anti-Zionism and antisemitism,” Goldschmidt said. “We have seen this red line disappear.” Watchdogs have pointed to a dramatic increase in incidents since October. Rias, which monitors antisemitism in Germany, documented a 320% increase in incidents in the month after 7 October. The Council of Jewish Institutions in France (CRIF) has said that in the three months following Hamas attacks, antisemitic incidents were equivalent in number to those in the previous three years combined. Asked if he feared that threats and harassment would cross more into the realm of violence, Goldschmidt said: “It never stops with words.” In recent weeks, Warsaw’s main synagogue was attacked with firebombs and the president of the Belgian union of Jewish students was assaulted in Brussels. Within the Jewish community, there are growing concerns about the safety of students on European campuses. Emma Hallali, the president of the European Union of Jewish Students, said: “Jewish students on campuses are standing at the frontlines; they are the ones having to face the wave of antisemitic violence amid protests and encampments on campuses. “Universities are not doing enough to protect Jewish students, with some students leaving the campuses and preferring to work from home.” Hallali added: “Jewish students will not and should not tolerate nor accept when some students are calling for the death of Jews, excluding them from entering their campuses, or beating them up because they are wearing a star of David, holding an Israeli flag, or speaking Hebrew.” Goldschmidt, who is the exiled chief rabbi of Moscow and left Russia after refusing to back the invasion of Ukraine, said antisemitism was not only a matter for the Jewish community. “I think that, at the end of the day, this is not a problem of the Jewish community. At the end of the day, this is a major problem for Europe,” he said. “This situation in the streets is destabilising our societies,” he added, saying he believed ongoing “turbulence” could drive voters away from establishment parties. Goldschmidt also warned about the impact of misinformation and suggested looking at “who are the beneficiaries of this turbulence, which countries are interested in the weakening of the European project, of democracy in Europe”. In a message to European leaders, he said: “It is as much your problem as it is our problem.” A leading rabbi has warned that threats and harassment are leading some Europeans to hide their Jewish identities, cautioning that the rise in antisemitism could destabilise European societies. Jewish communities across Europe have been grappling with an increase in hate speech, vandalism, harassment and threats since Hamas’s 7 October attack on Israel and the ensuing war in Gaza. “The statistics speak of a rise of hundreds of percentages all over Europe,” said Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the Conference of European Rabbis, an Orthodox rabbinical alliance. In an interview with the Guardian in Brussels, Goldschmidt said that “many Jews are trying to hide their Jewishness”. “One of the most asked questions to the rabbis since October 7 is if you can take off the mezuzah [a religious parchment in a case] off your door,” he said, adding: “This says a lot.” Other precautions some people were taking included wearing hats instead of the traditional kippah in the street and “when they go into Ubers not speaking Hebrew”, the rabbi said. “There used to be a red line between anti-Zionism and antisemitism,” Goldschmidt said. “We have seen this red line disappear.” Watchdogs have pointed to a dramatic increase in incidents since October. Rias, which monitors antisemitism in Germany, documented a 320% increase in incidents in the month after 7 October. The Council of Jewish Institutions in France (CRIF) has said that in the three months following Hamas attacks, antisemitic incidents were equivalent in number to those in the previous three years combined. Asked if he feared that threats and harassment would cross more into the realm of violence, Goldschmidt said: “It never stops with words.” In recent weeks, Warsaw’s main synagogue was attacked with firebombs and the president of the Belgian union of Jewish students was assaulted in Brussels. Within the Jewish community, there are growing concerns about the safety of students on European campuses. Emma Hallali, the president of the European Union of Jewish Students, said: “Jewish students on campuses are standing at the frontlines; they are the ones having to face the wave of antisemitic violence amid protests and encampments on campuses. “Universities are not doing enough to protect Jewish students, with some students leaving the campuses and preferring to work from home.” Hallali added: “Jewish students will not and should not tolerate nor accept when some students are calling for the death of Jews, excluding them from entering their campuses, or beating them up because they are wearing a star of David, holding an Israeli flag, or speaking Hebrew.” Goldschmidt, who is the exiled chief rabbi of Moscow and left Russia after refusing to back the invasion of Ukraine, said antisemitism was not only a matter for the Jewish community. “I think that, at the end of the day, this is not a problem of the Jewish community. At the end of the day, this is a major problem for Europe,” he said. “This situation in the streets is destabilising our societies,” he added, saying he believed ongoing “turbulence” could drive voters away from establishment parties. Goldschmidt also warned about the impact of misinformation and suggested looking at “who are the beneficiaries of this turbulence, which countries are interested in the weakening of the European project, of democracy in Europe”. In a message to European leaders, he said: “It is as much your problem as it is our problem.” A leading rabbi has warned that threats and harassment are leading some Europeans to hide their Jewish identities, cautioning that the rise in antisemitism could destabilise European societies. Jewish communities across Europe have been grappling with an increase in hate speech, vandalism, harassment and threats since Hamas’s 7 October attack on Israel and the ensuing war in Gaza. “The statistics speak of a rise of hundreds of percentages all over Europe,” said Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the Conference of European Rabbis, an Orthodox rabbinical alliance. In an interview with the Guardian in Brussels, Goldschmidt said that “many Jews are trying to hide their Jewishness”. “One of the most asked questions to the rabbis since October 7 is if you can take off the mezuzah [a religious parchment in a case] off your door,” he said, adding: “This says a lot.” Other precautions some people were taking included wearing hats instead of the traditional kippah in the street and “when they go into Ubers not speaking Hebrew”, the rabbi said. “There used to be a red line between anti-Zionism and antisemitism,” Goldschmidt said. “We have seen this red line disappear.” Watchdogs have pointed to a dramatic increase in incidents since October. Rias, which monitors antisemitism in Germany, documented a 320% increase in incidents in the month after 7 October. The Council of Jewish Institutions in France (CRIF) has said that in the three months following Hamas attacks, antisemitic incidents were equivalent in number to those in the previous three years combined. Asked if he feared that threats and harassment would cross more into the realm of violence, Goldschmidt said: “It never stops with words.” In recent weeks, Warsaw’s main synagogue was attacked with firebombs and the president of the Belgian union of Jewish students was assaulted in Brussels. Within the Jewish community, there are growing concerns about the safety of students on European campuses. Emma Hallali, the president of the European Union of Jewish Students, said: “Jewish students on campuses are standing at the frontlines; they are the ones having to face the wave of antisemitic violence amid protests and encampments on campuses. “Universities are not doing enough to protect Jewish students, with some students leaving the campuses and preferring to work from home.” Hallali added: “Jewish students will not and should not tolerate nor accept when some students are calling for the death of Jews, excluding them from entering their campuses, or beating them up because they are wearing a star of David, holding an Israeli flag, or speaking Hebrew.” Goldschmidt, who is the exiled chief rabbi of Moscow and left Russia after refusing to back the invasion of Ukraine, said antisemitism was not only a matter for the Jewish community. “I think that, at the end of the day, this is not a problem of the Jewish community. At the end of the day, this is a major problem for Europe,” he said. “This situation in the streets is destabilising our societies,” he added, saying he believed ongoing “turbulence” could drive voters away from establishment parties. Goldschmidt also warned about the impact of misinformation and suggested looking at “who are the beneficiaries of this turbulence, which countries are interested in the weakening of the European project, of democracy in Europe”. In a message to European leaders, he said: “It is as much your problem as it is our problem.” Explore more on these topics Antisemitism Europe Judaism Belgium Israel-Gaza war news Share Reuse this content Antisemitism Europe Judaism Belgium Israel-Gaza war news |
UK climate activists convicted in first trial of new anti-protest laws
Phoebe Plummer (left) and Chiara Sarti outside Southwark crown court in London. Photograph: Hesther Ng/Story Picture Agency View image in fullscreen Phoebe Plummer (left) and Chiara Sarti outside Southwark crown court in London. Photograph: Hesther Ng/Story Picture Agency This article is more than 1 year old UK climate activists convicted in first trial of new anti-protest laws This article is more than 1 year old Phoebe Plummer, Chiara Sarti and Daniel Hall took part in protest march last year in Just Stop Oil campaign Three climate activists have been convicted of “interference with key national infrastructure” by marching in the road in west London for 20 minutes, in the new offence’s first test at trial. Phoebe Plummer, Chiara Sarti and Daniel Hall were the first defendants to face a jury trial on the new section 7 of the Public Order Act 2023, which bans any act preventing harbours, airports, railways or roads “from being used or operated to any extent”. Critics have called the law repressive, and claimed that it gives authorities a licence to crack down on virtually any protest at their discretion. The defendants had sought to persuade the jury that convicting them under the new law could criminalise a swathe of legitimate protest. But after jurors were directed to only take into account whether or not the protest had caused “significant” disruption to the roads, they found the defendants guilty in an 11-1 majority verdict. Over a five-day trial, Southwark crown court heard that on 15 November last year that Plummer, Sarti and Hall took part in a slow march protest along Earls Court Road as part of the Just Stop Oil campaign, which calls on the government to ban new licences for oil and gas exploitation in the UK. The court heard the protest had caused long tailbacks, including on the Cromwell Road, part of the A4, and reaching as far away as the Hammersmith flyover, with traffic held up for several hours. “This is key national infrastructure – A-roads,” the prosecution argued. “They intended to cause a delay. The protest interfered with the use of these roads in that the use of these roads was severely delayed.” In their defence, Plummer, Sarti and Hall said their protest was designed to minimise the amount of disruption caused to drivers, while still causing enough to gain media coverage of their demand that the government introduce a ban on new licences for oil and gas exploitation. But on the instructions of Judge Chris Hehir they were restricted in the evidence they could bring regarding their motivation for taking part in the protest and mentions of the climate crisis, and told they could not mount a defence of justification. Nonetheless, in closing speeches to the jury, both Plummer, who represented herself, and Raj Chada, who represented Sarti, made reference to the unusual heat in the court, which had led Hehir to finish early on several days of the trial. “The irony of that, courtrooms being so hot in May that the trial day ends early, is not lost on me,” Plummer told the jury. She went on: “It was not my intention to delay anyone. I don’t want to cause delay or disruption to anyone. “I want to prevent the massive disruption to all of us, from flooded roads, homes, and fields, from heat that melts roads and runways and is already killing and displacing millions around the world. That was my intention.” Hehir repeatedly interrupted Plummer’s closing speech, reminding her of his instructions, before finally ordering the jury to leave after she invited them to join her in a minute’s silence for the victims of climate breakdown. In his final address to jurors, Hall also made reference to the climate crisis, saying: “Isn’t it more reckless to spend the final two to three years we have [left] to avoid climate breakdown signing petitions and politely protesting by the side of the road, because it’s preferable to our lawbreaking government?” At that point he too was silenced by Hehir. The trio will be sentenced on 3 July. The maximum penalty is 12 months imprisonment, an unlimited fine or both. Explore more on these topics UK news news Share Reuse this content Phoebe Plummer (left) and Chiara Sarti outside Southwark crown court in London. Photograph: Hesther Ng/Story Picture Agency View image in fullscreen Phoebe Plummer (left) and Chiara Sarti outside Southwark crown court in London. Photograph: Hesther Ng/Story Picture Agency This article is more than 1 year old UK climate activists convicted in first trial of new anti-protest laws This article is more than 1 year old Phoebe Plummer, Chiara Sarti and Daniel Hall took part in protest march last year in Just Stop Oil campaign Three climate activists have been convicted of “interference with key national infrastructure” by marching in the road in west London for 20 minutes, in the new offence’s first test at trial. Phoebe Plummer, Chiara Sarti and Daniel Hall were the first defendants to face a jury trial on the new section 7 of the Public Order Act 2023, which bans any act preventing harbours, airports, railways or roads “from being used or operated to any extent”. Critics have called the law repressive, and claimed that it gives authorities a licence to crack down on virtually any protest at their discretion. The defendants had sought to persuade the jury that convicting them under the new law could criminalise a swathe of legitimate protest. But after jurors were directed to only take into account whether or not the protest had caused “significant” disruption to the roads, they found the defendants guilty in an 11-1 majority verdict. Over a five-day trial, Southwark crown court heard that on 15 November last year that Plummer, Sarti and Hall took part in a slow march protest along Earls Court Road as part of the Just Stop Oil campaign, which calls on the government to ban new licences for oil and gas exploitation in the UK. The court heard the protest had caused long tailbacks, including on the Cromwell Road, part of the A4, and reaching as far away as the Hammersmith flyover, with traffic held up for several hours. “This is key national infrastructure – A-roads,” the prosecution argued. “They intended to cause a delay. The protest interfered with the use of these roads in that the use of these roads was severely delayed.” In their defence, Plummer, Sarti and Hall said their protest was designed to minimise the amount of disruption caused to drivers, while still causing enough to gain media coverage of their demand that the government introduce a ban on new licences for oil and gas exploitation. But on the instructions of Judge Chris Hehir they were restricted in the evidence they could bring regarding their motivation for taking part in the protest and mentions of the climate crisis, and told they could not mount a defence of justification. Nonetheless, in closing speeches to the jury, both Plummer, who represented herself, and Raj Chada, who represented Sarti, made reference to the unusual heat in the court, which had led Hehir to finish early on several days of the trial. “The irony of that, courtrooms being so hot in May that the trial day ends early, is not lost on me,” Plummer told the jury. She went on: “It was not my intention to delay anyone. I don’t want to cause delay or disruption to anyone. “I want to prevent the massive disruption to all of us, from flooded roads, homes, and fields, from heat that melts roads and runways and is already killing and displacing millions around the world. That was my intention.” Hehir repeatedly interrupted Plummer’s closing speech, reminding her of his instructions, before finally ordering the jury to leave after she invited them to join her in a minute’s silence for the victims of climate breakdown. In his final address to jurors, Hall also made reference to the climate crisis, saying: “Isn’t it more reckless to spend the final two to three years we have [left] to avoid climate breakdown signing petitions and politely protesting by the side of the road, because it’s preferable to our lawbreaking government?” At that point he too was silenced by Hehir. The trio will be sentenced on 3 July. The maximum penalty is 12 months imprisonment, an unlimited fine or both. Explore more on these topics UK news news Share Reuse this content Phoebe Plummer (left) and Chiara Sarti outside Southwark crown court in London. Photograph: Hesther Ng/Story Picture Agency View image in fullscreen Phoebe Plummer (left) and Chiara Sarti outside Southwark crown court in London. Photograph: Hesther Ng/Story Picture Agency Phoebe Plummer (left) and Chiara Sarti outside Southwark crown court in London. Photograph: Hesther Ng/Story Picture Agency View image in fullscreen Phoebe Plummer (left) and Chiara Sarti outside Southwark crown court in London. Photograph: Hesther Ng/Story Picture Agency Phoebe Plummer (left) and Chiara Sarti outside Southwark crown court in London. Photograph: Hesther Ng/Story Picture Agency View image in fullscreen Phoebe Plummer (left) and Chiara Sarti outside Southwark crown court in London. Photograph: Hesther Ng/Story Picture Agency Phoebe Plummer (left) and Chiara Sarti outside Southwark crown court in London. Photograph: Hesther Ng/Story Picture Agency View image in fullscreen Phoebe Plummer (left) and Chiara Sarti outside Southwark crown court in London. Photograph: Hesther Ng/Story Picture Agency Phoebe Plummer (left) and Chiara Sarti outside Southwark crown court in London. Photograph: Hesther Ng/Story Picture Agency Phoebe Plummer (left) and Chiara Sarti outside Southwark crown court in London. Photograph: Hesther Ng/Story Picture Agency This article is more than 1 year old UK climate activists convicted in first trial of new anti-protest laws This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old UK climate activists convicted in first trial of new anti-protest laws This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old UK climate activists convicted in first trial of new anti-protest laws This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Phoebe Plummer, Chiara Sarti and Daniel Hall took part in protest march last year in Just Stop Oil campaign Phoebe Plummer, Chiara Sarti and Daniel Hall took part in protest march last year in Just Stop Oil campaign Phoebe Plummer, Chiara Sarti and Daniel Hall took part in protest march last year in Just Stop Oil campaign Three climate activists have been convicted of “interference with key national infrastructure” by marching in the road in west London for 20 minutes, in the new offence’s first test at trial. Phoebe Plummer, Chiara Sarti and Daniel Hall were the first defendants to face a jury trial on the new section 7 of the Public Order Act 2023, which bans any act preventing harbours, airports, railways or roads “from being used or operated to any extent”. Critics have called the law repressive, and claimed that it gives authorities a licence to crack down on virtually any protest at their discretion. The defendants had sought to persuade the jury that convicting them under the new law could criminalise a swathe of legitimate protest. But after jurors were directed to only take into account whether or not the protest had caused “significant” disruption to the roads, they found the defendants guilty in an 11-1 majority verdict. Over a five-day trial, Southwark crown court heard that on 15 November last year that Plummer, Sarti and Hall took part in a slow march protest along Earls Court Road as part of the Just Stop Oil campaign, which calls on the government to ban new licences for oil and gas exploitation in the UK. The court heard the protest had caused long tailbacks, including on the Cromwell Road, part of the A4, and reaching as far away as the Hammersmith flyover, with traffic held up for several hours. “This is key national infrastructure – A-roads,” the prosecution argued. “They intended to cause a delay. The protest interfered with the use of these roads in that the use of these roads was severely delayed.” In their defence, Plummer, Sarti and Hall said their protest was designed to minimise the amount of disruption caused to drivers, while still causing enough to gain media coverage of their demand that the government introduce a ban on new licences for oil and gas exploitation. But on the instructions of Judge Chris Hehir they were restricted in the evidence they could bring regarding their motivation for taking part in the protest and mentions of the climate crisis, and told they could not mount a defence of justification. Nonetheless, in closing speeches to the jury, both Plummer, who represented herself, and Raj Chada, who represented Sarti, made reference to the unusual heat in the court, which had led Hehir to finish early on several days of the trial. “The irony of that, courtrooms being so hot in May that the trial day ends early, is not lost on me,” Plummer told the jury. She went on: “It was not my intention to delay anyone. I don’t want to cause delay or disruption to anyone. “I want to prevent the massive disruption to all of us, from flooded roads, homes, and fields, from heat that melts roads and runways and is already killing and displacing millions around the world. That was my intention.” Hehir repeatedly interrupted Plummer’s closing speech, reminding her of his instructions, before finally ordering the jury to leave after she invited them to join her in a minute’s silence for the victims of climate breakdown. In his final address to jurors, Hall also made reference to the climate crisis, saying: “Isn’t it more reckless to spend the final two to three years we have [left] to avoid climate breakdown signing petitions and politely protesting by the side of the road, because it’s preferable to our lawbreaking government?” At that point he too was silenced by Hehir. The trio will be sentenced on 3 July. The maximum penalty is 12 months imprisonment, an unlimited fine or both. Explore more on these topics UK news news Share Reuse this content Three climate activists have been convicted of “interference with key national infrastructure” by marching in the road in west London for 20 minutes, in the new offence’s first test at trial. Phoebe Plummer, Chiara Sarti and Daniel Hall were the first defendants to face a jury trial on the new section 7 of the Public Order Act 2023, which bans any act preventing harbours, airports, railways or roads “from being used or operated to any extent”. Critics have called the law repressive, and claimed that it gives authorities a licence to crack down on virtually any protest at their discretion. The defendants had sought to persuade the jury that convicting them under the new law could criminalise a swathe of legitimate protest. But after jurors were directed to only take into account whether or not the protest had caused “significant” disruption to the roads, they found the defendants guilty in an 11-1 majority verdict. Over a five-day trial, Southwark crown court heard that on 15 November last year that Plummer, Sarti and Hall took part in a slow march protest along Earls Court Road as part of the Just Stop Oil campaign, which calls on the government to ban new licences for oil and gas exploitation in the UK. The court heard the protest had caused long tailbacks, including on the Cromwell Road, part of the A4, and reaching as far away as the Hammersmith flyover, with traffic held up for several hours. “This is key national infrastructure – A-roads,” the prosecution argued. “They intended to cause a delay. The protest interfered with the use of these roads in that the use of these roads was severely delayed.” In their defence, Plummer, Sarti and Hall said their protest was designed to minimise the amount of disruption caused to drivers, while still causing enough to gain media coverage of their demand that the government introduce a ban on new licences for oil and gas exploitation. But on the instructions of Judge Chris Hehir they were restricted in the evidence they could bring regarding their motivation for taking part in the protest and mentions of the climate crisis, and told they could not mount a defence of justification. Nonetheless, in closing speeches to the jury, both Plummer, who represented herself, and Raj Chada, who represented Sarti, made reference to the unusual heat in the court, which had led Hehir to finish early on several days of the trial. “The irony of that, courtrooms being so hot in May that the trial day ends early, is not lost on me,” Plummer told the jury. She went on: “It was not my intention to delay anyone. I don’t want to cause delay or disruption to anyone. “I want to prevent the massive disruption to all of us, from flooded roads, homes, and fields, from heat that melts roads and runways and is already killing and displacing millions around the world. That was my intention.” Hehir repeatedly interrupted Plummer’s closing speech, reminding her of his instructions, before finally ordering the jury to leave after she invited them to join her in a minute’s silence for the victims of climate breakdown. In his final address to jurors, Hall also made reference to the climate crisis, saying: “Isn’t it more reckless to spend the final two to three years we have [left] to avoid climate breakdown signing petitions and politely protesting by the side of the road, because it’s preferable to our lawbreaking government?” At that point he too was silenced by Hehir. The trio will be sentenced on 3 July. The maximum penalty is 12 months imprisonment, an unlimited fine or both. Explore more on these topics UK news news Share Reuse this content Three climate activists have been convicted of “interference with key national infrastructure” by marching in the road in west London for 20 minutes, in the new offence’s first test at trial. Phoebe Plummer, Chiara Sarti and Daniel Hall were the first defendants to face a jury trial on the new section 7 of the Public Order Act 2023, which bans any act preventing harbours, airports, railways or roads “from being used or operated to any extent”. Critics have called the law repressive, and claimed that it gives authorities a licence to crack down on virtually any protest at their discretion. The defendants had sought to persuade the jury that convicting them under the new law could criminalise a swathe of legitimate protest. But after jurors were directed to only take into account whether or not the protest had caused “significant” disruption to the roads, they found the defendants guilty in an 11-1 majority verdict. Over a five-day trial, Southwark crown court heard that on 15 November last year that Plummer, Sarti and Hall took part in a slow march protest along Earls Court Road as part of the Just Stop Oil campaign, which calls on the government to ban new licences for oil and gas exploitation in the UK. The court heard the protest had caused long tailbacks, including on the Cromwell Road, part of the A4, and reaching as far away as the Hammersmith flyover, with traffic held up for several hours. “This is key national infrastructure – A-roads,” the prosecution argued. “They intended to cause a delay. The protest interfered with the use of these roads in that the use of these roads was severely delayed.” In their defence, Plummer, Sarti and Hall said their protest was designed to minimise the amount of disruption caused to drivers, while still causing enough to gain media coverage of their demand that the government introduce a ban on new licences for oil and gas exploitation. But on the instructions of Judge Chris Hehir they were restricted in the evidence they could bring regarding their motivation for taking part in the protest and mentions of the climate crisis, and told they could not mount a defence of justification. Nonetheless, in closing speeches to the jury, both Plummer, who represented herself, and Raj Chada, who represented Sarti, made reference to the unusual heat in the court, which had led Hehir to finish early on several days of the trial. “The irony of that, courtrooms being so hot in May that the trial day ends early, is not lost on me,” Plummer told the jury. She went on: “It was not my intention to delay anyone. I don’t want to cause delay or disruption to anyone. “I want to prevent the massive disruption to all of us, from flooded roads, homes, and fields, from heat that melts roads and runways and is already killing and displacing millions around the world. That was my intention.” Hehir repeatedly interrupted Plummer’s closing speech, reminding her of his instructions, before finally ordering the jury to leave after she invited them to join her in a minute’s silence for the victims of climate breakdown. In his final address to jurors, Hall also made reference to the climate crisis, saying: “Isn’t it more reckless to spend the final two to three years we have [left] to avoid climate breakdown signing petitions and politely protesting by the side of the road, because it’s preferable to our lawbreaking government?” At that point he too was silenced by Hehir. The trio will be sentenced on 3 July. The maximum penalty is 12 months imprisonment, an unlimited fine or both. Three climate activists have been convicted of “interference with key national infrastructure” by marching in the road in west London for 20 minutes, in the new offence’s first test at trial. Phoebe Plummer, Chiara Sarti and Daniel Hall were the first defendants to face a jury trial on the new section 7 of the Public Order Act 2023, which bans any act preventing harbours, airports, railways or roads “from being used or operated to any extent”. Critics have called the law repressive, and claimed that it gives authorities a licence to crack down on virtually any protest at their discretion. The defendants had sought to persuade the jury that convicting them under the new law could criminalise a swathe of legitimate protest. But after jurors were directed to only take into account whether or not the protest had caused “significant” disruption to the roads, they found the defendants guilty in an 11-1 majority verdict. Over a five-day trial, Southwark crown court heard that on 15 November last year that Plummer, Sarti and Hall took part in a slow march protest along Earls Court Road as part of the Just Stop Oil campaign, which calls on the government to ban new licences for oil and gas exploitation in the UK. The court heard the protest had caused long tailbacks, including on the Cromwell Road, part of the A4, and reaching as far away as the Hammersmith flyover, with traffic held up for several hours. “This is key national infrastructure – A-roads,” the prosecution argued. “They intended to cause a delay. The protest interfered with the use of these roads in that the use of these roads was severely delayed.” In their defence, Plummer, Sarti and Hall said their protest was designed to minimise the amount of disruption caused to drivers, while still causing enough to gain media coverage of their demand that the government introduce a ban on new licences for oil and gas exploitation. But on the instructions of Judge Chris Hehir they were restricted in the evidence they could bring regarding their motivation for taking part in the protest and mentions of the climate crisis, and told they could not mount a defence of justification. Nonetheless, in closing speeches to the jury, both Plummer, who represented herself, and Raj Chada, who represented Sarti, made reference to the unusual heat in the court, which had led Hehir to finish early on several days of the trial. “The irony of that, courtrooms being so hot in May that the trial day ends early, is not lost on me,” Plummer told the jury. She went on: “It was not my intention to delay anyone. I don’t want to cause delay or disruption to anyone. “I want to prevent the massive disruption to all of us, from flooded roads, homes, and fields, from heat that melts roads and runways and is already killing and displacing millions around the world. That was my intention.” Hehir repeatedly interrupted Plummer’s closing speech, reminding her of his instructions, before finally ordering the jury to leave after she invited them to join her in a minute’s silence for the victims of climate breakdown. In his final address to jurors, Hall also made reference to the climate crisis, saying: “Isn’t it more reckless to spend the final two to three years we have [left] to avoid climate breakdown signing petitions and politely protesting by the side of the road, because it’s preferable to our lawbreaking government?” At that point he too was silenced by Hehir. The trio will be sentenced on 3 July. The maximum penalty is 12 months imprisonment, an unlimited fine or both. Three climate activists have been convicted of “interference with key national infrastructure” by marching in the road in west London for 20 minutes, in the new offence’s first test at trial. Phoebe Plummer, Chiara Sarti and Daniel Hall were the first defendants to face a jury trial on the new section 7 of the Public Order Act 2023, which bans any act preventing harbours, airports, railways or roads “from being used or operated to any extent”. Critics have called the law repressive, and claimed that it gives authorities a licence to crack down on virtually any protest at their discretion. The defendants had sought to persuade the jury that convicting them under the new law could criminalise a swathe of legitimate protest. But after jurors were directed to only take into account whether or not the protest had caused “significant” disruption to the roads, they found the defendants guilty in an 11-1 majority verdict. Over a five-day trial, Southwark crown court heard that on 15 November last year that Plummer, Sarti and Hall took part in a slow march protest along Earls Court Road as part of the Just Stop Oil campaign, which calls on the government to ban new licences for oil and gas exploitation in the UK. The court heard the protest had caused long tailbacks, including on the Cromwell Road, part of the A4, and reaching as far away as the Hammersmith flyover, with traffic held up for several hours. “This is key national infrastructure – A-roads,” the prosecution argued. “They intended to cause a delay. The protest interfered with the use of these roads in that the use of these roads was severely delayed.” In their defence, Plummer, Sarti and Hall said their protest was designed to minimise the amount of disruption caused to drivers, while still causing enough to gain media coverage of their demand that the government introduce a ban on new licences for oil and gas exploitation. But on the instructions of Judge Chris Hehir they were restricted in the evidence they could bring regarding their motivation for taking part in the protest and mentions of the climate crisis, and told they could not mount a defence of justification. Nonetheless, in closing speeches to the jury, both Plummer, who represented herself, and Raj Chada, who represented Sarti, made reference to the unusual heat in the court, which had led Hehir to finish early on several days of the trial. “The irony of that, courtrooms being so hot in May that the trial day ends early, is not lost on me,” Plummer told the jury. She went on: “It was not my intention to delay anyone. I don’t want to cause delay or disruption to anyone. “I want to prevent the massive disruption to all of us, from flooded roads, homes, and fields, from heat that melts roads and runways and is already killing and displacing millions around the world. That was my intention.” Hehir repeatedly interrupted Plummer’s closing speech, reminding her of his instructions, before finally ordering the jury to leave after she invited them to join her in a minute’s silence for the victims of climate breakdown. In his final address to jurors, Hall also made reference to the climate crisis, saying: “Isn’t it more reckless to spend the final two to three years we have [left] to avoid climate breakdown signing petitions and politely protesting by the side of the road, because it’s preferable to our lawbreaking government?” At that point he too was silenced by Hehir. The trio will be sentenced on 3 July. The maximum penalty is 12 months imprisonment, an unlimited fine or both. Explore more on these topics UK news news Share Reuse this content |
‘Someone is going to die’: MPs warned of E coli risk to swimmers in English waters
Many sites are not monitored for E coli, said Charles Watson of River Action, as they are not designated bathing areas. Photograph: Andrew Holt/Alamy View image in fullscreen Many sites are not monitored for E coli, said Charles Watson of River Action, as they are not designated bathing areas. Photograph: Andrew Holt/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old ‘Someone is going to die’: MPs warned of E coli risk to swimmers in English waters This article is more than 1 year old Clean river campaigner says pollution poses threat as Labour MP calls for water industry to be taken into public ownership A clean river campaigner has warned of a serious risk someone will die from swimming in English rivers and seas because of the level of E coli from water pollution. Charles Watson of River Action, speaking on Wednesday as the bathing water season officially opened, said that with warm weather approaching and half-term in a week, thousands of children and families would be taking to rivers, lakes and seas. Most of these sites are not monitored for E coli , as they are not designated bathing sites. ‘You wouldn’t put your dog in this river’: Boat Race exposes Thames Water failings Read more Watson’s organisation tested for E coli in the River Thames before the Oxford and Cambridge boat race last month, and found E coli levels that were off the scale in terms of public health. Dr Rob Collins, of the Rivers Trust, said there was no monitoring of the pathogens in rivers, including Cryptosporidium which spreads waterborne disease. “I am not exaggerating when I say someone is going to die,” Watson told MPs on the environmental audit committee (EAC). “There is no guidance being produced by the Environment Agency regarding public health. Thousands of children and families will be taking to rivers and lakes at half-term none of which have bathing status. No one is monitoring this.” Do not enter the water: how dirty Boat Race has captured world’s attention Read more Watson said the Department for Environment’s designation of 12 new river bathing water sites this week – where the water will be tested from May to September – was welcome, but the water quality in the rivers was poor. Just 16% of rivers in England pass tests for good biological status, and none pass tests for chemical pollution. View image in fullscreen Manningtree beach, by the River Stour in Essex, is one of the 12 new designated river bathing sites. Photograph: Tolga Akmen/EPA The warning came as the Labour MP Clive Lewis called for the water industry in England to be brought into public ownership. In an early day motion laid before parliament, Lewis said the industry had proved it was not capable of building the infrastructure required to deal with the impact of climate breakdown, including increased flooding and droughts. Lewis and other MPs challenged water industry representatives and the regulator Ofwat on Wednesday as the EAC sought answers on what progress had been made to tackle sewage pollution in rivers and seas. Lewis said: “Water companies in England have incurred debts of £64bn and paid out £78bn in dividends since they were privatised, debt-free, in 1989 … Water companies paid out £1.4bn in dividends in 2022 even as 11 of them were fined in the same year for missing performance targets.” Climate change threats, which are making flooding and drought more severe, required a change to the way the industry was managed to build in resilience, Lewis said. MPs are putting pressure on the industry as the regulator Ofwat prepares to announce whether it will allow Thames Water, which has total debts of £18bn, to hike customer fees by more than 40% and avoid high fines for pollution, in order to get the equity funding it needs to continue operating. Ofwat is due to give its first public view on private water firms’ business plans in June. The government has assembled a team, under the banner of Project Timber , to draw up contingency plans to rescue Thames Water if needed, which could include the bulk of its debt being added to the public purse. But Lewis said a government bailout would send a dangerous signal to other utilities that reckless decisions carry no private risk. He urged Ofwat to reject Thames Water’s request to increase bills, face lower pollution fines and continue to pay dividends. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion View image in fullscreen The River Teme at Ludlow, Shropshire, is another of the new designated river bathing sites. Photograph: David Bagnall/Alamy Collins told MPs that rivers were in a dire state. “We are flatlining,” he said. A target of the majority of rivers reaching a good status by 2027 under the the water framework directive would not be met, he said. “We are going to limp along to 21% having good status in England by then.” An inquiry by the EAC in 2022 into sewage pollution found that rivers were being subjected to a chemical cocktail of sewage, agricultural waste and plastic pollution which was suffocating biodiversity and putting public health at risk. But discharges of raw sewage and pollution into waterways from treated sewage have continued and last year water companies discharged raw sewage into rivers and coastal waters for a record 3.6m hours, an increase of 105% on the previous 12 months. The scale of the discharges of untreated waste made 2023 the worst year for storm water pollution. The data showed that failure to maintain assets and a lack of capacity at treatment plants were the main reasons for the scale of raw sewage flowing from high discharging overflows. Guardian analysis showed that more than 2,000 overflows owned by a number of companies discharged raw sewage into rivers and seas at a scale that should spark an immediate investigation into illegal breaches of permit conditions. View image in fullscreen United Utilities dumped millions of litres of raw sewage into Windermere in February, the BBC has reported. Photograph: Christopher Thomond/The Guardian Figures obtained by the BBC on Wednesday revealed United Utilities dumped millions of litres of raw sewage into Windermere in the Lake District in February after a fault took 10 hours to fix. The bathing water season began on Wednesday, meaning the Environment Agency will begin the testing of 451 bathing water areas across England. The risk to public health from sewage pollution was exposed in Devon, where the UK Health Security Agency said 16 cases of cryptosporidiosis, a diarrhoea-type illness caused by Cryptosporidium , had been confirmed. The waterborne disease can be caused by swallowing contaminated water in rivers and streams. This Saturday thousands will take to coasts and rivers across the UK to protest about the state of the nation’s waterways, in paddle-out events coordinated by Surfers Against Sewage. Protests are taking place at the West Pier in Brighton and at Gyllyngvase beach in Falmouth, as well as on the Great Ouse river in Bedford. Explore more on these topics Water Clive Lewis Labour Privatisation Pollution news Share Reuse this content Many sites are not monitored for E coli, said Charles Watson of River Action, as they are not designated bathing areas. Photograph: Andrew Holt/Alamy View image in fullscreen Many sites are not monitored for E coli, said Charles Watson of River Action, as they are not designated bathing areas. Photograph: Andrew Holt/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old ‘Someone is going to die’: MPs warned of E coli risk to swimmers in English waters This article is more than 1 year old Clean river campaigner says pollution poses threat as Labour MP calls for water industry to be taken into public ownership A clean river campaigner has warned of a serious risk someone will die from swimming in English rivers and seas because of the level of E coli from water pollution. Charles Watson of River Action, speaking on Wednesday as the bathing water season officially opened, said that with warm weather approaching and half-term in a week, thousands of children and families would be taking to rivers, lakes and seas. Most of these sites are not monitored for E coli , as they are not designated bathing sites. ‘You wouldn’t put your dog in this river’: Boat Race exposes Thames Water failings Read more Watson’s organisation tested for E coli in the River Thames before the Oxford and Cambridge boat race last month, and found E coli levels that were off the scale in terms of public health. Dr Rob Collins, of the Rivers Trust, said there was no monitoring of the pathogens in rivers, including Cryptosporidium which spreads waterborne disease. “I am not exaggerating when I say someone is going to die,” Watson told MPs on the environmental audit committee (EAC). “There is no guidance being produced by the Environment Agency regarding public health. Thousands of children and families will be taking to rivers and lakes at half-term none of which have bathing status. No one is monitoring this.” Do not enter the water: how dirty Boat Race has captured world’s attention Read more Watson said the Department for Environment’s designation of 12 new river bathing water sites this week – where the water will be tested from May to September – was welcome, but the water quality in the rivers was poor. Just 16% of rivers in England pass tests for good biological status, and none pass tests for chemical pollution. View image in fullscreen Manningtree beach, by the River Stour in Essex, is one of the 12 new designated river bathing sites. Photograph: Tolga Akmen/EPA The warning came as the Labour MP Clive Lewis called for the water industry in England to be brought into public ownership. In an early day motion laid before parliament, Lewis said the industry had proved it was not capable of building the infrastructure required to deal with the impact of climate breakdown, including increased flooding and droughts. Lewis and other MPs challenged water industry representatives and the regulator Ofwat on Wednesday as the EAC sought answers on what progress had been made to tackle sewage pollution in rivers and seas. Lewis said: “Water companies in England have incurred debts of £64bn and paid out £78bn in dividends since they were privatised, debt-free, in 1989 … Water companies paid out £1.4bn in dividends in 2022 even as 11 of them were fined in the same year for missing performance targets.” Climate change threats, which are making flooding and drought more severe, required a change to the way the industry was managed to build in resilience, Lewis said. MPs are putting pressure on the industry as the regulator Ofwat prepares to announce whether it will allow Thames Water, which has total debts of £18bn, to hike customer fees by more than 40% and avoid high fines for pollution, in order to get the equity funding it needs to continue operating. Ofwat is due to give its first public view on private water firms’ business plans in June. The government has assembled a team, under the banner of Project Timber , to draw up contingency plans to rescue Thames Water if needed, which could include the bulk of its debt being added to the public purse. But Lewis said a government bailout would send a dangerous signal to other utilities that reckless decisions carry no private risk. He urged Ofwat to reject Thames Water’s request to increase bills, face lower pollution fines and continue to pay dividends. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion View image in fullscreen The River Teme at Ludlow, Shropshire, is another of the new designated river bathing sites. Photograph: David Bagnall/Alamy Collins told MPs that rivers were in a dire state. “We are flatlining,” he said. A target of the majority of rivers reaching a good status by 2027 under the the water framework directive would not be met, he said. “We are going to limp along to 21% having good status in England by then.” An inquiry by the EAC in 2022 into sewage pollution found that rivers were being subjected to a chemical cocktail of sewage, agricultural waste and plastic pollution which was suffocating biodiversity and putting public health at risk. But discharges of raw sewage and pollution into waterways from treated sewage have continued and last year water companies discharged raw sewage into rivers and coastal waters for a record 3.6m hours, an increase of 105% on the previous 12 months. The scale of the discharges of untreated waste made 2023 the worst year for storm water pollution. The data showed that failure to maintain assets and a lack of capacity at treatment plants were the main reasons for the scale of raw sewage flowing from high discharging overflows. Guardian analysis showed that more than 2,000 overflows owned by a number of companies discharged raw sewage into rivers and seas at a scale that should spark an immediate investigation into illegal breaches of permit conditions. View image in fullscreen United Utilities dumped millions of litres of raw sewage into Windermere in February, the BBC has reported. Photograph: Christopher Thomond/The Guardian Figures obtained by the BBC on Wednesday revealed United Utilities dumped millions of litres of raw sewage into Windermere in the Lake District in February after a fault took 10 hours to fix. The bathing water season began on Wednesday, meaning the Environment Agency will begin the testing of 451 bathing water areas across England. The risk to public health from sewage pollution was exposed in Devon, where the UK Health Security Agency said 16 cases of cryptosporidiosis, a diarrhoea-type illness caused by Cryptosporidium , had been confirmed. The waterborne disease can be caused by swallowing contaminated water in rivers and streams. This Saturday thousands will take to coasts and rivers across the UK to protest about the state of the nation’s waterways, in paddle-out events coordinated by Surfers Against Sewage. Protests are taking place at the West Pier in Brighton and at Gyllyngvase beach in Falmouth, as well as on the Great Ouse river in Bedford. Explore more on these topics Water Clive Lewis Labour Privatisation Pollution news Share Reuse this content Many sites are not monitored for E coli, said Charles Watson of River Action, as they are not designated bathing areas. Photograph: Andrew Holt/Alamy View image in fullscreen Many sites are not monitored for E coli, said Charles Watson of River Action, as they are not designated bathing areas. Photograph: Andrew Holt/Alamy Many sites are not monitored for E coli, said Charles Watson of River Action, as they are not designated bathing areas. Photograph: Andrew Holt/Alamy View image in fullscreen Many sites are not monitored for E coli, said Charles Watson of River Action, as they are not designated bathing areas. Photograph: Andrew Holt/Alamy Many sites are not monitored for E coli, said Charles Watson of River Action, as they are not designated bathing areas. Photograph: Andrew Holt/Alamy View image in fullscreen Many sites are not monitored for E coli, said Charles Watson of River Action, as they are not designated bathing areas. Photograph: Andrew Holt/Alamy Many sites are not monitored for E coli, said Charles Watson of River Action, as they are not designated bathing areas. Photograph: Andrew Holt/Alamy View image in fullscreen Many sites are not monitored for E coli, said Charles Watson of River Action, as they are not designated bathing areas. Photograph: Andrew Holt/Alamy Many sites are not monitored for E coli, said Charles Watson of River Action, as they are not designated bathing areas. Photograph: Andrew Holt/Alamy Many sites are not monitored for E coli, said Charles Watson of River Action, as they are not designated bathing areas. Photograph: Andrew Holt/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old ‘Someone is going to die’: MPs warned of E coli risk to swimmers in English waters This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Someone is going to die’: MPs warned of E coli risk to swimmers in English waters This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Someone is going to die’: MPs warned of E coli risk to swimmers in English waters This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Clean river campaigner says pollution poses threat as Labour MP calls for water industry to be taken into public ownership Clean river campaigner says pollution poses threat as Labour MP calls for water industry to be taken into public ownership Clean river campaigner says pollution poses threat as Labour MP calls for water industry to be taken into public ownership A clean river campaigner has warned of a serious risk someone will die from swimming in English rivers and seas because of the level of E coli from water pollution. Charles Watson of River Action, speaking on Wednesday as the bathing water season officially opened, said that with warm weather approaching and half-term in a week, thousands of children and families would be taking to rivers, lakes and seas. Most of these sites are not monitored for E coli , as they are not designated bathing sites. ‘You wouldn’t put your dog in this river’: Boat Race exposes Thames Water failings Read more Watson’s organisation tested for E coli in the River Thames before the Oxford and Cambridge boat race last month, and found E coli levels that were off the scale in terms of public health. Dr Rob Collins, of the Rivers Trust, said there was no monitoring of the pathogens in rivers, including Cryptosporidium which spreads waterborne disease. “I am not exaggerating when I say someone is going to die,” Watson told MPs on the environmental audit committee (EAC). “There is no guidance being produced by the Environment Agency regarding public health. Thousands of children and families will be taking to rivers and lakes at half-term none of which have bathing status. No one is monitoring this.” Do not enter the water: how dirty Boat Race has captured world’s attention Read more Watson said the Department for Environment’s designation of 12 new river bathing water sites this week – where the water will be tested from May to September – was welcome, but the water quality in the rivers was poor. Just 16% of rivers in England pass tests for good biological status, and none pass tests for chemical pollution. View image in fullscreen Manningtree beach, by the River Stour in Essex, is one of the 12 new designated river bathing sites. Photograph: Tolga Akmen/EPA The warning came as the Labour MP Clive Lewis called for the water industry in England to be brought into public ownership. In an early day motion laid before parliament, Lewis said the industry had proved it was not capable of building the infrastructure required to deal with the impact of climate breakdown, including increased flooding and droughts. Lewis and other MPs challenged water industry representatives and the regulator Ofwat on Wednesday as the EAC sought answers on what progress had been made to tackle sewage pollution in rivers and seas. Lewis said: “Water companies in England have incurred debts of £64bn and paid out £78bn in dividends since they were privatised, debt-free, in 1989 … Water companies paid out £1.4bn in dividends in 2022 even as 11 of them were fined in the same year for missing performance targets.” Climate change threats, which are making flooding and drought more severe, required a change to the way the industry was managed to build in resilience, Lewis said. MPs are putting pressure on the industry as the regulator Ofwat prepares to announce whether it will allow Thames Water, which has total debts of £18bn, to hike customer fees by more than 40% and avoid high fines for pollution, in order to get the equity funding it needs to continue operating. Ofwat is due to give its first public view on private water firms’ business plans in June. The government has assembled a team, under the banner of Project Timber , to draw up contingency plans to rescue Thames Water if needed, which could include the bulk of its debt being added to the public purse. But Lewis said a government bailout would send a dangerous signal to other utilities that reckless decisions carry no private risk. He urged Ofwat to reject Thames Water’s request to increase bills, face lower pollution fines and continue to pay dividends. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion View image in fullscreen The River Teme at Ludlow, Shropshire, is another of the new designated river bathing sites. Photograph: David Bagnall/Alamy Collins told MPs that rivers were in a dire state. “We are flatlining,” he said. A target of the majority of rivers reaching a good status by 2027 under the the water framework directive would not be met, he said. “We are going to limp along to 21% having good status in England by then.” An inquiry by the EAC in 2022 into sewage pollution found that rivers were being subjected to a chemical cocktail of sewage, agricultural waste and plastic pollution which was suffocating biodiversity and putting public health at risk. But discharges of raw sewage and pollution into waterways from treated sewage have continued and last year water companies discharged raw sewage into rivers and coastal waters for a record 3.6m hours, an increase of 105% on the previous 12 months. The scale of the discharges of untreated waste made 2023 the worst year for storm water pollution. The data showed that failure to maintain assets and a lack of capacity at treatment plants were the main reasons for the scale of raw sewage flowing from high discharging overflows. Guardian analysis showed that more than 2,000 overflows owned by a number of companies discharged raw sewage into rivers and seas at a scale that should spark an immediate investigation into illegal breaches of permit conditions. View image in fullscreen United Utilities dumped millions of litres of raw sewage into Windermere in February, the BBC has reported. Photograph: Christopher Thomond/The Guardian Figures obtained by the BBC on Wednesday revealed United Utilities dumped millions of litres of raw sewage into Windermere in the Lake District in February after a fault took 10 hours to fix. The bathing water season began on Wednesday, meaning the Environment Agency will begin the testing of 451 bathing water areas across England. The risk to public health from sewage pollution was exposed in Devon, where the UK Health Security Agency said 16 cases of cryptosporidiosis, a diarrhoea-type illness caused by Cryptosporidium , had been confirmed. The waterborne disease can be caused by swallowing contaminated water in rivers and streams. This Saturday thousands will take to coasts and rivers across the UK to protest about the state of the nation’s waterways, in paddle-out events coordinated by Surfers Against Sewage. Protests are taking place at the West Pier in Brighton and at Gyllyngvase beach in Falmouth, as well as on the Great Ouse river in Bedford. Explore more on these topics Water Clive Lewis Labour Privatisation Pollution news Share Reuse this content A clean river campaigner has warned of a serious risk someone will die from swimming in English rivers and seas because of the level of E coli from water pollution. Charles Watson of River Action, speaking on Wednesday as the bathing water season officially opened, said that with warm weather approaching and half-term in a week, thousands of children and families would be taking to rivers, lakes and seas. Most of these sites are not monitored for E coli , as they are not designated bathing sites. ‘You wouldn’t put your dog in this river’: Boat Race exposes Thames Water failings Read more Watson’s organisation tested for E coli in the River Thames before the Oxford and Cambridge boat race last month, and found E coli levels that were off the scale in terms of public health. Dr Rob Collins, of the Rivers Trust, said there was no monitoring of the pathogens in rivers, including Cryptosporidium which spreads waterborne disease. “I am not exaggerating when I say someone is going to die,” Watson told MPs on the environmental audit committee (EAC). “There is no guidance being produced by the Environment Agency regarding public health. Thousands of children and families will be taking to rivers and lakes at half-term none of which have bathing status. No one is monitoring this.” Do not enter the water: how dirty Boat Race has captured world’s attention Read more Watson said the Department for Environment’s designation of 12 new river bathing water sites this week – where the water will be tested from May to September – was welcome, but the water quality in the rivers was poor. Just 16% of rivers in England pass tests for good biological status, and none pass tests for chemical pollution. View image in fullscreen Manningtree beach, by the River Stour in Essex, is one of the 12 new designated river bathing sites. Photograph: Tolga Akmen/EPA The warning came as the Labour MP Clive Lewis called for the water industry in England to be brought into public ownership. In an early day motion laid before parliament, Lewis said the industry had proved it was not capable of building the infrastructure required to deal with the impact of climate breakdown, including increased flooding and droughts. Lewis and other MPs challenged water industry representatives and the regulator Ofwat on Wednesday as the EAC sought answers on what progress had been made to tackle sewage pollution in rivers and seas. Lewis said: “Water companies in England have incurred debts of £64bn and paid out £78bn in dividends since they were privatised, debt-free, in 1989 … Water companies paid out £1.4bn in dividends in 2022 even as 11 of them were fined in the same year for missing performance targets.” Climate change threats, which are making flooding and drought more severe, required a change to the way the industry was managed to build in resilience, Lewis said. MPs are putting pressure on the industry as the regulator Ofwat prepares to announce whether it will allow Thames Water, which has total debts of £18bn, to hike customer fees by more than 40% and avoid high fines for pollution, in order to get the equity funding it needs to continue operating. Ofwat is due to give its first public view on private water firms’ business plans in June. The government has assembled a team, under the banner of Project Timber , to draw up contingency plans to rescue Thames Water if needed, which could include the bulk of its debt being added to the public purse. But Lewis said a government bailout would send a dangerous signal to other utilities that reckless decisions carry no private risk. He urged Ofwat to reject Thames Water’s request to increase bills, face lower pollution fines and continue to pay dividends. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion View image in fullscreen The River Teme at Ludlow, Shropshire, is another of the new designated river bathing sites. Photograph: David Bagnall/Alamy Collins told MPs that rivers were in a dire state. “We are flatlining,” he said. A target of the majority of rivers reaching a good status by 2027 under the the water framework directive would not be met, he said. “We are going to limp along to 21% having good status in England by then.” An inquiry by the EAC in 2022 into sewage pollution found that rivers were being subjected to a chemical cocktail of sewage, agricultural waste and plastic pollution which was suffocating biodiversity and putting public health at risk. But discharges of raw sewage and pollution into waterways from treated sewage have continued and last year water companies discharged raw sewage into rivers and coastal waters for a record 3.6m hours, an increase of 105% on the previous 12 months. The scale of the discharges of untreated waste made 2023 the worst year for storm water pollution. The data showed that failure to maintain assets and a lack of capacity at treatment plants were the main reasons for the scale of raw sewage flowing from high discharging overflows. Guardian analysis showed that more than 2,000 overflows owned by a number of companies discharged raw sewage into rivers and seas at a scale that should spark an immediate investigation into illegal breaches of permit conditions. View image in fullscreen United Utilities dumped millions of litres of raw sewage into Windermere in February, the BBC has reported. Photograph: Christopher Thomond/The Guardian Figures obtained by the BBC on Wednesday revealed United Utilities dumped millions of litres of raw sewage into Windermere in the Lake District in February after a fault took 10 hours to fix. The bathing water season began on Wednesday, meaning the Environment Agency will begin the testing of 451 bathing water areas across England. The risk to public health from sewage pollution was exposed in Devon, where the UK Health Security Agency said 16 cases of cryptosporidiosis, a diarrhoea-type illness caused by Cryptosporidium , had been confirmed. The waterborne disease can be caused by swallowing contaminated water in rivers and streams. This Saturday thousands will take to coasts and rivers across the UK to protest about the state of the nation’s waterways, in paddle-out events coordinated by Surfers Against Sewage. Protests are taking place at the West Pier in Brighton and at Gyllyngvase beach in Falmouth, as well as on the Great Ouse river in Bedford. Explore more on these topics Water Clive Lewis Labour Privatisation Pollution news Share Reuse this content A clean river campaigner has warned of a serious risk someone will die from swimming in English rivers and seas because of the level of E coli from water pollution. Charles Watson of River Action, speaking on Wednesday as the bathing water season officially opened, said that with warm weather approaching and half-term in a week, thousands of children and families would be taking to rivers, lakes and seas. Most of these sites are not monitored for E coli , as they are not designated bathing sites. ‘You wouldn’t put your dog in this river’: Boat Race exposes Thames Water failings Read more Watson’s organisation tested for E coli in the River Thames before the Oxford and Cambridge boat race last month, and found E coli levels that were off the scale in terms of public health. Dr Rob Collins, of the Rivers Trust, said there was no monitoring of the pathogens in rivers, including Cryptosporidium which spreads waterborne disease. “I am not exaggerating when I say someone is going to die,” Watson told MPs on the environmental audit committee (EAC). “There is no guidance being produced by the Environment Agency regarding public health. Thousands of children and families will be taking to rivers and lakes at half-term none of which have bathing status. No one is monitoring this.” Do not enter the water: how dirty Boat Race has captured world’s attention Read more Watson said the Department for Environment’s designation of 12 new river bathing water sites this week – where the water will be tested from May to September – was welcome, but the water quality in the rivers was poor. Just 16% of rivers in England pass tests for good biological status, and none pass tests for chemical pollution. View image in fullscreen Manningtree beach, by the River Stour in Essex, is one of the 12 new designated river bathing sites. Photograph: Tolga Akmen/EPA The warning came as the Labour MP Clive Lewis called for the water industry in England to be brought into public ownership. In an early day motion laid before parliament, Lewis said the industry had proved it was not capable of building the infrastructure required to deal with the impact of climate breakdown, including increased flooding and droughts. Lewis and other MPs challenged water industry representatives and the regulator Ofwat on Wednesday as the EAC sought answers on what progress had been made to tackle sewage pollution in rivers and seas. Lewis said: “Water companies in England have incurred debts of £64bn and paid out £78bn in dividends since they were privatised, debt-free, in 1989 … Water companies paid out £1.4bn in dividends in 2022 even as 11 of them were fined in the same year for missing performance targets.” Climate change threats, which are making flooding and drought more severe, required a change to the way the industry was managed to build in resilience, Lewis said. MPs are putting pressure on the industry as the regulator Ofwat prepares to announce whether it will allow Thames Water, which has total debts of £18bn, to hike customer fees by more than 40% and avoid high fines for pollution, in order to get the equity funding it needs to continue operating. Ofwat is due to give its first public view on private water firms’ business plans in June. The government has assembled a team, under the banner of Project Timber , to draw up contingency plans to rescue Thames Water if needed, which could include the bulk of its debt being added to the public purse. But Lewis said a government bailout would send a dangerous signal to other utilities that reckless decisions carry no private risk. He urged Ofwat to reject Thames Water’s request to increase bills, face lower pollution fines and continue to pay dividends. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion View image in fullscreen The River Teme at Ludlow, Shropshire, is another of the new designated river bathing sites. Photograph: David Bagnall/Alamy Collins told MPs that rivers were in a dire state. “We are flatlining,” he said. A target of the majority of rivers reaching a good status by 2027 under the the water framework directive would not be met, he said. “We are going to limp along to 21% having good status in England by then.” An inquiry by the EAC in 2022 into sewage pollution found that rivers were being subjected to a chemical cocktail of sewage, agricultural waste and plastic pollution which was suffocating biodiversity and putting public health at risk. But discharges of raw sewage and pollution into waterways from treated sewage have continued and last year water companies discharged raw sewage into rivers and coastal waters for a record 3.6m hours, an increase of 105% on the previous 12 months. The scale of the discharges of untreated waste made 2023 the worst year for storm water pollution. The data showed that failure to maintain assets and a lack of capacity at treatment plants were the main reasons for the scale of raw sewage flowing from high discharging overflows. Guardian analysis showed that more than 2,000 overflows owned by a number of companies discharged raw sewage into rivers and seas at a scale that should spark an immediate investigation into illegal breaches of permit conditions. View image in fullscreen United Utilities dumped millions of litres of raw sewage into Windermere in February, the BBC has reported. Photograph: Christopher Thomond/The Guardian Figures obtained by the BBC on Wednesday revealed United Utilities dumped millions of litres of raw sewage into Windermere in the Lake District in February after a fault took 10 hours to fix. The bathing water season began on Wednesday, meaning the Environment Agency will begin the testing of 451 bathing water areas across England. The risk to public health from sewage pollution was exposed in Devon, where the UK Health Security Agency said 16 cases of cryptosporidiosis, a diarrhoea-type illness caused by Cryptosporidium , had been confirmed. The waterborne disease can be caused by swallowing contaminated water in rivers and streams. This Saturday thousands will take to coasts and rivers across the UK to protest about the state of the nation’s waterways, in paddle-out events coordinated by Surfers Against Sewage. Protests are taking place at the West Pier in Brighton and at Gyllyngvase beach in Falmouth, as well as on the Great Ouse river in Bedford. A clean river campaigner has warned of a serious risk someone will die from swimming in English rivers and seas because of the level of E coli from water pollution. Charles Watson of River Action, speaking on Wednesday as the bathing water season officially opened, said that with warm weather approaching and half-term in a week, thousands of children and families would be taking to rivers, lakes and seas. Most of these sites are not monitored for E coli , as they are not designated bathing sites. ‘You wouldn’t put your dog in this river’: Boat Race exposes Thames Water failings Read more Watson’s organisation tested for E coli in the River Thames before the Oxford and Cambridge boat race last month, and found E coli levels that were off the scale in terms of public health. Dr Rob Collins, of the Rivers Trust, said there was no monitoring of the pathogens in rivers, including Cryptosporidium which spreads waterborne disease. “I am not exaggerating when I say someone is going to die,” Watson told MPs on the environmental audit committee (EAC). “There is no guidance being produced by the Environment Agency regarding public health. Thousands of children and families will be taking to rivers and lakes at half-term none of which have bathing status. No one is monitoring this.” Do not enter the water: how dirty Boat Race has captured world’s attention Read more Watson said the Department for Environment’s designation of 12 new river bathing water sites this week – where the water will be tested from May to September – was welcome, but the water quality in the rivers was poor. Just 16% of rivers in England pass tests for good biological status, and none pass tests for chemical pollution. View image in fullscreen Manningtree beach, by the River Stour in Essex, is one of the 12 new designated river bathing sites. Photograph: Tolga Akmen/EPA The warning came as the Labour MP Clive Lewis called for the water industry in England to be brought into public ownership. In an early day motion laid before parliament, Lewis said the industry had proved it was not capable of building the infrastructure required to deal with the impact of climate breakdown, including increased flooding and droughts. Lewis and other MPs challenged water industry representatives and the regulator Ofwat on Wednesday as the EAC sought answers on what progress had been made to tackle sewage pollution in rivers and seas. Lewis said: “Water companies in England have incurred debts of £64bn and paid out £78bn in dividends since they were privatised, debt-free, in 1989 … Water companies paid out £1.4bn in dividends in 2022 even as 11 of them were fined in the same year for missing performance targets.” Climate change threats, which are making flooding and drought more severe, required a change to the way the industry was managed to build in resilience, Lewis said. MPs are putting pressure on the industry as the regulator Ofwat prepares to announce whether it will allow Thames Water, which has total debts of £18bn, to hike customer fees by more than 40% and avoid high fines for pollution, in order to get the equity funding it needs to continue operating. Ofwat is due to give its first public view on private water firms’ business plans in June. The government has assembled a team, under the banner of Project Timber , to draw up contingency plans to rescue Thames Water if needed, which could include the bulk of its debt being added to the public purse. But Lewis said a government bailout would send a dangerous signal to other utilities that reckless decisions carry no private risk. He urged Ofwat to reject Thames Water’s request to increase bills, face lower pollution fines and continue to pay dividends. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion View image in fullscreen The River Teme at Ludlow, Shropshire, is another of the new designated river bathing sites. Photograph: David Bagnall/Alamy Collins told MPs that rivers were in a dire state. “We are flatlining,” he said. A target of the majority of rivers reaching a good status by 2027 under the the water framework directive would not be met, he said. “We are going to limp along to 21% having good status in England by then.” An inquiry by the EAC in 2022 into sewage pollution found that rivers were being subjected to a chemical cocktail of sewage, agricultural waste and plastic pollution which was suffocating biodiversity and putting public health at risk. But discharges of raw sewage and pollution into waterways from treated sewage have continued and last year water companies discharged raw sewage into rivers and coastal waters for a record 3.6m hours, an increase of 105% on the previous 12 months. The scale of the discharges of untreated waste made 2023 the worst year for storm water pollution. The data showed that failure to maintain assets and a lack of capacity at treatment plants were the main reasons for the scale of raw sewage flowing from high discharging overflows. Guardian analysis showed that more than 2,000 overflows owned by a number of companies discharged raw sewage into rivers and seas at a scale that should spark an immediate investigation into illegal breaches of permit conditions. View image in fullscreen United Utilities dumped millions of litres of raw sewage into Windermere in February, the BBC has reported. Photograph: Christopher Thomond/The Guardian Figures obtained by the BBC on Wednesday revealed United Utilities dumped millions of litres of raw sewage into Windermere in the Lake District in February after a fault took 10 hours to fix. The bathing water season began on Wednesday, meaning the Environment Agency will begin the testing of 451 bathing water areas across England. The risk to public health from sewage pollution was exposed in Devon, where the UK Health Security Agency said 16 cases of cryptosporidiosis, a diarrhoea-type illness caused by Cryptosporidium , had been confirmed. The waterborne disease can be caused by swallowing contaminated water in rivers and streams. This Saturday thousands will take to coasts and rivers across the UK to protest about the state of the nation’s waterways, in paddle-out events coordinated by Surfers Against Sewage. Protests are taking place at the West Pier in Brighton and at Gyllyngvase beach in Falmouth, as well as on the Great Ouse river in Bedford. A clean river campaigner has warned of a serious risk someone will die from swimming in English rivers and seas because of the level of E coli from water pollution. Charles Watson of River Action, speaking on Wednesday as the bathing water season officially opened, said that with warm weather approaching and half-term in a week, thousands of children and families would be taking to rivers, lakes and seas. Most of these sites are not monitored for E coli , as they are not designated bathing sites. ‘You wouldn’t put your dog in this river’: Boat Race exposes Thames Water failings Read more ‘You wouldn’t put your dog in this river’: Boat Race exposes Thames Water failings Read more ‘You wouldn’t put your dog in this river’: Boat Race exposes Thames Water failings Read more ‘You wouldn’t put your dog in this river’: Boat Race exposes Thames Water failings ‘You wouldn’t put your dog in this river’: Boat Race exposes Thames Water failings Watson’s organisation tested for E coli in the River Thames before the Oxford and Cambridge boat race last month, and found E coli levels that were off the scale in terms of public health. Dr Rob Collins, of the Rivers Trust, said there was no monitoring of the pathogens in rivers, including Cryptosporidium which spreads waterborne disease. “I am not exaggerating when I say someone is going to die,” Watson told MPs on the environmental audit committee (EAC). “There is no guidance being produced by the Environment Agency regarding public health. Thousands of children and families will be taking to rivers and lakes at half-term none of which have bathing status. No one is monitoring this.” Do not enter the water: how dirty Boat Race has captured world’s attention Read more Do not enter the water: how dirty Boat Race has captured world’s attention Read more Do not enter the water: how dirty Boat Race has captured world’s attention Read more Do not enter the water: how dirty Boat Race has captured world’s attention Do not enter the water: how dirty Boat Race has captured world’s attention Watson said the Department for Environment’s designation of 12 new river bathing water sites this week – where the water will be tested from May to September – was welcome, but the water quality in the rivers was poor. Just 16% of rivers in England pass tests for good biological status, and none pass tests for chemical pollution. The warning came as the Labour MP Clive Lewis called for the water industry in England to be brought into public ownership. In an early day motion laid before parliament, Lewis said the industry had proved it was not capable of building the infrastructure required to deal with the impact of climate breakdown, including increased flooding and droughts. Lewis and other MPs challenged water industry representatives and the regulator Ofwat on Wednesday as the EAC sought answers on what progress had been made to tackle sewage pollution in rivers and seas. Lewis said: “Water companies in England have incurred debts of £64bn and paid out £78bn in dividends since they were privatised, debt-free, in 1989 … Water companies paid out £1.4bn in dividends in 2022 even as 11 of them were fined in the same year for missing performance targets.” Climate change threats, which are making flooding and drought more severe, required a change to the way the industry was managed to build in resilience, Lewis said. MPs are putting pressure on the industry as the regulator Ofwat prepares to announce whether it will allow Thames Water, which has total debts of £18bn, to hike customer fees by more than 40% and avoid high fines for pollution, in order to get the equity funding it needs to continue operating. Ofwat is due to give its first public view on private water firms’ business plans in June. The government has assembled a team, under the banner of Project Timber , to draw up contingency plans to rescue Thames Water if needed, which could include the bulk of its debt being added to the public purse. But Lewis said a government bailout would send a dangerous signal to other utilities that reckless decisions carry no private risk. He urged Ofwat to reject Thames Water’s request to increase bills, face lower pollution fines and continue to pay dividends. Collins told MPs that rivers were in a dire state. “We are flatlining,” he said. A target of the majority of rivers reaching a good status by 2027 under the the water framework directive would not be met, he said. “We are going to limp along to 21% having good status in England by then.” An inquiry by the EAC in 2022 into sewage pollution found that rivers were being subjected to a chemical cocktail of sewage, agricultural waste and plastic pollution which was suffocating biodiversity and putting public health at risk. But discharges of raw sewage and pollution into waterways from treated sewage have continued and last year water companies discharged raw sewage into rivers and coastal waters for a record 3.6m hours, an increase of 105% on the previous 12 months. The scale of the discharges of untreated waste made 2023 the worst year for storm water pollution. The data showed that failure to maintain assets and a lack of capacity at treatment plants were the main reasons for the scale of raw sewage flowing from high discharging overflows. Guardian analysis showed that more than 2,000 overflows owned by a number of companies discharged raw sewage into rivers and seas at a scale that should spark an immediate investigation into illegal breaches of permit conditions. Figures obtained by the BBC on Wednesday revealed United Utilities dumped millions of litres of raw sewage into Windermere in the Lake District in February after a fault took 10 hours to fix. The bathing water season began on Wednesday, meaning the Environment Agency will begin the testing of 451 bathing water areas across England. The risk to public health from sewage pollution was exposed in Devon, where the UK Health Security Agency said 16 cases of cryptosporidiosis, a diarrhoea-type illness caused by Cryptosporidium , had been confirmed. The waterborne disease can be caused by swallowing contaminated water in rivers and streams. This Saturday thousands will take to coasts and rivers across the UK to protest about the state of the nation’s waterways, in paddle-out events coordinated by Surfers Against Sewage. Protests are taking place at the West Pier in Brighton and at Gyllyngvase beach in Falmouth, as well as on the Great Ouse river in Bedford. Explore more on these topics Water Clive Lewis Labour Privatisation Pollution news Share Reuse this content Water Clive Lewis Labour Privatisation Pollution news |
Don’t despair about the climate. Be part of the social tipping point
‘I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair.’ Cars charging at Wetherby Services, North Yorkshire. Photograph: Phil Wilkinson/Alamy View image in fullscreen ‘I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair.’ Cars charging at Wetherby Services, North Yorkshire. Photograph: Phil Wilkinson/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old Letters Don’t despair about the climate. Be part of the social tipping point This article is more than 1 year old A Guardian survey of leading climate scientists revealed their despair about the future. John Coghlan , Rachael Orr , Natalie Bennett, Dr Robin Russell-Jones and Gregory Johnson find reasons to keep on fighting I must commend the Guardian and Damian Carrington for the excellent reporting on the views of leading climate scientists ( ‘Hopeless and broken’ Why the world’s top climate scientists are in despair, 8 May ). I have experienced climate despair, which has led me to take part in non-violent protests, and I can certainly bear witness to the fact that this kind of collective action goes a long way to offset the despair. However, protest is not for everyone. There are other ways to play our part. We can help to accelerate the energy transition. Some 51% of final energy consumption is for heating and cooling, and 32% is for transport, according to the International Energy Agency , so we must ditch the old boiler and invest in a heat pump, and swap our petrol car for an electric model. By fitting solar panels, we can also generate renewable energy to power both transport and heating. Having done these things myself, I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair. If we support the drive to achieve net zero, we should also join the dots and realise that this means we each have to live net zero lives. Collective acceptance of this may be one of the “social tipping points” that would accelerate the solution. We need to make it socially unacceptable to drive combustion cars and heat our homes with fossil fuels. The Guardian is one of a few major newspapers worldwide that is prepared to give the climate crisis the prominence it deserves. Maybe it can be one of the first to help bring about this social tipping point. John Coghlan Bradford-on-Avon, Wiltshire Your article ( World’s top climate scientists expect global heating to blast past 1.5C target, 8 May ) and editorial in the same edition ( The Guardian view on the climate emergency: we cannot afford to despair, 8 May ) highlight the strong emotions felt by the climate science community about where we are in terms of tackling climate change. The words – hopeless, infuriated, scared – stand in contrast to the usual dispassionate language of climate science. Your editorial cautions against despair because it is counterproductive. And yet conversations about climate action continue to be coloured by depictions of a dystopian future. Over the past few months, Climate Outreach and More in Common talked to more than 5,000 people across Britain. We’re hearing something a bit different from ordinary people: that government action and investment in tackling climate change makes many people feel positive. The majority want to press ahead with net zero, believing it will be good for the UK. They have hope. Climate action happens when people feel a sense of agency – when we believe that we can do something, and that what we do matters. This is the conclusion of a vast amount of social science research – and our own work at Climate Outreach. If we’re to avoid the version of the future that experts fear, we urgently need a new climate conversation. Rachael Orr CEO , Climate Outreach Your editorial is absolutely right that social and political tipping points on climate action are on the horizon, which is why scientists – while their warnings must be urgently heeded, together with the information that every 0.1 degree is important – are not best placed to prophesy our climate fate. A business-as-usual society with added technology will not do. Solar panels, electric buses and a circular economy are essential for a livable planet, but without social innovation they will only deliver us to a cleaner disaster. Ending financialisation of public services and the crisis of “too much finance”, cutting working hours (with a four-day week without loss of pay for starters) and introducing a universal basic income – to free up human time, energy and talents to be directed well – are the kind of foundational changes that can and must be part of climate action. Scientists are not the experts here. Grassroots political activists, campaigners, independent thinkers, indigenous traditions and the people collectively, through participatory democracy, can see and deliver the path to human societies living within the physical limits of this fragile planet while caring for climate and nature. Natalie Bennett Green party, House of Lords ; author of Change Everything: How We Can Rethink, Repair and Rebuild Society It doesn’t require a survey to know that the global mean temperature rise will breach 1.5C before 2030. In 2023, Jim Hansen demonstrated that the rate of warming, 0.18C per decade since the early 70s, has increased to 0.27C per decade since 2010. The reasons for the acceleration in warming are not entirely clear, but two important possibilities are the rapid rise in atmospheric methane since 2008, and the loss of aerosol cooling from legislation limiting the sulphur content of fuels used for shipping. The IPCC are therefore deluded if they are claiming that the 1.5C limit is still achievable. Dr Robin Russell-Jones Founder, Help Rescue the Planet Thank you for your explainer article “ What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? ” ( What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? The expert view, the guardian.com, 9 May ). The experts you interviewed are quite right in saying that the most powerful action is to vote, but one is quite wrong in saying that “individual action can only amount to a drop in the bucket”. Telling people that they’re just a drop in a bucket is not going to motivate them to act. In New York state back in the 70s, Consolidated Edison asked consumers to save electricity because of the fuel crisis. In response, it was said that individual consumers saved so much electricity that the utility applied for a rate hike. No one set out to destroy the environment. Survival once meant grabbing everything we could get and doing everything the cheap and easy way. Now we can and must act differently. Voting is fine, but all of us drops in this bucket must also change our consumption habits. Billions of individual decisions put us in this hole; billions of individual decisions will get us out. Gregory Johnson Bergesserin, Bourgogne, France Explore more on these topics Climate crisis Protest Heat pumps Electric, hybrid and low-emission cars Mental health Fossil fuels Ethical and green living letters Share Reuse this content ‘I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair.’ Cars charging at Wetherby Services, North Yorkshire. Photograph: Phil Wilkinson/Alamy View image in fullscreen ‘I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair.’ Cars charging at Wetherby Services, North Yorkshire. Photograph: Phil Wilkinson/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old Letters Don’t despair about the climate. Be part of the social tipping point This article is more than 1 year old A Guardian survey of leading climate scientists revealed their despair about the future. John Coghlan , Rachael Orr , Natalie Bennett, Dr Robin Russell-Jones and Gregory Johnson find reasons to keep on fighting I must commend the Guardian and Damian Carrington for the excellent reporting on the views of leading climate scientists ( ‘Hopeless and broken’ Why the world’s top climate scientists are in despair, 8 May ). I have experienced climate despair, which has led me to take part in non-violent protests, and I can certainly bear witness to the fact that this kind of collective action goes a long way to offset the despair. However, protest is not for everyone. There are other ways to play our part. We can help to accelerate the energy transition. Some 51% of final energy consumption is for heating and cooling, and 32% is for transport, according to the International Energy Agency , so we must ditch the old boiler and invest in a heat pump, and swap our petrol car for an electric model. By fitting solar panels, we can also generate renewable energy to power both transport and heating. Having done these things myself, I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair. If we support the drive to achieve net zero, we should also join the dots and realise that this means we each have to live net zero lives. Collective acceptance of this may be one of the “social tipping points” that would accelerate the solution. We need to make it socially unacceptable to drive combustion cars and heat our homes with fossil fuels. The Guardian is one of a few major newspapers worldwide that is prepared to give the climate crisis the prominence it deserves. Maybe it can be one of the first to help bring about this social tipping point. John Coghlan Bradford-on-Avon, Wiltshire Your article ( World’s top climate scientists expect global heating to blast past 1.5C target, 8 May ) and editorial in the same edition ( The Guardian view on the climate emergency: we cannot afford to despair, 8 May ) highlight the strong emotions felt by the climate science community about where we are in terms of tackling climate change. The words – hopeless, infuriated, scared – stand in contrast to the usual dispassionate language of climate science. Your editorial cautions against despair because it is counterproductive. And yet conversations about climate action continue to be coloured by depictions of a dystopian future. Over the past few months, Climate Outreach and More in Common talked to more than 5,000 people across Britain. We’re hearing something a bit different from ordinary people: that government action and investment in tackling climate change makes many people feel positive. The majority want to press ahead with net zero, believing it will be good for the UK. They have hope. Climate action happens when people feel a sense of agency – when we believe that we can do something, and that what we do matters. This is the conclusion of a vast amount of social science research – and our own work at Climate Outreach. If we’re to avoid the version of the future that experts fear, we urgently need a new climate conversation. Rachael Orr CEO , Climate Outreach Your editorial is absolutely right that social and political tipping points on climate action are on the horizon, which is why scientists – while their warnings must be urgently heeded, together with the information that every 0.1 degree is important – are not best placed to prophesy our climate fate. A business-as-usual society with added technology will not do. Solar panels, electric buses and a circular economy are essential for a livable planet, but without social innovation they will only deliver us to a cleaner disaster. Ending financialisation of public services and the crisis of “too much finance”, cutting working hours (with a four-day week without loss of pay for starters) and introducing a universal basic income – to free up human time, energy and talents to be directed well – are the kind of foundational changes that can and must be part of climate action. Scientists are not the experts here. Grassroots political activists, campaigners, independent thinkers, indigenous traditions and the people collectively, through participatory democracy, can see and deliver the path to human societies living within the physical limits of this fragile planet while caring for climate and nature. Natalie Bennett Green party, House of Lords ; author of Change Everything: How We Can Rethink, Repair and Rebuild Society It doesn’t require a survey to know that the global mean temperature rise will breach 1.5C before 2030. In 2023, Jim Hansen demonstrated that the rate of warming, 0.18C per decade since the early 70s, has increased to 0.27C per decade since 2010. The reasons for the acceleration in warming are not entirely clear, but two important possibilities are the rapid rise in atmospheric methane since 2008, and the loss of aerosol cooling from legislation limiting the sulphur content of fuels used for shipping. The IPCC are therefore deluded if they are claiming that the 1.5C limit is still achievable. Dr Robin Russell-Jones Founder, Help Rescue the Planet Thank you for your explainer article “ What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? ” ( What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? The expert view, the guardian.com, 9 May ). The experts you interviewed are quite right in saying that the most powerful action is to vote, but one is quite wrong in saying that “individual action can only amount to a drop in the bucket”. Telling people that they’re just a drop in a bucket is not going to motivate them to act. In New York state back in the 70s, Consolidated Edison asked consumers to save electricity because of the fuel crisis. In response, it was said that individual consumers saved so much electricity that the utility applied for a rate hike. No one set out to destroy the environment. Survival once meant grabbing everything we could get and doing everything the cheap and easy way. Now we can and must act differently. Voting is fine, but all of us drops in this bucket must also change our consumption habits. Billions of individual decisions put us in this hole; billions of individual decisions will get us out. Gregory Johnson Bergesserin, Bourgogne, France Explore more on these topics Climate crisis Protest Heat pumps Electric, hybrid and low-emission cars Mental health Fossil fuels Ethical and green living letters Share Reuse this content ‘I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair.’ Cars charging at Wetherby Services, North Yorkshire. Photograph: Phil Wilkinson/Alamy View image in fullscreen ‘I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair.’ Cars charging at Wetherby Services, North Yorkshire. Photograph: Phil Wilkinson/Alamy ‘I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair.’ Cars charging at Wetherby Services, North Yorkshire. Photograph: Phil Wilkinson/Alamy View image in fullscreen ‘I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair.’ Cars charging at Wetherby Services, North Yorkshire. Photograph: Phil Wilkinson/Alamy ‘I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair.’ Cars charging at Wetherby Services, North Yorkshire. Photograph: Phil Wilkinson/Alamy View image in fullscreen ‘I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair.’ Cars charging at Wetherby Services, North Yorkshire. Photograph: Phil Wilkinson/Alamy ‘I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair.’ Cars charging at Wetherby Services, North Yorkshire. Photograph: Phil Wilkinson/Alamy View image in fullscreen ‘I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair.’ Cars charging at Wetherby Services, North Yorkshire. Photograph: Phil Wilkinson/Alamy ‘I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair.’ Cars charging at Wetherby Services, North Yorkshire. Photograph: Phil Wilkinson/Alamy ‘I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair.’ Cars charging at Wetherby Services, North Yorkshire. Photograph: Phil Wilkinson/Alamy This article is more than 1 year old Letters Don’t despair about the climate. Be part of the social tipping point This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Letters Don’t despair about the climate. Be part of the social tipping point This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Letters Don’t despair about the climate. Be part of the social tipping point This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Letters Don’t despair about the climate. Be part of the social tipping point This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old A Guardian survey of leading climate scientists revealed their despair about the future. John Coghlan , Rachael Orr , Natalie Bennett, Dr Robin Russell-Jones and Gregory Johnson find reasons to keep on fighting A Guardian survey of leading climate scientists revealed their despair about the future. John Coghlan , Rachael Orr , Natalie Bennett, Dr Robin Russell-Jones and Gregory Johnson find reasons to keep on fighting A Guardian survey of leading climate scientists revealed their despair about the future. John Coghlan , Rachael Orr , Natalie Bennett, Dr Robin Russell-Jones and Gregory Johnson find reasons to keep on fighting I must commend the Guardian and Damian Carrington for the excellent reporting on the views of leading climate scientists ( ‘Hopeless and broken’ Why the world’s top climate scientists are in despair, 8 May ). I have experienced climate despair, which has led me to take part in non-violent protests, and I can certainly bear witness to the fact that this kind of collective action goes a long way to offset the despair. However, protest is not for everyone. There are other ways to play our part. We can help to accelerate the energy transition. Some 51% of final energy consumption is for heating and cooling, and 32% is for transport, according to the International Energy Agency , so we must ditch the old boiler and invest in a heat pump, and swap our petrol car for an electric model. By fitting solar panels, we can also generate renewable energy to power both transport and heating. Having done these things myself, I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair. If we support the drive to achieve net zero, we should also join the dots and realise that this means we each have to live net zero lives. Collective acceptance of this may be one of the “social tipping points” that would accelerate the solution. We need to make it socially unacceptable to drive combustion cars and heat our homes with fossil fuels. The Guardian is one of a few major newspapers worldwide that is prepared to give the climate crisis the prominence it deserves. Maybe it can be one of the first to help bring about this social tipping point. John Coghlan Bradford-on-Avon, Wiltshire Your article ( World’s top climate scientists expect global heating to blast past 1.5C target, 8 May ) and editorial in the same edition ( The Guardian view on the climate emergency: we cannot afford to despair, 8 May ) highlight the strong emotions felt by the climate science community about where we are in terms of tackling climate change. The words – hopeless, infuriated, scared – stand in contrast to the usual dispassionate language of climate science. Your editorial cautions against despair because it is counterproductive. And yet conversations about climate action continue to be coloured by depictions of a dystopian future. Over the past few months, Climate Outreach and More in Common talked to more than 5,000 people across Britain. We’re hearing something a bit different from ordinary people: that government action and investment in tackling climate change makes many people feel positive. The majority want to press ahead with net zero, believing it will be good for the UK. They have hope. Climate action happens when people feel a sense of agency – when we believe that we can do something, and that what we do matters. This is the conclusion of a vast amount of social science research – and our own work at Climate Outreach. If we’re to avoid the version of the future that experts fear, we urgently need a new climate conversation. Rachael Orr CEO , Climate Outreach Your editorial is absolutely right that social and political tipping points on climate action are on the horizon, which is why scientists – while their warnings must be urgently heeded, together with the information that every 0.1 degree is important – are not best placed to prophesy our climate fate. A business-as-usual society with added technology will not do. Solar panels, electric buses and a circular economy are essential for a livable planet, but without social innovation they will only deliver us to a cleaner disaster. Ending financialisation of public services and the crisis of “too much finance”, cutting working hours (with a four-day week without loss of pay for starters) and introducing a universal basic income – to free up human time, energy and talents to be directed well – are the kind of foundational changes that can and must be part of climate action. Scientists are not the experts here. Grassroots political activists, campaigners, independent thinkers, indigenous traditions and the people collectively, through participatory democracy, can see and deliver the path to human societies living within the physical limits of this fragile planet while caring for climate and nature. Natalie Bennett Green party, House of Lords ; author of Change Everything: How We Can Rethink, Repair and Rebuild Society It doesn’t require a survey to know that the global mean temperature rise will breach 1.5C before 2030. In 2023, Jim Hansen demonstrated that the rate of warming, 0.18C per decade since the early 70s, has increased to 0.27C per decade since 2010. The reasons for the acceleration in warming are not entirely clear, but two important possibilities are the rapid rise in atmospheric methane since 2008, and the loss of aerosol cooling from legislation limiting the sulphur content of fuels used for shipping. The IPCC are therefore deluded if they are claiming that the 1.5C limit is still achievable. Dr Robin Russell-Jones Founder, Help Rescue the Planet Thank you for your explainer article “ What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? ” ( What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? The expert view, the guardian.com, 9 May ). The experts you interviewed are quite right in saying that the most powerful action is to vote, but one is quite wrong in saying that “individual action can only amount to a drop in the bucket”. Telling people that they’re just a drop in a bucket is not going to motivate them to act. In New York state back in the 70s, Consolidated Edison asked consumers to save electricity because of the fuel crisis. In response, it was said that individual consumers saved so much electricity that the utility applied for a rate hike. No one set out to destroy the environment. Survival once meant grabbing everything we could get and doing everything the cheap and easy way. Now we can and must act differently. Voting is fine, but all of us drops in this bucket must also change our consumption habits. Billions of individual decisions put us in this hole; billions of individual decisions will get us out. Gregory Johnson Bergesserin, Bourgogne, France Explore more on these topics Climate crisis Protest Heat pumps Electric, hybrid and low-emission cars Mental health Fossil fuels Ethical and green living letters Share Reuse this content I must commend the Guardian and Damian Carrington for the excellent reporting on the views of leading climate scientists ( ‘Hopeless and broken’ Why the world’s top climate scientists are in despair, 8 May ). I have experienced climate despair, which has led me to take part in non-violent protests, and I can certainly bear witness to the fact that this kind of collective action goes a long way to offset the despair. However, protest is not for everyone. There are other ways to play our part. We can help to accelerate the energy transition. Some 51% of final energy consumption is for heating and cooling, and 32% is for transport, according to the International Energy Agency , so we must ditch the old boiler and invest in a heat pump, and swap our petrol car for an electric model. By fitting solar panels, we can also generate renewable energy to power both transport and heating. Having done these things myself, I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair. If we support the drive to achieve net zero, we should also join the dots and realise that this means we each have to live net zero lives. Collective acceptance of this may be one of the “social tipping points” that would accelerate the solution. We need to make it socially unacceptable to drive combustion cars and heat our homes with fossil fuels. The Guardian is one of a few major newspapers worldwide that is prepared to give the climate crisis the prominence it deserves. Maybe it can be one of the first to help bring about this social tipping point. John Coghlan Bradford-on-Avon, Wiltshire Your article ( World’s top climate scientists expect global heating to blast past 1.5C target, 8 May ) and editorial in the same edition ( The Guardian view on the climate emergency: we cannot afford to despair, 8 May ) highlight the strong emotions felt by the climate science community about where we are in terms of tackling climate change. The words – hopeless, infuriated, scared – stand in contrast to the usual dispassionate language of climate science. Your editorial cautions against despair because it is counterproductive. And yet conversations about climate action continue to be coloured by depictions of a dystopian future. Over the past few months, Climate Outreach and More in Common talked to more than 5,000 people across Britain. We’re hearing something a bit different from ordinary people: that government action and investment in tackling climate change makes many people feel positive. The majority want to press ahead with net zero, believing it will be good for the UK. They have hope. Climate action happens when people feel a sense of agency – when we believe that we can do something, and that what we do matters. This is the conclusion of a vast amount of social science research – and our own work at Climate Outreach. If we’re to avoid the version of the future that experts fear, we urgently need a new climate conversation. Rachael Orr CEO , Climate Outreach Your editorial is absolutely right that social and political tipping points on climate action are on the horizon, which is why scientists – while their warnings must be urgently heeded, together with the information that every 0.1 degree is important – are not best placed to prophesy our climate fate. A business-as-usual society with added technology will not do. Solar panels, electric buses and a circular economy are essential for a livable planet, but without social innovation they will only deliver us to a cleaner disaster. Ending financialisation of public services and the crisis of “too much finance”, cutting working hours (with a four-day week without loss of pay for starters) and introducing a universal basic income – to free up human time, energy and talents to be directed well – are the kind of foundational changes that can and must be part of climate action. Scientists are not the experts here. Grassroots political activists, campaigners, independent thinkers, indigenous traditions and the people collectively, through participatory democracy, can see and deliver the path to human societies living within the physical limits of this fragile planet while caring for climate and nature. Natalie Bennett Green party, House of Lords ; author of Change Everything: How We Can Rethink, Repair and Rebuild Society It doesn’t require a survey to know that the global mean temperature rise will breach 1.5C before 2030. In 2023, Jim Hansen demonstrated that the rate of warming, 0.18C per decade since the early 70s, has increased to 0.27C per decade since 2010. The reasons for the acceleration in warming are not entirely clear, but two important possibilities are the rapid rise in atmospheric methane since 2008, and the loss of aerosol cooling from legislation limiting the sulphur content of fuels used for shipping. The IPCC are therefore deluded if they are claiming that the 1.5C limit is still achievable. Dr Robin Russell-Jones Founder, Help Rescue the Planet Thank you for your explainer article “ What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? ” ( What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? The expert view, the guardian.com, 9 May ). The experts you interviewed are quite right in saying that the most powerful action is to vote, but one is quite wrong in saying that “individual action can only amount to a drop in the bucket”. Telling people that they’re just a drop in a bucket is not going to motivate them to act. In New York state back in the 70s, Consolidated Edison asked consumers to save electricity because of the fuel crisis. In response, it was said that individual consumers saved so much electricity that the utility applied for a rate hike. No one set out to destroy the environment. Survival once meant grabbing everything we could get and doing everything the cheap and easy way. Now we can and must act differently. Voting is fine, but all of us drops in this bucket must also change our consumption habits. Billions of individual decisions put us in this hole; billions of individual decisions will get us out. Gregory Johnson Bergesserin, Bourgogne, France Explore more on these topics Climate crisis Protest Heat pumps Electric, hybrid and low-emission cars Mental health Fossil fuels Ethical and green living letters Share Reuse this content I must commend the Guardian and Damian Carrington for the excellent reporting on the views of leading climate scientists ( ‘Hopeless and broken’ Why the world’s top climate scientists are in despair, 8 May ). I have experienced climate despair, which has led me to take part in non-violent protests, and I can certainly bear witness to the fact that this kind of collective action goes a long way to offset the despair. However, protest is not for everyone. There are other ways to play our part. We can help to accelerate the energy transition. Some 51% of final energy consumption is for heating and cooling, and 32% is for transport, according to the International Energy Agency , so we must ditch the old boiler and invest in a heat pump, and swap our petrol car for an electric model. By fitting solar panels, we can also generate renewable energy to power both transport and heating. Having done these things myself, I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair. If we support the drive to achieve net zero, we should also join the dots and realise that this means we each have to live net zero lives. Collective acceptance of this may be one of the “social tipping points” that would accelerate the solution. We need to make it socially unacceptable to drive combustion cars and heat our homes with fossil fuels. The Guardian is one of a few major newspapers worldwide that is prepared to give the climate crisis the prominence it deserves. Maybe it can be one of the first to help bring about this social tipping point. John Coghlan Bradford-on-Avon, Wiltshire Your article ( World’s top climate scientists expect global heating to blast past 1.5C target, 8 May ) and editorial in the same edition ( The Guardian view on the climate emergency: we cannot afford to despair, 8 May ) highlight the strong emotions felt by the climate science community about where we are in terms of tackling climate change. The words – hopeless, infuriated, scared – stand in contrast to the usual dispassionate language of climate science. Your editorial cautions against despair because it is counterproductive. And yet conversations about climate action continue to be coloured by depictions of a dystopian future. Over the past few months, Climate Outreach and More in Common talked to more than 5,000 people across Britain. We’re hearing something a bit different from ordinary people: that government action and investment in tackling climate change makes many people feel positive. The majority want to press ahead with net zero, believing it will be good for the UK. They have hope. Climate action happens when people feel a sense of agency – when we believe that we can do something, and that what we do matters. This is the conclusion of a vast amount of social science research – and our own work at Climate Outreach. If we’re to avoid the version of the future that experts fear, we urgently need a new climate conversation. Rachael Orr CEO , Climate Outreach Your editorial is absolutely right that social and political tipping points on climate action are on the horizon, which is why scientists – while their warnings must be urgently heeded, together with the information that every 0.1 degree is important – are not best placed to prophesy our climate fate. A business-as-usual society with added technology will not do. Solar panels, electric buses and a circular economy are essential for a livable planet, but without social innovation they will only deliver us to a cleaner disaster. Ending financialisation of public services and the crisis of “too much finance”, cutting working hours (with a four-day week without loss of pay for starters) and introducing a universal basic income – to free up human time, energy and talents to be directed well – are the kind of foundational changes that can and must be part of climate action. Scientists are not the experts here. Grassroots political activists, campaigners, independent thinkers, indigenous traditions and the people collectively, through participatory democracy, can see and deliver the path to human societies living within the physical limits of this fragile planet while caring for climate and nature. Natalie Bennett Green party, House of Lords ; author of Change Everything: How We Can Rethink, Repair and Rebuild Society It doesn’t require a survey to know that the global mean temperature rise will breach 1.5C before 2030. In 2023, Jim Hansen demonstrated that the rate of warming, 0.18C per decade since the early 70s, has increased to 0.27C per decade since 2010. The reasons for the acceleration in warming are not entirely clear, but two important possibilities are the rapid rise in atmospheric methane since 2008, and the loss of aerosol cooling from legislation limiting the sulphur content of fuels used for shipping. The IPCC are therefore deluded if they are claiming that the 1.5C limit is still achievable. Dr Robin Russell-Jones Founder, Help Rescue the Planet Thank you for your explainer article “ What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? ” ( What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? The expert view, the guardian.com, 9 May ). The experts you interviewed are quite right in saying that the most powerful action is to vote, but one is quite wrong in saying that “individual action can only amount to a drop in the bucket”. Telling people that they’re just a drop in a bucket is not going to motivate them to act. In New York state back in the 70s, Consolidated Edison asked consumers to save electricity because of the fuel crisis. In response, it was said that individual consumers saved so much electricity that the utility applied for a rate hike. No one set out to destroy the environment. Survival once meant grabbing everything we could get and doing everything the cheap and easy way. Now we can and must act differently. Voting is fine, but all of us drops in this bucket must also change our consumption habits. Billions of individual decisions put us in this hole; billions of individual decisions will get us out. Gregory Johnson Bergesserin, Bourgogne, France Explore more on these topics Climate crisis Protest Heat pumps Electric, hybrid and low-emission cars Mental health Fossil fuels Ethical and green living letters Share Reuse this content I must commend the Guardian and Damian Carrington for the excellent reporting on the views of leading climate scientists ( ‘Hopeless and broken’ Why the world’s top climate scientists are in despair, 8 May ). I have experienced climate despair, which has led me to take part in non-violent protests, and I can certainly bear witness to the fact that this kind of collective action goes a long way to offset the despair. However, protest is not for everyone. There are other ways to play our part. We can help to accelerate the energy transition. Some 51% of final energy consumption is for heating and cooling, and 32% is for transport, according to the International Energy Agency , so we must ditch the old boiler and invest in a heat pump, and swap our petrol car for an electric model. By fitting solar panels, we can also generate renewable energy to power both transport and heating. Having done these things myself, I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair. If we support the drive to achieve net zero, we should also join the dots and realise that this means we each have to live net zero lives. Collective acceptance of this may be one of the “social tipping points” that would accelerate the solution. We need to make it socially unacceptable to drive combustion cars and heat our homes with fossil fuels. The Guardian is one of a few major newspapers worldwide that is prepared to give the climate crisis the prominence it deserves. Maybe it can be one of the first to help bring about this social tipping point. John Coghlan Bradford-on-Avon, Wiltshire Your article ( World’s top climate scientists expect global heating to blast past 1.5C target, 8 May ) and editorial in the same edition ( The Guardian view on the climate emergency: we cannot afford to despair, 8 May ) highlight the strong emotions felt by the climate science community about where we are in terms of tackling climate change. The words – hopeless, infuriated, scared – stand in contrast to the usual dispassionate language of climate science. Your editorial cautions against despair because it is counterproductive. And yet conversations about climate action continue to be coloured by depictions of a dystopian future. Over the past few months, Climate Outreach and More in Common talked to more than 5,000 people across Britain. We’re hearing something a bit different from ordinary people: that government action and investment in tackling climate change makes many people feel positive. The majority want to press ahead with net zero, believing it will be good for the UK. They have hope. Climate action happens when people feel a sense of agency – when we believe that we can do something, and that what we do matters. This is the conclusion of a vast amount of social science research – and our own work at Climate Outreach. If we’re to avoid the version of the future that experts fear, we urgently need a new climate conversation. Rachael Orr CEO , Climate Outreach Your editorial is absolutely right that social and political tipping points on climate action are on the horizon, which is why scientists – while their warnings must be urgently heeded, together with the information that every 0.1 degree is important – are not best placed to prophesy our climate fate. A business-as-usual society with added technology will not do. Solar panels, electric buses and a circular economy are essential for a livable planet, but without social innovation they will only deliver us to a cleaner disaster. Ending financialisation of public services and the crisis of “too much finance”, cutting working hours (with a four-day week without loss of pay for starters) and introducing a universal basic income – to free up human time, energy and talents to be directed well – are the kind of foundational changes that can and must be part of climate action. Scientists are not the experts here. Grassroots political activists, campaigners, independent thinkers, indigenous traditions and the people collectively, through participatory democracy, can see and deliver the path to human societies living within the physical limits of this fragile planet while caring for climate and nature. Natalie Bennett Green party, House of Lords ; author of Change Everything: How We Can Rethink, Repair and Rebuild Society It doesn’t require a survey to know that the global mean temperature rise will breach 1.5C before 2030. In 2023, Jim Hansen demonstrated that the rate of warming, 0.18C per decade since the early 70s, has increased to 0.27C per decade since 2010. The reasons for the acceleration in warming are not entirely clear, but two important possibilities are the rapid rise in atmospheric methane since 2008, and the loss of aerosol cooling from legislation limiting the sulphur content of fuels used for shipping. The IPCC are therefore deluded if they are claiming that the 1.5C limit is still achievable. Dr Robin Russell-Jones Founder, Help Rescue the Planet Thank you for your explainer article “ What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? ” ( What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? The expert view, the guardian.com, 9 May ). The experts you interviewed are quite right in saying that the most powerful action is to vote, but one is quite wrong in saying that “individual action can only amount to a drop in the bucket”. Telling people that they’re just a drop in a bucket is not going to motivate them to act. In New York state back in the 70s, Consolidated Edison asked consumers to save electricity because of the fuel crisis. In response, it was said that individual consumers saved so much electricity that the utility applied for a rate hike. No one set out to destroy the environment. Survival once meant grabbing everything we could get and doing everything the cheap and easy way. Now we can and must act differently. Voting is fine, but all of us drops in this bucket must also change our consumption habits. Billions of individual decisions put us in this hole; billions of individual decisions will get us out. Gregory Johnson Bergesserin, Bourgogne, France I must commend the Guardian and Damian Carrington for the excellent reporting on the views of leading climate scientists ( ‘Hopeless and broken’ Why the world’s top climate scientists are in despair, 8 May ). I have experienced climate despair, which has led me to take part in non-violent protests, and I can certainly bear witness to the fact that this kind of collective action goes a long way to offset the despair. However, protest is not for everyone. There are other ways to play our part. We can help to accelerate the energy transition. Some 51% of final energy consumption is for heating and cooling, and 32% is for transport, according to the International Energy Agency , so we must ditch the old boiler and invest in a heat pump, and swap our petrol car for an electric model. By fitting solar panels, we can also generate renewable energy to power both transport and heating. Having done these things myself, I have found that the lightening of my carbon footprint brings with it a lightening of climate despair. If we support the drive to achieve net zero, we should also join the dots and realise that this means we each have to live net zero lives. Collective acceptance of this may be one of the “social tipping points” that would accelerate the solution. We need to make it socially unacceptable to drive combustion cars and heat our homes with fossil fuels. The Guardian is one of a few major newspapers worldwide that is prepared to give the climate crisis the prominence it deserves. Maybe it can be one of the first to help bring about this social tipping point. John Coghlan Bradford-on-Avon, Wiltshire Your article ( World’s top climate scientists expect global heating to blast past 1.5C target, 8 May ) and editorial in the same edition ( The Guardian view on the climate emergency: we cannot afford to despair, 8 May ) highlight the strong emotions felt by the climate science community about where we are in terms of tackling climate change. The words – hopeless, infuriated, scared – stand in contrast to the usual dispassionate language of climate science. Your editorial cautions against despair because it is counterproductive. And yet conversations about climate action continue to be coloured by depictions of a dystopian future. Over the past few months, Climate Outreach and More in Common talked to more than 5,000 people across Britain. We’re hearing something a bit different from ordinary people: that government action and investment in tackling climate change makes many people feel positive. The majority want to press ahead with net zero, believing it will be good for the UK. They have hope. Climate action happens when people feel a sense of agency – when we believe that we can do something, and that what we do matters. This is the conclusion of a vast amount of social science research – and our own work at Climate Outreach. If we’re to avoid the version of the future that experts fear, we urgently need a new climate conversation. Rachael Orr CEO , Climate Outreach Your editorial is absolutely right that social and political tipping points on climate action are on the horizon, which is why scientists – while their warnings must be urgently heeded, together with the information that every 0.1 degree is important – are not best placed to prophesy our climate fate. A business-as-usual society with added technology will not do. Solar panels, electric buses and a circular economy are essential for a livable planet, but without social innovation they will only deliver us to a cleaner disaster. Ending financialisation of public services and the crisis of “too much finance”, cutting working hours (with a four-day week without loss of pay for starters) and introducing a universal basic income – to free up human time, energy and talents to be directed well – are the kind of foundational changes that can and must be part of climate action. Scientists are not the experts here. Grassroots political activists, campaigners, independent thinkers, indigenous traditions and the people collectively, through participatory democracy, can see and deliver the path to human societies living within the physical limits of this fragile planet while caring for climate and nature. Natalie Bennett Green party, House of Lords ; author of Change Everything: How We Can Rethink, Repair and Rebuild Society It doesn’t require a survey to know that the global mean temperature rise will breach 1.5C before 2030. In 2023, Jim Hansen demonstrated that the rate of warming, 0.18C per decade since the early 70s, has increased to 0.27C per decade since 2010. The reasons for the acceleration in warming are not entirely clear, but two important possibilities are the rapid rise in atmospheric methane since 2008, and the loss of aerosol cooling from legislation limiting the sulphur content of fuels used for shipping. The IPCC are therefore deluded if they are claiming that the 1.5C limit is still achievable. Dr Robin Russell-Jones Founder, Help Rescue the Planet Thank you for your explainer article “ What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? ” ( What are the most powerful climate actions you can take? The expert view, the guardian.com, 9 May ). The experts you interviewed are quite right in saying that the most powerful action is to vote, but one is quite wrong in saying that “individual action can only amount to a drop in the bucket”. Telling people that they’re just a drop in a bucket is not going to motivate them to act. In New York state back in the 70s, Consolidated Edison asked consumers to save electricity because of the fuel crisis. In response, it was said that individual consumers saved so much electricity that the utility applied for a rate hike. No one set out to destroy the environment. Survival once meant grabbing everything we could get and doing everything the cheap and easy way. Now we can and must act differently. Voting is fine, but all of us drops in this bucket must also change our consumption habits. Billions of individual decisions put us in this hole; billions of individual decisions will get us out. Gregory Johnson Bergesserin, Bourgogne, France I must commend the Guardian and Damian Carrington for the excellent reporting on the views
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
Solicitor general to appeal over case of climate activist who held sign on jurors’ rights
Trudi Warner, 68, (third from left) from Walthamstow, east London, and supporters holding up signs outside the Old Bailey in central London last year. Photograph: Emily Pennink/PA View image in fullscreen Trudi Warner, 68, (third from left) from Walthamstow, east London, and supporters holding up signs outside the Old Bailey in central London last year. Photograph: Emily Pennink/PA This article is more than 1 year old Solicitor general to appeal over case of climate activist who held sign on jurors’ rights This article is more than 1 year old Exclusive: Judge accused Robert Courts of ‘mischaracterising evidence’ against Trudi Warner The government’s most senior law officer is to appeal against a decision not to allow a contempt of court action against climate campaigner Trudi Warner for holding a placard on the rights of jurors outside a British court, the Guardian can reveal. Mr Justice Saini ruled at the high court last month there was no basis to take action against Warner, 69, for holding up the sign informing jurors of their right to acquit a defendant based on their conscience. He said the government’s claim that her behaviour fell into the category of criminal contempt was “fanciful”. Saini in his ruling accused the government’s solicitor general of “significantly mischaracterising” the evidence, when his lawyers alleged Warner behaved in an intimidating manner, confronting potential jurors outside the court. His ruling also reiterated that there was a well established principle in law of jury equity; a de facto power to acquit a defendant regardless of directions from the judge. But lawyers for the solicitor general, Robert Courts, have informed Warner’s lawyers they are appealing against the decision. It is another chapter in a year-long legal action against Warner for her lone protest outside the court at the start of a trial of Insulate Britain protesters for a peaceful roadblock. Warner’s sign was in reference to a 1670 landmark case which cemented the independence of juries, known as “Bushel’s case”, in which a jury refused to find defendants guilty despite having repeatedly been instructed to do so by the judge. Warner’s placard read: “Jurors, you have an absolute right to acquit a defendant according to your conscience.” She acted after judge Silas Reid forbade protesters from mentioning climate breakdown as part of their defences. On learning of the further legal action by the government to pursue her for contempt of court – which could carry a two year prison term or a fine – Warner said: “It feels really shocking, to be honest. They clearly want to make an example of me. In a sense I am not surprised, but this is just more public money, and it is shocking.” Warner stood outside inner London crown court last March for 30 minutes holding the placard as members of the public, lawyers and potential jurors filed into court. She held the sign on the first day of a trial for public nuisance of members of the climate campaign group Insulate Britain. The following day she was handcuffed outside the court, and put into the dock before the judge. He referred her action to the attorney general who sought permission at the high court last month to pursue her for contempt of court. A spokesperson for the attorney general said: “The high court’s judgment in this case has raised important questions about protecting jurors from interference, which is why the solicitor general is seeking permission to appeal. Contempt of court is a serious matter and the power to issue proceedings is used sparingly.” Explore more on these topics UK criminal justice UK civil liberties Climate crisis Protest news Share Reuse this content Trudi Warner, 68, (third from left) from Walthamstow, east London, and supporters holding up signs outside the Old Bailey in central London last year. Photograph: Emily Pennink/PA View image in fullscreen Trudi Warner, 68, (third from left) from Walthamstow, east London, and supporters holding up signs outside the Old Bailey in central London last year. Photograph: Emily Pennink/PA This article is more than 1 year old Solicitor general to appeal over case of climate activist who held sign on jurors’ rights This article is more than 1 year old Exclusive: Judge accused Robert Courts of ‘mischaracterising evidence’ against Trudi Warner The government’s most senior law officer is to appeal against a decision not to allow a contempt of court action against climate campaigner Trudi Warner for holding a placard on the rights of jurors outside a British court, the Guardian can reveal. Mr Justice Saini ruled at the high court last month there was no basis to take action against Warner, 69, for holding up the sign informing jurors of their right to acquit a defendant based on their conscience. He said the government’s claim that her behaviour fell into the category of criminal contempt was “fanciful”. Saini in his ruling accused the government’s solicitor general of “significantly mischaracterising” the evidence, when his lawyers alleged Warner behaved in an intimidating manner, confronting potential jurors outside the court. His ruling also reiterated that there was a well established principle in law of jury equity; a de facto power to acquit a defendant regardless of directions from the judge. But lawyers for the solicitor general, Robert Courts, have informed Warner’s lawyers they are appealing against the decision. It is another chapter in a year-long legal action against Warner for her lone protest outside the court at the start of a trial of Insulate Britain protesters for a peaceful roadblock. Warner’s sign was in reference to a 1670 landmark case which cemented the independence of juries, known as “Bushel’s case”, in which a jury refused to find defendants guilty despite having repeatedly been instructed to do so by the judge. Warner’s placard read: “Jurors, you have an absolute right to acquit a defendant according to your conscience.” She acted after judge Silas Reid forbade protesters from mentioning climate breakdown as part of their defences. On learning of the further legal action by the government to pursue her for contempt of court – which could carry a two year prison term or a fine – Warner said: “It feels really shocking, to be honest. They clearly want to make an example of me. In a sense I am not surprised, but this is just more public money, and it is shocking.” Warner stood outside inner London crown court last March for 30 minutes holding the placard as members of the public, lawyers and potential jurors filed into court. She held the sign on the first day of a trial for public nuisance of members of the climate campaign group Insulate Britain. The following day she was handcuffed outside the court, and put into the dock before the judge. He referred her action to the attorney general who sought permission at the high court last month to pursue her for contempt of court. A spokesperson for the attorney general said: “The high court’s judgment in this case has raised important questions about protecting jurors from interference, which is why the solicitor general is seeking permission to appeal. Contempt of court is a serious matter and the power to issue proceedings is used sparingly.” Explore more on these topics UK criminal justice UK civil liberties Climate crisis Protest news Share Reuse this content Trudi Warner, 68, (third from left) from Walthamstow, east London, and supporters holding up signs outside the Old Bailey in central London last year. Photograph: Emily Pennink/PA View image in fullscreen Trudi Warner, 68, (third from left) from Walthamstow, east London, and supporters holding up signs outside the Old Bailey in central London last year. Photograph: Emily Pennink/PA Trudi Warner, 68, (third from left) from Walthamstow, east London, and supporters holding up signs outside the Old Bailey in central London last year. Photograph: Emily Pennink/PA View image in fullscreen Trudi Warner, 68, (third from left) from Walthamstow, east London, and supporters holding up signs outside the Old Bailey in central London last year. Photograph: Emily Pennink/PA Trudi Warner, 68, (third from left) from Walthamstow, east London, and supporters holding up signs outside the Old Bailey in central London last year. Photograph: Emily Pennink/PA View image in fullscreen Trudi Warner, 68, (third from left) from Walthamstow, east London, and supporters holding up signs outside the Old Bailey in central London last year. Photograph: Emily Pennink/PA Trudi Warner, 68, (third from left) from Walthamstow, east London, and supporters holding up signs outside the Old Bailey in central London last year. Photograph: Emily Pennink/PA View image in fullscreen Trudi Warner, 68, (third from left) from Walthamstow, east London, and supporters holding up signs outside the Old Bailey in central London last year. Photograph: Emily Pennink/PA Trudi Warner, 68, (third from left) from Walthamstow, east London, and supporters holding up signs outside the Old Bailey in central London last year. Photograph: Emily Pennink/PA Trudi Warner, 68, (third from left) from Walthamstow, east London, and supporters holding up signs outside the Old Bailey in central London last year. Photograph: Emily Pennink/PA This article is more than 1 year old Solicitor general to appeal over case of climate activist who held sign on jurors’ rights This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Solicitor general to appeal over case of climate activist who held sign on jurors’ rights This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Solicitor general to appeal over case of climate activist who held sign on jurors’ rights This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Exclusive: Judge accused Robert Courts of ‘mischaracterising evidence’ against Trudi Warner Exclusive: Judge accused Robert Courts of ‘mischaracterising evidence’ against Trudi Warner Exclusive: Judge accused Robert Courts of ‘mischaracterising evidence’ against Trudi Warner The government’s most senior law officer is to appeal against a decision not to allow a contempt of court action against climate campaigner Trudi Warner for holding a placard on the rights of jurors outside a British court, the Guardian can reveal. Mr Justice Saini ruled at the high court last month there was no basis to take action against Warner, 69, for holding up the sign informing jurors of their right to acquit a defendant based on their conscience. He said the government’s claim that her behaviour fell into the category of criminal contempt was “fanciful”. Saini in his ruling accused the government’s solicitor general of “significantly mischaracterising” the evidence, when his lawyers alleged Warner behaved in an intimidating manner, confronting potential jurors outside the court. His ruling also reiterated that there was a well established principle in law of jury equity; a de facto power to acquit a defendant regardless of directions from the judge. But lawyers for the solicitor general, Robert Courts, have informed Warner’s lawyers they are appealing against the decision. It is another chapter in a year-long legal action against Warner for her lone protest outside the court at the start of a trial of Insulate Britain protesters for a peaceful roadblock. Warner’s sign was in reference to a 1670 landmark case which cemented the independence of juries, known as “Bushel’s case”, in which a jury refused to find defendants guilty despite having repeatedly been instructed to do so by the judge. Warner’s placard read: “Jurors, you have an absolute right to acquit a defendant according to your conscience.” She acted after judge Silas Reid forbade protesters from mentioning climate breakdown as part of their defences. On learning of the further legal action by the government to pursue her for contempt of court – which could carry a two year prison term or a fine – Warner said: “It feels really shocking, to be honest. They clearly want to make an example of me. In a sense I am not surprised, but this is just more public money, and it is shocking.” Warner stood outside inner London crown court last March for 30 minutes holding the placard as members of the public, lawyers and potential jurors filed into court. She held the sign on the first day of a trial for public nuisance of members of the climate campaign group Insulate Britain. The following day she was handcuffed outside the court, and put into the dock before the judge. He referred her action to the attorney general who sought permission at the high court last month to pursue her for contempt of court. A spokesperson for the attorney general said: “The high court’s judgment in this case has raised important questions about protecting jurors from interference, which is why the solicitor general is seeking permission to appeal. Contempt of court is a serious matter and the power to issue proceedings is used sparingly.” Explore more on these topics UK criminal justice UK civil liberties Climate crisis Protest news Share Reuse this content The government’s most senior law officer is to appeal against a decision not to allow a contempt of court action against climate campaigner Trudi Warner for holding a placard on the rights of jurors outside a British court, the Guardian can reveal. Mr Justice Saini ruled at the high court last month there was no basis to take action against Warner, 69, for holding up the sign informing jurors of their right to acquit a defendant based on their conscience. He said the government’s claim that her behaviour fell into the category of criminal contempt was “fanciful”. Saini in his ruling accused the government’s solicitor general of “significantly mischaracterising” the evidence, when his lawyers alleged Warner behaved in an intimidating manner, confronting potential jurors outside the court. His ruling also reiterated that there was a well established principle in law of jury equity; a de facto power to acquit a defendant regardless of directions from the judge. But lawyers for the solicitor general, Robert Courts, have informed Warner’s lawyers they are appealing against the decision. It is another chapter in a year-long legal action against Warner for her lone protest outside the court at the start of a trial of Insulate Britain protesters for a peaceful roadblock. Warner’s sign was in reference to a 1670 landmark case which cemented the independence of juries, known as “Bushel’s case”, in which a jury refused to find defendants guilty despite having repeatedly been instructed to do so by the judge. Warner’s placard read: “Jurors, you have an absolute right to acquit a defendant according to your conscience.” She acted after judge Silas Reid forbade protesters from mentioning climate breakdown as part of their defences. On learning of the further legal action by the government to pursue her for contempt of court – which could carry a two year prison term or a fine – Warner said: “It feels really shocking, to be honest. They clearly want to make an example of me. In a sense I am not surprised, but this is just more public money, and it is shocking.” Warner stood outside inner London crown court last March for 30 minutes holding the placard as members of the public, lawyers and potential jurors filed into court. She held the sign on the first day of a trial for public nuisance of members of the climate campaign group Insulate Britain. The following day she was handcuffed outside the court, and put into the dock before the judge. He referred her action to the attorney general who sought permission at the high court last month to pursue her for contempt of court. A spokesperson for the attorney general said: “The high court’s judgment in this case has raised important questions about protecting jurors from interference, which is why the solicitor general is seeking permission to appeal. Contempt of court is a serious matter and the power to issue proceedings is used sparingly.” Explore more on these topics UK criminal justice UK civil liberties Climate crisis Protest news Share Reuse this content The government’s most senior law officer is to appeal against a decision not to allow a contempt of court action against climate campaigner Trudi Warner for holding a placard on the rights of jurors outside a British court, the Guardian can reveal. Mr Justice Saini ruled at the high court last month there was no basis to take action against Warner, 69, for holding up the sign informing jurors of their right to acquit a defendant based on their conscience. He said the government’s claim that her behaviour fell into the category of criminal contempt was “fanciful”. Saini in his ruling accused the government’s solicitor general of “significantly mischaracterising” the evidence, when his lawyers alleged Warner behaved in an intimidating manner, confronting potential jurors outside the court. His ruling also reiterated that there was a well established principle in law of jury equity; a de facto power to acquit a defendant regardless of directions from the judge. But lawyers for the solicitor general, Robert Courts, have informed Warner’s lawyers they are appealing against the decision. It is another chapter in a year-long legal action against Warner for her lone protest outside the court at the start of a trial of Insulate Britain protesters for a peaceful roadblock. Warner’s sign was in reference to a 1670 landmark case which cemented the independence of juries, known as “Bushel’s case”, in which a jury refused to find defendants guilty despite having repeatedly been instructed to do so by the judge. Warner’s placard read: “Jurors, you have an absolute right to acquit a defendant according to your conscience.” She acted after judge Silas Reid forbade protesters from mentioning climate breakdown as part of their defences. On learning of the further legal action by the government to pursue her for contempt of court – which could carry a two year prison term or a fine – Warner said: “It feels really shocking, to be honest. They clearly want to make an example of me. In a sense I am not surprised, but this is just more public money, and it is shocking.” Warner stood outside inner London crown court last March for 30 minutes holding the placard as members of the public, lawyers and potential jurors filed into court. She held the sign on the first day of a trial for public nuisance of members of the climate campaign group Insulate Britain. The following day she was handcuffed outside the court, and put into the dock before the judge. He referred her action to the attorney general who sought permission at the high court last month to pursue her for contempt of court. A spokesperson for the attorney general said: “The high court’s judgment in this case has raised important questions about protecting jurors from interference, which is why the solicitor general is seeking permission to appeal. Contempt of court is a serious matter and the power to issue proceedings is used sparingly.” The government’s most senior law officer is to appeal against a decision not to allow a contempt of court action against climate campaigner Trudi Warner for holding a placard on the rights of jurors outside a British court, the Guardian can reveal. Mr Justice Saini ruled at the high court last month there was no basis to take action against Warner, 69, for holding up the sign informing jurors of their right to acquit a defendant based on their conscience. He said the government’s claim that her behaviour fell into the category of criminal contempt was “fanciful”. Saini in his ruling accused the government’s solicitor general of “significantly mischaracterising” the evidence, when his lawyers alleged Warner behaved in an intimidating manner, confronting potential jurors outside the court. His ruling also reiterated that there was a well established principle in law of jury equity; a de facto power to acquit a defendant regardless of directions from the judge. But lawyers for the solicitor general, Robert Courts, have informed Warner’s lawyers they are appealing against the decision. It is another chapter in a year-long legal action against Warner for her lone protest outside the court at the start of a trial of Insulate Britain protesters for a peaceful roadblock. Warner’s sign was in reference to a 1670 landmark case which cemented the independence of juries, known as “Bushel’s case”, in which a jury refused to find defendants guilty despite having repeatedly been instructed to do so by the judge. Warner’s placard read: “Jurors, you have an absolute right to acquit a defendant according to your conscience.” She acted after judge Silas Reid forbade protesters from mentioning climate breakdown as part of their defences. On learning of the further legal action by the government to pursue her for contempt of court – which could carry a two year prison term or a fine – Warner said: “It feels really shocking, to be honest. They clearly want to make an example of me. In a sense I am not surprised, but this is just more public money, and it is shocking.” Warner stood outside inner London crown court last March for 30 minutes holding the placard as members of the public, lawyers and potential jurors filed into court. She held the sign on the first day of a trial for public nuisance of members of the climate campaign group Insulate Britain. The following day she was handcuffed outside the court, and put into the dock before the judge. He referred her action to the attorney general who sought permission at the high court last month to pursue her for contempt of court. A spokesperson for the attorney general said: “The high court’s judgment in this case has raised important questions about protecting jurors from interference, which is why the solicitor general is seeking permission to appeal. Contempt of court is a serious matter and the power to issue proceedings is used sparingly.” The government’s most senior law officer is to appeal against a decision not to allow a contempt of court action against climate campaigner Trudi Warner for holding a placard on the rights of jurors outside a British court, the Guardian can reveal. Mr Justice Saini ruled at the high court last month there was no basis to take action against Warner, 69, for holding up the sign informing jurors of their right to acquit a defendant based on their conscience. He said the government’s claim that her behaviour fell into the category of criminal contempt was “fanciful”. Saini in his ruling accused the government’s solicitor general of “significantly mischaracterising” the evidence, when his lawyers alleged Warner behaved in an intimidating manner, confronting potential jurors outside the court. His ruling also reiterated that there was a well established principle in law of jury equity; a de facto power to acquit a defendant regardless of directions from the judge. But lawyers for the solicitor general, Robert Courts, have informed Warner’s lawyers they are appealing against the decision. It is another chapter in a year-long legal action against Warner for her lone protest outside the court at the start of a trial of Insulate Britain protesters for a peaceful roadblock. Warner’s sign was in reference to a 1670 landmark case which cemented the independence of juries, known as “Bushel’s case”, in which a jury refused to find defendants guilty despite having repeatedly been instructed to do so by the judge. Warner’s placard read: “Jurors, you have an absolute right to acquit a defendant according to your conscience.” She acted after judge Silas Reid forbade protesters from mentioning climate breakdown as part of their defences. On learning of the further legal action by the government to pursue her for contempt of court – which could carry a two year prison term or a fine – Warner said: “It feels really shocking, to be honest. They clearly want to make an example of me. In a sense I am not surprised, but this is just more public money, and it is shocking.” Warner stood outside inner London crown court last March for 30 minutes holding the placard as members of the public, lawyers and potential jurors filed into court. She held the sign on the first day of a trial for public nuisance of members of the climate campaign group Insulate Britain. The following day she was handcuffed outside the court, and put into the dock before the judge. He referred her action to the attorney general who sought permission at the high court last month to pursue her for contempt of court. A spokesperson for the attorney general said: “The high court’s judgment in this case has raised important questions about protecting jurors from interference, which is why the solicitor general is seeking permission to appeal. Contempt of court is a serious matter and the power to issue proceedings is used sparingly.” Explore more on these topics UK criminal justice UK civil liberties Climate crisis Protest news Share Reuse this content UK criminal justice UK civil liberties Climate crisis Protest news |
Starmer takes it step by step in the phoney war that is a general election campaign
Keir Starmer’s first steps: whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Photograph: Leon Neal/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Keir Starmer’s first steps: whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Photograph: Leon Neal/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Starmer takes it step by step in the phoney war that is a general election campaign This article is more than 1 year old John Crace With no date in sight, the waiting game drags on. So Labour spells out the message again, and again C all it the phoney war. The government has long since stopped governing. Politics is now conducted entirely through the prism of a general election campaign. The Tories go through a weekly relaunch in a desperate hunt for credibility. Something that might allow them to at least save some face. Losing has already been factored into everyone’s calculations. But still we don’t have a date as Rishi Sunak hangs on for a miracle. At this rate, by the time the election is announced we’re all going to be thoroughly knackered. On Thursday it was Labour’s turn for a dry run. A no-holds-barred launch of its general election campaign that isn’t, because it hasn’t officially started. If you get my drift. A chance to meet the government-in-waiting which looks more like a government than the one that is in office. It’s an upside down world we live in now. Nothing is quite what it seems. We’re just waiting. Waiting. A state of both imminence and immanence. Creeps in this petty pace from day to day. Till the last syllable of recorded time. The way to dusty death. The difference in ambition between the Tories and Labour could not be more pronounced. Sunak had given his relaunch 7.0 in a tiny room with just a handful of hacks present. He might as well have been in a bunker with his two remaining believers present. It felt unhinged. Whoops Apocalypse! If that is the best Rish! has got he should give up now. At the same time, Esther McVey was upstaging him by declaring war on coloured lanyards . Finger on the pulse, Esther. Finger on the pulse. Labour’s launch at the Backstage Centre in Purfleet was altogether on a bigger scale. Yet somehow far more human. These were people and ideas with whom most could connect. The politics made personal. Though not without its glitches. No one has yet found a way of assembling the entire shadow cabinet and a few assorted guests on a stage without making everyone look as if they were starring in their own hostage video. This was to be more of a greatest hits concert – each performer got a five-minute slot – played out under a banner of “My First Steps for Change” alongside a portrait of Keir Starmer looking every inch the 1980s catalogue model. Check out those slacks. Though whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Any resemblance to 1997 was entirely coincidental. First up was Angela Rayner. “This is Labour’s first steps,” she began. Just in case we had missed this. First Steps, mind. As opposed to the First Missions which Starmer launched more than a year ago, and which most of us could barely remember now. Though the missions had not been entirely forgotten. Just, shall we say, somewhat superseded. An occupational hazard in a Never Ending election campaign. Let’s call it a refocus. Thank you and goodnight, said Angela as she introduced Rachel Reeves to tee up step one . This amounted to a commitment to not crash the economy. It’s a sign of how far we’ve fallen as a country that a promise not to make everyone worse off provokes an outburst of gratitude from voters. Tears of relief that we won’t all become destitute. Stability is no longer boring; it’s a lifestyle aspiration. But that wasn’t all. We still hoped to become the fastest-growing economy in the G7, but let’s just take one thing at a time. Cut to the video screen. A property developer and the Boots CEO declaring their undying love for Rachel. And why not? Even I would look like an economic god compared with Jeremy Hunt. Then it was Wes Streeting’s turn. Normally Wes can work a crowd, but maybe he felt confined by the format. His delivery was strangely detached as he promised to reduce hospital waiting lists. The impressive list of guests continued with Nathaniel, a teacher with a terminal cancer diagnosis who had also done a turn at last year’s Labour party conference. He was the first to get a proper standing ovation. Then Mike Tapp, the Labour party candidate for Dover. He could talk border security. And perhaps reassure everyone there was life after Natalie Elphicke . Then came Ed Miliband. He too spoke with passion. Not to mention a sense of deja vu. Images of the Ed Stone must have been flashing through his mind. If only he had tempted hubris. Then, 2015 was a lifetime ago. Just stick to energy, Ed. Cheaper and greener. Job done. Yvette Cooper and Bridget Phillipson were equally competent as they talked through their first steps. No great flourishes. Just stick to the scripts. This was no place for prima donnas. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Just as it felt as if the tempo was about to flag, the volume got turned up. A video of Keir in various Action Man poses, an introduction from a former Tory voter, and then the man himself. The jacketless, tieless Keir with rolled-up sleeves. Poised to deliver for the country. It wasn’t subtle. There were no big arguments here. Those have been long since fought and won. He has already persuaded more than enough people that the Tories are not fit to govern. This was all about getting the message across. It was like listening to the news on the radio. First tell everyone what you are going to tell them. Then tell them what you want to tell them. Finish by telling them again what you’ve already told them. Because what we got were the First Steps spelled out all over again, twice. Along with the word “change”. Time for a change. A leader with his shadow cabinet literally behind him. Something of which Sunak can only dream. Starmer ended with questions from the media. In the past this has been where he has been at his most awkward. Now he seemed entirely relaxed. Happy with his team, confident in his message. Ready to take questions from anyone. Unlike the Tetchmeister. Was he being ambitious enough? Read his lips. These were just the first steps. What had happened to the more Labour policies like workers’ rights? He was here to park his tanks on the Tories’ lawns. Most of his six first steps were what any government would aspire to. He was here to get elected, not join a protest movement. Wasn’t it all a bit Tony Blair? He should be so lucky. Blair had won three elections on the bounce. Ninety minutes in – an age for any normal political shindig – and people were getting restless. Starmer wrapped things up. Time to head home. The Tories may be falling apart but Labour now had all its ducks in a row. Bring on the election. Bring on the real war. Explore more on these topics Labour The politics sketch Keir Starmer General elections Angela Rayner Rachel Reeves Wes Streeting Ed Miliband comment Share Reuse this content Keir Starmer’s first steps: whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Photograph: Leon Neal/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Keir Starmer’s first steps: whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Photograph: Leon Neal/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Starmer takes it step by step in the phoney war that is a general election campaign This article is more than 1 year old John Crace With no date in sight, the waiting game drags on. So Labour spells out the message again, and again C all it the phoney war. The government has long since stopped governing. Politics is now conducted entirely through the prism of a general election campaign. The Tories go through a weekly relaunch in a desperate hunt for credibility. Something that might allow them to at least save some face. Losing has already been factored into everyone’s calculations. But still we don’t have a date as Rishi Sunak hangs on for a miracle. At this rate, by the time the election is announced we’re all going to be thoroughly knackered. On Thursday it was Labour’s turn for a dry run. A no-holds-barred launch of its general election campaign that isn’t, because it hasn’t officially started. If you get my drift. A chance to meet the government-in-waiting which looks more like a government than the one that is in office. It’s an upside down world we live in now. Nothing is quite what it seems. We’re just waiting. Waiting. A state of both imminence and immanence. Creeps in this petty pace from day to day. Till the last syllable of recorded time. The way to dusty death. The difference in ambition between the Tories and Labour could not be more pronounced. Sunak had given his relaunch 7.0 in a tiny room with just a handful of hacks present. He might as well have been in a bunker with his two remaining believers present. It felt unhinged. Whoops Apocalypse! If that is the best Rish! has got he should give up now. At the same time, Esther McVey was upstaging him by declaring war on coloured lanyards . Finger on the pulse, Esther. Finger on the pulse. Labour’s launch at the Backstage Centre in Purfleet was altogether on a bigger scale. Yet somehow far more human. These were people and ideas with whom most could connect. The politics made personal. Though not without its glitches. No one has yet found a way of assembling the entire shadow cabinet and a few assorted guests on a stage without making everyone look as if they were starring in their own hostage video. This was to be more of a greatest hits concert – each performer got a five-minute slot – played out under a banner of “My First Steps for Change” alongside a portrait of Keir Starmer looking every inch the 1980s catalogue model. Check out those slacks. Though whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Any resemblance to 1997 was entirely coincidental. First up was Angela Rayner. “This is Labour’s first steps,” she began. Just in case we had missed this. First Steps, mind. As opposed to the First Missions which Starmer launched more than a year ago, and which most of us could barely remember now. Though the missions had not been entirely forgotten. Just, shall we say, somewhat superseded. An occupational hazard in a Never Ending election campaign. Let’s call it a refocus. Thank you and goodnight, said Angela as she introduced Rachel Reeves to tee up step one . This amounted to a commitment to not crash the economy. It’s a sign of how far we’ve fallen as a country that a promise not to make everyone worse off provokes an outburst of gratitude from voters. Tears of relief that we won’t all become destitute. Stability is no longer boring; it’s a lifestyle aspiration. But that wasn’t all. We still hoped to become the fastest-growing economy in the G7, but let’s just take one thing at a time. Cut to the video screen. A property developer and the Boots CEO declaring their undying love for Rachel. And why not? Even I would look like an economic god compared with Jeremy Hunt. Then it was Wes Streeting’s turn. Normally Wes can work a crowd, but maybe he felt confined by the format. His delivery was strangely detached as he promised to reduce hospital waiting lists. The impressive list of guests continued with Nathaniel, a teacher with a terminal cancer diagnosis who had also done a turn at last year’s Labour party conference. He was the first to get a proper standing ovation. Then Mike Tapp, the Labour party candidate for Dover. He could talk border security. And perhaps reassure everyone there was life after Natalie Elphicke . Then came Ed Miliband. He too spoke with passion. Not to mention a sense of deja vu. Images of the Ed Stone must have been flashing through his mind. If only he had tempted hubris. Then, 2015 was a lifetime ago. Just stick to energy, Ed. Cheaper and greener. Job done. Yvette Cooper and Bridget Phillipson were equally competent as they talked through their first steps. No great flourishes. Just stick to the scripts. This was no place for prima donnas. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Just as it felt as if the tempo was about to flag, the volume got turned up. A video of Keir in various Action Man poses, an introduction from a former Tory voter, and then the man himself. The jacketless, tieless Keir with rolled-up sleeves. Poised to deliver for the country. It wasn’t subtle. There were no big arguments here. Those have been long since fought and won. He has already persuaded more than enough people that the Tories are not fit to govern. This was all about getting the message across. It was like listening to the news on the radio. First tell everyone what you are going to tell them. Then tell them what you want to tell them. Finish by telling them again what you’ve already told them. Because what we got were the First Steps spelled out all over again, twice. Along with the word “change”. Time for a change. A leader with his shadow cabinet literally behind him. Something of which Sunak can only dream. Starmer ended with questions from the media. In the past this has been where he has been at his most awkward. Now he seemed entirely relaxed. Happy with his team, confident in his message. Ready to take questions from anyone. Unlike the Tetchmeister. Was he being ambitious enough? Read his lips. These were just the first steps. What had happened to the more Labour policies like workers’ rights? He was here to park his tanks on the Tories’ lawns. Most of his six first steps were what any government would aspire to. He was here to get elected, not join a protest movement. Wasn’t it all a bit Tony Blair? He should be so lucky. Blair had won three elections on the bounce. Ninety minutes in – an age for any normal political shindig – and people were getting restless. Starmer wrapped things up. Time to head home. The Tories may be falling apart but Labour now had all its ducks in a row. Bring on the election. Bring on the real war. Explore more on these topics Labour The politics sketch Keir Starmer General elections Angela Rayner Rachel Reeves Wes Streeting Ed Miliband comment Share Reuse this content Keir Starmer’s first steps: whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Photograph: Leon Neal/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Keir Starmer’s first steps: whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Photograph: Leon Neal/Getty Images Keir Starmer’s first steps: whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Photograph: Leon Neal/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Keir Starmer’s first steps: whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Photograph: Leon Neal/Getty Images Keir Starmer’s first steps: whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Photograph: Leon Neal/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Keir Starmer’s first steps: whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Photograph: Leon Neal/Getty Images Keir Starmer’s first steps: whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Photograph: Leon Neal/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Keir Starmer’s first steps: whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Photograph: Leon Neal/Getty Images Keir Starmer’s first steps: whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Photograph: Leon Neal/Getty Images Keir Starmer’s first steps: whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Photograph: Leon Neal/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Starmer takes it step by step in the phoney war that is a general election campaign This article is more than 1 year old John Crace This article is more than 1 year old Starmer takes it step by step in the phoney war that is a general election campaign This article is more than 1 year old John Crace This article is more than 1 year old Starmer takes it step by step in the phoney war that is a general election campaign This article is more than 1 year old John Crace This article is more than 1 year old Starmer takes it step by step in the phoney war that is a general election campaign This article is more than 1 year old John Crace This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old With no date in sight, the waiting game drags on. So Labour spells out the message again, and again With no date in sight, the waiting game drags on. So Labour spells out the message again, and again With no date in sight, the waiting game drags on. So Labour spells out the message again, and again C all it the phoney war. The government has long since stopped governing. Politics is now conducted entirely through the prism of a general election campaign. The Tories go through a weekly relaunch in a desperate hunt for credibility. Something that might allow them to at least save some face. Losing has already been factored into everyone’s calculations. But still we don’t have a date as Rishi Sunak hangs on for a miracle. At this rate, by the time the election is announced we’re all going to be thoroughly knackered. On Thursday it was Labour’s turn for a dry run. A no-holds-barred launch of its general election campaign that isn’t, because it hasn’t officially started. If you get my drift. A chance to meet the government-in-waiting which looks more like a government than the one that is in office. It’s an upside down world we live in now. Nothing is quite what it seems. We’re just waiting. Waiting. A state of both imminence and immanence. Creeps in this petty pace from day to day. Till the last syllable of recorded time. The way to dusty death. The difference in ambition between the Tories and Labour could not be more pronounced. Sunak had given his relaunch 7.0 in a tiny room with just a handful of hacks present. He might as well have been in a bunker with his two remaining believers present. It felt unhinged. Whoops Apocalypse! If that is the best Rish! has got he should give up now. At the same time, Esther McVey was upstaging him by declaring war on coloured lanyards . Finger on the pulse, Esther. Finger on the pulse. Labour’s launch at the Backstage Centre in Purfleet was altogether on a bigger scale. Yet somehow far more human. These were people and ideas with whom most could connect. The politics made personal. Though not without its glitches. No one has yet found a way of assembling the entire shadow cabinet and a few assorted guests on a stage without making everyone look as if they were starring in their own hostage video. This was to be more of a greatest hits concert – each performer got a five-minute slot – played out under a banner of “My First Steps for Change” alongside a portrait of Keir Starmer looking every inch the 1980s catalogue model. Check out those slacks. Though whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Any resemblance to 1997 was entirely coincidental. First up was Angela Rayner. “This is Labour’s first steps,” she began. Just in case we had missed this. First Steps, mind. As opposed to the First Missions which Starmer launched more than a year ago, and which most of us could barely remember now. Though the missions had not been entirely forgotten. Just, shall we say, somewhat superseded. An occupational hazard in a Never Ending election campaign. Let’s call it a refocus. Thank you and goodnight, said Angela as she introduced Rachel Reeves to tee up step one . This amounted to a commitment to not crash the economy. It’s a sign of how far we’ve fallen as a country that a promise not to make everyone worse off provokes an outburst of gratitude from voters. Tears of relief that we won’t all become destitute. Stability is no longer boring; it’s a lifestyle aspiration. But that wasn’t all. We still hoped to become the fastest-growing economy in the G7, but let’s just take one thing at a time. Cut to the video screen. A property developer and the Boots CEO declaring their undying love for Rachel. And why not? Even I would look like an economic god compared with Jeremy Hunt. Then it was Wes Streeting’s turn. Normally Wes can work a crowd, but maybe he felt confined by the format. His delivery was strangely detached as he promised to reduce hospital waiting lists. The impressive list of guests continued with Nathaniel, a teacher with a terminal cancer diagnosis who had also done a turn at last year’s Labour party conference. He was the first to get a proper standing ovation. Then Mike Tapp, the Labour party candidate for Dover. He could talk border security. And perhaps reassure everyone there was life after Natalie Elphicke . Then came Ed Miliband. He too spoke with passion. Not to mention a sense of deja vu. Images of the Ed Stone must have been flashing through his mind. If only he had tempted hubris. Then, 2015 was a lifetime ago. Just stick to energy, Ed. Cheaper and greener. Job done. Yvette Cooper and Bridget Phillipson were equally competent as they talked through their first steps. No great flourishes. Just stick to the scripts. This was no place for prima donnas. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Just as it felt as if the tempo was about to flag, the volume got turned up. A video of Keir in various Action Man poses, an introduction from a former Tory voter, and then the man himself. The jacketless, tieless Keir with rolled-up sleeves. Poised to deliver for the country. It wasn’t subtle. There were no big arguments here. Those have been long since fought and won. He has already persuaded more than enough people that the Tories are not fit to govern. This was all about getting the message across. It was like listening to the news on the radio. First tell everyone what you are going to tell them. Then tell them what you want to tell them. Finish by telling them again what you’ve already told them. Because what we got were the First Steps spelled out all over again, twice. Along with the word “change”. Time for a change. A leader with his shadow cabinet literally behind him. Something of which Sunak can only dream. Starmer ended with questions from the media. In the past this has been where he has been at his most awkward. Now he seemed entirely relaxed. Happy with his team, confident in his message. Ready to take questions from anyone. Unlike the Tetchmeister. Was he being ambitious enough? Read his lips. These were just the first steps. What had happened to the more Labour policies like workers’ rights? He was here to park his tanks on the Tories’ lawns. Most of his six first steps were what any government would aspire to. He was here to get elected, not join a protest movement. Wasn’t it all a bit Tony Blair? He should be so lucky. Blair had won three elections on the bounce. Ninety minutes in – an age for any normal political shindig – and people were getting restless. Starmer wrapped things up. Time to head home. The Tories may be falling apart but Labour now had all its ducks in a row. Bring on the election. Bring on the real war. Explore more on these topics Labour The politics sketch Keir Starmer General elections Angela Rayner Rachel Reeves Wes Streeting Ed Miliband comment Share Reuse this content C all it the phoney war. The government has long since stopped governing. Politics is now conducted entirely through the prism of a general election campaign. The Tories go through a weekly relaunch in a desperate hunt for credibility. Something that might allow them to at least save some face. Losing has already been factored into everyone’s calculations. But still we don’t have a date as Rishi Sunak hangs on for a miracle. At this rate, by the time the election is announced we’re all going to be thoroughly knackered. On Thursday it was Labour’s turn for a dry run. A no-holds-barred launch of its general election campaign that isn’t, because it hasn’t officially started. If you get my drift. A chance to meet the government-in-waiting which looks more like a government than the one that is in office. It’s an upside down world we live in now. Nothing is quite what it seems. We’re just waiting. Waiting. A state of both imminence and immanence. Creeps in this petty pace from day to day. Till the last syllable of recorded time. The way to dusty death. The difference in ambition between the Tories and Labour could not be more pronounced. Sunak had given his relaunch 7.0 in a tiny room with just a handful of hacks present. He might as well have been in a bunker with his two remaining believers present. It felt unhinged. Whoops Apocalypse! If that is the best Rish! has got he should give up now. At the same time, Esther McVey was upstaging him by declaring war on coloured lanyards . Finger on the pulse, Esther. Finger on the pulse. Labour’s launch at the Backstage Centre in Purfleet was altogether on a bigger scale. Yet somehow far more human. These were people and ideas with whom most could connect. The politics made personal. Though not without its glitches. No one has yet found a way of assembling the entire shadow cabinet and a few assorted guests on a stage without making everyone look as if they were starring in their own hostage video. This was to be more of a greatest hits concert – each performer got a five-minute slot – played out under a banner of “My First Steps for Change” alongside a portrait of Keir Starmer looking every inch the 1980s catalogue model. Check out those slacks. Though whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Any resemblance to 1997 was entirely coincidental. First up was Angela Rayner. “This is Labour’s first steps,” she began. Just in case we had missed this. First Steps, mind. As opposed to the First Missions which Starmer launched more than a year ago, and which most of us could barely remember now. Though the missions had not been entirely forgotten. Just, shall we say, somewhat superseded. An occupational hazard in a Never Ending election campaign. Let’s call it a refocus. Thank you and goodnight, said Angela as she introduced Rachel Reeves to tee up step one . This amounted to a commitment to not crash the economy. It’s a sign of how far we’ve fallen as a country that a promise not to make everyone worse off provokes an outburst of gratitude from voters. Tears of relief that we won’t all become destitute. Stability is no longer boring; it’s a lifestyle aspiration. But that wasn’t all. We still hoped to become the fastest-growing economy in the G7, but let’s just take one thing at a time. Cut to the video screen. A property developer and the Boots CEO declaring their undying love for Rachel. And why not? Even I would look like an economic god compared with Jeremy Hunt. Then it was Wes Streeting’s turn. Normally Wes can work a crowd, but maybe he felt confined by the format. His delivery was strangely detached as he promised to reduce hospital waiting lists. The impressive list of guests continued with Nathaniel, a teacher with a terminal cancer diagnosis who had also done a turn at last year’s Labour party conference. He was the first to get a proper standing ovation. Then Mike Tapp, the Labour party candidate for Dover. He could talk border security. And perhaps reassure everyone there was life after Natalie Elphicke . Then came Ed Miliband. He too spoke with passion. Not to mention a sense of deja vu. Images of the Ed Stone must have been flashing through his mind. If only he had tempted hubris. Then, 2015 was a lifetime ago. Just stick to energy, Ed. Cheaper and greener. Job done. Yvette Cooper and Bridget Phillipson were equally competent as they talked through their first steps. No great flourishes. Just stick to the scripts. This was no place for prima donnas. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Just as it felt as if the tempo was about to flag, the volume got turned up. A video of Keir in various Action Man poses, an introduction from a former Tory voter, and then the man himself. The jacketless, tieless Keir with rolled-up sleeves. Poised to deliver for the country. It wasn’t subtle. There were no big arguments here. Those have been long since fought and won. He has already persuaded more than enough people that the Tories are not fit to govern. This was all about getting the message across. It was like listening to the news on the radio. First tell everyone what you are going to tell them. Then tell them what you want to tell them. Finish by telling them again what you’ve already told them. Because what we got were the First Steps spelled out all over again, twice. Along with the word “change”. Time for a change. A leader with his shadow cabinet literally behind him. Something of which Sunak can only dream. Starmer ended with questions from the media. In the past this has been where he has been at his most awkward. Now he seemed entirely relaxed. Happy with his team, confident in his message. Ready to take questions from anyone. Unlike the Tetchmeister. Was he being ambitious enough? Read his lips. These were just the first steps. What had happened to the more Labour policies like workers’ rights? He was here to park his tanks on the Tories’ lawns. Most of his six first steps were what any government would aspire to. He was here to get elected, not join a protest movement. Wasn’t it all a bit Tony Blair? He should be so lucky. Blair had won three elections on the bounce. Ninety minutes in – an age for any normal political shindig – and people were getting restless. Starmer wrapped things up. Time to head home. The Tories may be falling apart but Labour now had all its ducks in a row. Bring on the election. Bring on the real war. Explore more on these topics Labour The politics sketch Keir Starmer General elections Angela Rayner Rachel Reeves Wes Streeting Ed Miliband comment Share Reuse this content C all it the phoney war. The government has long since stopped governing. Politics is now conducted entirely through the prism of a general election campaign. The Tories go through a weekly relaunch in a desperate hunt for credibility. Something that might allow them to at least save some face. Losing has already been factored into everyone’s calculations. But still we don’t have a date as Rishi Sunak hangs on for a miracle. At this rate, by the time the election is announced we’re all going to be thoroughly knackered. On Thursday it was Labour’s turn for a dry run. A no-holds-barred launch of its general election campaign that isn’t, because it hasn’t officially started. If you get my drift. A chance to meet the government-in-waiting which looks more like a government than the one that is in office. It’s an upside down world we live in now. Nothing is quite what it seems. We’re just waiting. Waiting. A state of both imminence and immanence. Creeps in this petty pace from day to day. Till the last syllable of recorded time. The way to dusty death. The difference in ambition between the Tories and Labour could not be more pronounced. Sunak had given his relaunch 7.0 in a tiny room with just a handful of hacks present. He might as well have been in a bunker with his two remaining believers present. It felt unhinged. Whoops Apocalypse! If that is the best Rish! has got he should give up now. At the same time, Esther McVey was upstaging him by declaring war on coloured lanyards . Finger on the pulse, Esther. Finger on the pulse. Labour’s launch at the Backstage Centre in Purfleet was altogether on a bigger scale. Yet somehow far more human. These were people and ideas with whom most could connect. The politics made personal. Though not without its glitches. No one has yet found a way of assembling the entire shadow cabinet and a few assorted guests on a stage without making everyone look as if they were starring in their own hostage video. This was to be more of a greatest hits concert – each performer got a five-minute slot – played out under a banner of “My First Steps for Change” alongside a portrait of Keir Starmer looking every inch the 1980s catalogue model. Check out those slacks. Though whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Any resemblance to 1997 was entirely coincidental. First up was Angela Rayner. “This is Labour’s first steps,” she began. Just in case we had missed this. First Steps, mind. As opposed to the First Missions which Starmer launched more than a year ago, and which most of us could barely remember now. Though the missions had not been entirely forgotten. Just, shall we say, somewhat superseded. An occupational hazard in a Never Ending election campaign. Let’s call it a refocus. Thank you and goodnight, said Angela as she introduced Rachel Reeves to tee up step one . This amounted to a commitment to not crash the economy. It’s a sign of how far we’ve fallen as a country that a promise not to make everyone worse off provokes an outburst of gratitude from voters. Tears of relief that we won’t all become destitute. Stability is no longer boring; it’s a lifestyle aspiration. But that wasn’t all. We still hoped to become the fastest-growing economy in the G7, but let’s just take one thing at a time. Cut to the video screen. A property developer and the Boots CEO declaring their undying love for Rachel. And why not? Even I would look like an economic god compared with Jeremy Hunt. Then it was Wes Streeting’s turn. Normally Wes can work a crowd, but maybe he felt confined by the format. His delivery was strangely detached as he promised to reduce hospital waiting lists. The impressive list of guests continued with Nathaniel, a teacher with a terminal cancer diagnosis who had also done a turn at last year’s Labour party conference. He was the first to get a proper standing ovation. Then Mike Tapp, the Labour party candidate for Dover. He could talk border security. And perhaps reassure everyone there was life after Natalie Elphicke . Then came Ed Miliband. He too spoke with passion. Not to mention a sense of deja vu. Images of the Ed Stone must have been flashing through his mind. If only he had tempted hubris. Then, 2015 was a lifetime ago. Just stick to energy, Ed. Cheaper and greener. Job done. Yvette Cooper and Bridget Phillipson were equally competent as they talked through their first steps. No great flourishes. Just stick to the scripts. This was no place for prima donnas. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Just as it felt as if the tempo was about to flag, the volume got turned up. A video of Keir in various Action Man poses, an introduction from a former Tory voter, and then the man himself. The jacketless, tieless Keir with rolled-up sleeves. Poised to deliver for the country. It wasn’t subtle. There were no big arguments here. Those have been long since fought and won. He has already persuaded more than enough people that the Tories are not fit to govern. This was all about getting the message across. It was like listening to the news on the radio. First tell everyone what you are going to tell them. Then tell them what you want to tell them. Finish by telling them again what you’ve already told them. Because what we got were the First Steps spelled out all over again, twice. Along with the word “change”. Time for a change. A leader with his shadow cabinet literally behind him. Something of which Sunak can only dream. Starmer ended with questions from the media. In the past this has been where he has been at his most awkward. Now he seemed entirely relaxed. Happy with his team, confident in his message. Ready to take questions from anyone. Unlike the Tetchmeister. Was he being ambitious enough? Read his lips. These were just the first steps. What had happened to the more Labour policies like workers’ rights? He was here to park his tanks on the Tories’ lawns. Most of his six first steps were what any government would aspire to. He was here to get elected, not join a protest movement. Wasn’t it all a bit Tony Blair? He should be so lucky. Blair had won three elections on the bounce. Ninety minutes in – an age for any normal political shindig – and people were getting restless. Starmer wrapped things up. Time to head home. The Tories may be falling apart but Labour now had all its ducks in a row. Bring on the election. Bring on the real war. Explore more on these topics Labour The politics sketch Keir Starmer General elections Angela Rayner Rachel Reeves Wes Streeting Ed Miliband comment Share Reuse this content C all it the phoney war. The government has long since stopped governing. Politics is now conducted entirely through the prism of a general election campaign. The Tories go through a weekly relaunch in a desperate hunt for credibility. Something that might allow them to at least save some face. Losing has already been factored into everyone’s calculations. But still we don’t have a date as Rishi Sunak hangs on for a miracle. At this rate, by the time the election is announced we’re all going to be thoroughly knackered. On Thursday it was Labour’s turn for a dry run. A no-holds-barred launch of its general election campaign that isn’t, because it hasn’t officially started. If you get my drift. A chance to meet the government-in-waiting which looks more like a government than the one that is in office. It’s an upside down world we live in now. Nothing is quite what it seems. We’re just waiting. Waiting. A state of both imminence and immanence. Creeps in this petty pace from day to day. Till the last syllable of recorded time. The way to dusty death. The difference in ambition between the Tories and Labour could not be more pronounced. Sunak had given his relaunch 7.0 in a tiny room with just a handful of hacks present. He might as well have been in a bunker with his two remaining believers present. It felt unhinged. Whoops Apocalypse! If that is the best Rish! has got he should give up now. At the same time, Esther McVey was upstaging him by declaring war on coloured lanyards . Finger on the pulse, Esther. Finger on the pulse. Labour’s launch at the Backstage Centre in Purfleet was altogether on a bigger scale. Yet somehow far more human. These were people and ideas with whom most could connect. The politics made personal. Though not without its glitches. No one has yet found a way of assembling the entire shadow cabinet and a few assorted guests on a stage without making everyone look as if they were starring in their own hostage video. This was to be more of a greatest hits concert – each performer got a five-minute slot – played out under a banner of “My First Steps for Change” alongside a portrait of Keir Starmer looking every inch the 1980s catalogue model. Check out those slacks. Though whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Any resemblance to 1997 was entirely coincidental. First up was Angela Rayner. “This is Labour’s first steps,” she began. Just in case we had missed this. First Steps, mind. As opposed to the First Missions which Starmer launched more than a year ago, and which most of us could barely remember now. Though the missions had not been entirely forgotten. Just, shall we say, somewhat superseded. An occupational hazard in a Never Ending election campaign. Let’s call it a refocus. Thank you and goodnight, said Angela as she introduced Rachel Reeves to tee up step one . This amounted to a commitment to not crash the economy. It’s a sign of how far we’ve fallen as a country that a promise not to make everyone worse off provokes an outburst of gratitude from voters. Tears of relief that we won’t all become destitute. Stability is no longer boring; it’s a lifestyle aspiration. But that wasn’t all. We still hoped to become the fastest-growing economy in the G7, but let’s just take one thing at a time. Cut to the video screen. A property developer and the Boots CEO declaring their undying love for Rachel. And why not? Even I would look like an economic god compared with Jeremy Hunt. Then it was Wes Streeting’s turn. Normally Wes can work a crowd, but maybe he felt confined by the format. His delivery was strangely detached as he promised to reduce hospital waiting lists. The impressive list of guests continued with Nathaniel, a teacher with a terminal cancer diagnosis who had also done a turn at last year’s Labour party conference. He was the first to get a proper standing ovation. Then Mike Tapp, the Labour party candidate for Dover. He could talk border security. And perhaps reassure everyone there was life after Natalie Elphicke . Then came Ed Miliband. He too spoke with passion. Not to mention a sense of deja vu. Images of the Ed Stone must have been flashing through his mind. If only he had tempted hubris. Then, 2015 was a lifetime ago. Just stick to energy, Ed. Cheaper and greener. Job done. Yvette Cooper and Bridget Phillipson were equally competent as they talked through their first steps. No great flourishes. Just stick to the scripts. This was no place for prima donnas. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Just as it felt as if the tempo was about to flag, the volume got turned up. A video of Keir in various Action Man poses, an introduction from a former Tory voter, and then the man himself. The jacketless, tieless Keir with rolled-up sleeves. Poised to deliver for the country. It wasn’t subtle. There were no big arguments here. Those have been long since fought and won. He has already persuaded more than enough people that the Tories are not fit to govern. This was all about getting the message across. It was like listening to the news on the radio. First tell everyone what you are going to tell them. Then tell them what you want to tell them. Finish by telling them again what you’ve already told them. Because what we got were the First Steps spelled out all over again, twice. Along with the word “change”. Time for a change. A leader with his shadow cabinet literally behind him. Something of which Sunak can only dream. Starmer ended with questions from the media. In the past this has been where he has been at his most awkward. Now he seemed entirely relaxed. Happy with his team, confident in his message. Ready to take questions from anyone. Unlike the Tetchmeister. Was he being ambitious enough? Read his lips. These were just the first steps. What had happened to the more Labour policies like workers’ rights? He was here to park his tanks on the Tories’ lawns. Most of his six first steps were what any government would aspire to. He was here to get elected, not join a protest movement. Wasn’t it all a bit Tony Blair? He should be so lucky. Blair had won three elections on the bounce. Ninety minutes in – an age for any normal political shindig – and people were getting restless. Starmer wrapped things up. Time to head home. The Tories may be falling apart but Labour now had all its ducks in a row. Bring on the election. Bring on the real war. C all it the phoney war. The government has long since stopped governing. Politics is now conducted entirely through the prism of a general election campaign. The Tories go through a weekly relaunch in a desperate hunt for credibility. Something that might allow them to at least save some face. Losing has already been factored into everyone’s calculations. But still we don’t have a date as Rishi Sunak hangs on for a miracle. At this rate, by the time the election is announced we’re all going to be thoroughly knackered. On Thursday it was Labour’s turn for a dry run. A no-holds-barred launch of its general election campaign that isn’t, because it hasn’t officially started. If you get my drift. A chance to meet the government-in-waiting which looks more like a government than the one that is in office. It’s an upside down world we live in now. Nothing is quite what it seems. We’re just waiting. Waiting. A state of both imminence and immanence. Creeps in this petty pace from day to day. Till the last syllable of recorded time. The way to dusty death. The difference in ambition between the Tories and Labour could not be more pronounced. Sunak had given his relaunch 7.0 in a tiny room with just a handful of hacks present. He might as well have been in a bunker with his two remaining believers present. It felt unhinged. Whoops Apocalypse! If that is the best Rish! has got he should give up now. At the same time, Esther McVey was upstaging him by declaring war on coloured lanyards . Finger on the pulse, Esther. Finger on the pulse. Labour’s launch at the Backstage Centre in Purfleet was altogether on a bigger scale. Yet somehow far more human. These were people and ideas with whom most could connect. The politics made personal. Though not without its glitches. No one has yet found a way of assembling the entire shadow cabinet and a few assorted guests on a stage without making everyone look as if they were starring in their own hostage video. This was to be more of a greatest hits concert – each performer got a five-minute slot – played out under a banner of “My First Steps for Change” alongside a portrait of Keir Starmer looking every inch the 1980s catalogue model. Check out those slacks. Though whatever you do, don’t call it a pledge card. Any resemblance to 1997 was entirely coincidental. First up was Angela Rayner. “This is Labour’s first steps,” she began. Just in case we had missed this. First Steps, mind. As opposed to the First Missions which Starmer launched more than a year ago, and which most of us could barely remember now. Though the missions had not been entirely forgotten. Just, shall we say, somewhat superseded. An occupational hazard in a Never Ending election campaign. Let’s call it a refocus. Thank you and goodnight, said Angela as she introduced Rachel Reeves to tee up step one . This amounted to a commitment to not crash the economy. It’s a sign of how far we’ve fallen as a country that a promise not to make everyone worse off provokes an outburst of gratitude from voters. Tears of relief that we won’t all become destitute. Stability is no longer boring; it’s a lifestyle aspiration. But that wasn’t all. We still hoped to become the fastest-growing economy in the G7, but let’s just take one thing at a time. Cut to the video screen. A property developer and the Boots CEO declaring their undying love for Rachel. And why not? Even I would look like an economic god compared with Jeremy Hunt. Then it was Wes Streeting’s turn. Normally Wes can work a crowd, but maybe he felt confined by the format. His delivery was strangely detached as he promised to reduce hospital waiting lists. The impressive list of guests continued with Nathaniel, a teacher with a terminal cancer diagnosis who had also done a turn at last year’s Labour party conference. He was the first to get a proper standing ovation. Then Mike Tapp, the Labour party candidate for Dover. He could talk border security. And perhaps reassure everyone there was life after Natalie Elphicke . Then came Ed Miliband. He too spoke with passion. Not to mention a sense of deja vu. Images of the Ed Stone must have been flashing through his mind. If only he had tempted hubris. Then, 2015 was a lifetime ago. Just stick to energy, Ed. Cheaper and greener. Job done. Yvette Cooper and Bridget Phillipson were equally competent as they talked through their first steps. No great flourishes. Just stick to the scripts. This was no place for prima donnas. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Just as it felt as if the tempo was about to flag, the volume got turned up. A video of Keir in various Action Man poses, an introduction from a former Tory voter, and then the man himself. The jacketless, tieless Keir with rolled-up sleeves. Poised to deliver for the country. It wasn’t subtle. There were no big arguments here. Those have been long since fought and won. He has already persuaded more than enough people that the Tories are not fit to govern. This was all about getting the message across. It was like listening to the news on the radio. First tell everyone what you are going to tell them. Then tell them what you want to tell them. Finish by telling them again what you’ve already told them. Because what we got were the First Steps spelled out all over again, twice. Along with the word “change”. Time for a change. A leader with his shadow cabinet literally behind him. Something of which Sunak can only dream. Starmer ended with questions from the media. In the past this has been where he has been at his most awkward. Now he seemed entirely relaxed. Happy with his team, confident in his message. Ready to take questions from anyone. Unlike the Tetchmeister. Was he being ambitious enough? Read his lips. These were just the first steps. What had happened to the more Labour policies like workers’ rights? He was here to park his tanks on the Tories’ lawns. Most of his six first steps were what any government would aspire to. He was here to get elected, not join a protest movement. Wasn’t it all a bit Tony Blair? He should be so lucky. Blair had won three elections on the bounce. Ninety minutes in – an age for any normal political shindig – and people were getting restless. Starmer wrapped things up. Time to head home. The Tories may be falling apart but Labour now had all its
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
Activists sue Russia over ‘weak’ climate policy
Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels. Photograph: Sergei Karpukhin/Reuters View image in fullscreen Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels. Photograph: Sergei Karpukhin/Reuters This article is more than 1 year old Activists sue Russia over ‘weak’ climate policy This article is more than 1 year old Russian constitutional court is considering claim, which activists hope will raise awareness about emissions A group of activists are fighting for the right to scrutinise Russia’s climate policies, and in particular its enormous methane emissions, in court. Russia’s constitutional court is considering a claim brought by 18 individuals and the NGO Ecodefense that insufficient action by the Russian state to cut national greenhouse gas emissions is violating their rights to life, health and a healthy environment. Another organisation that had planned to join the case, Moscow Helsinki, was closed down last year by a different Russian court. It was the country’s oldest human rights group. The claimants previously asked Russia’s supreme court to examine national climate policy, but it refused to take on the case. They then took a fresh claim to the constitutional court, which is responsible for upholding the country’s constitution. The court has decided some environmental cases in the past, including state liability for the Chornobyl nuclear disaster, but it has not yet dealt with climate breakdown. “We are insisting in this case that the current climate policy of Russia is too weak and can’t protect us against the most catastrophic consequences of climate change,” said Vladimir Slivyak from Ecodefense. One of those bringing the case is Arshak Makichyan, who has previously been jailed in Russia after taking part in climate protests and who now lives in Germany. He said the lawsuit was about the contradiction between Russia’s climate policy and its constitution. Russia is one of the world’s biggest greenhouse gas emitters. The government has set a target to achieve net zero by 2060 but has done little to achieve this, leading Climate Action Tracker (CAT) to call its efforts “critically insufficient” . Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels, and its climate plans rely heavily on national forests taking up twice as much carbon as they do today. “No information substantiates such an enormous increase of carbon take-up,” says CAT. “It also doesn’t appear to address the impact of enormous wildfires in its Siberian forests in recent years.” Russia is close to the host of the next climate talks , Azerbaijan, which has defended investment in oil and gas. The claimants say Russia’s climate plans are scientifically unsubstantiated and ineffective in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and they argue the plans should be significantly tightened to be in line with the Paris agreement. Part of the claim focuses on Russia’s role as the world’s biggest source of methane from fossil fuel extraction. Russian gas infrastructure is notoriously leaky and is responsible for a significant proportion of super-emitting leaks. Makichyan noted that Russia had no targets at all for reducing methane emissions. There have been few lawsuits to date that focus on short-lived but hugely potent climate pollutants such as methane, but academics expect more litigation on this topic in the future. Russia is particularly vulnerable to climate breakdown and its average temperatures having risen twice as fast as the global average. The lawsuit outlines how some of the claimants who live in large Russian cities have been affected by heatwaves and severe air pollution due to forest fires. As the climate crisis intensifies, Russia can expect more frequent and intense heatwaves, drought and extreme rainfall. This spring there were unusually severe floods in the Ural mountains and Siberia, forcing tens of thousands of people to evacuate their homes. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion According to the lawsuit, young and Indigenous people in particular are being discriminated against. It says Indigenous communities such as the Sámi could lose traditional food sources such as venison, fish and berries, putting their health and wellbeing at risk. Melting permafrost, floods and other extreme weather events will increase their exposure to disease and water contamination from toxic waste. Andrei Danilov, the director of the Sámi Heritage and Development Foundation, who is another claimant in the case, said hunting and fishing times were already changing. “With the disappearance of deer, fish and game, our lives change,” he said. “It’s not just a way of life. Our language, our culture directly depends on it.” Danilov previously won a case in the constitutional court upholding the rights of Indigenous people to hunt to maintain a traditional lifestyle. But he has since left Russia, where he said the authorities “did not like my insistence on protecting constitutional rights”, and is seeking political asylum in Norway. Makichyan said he did not have much hope that the case would succeed but it was “a helpful instrument to raise awareness about Russian climate policies”. The claimants would have to exhaust all domestic legal options to have a case considered at the European court of human rights, which recently ruled that states were breaching the rights of their citizens by failing to do enough to cut national emissions. Although Russia no longer recognises the European court’s jurisdiction, the court does have power to scrutinise its actions before September 2022. The Russian government did not respond to a request for comment. Explore more on these topics Environmental activism Greenhouse gas emissions Climate crisis Russia news Share Reuse this content Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels. Photograph: Sergei Karpukhin/Reuters View image in fullscreen Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels. Photograph: Sergei Karpukhin/Reuters This article is more than 1 year old Activists sue Russia over ‘weak’ climate policy This article is more than 1 year old Russian constitutional court is considering claim, which activists hope will raise awareness about emissions A group of activists are fighting for the right to scrutinise Russia’s climate policies, and in particular its enormous methane emissions, in court. Russia’s constitutional court is considering a claim brought by 18 individuals and the NGO Ecodefense that insufficient action by the Russian state to cut national greenhouse gas emissions is violating their rights to life, health and a healthy environment. Another organisation that had planned to join the case, Moscow Helsinki, was closed down last year by a different Russian court. It was the country’s oldest human rights group. The claimants previously asked Russia’s supreme court to examine national climate policy, but it refused to take on the case. They then took a fresh claim to the constitutional court, which is responsible for upholding the country’s constitution. The court has decided some environmental cases in the past, including state liability for the Chornobyl nuclear disaster, but it has not yet dealt with climate breakdown. “We are insisting in this case that the current climate policy of Russia is too weak and can’t protect us against the most catastrophic consequences of climate change,” said Vladimir Slivyak from Ecodefense. One of those bringing the case is Arshak Makichyan, who has previously been jailed in Russia after taking part in climate protests and who now lives in Germany. He said the lawsuit was about the contradiction between Russia’s climate policy and its constitution. Russia is one of the world’s biggest greenhouse gas emitters. The government has set a target to achieve net zero by 2060 but has done little to achieve this, leading Climate Action Tracker (CAT) to call its efforts “critically insufficient” . Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels, and its climate plans rely heavily on national forests taking up twice as much carbon as they do today. “No information substantiates such an enormous increase of carbon take-up,” says CAT. “It also doesn’t appear to address the impact of enormous wildfires in its Siberian forests in recent years.” Russia is close to the host of the next climate talks , Azerbaijan, which has defended investment in oil and gas. The claimants say Russia’s climate plans are scientifically unsubstantiated and ineffective in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and they argue the plans should be significantly tightened to be in line with the Paris agreement. Part of the claim focuses on Russia’s role as the world’s biggest source of methane from fossil fuel extraction. Russian gas infrastructure is notoriously leaky and is responsible for a significant proportion of super-emitting leaks. Makichyan noted that Russia had no targets at all for reducing methane emissions. There have been few lawsuits to date that focus on short-lived but hugely potent climate pollutants such as methane, but academics expect more litigation on this topic in the future. Russia is particularly vulnerable to climate breakdown and its average temperatures having risen twice as fast as the global average. The lawsuit outlines how some of the claimants who live in large Russian cities have been affected by heatwaves and severe air pollution due to forest fires. As the climate crisis intensifies, Russia can expect more frequent and intense heatwaves, drought and extreme rainfall. This spring there were unusually severe floods in the Ural mountains and Siberia, forcing tens of thousands of people to evacuate their homes. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion According to the lawsuit, young and Indigenous people in particular are being discriminated against. It says Indigenous communities such as the Sámi could lose traditional food sources such as venison, fish and berries, putting their health and wellbeing at risk. Melting permafrost, floods and other extreme weather events will increase their exposure to disease and water contamination from toxic waste. Andrei Danilov, the director of the Sámi Heritage and Development Foundation, who is another claimant in the case, said hunting and fishing times were already changing. “With the disappearance of deer, fish and game, our lives change,” he said. “It’s not just a way of life. Our language, our culture directly depends on it.” Danilov previously won a case in the constitutional court upholding the rights of Indigenous people to hunt to maintain a traditional lifestyle. But he has since left Russia, where he said the authorities “did not like my insistence on protecting constitutional rights”, and is seeking political asylum in Norway. Makichyan said he did not have much hope that the case would succeed but it was “a helpful instrument to raise awareness about Russian climate policies”. The claimants would have to exhaust all domestic legal options to have a case considered at the European court of human rights, which recently ruled that states were breaching the rights of their citizens by failing to do enough to cut national emissions. Although Russia no longer recognises the European court’s jurisdiction, the court does have power to scrutinise its actions before September 2022. The Russian government did not respond to a request for comment. Explore more on these topics Environmental activism Greenhouse gas emissions Climate crisis Russia news Share Reuse this content Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels. Photograph: Sergei Karpukhin/Reuters View image in fullscreen Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels. Photograph: Sergei Karpukhin/Reuters Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels. Photograph: Sergei Karpukhin/Reuters View image in fullscreen Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels. Photograph: Sergei Karpukhin/Reuters Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels. Photograph: Sergei Karpukhin/Reuters View image in fullscreen Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels. Photograph: Sergei Karpukhin/Reuters Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels. Photograph: Sergei Karpukhin/Reuters View image in fullscreen Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels. Photograph: Sergei Karpukhin/Reuters Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels. Photograph: Sergei Karpukhin/Reuters Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels. Photograph: Sergei Karpukhin/Reuters This article is more than 1 year old Activists sue Russia over ‘weak’ climate policy This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Activists sue Russia over ‘weak’ climate policy This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Activists sue Russia over ‘weak’ climate policy This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Russian constitutional court is considering claim, which activists hope will raise awareness about emissions Russian constitutional court is considering claim, which activists hope will raise awareness about emissions Russian constitutional court is considering claim, which activists hope will raise awareness about emissions A group of activists are fighting for the right to scrutinise Russia’s climate policies, and in particular its enormous methane emissions, in court. Russia’s constitutional court is considering a claim brought by 18 individuals and the NGO Ecodefense that insufficient action by the Russian state to cut national greenhouse gas emissions is violating their rights to life, health and a healthy environment. Another organisation that had planned to join the case, Moscow Helsinki, was closed down last year by a different Russian court. It was the country’s oldest human rights group. The claimants previously asked Russia’s supreme court to examine national climate policy, but it refused to take on the case. They then took a fresh claim to the constitutional court, which is responsible for upholding the country’s constitution. The court has decided some environmental cases in the past, including state liability for the Chornobyl nuclear disaster, but it has not yet dealt with climate breakdown. “We are insisting in this case that the current climate policy of Russia is too weak and can’t protect us against the most catastrophic consequences of climate change,” said Vladimir Slivyak from Ecodefense. One of those bringing the case is Arshak Makichyan, who has previously been jailed in Russia after taking part in climate protests and who now lives in Germany. He said the lawsuit was about the contradiction between Russia’s climate policy and its constitution. Russia is one of the world’s biggest greenhouse gas emitters. The government has set a target to achieve net zero by 2060 but has done little to achieve this, leading Climate Action Tracker (CAT) to call its efforts “critically insufficient” . Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels, and its climate plans rely heavily on national forests taking up twice as much carbon as they do today. “No information substantiates such an enormous increase of carbon take-up,” says CAT. “It also doesn’t appear to address the impact of enormous wildfires in its Siberian forests in recent years.” Russia is close to the host of the next climate talks , Azerbaijan, which has defended investment in oil and gas. The claimants say Russia’s climate plans are scientifically unsubstantiated and ineffective in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and they argue the plans should be significantly tightened to be in line with the Paris agreement. Part of the claim focuses on Russia’s role as the world’s biggest source of methane from fossil fuel extraction. Russian gas infrastructure is notoriously leaky and is responsible for a significant proportion of super-emitting leaks. Makichyan noted that Russia had no targets at all for reducing methane emissions. There have been few lawsuits to date that focus on short-lived but hugely potent climate pollutants such as methane, but academics expect more litigation on this topic in the future. Russia is particularly vulnerable to climate breakdown and its average temperatures having risen twice as fast as the global average. The lawsuit outlines how some of the claimants who live in large Russian cities have been affected by heatwaves and severe air pollution due to forest fires. As the climate crisis intensifies, Russia can expect more frequent and intense heatwaves, drought and extreme rainfall. This spring there were unusually severe floods in the Ural mountains and Siberia, forcing tens of thousands of people to evacuate their homes. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion According to the lawsuit, young and Indigenous people in particular are being discriminated against. It says Indigenous communities such as the Sámi could lose traditional food sources such as venison, fish and berries, putting their health and wellbeing at risk. Melting permafrost, floods and other extreme weather events will increase their exposure to disease and water contamination from toxic waste. Andrei Danilov, the director of the Sámi Heritage and Development Foundation, who is another claimant in the case, said hunting and fishing times were already changing. “With the disappearance of deer, fish and game, our lives change,” he said. “It’s not just a way of life. Our language, our culture directly depends on it.” Danilov previously won a case in the constitutional court upholding the rights of Indigenous people to hunt to maintain a traditional lifestyle. But he has since left Russia, where he said the authorities “did not like my insistence on protecting constitutional rights”, and is seeking political asylum in Norway. Makichyan said he did not have much hope that the case would succeed but it was “a helpful instrument to raise awareness about Russian climate policies”. The claimants would have to exhaust all domestic legal options to have a case considered at the European court of human rights, which recently ruled that states were breaching the rights of their citizens by failing to do enough to cut national emissions. Although Russia no longer recognises the European court’s jurisdiction, the court does have power to scrutinise its actions before September 2022. The Russian government did not respond to a request for comment. Explore more on these topics Environmental activism Greenhouse gas emissions Climate crisis Russia news Share Reuse this content A group of activists are fighting for the right to scrutinise Russia’s climate policies, and in particular its enormous methane emissions, in court. Russia’s constitutional court is considering a claim brought by 18 individuals and the NGO Ecodefense that insufficient action by the Russian state to cut national greenhouse gas emissions is violating their rights to life, health and a healthy environment. Another organisation that had planned to join the case, Moscow Helsinki, was closed down last year by a different Russian court. It was the country’s oldest human rights group. The claimants previously asked Russia’s supreme court to examine national climate policy, but it refused to take on the case. They then took a fresh claim to the constitutional court, which is responsible for upholding the country’s constitution. The court has decided some environmental cases in the past, including state liability for the Chornobyl nuclear disaster, but it has not yet dealt with climate breakdown. “We are insisting in this case that the current climate policy of Russia is too weak and can’t protect us against the most catastrophic consequences of climate change,” said Vladimir Slivyak from Ecodefense. One of those bringing the case is Arshak Makichyan, who has previously been jailed in Russia after taking part in climate protests and who now lives in Germany. He said the lawsuit was about the contradiction between Russia’s climate policy and its constitution. Russia is one of the world’s biggest greenhouse gas emitters. The government has set a target to achieve net zero by 2060 but has done little to achieve this, leading Climate Action Tracker (CAT) to call its efforts “critically insufficient” . Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels, and its climate plans rely heavily on national forests taking up twice as much carbon as they do today. “No information substantiates such an enormous increase of carbon take-up,” says CAT. “It also doesn’t appear to address the impact of enormous wildfires in its Siberian forests in recent years.” Russia is close to the host of the next climate talks , Azerbaijan, which has defended investment in oil and gas. The claimants say Russia’s climate plans are scientifically unsubstantiated and ineffective in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and they argue the plans should be significantly tightened to be in line with the Paris agreement. Part of the claim focuses on Russia’s role as the world’s biggest source of methane from fossil fuel extraction. Russian gas infrastructure is notoriously leaky and is responsible for a significant proportion of super-emitting leaks. Makichyan noted that Russia had no targets at all for reducing methane emissions. There have been few lawsuits to date that focus on short-lived but hugely potent climate pollutants such as methane, but academics expect more litigation on this topic in the future. Russia is particularly vulnerable to climate breakdown and its average temperatures having risen twice as fast as the global average. The lawsuit outlines how some of the claimants who live in large Russian cities have been affected by heatwaves and severe air pollution due to forest fires. As the climate crisis intensifies, Russia can expect more frequent and intense heatwaves, drought and extreme rainfall. This spring there were unusually severe floods in the Ural mountains and Siberia, forcing tens of thousands of people to evacuate their homes. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion According to the lawsuit, young and Indigenous people in particular are being discriminated against. It says Indigenous communities such as the Sámi could lose traditional food sources such as venison, fish and berries, putting their health and wellbeing at risk. Melting permafrost, floods and other extreme weather events will increase their exposure to disease and water contamination from toxic waste. Andrei Danilov, the director of the Sámi Heritage and Development Foundation, who is another claimant in the case, said hunting and fishing times were already changing. “With the disappearance of deer, fish and game, our lives change,” he said. “It’s not just a way of life. Our language, our culture directly depends on it.” Danilov previously won a case in the constitutional court upholding the rights of Indigenous people to hunt to maintain a traditional lifestyle. But he has since left Russia, where he said the authorities “did not like my insistence on protecting constitutional rights”, and is seeking political asylum in Norway. Makichyan said he did not have much hope that the case would succeed but it was “a helpful instrument to raise awareness about Russian climate policies”. The claimants would have to exhaust all domestic legal options to have a case considered at the European court of human rights, which recently ruled that states were breaching the rights of their citizens by failing to do enough to cut national emissions. Although Russia no longer recognises the European court’s jurisdiction, the court does have power to scrutinise its actions before September 2022. The Russian government did not respond to a request for comment. Explore more on these topics Environmental activism Greenhouse gas emissions Climate crisis Russia news Share Reuse this content A group of activists are fighting for the right to scrutinise Russia’s climate policies, and in particular its enormous methane emissions, in court. Russia’s constitutional court is considering a claim brought by 18 individuals and the NGO Ecodefense that insufficient action by the Russian state to cut national greenhouse gas emissions is violating their rights to life, health and a healthy environment. Another organisation that had planned to join the case, Moscow Helsinki, was closed down last year by a different Russian court. It was the country’s oldest human rights group. The claimants previously asked Russia’s supreme court to examine national climate policy, but it refused to take on the case. They then took a fresh claim to the constitutional court, which is responsible for upholding the country’s constitution. The court has decided some environmental cases in the past, including state liability for the Chornobyl nuclear disaster, but it has not yet dealt with climate breakdown. “We are insisting in this case that the current climate policy of Russia is too weak and can’t protect us against the most catastrophic consequences of climate change,” said Vladimir Slivyak from Ecodefense. One of those bringing the case is Arshak Makichyan, who has previously been jailed in Russia after taking part in climate protests and who now lives in Germany. He said the lawsuit was about the contradiction between Russia’s climate policy and its constitution. Russia is one of the world’s biggest greenhouse gas emitters. The government has set a target to achieve net zero by 2060 but has done little to achieve this, leading Climate Action Tracker (CAT) to call its efforts “critically insufficient” . Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels, and its climate plans rely heavily on national forests taking up twice as much carbon as they do today. “No information substantiates such an enormous increase of carbon take-up,” says CAT. “It also doesn’t appear to address the impact of enormous wildfires in its Siberian forests in recent years.” Russia is close to the host of the next climate talks , Azerbaijan, which has defended investment in oil and gas. The claimants say Russia’s climate plans are scientifically unsubstantiated and ineffective in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and they argue the plans should be significantly tightened to be in line with the Paris agreement. Part of the claim focuses on Russia’s role as the world’s biggest source of methane from fossil fuel extraction. Russian gas infrastructure is notoriously leaky and is responsible for a significant proportion of super-emitting leaks. Makichyan noted that Russia had no targets at all for reducing methane emissions. There have been few lawsuits to date that focus on short-lived but hugely potent climate pollutants such as methane, but academics expect more litigation on this topic in the future. Russia is particularly vulnerable to climate breakdown and its average temperatures having risen twice as fast as the global average. The lawsuit outlines how some of the claimants who live in large Russian cities have been affected by heatwaves and severe air pollution due to forest fires. As the climate crisis intensifies, Russia can expect more frequent and intense heatwaves, drought and extreme rainfall. This spring there were unusually severe floods in the Ural mountains and Siberia, forcing tens of thousands of people to evacuate their homes. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion According to the lawsuit, young and Indigenous people in particular are being discriminated against. It says Indigenous communities such as the Sámi could lose traditional food sources such as venison, fish and berries, putting their health and wellbeing at risk. Melting permafrost, floods and other extreme weather events will increase their exposure to disease and water contamination from toxic waste. Andrei Danilov, the director of the Sámi Heritage and Development Foundation, who is another claimant in the case, said hunting and fishing times were already changing. “With the disappearance of deer, fish and game, our lives change,” he said. “It’s not just a way of life. Our language, our culture directly depends on it.” Danilov previously won a case in the constitutional court upholding the rights of Indigenous people to hunt to maintain a traditional lifestyle. But he has since left Russia, where he said the authorities “did not like my insistence on protecting constitutional rights”, and is seeking political asylum in Norway. Makichyan said he did not have much hope that the case would succeed but it was “a helpful instrument to raise awareness about Russian climate policies”. The claimants would have to exhaust all domestic legal options to have a case considered at the European court of human rights, which recently ruled that states were breaching the rights of their citizens by failing to do enough to cut national emissions. Although Russia no longer recognises the European court’s jurisdiction, the court does have power to scrutinise its actions before September 2022. The Russian government did not respond to a request for comment. A group of activists are fighting for the right to scrutinise Russia’s climate policies, and in particular its enormous methane emissions, in court. Russia’s constitutional court is considering a claim brought by 18 individuals and the NGO Ecodefense that insufficient action by the Russian state to cut national greenhouse gas emissions is violating their rights to life, health and a healthy environment. Another organisation that had planned to join the case, Moscow Helsinki, was closed down last year by a different Russian court. It was the country’s oldest human rights group. The claimants previously asked Russia’s supreme court to examine national climate policy, but it refused to take on the case. They then took a fresh claim to the constitutional court, which is responsible for upholding the country’s constitution. The court has decided some environmental cases in the past, including state liability for the Chornobyl nuclear disaster, but it has not yet dealt with climate breakdown. “We are insisting in this case that the current climate policy of Russia is too weak and can’t protect us against the most catastrophic consequences of climate change,” said Vladimir Slivyak from Ecodefense. One of those bringing the case is Arshak Makichyan, who has previously been jailed in Russia after taking part in climate protests and who now lives in Germany. He said the lawsuit was about the contradiction between Russia’s climate policy and its constitution. Russia is one of the world’s biggest greenhouse gas emitters. The government has set a target to achieve net zero by 2060 but has done little to achieve this, leading Climate Action Tracker (CAT) to call its efforts “critically insufficient” . Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels, and its climate plans rely heavily on national forests taking up twice as much carbon as they do today. “No information substantiates such an enormous increase of carbon take-up,” says CAT. “It also doesn’t appear to address the impact of enormous wildfires in its Siberian forests in recent years.” Russia is close to the host of the next climate talks , Azerbaijan, which has defended investment in oil and gas. The claimants say Russia’s climate plans are scientifically unsubstantiated and ineffective in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and they argue the plans should be significantly tightened to be in line with the Paris agreement. Part of the claim focuses on Russia’s role as the world’s biggest source of methane from fossil fuel extraction. Russian gas infrastructure is notoriously leaky and is responsible for a significant proportion of super-emitting leaks. Makichyan noted that Russia had no targets at all for reducing methane emissions. There have been few lawsuits to date that focus on short-lived but hugely potent climate pollutants such as methane, but academics expect more litigation on this topic in the future. Russia is particularly vulnerable to climate breakdown and its average temperatures having risen twice as fast as the global average. The lawsuit outlines how some of the claimants who live in large Russian cities have been affected by heatwaves and severe air pollution due to forest fires. As the climate crisis intensifies, Russia can expect more frequent and intense heatwaves, drought and extreme rainfall. This spring there were unusually severe floods in the Ural mountains and Siberia, forcing tens of thousands of people to evacuate their homes. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion According to the lawsuit, young and Indigenous people in particular are being discriminated against. It says Indigenous communities such as the Sámi could lose traditional food sources such as venison, fish and berries, putting their health and wellbeing at risk. Melting permafrost, floods and other extreme weather events will increase their exposure to disease and water contamination from toxic waste. Andrei Danilov, the director of the Sámi Heritage and Development Foundation, who is another claimant in the case, said hunting and fishing times were already changing. “With the disappearance of deer, fish and game, our lives change,” he said. “It’s not just a way of life. Our language, our culture directly depends on it.” Danilov previously won a case in the constitutional court upholding the rights of Indigenous people to hunt to maintain a traditional lifestyle. But he has since left Russia, where he said the authorities “did not like my insistence on protecting constitutional rights”, and is seeking political asylum in Norway. Makichyan said he did not have much hope that the case would succeed but it was “a helpful instrument to raise awareness about Russian climate policies”. The claimants would have to exhaust all domestic legal options to have a case considered at the European court of human rights, which recently ruled that states were breaching the rights of their citizens by failing to do enough to cut national emissions. Although Russia no longer recognises the European court’s jurisdiction, the court does have power to scrutinise its actions before September 2022. The Russian government did not respond to a request for comment. A group of activists are fighting for the right to scrutinise Russia’s climate policies, and in particular its enormous methane emissions, in court. Russia’s constitutional court is considering a claim brought by 18 individuals and the NGO Ecodefense that insufficient action by the Russian state to cut national greenhouse gas emissions is violating their rights to life, health and a healthy environment. Another organisation that had planned to join the case, Moscow Helsinki, was closed down last year by a different Russian court. It was the country’s oldest human rights group. The claimants previously asked Russia’s supreme court to examine national climate policy, but it refused to take on the case. They then took a fresh claim to the constitutional court, which is responsible for upholding the country’s constitution. The court has decided some environmental cases in the past, including state liability for the Chornobyl nuclear disaster, but it has not yet dealt with climate breakdown. “We are insisting in this case that the current climate policy of Russia is too weak and can’t protect us against the most catastrophic consequences of climate change,” said Vladimir Slivyak from Ecodefense. One of those bringing the case is Arshak Makichyan, who has previously been jailed in Russia after taking part in climate protests and who now lives in Germany. He said the lawsuit was about the contradiction between Russia’s climate policy and its constitution. Russia is one of the world’s biggest greenhouse gas emitters. The government has set a target to achieve net zero by 2060 but has done little to achieve this, leading Climate Action Tracker (CAT) to call its efforts “critically insufficient” . Russia’s energy strategy focuses almost exclusively on extracting, consuming and exporting fossil fuels, and its climate plans rely heavily on national forests taking up twice as much carbon as they do today. “No information substantiates such an enormous increase of carbon take-up,” says CAT. “It also doesn’t appear to address the impact of enormous wildfires in its Siberian forests in recent years.” Russia is close to the host of the next climate talks , Azerbaijan, which has defended investment in oil and gas. The claimants say Russia’s climate plans are scientifically unsubstantiated and ineffective in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and they argue the plans should be significantly tightened to be in line with the Paris agreement. Part of the claim focuses on Russia’s role as the world’s biggest source of methane from fossil fuel extraction. Russian gas infrastructure is notoriously leaky and is responsible for a significant proportion of super-emitting leaks. Makichyan noted that Russia had no targets at all for reducing methane emissions. There have been few lawsuits to date that focus on short-lived but hugely potent climate pollutants such as methane, but academics expect more litigation on this topic in the future. Russia is particularly vulnerable to climate breakdown and its average temperatures having risen twice as fast as the global average. The lawsuit outlines how some of the claimants who live in large Russian cities have been affected by heatwaves and severe air pollution due to forest fires. As the climate crisis intensifies, Russia can expect more frequent and intense heatwaves, drought and extreme rainfall. This spring there were unusually severe floods in the Ural mountains and Siberia, forcing tens of thousands of people to evacuate their homes. According to the lawsuit, young and Indigenous people in particular are being discriminated against. It says Indigenous communities such as the Sámi could lose traditional food sources such as venison, fish and berries, putting their health and wellbeing at risk. Melting permafrost, floods and other extreme weather events will increase their exposure to disease and water contamination from toxic waste. Andrei Danilov, the director of the Sámi Heritage and Development Foundation, who is another claimant in the case, said hunting and fishing times were already changing. “With the disappearance of deer, fish and game, our lives change,” he said. “It’s not just a way of life. Our language, our culture directly depends on it.” Danilov previously won a case in the constitutional court upholding the rights of Indigenous people to hunt to maintain a traditional lifestyle. But he has since left Russia, where he said the authorities “did not like my insistence on protecting constitutional rights”, and is seeking political asylum in Norway. Makichyan said he did not have much hope that the case would succeed but it was “a helpful instrument to raise awareness about Russian climate policies”. The claimants would have to exhaust all domestic legal options to have a case considered at the European court of human rights, which recently ruled that states were breaching the rights of their citizens by failing to do enough to cut national emissions. Although Russia no longer recognises the European court’s jurisdiction, the court does have power to scrutinise its actions before September 2022. The Russian government did not respond to a request for comment. Explore more on these topics Environmental activism Greenhouse gas emissions Climate crisis Russia news Share Reuse this content Environmental activism Greenhouse gas emissions Climate crisis Russia news |
Washington is pushing policies to combat antisemitism. Critics say they could violate free speech
The pro-Palestinian student encampment at the University of California in Berkeley, California, on 9 May 2024. Photograph: John G Mabanglo/EPA View image in fullscreen The pro-Palestinian student encampment at the University of California in Berkeley, California, on 9 May 2024. Photograph: John G Mabanglo/EPA This article is more than 1 year old Washington is pushing policies to combat antisemitism. Critics say they could violate free speech This article is more than 1 year old In the wake of campus protests, some say proposals are part of of a broader effort to silence criticism of Israel A gainst the backdrop of demonstrations against Israel’s war in Gaza on college campuses, the White House and Congress have announced a string of policies and commitments aimed at addressing what Joe Biden warned was a “ ferocious surge of antisemitism ” in the United States. Antisemitism was on the rise in the US before Hamas attacked Israel on 7 October, killing roughly 1,200 people and taking another 250 hostage. But the ensuing war has exacerbated the problem, with the law enforcement officials recording a spike in threats against Jewish Americans. Several of the proposals coming out of Washington DC have converged around college campuses, where hundreds of students have been arrested as part of pro-Palestinian demonstrations against Israel’s ongoing offensive in Gaza, which has killed tens of thousands of Palestinians and caused catastrophic levels of hunger. Many Jewish students have said that rhetoric common to the protests – for example, their denunciations of Zionism and calls for a Palestinian uprising – too often veers into antisemitism and poses a threat to their safety. A number of Democratic and Republican lawmakers, as well as the president, have echoed their fears, condemning documented instances of antisemitism on campus. But critics say some of the actions and polices under consideration threaten free speech and are part of a broader effort to silence legitimate criticism of Israel. “The view that these encampments, these student protests, are per se antisemitic, which I think some people have, is leading to very aggressive repression,” said Genevieve Lakier , a professor of law at the University of Chicago law school and an expert in the first amendment. “I also think it is incorrect, particularly when the student movement is being populated and led in many ways by Jewish students.” The wave of student activism against the war in Gaza has renewed a charged debate over what constitutes antisemitism. Many supporters of Israel say the situation on college campuses validates the view, articulated in 2022 by the Anti-Defamation League’s chief executive, Jonathan Greenblatt, that “anti-Zionism is antisemitism”. But the Jewish and non-Jewish students involved with campus protests say their critiques of Israel, and its rightwing government’s prosecution of the war, are legitimate political speech that should not be conflated with antisemitism. In remarks at a Holocaust remembrance ceremony at the Capitol last week, Biden vowed to leverage the full force of the US government to fight hate and bigotry against Jews and outlined specific policy steps his administration was taking to confront antisemitic discrimination in schools and universities. The debate is also playing out on Capitol Hill, where the Senate is considering a bill that would codify into federal law a definition of antisemitism adopted in 2016 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), an intergovernmental organization based in Stockholm. The IHRA defines antisemitism as “certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews”. But it also includes several modern examples of antisemitism that alarm free speech advocates, among them “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination”, claiming Israel’s existence is a “racist endeavor” and “applying double standards” to Israel that are not expected of other countries. Supporters say the bill, known as the Antisemitism Awareness Act , is critical. “We really believe it’s the single most important thing that Congress could do right now to help bring under control the rampant antisemitism we’ve seen on campus,” said Eric Fingerhut, president and CEO of the Jewish Federations of North America , which is lobbying in support of the legislation. But opponents are urging the Senate to block the bill, recently approved by the House in a resounding 320-91 vote , “In a democratic society, we’re allowed to engage in political advocacy and political protests that criticize any government in the world,” said Tyler Coward, lead counsel for government affairs at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (Fire). “Taking some ideas off the table for one country is classic viewpoint discrimination that the courts just won’t tolerate.” Fire has opposed iterations of this bill since it was introduced in 2016, citing concerns that the definition is “vague, overbroad, and includes criticism of Israeli government policy”. If enacted, the Department of Education would be required to use the definition when conducting federal investigations into alleged incidents of discrimination against Jewish students. Colleges or universities found to have violated the law could be stripped of federal funding. Fingerhut said free speech concerns were a “red herring”, arguing that the legislation was designed to give the Department of Education and academic institutions a “clear” standard for punishing acts of antisemitism. But the bill has drawn condemnation from pro-Palestinian advocacy groups who view it as an attempt to quash their ascendent movement. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (Cair) condemned the legislation as a “one-sided, and dishonest proposal about campus antisemitism that ignore[s] anti-Palestinian racism and conflates criticism of the Israeli government with antisemitism”. Since the Israel-Hamas conflict began seven months ago, the law enforcement officials have also warned of a rise in threats against Muslim and Arab Americans, and advocates are monitoring an uptick in Islamophobia on college campuses. One of the effort’s most notable opponents is a lawyer and scholar who authored the IHRA’s definition of antisemitism. Kenneth Stern, who is the director of the Bard Center for the Study of Hate and is Jewish, has said the definition was created with the purpose of collecting better data on antisemitism across borders, not to be turned into a campus hate-speech code. “In my experience, people who care about campus antisemitism, and want to do something about it, sometimes advocate things that feel good … but actually do great harm,” he testified in 2017 against a previous iteration of the bill. That version stalled, but two years later, proponents won a significant victory when Donald Trump issued a sweeping executive order instructing federal agencies to use the IHRA definition when investigating civil rights complaints. In recent months, alarm over rising antisemitism – which Jewish groups say is not unique to college campuses – appears to have broadened support for the Antisemitism Awareness Act. Still, the vote split House Democrats, including some Jewish members of the caucus, who disagreed over whether it was the right legislative fix. The representative Josh Gottheimer, a New Jersey Democrat who sponsored the House bill, said it was a necessary response to the “tidal wave” of antisemitism, while Maryland representative Jamie Raskin, a Democrat and constitutional scholar, voted for the bill but called it “essentially symbolic”. “At this moment of anguish and confusion over the dangerous surge of antisemitism, authoritarianism and racism all over the country and the world, it seems unlikely that this meaningless ‘gotcha’ legislation can help much – but neither can it hurt much,” Raskin said . But the representative Jerry Nadler of New York, who describes himself as “ an observant Jew, a proud Zionist, a strong supporter of Israel ”, voted against the bill. In an op-ed for the Washington Post , Nadler explained that he supported the sentiment behind the bill, but feared the it could “sweep in perfectly valid criticism of the state of Israel that, alone, does not necessarily constitute unlawful harassment or antisemitism”. “I want my Jewish community to feel safe on campus, but I do not need it shielded from controversial views simply because those views are unpopular,” he wrote. The legislation has also drawn opposition from some conservatives over concerns that it could be used to persecute Christians who express the belief that Jews killed Jesus, an assertion widely regarded as antisemitic that historians and Christian leaders, including Pope Benedict, have rejected . Civil liberties advocates are also raising concerns about an anti-terrorism bill approved overwhelmingly by the House last month in the wake of Iran’s unprecedented missile assault on Israel. Proponents say the measure is a necessary guardrail to prevent US-based organizations from providing financial support to Israel’s enemies. But critics have called it an “Orwellian bill aimed at silencing nonprofits that support Palestinian human rights”. Last week, Biden announced a series of actions that build on what the White House has called “the most comprehensive and ambitious US government effort to counter antisemitism in American history”. It included new guidance by the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights, sent to every school and college, that outlines examples of antisemitic discrimination and other forms of hate that could lead to a federal civil rights investigation. Since the 7 October attack, the Department of Education has launched more than 100 investigations into colleges and public school districts over allegations of “discrimination involving shared ancestry”, which include incidents of antisemitism and Islamophobia. The initiative also includes additional steps the Department of Homeland Security would take to help campuses improve safety. Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, House Republicans have vowed to use their majority to intensify scrutiny of antisemitism on college campuses, part of their election-year strategy to use the unrest as a political cudgel against Biden and the Democrats, who are deeply divided over the Israel-Gaza war. Wielding their oversight powers, several House Republican chairs have announced plans to investigate universities where pro-Palestinian student protests have flourished. On Wednesday, a House subcommittee held a hearing, titled Antisemitism on College Campuses , in which Jewish college students testified that their university administrations had failed to stop antisemitic threats and harassment. And during a congressional panel last week, Republicans challenged the leaders of some of the nation’s largest public school systems to do more to counter antisemitism in their schools. It follows a tense hearing on antisemitism with administration officials from some of the nation’s most prestigious universities that precipitated the resignations of the presidents of Harvard University and the University of Pennsylvania. A congressional appearance last month by Columbia University’s president, Minouche Shafik, escalated the antiwar protests at her school that then spread to campuses across the country. “There are a lot of shades of McCarthyism as the House keeps calling people in to shame and name them, to spread moral panic,” said Lakier of the University of Chicago law school. Facing enormous pressure from Congress and the Department of Education, as well as from students, faculty, donors and alumni, universities and colleges, Lakier argued, are collectively showing less tolerance for the pro-Palestinian student protests than they did for Vietnam war-era campus activism. On dozens of university campuses, state and local police officers, sometimes in riot gear , have dispersed pro-Palestinian protesters, often at the request of university officials. As many as 2,400 people have been arrested during pro-Palestinian campus protests in recent weeks, while many students have been suspended or expelled. “From a first amendment perspective, one hopes you learn from the past,” Lakier said, “but to be repeating it is distressing.” Explore more on these topics Antisemitism Israel-Gaza war Biden administration US campus protests Censorship US politics Islamophobia features Share Reuse this content The pro-Palestinian student encampment at the University of California in Berkeley, California, on 9 May 2024. Photograph: John G Mabanglo/EPA View image in fullscreen The pro-Palestinian student encampment at the University of California in Berkeley, California, on 9 May 2024. Photograph: John G Mabanglo/EPA This article is more than 1 year old Washington is pushing policies to combat antisemitism. Critics say they could violate free speech This article is more than 1 year old In the wake of campus protests, some say proposals are part of of a broader effort to silence criticism of Israel A gainst the backdrop of demonstrations against Israel’s war in Gaza on college campuses, the White House and Congress have announced a string of policies and commitments aimed at addressing what Joe Biden warned was a “ ferocious surge of antisemitism ” in the United States. Antisemitism was on the rise in the US before Hamas attacked Israel on 7 October, killing roughly 1,200 people and taking another 250 hostage. But the ensuing war has exacerbated the problem, with the law enforcement officials recording a spike in threats against Jewish Americans. Several of the proposals coming out of Washington DC have converged around college campuses, where hundreds of students have been arrested as part of pro-Palestinian demonstrations against Israel’s ongoing offensive in Gaza, which has killed tens of thousands of Palestinians and caused catastrophic levels of hunger. Many Jewish students have said that rhetoric common to the protests – for example, their denunciations of Zionism and calls for a Palestinian uprising – too often veers into antisemitism and poses a threat to their safety. A number of Democratic and Republican lawmakers, as well as the president, have echoed their fears, condemning documented instances of antisemitism on campus. But critics say some of the actions and polices under consideration threaten free speech and are part of a broader effort to silence legitimate criticism of Israel. “The view that these encampments, these student protests, are per se antisemitic, which I think some people have, is leading to very aggressive repression,” said Genevieve Lakier , a professor of law at the University of Chicago law school and an expert in the first amendment. “I also think it is incorrect, particularly when the student movement is being populated and led in many ways by Jewish students.” The wave of student activism against the war in Gaza has renewed a charged debate over what constitutes antisemitism. Many supporters of Israel say the situation on college campuses validates the view, articulated in 2022 by the Anti-Defamation League’s chief executive, Jonathan Greenblatt, that “anti-Zionism is antisemitism”. But the Jewish and non-Jewish students involved with campus protests say their critiques of Israel, and its rightwing government’s prosecution of the war, are legitimate political speech that should not be conflated with antisemitism. In remarks at a Holocaust remembrance ceremony at the Capitol last week, Biden vowed to leverage the full force of the US government to fight hate and bigotry against Jews and outlined specific policy steps his administration was taking to confront antisemitic discrimination in schools and universities. The debate is also playing out on Capitol Hill, where the Senate is considering a bill that would codify into federal law a definition of antisemitism adopted in 2016 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), an intergovernmental organization based in Stockholm. The IHRA defines antisemitism as “certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews”. But it also includes several modern examples of antisemitism that alarm free speech advocates, among them “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination”, claiming Israel’s existence is a “racist endeavor” and “applying double standards” to Israel that are not expected of other countries. Supporters say the bill, known as the Antisemitism Awareness Act , is critical. “We really believe it’s the single most important thing that Congress could do right now to help bring under control the rampant antisemitism we’ve seen on campus,” said Eric Fingerhut, president and CEO of the Jewish Federations of North America , which is lobbying in support of the legislation. But opponents are urging the Senate to block the bill, recently approved by the House in a resounding 320-91 vote , “In a democratic society, we’re allowed to engage in political advocacy and political protests that criticize any government in the world,” said Tyler Coward, lead counsel for government affairs at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (Fire). “Taking some ideas off the table for one country is classic viewpoint discrimination that the courts just won’t tolerate.” Fire has opposed iterations of this bill since it was introduced in 2016, citing concerns that the definition is “vague, overbroad, and includes criticism of Israeli government policy”. If enacted, the Department of Education would be required to use the definition when conducting federal investigations into alleged incidents of discrimination against Jewish students. Colleges or universities found to have violated the law could be stripped of federal funding. Fingerhut said free speech concerns were a “red herring”, arguing that the legislation was designed to give the Department of Education and academic institutions a “clear” standard for punishing acts of antisemitism. But the bill has drawn condemnation from pro-Palestinian advocacy groups who view it as an attempt to quash their ascendent movement. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (Cair) condemned the legislation as a “one-sided, and dishonest proposal about campus antisemitism that ignore[s] anti-Palestinian racism and conflates criticism of the Israeli government with antisemitism”. Since the Israel-Hamas conflict began seven months ago, the law enforcement officials have also warned of a rise in threats against Muslim and Arab Americans, and advocates are monitoring an uptick in Islamophobia on college campuses. One of the effort’s most notable opponents is a lawyer and scholar who authored the IHRA’s definition of antisemitism. Kenneth Stern, who is the director of the Bard Center for the Study of Hate and is Jewish, has said the definition was created with the purpose of collecting better data on antisemitism across borders, not to be turned into a campus hate-speech code. “In my experience, people who care about campus antisemitism, and want to do something about it, sometimes advocate things that feel good … but actually do great harm,” he testified in 2017 against a previous iteration of the bill. That version stalled, but two years later, proponents won a significant victory when Donald Trump issued a sweeping executive order instructing federal agencies to use the IHRA definition when investigating civil rights complaints. In recent months, alarm over rising antisemitism – which Jewish groups say is not unique to college campuses – appears to have broadened support for the Antisemitism Awareness Act. Still, the vote split House Democrats, including some Jewish members of the caucus, who disagreed over whether it was the right legislative fix. The representative Josh Gottheimer, a New Jersey Democrat who sponsored the House bill, said it was a necessary response to the “tidal wave” of antisemitism, while Maryland representative Jamie Raskin, a Democrat and constitutional scholar, voted for the bill but called it “essentially symbolic”. “At this moment of anguish and confusion over the dangerous surge of antisemitism, authoritarianism and racism all over the country and the world, it seems unlikely that this meaningless ‘gotcha’ legislation can help much – but neither can it hurt much,” Raskin said . But the representative Jerry Nadler of New York, who describes himself as “ an observant Jew, a proud Zionist, a strong supporter of Israel ”, voted against the bill. In an op-ed for the Washington Post , Nadler explained that he supported the sentiment behind the bill, but feared the it could “sweep in perfectly valid criticism of the state of Israel that, alone, does not necessarily constitute unlawful harassment or antisemitism”. “I want my Jewish community to feel safe on campus, but I do not need it shielded from controversial views simply because those views are unpopular,” he wrote. The legislation has also drawn opposition from some conservatives over concerns that it could be used to persecute Christians who express the belief that Jews killed Jesus, an assertion widely regarded as antisemitic that historians and Christian leaders, including Pope Benedict, have rejected . Civil liberties advocates are also raising concerns about an anti-terrorism bill approved overwhelmingly by the House last month in the wake of Iran’s unprecedented missile assault on Israel. Proponents say the measure is a necessary guardrail to prevent US-based organizations from providing financial support to Israel’s enemies. But critics have called it an “Orwellian bill aimed at silencing nonprofits that support Palestinian human rights”. Last week, Biden announced a series of actions that build on what the White House has called “the most comprehensive and ambitious US government effort to counter antisemitism in American history”. It included new guidance by the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights, sent to every school and college, that outlines examples of antisemitic discrimination and other forms of hate that could lead to a federal civil rights investigation. Since the 7 October attack, the Department of Education has launched more than 100 investigations into colleges and public school districts over allegations of “discrimination involving shared ancestry”, which include incidents of antisemitism and Islamophobia. The initiative also includes additional steps the Department of Homeland Security would take to help campuses improve safety. Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, House Republicans have vowed to use their majority to intensify scrutiny of antisemitism on college campuses, part of their election-year strategy to use the unrest as a political cudgel against Biden and the Democrats, who are deeply divided over the Israel-Gaza war. Wielding their oversight powers, several House Republican chairs have announced plans to investigate universities where pro-Palestinian student protests have flourished. On Wednesday, a House subcommittee held a hearing, titled Antisemitism on College Campuses , in which Jewish college students testified that their university administrations had failed to stop antisemitic threats and harassment. And during a congressional panel last week, Republicans challenged the leaders of some of the nation’s largest public school systems to do more to counter antisemitism in their schools. It follows a tense hearing on antisemitism with administration officials from some of the nation’s most prestigious universities that precipitated the resignations of the presidents of Harvard University and the University of Pennsylvania. A congressional appearance last month by Columbia University’s president, Minouche Shafik, escalated the antiwar protests at her school that then spread to campuses across the country. “There are a lot of shades of McCarthyism as the House keeps calling people in to shame and name them, to spread moral panic,” said Lakier of the University of Chicago law school. Facing enormous pressure from Congress and the Department of Education, as well as from students, faculty, donors and alumni, universities and colleges, Lakier argued, are collectively showing less tolerance for the pro-Palestinian student protests than they did for Vietnam war-era campus activism. On dozens of university campuses, state and local police officers, sometimes in riot gear , have dispersed pro-Palestinian protesters, often at the request of university officials. As many as 2,400 people have been arrested during pro-Palestinian campus protests in recent weeks, while many students have been suspended or expelled. “From a first amendment perspective, one hopes you learn from the past,” Lakier said, “but to be repeating it is distressing.” Explore more on these topics Antisemitism Israel-Gaza war Biden administration US campus protests Censorship US politics Islamophobia features Share Reuse this content The pro-Palestinian student encampment at the University of California in Berkeley, California, on 9 May 2024. Photograph: John G Mabanglo/EPA View image in fullscreen The pro-Palestinian student encampment at the University of California in Berkeley, California, on 9 May 2024. Photograph: John G Mabanglo/EPA The pro-Palestinian student encampment at the University of California in Berkeley, California, on 9 May 2024. Photograph: John G Mabanglo/EPA View image in fullscreen The pro-Palestinian student encampment at the University of California in Berkeley, California, on 9 May 2024. Photograph: John G Mabanglo/EPA The pro-Palestinian student encampment at the University of California in Berkeley, California, on 9 May 2024. Photograph: John G Mabanglo/EPA View image in fullscreen The pro-Palestinian student encampment at the University of California in Berkeley, California, on 9 May 2024. Photograph: John G Mabanglo/EPA The pro-Palestinian student encampment at the University of California in Berkeley, California, on 9 May 2024. Photograph: John G Mabanglo/EPA View image in fullscreen The pro-Palestinian student encampment at the University of California in Berkeley, California, on 9 May 2024. Photograph: John G Mabanglo/EPA The pro-Palestinian student encampment at the University of California in Berkeley, California, on 9 May 2024. Photograph: John G Mabanglo/EPA The pro-Palestinian student encampment at the University of California in Berkeley, California, on 9 May 2024. Photograph: John G Mabanglo/EPA This article is more than 1 year old Washington is pushing policies to combat antisemitism. Critics say they could violate free speech This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Washington is pushing policies to combat antisemitism. Critics say they could violate free speech This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Washington is pushing policies to combat antisemitism. Critics say they could violate free speech This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old In the wake of campus protests, some say proposals are part of of a broader effort to silence criticism of Israel In the wake of campus protests, some say proposals are part of of a broader effort to silence criticism of Israel In the wake of campus protests, some say proposals are part of of a broader effort to silence criticism of Israel A gainst the backdrop of demonstrations against Israel’s war in Gaza on college campuses, the White House and Congress have announced a string of policies and commitments aimed at addressing what Joe Biden warned was a “ ferocious surge of antisemitism ” in the United States. Antisemitism was on the rise in the US before Hamas attacked Israel on 7 October, killing roughly 1,200 people and taking another 250 hostage. But the ensuing war has exacerbated the problem, with the law enforcement officials recording a spike in threats against Jewish Americans. Several of the proposals coming out of Washington DC have converged around college campuses, where hundreds of students have been arrested as part of pro-Palestinian demonstrations against Israel’s ongoing offensive in Gaza, which has killed tens of thousands of Palestinians and caused catastrophic levels of hunger. Many Jewish students have said that rhetoric common to the protests – for example, their denunciations of Zionism and calls for a Palestinian uprising – too often veers into antisemitism and poses a threat to their safety. A number of Democratic and Republican lawmakers, as well as the president, have echoed their fears, condemning documented instances of antisemitism on campus. But critics say some of the actions and polices under consideration threaten free speech and are part of a broader effort to silence legitimate criticism of Israel. “The view that these encampments, these student protests, are per se antisemitic, which I think some people have, is leading to very aggressive repression,” said Genevieve Lakier , a professor of law at the University of Chicago law school and an expert in the first amendment. “I also think it is incorrect, particularly when the student movement is being populated and led in many ways by Jewish students.” The wave of student activism against the war in Gaza has renewed a charged debate over what constitutes antisemitism. Many supporters of Israel say the situation on college campuses validates the view, articulated in 2022 by the Anti-Defamation League’s chief executive, Jonathan Greenblatt, that “anti-Zionism is antisemitism”. But the Jewish and non-Jewish students involved with campus protests say their critiques of Israel, and its rightwing government’s prosecution of the war, are legitimate political speech that should not be conflated with antisemitism. In remarks at a Holocaust remembrance ceremony at the Capitol last week, Biden vowed to leverage the full force of the US government to fight hate and bigotry against Jews and outlined specific policy steps his administration was taking to confront antisemitic discrimination in schools and universities. The debate is also playing out on Capitol Hill, where the Senate is considering a bill that would codify into federal law a definition of antisemitism adopted in 2016 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), an intergovernmental organization based in Stockholm. The IHRA defines antisemitism as “certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews”. But it also includes several modern examples of antisemitism that alarm free speech advocates, among them “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination”, claiming Israel’s existence is a “racist endeavor” and “applying double standards” to Israel that are not expected of other countries. Supporters say the bill, known as the Antisemitism Awareness Act , is critical. “We really believe it’s the single most important thing that Congress could do right now to help bring under control the rampant antisemitism we’ve seen on campus,” said Eric Fingerhut, president and CEO of the Jewish Federations of North America , which is lobbying in support of the legislation. But opponents are urging the Senate to block the bill, recently approved by the House in a resounding 320-91 vote , “In a democratic society, we’re allowed to engage in political advocacy and political protests that criticize any government in the world,” said Tyler Coward, lead counsel for government affairs at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (Fire). “Taking some ideas off the table for one country is classic viewpoint discrimination that the courts just won’t tolerate.” Fire has opposed iterations of this bill since it was introduced in 2016, citing concerns that the definition is “vague, overbroad, and includes criticism of Israeli government policy”. If enacted, the Department of Education would be required to use the definition when conducting federal investigations into alleged incidents of discrimination against Jewish students. Colleges or universities found to have violated the law could be stripped of federal funding. Fingerhut said free speech concerns were a “red herring”, arguing that the legislation was designed to give the Department of Education and academic institutions a “clear” standard for punishing acts of antisemitism. But the bill has drawn condemnation from pro-Palestinian advocacy groups who view it as an attempt to quash their ascendent movement. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (Cair) condemned the legislation as a “one-sided, and dishonest proposal about campus antisemitism that ignore[s] anti-Palestinian racism and conflates criticism of the Israeli government with antisemitism”. Since the Israel-Hamas conflict began seven months ago, the law enforcement officials have also warned of a rise in threats against Muslim and Arab Americans, and advocates are monitoring an uptick in Islamophobia on college campuses. One of the effort’s most notable opponents is a lawyer and scholar who authored the IHRA’s definition of antisemitism. Kenneth Stern, who is the director of the Bard Center for the Study of Hate and is Jewish, has said the definition was created with the purpose of collecting better data on antisemitism across borders, not to be turned into a campus hate-speech code. “In my experience, people who care about campus antisemitism, and want to do something about it, sometimes advocate things that feel good … but actually do great harm,” he testified in 2017 against a previous iteration of the bill. That version stalled, but two years later, proponents won a significant victory when Donald Trump issued a sweeping executive order instructing federal agencies to use the IHRA definition when investigating civil rights complaints. In recent months, alarm over rising antisemitism – which Jewish groups say is not unique to college campuses – appears to have broadened support for the Antisemitism Awareness Act. Still, the vote split House Democrats, including some Jewish members of the caucus, who disagreed over whether it was the right legislative fix. The representative Josh Gottheimer, a New Jersey Democrat who sponsored the House bill, said it was a necessary response to the “tidal wave” of antisemitism, while Maryland representative Jamie Raskin, a Democrat and constitutional scholar, voted for the bill but called it “essentially symbolic”. “At this moment of anguish and confusion over the dangerous surge of antisemitism, authoritarianism and racism all over the country and the world, it seems unlikely that this meaningless ‘gotcha’ legislation can help much – but neither can it hurt much,” Raskin said . But the representative Jerry Nadler of New York, who describes himself as “ an observant Jew, a proud Zionist, a strong supporter of Israel ”, voted against the bill. In an op-ed for the Washington Post , Nadler explained that he supported the sentiment behind the bill, but feared the it could “sweep in perfectly valid criticism of the state of Israel that, alone, does not necessarily constitute unlawful harassment or antisemitism”. “I want my Jewish community to feel safe on campus, but I do not need it shielded from controversial views simply because those views are unpopular,” he wrote. The legislation has also drawn opposition from some conservatives over concerns that it could be used to persecute Christians who express the belief that Jews killed Jesus, an assertion widely regarded as antisemitic that historians and Christian leaders, including Pope Benedict, have rejected . Civil liberties advocates are also raising concerns about an anti-terrorism bill approved overwhelmingly by the House last month in the wake of Iran’s unprecedented missile assault on Israel. Proponents say the measure is a necessary guardrail to prevent US-based organizations from providing financial support to Israel’s enemies. But critics have called it an “Orwellian bill aimed at silencing nonprofits that support Palestinian human rights”. Last week, Biden announced a series of actions that build on what the White House has called “the most comprehensive and ambitious US government effort to counter antisemitism in American history”. It included new guidance by the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights, sent to every school and college, that outlines examples of antisemitic discrimination and other forms of hate that could lead to a federal civil rights investigation. Since the 7 October attack, the Department of Education has launched more than 100 investigations into colleges and public school districts over allegations of “discrimination involving shared ancestry”, which include incidents of antisemitism and Islamophobia. The initiative also includes additional steps the Department of Homeland Security would take to help campuses improve safety. Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, House Republicans have vowed to use their majority to intensify scrutiny of antisemitism on college campuses, part of their election-year strategy to use the unrest as a political cudgel against Biden and the Democrats, who are deeply divided over the Israel-Gaza war. Wielding their oversight powers, several House Republican chairs have announced plans to investigate universities where pro-Palestinian student protests have flourished. On Wednesday, a House subcommittee held a hearing, titled Antisemitism on College Campuses , in which Jewish college students testified that their university administrations had failed to stop antisemitic threats and harassment. And during a congressional panel last week, Republicans challenged the leaders of some of the nation’s largest public school systems to do more to counter antisemitism in their schools. It follows a tense hearing on antisemitism with administration officials from some of the nation’s most prestigious universities that precipitated the resignations of the presidents of Harvard University and the University of Pennsylvania. A congressional appearance last month by Columbia University’s president, Minouche Shafik, escalated the antiwar protests at her school that then spread to campuses across the country. “There are a lot of shades of McCarthyism as the House keeps calling people in to shame and name them, to spread moral panic,” said Lakier of the University of Chicago law school. Facing enormous pressure from Congress and the Department of Education, as well as from students, faculty, donors and alumni, universities and colleges, Lakier argued, are collectively showing less tolerance for the pro-Palestinian student protests than they did for Vietnam war-era campus activism. On dozens of university campuses, state and local police officers, sometimes in riot gear , have dispersed pro-Palestinian protesters, often at the request of university officials. As many as 2,400 people have been arrested during pro-Palestinian campus protests in recent weeks, while many students have been suspended or expelled. “From a first amendment perspective, one hopes you learn from the past,” Lakier said, “but to be repeating it is distressing.” Explore more on these topics Antisemitism Israel-Gaza war Biden administration US campus protests Censorship US politics Islamophobia features Share Reuse this content A gainst the backdrop of demonstrations against Israel’s war in Gaza on college campuses, the White House and Congress have announced a string of policies and commitments aimed at addressing what Joe Biden warned was a “ ferocious surge of antisemitism ” in the United States. Antisemitism was on the rise in the US before Hamas attacked Israel on 7 October, killing roughly 1,200 people and taking another 250 hostage. But the ensuing war has exacerbated the problem, with the law enforcement officials recording a spike in threats against Jewish Americans. Several of the proposals coming out of Washington DC have converged around college campuses, where hundreds of students have been arrested as part of pro-Palestinian demonstrations against Israel’s ongoing offensive in Gaza, which has killed tens of thousands of Palestinians and caused catastrophic levels of hunger. Many Jewish students have said that rhetoric common to the protests – for example, their denunciations of Zionism and calls for a Palestinian uprising – too often veers into antisemitism and poses a threat to their safety. A number of Democratic and Republican lawmakers, as well as the president, have echoed their fears, condemning documented instances of antisemitism on campus. But critics say some of the actions and polices under consideration threaten free speech and are part of a broader effort to silence legitimate criticism of Israel. “The view that these encampments, these student protests, are per se antisemitic, which I think some people have, is leading to very aggressive repression,” said Genevieve Lakier , a professor of law at the University of Chicago law school and an expert in the first amendment. “I also think it is incorrect, particularly when the student movement is being populated and led in many ways by Jewish students.” The wave of student activism against the war in Gaza has renewed a charged debate over what constitutes antisemitism. Many supporters of Israel say the situation on college campuses validates the view, articulated in 2022 by the Anti-Defamation League’s chief executive, Jonathan Greenblatt, that “anti-Zionism is antisemitism”. But the Jewish and non-Jewish students involved with campus protests say their critiques of Israel, and its rightwing government’s prosecution of the war, are legitimate political speech that should not be conflated with antisemitism. In remarks at a Holocaust remembrance ceremony at the Capitol last week, Biden vowed to leverage the full force of the US government to fight hate and bigotry against Jews and outlined specific policy steps his administration was taking to confront antisemitic discrimination in schools and universities. The debate is also playing out on Capitol Hill, where the Senate is considering a bill that would codify into federal law a definition of antisemitism adopted in 2016 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), an intergovernmental organization based in Stockholm. The IHRA defines antisemitism as “certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews”. But it also includes several modern examples of antisemitism that alarm free speech advocates, among them “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination”, claiming Israel’s existence is a “racist endeavor” and “applying double standards” to Israel that are not expected of other countries. Supporters say the bill, known as the Antisemitism Awareness Act , is critical. “We really believe it’s the single most important thing that Congress could do right now to help bring under control the rampant antisemitism we’ve seen on campus,” said Eric Fingerhut, president and CEO of the Jewish Federations of North America , which is lobbying in support of the legislation. But opponents are urging the Senate to block the bill, recently approved by the House in a resounding 320-91 vote , “In a democratic society, we’re allowed to engage in political advocacy and political protests that criticize any government in the world,” said Tyler Coward, lead counsel for government affairs at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (Fire). “Taking some ideas off the table for one country is classic viewpoint discrimination that the courts just won’t tolerate.” Fire has opposed iterations of this bill since it was introduced in 2016, citing concerns that the definition is “vague, overbroad, and includes criticism of Israeli government policy”. If enacted, the Department of Education would be required to use the definition when conducting federal investigations into alleged incidents of discrimination against Jewish students. Colleges or universities found to have violated the law could be stripped of federal funding. Fingerhut said free speech concerns were a “red herring”, arguing that the legislation was designed to give the Department of Education and academic institutions a “clear” standard for punishing acts of antisemitism. But the bill has drawn condemnation from pro-Palestinian advocacy groups who view it as an attempt to quash their ascendent movement. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (Cair) condemned the legislation as a “one-sided, and dishonest proposal about campus antisemitism that ignore[s] anti-Palestinian racism and conflates criticism of the Israeli government with antisemitism”. Since the Israel-Hamas conflict began seven months ago, the law enforcement officials have also warned of a rise in threats against Muslim and Arab Americans, and advocates are monitoring an uptick in Islamophobia on college campuses. One of the effort’s most notable opponents is a lawyer and scholar who authored the IHRA’s definition of antisemitism. Kenneth Stern, who is the director of the Bard Center for the Study of Hate and is Jewish, has said the definition was created with the purpose of collecting better data on antisemitism across borders, not to be turned into a campus hate-speech code. “In my experience, people who care about campus antisemitism, and want to do something about it, sometimes advocate things that feel good … but actually do great harm,” he testified in 2017 against a previous iteration of the bill. That version stalled, but two years later, proponents won a significant victory when Donald Trump issued a sweeping executive order instructing federal agencies to use the IHRA definition when investigating civil rights complaints. In recent months, alarm over rising antisemitism – which Jewish groups say is not unique to college campuses – appears to have broadened support for the Antisemitism Awareness Act. Still, the vote split House Democrats, including some Jewish members of the caucus, who disagreed over whether it was the right legislative fix. The representative Josh Gottheimer, a New Jersey Democrat who sponsored the House bill, said it was a necessary response to the “tidal wave” of antisemitism, while Maryland representative Jamie Raskin, a Democrat and constitutional scholar, voted for the bill but called it “essentially symbolic”. “At this moment of anguish and confusion over the dangerous surge of antisemitism, authoritarianism and racism all over the country and the world, it seems unlikely that this meaningless ‘gotcha’ legislation can help much – but neither can it hurt much,” Raskin said . But the representative Jerry Nadler of New York, who describes himself as “ an observant Jew, a proud Zionist, a strong supporter of Israel ”, voted against the bill. In an op-ed for the Washington Post , Nadler explained that he supported the sentiment behind the bill, but feared the it could “sweep in perfectly valid criticism of the state of Israel that, alone, does not necessarily constitute unlawful harassment or antisemitism”. “I want my Jewish community to feel safe on campus, but I do not need it shielded from controversial views simply because those views are unpopular,” he wrote. The legislation has also drawn opposition from some conservatives over concerns that it could be used to persecute Christians who express the belief that Jews killed Jesus, an assertion widely regarded as antisemitic that historians and Christian leaders, including Pope Benedict, have rejected . Civil liberties advocates are also raising concerns about an anti-terrorism bill approved overwhelmingly by the House last month in the wake of Iran’s unprecedented missile assault on Israel. Proponents say the measure is a necessary guardrail to prevent US-based organizations from providing financial support to Israel’s enemies. But critics have called it an “Orwellian bill aimed at silencing nonprofits that support Palestinian human rights”. Last week, Biden announced a series of actions that build on what the White House has called “the most comprehensive and ambitious US government effort to counter antisemitism in American history”. It included new guidance by the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights, sent to every school and college, that outlines examples of antisemitic discrimination and other forms of hate that could lead to a federal civil rights investigation. Since the 7 October attack, the Department of Education has launched more than 100 investigations into colleges and public school districts over allegations of “discrimination involving shared ancestry”, which include incidents of antisemitism and Islamophobia. The initiative also includes additional steps the Department of Homeland Security would take to help campuses improve safety. Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, House Republicans have vowed to use their majority to intensify scrutiny of antisemitism on college campuses, part of
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
Protesters vow to keep up pressure on Tesla as it expands German gigafactory
Environmental activists march in front of the Tesla plant in Grünheide, which plans to make 1m EVs a year. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Environmental activists march in front of the Tesla plant in Grünheide, which plans to make 1m EVs a year. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Protesters vow to keep up pressure on Tesla as it expands German gigafactory This article is more than 1 year old Town of Grünheide approved the US automaker’s plan on Thursday to double the capacity of the site, despite opposition Environmental protesters vowed to keep up the pressure on Tesla after failing to stop plans by Elon Musk’s company from expanding its sprawling electric vehicle plant outside Berlin. The town council of Grünheide, guarded by police and plain-clothed security guards, gave the green light on Thursday to the US automaker after a heated, nearly three-hour debate disrupted by heckling and booing from the audience of about 200 people. A scaled-back “compromise” scheme, which still needs the go-ahead from local environmental authorities, allows Tesla to enlarge the manufacturing facility and build new infrastructure to move logistics to rail lines and off local roads. The company intends to double the capacity of the German site to 100 gigawatt hours of battery production and 1m EVs a year in the face of increasing Chinese competition in the European market. The Tesla manager, Alexander Riederer, told the meeting that long term, the company would like to see 2m cars roll off the Grünheide assembly line each year. The gigafactory, the first Tesla operation of its kind in Europe, employs about 12,500 workers. A week before the meeting, activists, who had set up a protest camp in the town where the factory is located, attempted to storm the Tesla premises during a rally of about 800 people, clashing with police. Musk, the Tesla CEO, criticised the response as too lenient on his social media platform X. Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Read more The demonstrators, led by organisers Disrupt Tesla and supported by groups including Extinction Rebellion , argue that the enlarged site will cause damage to the local environment and threaten drinking water supplies. They also object to the impact on local communities in countries such as Argentina and Bolivia wreaked by lithium mining required to produce electric car batteries. Outside the gymnasium where the council meeting was held, about 50 activists held up banners reading “Water is a human right” and “People over profit”. Participants had their bags inspected before entering the hall and security guards confiscated all water bottles. The final vote – 11 in favour, six opposed, two absentions – was met with cries of “traitors!” and “we’ll remember!” and stunned silence among the demonstrators who later hugged and wept on the lawn in front of the building. Tesla welcomed the vote, saying it would provide “reliability for planning” while preventing 1,900 lorry trips each day on local roads thanks to the rail option. View image in fullscreen Riot police walk next to activists who tried to storm the Tesla building and set up camp outside. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images Esther Kamm, of the Turn Off the Tap on Tesla group, called the outcome a “catastrophe” and said protesters would not back down. “There are still many stages to come where we can cause disruptions and we will call on people to bring their pressure to bear,” she said, suggesting civil disobedience as well as legal appeals. “The town can still withdraw its approval or Tesla can say ‘we’re sick of all this resistance, it’s not worth it any more’.” However, many residents welcomed the coming expansion as good for the 9,000 people in Grünheide, about 25 miles (40km) south-east of central Berlin. “It frustrates me that the perspective you’re hearing here is so local, so not-in-my-back yard,” Bernd Rühl, 52, who works in the solar power sector. Rühl described himself as a former environmental activist and said he named his 20-year-old daughter after Julia ‘Butterfly’ Hill, who lived in an ancient California redwood tree for two years to keep it from being felled. He said he felt the protesters and local opponents failed to recognise the importance of the “transport transformation” away from Germany’s dominant car industry built on combustion engines. “You can say what you want about Elon Musk – he’s a polarising figure – but electric cars are the much better alternative if you care about global climate protection.” Robert Habeck, Germany’s economy minister of the Greens, criticised the Grünheide protests last week, saying that automobile manufacturing would remain a crucial component of Europe’s top economy for generations to come. “No one can have an interest in a Germany without car production,” he told Funke media group. “We are trying to get the cars of the future built here so that we can keep the jobs and value creation here. Tesla is building those kinds of cars.” Many of the protesters and residents said that the council’s vote had been “undemocratic” because it ran counter to a non-binding referendum in February. Citizens voted by a 62% majority with a large turnout at that time against Tesla’s plans. As a result, the company put forward a more modest scheme including cutting down 47 hectares of pine forest – half of what was originally planned. The protests, however, continued. The production site was shut down for a week in March after suspected arson cut off its power. A separate collective called Volcano group claimed responsibility for the fire, calling for the “complete destruction of the gigafactory”. Explore more on these topics Tesla Germany Elon Musk news Share Reuse this content Environmental activists march in front of the Tesla plant in Grünheide, which plans to make 1m EVs a year. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Environmental activists march in front of the Tesla plant in Grünheide, which plans to make 1m EVs a year. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Protesters vow to keep up pressure on Tesla as it expands German gigafactory This article is more than 1 year old Town of Grünheide approved the US automaker’s plan on Thursday to double the capacity of the site, despite opposition Environmental protesters vowed to keep up the pressure on Tesla after failing to stop plans by Elon Musk’s company from expanding its sprawling electric vehicle plant outside Berlin. The town council of Grünheide, guarded by police and plain-clothed security guards, gave the green light on Thursday to the US automaker after a heated, nearly three-hour debate disrupted by heckling and booing from the audience of about 200 people. A scaled-back “compromise” scheme, which still needs the go-ahead from local environmental authorities, allows Tesla to enlarge the manufacturing facility and build new infrastructure to move logistics to rail lines and off local roads. The company intends to double the capacity of the German site to 100 gigawatt hours of battery production and 1m EVs a year in the face of increasing Chinese competition in the European market. The Tesla manager, Alexander Riederer, told the meeting that long term, the company would like to see 2m cars roll off the Grünheide assembly line each year. The gigafactory, the first Tesla operation of its kind in Europe, employs about 12,500 workers. A week before the meeting, activists, who had set up a protest camp in the town where the factory is located, attempted to storm the Tesla premises during a rally of about 800 people, clashing with police. Musk, the Tesla CEO, criticised the response as too lenient on his social media platform X. Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Read more The demonstrators, led by organisers Disrupt Tesla and supported by groups including Extinction Rebellion , argue that the enlarged site will cause damage to the local environment and threaten drinking water supplies. They also object to the impact on local communities in countries such as Argentina and Bolivia wreaked by lithium mining required to produce electric car batteries. Outside the gymnasium where the council meeting was held, about 50 activists held up banners reading “Water is a human right” and “People over profit”. Participants had their bags inspected before entering the hall and security guards confiscated all water bottles. The final vote – 11 in favour, six opposed, two absentions – was met with cries of “traitors!” and “we’ll remember!” and stunned silence among the demonstrators who later hugged and wept on the lawn in front of the building. Tesla welcomed the vote, saying it would provide “reliability for planning” while preventing 1,900 lorry trips each day on local roads thanks to the rail option. View image in fullscreen Riot police walk next to activists who tried to storm the Tesla building and set up camp outside. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images Esther Kamm, of the Turn Off the Tap on Tesla group, called the outcome a “catastrophe” and said protesters would not back down. “There are still many stages to come where we can cause disruptions and we will call on people to bring their pressure to bear,” she said, suggesting civil disobedience as well as legal appeals. “The town can still withdraw its approval or Tesla can say ‘we’re sick of all this resistance, it’s not worth it any more’.” However, many residents welcomed the coming expansion as good for the 9,000 people in Grünheide, about 25 miles (40km) south-east of central Berlin. “It frustrates me that the perspective you’re hearing here is so local, so not-in-my-back yard,” Bernd Rühl, 52, who works in the solar power sector. Rühl described himself as a former environmental activist and said he named his 20-year-old daughter after Julia ‘Butterfly’ Hill, who lived in an ancient California redwood tree for two years to keep it from being felled. He said he felt the protesters and local opponents failed to recognise the importance of the “transport transformation” away from Germany’s dominant car industry built on combustion engines. “You can say what you want about Elon Musk – he’s a polarising figure – but electric cars are the much better alternative if you care about global climate protection.” Robert Habeck, Germany’s economy minister of the Greens, criticised the Grünheide protests last week, saying that automobile manufacturing would remain a crucial component of Europe’s top economy for generations to come. “No one can have an interest in a Germany without car production,” he told Funke media group. “We are trying to get the cars of the future built here so that we can keep the jobs and value creation here. Tesla is building those kinds of cars.” Many of the protesters and residents said that the council’s vote had been “undemocratic” because it ran counter to a non-binding referendum in February. Citizens voted by a 62% majority with a large turnout at that time against Tesla’s plans. As a result, the company put forward a more modest scheme including cutting down 47 hectares of pine forest – half of what was originally planned. The protests, however, continued. The production site was shut down for a week in March after suspected arson cut off its power. A separate collective called Volcano group claimed responsibility for the fire, calling for the “complete destruction of the gigafactory”. Explore more on these topics Tesla Germany Elon Musk news Share Reuse this content Environmental activists march in front of the Tesla plant in Grünheide, which plans to make 1m EVs a year. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Environmental activists march in front of the Tesla plant in Grünheide, which plans to make 1m EVs a year. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images Environmental activists march in front of the Tesla plant in Grünheide, which plans to make 1m EVs a year. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Environmental activists march in front of the Tesla plant in Grünheide, which plans to make 1m EVs a year. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images Environmental activists march in front of the Tesla plant in Grünheide, which plans to make 1m EVs a year. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Environmental activists march in front of the Tesla plant in Grünheide, which plans to make 1m EVs a year. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images Environmental activists march in front of the Tesla plant in Grünheide, which plans to make 1m EVs a year. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Environmental activists march in front of the Tesla plant in Grünheide, which plans to make 1m EVs a year. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images Environmental activists march in front of the Tesla plant in Grünheide, which plans to make 1m EVs a year. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images Environmental activists march in front of the Tesla plant in Grünheide, which plans to make 1m EVs a year. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Protesters vow to keep up pressure on Tesla as it expands German gigafactory This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Protesters vow to keep up pressure on Tesla as it expands German gigafactory This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Protesters vow to keep up pressure on Tesla as it expands German gigafactory This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Town of Grünheide approved the US automaker’s plan on Thursday to double the capacity of the site, despite opposition Town of Grünheide approved the US automaker’s plan on Thursday to double the capacity of the site, despite opposition Town of Grünheide approved the US automaker’s plan on Thursday to double the capacity of the site, despite opposition Environmental protesters vowed to keep up the pressure on Tesla after failing to stop plans by Elon Musk’s company from expanding its sprawling electric vehicle plant outside Berlin. The town council of Grünheide, guarded by police and plain-clothed security guards, gave the green light on Thursday to the US automaker after a heated, nearly three-hour debate disrupted by heckling and booing from the audience of about 200 people. A scaled-back “compromise” scheme, which still needs the go-ahead from local environmental authorities, allows Tesla to enlarge the manufacturing facility and build new infrastructure to move logistics to rail lines and off local roads. The company intends to double the capacity of the German site to 100 gigawatt hours of battery production and 1m EVs a year in the face of increasing Chinese competition in the European market. The Tesla manager, Alexander Riederer, told the meeting that long term, the company would like to see 2m cars roll off the Grünheide assembly line each year. The gigafactory, the first Tesla operation of its kind in Europe, employs about 12,500 workers. A week before the meeting, activists, who had set up a protest camp in the town where the factory is located, attempted to storm the Tesla premises during a rally of about 800 people, clashing with police. Musk, the Tesla CEO, criticised the response as too lenient on his social media platform X. Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Read more The demonstrators, led by organisers Disrupt Tesla and supported by groups including Extinction Rebellion , argue that the enlarged site will cause damage to the local environment and threaten drinking water supplies. They also object to the impact on local communities in countries such as Argentina and Bolivia wreaked by lithium mining required to produce electric car batteries. Outside the gymnasium where the council meeting was held, about 50 activists held up banners reading “Water is a human right” and “People over profit”. Participants had their bags inspected before entering the hall and security guards confiscated all water bottles. The final vote – 11 in favour, six opposed, two absentions – was met with cries of “traitors!” and “we’ll remember!” and stunned silence among the demonstrators who later hugged and wept on the lawn in front of the building. Tesla welcomed the vote, saying it would provide “reliability for planning” while preventing 1,900 lorry trips each day on local roads thanks to the rail option. View image in fullscreen Riot police walk next to activists who tried to storm the Tesla building and set up camp outside. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images Esther Kamm, of the Turn Off the Tap on Tesla group, called the outcome a “catastrophe” and said protesters would not back down. “There are still many stages to come where we can cause disruptions and we will call on people to bring their pressure to bear,” she said, suggesting civil disobedience as well as legal appeals. “The town can still withdraw its approval or Tesla can say ‘we’re sick of all this resistance, it’s not worth it any more’.” However, many residents welcomed the coming expansion as good for the 9,000 people in Grünheide, about 25 miles (40km) south-east of central Berlin. “It frustrates me that the perspective you’re hearing here is so local, so not-in-my-back yard,” Bernd Rühl, 52, who works in the solar power sector. Rühl described himself as a former environmental activist and said he named his 20-year-old daughter after Julia ‘Butterfly’ Hill, who lived in an ancient California redwood tree for two years to keep it from being felled. He said he felt the protesters and local opponents failed to recognise the importance of the “transport transformation” away from Germany’s dominant car industry built on combustion engines. “You can say what you want about Elon Musk – he’s a polarising figure – but electric cars are the much better alternative if you care about global climate protection.” Robert Habeck, Germany’s economy minister of the Greens, criticised the Grünheide protests last week, saying that automobile manufacturing would remain a crucial component of Europe’s top economy for generations to come. “No one can have an interest in a Germany without car production,” he told Funke media group. “We are trying to get the cars of the future built here so that we can keep the jobs and value creation here. Tesla is building those kinds of cars.” Many of the protesters and residents said that the council’s vote had been “undemocratic” because it ran counter to a non-binding referendum in February. Citizens voted by a 62% majority with a large turnout at that time against Tesla’s plans. As a result, the company put forward a more modest scheme including cutting down 47 hectares of pine forest – half of what was originally planned. The protests, however, continued. The production site was shut down for a week in March after suspected arson cut off its power. A separate collective called Volcano group claimed responsibility for the fire, calling for the “complete destruction of the gigafactory”. Explore more on these topics Tesla Germany Elon Musk news Share Reuse this content Environmental protesters vowed to keep up the pressure on Tesla after failing to stop plans by Elon Musk’s company from expanding its sprawling electric vehicle plant outside Berlin. The town council of Grünheide, guarded by police and plain-clothed security guards, gave the green light on Thursday to the US automaker after a heated, nearly three-hour debate disrupted by heckling and booing from the audience of about 200 people. A scaled-back “compromise” scheme, which still needs the go-ahead from local environmental authorities, allows Tesla to enlarge the manufacturing facility and build new infrastructure to move logistics to rail lines and off local roads. The company intends to double the capacity of the German site to 100 gigawatt hours of battery production and 1m EVs a year in the face of increasing Chinese competition in the European market. The Tesla manager, Alexander Riederer, told the meeting that long term, the company would like to see 2m cars roll off the Grünheide assembly line each year. The gigafactory, the first Tesla operation of its kind in Europe, employs about 12,500 workers. A week before the meeting, activists, who had set up a protest camp in the town where the factory is located, attempted to storm the Tesla premises during a rally of about 800 people, clashing with police. Musk, the Tesla CEO, criticised the response as too lenient on his social media platform X. Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Read more The demonstrators, led by organisers Disrupt Tesla and supported by groups including Extinction Rebellion , argue that the enlarged site will cause damage to the local environment and threaten drinking water supplies. They also object to the impact on local communities in countries such as Argentina and Bolivia wreaked by lithium mining required to produce electric car batteries. Outside the gymnasium where the council meeting was held, about 50 activists held up banners reading “Water is a human right” and “People over profit”. Participants had their bags inspected before entering the hall and security guards confiscated all water bottles. The final vote – 11 in favour, six opposed, two absentions – was met with cries of “traitors!” and “we’ll remember!” and stunned silence among the demonstrators who later hugged and wept on the lawn in front of the building. Tesla welcomed the vote, saying it would provide “reliability for planning” while preventing 1,900 lorry trips each day on local roads thanks to the rail option. View image in fullscreen Riot police walk next to activists who tried to storm the Tesla building and set up camp outside. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images Esther Kamm, of the Turn Off the Tap on Tesla group, called the outcome a “catastrophe” and said protesters would not back down. “There are still many stages to come where we can cause disruptions and we will call on people to bring their pressure to bear,” she said, suggesting civil disobedience as well as legal appeals. “The town can still withdraw its approval or Tesla can say ‘we’re sick of all this resistance, it’s not worth it any more’.” However, many residents welcomed the coming expansion as good for the 9,000 people in Grünheide, about 25 miles (40km) south-east of central Berlin. “It frustrates me that the perspective you’re hearing here is so local, so not-in-my-back yard,” Bernd Rühl, 52, who works in the solar power sector. Rühl described himself as a former environmental activist and said he named his 20-year-old daughter after Julia ‘Butterfly’ Hill, who lived in an ancient California redwood tree for two years to keep it from being felled. He said he felt the protesters and local opponents failed to recognise the importance of the “transport transformation” away from Germany’s dominant car industry built on combustion engines. “You can say what you want about Elon Musk – he’s a polarising figure – but electric cars are the much better alternative if you care about global climate protection.” Robert Habeck, Germany’s economy minister of the Greens, criticised the Grünheide protests last week, saying that automobile manufacturing would remain a crucial component of Europe’s top economy for generations to come. “No one can have an interest in a Germany without car production,” he told Funke media group. “We are trying to get the cars of the future built here so that we can keep the jobs and value creation here. Tesla is building those kinds of cars.” Many of the protesters and residents said that the council’s vote had been “undemocratic” because it ran counter to a non-binding referendum in February. Citizens voted by a 62% majority with a large turnout at that time against Tesla’s plans. As a result, the company put forward a more modest scheme including cutting down 47 hectares of pine forest – half of what was originally planned. The protests, however, continued. The production site was shut down for a week in March after suspected arson cut off its power. A separate collective called Volcano group claimed responsibility for the fire, calling for the “complete destruction of the gigafactory”. Explore more on these topics Tesla Germany Elon Musk news Share Reuse this content Environmental protesters vowed to keep up the pressure on Tesla after failing to stop plans by Elon Musk’s company from expanding its sprawling electric vehicle plant outside Berlin. The town council of Grünheide, guarded by police and plain-clothed security guards, gave the green light on Thursday to the US automaker after a heated, nearly three-hour debate disrupted by heckling and booing from the audience of about 200 people. A scaled-back “compromise” scheme, which still needs the go-ahead from local environmental authorities, allows Tesla to enlarge the manufacturing facility and build new infrastructure to move logistics to rail lines and off local roads. The company intends to double the capacity of the German site to 100 gigawatt hours of battery production and 1m EVs a year in the face of increasing Chinese competition in the European market. The Tesla manager, Alexander Riederer, told the meeting that long term, the company would like to see 2m cars roll off the Grünheide assembly line each year. The gigafactory, the first Tesla operation of its kind in Europe, employs about 12,500 workers. A week before the meeting, activists, who had set up a protest camp in the town where the factory is located, attempted to storm the Tesla premises during a rally of about 800 people, clashing with police. Musk, the Tesla CEO, criticised the response as too lenient on his social media platform X. Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Read more The demonstrators, led by organisers Disrupt Tesla and supported by groups including Extinction Rebellion , argue that the enlarged site will cause damage to the local environment and threaten drinking water supplies. They also object to the impact on local communities in countries such as Argentina and Bolivia wreaked by lithium mining required to produce electric car batteries. Outside the gymnasium where the council meeting was held, about 50 activists held up banners reading “Water is a human right” and “People over profit”. Participants had their bags inspected before entering the hall and security guards confiscated all water bottles. The final vote – 11 in favour, six opposed, two absentions – was met with cries of “traitors!” and “we’ll remember!” and stunned silence among the demonstrators who later hugged and wept on the lawn in front of the building. Tesla welcomed the vote, saying it would provide “reliability for planning” while preventing 1,900 lorry trips each day on local roads thanks to the rail option. View image in fullscreen Riot police walk next to activists who tried to storm the Tesla building and set up camp outside. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images Esther Kamm, of the Turn Off the Tap on Tesla group, called the outcome a “catastrophe” and said protesters would not back down. “There are still many stages to come where we can cause disruptions and we will call on people to bring their pressure to bear,” she said, suggesting civil disobedience as well as legal appeals. “The town can still withdraw its approval or Tesla can say ‘we’re sick of all this resistance, it’s not worth it any more’.” However, many residents welcomed the coming expansion as good for the 9,000 people in Grünheide, about 25 miles (40km) south-east of central Berlin. “It frustrates me that the perspective you’re hearing here is so local, so not-in-my-back yard,” Bernd Rühl, 52, who works in the solar power sector. Rühl described himself as a former environmental activist and said he named his 20-year-old daughter after Julia ‘Butterfly’ Hill, who lived in an ancient California redwood tree for two years to keep it from being felled. He said he felt the protesters and local opponents failed to recognise the importance of the “transport transformation” away from Germany’s dominant car industry built on combustion engines. “You can say what you want about Elon Musk – he’s a polarising figure – but electric cars are the much better alternative if you care about global climate protection.” Robert Habeck, Germany’s economy minister of the Greens, criticised the Grünheide protests last week, saying that automobile manufacturing would remain a crucial component of Europe’s top economy for generations to come. “No one can have an interest in a Germany without car production,” he told Funke media group. “We are trying to get the cars of the future built here so that we can keep the jobs and value creation here. Tesla is building those kinds of cars.” Many of the protesters and residents said that the council’s vote had been “undemocratic” because it ran counter to a non-binding referendum in February. Citizens voted by a 62% majority with a large turnout at that time against Tesla’s plans. As a result, the company put forward a more modest scheme including cutting down 47 hectares of pine forest – half of what was originally planned. The protests, however, continued. The production site was shut down for a week in March after suspected arson cut off its power. A separate collective called Volcano group claimed responsibility for the fire, calling for the “complete destruction of the gigafactory”. Environmental protesters vowed to keep up the pressure on Tesla after failing to stop plans by Elon Musk’s company from expanding its sprawling electric vehicle plant outside Berlin. The town council of Grünheide, guarded by police and plain-clothed security guards, gave the green light on Thursday to the US automaker after a heated, nearly three-hour debate disrupted by heckling and booing from the audience of about 200 people. A scaled-back “compromise” scheme, which still needs the go-ahead from local environmental authorities, allows Tesla to enlarge the manufacturing facility and build new infrastructure to move logistics to rail lines and off local roads. The company intends to double the capacity of the German site to 100 gigawatt hours of battery production and 1m EVs a year in the face of increasing Chinese competition in the European market. The Tesla manager, Alexander Riederer, told the meeting that long term, the company would like to see 2m cars roll off the Grünheide assembly line each year. The gigafactory, the first Tesla operation of its kind in Europe, employs about 12,500 workers. A week before the meeting, activists, who had set up a protest camp in the town where the factory is located, attempted to storm the Tesla premises during a rally of about 800 people, clashing with police. Musk, the Tesla CEO, criticised the response as too lenient on his social media platform X. Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Read more The demonstrators, led by organisers Disrupt Tesla and supported by groups including Extinction Rebellion , argue that the enlarged site will cause damage to the local environment and threaten drinking water supplies. They also object to the impact on local communities in countries such as Argentina and Bolivia wreaked by lithium mining required to produce electric car batteries. Outside the gymnasium where the council meeting was held, about 50 activists held up banners reading “Water is a human right” and “People over profit”. Participants had their bags inspected before entering the hall and security guards confiscated all water bottles. The final vote – 11 in favour, six opposed, two absentions – was met with cries of “traitors!” and “we’ll remember!” and stunned silence among the demonstrators who later hugged and wept on the lawn in front of the building. Tesla welcomed the vote, saying it would provide “reliability for planning” while preventing 1,900 lorry trips each day on local roads thanks to the rail option. View image in fullscreen Riot police walk next to activists who tried to storm the Tesla building and set up camp outside. Photograph: John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images Esther Kamm, of the Turn Off the Tap on Tesla group, called the outcome a “catastrophe” and said protesters would not back down. “There are still many stages to come where we can cause disruptions and we will call on people to bring their pressure to bear,” she said, suggesting civil disobedience as well as legal appeals. “The town can still withdraw its approval or Tesla can say ‘we’re sick of all this resistance, it’s not worth it any more’.” However, many residents welcomed the coming expansion as good for the 9,000 people in Grünheide, about 25 miles (40km) south-east of central Berlin. “It frustrates me that the perspective you’re hearing here is so local, so not-in-my-back yard,” Bernd Rühl, 52, who works in the solar power sector. Rühl described himself as a former environmental activist and said he named his 20-year-old daughter after Julia ‘Butterfly’ Hill, who lived in an ancient California redwood tree for two years to keep it from being felled. He said he felt the protesters and local opponents failed to recognise the importance of the “transport transformation” away from Germany’s dominant car industry built on combustion engines. “You can say what you want about Elon Musk – he’s a polarising figure – but electric cars are the much better alternative if you care about global climate protection.” Robert Habeck, Germany’s economy minister of the Greens, criticised the Grünheide protests last week, saying that automobile manufacturing would remain a crucial component of Europe’s top economy for generations to come. “No one can have an interest in a Germany without car production,” he told Funke media group. “We are trying to get the cars of the future built here so that we can keep the jobs and value creation here. Tesla is building those kinds of cars.” Many of the protesters and residents said that the council’s vote had been “undemocratic” because it ran counter to a non-binding referendum in February. Citizens voted by a 62% majority with a large turnout at that time against Tesla’s plans. As a result, the company put forward a more modest scheme including cutting down 47 hectares of pine forest – half of what was originally planned. The protests, however, continued. The production site was shut down for a week in March after suspected arson cut off its power. A separate collective called Volcano group claimed responsibility for the fire, calling for the “complete destruction of the gigafactory”. Environmental protesters vowed to keep up the pressure on Tesla after failing to stop plans by Elon Musk’s company from expanding its sprawling electric vehicle plant outside Berlin. The town council of Grünheide, guarded by police and plain-clothed security guards, gave the green light on Thursday to the US automaker after a heated, nearly three-hour debate disrupted by heckling and booing from the audience of about 200 people. A scaled-back “compromise” scheme, which still needs the go-ahead from local environmental authorities, allows Tesla to enlarge the manufacturing facility and build new infrastructure to move logistics to rail lines and off local roads. The company intends to double the capacity of the German site to 100 gigawatt hours of battery production and 1m EVs a year in the face of increasing Chinese competition in the European market. The Tesla manager, Alexander Riederer, told the meeting that long term, the company would like to see 2m cars roll off the Grünheide assembly line each year. The gigafactory, the first Tesla operation of its kind in Europe, employs about 12,500 workers. A week before the meeting, activists, who had set up a protest camp in the town where the factory is located, attempted to storm the Tesla premises during a rally of about 800 people, clashing with police. Musk, the Tesla CEO, criticised the response as too lenient on his social media platform X. Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Read more Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Read more Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Read more Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? Has Elon Musk driven Tesla off track? The demonstrators, led by organisers Disrupt Tesla and supported by groups including Extinction Rebellion , argue that the enlarged site will cause damage to the local environment and threaten drinking water supplies. They also object to the impact on local communities in countries such as Argentina and Bolivia wreaked by lithium mining required to produce electric car batteries. Outside the gymnasium where the council meeting was held, about 50 activists held up banners reading “Water is a human right” and “People over profit”. Participants had their bags inspected before entering the hall and security guards confiscated all water bottles. The final vote – 11 in favour, six opposed, two absentions – was met with cries of “traitors!” and “we’ll remember!” and stunned silence among the demonstrators who later hugged and wept on the lawn in front of the building. Tesla welcomed the vote, saying it would provide “reliability for planning” while preventing 1,900 lorry trips each day on local roads thanks to the rail option. Esther Kamm, of the Turn Off the Tap on Tesla group, called the outcome a “catastrophe” and said protesters would not back down. “There are still many stages to come where we can cause disruptions and we will call on people to bring their pressure to bear,” she said, suggesting civil disobedience as well as legal appeals. “The town can still withdraw its approval or Tesla can say ‘we’re sick of all this resistance, it’s not worth it any more’.” However, many residents welcomed the coming expansion as good for the 9,000 people in Grünheide, about 25 miles (40km) south-east of central Berlin. “It frustrates me that the perspective you’re hearing here is so local, so not-in-my-back yard,” Bernd Rühl, 52, who works in the solar power sector. Rühl described himself as a former environmental activist and said he named his 20-year-old daughter after Julia ‘Butterfly’ Hill, who lived in an ancient California redwood tree for two years to keep it from being felled. He said he felt the protesters and local opponents failed to recognise the importance of the “transport transformation” away from Germany’s dominant car industry built on combustion engines. “You can say what you want about Elon Musk – he’s a polarising figure – but electric cars are the much better alternative if you care about global climate protection.” Robert Habeck, Germany’s economy minister of the Greens, criticised the Grünheide protests last week, saying that automobile manufacturing would remain a crucial component of Europe’s top economy for generations to come. “No one can have an interest in a Germany without car production,” he told Funke media group. “We are trying to get the cars of the future built here so that we can keep the jobs and value creation here. Tesla is building those kinds of cars.” Many of the protesters and residents said that the council’s vote had been “undemocratic” because it ran counter to a non-binding referendum in February. Citizens voted by a 62% majority with a large turnout at that time against Tesla’s plans. As a result, the company put forward a more modest scheme including cutting down 47 hectares of pine forest – half of what was originally planned. The protests, however, continued. The production site was shut down for a week in March after suspected arson cut off its power. A separate collective called Volcano group claimed responsibility for the fire, calling for the “complete destruction of the gigafactory”. Explore more on these topics Tesla Germany Elon Musk news Share Reuse this content |
‘Art-washing’? Unease as British cultural institutions lend lustre to Saudi trade push
Oliver Dowden, the deputy prime minister, being greeted at the Great Futures Anglo-Saudi trade conference this week. Photograph: Cabinet Office/Twitter View image in fullscreen Oliver Dowden, the deputy prime minister, being greeted at the Great Futures Anglo-Saudi trade conference this week. Photograph: Cabinet Office/Twitter This article is more than 1 year old ‘Art-washing’? Unease as British cultural institutions lend lustre to Saudi trade push This article is more than 1 year old Campaigners say move to use the arts to reinforce economic ties with Riyadh may help to launder Gulf state’s human rights record It was an unusual gig for YolanDa Brown, the saxophonist and composer who this week performed high above the clouds for a UK delegation on a private British Airways plane bound for Saudi Arabia . The flight was part of a trade offensive for British businesses and institutions in Riyadh, with Brown’s performance part of a new focus for Saudi-UK relations – international arts. The two-day Great Futures conference, in the Saudi capital, attracted 450 UK business leaders and politicians to its panels, dinners and meetings. Notable in the delegation was a significant contingent of cultural bodies, a move which immediately drew criticism that the Gulf state was “art-washing” – using Britain’s venerable institutions to improve its international image even as concerns over Riyadh’s human rights record continue to mount. “British businesses have a responsibility to mitigate their risk of contributing to human rights harms, which includes the risk of reputation laundering,” said Joey Shea, a researcher focused on Saudi Arabia at Human Rights Watch. For Britain’s smart business elite, a reminder not to wear “tight-fitting” clothing or garments carrying “profane slogans” might not have been entirely necessary. But since representatives of the UK government-funded Great trade campaign sent delegates, the “cultural guidance” (which also carried advice on local laws and alcohol consumption) served as a reminder of the problematic backdrop to the Middle East charm offensive. #GREATFUTURES Riyadh is expected to secure a constellation of investment across sectors: from financial services to higher education. It is the launch of a year-long campaign to highlight UK expertise and capability in sectors that support Saudi Arabia’s #Vision2030 🇸🇦🇬🇧 pic.twitter.com/A7gLBrO3yC — GREAT Britain and Northern Ireland Campaign (@GREATBritain) May 15, 2024 The Great campaign was set up in 2011 to encourage trade and tourism and, in 2021, received £60m in funding designed to complement the post-Brexit push for new trade deals. The outcome has been £4.5bn in exports and investment in 13 years, its supporters claim. Britain’s trading relationship with Saudi is well established – from supplying Lightning and Strikemaster aircraft in the 1960s to the 1985 al-Yamamah guns-for-oil deal , which was embroiled in corruption allegations. The relationship is now broadening into industries ranging from tech to high-profile sporting events . Saudi exports were worth £13.1bn to Britain in 2023. With the oil money continuing to flow from Saudi’s $700bn Public Investment Fund, British ministers and businesses are keen for a slice of the action, as the regime of the crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman , splurges on ambitious infrastructure projects, including a desert ski resort and a ( scaled-back ) project to build a 105-mile long “landscraper” city named the Line. Britain’s establishment is throwing itself into the relationship. The UK’s ambassador to Riyadh, Neil Compton, talked up the “transformational change” he had witnessed in post, in a letter to the visiting delegates. On stage, the British minister for investment, the peer Dominic Johnson, said he had been “grabbing people by the lapels” to champion Saudi after his first trip. There were also industry-specific dinners, including one hosted at the Unesco heritage site at Ad-Dir’iyah. Beneath this grandeur is a hum of international disquiet around the kingdom’s human rights record, from its death penalty to the fact that homosexuality remains a criminal offence. Downing Street said the deputy prime minister, Oliver Dowden, had raised allegations that Saudi forces had been “told to kill”, after claims concerning a man who protested about evictions to make way for the Line and who was shot and killed. The foreign secretary, David Cameron, recently said the UK opposed “child executions” after concerns over apparent abuses in Saudi. At the conference, speakers represented a hodgepodge of interests, ranging from sport to the construction and automotive industries. The designer Thomas Heatherwick, former footballer Rio Ferdinand, and a clutch of Tory figures, including the party’s former co-chair, Ben Elliot, appeared. Pointedly, the head coach of the Saudi-backed Newcastle United’s women’s football team was present, as was club director Amanda Staveley. The titans of the FTSE were notably absent, with just HSBC and British Airways attending. But perhaps most notable were the British cultural institutions that had made the trip: the Southbank Centre, an organisation candid about its desperate need for fresh funds ; the National Theatre; and the Royal Opera House. View image in fullscreen Lucy Frazer, the culture secretary, was forced to rebut claims by campaigners that British institutions were lending ‘legitimacy’ to the Saudi government. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA Under Saudi’s Vision 2030 strategy, 11 dedicated cultural commissions are being set up, including one for theatre and the performing arts, with the aim of building partnerships with existing specialists in each area. In her speech , the culture secretary, Lucy Frazer, lauded the opportunities for film financing, new recording studios and the hosting of large concerts and festivals. In the museum sector, the Louvre’s offshoot in Abu Dhabi has provided a blueprint for western museums opening sites in the Middle East, while last year the Science Museum Group signed an agreement with Saudi to create a “museums hub”– sharing knowledge between international researchers – in Riyadh. “This expo will generate hundreds of millions if not billions for the UK,” said Jonathan Shalit, the celebrity agent who managed the singer Charlotte Church. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Shalit, whose InterTalent Group counts the singers Pixie Lott and Lulu as clients, chaired a panel that included the head of Virgin Music UK, and argued that the kingdom’s young population (60% of Saudis are under 30) offered a “huge opportunity” for the creative industries. High-profile western artists are increasingly performing in the region; last year’s desert Soundstorm festival featured Bruno Mars, David Guetta and Metallica. But not everyone is convinced. “The Saudi government uses its near limitless funds to host high-profile events with celebrities, athletes, and now artists and cultural institutions, to whitewash its poor human rights record and deflect efforts to hold its leadership accountable for terrible abuses,” said Shea. “Artists and cultural institutions must speak out about the country’s grave abuses or risk becoming complicit in them.” Frazer was forced to rebut claims by rights campaigners that the institutions were handing “legitimacy” to the Saudi state. James Lynch, co-founder of the workers’ rights group FairSquare, told Middle East Eye: “There are serious questions for these cultural leaders, not least whether seeking partnerships with the Saudi crown prince’s gigaprojects really fits with the values their institutions claim to promote, or whether they are participating in a high-level art-washing exercise.” The kingdom already stands accused of sports-washing, with vast sums spent on acquiring and hosting major event, on the takeover of Newcastle United, and on a successful bid for the 2034 World Cup . For their part, the UK’s cultural institutions have argued that their presence could help push for societal change. View image in fullscreen The stage at the Soundstorm festival, where Bruno Mars, David Guetta and Metallica performed last year. Photograph: MD Beast/Getty Images “Many in the creative industries are not ready to embrace Saudi yet,” said Shalit. “A lot of people in the LGBTQ+ community would not be comfortable coming to Saudi. I understand that. If you’re a touring theatre company reliant on convincing a company of 200 performers to come to Saudi, that may be a problem.” But, he said, last year’s first onstage kiss in Saudi – between a man and a woman in Phantom of the Opera – had been a significant moment. “I would say to the people who do not want to visit Saudi: you do not change the narrative by not engaging. I get the sense they’re happy to have the conversation – change is afoot.” Saudi’s youthful demographic could also hold the key in another fertile sector – that of education. “This country is going places,” said Karan Bilimoria, the former CBI president, who is chancellor of the University of Birmingham, which has 500 Saudi students. “It’s both ways – students coming to the UK, and schools and universities expanding here.” The University of Strathclyde will open in the kingdom this year, with a drive to train women in fields such as engineering and business. For cash-strapped British universities , deep-pocketed students and lucrative overseas tie-ups look appealing. But what of Saudi’s fossil-fuelled impact on the climate crisis ? “I do not want to speak about that,” said Bilimoria. “I’m here with a positive frame of mind to build relations between our countries.” Explore more on these topics Trade policy Saudi Arabia International trade Conservative leadership Human rights Museums Middle East and north Africa features Share Reuse this content Oliver Dowden, the deputy prime minister, being greeted at the Great Futures Anglo-Saudi trade conference this week. Photograph: Cabinet Office/Twitter View image in fullscreen Oliver Dowden, the deputy prime minister, being greeted at the Great Futures Anglo-Saudi trade conference this week. Photograph: Cabinet Office/Twitter This article is more than 1 year old ‘Art-washing’? Unease as British cultural institutions lend lustre to Saudi trade push This article is more than 1 year old Campaigners say move to use the arts to reinforce economic ties with Riyadh may help to launder Gulf state’s human rights record It was an unusual gig for YolanDa Brown, the saxophonist and composer who this week performed high above the clouds for a UK delegation on a private British Airways plane bound for Saudi Arabia . The flight was part of a trade offensive for British businesses and institutions in Riyadh, with Brown’s performance part of a new focus for Saudi-UK relations – international arts. The two-day Great Futures conference, in the Saudi capital, attracted 450 UK business leaders and politicians to its panels, dinners and meetings. Notable in the delegation was a significant contingent of cultural bodies, a move which immediately drew criticism that the Gulf state was “art-washing” – using Britain’s venerable institutions to improve its international image even as concerns over Riyadh’s human rights record continue to mount. “British businesses have a responsibility to mitigate their risk of contributing to human rights harms, which includes the risk of reputation laundering,” said Joey Shea, a researcher focused on Saudi Arabia at Human Rights Watch. For Britain’s smart business elite, a reminder not to wear “tight-fitting” clothing or garments carrying “profane slogans” might not have been entirely necessary. But since representatives of the UK government-funded Great trade campaign sent delegates, the “cultural guidance” (which also carried advice on local laws and alcohol consumption) served as a reminder of the problematic backdrop to the Middle East charm offensive. #GREATFUTURES Riyadh is expected to secure a constellation of investment across sectors: from financial services to higher education. It is the launch of a year-long campaign to highlight UK expertise and capability in sectors that support Saudi Arabia’s #Vision2030 🇸🇦🇬🇧 pic.twitter.com/A7gLBrO3yC — GREAT Britain and Northern Ireland Campaign (@GREATBritain) May 15, 2024 The Great campaign was set up in 2011 to encourage trade and tourism and, in 2021, received £60m in funding designed to complement the post-Brexit push for new trade deals. The outcome has been £4.5bn in exports and investment in 13 years, its supporters claim. Britain’s trading relationship with Saudi is well established – from supplying Lightning and Strikemaster aircraft in the 1960s to the 1985 al-Yamamah guns-for-oil deal , which was embroiled in corruption allegations. The relationship is now broadening into industries ranging from tech to high-profile sporting events . Saudi exports were worth £13.1bn to Britain in 2023. With the oil money continuing to flow from Saudi’s $700bn Public Investment Fund, British ministers and businesses are keen for a slice of the action, as the regime of the crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman , splurges on ambitious infrastructure projects, including a desert ski resort and a ( scaled-back ) project to build a 105-mile long “landscraper” city named the Line. Britain’s establishment is throwing itself into the relationship. The UK’s ambassador to Riyadh, Neil Compton, talked up the “transformational change” he had witnessed in post, in a letter to the visiting delegates. On stage, the British minister for investment, the peer Dominic Johnson, said he had been “grabbing people by the lapels” to champion Saudi after his first trip. There were also industry-specific dinners, including one hosted at the Unesco heritage site at Ad-Dir’iyah. Beneath this grandeur is a hum of international disquiet around the kingdom’s human rights record, from its death penalty to the fact that homosexuality remains a criminal offence. Downing Street said the deputy prime minister, Oliver Dowden, had raised allegations that Saudi forces had been “told to kill”, after claims concerning a man who protested about evictions to make way for the Line and who was shot and killed. The foreign secretary, David Cameron, recently said the UK opposed “child executions” after concerns over apparent abuses in Saudi. At the conference, speakers represented a hodgepodge of interests, ranging from sport to the construction and automotive industries. The designer Thomas Heatherwick, former footballer Rio Ferdinand, and a clutch of Tory figures, including the party’s former co-chair, Ben Elliot, appeared. Pointedly, the head coach of the Saudi-backed Newcastle United’s women’s football team was present, as was club director Amanda Staveley. The titans of the FTSE were notably absent, with just HSBC and British Airways attending. But perhaps most notable were the British cultural institutions that had made the trip: the Southbank Centre, an organisation candid about its desperate need for fresh funds ; the National Theatre; and the Royal Opera House. View image in fullscreen Lucy Frazer, the culture secretary, was forced to rebut claims by campaigners that British institutions were lending ‘legitimacy’ to the Saudi government. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA Under Saudi’s Vision 2030 strategy, 11 dedicated cultural commissions are being set up, including one for theatre and the performing arts, with the aim of building partnerships with existing specialists in each area. In her speech , the culture secretary, Lucy Frazer, lauded the opportunities for film financing, new recording studios and the hosting of large concerts and festivals. In the museum sector, the Louvre’s offshoot in Abu Dhabi has provided a blueprint for western museums opening sites in the Middle East, while last year the Science Museum Group signed an agreement with Saudi to create a “museums hub”– sharing knowledge between international researchers – in Riyadh. “This expo will generate hundreds of millions if not billions for the UK,” said Jonathan Shalit, the celebrity agent who managed the singer Charlotte Church. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Shalit, whose InterTalent Group counts the singers Pixie Lott and Lulu as clients, chaired a panel that included the head of Virgin Music UK, and argued that the kingdom’s young population (60% of Saudis are under 30) offered a “huge opportunity” for the creative industries. High-profile western artists are increasingly performing in the region; last year’s desert Soundstorm festival featured Bruno Mars, David Guetta and Metallica. But not everyone is convinced. “The Saudi government uses its near limitless funds to host high-profile events with celebrities, athletes, and now artists and cultural institutions, to whitewash its poor human rights record and deflect efforts to hold its leadership accountable for terrible abuses,” said Shea. “Artists and cultural institutions must speak out about the country’s grave abuses or risk becoming complicit in them.” Frazer was forced to rebut claims by rights campaigners that the institutions were handing “legitimacy” to the Saudi state. James Lynch, co-founder of the workers’ rights group FairSquare, told Middle East Eye: “There are serious questions for these cultural leaders, not least whether seeking partnerships with the Saudi crown prince’s gigaprojects really fits with the values their institutions claim to promote, or whether they are participating in a high-level art-washing exercise.” The kingdom already stands accused of sports-washing, with vast sums spent on acquiring and hosting major event, on the takeover of Newcastle United, and on a successful bid for the 2034 World Cup . For their part, the UK’s cultural institutions have argued that their presence could help push for societal change. View image in fullscreen The stage at the Soundstorm festival, where Bruno Mars, David Guetta and Metallica performed last year. Photograph: MD Beast/Getty Images “Many in the creative industries are not ready to embrace Saudi yet,” said Shalit. “A lot of people in the LGBTQ+ community would not be comfortable coming to Saudi. I understand that. If you’re a touring theatre company reliant on convincing a company of 200 performers to come to Saudi, that may be a problem.” But, he said, last year’s first onstage kiss in Saudi – between a man and a woman in Phantom of the Opera – had been a significant moment. “I would say to the people who do not want to visit Saudi: you do not change the narrative by not engaging. I get the sense they’re happy to have the conversation – change is afoot.” Saudi’s youthful demographic could also hold the key in another fertile sector – that of education. “This country is going places,” said Karan Bilimoria, the former CBI president, who is chancellor of the University of Birmingham, which has 500 Saudi students. “It’s both ways – students coming to the UK, and schools and universities expanding here.” The University of Strathclyde will open in the kingdom this year, with a drive to train women in fields such as engineering and business. For cash-strapped British universities , deep-pocketed students and lucrative overseas tie-ups look appealing. But what of Saudi’s fossil-fuelled impact on the climate crisis ? “I do not want to speak about that,” said Bilimoria. “I’m here with a positive frame of mind to build relations between our countries.” Explore more on these topics Trade policy Saudi Arabia International trade Conservative leadership Human rights Museums Middle East and north Africa features Share Reuse this content Oliver Dowden, the deputy prime minister, being greeted at the Great Futures Anglo-Saudi trade conference this week. Photograph: Cabinet Office/Twitter View image in fullscreen Oliver Dowden, the deputy prime minister, being greeted at the Great Futures Anglo-Saudi trade conference this week. Photograph: Cabinet Office/Twitter Oliver Dowden, the deputy prime minister, being greeted at the Great Futures Anglo-Saudi trade conference this week. Photograph: Cabinet Office/Twitter View image in fullscreen Oliver Dowden, the deputy prime minister, being greeted at the Great Futures Anglo-Saudi trade conference this week. Photograph: Cabinet Office/Twitter Oliver Dowden, the deputy prime minister, being greeted at the Great Futures Anglo-Saudi trade conference this week. Photograph: Cabinet Office/Twitter View image in fullscreen Oliver Dowden, the deputy prime minister, being greeted at the Great Futures Anglo-Saudi trade conference this week. Photograph: Cabinet Office/Twitter Oliver Dowden, the deputy prime minister, being greeted at the Great Futures Anglo-Saudi trade conference this week. Photograph: Cabinet Office/Twitter View image in fullscreen Oliver Dowden, the deputy prime minister, being greeted at the Great Futures Anglo-Saudi trade conference this week. Photograph: Cabinet Office/Twitter Oliver Dowden, the deputy prime minister, being greeted at the Great Futures Anglo-Saudi trade conference this week. Photograph: Cabinet Office/Twitter Oliver Dowden, the deputy prime minister, being greeted at the Great Futures Anglo-Saudi trade conference this week. Photograph: Cabinet Office/Twitter This article is more than 1 year old ‘Art-washing’? Unease as British cultural institutions lend lustre to Saudi trade push This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Art-washing’? Unease as British cultural institutions lend lustre to Saudi trade push This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Art-washing’? Unease as British cultural institutions lend lustre to Saudi trade push This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Campaigners say move to use the arts to reinforce economic ties with Riyadh may help to launder Gulf state’s human rights record Campaigners say move to use the arts to reinforce economic ties with Riyadh may help to launder Gulf state’s human rights record Campaigners say move to use the arts to reinforce economic ties with Riyadh may help to launder Gulf state’s human rights record It was an unusual gig for YolanDa Brown, the saxophonist and composer who this week performed high above the clouds for a UK delegation on a private British Airways plane bound for Saudi Arabia . The flight was part of a trade offensive for British businesses and institutions in Riyadh, with Brown’s performance part of a new focus for Saudi-UK relations – international arts. The two-day Great Futures conference, in the Saudi capital, attracted 450 UK business leaders and politicians to its panels, dinners and meetings. Notable in the delegation was a significant contingent of cultural bodies, a move which immediately drew criticism that the Gulf state was “art-washing” – using Britain’s venerable institutions to improve its international image even as concerns over Riyadh’s human rights record continue to mount. “British businesses have a responsibility to mitigate their risk of contributing to human rights harms, which includes the risk of reputation laundering,” said Joey Shea, a researcher focused on Saudi Arabia at Human Rights Watch. For Britain’s smart business elite, a reminder not to wear “tight-fitting” clothing or garments carrying “profane slogans” might not have been entirely necessary. But since representatives of the UK government-funded Great trade campaign sent delegates, the “cultural guidance” (which also carried advice on local laws and alcohol consumption) served as a reminder of the problematic backdrop to the Middle East charm offensive. #GREATFUTURES Riyadh is expected to secure a constellation of investment across sectors: from financial services to higher education. It is the launch of a year-long campaign to highlight UK expertise and capability in sectors that support Saudi Arabia’s #Vision2030 🇸🇦🇬🇧 pic.twitter.com/A7gLBrO3yC — GREAT Britain and Northern Ireland Campaign (@GREATBritain) May 15, 2024 The Great campaign was set up in 2011 to encourage trade and tourism and, in 2021, received £60m in funding designed to complement the post-Brexit push for new trade deals. The outcome has been £4.5bn in exports and investment in 13 years, its supporters claim. Britain’s trading relationship with Saudi is well established – from supplying Lightning and Strikemaster aircraft in the 1960s to the 1985 al-Yamamah guns-for-oil deal , which was embroiled in corruption allegations. The relationship is now broadening into industries ranging from tech to high-profile sporting events . Saudi exports were worth £13.1bn to Britain in 2023. With the oil money continuing to flow from Saudi’s $700bn Public Investment Fund, British ministers and businesses are keen for a slice of the action, as the regime of the crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman , splurges on ambitious infrastructure projects, including a desert ski resort and a ( scaled-back ) project to build a 105-mile long “landscraper” city named the Line. Britain’s establishment is throwing itself into the relationship. The UK’s ambassador to Riyadh, Neil Compton, talked up the “transformational change” he had witnessed in post, in a letter to the visiting delegates. On stage, the British minister for investment, the peer Dominic Johnson, said he had been “grabbing people by the lapels” to champion Saudi after his first trip. There were also industry-specific dinners, including one hosted at the Unesco heritage site at Ad-Dir’iyah. Beneath this grandeur is a hum of international disquiet around the kingdom’s human rights record, from its death penalty to the fact that homosexuality remains a criminal offence. Downing Street said the deputy prime minister, Oliver Dowden, had raised allegations that Saudi forces had been “told to kill”, after claims concerning a man who protested about evictions to make way for the Line and who was shot and killed. The foreign secretary, David Cameron, recently said the UK opposed “child executions” after concerns over apparent abuses in Saudi. At the conference, speakers represented a hodgepodge of interests, ranging from sport to the construction and automotive industries. The designer Thomas Heatherwick, former footballer Rio Ferdinand, and a clutch of Tory figures, including the party’s former co-chair, Ben Elliot, appeared. Pointedly, the head coach of the Saudi-backed Newcastle United’s women’s football team was present, as was club director Amanda Staveley. The titans of the FTSE were notably absent, with just HSBC and British Airways attending. But perhaps most notable were the British cultural institutions that had made the trip: the Southbank Centre, an organisation candid about its desperate need for fresh funds ; the National Theatre; and the Royal Opera House. View image in fullscreen Lucy Frazer, the culture secretary, was forced to rebut claims by campaigners that British institutions were lending ‘legitimacy’ to the Saudi government. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA Under Saudi’s Vision 2030 strategy, 11 dedicated cultural commissions are being set up, including one for theatre and the performing arts, with the aim of building partnerships with existing specialists in each area. In her speech , the culture secretary, Lucy Frazer, lauded the opportunities for film financing, new recording studios and the hosting of large concerts and festivals. In the museum sector, the Louvre’s offshoot in Abu Dhabi has provided a blueprint for western museums opening sites in the Middle East, while last year the Science Museum Group signed an agreement with Saudi to create a “museums hub”– sharing knowledge between international researchers – in Riyadh. “This expo will generate hundreds of millions if not billions for the UK,” said Jonathan Shalit, the celebrity agent who managed the singer Charlotte Church. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Shalit, whose InterTalent Group counts the singers Pixie Lott and Lulu as clients, chaired a panel that included the head of Virgin Music UK, and argued that the kingdom’s young population (60% of Saudis are under 30) offered a “huge opportunity” for the creative industries. High-profile western artists are increasingly performing in the region; last year’s desert Soundstorm festival featured Bruno Mars, David Guetta and Metallica. But not everyone is convinced. “The Saudi government uses its near limitless funds to host high-profile events with celebrities, athletes, and now artists and cultural institutions, to whitewash its poor human rights record and deflect efforts to hold its leadership accountable for terrible abuses,” said Shea. “Artists and cultural institutions must speak out about the country’s grave abuses or risk becoming complicit in them.” Frazer was forced to rebut claims by rights campaigners that the institutions were handing “legitimacy” to the Saudi state. James Lynch, co-founder of the workers’ rights group FairSquare, told Middle East Eye: “There are serious questions for these cultural leaders, not least whether seeking partnerships with the Saudi crown prince’s gigaprojects really fits with the values their institutions claim to promote, or whether they are participating in a high-level art-washing exercise.” The kingdom already stands accused of sports-washing, with vast sums spent on acquiring and hosting major event, on the takeover of Newcastle United, and on a successful bid for the 2034 World Cup . For their part, the UK’s cultural institutions have argued that their presence could help push for societal change. View image in fullscreen The stage at the Soundstorm festival, where Bruno Mars, David Guetta and Metallica performed last year. Photograph: MD Beast/Getty Images “Many in the creative industries are not ready to embrace Saudi yet,” said Shalit. “A lot of people in the LGBTQ+ community would not be comfortable coming to Saudi. I understand that. If you’re a touring theatre company reliant on convincing a company of 200 performers to come to Saudi, that may be a problem.” But, he said, last year’s first onstage kiss in Saudi – between a man and a woman in Phantom of the Opera – had been a significant moment. “I would say to the people who do not want to visit Saudi: you do not change the narrative by not engaging. I get the sense they’re happy to have the conversation – change is afoot.” Saudi’s youthful demographic could also hold the key in another fertile sector – that of education. “This country is going places,” said Karan Bilimoria, the former CBI president, who is chancellor of the University of Birmingham, which has 500 Saudi students. “It’s both ways – students coming to the UK, and schools and universities expanding here.” The University of Strathclyde will open in the kingdom this year, with a drive to train women in fields such as engineering and business. For cash-strapped British universities , deep-pocketed students and lucrative overseas tie-ups look appealing. But what of Saudi’s fossil-fuelled impact on the climate crisis ? “I do not want to speak about that,” said Bilimoria. “I’m here with a positive frame of mind to build relations between our countries.” Explore more on these topics Trade policy Saudi Arabia International trade Conservative leadership Human rights Museums Middle East and north Africa features Share Reuse this content It was an unusual gig for YolanDa Brown, the saxophonist and composer who this week performed high above the clouds for a UK delegation on a private British Airways plane bound for Saudi Arabia . The flight was part of a trade offensive for British businesses and institutions in Riyadh, with Brown’s performance part of a new focus for Saudi-UK relations – international arts. The two-day Great Futures conference, in the Saudi capital, attracted 450 UK business leaders and politicians to its panels, dinners and meetings. Notable in the delegation was a significant contingent of cultural bodies, a move which immediately drew criticism that the Gulf state was “art-washing” – using Britain’s venerable institutions to improve its international image even as concerns over Riyadh’s human rights record continue to mount. “British businesses have a responsibility to mitigate their risk of contributing to human rights harms, which includes the risk of reputation laundering,” said Joey Shea, a researcher focused on Saudi Arabia at Human Rights Watch. For Britain’s smart business elite, a reminder not to wear “tight-fitting” clothing or garments carrying “profane slogans” might not have been entirely necessary. But since representatives of the UK government-funded Great trade campaign sent delegates, the “cultural guidance” (which also carried advice on local laws and alcohol consumption) served as a reminder of the problematic backdrop to the Middle East charm offensive. #GREATFUTURES Riyadh is expected to secure a constellation of investment across sectors: from financial services to higher education. It is the launch of a year-long campaign to highlight UK expertise and capability in sectors that support Saudi Arabia’s #Vision2030 🇸🇦🇬🇧 pic.twitter.com/A7gLBrO3yC — GREAT Britain and Northern Ireland Campaign (@GREATBritain) May 15, 2024 The Great campaign was set up in 2011 to encourage trade and tourism and, in 2021, received £60m in funding designed to complement the post-Brexit push for new trade deals. The outcome has been £4.5bn in exports and investment in 13 years, its supporters claim. Britain’s trading relationship with Saudi is well established – from supplying Lightning and Strikemaster aircraft in the 1960s to the 1985 al-Yamamah guns-for-oil deal , which was embroiled in corruption allegations. The relationship is now broadening into industries ranging from tech to high-profile sporting events . Saudi exports were worth £13.1bn to Britain in 2023. With the oil money continuing to flow from Saudi’s $700bn Public Investment Fund, British ministers and businesses are keen for a slice of the action, as the regime of the crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman , splurges on ambitious infrastructure projects, including a desert ski resort and a ( scaled-back ) project to build a 105-mile long “landscraper” city named the Line. Britain’s establishment is throwing itself into the relationship. The UK’s ambassador to Riyadh, Neil Compton, talked up the “transformational change” he had witnessed in post, in a letter to the visiting delegates. On stage, the British minister for investment, the peer Dominic Johnson, said he had been “grabbing people by the lapels” to champion Saudi after his first trip. There were also industry-specific dinners, including one hosted at the Unesco heritage site at Ad-Dir’iyah. Beneath this grandeur is a hum of international disquiet around the kingdom’s human rights record, from its death penalty to the fact that homosexuality remains a criminal offence. Downing Street said the deputy prime minister, Oliver Dowden, had raised allegations that Saudi forces had been “told to kill”, after claims concerning a man who protested about evictions to make way for the Line and who was shot and killed. The foreign secretary, David Cameron, recently said the UK opposed “child executions” after concerns over apparent abuses in Saudi. At the conference, speakers represented a hodgepodge of interests, ranging from sport to the construction and automotive industries. The designer Thomas Heatherwick, former footballer Rio Ferdinand, and a clutch of Tory figures, including the party’s former co-chair, Ben Elliot, appeared. Pointedly, the head coach of the Saudi-backed Newcastle United’s women’s football team was present, as was club director Amanda Staveley. The titans of the FTSE were notably absent, with just HSBC and British Airways attending. But perhaps most notable were the British cultural institutions that had made the trip: the Southbank Centre, an organisation candid about its desperate need for fresh funds ; the National Theatre; and the Royal Opera House. View image in fullscreen Lucy Frazer, the culture secretary, was forced to rebut claims by campaigners that British institutions were lending ‘legitimacy’ to the Saudi government. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA Under Saudi’s Vision 2030 strategy, 11 dedicated cultural commissions are being set up, including one for theatre and the performing arts, with the aim of building partnerships with existing specialists in each area. In her speech , the culture secretary, Lucy Frazer, lauded the opportunities for film financing, new recording studios and the hosting of large concerts and festivals. In the museum sector, the Louvre’s offshoot in Abu Dhabi has provided a blueprint for western museums opening sites in the Middle East, while last year the Science Museum Group signed an agreement with Saudi to create a “museums hub”– sharing knowledge between international researchers – in Riyadh. “This expo will generate hundreds of millions if not billions for the UK,” said Jonathan Shalit, the celebrity agent who managed the singer Charlotte Church. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Shalit, whose InterTalent Group counts the singers Pixie Lott and Lulu as clients, chaired a panel that included the head of Virgin Music UK, and argued that the kingdom’s young population (60% of Saudis are under 30) offered a “huge opportunity” for the creative industries. High-profile western artists are increasingly performing in the region; last year’s desert Soundstorm festival featured Bruno Mars, David Guetta and Metallica. But not everyone is convinced. “The Saudi government uses its near limitless funds to host high-profile events with celebrities, athletes, and now artists and cultural institutions, to whitewash its poor human rights record and deflect efforts to hold its leadership accountable for terrible abuses,” said Shea. “Artists and cultural institutions must speak out about the country’s grave abuses or risk becoming complicit in them.” Frazer was forced to rebut claims by rights campaigners that the institutions were handing “legitimacy” to the Saudi state. James Lynch, co-founder of the workers’ rights group FairSquare, told Middle East Eye: “There are serious questions for these cultural leaders, not least whether seeking partnerships with the Saudi crown prince’s gigaprojects really fits with the values their institutions claim to promote, or whether they are participating in a high-level art-washing exercise.” The kingdom already stands accused of sports-washing, with vast sums spent on acquiring and hosting major event, on the takeover of Newcastle United, and on a successful bid for the 2034 World Cup . For their part, the UK’s cultural institutions have argued that their presence could help push for societal change. View image in fullscreen The stage at the Soundstorm festival, where Bruno Mars, David Guetta and Metallica performed last year. Photograph: MD Beast/Getty Images “Many in the creative industries are not ready to embrace Saudi yet,” said Shalit. “A lot of people in the LGBTQ+ community would not be comfortable coming to Saudi. I understand that. If you’re a touring theatre company reliant on convincing a company of 200 performers to come to Saudi, that may be a problem.” But, he said, last year’s first onstage kiss in Saudi – between a man and a woman in Phantom of the Opera – had been a significant moment. “I would say to the people who do not want to visit Saudi: you do not change the narrative by not engaging. I get the sense they’re happy to have the conversation – change is afoot.” Saudi’s youthful demographic could also hold the key in another fertile sector – that of education. “This country is going places,” said Karan Bilimoria, the former CBI president, who is chancellor of the University of Birmingham, which has 500 Saudi students. “It’s both ways – students coming to the UK, and schools and universities expanding here.” The University of Strathclyde will open in the kingdom this year, with a drive to train women in fields such as engineering and business. For cash-strapped British universities , deep-pocketed students and lucrative overseas tie-ups look appealing. But what of Saudi’s fossil-fuelled impact on the climate crisis ? “I do not want to speak about that,” said Bilimoria. “I’m here with a positive frame of mind to build relations between our countries.” Explore more on these topics Trade policy Saudi Arabia International trade Conservative leadership Human rights Museums Middle East and north Africa features Share Reuse this content It was an unusual gig for YolanDa Brown, the saxophonist and composer who this week performed high above the clouds for a UK delegation on a private British Airways plane bound for Saudi Arabia . The flight was part of a trade offensive for British businesses and institutions in Riyadh, with Brown’s performance part of a new focus for Saudi-UK relations – international arts. The two-day Great Futures conference, in the Saudi capital, attracted 450 UK business leaders and politicians to its panels, dinners and meetings. Notable in the delegation was a significant contingent of cultural bodies, a move which immediately drew criticism that the Gulf state was “art-washing” – using Britain’s venerable institutions to improve its international image even as concerns over Riyadh’s human rights record continue to mount. “British businesses have a responsibility to mitigate their risk of contributing to human rights harms, which includes the risk of reputation laundering,” said Joey Shea, a researcher focused on Saudi Arabia at Human Rights Watch. For Britain’s smart business elite, a reminder not to wear “tight-fitting” clothing or garments carrying “profane slogans” might not have been entirely necessary. But since representatives of the UK government-funded Great trade campaign sent delegates, the “cultural guidance” (which also carried advice on local laws and alcohol consumption) served as a reminder of the problematic backdrop to the Middle East charm offensive. #GREATFUTURES Riyadh is expected to secure a constellation of investment across sectors: from financial services to higher education. It is the launch of a year-long campaign to highlight UK expertise and capability in sectors that support Saudi Arabia’s #Vision2030 🇸🇦🇬🇧 pic.twitter.com/A7gLBrO3yC — GREAT Britain and Northern Ireland Campaign (@GREATBritain) May 15, 2024 The Great campaign was set up in 2011 to encourage trade and tourism and, in 2021, received £60m in funding designed to complement the post-Brexit push for new trade deals. The outcome has been £4.5bn in exports and investment in 13 years, its supporters claim. Britain’s trading relationship with Saudi is well established – from supplying Lightning and Strikemaster aircraft in the 1960s to the 1985 al-Yamamah guns-for-oil deal , which was embroiled in corruption allegations. The relationship is now broadening into industries ranging from tech to high-profile sporting events . Saudi exports were worth £13.1bn to Britain in 2023. With the oil money continuing to flow from Saudi’s $700bn Public Investment Fund, British ministers and businesses are keen for a slice of the action, as the regime of the crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman , splurges on ambitious infrastructure projects, including a desert ski resort and a ( scaled-back ) project to build a 105-mile long “landscraper” city named the Line. Britain’s establishment is throwing itself into the relationship. The UK’s ambassador to Riyadh, Neil Compton, talked up the “transformational change” he had witnessed in post, in a letter to the visiting delegates. On stage, the British minister for investment, the peer Dominic Johnson, said he had been “grabbing people by the lapels” to champion Saudi after his first trip. There were also industry-specific dinners, including one hosted at the Unesco heritage site at Ad-Dir’iyah. Beneath this grandeur is a hum of international disquiet around the kingdom’s human rights record, from its death penalty to the fact that homosexuality remains a criminal offence. Downing Street said the deputy prime minister, Oliver Dowden, had raised allegations that Saudi forces had been “told to kill”, after claims concerning a man who protested about evictions to make way for the Line and who was shot and killed. The foreign secretary, David Cameron, recently said the UK opposed “child executions” after concerns over apparent abuses in Saudi. At the conference, speakers represented a hodgepodge of interests, ranging from sport to the construction and automotive industries. The designer Thomas Heatherwick, former footballer Rio Ferdinand, and a clutch of Tory figures, including the party’s former co-chair, Ben Elliot, appeared. Pointedly, the head coach of the Saudi-backed Newcastle United’s women’s football team was present, as was club director Amanda Staveley. The titans of the FTSE were notably absent, with just HSBC and British Airways attending. But perhaps most notable were the British cultural institutions that had made the trip: the Southbank Centre, an organisation candid about its desperate need for fresh funds ; the National Theatre; and the Royal Opera House. View image in fullscreen Lucy Frazer, the culture secretary, was forced to rebut claims by campaigners that British institutions were lending ‘legitimacy’ to the Saudi government. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA Under Saudi’s Vision 2030 strategy, 11 dedicated cultural commissions are being set up, including one for theatre and the performing arts, with the aim of building partnerships with existing specialists in each area. In her speech , the culture secretary, Lucy Frazer, lauded the opportunities for film financing, new recording studios and the hosting of large concerts and festivals. In the museum sector, the Louvre’s offshoot in Abu Dhabi has provided a blueprint for western museums opening sites in the Middle East, while last year the Science Museum Group signed an agreement with Saudi to create a “museums hub”– sharing knowledge between international researchers – in Riyadh. “This expo will generate hundreds of millions if not billions for the UK,” said Jonathan Shalit, the celebrity agent who managed the singer Charlotte Church. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Shalit, whose InterTalent Group counts the singers Pixie Lott and Lulu as clients, chaired a panel that included the head of Virgin Music UK, and argued that the kingdom’s young population (60% of Saudis are under 30) offered a “huge opportunity” for the creative industries. High-profile western artists are increasingly performing in the region; last year’s desert Soundstorm festival featured Bruno Mars, David Guetta and Metallica. But not everyone is convinced. “The Saudi government uses its near limitless funds to host high-profile events with celebrities, athletes, and now artists and cultural institutions, to whitewash its poor human rights record and deflect efforts to hold its leadership accountable for terrible abuses,” said Shea. “Artists and cultural institutions must speak out about the country’s grave abuses or risk becoming complicit in them.” Frazer was forced to rebut claims by rights campaigners that the institutions were handing “legitimacy” to the Saudi state. James Lynch, co-founder of the workers’ rights group FairSquare, told Middle East Eye: “There are serious questions for these cultural leaders, not least whether seeking partnerships with the Saudi crown prince’s gigaprojects really fits with the values their institutions claim to promote, or whether they are participating in a high-level art-washing exercise.” The kingdom already stands accused of sports-washing, with vast sums spent on acquiring and hosting major event, on the takeover of Newcastle United, and on a successful bid for the 2034 World Cup . For their part, the UK’s cultural institutions have argued that their presence could help push for societal change. View image in fullscreen The stage at the Soundstorm festival, where Bruno Mars, David Guetta and Metallica performed last year. Photograph: MD Beast/Getty Images “Many in the creative industries are not ready to embrace Saudi yet,” said Shalit. “A lot of people in the LGBTQ+ community would not be comfortable coming to Saudi. I understand that. If you’re a touring theatre company reliant on convincing a company of 200 performers to come to Saudi, that may be a problem.” But, he said, last year’s first onstage kiss in Saudi – between a man and a woman in Phantom of the Opera – had been a significant moment. “I would say to the people who do not want to visit Saudi: you do not change the narrative by not engaging. I get the sense they’re happy to have the conversation – change is afoot.” Saudi’s youthful demographic could also hold th
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
‘I’m the new Oppenheimer!’: my soul-destroying day at Palantir’s first-ever AI warfare conference
The co-founder and CEO of Palantir, Alex Karp, and Adm Tony Radakin at the event last week. Photograph: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Palantir View image in fullscreen The co-founder and CEO of Palantir, Alex Karp, and Adm Tony Radakin at the event last week. Photograph: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Palantir This article is more than 1 year old ‘I’m the new Oppenheimer!’: my soul-destroying day at Palantir’s first-ever AI warfare conference This article is more than 1 year old America’s military-industrial complex took center stage at AI Expo for National Competitiveness, where a fire-breathing panel set the tone O n 7 and 8 May in Washington DC, the city’s biggest convention hall welcomed America’s military-industrial complex, its top technology companies and its most outspoken justifiers of war crimes. Of course, that’s not how they would describe it. It was the inaugural “AI Expo for National Competitiveness”, hosted by the Special Competitive Studies Project – better known as the “techno-economic” thinktank created by the former Google CEO and current billionaire Eric Schmidt . The conference’s lead sponsor was Palantir, a software company co-founded by Peter Thiel that’s best known for inspiring 2019 protests against its work with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) at the height of Trump’s family separation policy. Currently, Palantir is supplying some of its AI products to the Israel Defense Forces . The conference hall was also filled with booths representing the US military and dozens of its contractors, ranging from Booz Allen Hamilton to a random company that was described to me as Uber for airplane software. At industry conferences like these, powerful people tend to be more unfiltered – they assume they’re in a safe space, among friends and peers. I was curious, what would they say about the AI-powered violence in Gaza , or what they think is the future of war? Attendees were told the conference highlight would be a series of panels in a large room toward the back of the hall. In reality, that room hosted just one of note. Featuring Schmidt and the Palantir CEO, Alex Karp, the fire-breathing panel would set the tone for the rest of the conference. More specifically, it divided attendees into two groups: those who see war as a matter of money and strategy, and those who see it as a matter of death. The vast majority of people there fell into group one. View image in fullscreen Eric Schmidt, David Cohen, Gen Mark Milley, Alex Karp, and Andrew Ross Sorkin gather for a panel. Photograph: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Palantir I’ve written about relationships between tech companies and the military before, so I shouldn’t have been surprised by anything I saw or heard at this conference. But when it ended, and I departed DC for home, it felt like my life force had been completely sucked out of my body. ‘The peace activists are war activists’ Swarms of people migrated across the hall to see the main panel, where Karp and Schmidt spoke alongside the CIA deputy director, David Cohen, and Mark Milley, who retired in September as chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, where he advised Joe Biden and other top officials on war matters. When Schmidt tried to introduce himself, his microphone didn’t work, so Cohen lent him his own. “It’s always great when the CIA helps you out,” Schmidt joked. This was about as light as things got for the next 90 minutes. As the moderator asked general questions about the panelists’ views on the future of war, Schmidt and Cohen answered cautiously. But Karp, who’s known as a provocateur, aggressively condoned violence, often peering into the audience with hungry eyes, palpably desperate for claps, boos or shock. He began by saying that the US has to “scare our adversaries to death” in war. Referring to Hamas’s 7 October attack on Israel, he said: “If what happened to them happened to us, there’d be a hole in the ground somewhere.” Members of the audience laughed when he mocked fresh graduates of Columbia University, which had some of the earliest encampment protests in the country. He said they’d have a hard time on the job market and described their views as a “pagan religion infecting our universities” and “an infection inside of our society”. (He’s made these comments before .) “The peace activists are war activists,” Karp insisted. “ We are the peace activists.” A huge aspect of war in a democracy, Karp went on to argue, is leaders successfully selling that war domestically. “If we lose the intellectual debate, you will not be able to deploy any armies in the west ever,” Karp said. View image in fullscreen Inside Palantir’s booth at the event. Photograph: Caroline Haskins Earlier in the panel, Milley had said that modern war involved conflict in “dense urban areas with high levels of collateral damage”, clearly alluding to the war in Gaza, but too afraid to say it. But every time Karp spoke, Milley became more bombastic. By the panel’s end, he was describing Americans who oppose the war in Gaza as “supporting a terrorist organization”. “Before we get self-righteous,” Milley said, in the second world war, “we, the US, killed 12,000 innocent French civilians. We destroyed 69 Japanese cities. We slaughtered people in massive numbers – men, women and children.” Meanwhile, Schmidt mainly talked about the importance of drones and automation in war. (He is quietly trying to start his own war drone company.) For his part, Cohen urged the room to see the 7 October attack as a “big warning” about tech in military settings. Although Israel had invested “very heavily” in defense and surveillance technology, it had failed to stop the attack, Cohen noted. “We do need to have a little bit of humility.” This didn’t seem to be a common view. The prevailing attitude of the conference was when systems fail, it just means you need newer technology, and more of it. I walked out of the panel in a quiet daze. Milley’s comments about the second world war echoed in my head. It was, frankly, jarring to hear a recent top US official defend Israel’s mass killing of Gazan civilians by invoking wartime massacres that not only preceded the Geneva Conventions, but helped justify their creation. All around me, I overheard upbeat conversation between hundreds of people who had just heard the same things I had – easygoing comments about lunch, travel or the next panel. I felt like we were living in totally different realities. Shaky soldier vision After pacing around for 10 minutes trying to enter a social headspace, I plugged my phone into an outlet and said hi to the person next to me, a man who appeared to be in his late 50s. I asked what he thought about the panel. Smiling meekly, he said it was “interesting” to hear Milley describe the second world war that way. “Have you seen Oppenheimer?” he asked. No, I said, but I’d read The Making of the Atomic Bomb. I thought he was going to talk about the hubris of people who build weapons of war. Instead, he told me he works in nuclear weapons research at Los Alamos laboratory. Reaching into his backpack, he handed me a few Los Alamos pens and stickers. After chatting for a few minutes – he wouldn’t get into much detail about his work, but did show off pictures of his expensive-looking rental car – he started packing up his things. “I just thought of something,” he said abruptly, laughing. “I am the new Oppenheimer!” I managed to force a laugh as he started back to the Los Alamos booth. Throughout the conference, I wandered to different booths. I ended up running into two people I knew from college. At the NSA booth, a young woman told me that the agency is great for “work-life balance”. I also stopped by Palantir’s career booth, where an employee, Elizabeth Watts, told me that the kind of person who works for Palantir is someone who wouldn’t be scared away by Karp’s panel. “People who are interested in national security, who understand there aren’t black and white solutions,” she said. “People who want to defend western democracies.” View image in fullscreen Palantir offered a new augmented reality tool for soldiers. Photograph: Caroline Haskins In Palantir’s cavernous main booth, I tried on a VR headset to test Palantir’s new augmented reality tool for soldiers. I was told I’d be able to direct a truck or drone while continuing to see the world around me. But when I put on the headset, my field of vision became shaky and out of focus. It reminded me of goggles they made us wear during Dare anti-drug programs in middle school, meant to simulate being drunk. Many people had been trying on the headset that day, a Palantir employee explained to me. In order for you to see things clearly, the headset has to fit your head and eyes perfectly. He didn’t offer to adjust the headset, so my hi-tech soldier vision remained out of focus. On the evening on the first day, Palantir had a social event with free drinks. The only options were two IPAs, and I had one called “the Corruption”. It was, bar none, the worst beverage I’ve had in my entire life. I ended up talking to a Canadian man named Sata, who appeared to be in his mid-20s. He said he was an investor in Palantir, so I asked how he had gotten the money. “I got in a car accident,” he said. After getting a small payout, he invested. So far, he said, he had made money from the investment, but lost money from this trip. No answers on ethics To my knowledge, the only other journalist covering the conference was my friend Jack Poulson, who said I should join him at a panel discussion about ethics and human rights. It was being held as far away from the rest of the conference as it could get while remaining physically inside the building. You had to exit the main exhibit hall, walk down two extremely long hallways, and enter a door at the very end to find it. By the time I arrived, they were ending the panel and starting the Q&A. Jack stood up at the first opportunity. He talked about the “provocative remarks” made throughout the conference about “exporting AI into places like Gaza”. Voice shaking, he mentioned Karp “unabashedly supporting” the ongoing killings in Gaza, and said Karp’s comments about “winning the debate” were clearly a euphemism for crushing dissent. A couple of audience members laughed quietly as Jack asked: could the panel respond to any of this? The moderator decided to let everybody else ask their questions and let the panelists choose which to answer. Unsurprisingly, no one directly answered Jack’s question. Later, as I entered the main conference hall, I found myself right behind a group of kids with tiny backpacks. They appeared to be in first or second grade. I asked a teacher, a blond woman with glasses, if there was an exhibit for kids. She said no, but one of them had a dad working at the event. A slim man with dark hair approached the kids. He had a Special Competitive Studies Project pin on his suit. Beaming, he took a picture with them. About 30 minutes later, I found him taking the kids on a tour. He was squatting down to their height and pointing at something in a booth for a military vendor. I couldn’t hear what he was saying. Helping choose what gets bombed I also went to a panel in Palantir’s booth titled Civilian Harm Mitigation. It was led by two “privacy and civil liberties engineers” – a young man and woman who spoke exclusively in monotone. They also used countless euphemisms for bombing and death. The woman described how Palantir’s Gaia map tool lets users “nominate targets of interest” for “the target nomination process”. She meant it helps people choose which places get bombed. View image in fullscreen The International Committee of the Red Cross’s booth. Photograph: Caroline Haskins After she clicked a few options on an interactive map, a targeted landmass lit up with bright blue blobs. These blobs, she said, were civilian areas like hospitals and schools. The civilian locations could also be described in text, she said, but it can take a long time to read. So, Gaia uses a large language model (something like ChatGPT) to sift through this information and simplify it. Essentially, people choosing bomb targets get a dumbed-down version of information about where children sleep and families get medical treatment. “Let’s say you’re operating in a place with a lot of civilian areas, like Gaza,” I asked the engineers afterward. “Does Palantir prevent you from ‘nominating a target’ in a civilian location?” Short answer, no. “The end user makes the decision,” the woman said. Only one booth, a small, immersive exhibit with tall gray walls, seemed concerned about the ordinary people affected by war. It was run by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). A door-like opening brought me into an emergency shelter for a young family caught in a conflict zone. There was a small couch with an open sleeping bag on top, and children’s toys in the corner. A yellow print-out warned the inhabitants to “STAY IN DESIGNATED SAFE ZONES”. A radio on a kitchen table seemed to be playing the news, but the connection was spotty. The exhibit was small, but in a conference largely celebrating the military industrial complex, it stuck out. It felt like a plea for someone, anyone, to consider the victims of war. Outside, I talked to an ICRC employee, Thomas Glass. He was attentive and engaged, but he seemed tired. He said that he had just spent several weeks in southern Gaza setting up a field hospital and supporting communal kitchens. I asked how people at the conference had been responding to his exhibit. Glass said that most people he met had been open-minded, but some asked why the ICRC was at the conference at all. They weren’t aggressive about it, he said. They just genuinely did not understand. Explore more on these topics Artificial intelligence (AI) US military Eric Schmidt features Share Reuse this content The co-founder and CEO of Palantir, Alex Karp, and Adm Tony Radakin at the event last week. Photograph: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Palantir View image in fullscreen The co-founder and CEO of Palantir, Alex Karp, and Adm Tony Radakin at the event last week. Photograph: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Palantir This article is more than 1 year old ‘I’m the new Oppenheimer!’: my soul-destroying day at Palantir’s first-ever AI warfare conference This article is more than 1 year old America’s military-industrial complex took center stage at AI Expo for National Competitiveness, where a fire-breathing panel set the tone O n 7 and 8 May in Washington DC, the city’s biggest convention hall welcomed America’s military-industrial complex, its top technology companies and its most outspoken justifiers of war crimes. Of course, that’s not how they would describe it. It was the inaugural “AI Expo for National Competitiveness”, hosted by the Special Competitive Studies Project – better known as the “techno-economic” thinktank created by the former Google CEO and current billionaire Eric Schmidt . The conference’s lead sponsor was Palantir, a software company co-founded by Peter Thiel that’s best known for inspiring 2019 protests against its work with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) at the height of Trump’s family separation policy. Currently, Palantir is supplying some of its AI products to the Israel Defense Forces . The conference hall was also filled with booths representing the US military and dozens of its contractors, ranging from Booz Allen Hamilton to a random company that was described to me as Uber for airplane software. At industry conferences like these, powerful people tend to be more unfiltered – they assume they’re in a safe space, among friends and peers. I was curious, what would they say about the AI-powered violence in Gaza , or what they think is the future of war? Attendees were told the conference highlight would be a series of panels in a large room toward the back of the hall. In reality, that room hosted just one of note. Featuring Schmidt and the Palantir CEO, Alex Karp, the fire-breathing panel would set the tone for the rest of the conference. More specifically, it divided attendees into two groups: those who see war as a matter of money and strategy, and those who see it as a matter of death. The vast majority of people there fell into group one. View image in fullscreen Eric Schmidt, David Cohen, Gen Mark Milley, Alex Karp, and Andrew Ross Sorkin gather for a panel. Photograph: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Palantir I’ve written about relationships between tech companies and the military before, so I shouldn’t have been surprised by anything I saw or heard at this conference. But when it ended, and I departed DC for home, it felt like my life force had been completely sucked out of my body. ‘The peace activists are war activists’ Swarms of people migrated across the hall to see the main panel, where Karp and Schmidt spoke alongside the CIA deputy director, David Cohen, and Mark Milley, who retired in September as chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, where he advised Joe Biden and other top officials on war matters. When Schmidt tried to introduce himself, his microphone didn’t work, so Cohen lent him his own. “It’s always great when the CIA helps you out,” Schmidt joked. This was about as light as things got for the next 90 minutes. As the moderator asked general questions about the panelists’ views on the future of war, Schmidt and Cohen answered cautiously. But Karp, who’s known as a provocateur, aggressively condoned violence, often peering into the audience with hungry eyes, palpably desperate for claps, boos or shock. He began by saying that the US has to “scare our adversaries to death” in war. Referring to Hamas’s 7 October attack on Israel, he said: “If what happened to them happened to us, there’d be a hole in the ground somewhere.” Members of the audience laughed when he mocked fresh graduates of Columbia University, which had some of the earliest encampment protests in the country. He said they’d have a hard time on the job market and described their views as a “pagan religion infecting our universities” and “an infection inside of our society”. (He’s made these comments before .) “The peace activists are war activists,” Karp insisted. “ We are the peace activists.” A huge aspect of war in a democracy, Karp went on to argue, is leaders successfully selling that war domestically. “If we lose the intellectual debate, you will not be able to deploy any armies in the west ever,” Karp said. View image in fullscreen Inside Palantir’s booth at the event. Photograph: Caroline Haskins Earlier in the panel, Milley had said that modern war involved conflict in “dense urban areas with high levels of collateral damage”, clearly alluding to the war in Gaza, but too afraid to say it. But every time Karp spoke, Milley became more bombastic. By the panel’s end, he was describing Americans who oppose the war in Gaza as “supporting a terrorist organization”. “Before we get self-righteous,” Milley said, in the second world war, “we, the US, killed 12,000 innocent French civilians. We destroyed 69 Japanese cities. We slaughtered people in massive numbers – men, women and children.” Meanwhile, Schmidt mainly talked about the importance of drones and automation in war. (He is quietly trying to start his own war drone company.) For his part, Cohen urged the room to see the 7 October attack as a “big warning” about tech in military settings. Although Israel had invested “very heavily” in defense and surveillance technology, it had failed to stop the attack, Cohen noted. “We do need to have a little bit of humility.” This didn’t seem to be a common view. The prevailing attitude of the conference was when systems fail, it just means you need newer technology, and more of it. I walked out of the panel in a quiet daze. Milley’s comments about the second world war echoed in my head. It was, frankly, jarring to hear a recent top US official defend Israel’s mass killing of Gazan civilians by invoking wartime massacres that not only preceded the Geneva Conventions, but helped justify their creation. All around me, I overheard upbeat conversation between hundreds of people who had just heard the same things I had – easygoing comments about lunch, travel or the next panel. I felt like we were living in totally different realities. Shaky soldier vision After pacing around for 10 minutes trying to enter a social headspace, I plugged my phone into an outlet and said hi to the person next to me, a man who appeared to be in his late 50s. I asked what he thought about the panel. Smiling meekly, he said it was “interesting” to hear Milley describe the second world war that way. “Have you seen Oppenheimer?” he asked. No, I said, but I’d read The Making of the Atomic Bomb. I thought he was going to talk about the hubris of people who build weapons of war. Instead, he told me he works in nuclear weapons research at Los Alamos laboratory. Reaching into his backpack, he handed me a few Los Alamos pens and stickers. After chatting for a few minutes – he wouldn’t get into much detail about his work, but did show off pictures of his expensive-looking rental car – he started packing up his things. “I just thought of something,” he said abruptly, laughing. “I am the new Oppenheimer!” I managed to force a laugh as he started back to the Los Alamos booth. Throughout the conference, I wandered to different booths. I ended up running into two people I knew from college. At the NSA booth, a young woman told me that the agency is great for “work-life balance”. I also stopped by Palantir’s career booth, where an employee, Elizabeth Watts, told me that the kind of person who works for Palantir is someone who wouldn’t be scared away by Karp’s panel. “People who are interested in national security, who understand there aren’t black and white solutions,” she said. “People who want to defend western democracies.” View image in fullscreen Palantir offered a new augmented reality tool for soldiers. Photograph: Caroline Haskins In Palantir’s cavernous main booth, I tried on a VR headset to test Palantir’s new augmented reality tool for soldiers. I was told I’d be able to direct a truck or drone while continuing to see the world around me. But when I put on the headset, my field of vision became shaky and out of focus. It reminded me of goggles they made us wear during Dare anti-drug programs in middle school, meant to simulate being drunk. Many people had been trying on the headset that day, a Palantir employee explained to me. In order for you to see things clearly, the headset has to fit your head and eyes perfectly. He didn’t offer to adjust the headset, so my hi-tech soldier vision remained out of focus. On the evening on the first day, Palantir had a social event with free drinks. The only options were two IPAs, and I had one called “the Corruption”. It was, bar none, the worst beverage I’ve had in my entire life. I ended up talking to a Canadian man named Sata, who appeared to be in his mid-20s. He said he was an investor in Palantir, so I asked how he had gotten the money. “I got in a car accident,” he said. After getting a small payout, he invested. So far, he said, he had made money from the investment, but lost money from this trip. No answers on ethics To my knowledge, the only other journalist covering the conference was my friend Jack Poulson, who said I should join him at a panel discussion about ethics and human rights. It was being held as far away from the rest of the conference as it could get while remaining physically inside the building. You had to exit the main exhibit hall, walk down two extremely long hallways, and enter a door at the very end to find it. By the time I arrived, they were ending the panel and starting the Q&A. Jack stood up at the first opportunity. He talked about the “provocative remarks” made throughout the conference about “exporting AI into places like Gaza”. Voice shaking, he mentioned Karp “unabashedly supporting” the ongoing killings in Gaza, and said Karp’s comments about “winning the debate” were clearly a euphemism for crushing dissent. A couple of audience members laughed quietly as Jack asked: could the panel respond to any of this? The moderator decided to let everybody else ask their questions and let the panelists choose which to answer. Unsurprisingly, no one directly answered Jack’s question. Later, as I entered the main conference hall, I found myself right behind a group of kids with tiny backpacks. They appeared to be in first or second grade. I asked a teacher, a blond woman with glasses, if there was an exhibit for kids. She said no, but one of them had a dad working at the event. A slim man with dark hair approached the kids. He had a Special Competitive Studies Project pin on his suit. Beaming, he took a picture with them. About 30 minutes later, I found him taking the kids on a tour. He was squatting down to their height and pointing at something in a booth for a military vendor. I couldn’t hear what he was saying. Helping choose what gets bombed I also went to a panel in Palantir’s booth titled Civilian Harm Mitigation. It was led by two “privacy and civil liberties engineers” – a young man and woman who spoke exclusively in monotone. They also used countless euphemisms for bombing and death. The woman described how Palantir’s Gaia map tool lets users “nominate targets of interest” for “the target nomination process”. She meant it helps people choose which places get bombed. View image in fullscreen The International Committee of the Red Cross’s booth. Photograph: Caroline Haskins After she clicked a few options on an interactive map, a targeted landmass lit up with bright blue blobs. These blobs, she said, were civilian areas like hospitals and schools. The civilian locations could also be described in text, she said, but it can take a long time to read. So, Gaia uses a large language model (something like ChatGPT) to sift through this information and simplify it. Essentially, people choosing bomb targets get a dumbed-down version of information about where children sleep and families get medical treatment. “Let’s say you’re operating in a place with a lot of civilian areas, like Gaza,” I asked the engineers afterward. “Does Palantir prevent you from ‘nominating a target’ in a civilian location?” Short answer, no. “The end user makes the decision,” the woman said. Only one booth, a small, immersive exhibit with tall gray walls, seemed concerned about the ordinary people affected by war. It was run by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). A door-like opening brought me into an emergency shelter for a young family caught in a conflict zone. There was a small couch with an open sleeping bag on top, and children’s toys in the corner. A yellow print-out warned the inhabitants to “STAY IN DESIGNATED SAFE ZONES”. A radio on a kitchen table seemed to be playing the news, but the connection was spotty. The exhibit was small, but in a conference largely celebrating the military industrial complex, it stuck out. It felt like a plea for someone, anyone, to consider the victims of war. Outside, I talked to an ICRC employee, Thomas Glass. He was attentive and engaged, but he seemed tired. He said that he had just spent several weeks in southern Gaza setting up a field hospital and supporting communal kitchens. I asked how people at the conference had been responding to his exhibit. Glass said that most people he met had been open-minded, but some asked why the ICRC was at the conference at all. They weren’t aggressive about it, he said. They just genuinely did not understand. Explore more on these topics Artificial intelligence (AI) US military Eric Schmidt features Share Reuse this content The co-founder and CEO of Palantir, Alex Karp, and Adm Tony Radakin at the event last week. Photograph: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Palantir View image in fullscreen The co-founder and CEO of Palantir, Alex Karp, and Adm Tony Radakin at the event last week. Photograph: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Palantir The co-founder and CEO of Palantir, Alex Karp, and Adm Tony Radakin at the event last week. Photograph: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Palantir View image in fullscreen The co-founder and CEO of Palantir, Alex Karp, and Adm Tony Radakin at the event last week. Photograph: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Palantir The co-founder and CEO of Palantir, Alex Karp, and Adm Tony Radakin at the event last week. Photograph: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Palantir View image in fullscreen The co-founder and CEO of Palantir, Alex Karp, and Adm Tony Radakin at the event last week. Photograph: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Palantir The co-founder and CEO of Palantir, Alex Karp, and Adm Tony Radakin at the event last week. Photograph: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Palantir View image in fullscreen The co-founder and CEO of Palantir, Alex Karp, and Adm Tony Radakin at the event last week. Photograph: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Palantir The co-founder and CEO of Palantir, Alex Karp, and Adm Tony Radakin at the event last week. Photograph: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Palantir The co-founder and CEO of Palantir, Alex Karp, and Adm Tony Radakin at the event last week. Photograph: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Palantir This article is more than 1 year old ‘I’m the new Oppenheimer!’: my soul-destroying day at Palantir’s first-ever AI warfare conference This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘I’m the new Oppenheimer!’: my soul-destroying day at Palantir’s first-ever AI warfare conference This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘I’m the new Oppenheimer!’: my soul-destroying day at Palantir’s first-ever AI warfare conference This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old America’s military-industrial complex took center stage at AI Expo for National Competitiveness, where a fire-breathing panel set the tone America’s military-industrial complex took center stage at AI Expo for National Competitiveness, where a fire-breathing panel set the tone America’s military-industrial complex took center stage at AI Expo for National Competitiveness, where a fire-breathing panel set the tone O n 7 and 8 May in Washington DC, the city’s biggest convention hall welcomed America’s military-industrial complex, its top technology companies and its most outspoken justifiers of war crimes. Of course, that’s not how they would describe it. It was the inaugural “AI Expo for National Competitiveness”, hosted by the Special Competitive Studies Project – better known as the “techno-economic” thinktank created by the former Google CEO and current billionaire Eric Schmidt . The conference’s lead sponsor was Palantir, a software company co-founded by Peter Thiel that’s best known for inspiring 2019 protests against its work with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) at the height of Trump’s family separation policy. Currently, Palantir is supplying some of its AI products to the Israel Defense Forces . The conference hall was also filled with booths representing the US military and dozens of its contractors, ranging from Booz Allen Hamilton to a random company that was described to me as Uber for airplane software. At industry conferences like these, powerful people tend to be more unfiltered – they assume they’re in a safe space, among friends and peers. I was curious, what would they say about the AI-powered violence in Gaza , or what they think is the future of war? Attendees were told the conference highlight would be a series of panels in a large room toward the back of the hall. In reality, that room hosted just one of note. Featuring Schmidt and the Palantir CEO, Alex Karp, the fire-breathing panel would set the tone for the rest of the conference. More specifically, it divided attendees into two groups: those who see war as a matter of money and strategy, and those who see it as a matter of death. The vast majority of people there fell into group one. View image in fullscreen Eric Schmidt, David Cohen, Gen Mark Milley, Alex Karp, and Andrew Ross Sorkin gather for a panel. Photograph: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Palantir I’ve written about relationships between tech companies and the military before, so I shouldn’t have been surprised by anything I saw or heard at this conference. But when it ended, and I departed DC for home, it felt like my life force had been completely sucked out of my body. ‘The peace activists are war activists’ Swarms of people migrated across the hall to see the main panel, where Karp and Schmidt spoke alongside the CIA deputy director, David Cohen, and Mark Milley, who retired in September as chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, where he advised Joe Biden and other top officials on war matters. When Schmidt tried to introduce himself, his microphone didn’t work, so Cohen lent him his own. “It’s always great when the CIA helps you out,” Schmidt joked. This was about as light as things got for the next 90 minutes. As the moderator asked general questions about the panelists’ views on the future of war, Schmidt and Cohen answered cautiously. But Karp, who’s known as a provocateur, aggressively condoned violence, often peering into the audience with hungry eyes, palpably desperate for claps, boos or shock. He began by saying that the US has to “scare our adversaries to death” in war. Referring to Hamas’s 7 October attack on Israel, he said: “If what happened to them happened to us, there’d be a hole in the ground somewhere.” Members of the audience laughed when he mocked fresh graduates of Columbia University, which had some of the earliest encampment protests in the country. He said they’d have a hard time on the job market and described their views as a “pagan religion infecting our universities” and “an infection inside of our society”. (He’s made these comments before .) “The peace activists are war activists,” Karp insisted. “ We are the peace activists.” A huge aspect of war in a democracy, Karp went on to argue, is leaders successfully selling that war domestically. “If we lose the intellectual debate, you will not be able to deploy any armies in the west ever,” Karp said. View image in fullscreen Inside Palantir’s booth at the event. Photograph: Caroline Haskins Earlier in the panel, Milley had said that modern war involved conflict in “dense urban areas with high levels of collateral damage”, clearly alluding to the war in Gaza, but too afraid to say it. But every time Karp spoke, Milley became more bombastic. By the panel’s end, he was describing Americans who oppose the war in Gaza as “supporting a terrorist organization”. “Before we get self-righteous,” Milley said, in the second world war, “we, the US, killed 12,000 innocent French civilians. We destroyed 69 Japanese cities. We slaughtered people in massive numbers – men, women and children.” Meanwhile, Schmidt mainly talked about the importance of drones and automation in war. (He is quietly trying to start his own war drone company.) For his part, Cohen urged the room to see the 7 October attack as a “big warning” about tech in military settings. Although Israel had invested “very heavily” in defense and surveillance technology, it had failed to stop the attack, Cohen noted. “We do need to have a little bit of humility.” This didn’t seem to be a common view. The prevailing attitude of the conference was when systems fail, it just means you need newer technology, and more of it. I walked out of the panel in a quiet daze. Milley’s comments about the second world war echoed in my head. It was, frankly, jarring to hear a recent top US official defend Israel’s mass killing of Gazan civilians by invoking wartime massacres that not only preceded the Geneva Conventions, but helped justify their creation. All around me, I overheard upbeat conversation between hundreds of people who had just heard the same things I had – easygoing comments about lunch, travel or the next panel. I felt like we were living in totally different realities. Shaky soldier vision After pacing around for 10 minutes trying to enter a social headspace, I plugged my phone into an outlet and said hi to the person next to me, a man who appeared to be in his late 50s. I asked what he thought about the panel. Smiling meekly, he said it was “interesting” to hear Milley describe the second world war that way. “Have you seen Oppenheimer?” he asked. No, I said, but I’d read The Making of the Atomic Bomb. I thought he was going to talk about the hubris of people who build weapons of war. Instead, he told me he works in nuclear weapons research at Los Alamos laboratory. Reaching into his backpack, he handed me a few Los Alamos pens and stickers. After chatting for a few minutes – he wouldn’t get into much detail about his work, but did show off pictures of his expensive-looking rental car – he started packing up his things. “I just thought of something,” he said abruptly, laughing. “I am the new Oppenheimer!” I managed to force a laugh as he started back to the Los Alamos booth. Throughout the conference, I wandered to different booths. I ended up running into two people I knew from college. At the NSA booth, a young woman told me that the agency is great for “work-life balance”. I also stopped by Palantir’s career booth, where an employee, Elizabeth Watts, told me that the kind of person who works for Palantir is someone who wouldn’t be scared away by Karp’s panel. “People who are interested in national security, who understand there aren’t black and white solutions,” she said. “People who want to defend western democracies.” View image in fullscreen Palantir offered a new augmented reality tool for soldiers. Photograph: Caroline Haskins In Palantir’s cavernous main booth, I tried on a VR headset to test Palantir’s new augmented reality tool for soldiers. I was told I’d be able to direct a truck or drone while continuing to see the world around me. But when I put on the headset, my field of vision became shaky and out of focus. It reminded me of goggles they made us wear during Dare anti-drug programs in middle school, meant to simulate being drunk. Many people had been trying on the headset that day, a Palantir employee explained to me. In order for you to see things clearly, the headset has to fit your head and eyes perfectly. He didn’t offer to adjust the headset, so my hi-tech soldier vision remained out of focus. On the evening on the first day, Palantir had a social event with free drinks. The only options were two IPAs, and I had one called “the Corruption”. It was, bar none, the worst beverage I’ve had in my entire life. I ended up talking to a Canadian man named Sata, who appeared to be in his mid-20s. He said he was an investor in Palantir, so I asked how he had gotten the money. “I got in a car accident,” he said. After getting a small payout, he invested. So far, he said, he had made money from the investment, but lost money from this trip. No answers on ethics To my knowledge, the only other journalist covering the conference was my friend Jack Poulson, who said I should join him at a panel discussion about ethics and human rights. It was being held as far away from the rest of the conference as it could get while remaining physically inside the building. You had to exit the main exhibit hall, walk down two extremely long hallways, and enter a door at the very end to find it. By the time I arrived, they were ending the panel and starting the Q&A. Jack stood up at the first opportunity. He talked about the “provocative remarks” made throughout the conference about “exporting AI into places like Gaza”. Voice shaking, he mentioned Karp “unabashedly supporting” the ongoing killings in Gaza, and said Karp’s comments about “winning the debate” were clearly a euphemism for crushing dissent. A couple of audience members laughed quietly as Jack asked: could the panel respond to any of this? The moderator decided to let everybody else ask their questions and let the panelists choose which to answer. Unsurprisingly, no one directly answered Jack’s question. Later, as I entered the main conference hall, I found myself right behind a group of kids with tiny backpacks. They appeared to be in first or second grade. I asked a teacher, a blond woman with glasses, if there was an exhibit for kids. She said no, but one of them had a dad working at the event. A slim man with dark hair approached the kids. He had a Special Competitive Studies Project pin on his suit. Beaming, he took a picture with them. About 30 minutes later, I found him taking the kids on a tour. He was squatting down to their height and pointing at something in a booth for a military vendor. I couldn’t hear what he was saying. Helping choose what gets bombed I also went to a panel in Palantir’s booth titled Civilian Harm Mitigation. It was led by two “privacy and civil liberties engineers” – a young man and woman who spoke exclusively in monotone. They also used countless euphemisms for bombing and death. The woman described how Palantir’s Gaia map tool lets users “nominate targets of interest” for “the target nomination process”. She meant it helps people choose which places get bombed. View image in fullscreen The International Committee of the Red Cross’s booth. Photograph: Caroline Haskins After she clicked a few options on an interactive map, a targeted landmass lit up with bright blue blobs. These blobs, she said, were civilian areas like hospitals and schools. The civilian locations could also be described in text, she said, but it can take a long time to read. So, Gaia uses a large language model (something like ChatGPT) to sift through this information and simplify it. Essentially, people choosing bomb targets get a dumbed-down version of information about where children sleep and families get medical treatment. “Let’s say you’re operating in a place with a lot of civilian areas, like Gaza,” I asked the engineers afterward. “Does Palantir prevent you from ‘nominating a target’ in a civilian location?” Short answer, no. “The end user makes the decision,” the woman said. Only one booth, a small, immersive exhibit with tall gray walls, seemed concerned about the ordinary people affected by war. It was run by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). A door-like opening brought me into an emergency shelter for a young family caught in a conflict zone. There was a small couch with an open sleeping bag on top, and children’s toys in the corner. A yellow print-out warned the inhabitants to “STAY IN DESIGNATED SAFE ZONES”. A radio on a kitchen table seemed to be playing the news, but the connection was spotty. The exhibit was small, but in a conference largely celebrating the military industrial complex, it stuck out. It felt like a plea for someone, anyone, to consider the victims of war. Outside, I talked to an ICRC employee, Thomas Glass. He was attentive and engaged, but he seemed tired. He said that he had just spent several weeks in southern Gaza setting up a field hospital and supporting communal kitchens. I asked how people at the conference had been responding to his exhibit. Glass said that most people he met had been open-minded, but some asked why the ICRC was at the conference at all. They weren’t aggressive about it, he said. They just genuinely did not understand. Explore more on these topics Artificial intelligence (AI) US military Eric Schmidt features Share Reuse this content O n 7 and 8 May in Washington DC, the city’s biggest convention hall welcomed America’s military-industrial complex, its top technology companies and its most outspoken justifiers of war crimes. Of course, that’s not how they would describe it. It was the inaugural “AI Expo for National Competitiveness”, hosted by the Special Competitive Studies Project – better known as the “techno-economic” thinktank created by the former Google CEO and current billionaire Eric Schmidt . The conference’s lead sponsor was Palantir, a software company co-founded by Peter Thiel that’s best known for inspiring 2019 protests against its work with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) at the height of Trump’s family separation policy. Currently, Palantir is supplying some of its AI products to the Israel Defense Forces . The conference hall was also filled with booths representing the US military and dozens of its contractors, ranging from Booz Allen Hamilton to a random company that was described to me as Uber for airplane software. At industry conferences like these, powerful people tend to be more unfiltered – they assume they’re in a safe space, among friends and peers. I was curious, what would they say about the AI-powered violence in Gaza , or what they think is the future of war? Attendees were told the conference highlight would be a series of panels in a large room toward the back of the hall. In reality, that room hosted just one of note. Featuring Schmidt and the Palantir CEO, Alex Karp, the fire-breathing panel would set the tone for the rest of the conference. More specifically, it divided attendees into two groups: those who see war as a matter of money and strategy, and those who see it as a matter of death. The vast majority of people there fell into group one. View image in fullscreen Eric Schmidt, David Cohen, Gen Mark Milley, Alex Karp, and Andrew Ross Sorkin gather for a panel. Photograph: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Palantir I’ve written about relationships between tech companies and the military before, so I shouldn’t have been surprised by anything I saw or heard at this conference. But when it ended, and I departed DC for home, it felt like my life force had been completely sucked out of my body. ‘The peace activists are war activists’ Swarms of people migrated across the hall to see the main panel, where Karp and Schmidt spoke alongside the CIA deputy director, David Cohen, and Mark Milley, who retired in September as chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, where he advised Joe Biden and other top officials on war matters. When Schmidt tried to introduce himself, his microphone didn’t work, so Cohen lent him his own. “It’s always great when the CIA helps you out,” Schmidt joked. This was about as light as things got for the next 90 minutes. As the moderator asked general questions about the panelists’ views on the future of war, Schmidt and Cohen answered cautiously. But Karp, who’s known as a provocateur, aggressively condoned violence, often peering into the audience with hungry eyes, palpably desperate for claps, boos or shock. He began by saying that the US has to “scare our adversaries to death” in war. Referring to Hamas’s 7 October attack on Israel, he said: “If what happened to them happened to us, there’d be a hole in the ground somewhere.” Members of the audience laughed when he mocked fresh graduates of Columbia University, which had some of the earliest encampment protests in the country. He said they’d have a hard time on the job market and described their views as a “pagan religion infecting our universities” and “an infection inside of our society”. (He’s made these comments before .) “The peace activists are war activists,” Karp insisted. “ We are the peace activists.” A huge aspect of war in a democracy, Karp went on to argue, is leaders successfully selling that war domestically. “If we lose the intellectual debate, you will not be able to deploy any armies in the west ever,” Karp said. View image in fullscreen Inside Palantir’s booth at the event. Photograph: Caroline Haskins Earlier in the panel, Milley had said that modern war involved conflict in “dense urban areas with high levels of collateral damage”, clearly alluding to the war in Gaza, but too afraid to say it. But every time Karp spoke, Milley became more bombastic. By the panel’s end, he was describing Americans who oppose the war in Gaza as “supporting a terrorist organization”. “Before we get self-righteous,” Milley said, in the second world war, “we, the US, killed 12,000 innocent French civilians. We destroyed 69 Japanese cities. We slaughtered people in massive numbers – men, women and children.” Meanwhile, Schmidt mainly talked about the importance of drones and automation in war. (He is quietly trying to start his own war drone company.) For his part, Cohen urged the room to see the 7 October attack as a “big warning” about tech in military settings. Although Israel had invested “very heavily” in defense and surveillance technology, it had failed to stop the attack, Cohen noted. “We do need to have a little bit of humility.” This didn’t seem to be a common view. The prevailing attitude of the conference was when systems fail, it just means you need newer technology, and more of it. I walked out of the p
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
‘Clean water is a basic right’: protesters against sewage in seas and rivers gather across the UK
Protesters during a paddle-out in Falmouth organised by Surfers Against Sewage. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer View image in fullscreen Protesters during a paddle-out in Falmouth organised by Surfers Against Sewage. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer This article is more than 1 year old ‘Clean water is a basic right’: protesters against sewage in seas and rivers gather across the UK This article is more than 1 year old Surfers and families vent their frustration with water companies after more news of poisoned drinking water and polluted lakes “C ut the crap” and “Fishes not faeces” read some of the many colourful slogans at Gyllyngvase Beach in Falmouth where hundreds of protesters gathered on Saturday to demand action over the scourge of sewage pollution in British waterways. Wearing fancy dress and waving inflated plastic poops, they paddled into the bay on surfboards, kayaks and standup paddle boards – as did protesters at more than 30 other events across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland – with the Cornish charity Surfers Against Sewage leading the way. “We know exactly what’s going in the sea,” Demi Taylor, one of several key speakers, told the Falmouth crowd. “No matter what the water companies try to tell us, if it looks like poo, it smells like poo and it tastes like poo, it probably is poo! “We’re here today to say the ocean doesn’t owe us anything; in fact we owe the ocean absolutely everything. At least we have the choice about whether we go into the sea [when it’s polluted] – the marine life out there doesn’t. So we’re here advocating on behalf of the environment.” Statistics show there were more than 464,056 sewage spills in England’s rivers and coastlines in 2023 – a 54% increase on the previous year – totalling more than 3.6m hours. South West Water , the local utility, accounted for 58,249 of those spills, totalling 530,737 hours. View image in fullscreen Local family Lauren, Mike and Roo Holford. Lauren says she wants to protect the environment for the next generation. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Lauren Holford attended the protest with her partner Mike and their two-year-old son Roo. “We’re here because we love going swimming in the ocean. But there have been so many sewage alerts locally – it felt like there was one every day at one point,” she said. “We’re also thinking about future generations. What’s it going to be like for them?” Giles Bristow, chief executive of Surfers Against Sewage, told the crowd: “This is our beach, our ocean, and we are reclaiming this place from the polluters. A year ago today we had an apology from the water companies , but did they change? No. Pollution events jumped last year, apparently because it was raining. It’s a shame they didn’t know it rains here.” Under exceptional circumstances, water companies are permitted to allow sewage into waterways, but Bristow said this was intended for “really heavy rain, to stop it backing up into people’s houses”. “The definition of ‘exceptional’ feels like it’s become more and more loose, and it’s almost become an operational exercise to keep costs down,” he said. “But we cannot keep putting people’s health at risk and allowing companies to profit from polluting the environment.” View image in fullscreen Protesters at Gyllyngvase beach making their feelings heard. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Sewage has become an especially topical issue. In Brixham, Devon, there have been 46 confirmed cases of cryptosporidiosis , a waterborne parasite that causes diarrhoea. Locals have now been told the tap water is safe to drink after having been advised previously to boil it. And in Cumbria’s Windermere, it was just revealed that 10m litres of raw sewage were accidentally pumped into the beauty spot in late February. “Look at the news, it’s horrendous,” said Taylor, a surf film festival director. “Everyone should have access to clean water and clean air, they are just basic human rights.” Bristow said there were many factors causing the problems. “We’ve got a growing population, climate change and increased urban development,” he said. “We’ve also got Victorian water systems, and we’ve been building badly on top of those systems for the past 100 years. We haven’t been investing properly to keep people safe.” View image in fullscreen Film festival director Demi Taylor and co-founder of SAS Chris Hines. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer And yet, according to analysis , the water companies paid £2.5bn in shareholder dividends in the past two years and added £8.2bn to their net debt from 2021-23. Taylor said: “I don’t know any other industry in which you can fail so catastrophically and do your job so badly and yet receive a great reward in terms of cash.” Although Surfers Against Sewage is a charity and describes itself as being “beyond party politics”, Bristow believes it is time for a change of regulation as well as greater imagination in planning. “We’re not sure as an organisation whether nationalisation of waterways is the right way forward because it hasn’t exactly worked in the devolved countries, but we certainly want to have a nature-led approach to solutions. We need to think about rewilding, rewooding, slow run-off and soft urban areas,” he said. As the protest wound down, Natalie Pramuk, a marine management student at Exeter University, exited the water. Despite the grim cause for the paddle-out, she was in optimistic mood. “This is the first time I’ve done a paddle-out,” she said. “It was exciting. The energy was really good and it was a powerful movement of people coming together – all different people who care about the sea for many different reasons. It’s really empowering. I hope this raises awareness.” View image in fullscreen Natalie Pramuk, a marine management student, who attended her first protest paddle-out. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Chris Hines, co-founder of Surfers Against Sewage, arrived in Falmouth after the paddle-out and said: “We campaigned hard through the 90s and there was a massive investment – £5.5bn worth of sewage treatment works were built – but unfortunately everybody has taken their eye off the ball and the water companies have pulled their pants down and started shitting in the sea again. “I’m immensely proud to see how many people came today and to see the spirit of people who use the sea. If you love something, you’ll do anything you can to protect it. People are clearly angry and they’re going to make change happen again.” The Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs said: “100% of storm overflows are now being monitored and if water companies are found to breach their permits action will be taken – up to and including criminal prosecution. We also need to be tackling every source of pollution – not just from storm overflows, but also agriculture, plastics, road run-off and chemicals.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Pollution The Observer Water Coastlines Utilities Oceans Protest features Share Reuse this content Protesters during a paddle-out in Falmouth organised by Surfers Against Sewage. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer View image in fullscreen Protesters during a paddle-out in Falmouth organised by Surfers Against Sewage. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer This article is more than 1 year old ‘Clean water is a basic right’: protesters against sewage in seas and rivers gather across the UK This article is more than 1 year old Surfers and families vent their frustration with water companies after more news of poisoned drinking water and polluted lakes “C ut the crap” and “Fishes not faeces” read some of the many colourful slogans at Gyllyngvase Beach in Falmouth where hundreds of protesters gathered on Saturday to demand action over the scourge of sewage pollution in British waterways. Wearing fancy dress and waving inflated plastic poops, they paddled into the bay on surfboards, kayaks and standup paddle boards – as did protesters at more than 30 other events across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland – with the Cornish charity Surfers Against Sewage leading the way. “We know exactly what’s going in the sea,” Demi Taylor, one of several key speakers, told the Falmouth crowd. “No matter what the water companies try to tell us, if it looks like poo, it smells like poo and it tastes like poo, it probably is poo! “We’re here today to say the ocean doesn’t owe us anything; in fact we owe the ocean absolutely everything. At least we have the choice about whether we go into the sea [when it’s polluted] – the marine life out there doesn’t. So we’re here advocating on behalf of the environment.” Statistics show there were more than 464,056 sewage spills in England’s rivers and coastlines in 2023 – a 54% increase on the previous year – totalling more than 3.6m hours. South West Water , the local utility, accounted for 58,249 of those spills, totalling 530,737 hours. View image in fullscreen Local family Lauren, Mike and Roo Holford. Lauren says she wants to protect the environment for the next generation. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Lauren Holford attended the protest with her partner Mike and their two-year-old son Roo. “We’re here because we love going swimming in the ocean. But there have been so many sewage alerts locally – it felt like there was one every day at one point,” she said. “We’re also thinking about future generations. What’s it going to be like for them?” Giles Bristow, chief executive of Surfers Against Sewage, told the crowd: “This is our beach, our ocean, and we are reclaiming this place from the polluters. A year ago today we had an apology from the water companies , but did they change? No. Pollution events jumped last year, apparently because it was raining. It’s a shame they didn’t know it rains here.” Under exceptional circumstances, water companies are permitted to allow sewage into waterways, but Bristow said this was intended for “really heavy rain, to stop it backing up into people’s houses”. “The definition of ‘exceptional’ feels like it’s become more and more loose, and it’s almost become an operational exercise to keep costs down,” he said. “But we cannot keep putting people’s health at risk and allowing companies to profit from polluting the environment.” View image in fullscreen Protesters at Gyllyngvase beach making their feelings heard. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Sewage has become an especially topical issue. In Brixham, Devon, there have been 46 confirmed cases of cryptosporidiosis , a waterborne parasite that causes diarrhoea. Locals have now been told the tap water is safe to drink after having been advised previously to boil it. And in Cumbria’s Windermere, it was just revealed that 10m litres of raw sewage were accidentally pumped into the beauty spot in late February. “Look at the news, it’s horrendous,” said Taylor, a surf film festival director. “Everyone should have access to clean water and clean air, they are just basic human rights.” Bristow said there were many factors causing the problems. “We’ve got a growing population, climate change and increased urban development,” he said. “We’ve also got Victorian water systems, and we’ve been building badly on top of those systems for the past 100 years. We haven’t been investing properly to keep people safe.” View image in fullscreen Film festival director Demi Taylor and co-founder of SAS Chris Hines. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer And yet, according to analysis , the water companies paid £2.5bn in shareholder dividends in the past two years and added £8.2bn to their net debt from 2021-23. Taylor said: “I don’t know any other industry in which you can fail so catastrophically and do your job so badly and yet receive a great reward in terms of cash.” Although Surfers Against Sewage is a charity and describes itself as being “beyond party politics”, Bristow believes it is time for a change of regulation as well as greater imagination in planning. “We’re not sure as an organisation whether nationalisation of waterways is the right way forward because it hasn’t exactly worked in the devolved countries, but we certainly want to have a nature-led approach to solutions. We need to think about rewilding, rewooding, slow run-off and soft urban areas,” he said. As the protest wound down, Natalie Pramuk, a marine management student at Exeter University, exited the water. Despite the grim cause for the paddle-out, she was in optimistic mood. “This is the first time I’ve done a paddle-out,” she said. “It was exciting. The energy was really good and it was a powerful movement of people coming together – all different people who care about the sea for many different reasons. It’s really empowering. I hope this raises awareness.” View image in fullscreen Natalie Pramuk, a marine management student, who attended her first protest paddle-out. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Chris Hines, co-founder of Surfers Against Sewage, arrived in Falmouth after the paddle-out and said: “We campaigned hard through the 90s and there was a massive investment – £5.5bn worth of sewage treatment works were built – but unfortunately everybody has taken their eye off the ball and the water companies have pulled their pants down and started shitting in the sea again. “I’m immensely proud to see how many people came today and to see the spirit of people who use the sea. If you love something, you’ll do anything you can to protect it. People are clearly angry and they’re going to make change happen again.” The Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs said: “100% of storm overflows are now being monitored and if water companies are found to breach their permits action will be taken – up to and including criminal prosecution. We also need to be tackling every source of pollution – not just from storm overflows, but also agriculture, plastics, road run-off and chemicals.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Pollution The Observer Water Coastlines Utilities Oceans Protest features Share Reuse this content Protesters during a paddle-out in Falmouth organised by Surfers Against Sewage. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer View image in fullscreen Protesters during a paddle-out in Falmouth organised by Surfers Against Sewage. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Protesters during a paddle-out in Falmouth organised by Surfers Against Sewage. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer View image in fullscreen Protesters during a paddle-out in Falmouth organised by Surfers Against Sewage. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Protesters during a paddle-out in Falmouth organised by Surfers Against Sewage. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer View image in fullscreen Protesters during a paddle-out in Falmouth organised by Surfers Against Sewage. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Protesters during a paddle-out in Falmouth organised by Surfers Against Sewage. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer View image in fullscreen Protesters during a paddle-out in Falmouth organised by Surfers Against Sewage. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Protesters during a paddle-out in Falmouth organised by Surfers Against Sewage. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Protesters during a paddle-out in Falmouth organised by Surfers Against Sewage. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer This article is more than 1 year old ‘Clean water is a basic right’: protesters against sewage in seas and rivers gather across the UK This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Clean water is a basic right’: protesters against sewage in seas and rivers gather across the UK This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Clean water is a basic right’: protesters against sewage in seas and rivers gather across the UK This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Surfers and families vent their frustration with water companies after more news of poisoned drinking water and polluted lakes Surfers and families vent their frustration with water companies after more news of poisoned drinking water and polluted lakes Surfers and families vent their frustration with water companies after more news of poisoned drinking water and polluted lakes “C ut the crap” and “Fishes not faeces” read some of the many colourful slogans at Gyllyngvase Beach in Falmouth where hundreds of protesters gathered on Saturday to demand action over the scourge of sewage pollution in British waterways. Wearing fancy dress and waving inflated plastic poops, they paddled into the bay on surfboards, kayaks and standup paddle boards – as did protesters at more than 30 other events across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland – with the Cornish charity Surfers Against Sewage leading the way. “We know exactly what’s going in the sea,” Demi Taylor, one of several key speakers, told the Falmouth crowd. “No matter what the water companies try to tell us, if it looks like poo, it smells like poo and it tastes like poo, it probably is poo! “We’re here today to say the ocean doesn’t owe us anything; in fact we owe the ocean absolutely everything. At least we have the choice about whether we go into the sea [when it’s polluted] – the marine life out there doesn’t. So we’re here advocating on behalf of the environment.” Statistics show there were more than 464,056 sewage spills in England’s rivers and coastlines in 2023 – a 54% increase on the previous year – totalling more than 3.6m hours. South West Water , the local utility, accounted for 58,249 of those spills, totalling 530,737 hours. View image in fullscreen Local family Lauren, Mike and Roo Holford. Lauren says she wants to protect the environment for the next generation. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Lauren Holford attended the protest with her partner Mike and their two-year-old son Roo. “We’re here because we love going swimming in the ocean. But there have been so many sewage alerts locally – it felt like there was one every day at one point,” she said. “We’re also thinking about future generations. What’s it going to be like for them?” Giles Bristow, chief executive of Surfers Against Sewage, told the crowd: “This is our beach, our ocean, and we are reclaiming this place from the polluters. A year ago today we had an apology from the water companies , but did they change? No. Pollution events jumped last year, apparently because it was raining. It’s a shame they didn’t know it rains here.” Under exceptional circumstances, water companies are permitted to allow sewage into waterways, but Bristow said this was intended for “really heavy rain, to stop it backing up into people’s houses”. “The definition of ‘exceptional’ feels like it’s become more and more loose, and it’s almost become an operational exercise to keep costs down,” he said. “But we cannot keep putting people’s health at risk and allowing companies to profit from polluting the environment.” View image in fullscreen Protesters at Gyllyngvase beach making their feelings heard. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Sewage has become an especially topical issue. In Brixham, Devon, there have been 46 confirmed cases of cryptosporidiosis , a waterborne parasite that causes diarrhoea. Locals have now been told the tap water is safe to drink after having been advised previously to boil it. And in Cumbria’s Windermere, it was just revealed that 10m litres of raw sewage were accidentally pumped into the beauty spot in late February. “Look at the news, it’s horrendous,” said Taylor, a surf film festival director. “Everyone should have access to clean water and clean air, they are just basic human rights.” Bristow said there were many factors causing the problems. “We’ve got a growing population, climate change and increased urban development,” he said. “We’ve also got Victorian water systems, and we’ve been building badly on top of those systems for the past 100 years. We haven’t been investing properly to keep people safe.” View image in fullscreen Film festival director Demi Taylor and co-founder of SAS Chris Hines. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer And yet, according to analysis , the water companies paid £2.5bn in shareholder dividends in the past two years and added £8.2bn to their net debt from 2021-23. Taylor said: “I don’t know any other industry in which you can fail so catastrophically and do your job so badly and yet receive a great reward in terms of cash.” Although Surfers Against Sewage is a charity and describes itself as being “beyond party politics”, Bristow believes it is time for a change of regulation as well as greater imagination in planning. “We’re not sure as an organisation whether nationalisation of waterways is the right way forward because it hasn’t exactly worked in the devolved countries, but we certainly want to have a nature-led approach to solutions. We need to think about rewilding, rewooding, slow run-off and soft urban areas,” he said. As the protest wound down, Natalie Pramuk, a marine management student at Exeter University, exited the water. Despite the grim cause for the paddle-out, she was in optimistic mood. “This is the first time I’ve done a paddle-out,” she said. “It was exciting. The energy was really good and it was a powerful movement of people coming together – all different people who care about the sea for many different reasons. It’s really empowering. I hope this raises awareness.” View image in fullscreen Natalie Pramuk, a marine management student, who attended her first protest paddle-out. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Chris Hines, co-founder of Surfers Against Sewage, arrived in Falmouth after the paddle-out and said: “We campaigned hard through the 90s and there was a massive investment – £5.5bn worth of sewage treatment works were built – but unfortunately everybody has taken their eye off the ball and the water companies have pulled their pants down and started shitting in the sea again. “I’m immensely proud to see how many people came today and to see the spirit of people who use the sea. If you love something, you’ll do anything you can to protect it. People are clearly angry and they’re going to make change happen again.” The Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs said: “100% of storm overflows are now being monitored and if water companies are found to breach their permits action will be taken – up to and including criminal prosecution. We also need to be tackling every source of pollution – not just from storm overflows, but also agriculture, plastics, road run-off and chemicals.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Pollution The Observer Water Coastlines Utilities Oceans Protest features Share Reuse this content “C ut the crap” and “Fishes not faeces” read some of the many colourful slogans at Gyllyngvase Beach in Falmouth where hundreds of protesters gathered on Saturday to demand action over the scourge of sewage pollution in British waterways. Wearing fancy dress and waving inflated plastic poops, they paddled into the bay on surfboards, kayaks and standup paddle boards – as did protesters at more than 30 other events across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland – with the Cornish charity Surfers Against Sewage leading the way. “We know exactly what’s going in the sea,” Demi Taylor, one of several key speakers, told the Falmouth crowd. “No matter what the water companies try to tell us, if it looks like poo, it smells like poo and it tastes like poo, it probably is poo! “We’re here today to say the ocean doesn’t owe us anything; in fact we owe the ocean absolutely everything. At least we have the choice about whether we go into the sea [when it’s polluted] – the marine life out there doesn’t. So we’re here advocating on behalf of the environment.” Statistics show there were more than 464,056 sewage spills in England’s rivers and coastlines in 2023 – a 54% increase on the previous year – totalling more than 3.6m hours. South West Water , the local utility, accounted for 58,249 of those spills, totalling 530,737 hours. View image in fullscreen Local family Lauren, Mike and Roo Holford. Lauren says she wants to protect the environment for the next generation. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Lauren Holford attended the protest with her partner Mike and their two-year-old son Roo. “We’re here because we love going swimming in the ocean. But there have been so many sewage alerts locally – it felt like there was one every day at one point,” she said. “We’re also thinking about future generations. What’s it going to be like for them?” Giles Bristow, chief executive of Surfers Against Sewage, told the crowd: “This is our beach, our ocean, and we are reclaiming this place from the polluters. A year ago today we had an apology from the water companies , but did they change? No. Pollution events jumped last year, apparently because it was raining. It’s a shame they didn’t know it rains here.” Under exceptional circumstances, water companies are permitted to allow sewage into waterways, but Bristow said this was intended for “really heavy rain, to stop it backing up into people’s houses”. “The definition of ‘exceptional’ feels like it’s become more and more loose, and it’s almost become an operational exercise to keep costs down,” he said. “But we cannot keep putting people’s health at risk and allowing companies to profit from polluting the environment.” View image in fullscreen Protesters at Gyllyngvase beach making their feelings heard. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Sewage has become an especially topical issue. In Brixham, Devon, there have been 46 confirmed cases of cryptosporidiosis , a waterborne parasite that causes diarrhoea. Locals have now been told the tap water is safe to drink after having been advised previously to boil it. And in Cumbria’s Windermere, it was just revealed that 10m litres of raw sewage were accidentally pumped into the beauty spot in late February. “Look at the news, it’s horrendous,” said Taylor, a surf film festival director. “Everyone should have access to clean water and clean air, they are just basic human rights.” Bristow said there were many factors causing the problems. “We’ve got a growing population, climate change and increased urban development,” he said. “We’ve also got Victorian water systems, and we’ve been building badly on top of those systems for the past 100 years. We haven’t been investing properly to keep people safe.” View image in fullscreen Film festival director Demi Taylor and co-founder of SAS Chris Hines. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer And yet, according to analysis , the water companies paid £2.5bn in shareholder dividends in the past two years and added £8.2bn to their net debt from 2021-23. Taylor said: “I don’t know any other industry in which you can fail so catastrophically and do your job so badly and yet receive a great reward in terms of cash.” Although Surfers Against Sewage is a charity and describes itself as being “beyond party politics”, Bristow believes it is time for a change of regulation as well as greater imagination in planning. “We’re not sure as an organisation whether nationalisation of waterways is the right way forward because it hasn’t exactly worked in the devolved countries, but we certainly want to have a nature-led approach to solutions. We need to think about rewilding, rewooding, slow run-off and soft urban areas,” he said. As the protest wound down, Natalie Pramuk, a marine management student at Exeter University, exited the water. Despite the grim cause for the paddle-out, she was in optimistic mood. “This is the first time I’ve done a paddle-out,” she said. “It was exciting. The energy was really good and it was a powerful movement of people coming together – all different people who care about the sea for many different reasons. It’s really empowering. I hope this raises awareness.” View image in fullscreen Natalie Pramuk, a marine management student, who attended her first protest paddle-out. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Chris Hines, co-founder of Surfers Against Sewage, arrived in Falmouth after the paddle-out and said: “We campaigned hard through the 90s and there was a massive investment – £5.5bn worth of sewage treatment works were built – but unfortunately everybody has taken their eye off the ball and the water companies have pulled their pants down and started shitting in the sea again. “I’m immensely proud to see how many people came today and to see the spirit of people who use the sea. If you love something, you’ll do anything you can to protect it. People are clearly angry and they’re going to make change happen again.” The Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs said: “100% of storm overflows are now being monitored and if water companies are found to breach their permits action will be taken – up to and including criminal prosecution. We also need to be tackling every source of pollution – not just from storm overflows, but also agriculture, plastics, road run-off and chemicals.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Pollution The Observer Water Coastlines Utilities Oceans Protest features Share Reuse this content “C ut the crap” and “Fishes not faeces” read some of the many colourful slogans at Gyllyngvase Beach in Falmouth where hundreds of protesters gathered on Saturday to demand action over the scourge of sewage pollution in British waterways. Wearing fancy dress and waving inflated plastic poops, they paddled into the bay on surfboards, kayaks and standup paddle boards – as did protesters at more than 30 other events across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland – with the Cornish charity Surfers Against Sewage leading the way. “We know exactly what’s going in the sea,” Demi Taylor, one of several key speakers, told the Falmouth crowd. “No matter what the water companies try to tell us, if it looks like poo, it smells like poo and it tastes like poo, it probably is poo! “We’re here today to say the ocean doesn’t owe us anything; in fact we owe the ocean absolutely everything. At least we have the choice about whether we go into the sea [when it’s polluted] – the marine life out there doesn’t. So we’re here advocating on behalf of the environment.” Statistics show there were more than 464,056 sewage spills in England’s rivers and coastlines in 2023 – a 54% increase on the previous year – totalling more than 3.6m hours. South West Water , the local utility, accounted for 58,249 of those spills, totalling 530,737 hours. View image in fullscreen Local family Lauren, Mike and Roo Holford. Lauren says she wants to protect the environment for the next generation. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Lauren Holford attended the protest with her partner Mike and their two-year-old son Roo. “We’re here because we love going swimming in the ocean. But there have been so many sewage alerts locally – it felt like there was one every day at one point,” she said. “We’re also thinking about future generations. What’s it going to be like for them?” Giles Bristow, chief executive of Surfers Against Sewage, told the crowd: “This is our beach, our ocean, and we are reclaiming this place from the polluters. A year ago today we had an apology from the water companies , but did they change? No. Pollution events jumped last year, apparently because it was raining. It’s a shame they didn’t know it rains here.” Under exceptional circumstances, water companies are permitted to allow sewage into waterways, but Bristow said this was intended for “really heavy rain, to stop it backing up into people’s houses”. “The definition of ‘exceptional’ feels like it’s become more and more loose, and it’s almost become an operational exercise to keep costs down,” he said. “But we cannot keep putting people’s health at risk and allowing companies to profit from polluting the environment.” View image in fullscreen Protesters at Gyllyngvase beach making their feelings heard. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Sewage has become an especially topical issue. In Brixham, Devon, there have been 46 confirmed cases of cryptosporidiosis , a waterborne parasite that causes diarrhoea. Locals have now been told the tap water is safe to drink after having been advised previously to boil it. And in Cumbria’s Windermere, it was just revealed that 10m litres of raw sewage were accidentally pumped into the beauty spot in late February. “Look at the news, it’s horrendous,” said Taylor, a surf film festival director. “Everyone should have access to clean water and clean air, they are just basic human rights.” Bristow said there were many factors causing the problems. “We’ve got a growing population, climate change and increased urban development,” he said. “We’ve also got Victorian water systems, and we’ve been building badly on top of those systems for the past 100 years. We haven’t been investing properly to keep people safe.” View image in fullscreen Film festival director Demi Taylor and co-founder of SAS Chris Hines. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer And yet, according to analysis , the water companies paid £2.5bn in shareholder dividends in the past two years and added £8.2bn to their net debt from 2021-23. Taylor said: “I don’t know any other industry in which you can fail so catastrophically and do your job so badly and yet receive a great reward in terms of cash.” Although Surfers Against Sewage is a charity and describes itself as being “beyond party politics”, Bristow believes it is time for a change of regulation as well as greater imagination in planning. “We’re not sure as an organisation whether nationalisation of waterways is the right way forward because it hasn’t exactly worked in the devolved countries, but we certainly want to have a nature-led approach to solutions. We need to think about rewilding, rewooding, slow run-off and soft urban areas,” he said. As the protest wound down, Natalie Pramuk, a marine management student at Exeter University, exited the water. Despite the grim cause for the paddle-out, she was in optimistic mood. “This is the first time I’ve done a paddle-out,” she said. “It was exciting. The energy was really good and it was a powerful movement of people coming together – all different people who care about the sea for many different reasons. It’s really empowering. I hope this raises awareness.” View image in fullscreen Natalie Pramuk, a marine management student, who attended her first protest paddle-out. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Chris Hines, co-founder of Surfers Against Sewage, arrived in Falmouth after the paddle-out and said: “We campaigned hard through the 90s and there was a massive investment – £5.5bn worth of sewage treatment works were built – but unfortunately everybody has taken their eye off the ball and the water companies have pulled their pants down and started shitting in the sea again. “I’m immensely proud to see how many people came today and to see the spirit of people who use the sea. If you love something, you’ll do anything you can to protect it. People are clearly angry and they’re going to make change happen again.” The Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs said: “100% of storm overflows are now being monitored and if water companies are found to breach their permits action will be taken – up to and including criminal prosecution. We also need to be tackling every source of pollution – not just from storm overflows, but also agriculture, plastics, road run-off and chemicals.” “C ut the crap” and “Fishes not faeces” read some of the many colourful slogans at Gyllyngvase Beach in Falmouth where hundreds of protesters gathered on Saturday to demand action over the scourge of sewage pollution in British waterways. Wearing fancy dress and waving inflated plastic poops, they paddled into the bay on surfboards, kayaks and standup paddle boards – as did protesters at more than 30 other events across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland – with the Cornish charity Surfers Against Sewage leading the way. “We know exactly what’s going in the sea,” Demi Taylor, one of several key speakers, told the Falmouth crowd. “No matter what the water companies try to tell us, if it looks like poo, it smells like poo and it tastes like poo, it probably is poo! “We’re here today to say the ocean doesn’t owe us anything; in fact we owe the ocean absolutely everything. At least we have the choice about whether we go into the sea [when it’s polluted] – the marine life out there doesn’t. So we’re here advocating on behalf of the environment.” Statistics show there were more than 464,056 sewage spills in England’s rivers and coastlines in 2023 – a 54% increase on the previous year – totalling more than 3.6m hours. South West Water , the local utility, accounted for 58,249 of those spills, totalling 530,737 hours. View image in fullscreen Local family Lauren, Mike and Roo Holford. Lauren says she wants to protect the environment for the next generation. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Lauren Holford attended the protest with her partner Mike and their two-year-old son Roo. “We’re here because we love going swimming in the ocean. But there have been so many sewage alerts locally – it felt like there was one every day at one point,” she said. “We’re also thinking about future generations. What’s it going to be like for them?” Giles Bristow, chief executive of Surfers Against Sewage, told the crowd: “This is our beach, our ocean, and we are reclaiming this place from the polluters. A year ago today we had an apology from the water companies , but did they change? No. Pollution events jumped last year, apparently because it was raining. It’s a shame they didn’t know it rains here.” Under exceptional circumstances, water companies are permitted to allow sewage into waterways, but Bristow said this was intended for “really heavy rain, to stop it backing up into people’s houses”. “The definition of ‘exceptional’ feels like it’s become more and more loose, and it’s almost become an operational exercise to keep costs down,” he said. “But we cannot keep putting people’s health at risk and allowing companies to profit from polluting the environment.” View image in fullscreen Protesters at Gyllyngvase beach making their feelings heard. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Sewage has become an especially topical issue. In Brixham, Devon, there have been 46 confirmed cases of cryptosporidiosis , a waterborne parasite that causes diarrhoea. Locals have now been told the tap water is safe to drink after having been advised previously to boil it. And in Cumbria’s Windermere, it was just revealed that 10m litres of raw sewage were accidentally pumped into the beauty spot in late February. “Look at the news, it’s horrendous,” said Taylor, a surf film festival director. “Everyone should have access to clean water and clean air, they are just basic human rights.” Bristow said there were many factors causing the problems. “We’ve got a growing population, climate change and increased urban development,” he said. “We’ve also got Victorian water systems, and we’ve been building badly on top of those systems for the past 100 years. We haven’t been investing properly to keep people safe.” View image in fullscreen Film festival director Demi Taylor and co-founder of SAS Chris Hines. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer And yet, according to analysis , the water companies paid £2.5bn in shareholder dividends in the past two years and added £8.2bn to their net debt from 2021-23. Taylor said: “I don’t know any other industry in which you can fail so catastrophically and do your job so badly and yet receive a great reward in terms of cash.” Although Surfers Against Sewage is a charity and describes itself as being “beyond party politics”, Bristow believes it is time for a change of regulation as well as greater imagination in planning. “We’re not sure as an organisation whether nationalisation of waterways is the right way forward because it hasn’t exactly worked in the devolved countries, but we certainly want to have a nature-led approach to solutions. We need to think about rewilding, rewooding, slow run-off and soft urban areas,” he said. As the protest wound down, Natalie Pramuk, a marine management student at Exeter University, exited the water. Despite the grim cause for the paddle-out, she was in optimistic mood. “This is the first time I’ve done a paddle-out,” she said. “It was exciting. The energy was really good and it was a powerful movement of people coming together – all different people who care about the sea for many different reasons. It’s really empowering. I hope this raises awareness.” View image in fullscreen Natalie Pramuk, a marine management student, who attended her first protest paddle-out. Photograph: Jonny Weeks/The Observer Chris Hines, co-founder of Surfers Against Sewage, arrived in Falmouth after the paddle-out and said: “We campaigned hard through the 90s and there was a massive investment – £5.5bn worth of sewage treatment works were built – but unfortunately everybody has taken their eye off the ball and the water companies have pulled their pants down and started shitting in the sea again. “I’m immensely proud to see how many people came today and to see the spirit of people who use the sea. If you love something, you’ll do anything you can to protect it. People are clearly angry and they’re going to make change happen again.” The Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs said: “100% of storm overflows are now being monitored and if water companies are found to breach their permits action will be taken – up to and including criminal prosecution. We also need to be tackling every source of pollution – not just from storm overflows, but also agriculture, plastics, road run-off and chemicals.” “C ut the crap” and “Fishes not faeces” read some of the many colourful slogans at Gyllyngvase Beach in Falmouth where hundreds of protesters gathered on Saturday to demand action over the scourge of sewage pollution in British waterways. Wearing fancy dress and waving inflated plastic poops, they paddled into the bay on surfboards, kayaks and standup paddle boards – as did protesters at more than 30 other events across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland – with the Cornish charity Surfers Against Sewage leading the way. “We know exactly what’s going in the sea,” Demi Taylor, one of several key speakers, told the Falmouth crowd. “No matter what the water companies try to tell us, if it looks like poo, it smells like poo and it tastes like poo, it probably is poo! “We’re here today to say the ocean doesn’t owe us anything; in fact we owe the ocean absolutely everything. At least we have the choice about whether we go into the sea [when it’s polluted] – the marine life out there doesn’t. So we’re here advocating on behalf of the environment.” Statistics show there were more than 464,056 sewage spills in England’s rivers and coastlines in 2023 – a 54% increase on the previous year – totalling more than 3.6m hours. South West Water , the local utility, accounted for 58,249 of those spills, totalling 530,737 hours. Lauren Holford attended the protest with her partner Mike and their two-year-old son Roo. “We’re here because we love going swimming in the ocean. But there have been so many sewage alerts locally – it felt like there was one every day at one point,” she said. “We’re also thinking about future generations. What’s it going to be like for them?” Giles Bristow, chief executive of Surfers Against Sewage, told the crowd: “This is our beach, our ocean, and we are reclaiming this place from the polluters. A year ago today we had an apology from the water companies , but did they change? No. Pollution events jumped last year, apparently because it was raining. It’s a shame they didn’t know it rains here.” Under exceptional circumstances, water companies are permitted to allow sewage into waterways, but Bristow said this was intended for “really heavy rain, to stop it backing up into people’s houses”. “The definition of ‘exceptional’ feels like it’s become more and more loose, and it’s almost become an operational exercise to keep costs down,” he said. “But we cannot keep putting people’s health at risk and allowing companies to profit from polluting the environment.” Sewage has become an especially topical issue. In Brixham, Devon, there have been 46 confirmed cases of cryptosporidiosis , a waterborne parasite that causes diarrhoea. Locals have now been told the tap water is safe to drink after having been advised previously to boil it. And in Cumbria’s Windermere, it was just revealed that 10m litres of raw sewage were accidentally pumped into the beauty spot in late February. “Look at the news, it’s horrendous,” said Taylor, a surf film festival director. “Everyone should have access to clean water and clean air, they are just basic human rights.” Bristow said there were many factors causing the problems. “We’ve got a growing population, climate change and increased urban development,” he said. “We’ve also got Victorian water systems, and we’ve been building badly on top of those systems for the past 100 years. We haven’t been investing properly to keep people safe.” And yet, according to analysis , the water companies paid £2.5bn in shareholder dividends in the past two years and added £8.2bn to their net debt from 2021-23. Taylor said: “I don’t know any other industry in which you can fail so catastrophically and do your job so badly and yet receive a great reward in terms of cash.” Although Surfers Against Sewage is a charity and describes itself as being “beyond party politics”, Bristow believes it is time for a change of regulation as well as greater imagination in planning. “We’re not sure as an organisation whether nationalisation of waterways is the right way forward because it hasn’t exactly worked in the devolved countries, but we certainly want to have a nature-led approach to solutions. We need to think about rewilding, rewooding, slow run-off and soft urban areas,” he said. As the protest wound down, Natalie Pramuk, a marine management student at Exeter University, exited the water. Despite the grim cause for the paddle-out, she was in optimistic mood. “This is the first time I’ve done a paddle-out,” she said. “It was exciting. The energy was really good and it was a powerful movement of people coming together – all different people who care about the sea for many different reasons. It’s really empowering. I hope this raises awareness.” Chris Hines, co-founder of Surfers Against Sewage, arrived in Falmouth after the paddle-out and said: “We campaigned hard through the 90s and there was a massive investment – £5.5bn worth of sewage treatment works were built – but unfortunately everybody has taken their eye off the ball and the water companies have pulled their pants down and started shitting in the sea again. “I’m immensely proud to see how many people came today and to see the spirit of people who use the sea. If you love something, you’ll do anything you can to protect it. People are clearly angry and they’re going to make change happen again.” The Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs said: “100% of storm overflows are now being monitored and if water companies are found to breach their permits action will be taken – up to and including criminal prosecution. We also need to be tackling every source of pollution – not just from storm overflows, but also agriculture, plastics, road run-off and chemicals.” This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media. Explore more on these topics Pollution The Observer Water Coastlines Utilities Oceans Protest features Share Reuse this content Pollution The Observer Water Coastlines Utilities Oceans Protest features |
How China is using AI news anchors to deliver its propaganda
Screengrab from a video from Chinese state-backed group called Storm-1376 showing an AI-generated newsreader. Photograph: Storm-1376 View image in fullscreen Screengrab from a video from Chinese state-backed group called Storm-1376 showing an AI-generated newsreader. Photograph: Storm-1376 This article is more than 1 year old How China is using AI news anchors to deliver its propaganda This article is more than 1 year old News avatars are proliferating on social media and experts say they will spread as the technology becomes more accessible T he news presenter has a deeply uncanny air as he delivers a partisan and pejorative message in Mandarin: Taiwan’s outgoing president, Tsai Ing-wen, is as effective as limp spinach, her period in office beset by economic under performance, social problems and protests. “Water spinach looks at water spinach. Turns out that water spinach isn’t just a name,” says the presenter, in an extended metaphor about Tsai being “Hollow Tsai” – a pun related to the Mandarin word for water spinach. Live AI-generated presenter compares Taiwan president to water spinach – video This is not a conventional broadcast journalist, even if the lack of impartiality is no longer a shock. The anchor is generated by an artificial intelligence programme, and the segment is trying, albeit clumsily, to influence the Taiwanese presidential election. The source and creator of the video are unknown, but the clip is designed to make voters doubt politicians who want Taiwan to remain at arm’s length from China , which claims that the self-governing island is part of its territory. It is the latest example of a sub-genre of the AI-generated disinformation game: the deepfake news anchor or TV presenter. Such avatars are proliferating on social networks, spreading state-backed propaganda. Experts do say this kind of video will continue to spread as the technology becomes more widely accessible. “It does not need to be perfect,” said Tyler Williams, the director of investigations at Graphika, a disinformation research company. “If a user is just scrolling through X or TikTok , they are not picking up little nuances on a smaller screen.” Beijing has already experimented with AI-generated news anchors. In 2018, the state news agency Xinhua unveiled Qiu Hao , a digital news presenter, who promised to bring viewers the news “24 hours a day, 365 days a year”. Although the Chinese public is generally enthusiastic about the use of digital avatars in the media, Qiu Hao failed to catch on more widely. China is at the forefront of the disinformation element of the trend. Last year, pro-China bot accounts on Facebook and X distributed AI-generated deepfake videos of news anchors representing a fictitious broadcaster called Wolf News. In one clip, the US government was accused of failing to deal with gun violence, while another highlighted China’s role at an international summit. In a report released in April, Microsoft said Chinese state-backed cyber groups had targeted the Taiwanese election with AI-generated disinformation content , including the use of fake news anchors or TV-style presenters. In one clip cited by Microsoft, the AI-generated anchor made unsubstantiated claims about the private life of the ultimately successful pro-sovereignty candidate – Lai Ching-te – alleging he had fathered children outside marriage. Microsoft said the news anchors were created by the CapCut video editing tool, developed by the Chinese company ByteDance, which owns TikTok. Clint Watts, the general manager of Microsoft’s threat analysis centre, points to China’s official use of synthetic news anchors in its domestic media market, which has also allowed the country to hone the format. It has now become a tool for disinformation, although there has been little discernible impact so far. “The Chinese are much more focused on trying to put AI into their systems – propaganda, disinformation – they moved there very quickly. They’re trying everything. It’s not particularly effective,” said Watts. Third-party vendors such as CapCut offer the news anchor format as a template, so it is easy to adapt and produce in large volume. There are also clips featuring avatars acting like a cross between a professional TV presenter and an influencer speaking direct to the camera. One video produced by a Chinese state-backed group called Storm 1376 – also known as Spamouflage – features an AI-generated blond, female presenter alleging the US and India are secretly selling weapons to the Myanmar military. 0:29 AI-generated presenter produced by Chinese state-backed group Storm-1376 – video The overall effect is far from convincing. Despite a realistic-looking presenter, the video is undermined by a stiff voice that is clearly computer-generated. Other examples unearthed by NewsGuard, an organisation that monitors misinformation and disinformation, show a Spamouflage-linked TikTok account using AI-generated avatars to comment on US news stories such as food costs and gas prices . One video shows an avatar with a computer-generated voice discussing Walmart’s prices under the slogan: “Is Walmart lying to you about the weight of their meat?” NewsGuard said the avatar videos were part of a pro-China network that was “widening” before the US presidential election. It noted 167 accounts created since last year that were linked to Spamouflage. Other nations have experimented with deepfake anchors. Iranian state-backed hackers recently interrupted TV streaming services in the United Arab Emirates to broadcast a deepfake newsreader delivering a report on the war in Gaza. On Friday the Washington Post reported that the Islamic State terrorist group is using AI-generated news anchors – in helmet and fatigues – to broadcast propaganda. And one European state is openly trying AI-generated presenters: Ukraine’s ministry of foreign affairs has launched an AI spokesperson, Victoria Shi , using the likeness of Rosalie Nombre – a Ukrainian singer and media personality who gave permission for her image to be used. The result is, at first glance at least, impressive. Last year, Beijing published guidelines for tagging content, stating that images or videos generated using AI should be clearly watermarked. But Jeffrey Ding, an assistant professor at George Washington University who focuses on technology, said it was an “open question” about how the tagging requirements would be enforced in practice, especially with regard to state propaganda. And while China’s guidelines require “erroneous” information in AI-generated content to be minimised , the priority for Chinese regulators is “controlling information flows and making sure that the content being produced is not politically sensitive and does not cause societal disruption,” said Ding. That means that when it comes to fake news, “for the Chinese government, what counts as disinformation on the Taiwan front might be very different from what the proper or truer interpretation of disinformation is”. Experts don’t believe the computer-made news anchors are effective dupes just yet: Tsai’s pro-sovereignty party won in Taiwan, despite the avatar’s best efforts. Macrina Wang, the deputy news verification editor at NewsGuard, said the avatar content she had seen was “quite crude” but was increasing in volume. To the trained eye these videos were obviously fake, she said, with stilted movement and a lack of shifting light or shadows on the avatar’s figure being among the giveaways. Nonetheless, some of the comments under the TikTok videos show that people have fallen for it. “There is a risk that the average person thinks this [avatar] is a real person,” she said, adding that AI was making video content “more compelling, clickable and viral”. Microsoft’s Watts said a more likely evolution of the newscaster tactic was footage of a real-life news anchor being manipulated rather than a fully AI-generated figure. We could see “any mainstream news media anchor being manipulated in a way to make them say something they didn’t say”, Watts said. That is “far more likely” than a fully synthetic effort. In its report last month, Microsoft researchers said they had not encountered many examples of AI-generated content having an impact on the offline world. “Rarely have nation-states’ employments of generative AI-enabled content achieved much reach across social media, and in only a few cases have we seen any genuine audience deception from such content,” the report read. Instead, audiences are gravitating towards simple forgeries like fake text stories embossed with spoof media logos. Watts said there was a chance that a fully-AI generated video could affect an election, but the tool to create such a clip did not exist yet. “My guess is the tool that is used with that video … isn’t even on the market yet.” The most effective AI video messenger may not be a newscaster yet. But it underlines the importance of video to states trying to sow confusion among voters. Threat actors will also be waiting for an example of an AI-made video that grabs an audience’s attention – and then replicating it. Both OpenAI and Google have demonstrated AI video makers in recent months, though neither has released their tools to the public. “The effective use of synthetic personas in videos that people actually watch will happen in a commercial space first. And then you’ll see the threat actors move to that.” Additional research by Chi Hui Lin Explore more on these topics Artificial intelligence (AI) China Taiwan TikTok Microsoft news Share Reuse this content Screengrab from a video from Chinese state-backed group called Storm-1376 showing an AI-generated newsreader. Photograph: Storm-1376 View image in fullscreen Screengrab from a video from Chinese state-backed group called Storm-1376 showing an AI-generated newsreader. Photograph: Storm-1376 This article is more than 1 year old How China is using AI news anchors to deliver its propaganda This article is more than 1 year old News avatars are proliferating on social media and experts say they will spread as the technology becomes more accessible T he news presenter has a deeply uncanny air as he delivers a partisan and pejorative message in Mandarin: Taiwan’s outgoing president, Tsai Ing-wen, is as effective as limp spinach, her period in office beset by economic under performance, social problems and protests. “Water spinach looks at water spinach. Turns out that water spinach isn’t just a name,” says the presenter, in an extended metaphor about Tsai being “Hollow Tsai” – a pun related to the Mandarin word for water spinach. Live AI-generated presenter compares Taiwan president to water spinach – video This is not a conventional broadcast journalist, even if the lack of impartiality is no longer a shock. The anchor is generated by an artificial intelligence programme, and the segment is trying, albeit clumsily, to influence the Taiwanese presidential election. The source and creator of the video are unknown, but the clip is designed to make voters doubt politicians who want Taiwan to remain at arm’s length from China , which claims that the self-governing island is part of its territory. It is the latest example of a sub-genre of the AI-generated disinformation game: the deepfake news anchor or TV presenter. Such avatars are proliferating on social networks, spreading state-backed propaganda. Experts do say this kind of video will continue to spread as the technology becomes more widely accessible. “It does not need to be perfect,” said Tyler Williams, the director of investigations at Graphika, a disinformation research company. “If a user is just scrolling through X or TikTok , they are not picking up little nuances on a smaller screen.” Beijing has already experimented with AI-generated news anchors. In 2018, the state news agency Xinhua unveiled Qiu Hao , a digital news presenter, who promised to bring viewers the news “24 hours a day, 365 days a year”. Although the Chinese public is generally enthusiastic about the use of digital avatars in the media, Qiu Hao failed to catch on more widely. China is at the forefront of the disinformation element of the trend. Last year, pro-China bot accounts on Facebook and X distributed AI-generated deepfake videos of news anchors representing a fictitious broadcaster called Wolf News. In one clip, the US government was accused of failing to deal with gun violence, while another highlighted China’s role at an international summit. In a report released in April, Microsoft said Chinese state-backed cyber groups had targeted the Taiwanese election with AI-generated disinformation content , including the use of fake news anchors or TV-style presenters. In one clip cited by Microsoft, the AI-generated anchor made unsubstantiated claims about the private life of the ultimately successful pro-sovereignty candidate – Lai Ching-te – alleging he had fathered children outside marriage. Microsoft said the news anchors were created by the CapCut video editing tool, developed by the Chinese company ByteDance, which owns TikTok. Clint Watts, the general manager of Microsoft’s threat analysis centre, points to China’s official use of synthetic news anchors in its domestic media market, which has also allowed the country to hone the format. It has now become a tool for disinformation, although there has been little discernible impact so far. “The Chinese are much more focused on trying to put AI into their systems – propaganda, disinformation – they moved there very quickly. They’re trying everything. It’s not particularly effective,” said Watts. Third-party vendors such as CapCut offer the news anchor format as a template, so it is easy to adapt and produce in large volume. There are also clips featuring avatars acting like a cross between a professional TV presenter and an influencer speaking direct to the camera. One video produced by a Chinese state-backed group called Storm 1376 – also known as Spamouflage – features an AI-generated blond, female presenter alleging the US and India are secretly selling weapons to the Myanmar military. 0:29 AI-generated presenter produced by Chinese state-backed group Storm-1376 – video The overall effect is far from convincing. Despite a realistic-looking presenter, the video is undermined by a stiff voice that is clearly computer-generated. Other examples unearthed by NewsGuard, an organisation that monitors misinformation and disinformation, show a Spamouflage-linked TikTok account using AI-generated avatars to comment on US news stories such as food costs and gas prices . One video shows an avatar with a computer-generated voice discussing Walmart’s prices under the slogan: “Is Walmart lying to you about the weight of their meat?” NewsGuard said the avatar videos were part of a pro-China network that was “widening” before the US presidential election. It noted 167 accounts created since last year that were linked to Spamouflage. Other nations have experimented with deepfake anchors. Iranian state-backed hackers recently interrupted TV streaming services in the United Arab Emirates to broadcast a deepfake newsreader delivering a report on the war in Gaza. On Friday the Washington Post reported that the Islamic State terrorist group is using AI-generated news anchors – in helmet and fatigues – to broadcast propaganda. And one European state is openly trying AI-generated presenters: Ukraine’s ministry of foreign affairs has launched an AI spokesperson, Victoria Shi , using the likeness of Rosalie Nombre – a Ukrainian singer and media personality who gave permission for her image to be used. The result is, at first glance at least, impressive. Last year, Beijing published guidelines for tagging content, stating that images or videos generated using AI should be clearly watermarked. But Jeffrey Ding, an assistant professor at George Washington University who focuses on technology, said it was an “open question” about how the tagging requirements would be enforced in practice, especially with regard to state propaganda. And while China’s guidelines require “erroneous” information in AI-generated content to be minimised , the priority for Chinese regulators is “controlling information flows and making sure that the content being produced is not politically sensitive and does not cause societal disruption,” said Ding. That means that when it comes to fake news, “for the Chinese government, what counts as disinformation on the Taiwan front might be very different from what the proper or truer interpretation of disinformation is”. Experts don’t believe the computer-made news anchors are effective dupes just yet: Tsai’s pro-sovereignty party won in Taiwan, despite the avatar’s best efforts. Macrina Wang, the deputy news verification editor at NewsGuard, said the avatar content she had seen was “quite crude” but was increasing in volume. To the trained eye these videos were obviously fake, she said, with stilted movement and a lack of shifting light or shadows on the avatar’s figure being among the giveaways. Nonetheless, some of the comments under the TikTok videos show that people have fallen for it. “There is a risk that the average person thinks this [avatar] is a real person,” she said, adding that AI was making video content “more compelling, clickable and viral”. Microsoft’s Watts said a more likely evolution of the newscaster tactic was footage of a real-life news anchor being manipulated rather than a fully AI-generated figure. We could see “any mainstream news media anchor being manipulated in a way to make them say something they didn’t say”, Watts said. That is “far more likely” than a fully synthetic effort. In its report last month, Microsoft researchers said they had not encountered many examples of AI-generated content having an impact on the offline world. “Rarely have nation-states’ employments of generative AI-enabled content achieved much reach across social media, and in only a few cases have we seen any genuine audience deception from such content,” the report read. Instead, audiences are gravitating towards simple forgeries like fake text stories embossed with spoof media logos. Watts said there was a chance that a fully-AI generated video could affect an election, but the tool to create such a clip did not exist yet. “My guess is the tool that is used with that video … isn’t even on the market yet.” The most effective AI video messenger may not be a newscaster yet. But it underlines the importance of video to states trying to sow confusion among voters. Threat actors will also be waiting for an example of an AI-made video that grabs an audience’s attention – and then replicating it. Both OpenAI and Google have demonstrated AI video makers in recent months, though neither has released their tools to the public. “The effective use of synthetic personas in videos that people actually watch will happen in a commercial space first. And then you’ll see the threat actors move to that.” Additional research by Chi Hui Lin Explore more on these topics Artificial intelligence (AI) China Taiwan TikTok Microsoft news Share Reuse this content Screengrab from a video from Chinese state-backed group called Storm-1376 showing an AI-generated newsreader. Photograph: Storm-1376 View image in fullscreen Screengrab from a video from Chinese state-backed group called Storm-1376 showing an AI-generated newsreader. Photograph: Storm-1376 Screengrab from a video from Chinese state-backed group called Storm-1376 showing an AI-generated newsreader. Photograph: Storm-1376 View image in fullscreen Screengrab from a video from Chinese state-backed group called Storm-1376 showing an AI-generated newsreader. Photograph: Storm-1376 Screengrab from a video from Chinese state-backed group called Storm-1376 showing an AI-generated newsreader. Photograph: Storm-1376 View image in fullscreen Screengrab from a video from Chinese state-backed group called Storm-1376 showing an AI-generated newsreader. Photograph: Storm-1376 Screengrab from a video from Chinese state-backed group called Storm-1376 showing an AI-generated newsreader. Photograph: Storm-1376 View image in fullscreen Screengrab from a video from Chinese state-backed group called Storm-1376 showing an AI-generated newsreader. Photograph: Storm-1376 Screengrab from a video from Chinese state-backed group called Storm-1376 showing an AI-generated newsreader. Photograph: Storm-1376 Screengrab from a video from Chinese state-backed group called Storm-1376 showing an AI-generated newsreader. Photograph: Storm-1376 This article is more than 1 year old How China is using AI news anchors to deliver its propaganda This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old How China is using AI news anchors to deliver its propaganda This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old How China is using AI news anchors to deliver its propaganda This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old News avatars are proliferating on social media and experts say they will spread as the technology becomes more accessible News avatars are proliferating on social media and experts say they will spread as the technology becomes more accessible News avatars are proliferating on social media and experts say they will spread as the technology becomes more accessible T he news presenter has a deeply uncanny air as he delivers a partisan and pejorative message in Mandarin: Taiwan’s outgoing president, Tsai Ing-wen, is as effective as limp spinach, her period in office beset by economic under performance, social problems and protests. “Water spinach looks at water spinach. Turns out that water spinach isn’t just a name,” says the presenter, in an extended metaphor about Tsai being “Hollow Tsai” – a pun related to the Mandarin word for water spinach. Live AI-generated presenter compares Taiwan president to water spinach – video This is not a conventional broadcast journalist, even if the lack of impartiality is no longer a shock. The anchor is generated by an artificial intelligence programme, and the segment is trying, albeit clumsily, to influence the Taiwanese presidential election. The source and creator of the video are unknown, but the clip is designed to make voters doubt politicians who want Taiwan to remain at arm’s length from China , which claims that the self-governing island is part of its territory. It is the latest example of a sub-genre of the AI-generated disinformation game: the deepfake news anchor or TV presenter. Such avatars are proliferating on social networks, spreading state-backed propaganda. Experts do say this kind of video will continue to spread as the technology becomes more widely accessible. “It does not need to be perfect,” said Tyler Williams, the director of investigations at Graphika, a disinformation research company. “If a user is just scrolling through X or TikTok , they are not picking up little nuances on a smaller screen.” Beijing has already experimented with AI-generated news anchors. In 2018, the state news agency Xinhua unveiled Qiu Hao , a digital news presenter, who promised to bring viewers the news “24 hours a day, 365 days a year”. Although the Chinese public is generally enthusiastic about the use of digital avatars in the media, Qiu Hao failed to catch on more widely. China is at the forefront of the disinformation element of the trend. Last year, pro-China bot accounts on Facebook and X distributed AI-generated deepfake videos of news anchors representing a fictitious broadcaster called Wolf News. In one clip, the US government was accused of failing to deal with gun violence, while another highlighted China’s role at an international summit. In a report released in April, Microsoft said Chinese state-backed cyber groups had targeted the Taiwanese election with AI-generated disinformation content , including the use of fake news anchors or TV-style presenters. In one clip cited by Microsoft, the AI-generated anchor made unsubstantiated claims about the private life of the ultimately successful pro-sovereignty candidate – Lai Ching-te – alleging he had fathered children outside marriage. Microsoft said the news anchors were created by the CapCut video editing tool, developed by the Chinese company ByteDance, which owns TikTok. Clint Watts, the general manager of Microsoft’s threat analysis centre, points to China’s official use of synthetic news anchors in its domestic media market, which has also allowed the country to hone the format. It has now become a tool for disinformation, although there has been little discernible impact so far. “The Chinese are much more focused on trying to put AI into their systems – propaganda, disinformation – they moved there very quickly. They’re trying everything. It’s not particularly effective,” said Watts. Third-party vendors such as CapCut offer the news anchor format as a template, so it is easy to adapt and produce in large volume. There are also clips featuring avatars acting like a cross between a professional TV presenter and an influencer speaking direct to the camera. One video produced by a Chinese state-backed group called Storm 1376 – also known as Spamouflage – features an AI-generated blond, female presenter alleging the US and India are secretly selling weapons to the Myanmar military. 0:29 AI-generated presenter produced by Chinese state-backed group Storm-1376 – video The overall effect is far from convincing. Despite a realistic-looking presenter, the video is undermined by a stiff voice that is clearly computer-generated. Other examples unearthed by NewsGuard, an organisation that monitors misinformation and disinformation, show a Spamouflage-linked TikTok account using AI-generated avatars to comment on US news stories such as food costs and gas prices . One video shows an avatar with a computer-generated voice discussing Walmart’s prices under the slogan: “Is Walmart lying to you about the weight of their meat?” NewsGuard said the avatar videos were part of a pro-China network that was “widening” before the US presidential election. It noted 167 accounts created since last year that were linked to Spamouflage. Other nations have experimented with deepfake anchors. Iranian state-backed hackers recently interrupted TV streaming services in the United Arab Emirates to broadcast a deepfake newsreader delivering a report on the war in Gaza. On Friday the Washington Post reported that the Islamic State terrorist group is using AI-generated news anchors – in helmet and fatigues – to broadcast propaganda. And one European state is openly trying AI-generated presenters: Ukraine’s ministry of foreign affairs has launched an AI spokesperson, Victoria Shi , using the likeness of Rosalie Nombre – a Ukrainian singer and media personality who gave permission for her image to be used. The result is, at first glance at least, impressive. Last year, Beijing published guidelines for tagging content, stating that images or videos generated using AI should be clearly watermarked. But Jeffrey Ding, an assistant professor at George Washington University who focuses on technology, said it was an “open question” about how the tagging requirements would be enforced in practice, especially with regard to state propaganda. And while China’s guidelines require “erroneous” information in AI-generated content to be minimised , the priority for Chinese regulators is “controlling information flows and making sure that the content being produced is not politically sensitive and does not cause societal disruption,” said Ding. That means that when it comes to fake news, “for the Chinese government, what counts as disinformation on the Taiwan front might be very different from what the proper or truer interpretation of disinformation is”. Experts don’t believe the computer-made news anchors are effective dupes just yet: Tsai’s pro-sovereignty party won in Taiwan, despite the avatar’s best efforts. Macrina Wang, the deputy news verification editor at NewsGuard, said the avatar content she had seen was “quite crude” but was increasing in volume. To the trained eye these videos were obviously fake, she said, with stilted movement and a lack of shifting light or shadows on the avatar’s figure being among the giveaways. Nonetheless, some of the comments under the TikTok videos show that people have fallen for it. “There is a risk that the average person thinks this [avatar] is a real person,” she said, adding that AI was making video content “more compelling, clickable and viral”. Microsoft’s Watts said a more likely evolution of the newscaster tactic was footage of a real-life news anchor being manipulated rather than a fully AI-generated figure. We could see “any mainstream news media anchor being manipulated in a way to make them say something they didn’t say”, Watts said. That is “far more likely” than a fully synthetic effort. In its report last month, Microsoft researchers said they had not encountered many examples of AI-generated content having an impact on the offline world. “Rarely have nation-states’ employments of generative AI-enabled content achieved much reach across social media, and in only a few cases have we seen any genuine audience deception from such content,” the report read. Instead, audiences are gravitating towards simple forgeries like fake text stories embossed with spoof media logos. Watts said there was a chance that a fully-AI generated video could affect an election, but the tool to create such a clip did not exist yet. “My guess is the tool that is used with that video … isn’t even on the market yet.” The most effective AI video messenger may not be a newscaster yet. But it underlines the importance of video to states trying to sow confusion among voters. Threat actors will also be waiting for an example of an AI-made video that grabs an audience’s attention – and then replicating it. Both OpenAI and Google have demonstrated AI video makers in recent months, though neither has released their tools to the public. “The effective use of synthetic personas in videos that people actually watch will happen in a commercial space first. And then you’ll see the threat actors move to that.” Additional research by Chi Hui Lin Explore more on these topics Artificial intelligence (AI) China Taiwan TikTok Microsoft news Share Reuse this content T he news presenter has a deeply uncanny air as he delivers a partisan and pejorative message in Mandarin: Taiwan’s outgoing president, Tsai Ing-wen, is as effective as limp spinach, her period in office beset by economic under performance, social problems and protests. “Water spinach looks at water spinach. Turns out that water spinach isn’t just a name,” says the presenter, in an extended metaphor about Tsai being “Hollow Tsai” – a pun related to the Mandarin word for water spinach. Live AI-generated presenter compares Taiwan president to water spinach – video This is not a conventional broadcast journalist, even if the lack of impartiality is no longer a shock. The anchor is generated by an artificial intelligence programme, and the segment is trying, albeit clumsily, to influence the Taiwanese presidential election. The source and creator of the video are unknown, but the clip is designed to make voters doubt politicians who want Taiwan to remain at arm’s length from China , which claims that the self-governing island is part of its territory. It is the latest example of a sub-genre of the AI-generated disinformation game: the deepfake news anchor or TV presenter. Such avatars are proliferating on social networks, spreading state-backed propaganda. Experts do say this kind of video will continue to spread as the technology becomes more widely accessible. “It does not need to be perfect,” said Tyler Williams, the director of investigations at Graphika, a disinformation research company. “If a user is just scrolling through X or TikTok , they are not picking up little nuances on a smaller screen.” Beijing has already experimented with AI-generated news anchors. In 2018, the state news agency Xinhua unveiled Qiu Hao , a digital news presenter, who promised to bring viewers the news “24 hours a day, 365 days a year”. Although the Chinese public is generally enthusiastic about the use of digital avatars in the media, Qiu Hao failed to catch on more widely. China is at the forefront of the disinformation element of the trend. Last year, pro-China bot accounts on Facebook and X distributed AI-generated deepfake videos of news anchors representing a fictitious broadcaster called Wolf News. In one clip, the US government was accused of failing to deal with gun violence, while another highlighted China’s role at an international summit. In a report released in April, Microsoft said Chinese state-backed cyber groups had targeted the Taiwanese election with AI-generated disinformation content , including the use of fake news anchors or TV-style presenters. In one clip cited by Microsoft, the AI-generated anchor made unsubstantiated claims about the private life of the ultimately successful pro-sovereignty candidate – Lai Ching-te – alleging he had fathered children outside marriage. Microsoft said the news anchors were created by the CapCut video editing tool, developed by the Chinese company ByteDance, which owns TikTok. Clint Watts, the general manager of Microsoft’s threat analysis centre, points to China’s official use of synthetic news anchors in its domestic media market, which has also allowed the country to hone the format. It has now become a tool for disinformation, although there has been little discernible impact so far. “The Chinese are much more focused on trying to put AI into their systems – propaganda, disinformation – they moved there very quickly. They’re trying everything. It’s not particularly effective,” said Watts. Third-party vendors such as CapCut offer the news anchor format as a template, so it is easy to adapt and produce in large volume. There are also clips featuring avatars acting like a cross between a professional TV presenter and an influencer speaking direct to the camera. One video produced by a Chinese state-backed group called Storm 1376 – also known as Spamouflage – features an AI-generated blond, female presenter alleging the US and India are secretly selling weapons to the Myanmar military. 0:29 AI-generated presenter produced by Chinese state-backed group Storm-1376 – video The overall effect is far from convincing. Despite a realistic-looking presenter, the video is undermined by a stiff voice that is clearly computer-generated. Other examples unearthed by NewsGuard, an organisation that monitors misinformation and disinformation, show a Spamouflage-linked TikTok account using AI-generated avatars to comment on US news stories such as food costs and gas prices . One video shows an avatar with a computer-generated voice discussing Walmart’s prices under the slogan: “Is Walmart lying to you about the weight of their meat?” NewsGuard said the avatar videos were part of a pro-China network that was “widening” before the US presidential election. It noted 167 accounts created since last year that were linked to Spamouflage. Other nations have experimented with deepfake anchors. Iranian state-backed hackers recently interrupted TV streaming services in the United Arab Emirates to broadcast a deepfake newsreader delivering a report on the war in Gaza. On Friday the Washington Post reported that the Islamic State terrorist group is using AI-generated news anchors – in helmet and fatigues – to broadcast propaganda. And one European state is openly trying AI-generated presenters: Ukraine’s ministry of foreign affairs has launched an AI spokesperson, Victoria Shi , using the likeness of Rosalie Nombre – a Ukrainian singer and media personality who gave permission for her image to be used. The result is, at first glance at least, impressive. Last year, Beijing published guidelines for tagging content, stating that images or videos generated using AI should be clearly watermarked. But Jeffrey Ding, an assistant professor at George Washington University who focuses on technology, said it was an “open question” about how the tagging requirements would be enforced in practice, especially with regard to state propaganda. And while China’s guidelines require “erroneous” information in AI-generated content to be minimised , the priority for Chinese regulators is “controlling information flows and making sure that the content being produced is not politically sensitive and does not cause societal disruption,” said Ding. That means that when it comes to fake news, “for the Chinese government, what counts as disinformation on the Taiwan front might be very different from what the proper or truer interpretation of disinformation is”. Experts don’t believe the computer-made news anchors are effective dupes just yet: Tsai’s pro-sovereignty party won in Taiwan, despite the avatar’s best efforts. Macrina Wang, the deputy news verification editor at NewsGuard, said the avatar content she had seen was “quite crude” but was increasing in volume. To the trained eye these videos were obviously fake, she said, with stilted movement and a lack of shifting light or shadows on the avatar’s figure being among the giveaways. Nonetheless, some of the comments under the TikTok videos show that people have fallen for it. “There is a risk that the average person thinks this [avatar] is a real person,” she said, adding that AI was making video content “more compelling, clickable and viral”. Microsoft’s Watts said a more likely evolution of the newscaster tactic was footage of a real-life news anchor being manipulated rather than a fully AI-generated figure. We could see “any mainstream news media anchor being manipulated in a way to make them say something they didn’t say”, Watts said. That is “far more likely” than a fully synthetic effort. In its report last month, Microsoft researchers said they had not encountered many examples of AI-generated content having an impact on the offline world. “Rarely have nation-states’ employments of generative AI-enabled content achieved much reach across social media, and in only a few cases have we seen any genuine audience deception from such content,” the report read. Instead, audiences are gravitating towards simple forgeries like fake text stories embossed with spoof media logos. Watts said there was a chance that a fully-AI generated video could affect an election, but the tool to create such a clip did not exist yet. “My guess is the tool that is used with that video … isn’t even on the market yet.” The most effective AI video messenger may not be a newscaster yet. But it underlines the importance of video to states trying to sow confusion among voters. Threat actors will also be waiting for an example of an AI-made video that grabs an audience’s attention – and then replicating it. Both OpenAI and Google have demonstrated AI video makers in recent months, though neither has released their tools to the public. “The effective use of synthetic personas in videos that people actually watch will happen in a commercial space first. And then you’ll see the threat actors move to that.” Additional research by Chi Hui Lin Explore more on these topics Artificial intelligence (AI) China Taiwan TikTok Microsoft news Share Reuse this content T he news presenter has a deeply uncanny air as he delivers a partisan and pejorative message in Mandarin: Taiwan’s outgoing president, Tsai Ing-wen, is as effective as limp spinach, her period in office beset by economic under performance, social problems and protests. “Water spinach looks at water spinach. Turns out that water spinach isn’t just a name,” says the presenter, in an extended metaphor about Tsai being “Hollow Tsai” – a pun related to the Mandarin word for water spinach. Live AI-generated presenter compares Taiwan president to water spinach – video This is not a conventional broadcast journalist, even if the lack of impartiality is no longer a shock. The anchor is generated by an artificial intelligence programme, and the segment is trying, albeit clumsily, to influence the Taiwanese presidential election. The source and creator of the video are unknown, but the clip is designed to make voters doubt politicians who want Taiwan to remain at arm’s length from China , which claims that the self-governing island is part of its territory. It is the latest example of a sub-genre of the AI-generated disinformation game: the deepfake news anchor or TV presenter. Such avatars are proliferating on social networks, spreading state-backed propaganda. Experts do say this kind of video will continue to spread as the technology becomes more widely accessible. “It does not need to be perfect,” said Tyler Williams, the director of investigations at Graphika, a disinformation research company. “If a user is just scrolling through X or TikTok , they are not picking up little nuances on a smaller screen.” Beijing has already experimented with AI-generated news anchors. In 2018, the state news agency Xinhua unveiled Qiu Hao , a digital news presenter, who promised to bring viewers the news “24 hours a day, 365 days a year”. Although the Chinese public is generally enthusiastic about the use of digital avatars in the media, Qiu Hao failed to catch on more widely. China is at the forefront of the disinformation element of the trend. Last year, pro-China bot accounts on Facebook and X distributed AI-generated deepfake videos of news anchors representing a fictitious broadcaster called Wolf News. In one clip, the US government was accused of failing to deal with gun violence, while another highlighted China’s role at an international summit. In a report released in April, Microsoft said Chinese state-backed cyber groups had targeted the Taiwanese election with AI-generated disinformation content , including the use of fake news anchors or TV-style presenters. In one clip cited by Microsoft, the AI-generated anchor made unsubstantiated claims about the private life of the ultimately successful pro-sovereignty candidate – Lai Ching-te – alleging he had fathered children outside marriage. Microsoft said the news anchors were created by the CapCut video editing tool, developed by the Chinese company ByteDance, which owns TikTok. Clint Watts, the general manager of Microsoft’s threat analysis centre, points to China’s official use of synthetic news anchors in its domestic media market, which has also allowed the country to hone the format. It has now become a tool for disinformation, although there has been little discernible impact so far. “The Chinese are much more focused on trying to put AI into their systems – propaganda, disinformation – they moved there very quickly. They’re trying everything. It’s not particularly effective,” said Watts. Third-party vendors such as CapCut offer the news anchor format as a template, so it is easy to adapt and produce in large volume. There are also clips featuring avatars acting like a cross between a professional TV presenter and an influencer speaking direct to the camera. One video produced by a Chinese state-backed group called Storm 1376 – also known as Spamouflage – features an AI-generated blond, female presenter alleging the US and India are secretly selling weapons to the Myanmar military. 0:29 AI-generated presenter produced by Chinese state-backed group Storm-1376 – video The overall effect is far from convincing. Despite a realistic-looking presenter, the video is undermined by a stiff voice that is clearly computer-generated. Other examples unearthed by NewsGuard, an organisation that monitors misinformation and disinformation, show a Spamouflage-linked TikTok account using AI-generated avatars to comment on US news stories such as food costs and gas prices . One video shows an avatar with a computer-generated voice discussing Walmart’s prices under the slogan: “Is Walmart lying to you about the weight of their meat?” NewsGuard said the avatar videos were part of a pro-China network that was “widening” before the US presidential election. It noted 167 accounts created since last year that were linked to Spamouflage. Other nations have experimented with deepfake anchors. Iranian state-backed hackers recently interrupted TV streaming services in the United Arab Emirates to broadcast a deepfake newsreader delivering a report on the war in Gaza. On Friday the Washington Post reported that the Islamic State terrorist group is using AI-generated news anchors – in helmet and fatigues – to broadcast propaganda. And one European state is openly trying AI-generated presenters: Ukraine’s ministry of foreign affairs has launched an AI spokesperson, Victoria Shi , using the likeness of Rosalie Nombre – a Ukrainian singer and media personality who gave permission for her image to be used. The result is, at first glance at least, impressive. Last year, Beijing published guidelines for tagging content, stating that images or videos generated using AI should be clearly watermarked. But Jeffrey Ding, an assistant professor at George Washington University who focuses on technology, said it was an “open question” about how the tagging requirements would be enforced in practice, especially with regard to state propaganda. And while China’s guidelines require “erroneous” information in AI-generated content to be minimised , the priority for Chinese regulators is “controlling information flows and making sure that the content being produced is not politically sensitive and does not cause societal disruption,” said Ding. That means that when it comes to fake news, “for the Chinese government, what counts as disinformation on the Taiwan front might be very different from what the proper or truer interpretation of disinformation is”. Experts don’t believe the computer-made news anchors are effective dupes just yet: Tsai’s pro-sovereignty party won in Taiwan, despite the avatar’s best efforts. Macrina Wang, the deputy news verification editor at NewsGuard, said the avatar content she had seen was “quite crude” but was increasing in volume. To the trained eye these videos were obviously fake, she said, with stilted movement and a lack of shifting light or shadows on the avatar’s figure being among the giveaways. Nonetheless, some of the comments under the TikTok videos show that people have fallen for it. “There is a risk that the average person thinks this [avatar] is a real person,” she said, adding that AI was making video content “more compelling, clickable and viral”. Microsoft’s Watts said a more likely evolution of the newscaster tactic was footage of a real-life news anchor being manipulated rather than a fully AI-generated figure. We could see “any mainstream news media anchor being manipulated in a way to make them say something they didn’t say”, Watts said. That is “far more likely” than a fully synthetic effort. In its report last month, Microsoft researchers said they had not encountered many examples of AI-generated content having an impact on the offline world. “Rarely have nation-states’ employments of generative AI-enabled content achieved much reach across social media, and in only a few cases have we seen any genuine audience deception from such content,” the report read. Instead, audiences are gravitating towards simple forgeries like fake text stories embossed with spoof media logos. Watts said there was a chance that a fully-AI generated video could affect an election, but the tool to create such a clip did not exist yet. “My guess is the tool that is used with that video … isn’t even on the market yet.” The most effective AI video messenger may not be a newscaster yet. But it underlines the importance of video to states trying to sow confusion among voters. Threat actors will also be waiting for an example of an AI-made video that grabs an audience’s attention – and then replicating it. Both OpenAI and Google have demonstrated AI video makers in recent months, though neither has released their tools to the public. “The effective use of synthetic personas in videos that people actually watch will happen in a commercial space first. And then you’ll see the threat actors move to that.” Additional research by Chi Hui Lin T he news presenter has a deeply uncanny air as he delivers a partisan and pejorative message in Mandarin: Taiwan’s outgoing president, Tsai Ing-wen, is as effective as limp spinach, her period in office beset by economic under performance, social problems and protests. “Water spinach looks at water spinach. Turns out that water spinach isn’t just a name,” says the presenter, in an extended metaphor about Tsai being “Hollow Tsai” – a pun related to the Mandarin word for water spinach. Live AI-generated presenter co
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
Aslef leader left proposed deal to end rail strikes unread
The Aslef general secretary, Mick Whelan, says he has not met the transport secretary for 17 months. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA View image in fullscreen The Aslef general secretary, Mick Whelan, says he has not met the transport secretary for 17 months. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA This article is more than 1 year old Aslef leader left proposed deal to end rail strikes unread This article is more than 1 year old Mick Whelan says unacceptable offer was briefed to the media 10 minutes after it was sent to him Mick Whelan, the head of the Aslef train drivers’ union , has never even opened an email setting out a proposed deal to end strike action 17 months ago because he realised the offer was so bad it would be rejected, he has said. In an interview with parliamentary magazine The House, Whelan said he had not met Mark Harper, the transport secretary, since December 2022, or Huw Merriman, the transport minister whose brief covers rail, since January 2023. This was not usual, said Whelan, who has been Aslef’s general secretary since 2011, especially given his union has been staging intermittent strikes over pay and working conditions in England since July 2022. Rail strikes restart as Aslef train drivers embark on new action Read more “In normal political cycles, you meet your minister a couple of times of year, so they can say he’s met with the trade unions, and you can get a few gripes off your chest. Occasionally, you might achieve something,” he said. Explaining the December 2022 offer from the Rail Delivery Group, which brings together train operating companies, Whelan said it was sent to him 10 minutes before it was briefed to the media, which he said showed bad faith. “On the day before New Year’s Eve, Keith [Aslef’s press officer] rang me at 3.40 in the afternoon and said: ‘The Mail, the Telegraph, the Sunday Express would like to know what you think of the deal’. Excuse me for a moment, what fucking deal?” Whelan recounted. Details of the offer given to the media, showing it involved two years of 4% pay rises in exchange for the acceptance of changed working practices, had been widely seen by members before the union’s board met. He said: “We’ve got a building full of resolutions from the branches, ‘Don’t you dare ever sign anything like that, we’ll cut your throat,’ basically.” The email was still in his inbox, unread, Whelan said. “I still haven’t opened it. Not to this day.” This was in part to protest against the way the offer was handled, Whelan said, but also because he had once been involved in a court case in which the litigant said he had read an email, when it was one of his staff who did, meaning he is naturally cautious about opening some messages. Whelan said his one meeting with Harper had been cordial, but that the transport secretary briefed the media otherwise: “I don’t believe I was rude or unprofessional. Next day it appeared in the Mail that he didn’t like my tone. “My experience of Mark Harper is he fundamentally, obviously, doesn’t like me or he wouldn’t brief to the Mail. I haven’t seen him since.” The other rail unions, the RMT and TSSA, have agreed deals with train operators, while Aslef has reached agreements in Scotland and Wales. A Department for Transport spokesperson said: “The transport secretary and rail minister have already facilitated a pay offer that would take train drivers’ average salaries up to £65,000 – almost twice the UK average salary. “Aslef are the only union left in dispute after the government oversaw deals with all the other unions.” Explore more on these topics Trade unions Rail transport Rail industry Transport news Share Reuse this content The Aslef general secretary, Mick Whelan, says he has not met the transport secretary for 17 months. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA View image in fullscreen The Aslef general secretary, Mick Whelan, says he has not met the transport secretary for 17 months. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA This article is more than 1 year old Aslef leader left proposed deal to end rail strikes unread This article is more than 1 year old Mick Whelan says unacceptable offer was briefed to the media 10 minutes after it was sent to him Mick Whelan, the head of the Aslef train drivers’ union , has never even opened an email setting out a proposed deal to end strike action 17 months ago because he realised the offer was so bad it would be rejected, he has said. In an interview with parliamentary magazine The House, Whelan said he had not met Mark Harper, the transport secretary, since December 2022, or Huw Merriman, the transport minister whose brief covers rail, since January 2023. This was not usual, said Whelan, who has been Aslef’s general secretary since 2011, especially given his union has been staging intermittent strikes over pay and working conditions in England since July 2022. Rail strikes restart as Aslef train drivers embark on new action Read more “In normal political cycles, you meet your minister a couple of times of year, so they can say he’s met with the trade unions, and you can get a few gripes off your chest. Occasionally, you might achieve something,” he said. Explaining the December 2022 offer from the Rail Delivery Group, which brings together train operating companies, Whelan said it was sent to him 10 minutes before it was briefed to the media, which he said showed bad faith. “On the day before New Year’s Eve, Keith [Aslef’s press officer] rang me at 3.40 in the afternoon and said: ‘The Mail, the Telegraph, the Sunday Express would like to know what you think of the deal’. Excuse me for a moment, what fucking deal?” Whelan recounted. Details of the offer given to the media, showing it involved two years of 4% pay rises in exchange for the acceptance of changed working practices, had been widely seen by members before the union’s board met. He said: “We’ve got a building full of resolutions from the branches, ‘Don’t you dare ever sign anything like that, we’ll cut your throat,’ basically.” The email was still in his inbox, unread, Whelan said. “I still haven’t opened it. Not to this day.” This was in part to protest against the way the offer was handled, Whelan said, but also because he had once been involved in a court case in which the litigant said he had read an email, when it was one of his staff who did, meaning he is naturally cautious about opening some messages. Whelan said his one meeting with Harper had been cordial, but that the transport secretary briefed the media otherwise: “I don’t believe I was rude or unprofessional. Next day it appeared in the Mail that he didn’t like my tone. “My experience of Mark Harper is he fundamentally, obviously, doesn’t like me or he wouldn’t brief to the Mail. I haven’t seen him since.” The other rail unions, the RMT and TSSA, have agreed deals with train operators, while Aslef has reached agreements in Scotland and Wales. A Department for Transport spokesperson said: “The transport secretary and rail minister have already facilitated a pay offer that would take train drivers’ average salaries up to £65,000 – almost twice the UK average salary. “Aslef are the only union left in dispute after the government oversaw deals with all the other unions.” Explore more on these topics Trade unions Rail transport Rail industry Transport news Share Reuse this content The Aslef general secretary, Mick Whelan, says he has not met the transport secretary for 17 months. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA View image in fullscreen The Aslef general secretary, Mick Whelan, says he has not met the transport secretary for 17 months. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA The Aslef general secretary, Mick Whelan, says he has not met the transport secretary for 17 months. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA View image in fullscreen The Aslef general secretary, Mick Whelan, says he has not met the transport secretary for 17 months. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA The Aslef general secretary, Mick Whelan, says he has not met the transport secretary for 17 months. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA View image in fullscreen The Aslef general secretary, Mick Whelan, says he has not met the transport secretary for 17 months. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA The Aslef general secretary, Mick Whelan, says he has not met the transport secretary for 17 months. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA View image in fullscreen The Aslef general secretary, Mick Whelan, says he has not met the transport secretary for 17 months. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA The Aslef general secretary, Mick Whelan, says he has not met the transport secretary for 17 months. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA The Aslef general secretary, Mick Whelan, says he has not met the transport secretary for 17 months. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA This article is more than 1 year old Aslef leader left proposed deal to end rail strikes unread This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Aslef leader left proposed deal to end rail strikes unread This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Aslef leader left proposed deal to end rail strikes unread This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Mick Whelan says unacceptable offer was briefed to the media 10 minutes after it was sent to him Mick Whelan says unacceptable offer was briefed to the media 10 minutes after it was sent to him Mick Whelan says unacceptable offer was briefed to the media 10 minutes after it was sent to him Mick Whelan, the head of the Aslef train drivers’ union , has never even opened an email setting out a proposed deal to end strike action 17 months ago because he realised the offer was so bad it would be rejected, he has said. In an interview with parliamentary magazine The House, Whelan said he had not met Mark Harper, the transport secretary, since December 2022, or Huw Merriman, the transport minister whose brief covers rail, since January 2023. This was not usual, said Whelan, who has been Aslef’s general secretary since 2011, especially given his union has been staging intermittent strikes over pay and working conditions in England since July 2022. Rail strikes restart as Aslef train drivers embark on new action Read more “In normal political cycles, you meet your minister a couple of times of year, so they can say he’s met with the trade unions, and you can get a few gripes off your chest. Occasionally, you might achieve something,” he said. Explaining the December 2022 offer from the Rail Delivery Group, which brings together train operating companies, Whelan said it was sent to him 10 minutes before it was briefed to the media, which he said showed bad faith. “On the day before New Year’s Eve, Keith [Aslef’s press officer] rang me at 3.40 in the afternoon and said: ‘The Mail, the Telegraph, the Sunday Express would like to know what you think of the deal’. Excuse me for a moment, what fucking deal?” Whelan recounted. Details of the offer given to the media, showing it involved two years of 4% pay rises in exchange for the acceptance of changed working practices, had been widely seen by members before the union’s board met. He said: “We’ve got a building full of resolutions from the branches, ‘Don’t you dare ever sign anything like that, we’ll cut your throat,’ basically.” The email was still in his inbox, unread, Whelan said. “I still haven’t opened it. Not to this day.” This was in part to protest against the way the offer was handled, Whelan said, but also because he had once been involved in a court case in which the litigant said he had read an email, when it was one of his staff who did, meaning he is naturally cautious about opening some messages. Whelan said his one meeting with Harper had been cordial, but that the transport secretary briefed the media otherwise: “I don’t believe I was rude or unprofessional. Next day it appeared in the Mail that he didn’t like my tone. “My experience of Mark Harper is he fundamentally, obviously, doesn’t like me or he wouldn’t brief to the Mail. I haven’t seen him since.” The other rail unions, the RMT and TSSA, have agreed deals with train operators, while Aslef has reached agreements in Scotland and Wales. A Department for Transport spokesperson said: “The transport secretary and rail minister have already facilitated a pay offer that would take train drivers’ average salaries up to £65,000 – almost twice the UK average salary. “Aslef are the only union left in dispute after the government oversaw deals with all the other unions.” Explore more on these topics Trade unions Rail transport Rail industry Transport news Share Reuse this content Mick Whelan, the head of the Aslef train drivers’ union , has never even opened an email setting out a proposed deal to end strike action 17 months ago because he realised the offer was so bad it would be rejected, he has said. In an interview with parliamentary magazine The House, Whelan said he had not met Mark Harper, the transport secretary, since December 2022, or Huw Merriman, the transport minister whose brief covers rail, since January 2023. This was not usual, said Whelan, who has been Aslef’s general secretary since 2011, especially given his union has been staging intermittent strikes over pay and working conditions in England since July 2022. Rail strikes restart as Aslef train drivers embark on new action Read more “In normal political cycles, you meet your minister a couple of times of year, so they can say he’s met with the trade unions, and you can get a few gripes off your chest. Occasionally, you might achieve something,” he said. Explaining the December 2022 offer from the Rail Delivery Group, which brings together train operating companies, Whelan said it was sent to him 10 minutes before it was briefed to the media, which he said showed bad faith. “On the day before New Year’s Eve, Keith [Aslef’s press officer] rang me at 3.40 in the afternoon and said: ‘The Mail, the Telegraph, the Sunday Express would like to know what you think of the deal’. Excuse me for a moment, what fucking deal?” Whelan recounted. Details of the offer given to the media, showing it involved two years of 4% pay rises in exchange for the acceptance of changed working practices, had been widely seen by members before the union’s board met. He said: “We’ve got a building full of resolutions from the branches, ‘Don’t you dare ever sign anything like that, we’ll cut your throat,’ basically.” The email was still in his inbox, unread, Whelan said. “I still haven’t opened it. Not to this day.” This was in part to protest against the way the offer was handled, Whelan said, but also because he had once been involved in a court case in which the litigant said he had read an email, when it was one of his staff who did, meaning he is naturally cautious about opening some messages. Whelan said his one meeting with Harper had been cordial, but that the transport secretary briefed the media otherwise: “I don’t believe I was rude or unprofessional. Next day it appeared in the Mail that he didn’t like my tone. “My experience of Mark Harper is he fundamentally, obviously, doesn’t like me or he wouldn’t brief to the Mail. I haven’t seen him since.” The other rail unions, the RMT and TSSA, have agreed deals with train operators, while Aslef has reached agreements in Scotland and Wales. A Department for Transport spokesperson said: “The transport secretary and rail minister have already facilitated a pay offer that would take train drivers’ average salaries up to £65,000 – almost twice the UK average salary. “Aslef are the only union left in dispute after the government oversaw deals with all the other unions.” Explore more on these topics Trade unions Rail transport Rail industry Transport news Share Reuse this content Mick Whelan, the head of the Aslef train drivers’ union , has never even opened an email setting out a proposed deal to end strike action 17 months ago because he realised the offer was so bad it would be rejected, he has said. In an interview with parliamentary magazine The House, Whelan said he had not met Mark Harper, the transport secretary, since December 2022, or Huw Merriman, the transport minister whose brief covers rail, since January 2023. This was not usual, said Whelan, who has been Aslef’s general secretary since 2011, especially given his union has been staging intermittent strikes over pay and working conditions in England since July 2022. Rail strikes restart as Aslef train drivers embark on new action Read more “In normal political cycles, you meet your minister a couple of times of year, so they can say he’s met with the trade unions, and you can get a few gripes off your chest. Occasionally, you might achieve something,” he said. Explaining the December 2022 offer from the Rail Delivery Group, which brings together train operating companies, Whelan said it was sent to him 10 minutes before it was briefed to the media, which he said showed bad faith. “On the day before New Year’s Eve, Keith [Aslef’s press officer] rang me at 3.40 in the afternoon and said: ‘The Mail, the Telegraph, the Sunday Express would like to know what you think of the deal’. Excuse me for a moment, what fucking deal?” Whelan recounted. Details of the offer given to the media, showing it involved two years of 4% pay rises in exchange for the acceptance of changed working practices, had been widely seen by members before the union’s board met. He said: “We’ve got a building full of resolutions from the branches, ‘Don’t you dare ever sign anything like that, we’ll cut your throat,’ basically.” The email was still in his inbox, unread, Whelan said. “I still haven’t opened it. Not to this day.” This was in part to protest against the way the offer was handled, Whelan said, but also because he had once been involved in a court case in which the litigant said he had read an email, when it was one of his staff who did, meaning he is naturally cautious about opening some messages. Whelan said his one meeting with Harper had been cordial, but that the transport secretary briefed the media otherwise: “I don’t believe I was rude or unprofessional. Next day it appeared in the Mail that he didn’t like my tone. “My experience of Mark Harper is he fundamentally, obviously, doesn’t like me or he wouldn’t brief to the Mail. I haven’t seen him since.” The other rail unions, the RMT and TSSA, have agreed deals with train operators, while Aslef has reached agreements in Scotland and Wales. A Department for Transport spokesperson said: “The transport secretary and rail minister have already facilitated a pay offer that would take train drivers’ average salaries up to £65,000 – almost twice the UK average salary. “Aslef are the only union left in dispute after the government oversaw deals with all the other unions.” Mick Whelan, the head of the Aslef train drivers’ union , has never even opened an email setting out a proposed deal to end strike action 17 months ago because he realised the offer was so bad it would be rejected, he has said. In an interview with parliamentary magazine The House, Whelan said he had not met Mark Harper, the transport secretary, since December 2022, or Huw Merriman, the transport minister whose brief covers rail, since January 2023. This was not usual, said Whelan, who has been Aslef’s general secretary since 2011, especially given his union has been staging intermittent strikes over pay and working conditions in England since July 2022. Rail strikes restart as Aslef train drivers embark on new action Read more “In normal political cycles, you meet your minister a couple of times of year, so they can say he’s met with the trade unions, and you can get a few gripes off your chest. Occasionally, you might achieve something,” he said. Explaining the December 2022 offer from the Rail Delivery Group, which brings together train operating companies, Whelan said it was sent to him 10 minutes before it was briefed to the media, which he said showed bad faith. “On the day before New Year’s Eve, Keith [Aslef’s press officer] rang me at 3.40 in the afternoon and said: ‘The Mail, the Telegraph, the Sunday Express would like to know what you think of the deal’. Excuse me for a moment, what fucking deal?” Whelan recounted. Details of the offer given to the media, showing it involved two years of 4% pay rises in exchange for the acceptance of changed working practices, had been widely seen by members before the union’s board met. He said: “We’ve got a building full of resolutions from the branches, ‘Don’t you dare ever sign anything like that, we’ll cut your throat,’ basically.” The email was still in his inbox, unread, Whelan said. “I still haven’t opened it. Not to this day.” This was in part to protest against the way the offer was handled, Whelan said, but also because he had once been involved in a court case in which the litigant said he had read an email, when it was one of his staff who did, meaning he is naturally cautious about opening some messages. Whelan said his one meeting with Harper had been cordial, but that the transport secretary briefed the media otherwise: “I don’t believe I was rude or unprofessional. Next day it appeared in the Mail that he didn’t like my tone. “My experience of Mark Harper is he fundamentally, obviously, doesn’t like me or he wouldn’t brief to the Mail. I haven’t seen him since.” The other rail unions, the RMT and TSSA, have agreed deals with train operators, while Aslef has reached agreements in Scotland and Wales. A Department for Transport spokesperson said: “The transport secretary and rail minister have already facilitated a pay offer that would take train drivers’ average salaries up to £65,000 – almost twice the UK average salary. “Aslef are the only union left in dispute after the government oversaw deals with all the other unions.” Mick Whelan, the head of the Aslef train drivers’ union , has never even opened an email setting out a proposed deal to end strike action 17 months ago because he realised the offer was so bad it would be rejected, he has said. In an interview with parliamentary magazine The House, Whelan said he had not met Mark Harper, the transport secretary, since December 2022, or Huw Merriman, the transport minister whose brief covers rail, since January 2023. This was not usual, said Whelan, who has been Aslef’s general secretary since 2011, especially given his union has been staging intermittent strikes over pay and working conditions in England since July 2022. Rail strikes restart as Aslef train drivers embark on new action Read more Rail strikes restart as Aslef train drivers embark on new action Read more Rail strikes restart as Aslef train drivers embark on new action Read more Rail strikes restart as Aslef train drivers embark on new action Rail strikes restart as Aslef train drivers embark on new action “In normal political cycles, you meet your minister a couple of times of year, so they can say he’s met with the trade unions, and you can get a few gripes off your chest. Occasionally, you might achieve something,” he said. Explaining the December 2022 offer from the Rail Delivery Group, which brings together train operating companies, Whelan said it was sent to him 10 minutes before it was briefed to the media, which he said showed bad faith. “On the day before New Year’s Eve, Keith [Aslef’s press officer] rang me at 3.40 in the afternoon and said: ‘The Mail, the Telegraph, the Sunday Express would like to know what you think of the deal’. Excuse me for a moment, what fucking deal?” Whelan recounted. Details of the offer given to the media, showing it involved two years of 4% pay rises in exchange for the acceptance of changed working practices, had been widely seen by members before the union’s board met. He said: “We’ve got a building full of resolutions from the branches, ‘Don’t you dare ever sign anything like that, we’ll cut your throat,’ basically.” The email was still in his inbox, unread, Whelan said. “I still haven’t opened it. Not to this day.” This was in part to protest against the way the offer was handled, Whelan said, but also because he had once been involved in a court case in which the litigant said he had read an email, when it was one of his staff who did, meaning he is naturally cautious about opening some messages. Whelan said his one meeting with Harper had been cordial, but that the transport secretary briefed the media otherwise: “I don’t believe I was rude or unprofessional. Next day it appeared in the Mail that he didn’t like my tone. “My experience of Mark Harper is he fundamentally, obviously, doesn’t like me or he wouldn’t brief to the Mail. I haven’t seen him since.” The other rail unions, the RMT and TSSA, have agreed deals with train operators, while Aslef has reached agreements in Scotland and Wales. A Department for Transport spokesperson said: “The transport secretary and rail minister have already facilitated a pay offer that would take train drivers’ average salaries up to £65,000 – almost twice the UK average salary. “Aslef are the only union left in dispute after the government oversaw deals with all the other unions.” Explore more on these topics Trade unions Rail transport Rail industry Transport news Share Reuse this content Trade unions Rail transport Rail industry Transport news |
‘A history that’s been suppressed’: the Black cowboy story is 200 years old
This article is more than 1 year old ‘A history that’s been suppressed’: the Black cowboy story is 200 years old This article is more than 1 year old Historians estimate a quarter of settlers of the US west were Black, moving cattle on horseback, settling towns and keeping the peace View image in fullscreen The Bill Pickett invitational rodeo in Conyers, Georgia, in 2019. Photograph: Diwang Valdez/Rolling Stone/Penske Media/Getty Images When Larry Callies went to the movies as a boy in Rosenberg, Texas, the heroes riding horses and wearing 10-gallon hats were all white men. But the real cowboys Callies knew were Black. His great-grandfather Lavel Callies was an enslaved cowboy who worked with horses professionally after emancipation. “We’re cowboys for three generations back,” says Callies, 71, who runs the Black Cowboy Museum . Historians estimate that 20% to 25% of the people who settled the continental US west – a region from Washington state to Montana and New Mexico to California – were Black men and women. They moved cattle on horseback, settled towns, kept the peace and delivered the mail in the wild, wild west. But Black cowgirls and cowboys have been pretty much invisible to most. For nearly 200 years, two separate cowboy narratives, one Black and one white, have trotted side by side in the US. The two have rarely crossed paths. Until now. View image in fullscreen Larry Callies, founder of the Black Cowboy Museum, in Rosenberg on 20 May 2021. Photograph: Elizabeth Conley/Houston Chronicle/Hearst Newspapers/Getty Images Today, it seems like modern Black cowboys and cowgirls are everywhere. Who could miss Beyoncé starring as a red-white-and-blue rodeo queen on the cover of her Cowboy Carter album? Her embrace of equestrian symbols shines a spotlight on those who have quietly kept the Black cowboy legacy alive: community equestrian clubs like Compton Cowboys and Chicago’s Broken Arrow Horseback Riding Club, modern Buffalo Soldier units, as well as local and traveling Black rodeos like the Bill Pickett invitational rodeo. Since 1984, the rodeo has crisscrossed the US, sharing the riding and roping talents of Black cowgirls and cowboys with audiences from New York to Florida and Dallas to Los Angeles. It raises the question: why did it take so long? “It’s hard to wake up a nation to history,” says actor and activist Glynn Turman, who recently wrapped up filming on Kevin Costner’s new western film series Horizon: An American Saga . “There’s a history that has always been suppressed when it comes to our culture,” Turman says. “It’s an ongoing assault.” View image in fullscreen The Bill Pickett invitational rodeo in Conyers, Georgia, in 2019. While everyone knows about George Washington’s cherry tree, few know the story of William Lee, the enslaved Black man who managed the general’s hunting expeditions and rode with him in revolutionary war battles. A century later, the invisibility of Black men and women who settled the west from the late 1860s to the 1890s is seen as part of the post-civil war backlash against Black economic and political gains. “Racism reached its zenith in the early 20th century in the US, so the things Black people have done have been swept under the rug,” says Art T Burton, a western historian. 7:35 Why the first US cowboys were black Many Americans are surprised to learn that many enslaved Black men and women did the dangerous work of taming wild horses for white folks to ride and herding cattle, says Mia Mask, a film historian at New York’s Vassar College. They would compete on weekends to see who was the best at calf roping and riding, which grew into rodeos for prize money. Black men turned working with horses into careers once they were free. View image in fullscreen American cowboy Bill Pickett (1870–1932) astride his horse, Spradley, early 20th century. Photograph: Oklahoma Historical Society/Getty Images That absence extended to decades of pop-culture movies and TV shows that told the story of the west. “It’s been a whitewashing of American cinema, and the western genre is part of that,” Mask says. “I’m always reminding folks that films are not the same as history, but films are where a lot of people become interested in learning more about history.” When Black people were included in early western sagas, they inhabited demeaning, stereotypical roles: childlike, shuffling servants and strong silent workers. An early exception was Bill Pickett, a formerly enslaved man from Texas who invented rodeo steer wrestling and tamed wild horses with his brothers. Pickett became a western show performer and starred in a pair of movies in the 1920s. Another pioneer was Herb Jeffries, AKA the Sepia Singing Cowboy, a baritone jazz singer and actor who starred in Black westerns in the 1930s. But most Black actors didn’t get to star in major movies until the 1960s when, for example, Sidney Poitier appeared in Duel at Diablo. And we now know that the Lone Ranger, a traveling white hero named Reed featured in movies, TV and radio dramas, was almost certainly inspired by legendary Black lawman Bass Reeves. In his 32-year career, deputy US marshal Reeves fought crime with several Native American partners and handed out silver dollars. “Bass Reeves is the closest person to resemble the Lone Ranger,” says Burton. “[He’s] much bigger. He is undoubtedly the greatest frontier hero in US history.” Burton detailed his adventures in the 2008 biography Black Gun, Silver Star: The Life and Legend of Frontier Marshal Bass Reeves, and David Oyelowo is starring in a Bass Reeves series on Peacock. So what changed? It’s always difficult to pin down when an awakening starts. Like a game of cultural Rashomon , every equestrian has a different perspective on what helped Black cowboy culture surface. Callies believes it started in 2017 when he appeared in the first season of the food history show High on the Hog . That’s when he shared the origin of the word “cowboy”, originally an insult reserved for Black men who worked with cattle. View image in fullscreen A cowboy prepares a horse to be loaded into a trailer at the end of the Bill Pickett invitational rodeo in Las Vegas, Nevada, in 2021. Photograph: Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times/Getty Images The following year, Chicago-area folk musician Dom Flemons released Black Cowboys , a storytelling album of Black people who shaped the west. “The Black cowboy story is so beautiful because it’s tangible and relatable,” Flemons says. He notes that March 2019 was when Bri Malandro, a Dallas woman, started the Instagram account @theyeehawagenda . It documents happenings in Black, queer, cowgirl and celebrity worlds that helped bring about the current moment, including Black Rodeo, a 1972 documentary about Muhammad Ali visiting the first Black rodeo in New York City, and Pharrell Williams’ 2024 western collection for Louis Vuitton that hit Paris runways. In April 2019, Lil Nas X paired with Billy Ray Cyrus to remix Old Town Road, a catchy, rap-country fusion that crowned Top 100 charts by Rolling Stone and Billboard. The song stirred controversy when Billboard pulled it from the country charts, saying “it does not embrace enough elements of today’s country music”. Still, Mask believes that viral images of George Floyd protests in the summer of 2020 made urban equestrians in places like Philadelphia, Los Angeles and Oakland impossible to ignore. “For BLM, people came out to protest with their horses in a way that prevented the containment and intimidation of Black protesters,” Mask says. “That puts the protest in a different context.” As Oakland cowgirl Brianna Noble noted in 2020 : “I’m just another protester if I go down there alone, but no one can ignore a Black woman sitting on top of a horse.” View image in fullscreen Brianna Noble rides her horse Dapper Dan through downtown Oakland, California, on 29 May 2020. Photograph: Noah Berger/AP Modern movies like Concrete Cowboy (2020), The Harder They Fall (2021) and Nope (2022) brought diverse Black equestrians to the big screen. But for the past 40 years, the Bill Pickett invitational rodeo, which travels the nation, has been the most enduring reminder of Black equestrian history. Margo LaDrew, the rodeo’s national director of business development, says demand for tickets boomed in 2021, after the rodeo first aired on national TV thanks to a partnership with the Professional Bull Riders. “It happened to be the same day Juneteenth became a national holiday,” she says. People loved seeing the rodeo open with the Black national anthem, hearing the popular R&B music, and learning the history of the Buffalo Soldiers and Bill Pickett from the announcer. “We tell history at our rodeo,” says LaDrew. “Looking at those kids’ faces when they come to the rodeo and they see cowboys in those outfits and they’re roping, we have heroes.” Turman, co-grand marshal for Bill Pickett rodeos for nearly 40 years, believes Black people will keep flocking to the rodeos and donning western wear because they appreciate seeing people who look like them embodying the heroic cowboy ideal. “It’s respect for your fellow man, a straight-up honesty,” says Turman, who also founded Camp Gid D Up to teach horse skills and values to urban kids in southern California. “It’s being able to look another person in the eye and speak directly with a firm handshake. And there’s a certain respect for the animals that are your partner in your work.” View image in fullscreen Actor Glynn Turman during the MLK Jr 34th Kingdom Day parade on 21 January 2019 in Los Angeles, California. Photograph: Chelsea Guglielmino/Getty Images After collaborating on Concrete Cowboy, Philadelphia equestrian Erin Brown partnered with filmmakers Ricky Staub and Dan Walser from Neighborhood Film Co to create the Philadelphia Urban Riding Academy. They teach riding skills to anyone interested to “help preserve the history and culture of urban cowboys in Philadelphia”. Brown, AKA the Concrete Cowgirl, was just seven when she started winning equestrian hunter-jumper timed trials. Riding at the Fletcher Street stables with her father, an ironworker who owns a welding company, helped her get over her shyness. It also kept her safe. “A lot of my peers are no longer here due to gun violence and drug overdoses,” she says. “I had a responsibility to go to the barn every day and take care of my horse, so I wasn’t engaging in a lot of what my peers were doing.” For all the current trendiness , Randy Savvy, the spokesperson for the Compton Cowboys, says he believes the vitality of Black cowboy culture is expanding horizons for Black youths, just like when they first saw Barack Obama in the White House. “The kids in the community get fed a very particular image of who we are, who we’re supposed to end up becoming, and what we’re supposed to be interested in,” Savvy says. “And it’s such a refreshing, eye-opening shock value thing to see a Black cowboy. It opens their minds up.” This article is more than 1 year old ‘A history that’s been suppressed’: the Black cowboy story is 200 years old This article is more than 1 year old Historians estimate a quarter of settlers of the US west were Black, moving cattle on horseback, settling towns and keeping the peace View image in fullscreen The Bill Pickett invitational rodeo in Conyers, Georgia, in 2019. Photograph: Diwang Valdez/Rolling Stone/Penske Media/Getty Images When Larry Callies went to the movies as a boy in Rosenberg, Texas, the heroes riding horses and wearing 10-gallon hats were all white men. But the real cowboys Callies knew were Black. His great-grandfather Lavel Callies was an enslaved cowboy who worked with horses professionally after emancipation. “We’re cowboys for three generations back,” says Callies, 71, who runs the Black Cowboy Museum . Historians estimate that 20% to 25% of the people who settled the continental US west – a region from Washington state to Montana and New Mexico to California – were Black men and women. They moved cattle on horseback, settled towns, kept the peace and delivered the mail in the wild, wild west. But Black cowgirls and cowboys have been pretty much invisible to most. For nearly 200 years, two separate cowboy narratives, one Black and one white, have trotted side by side in the US. The two have rarely crossed paths. Until now. View image in fullscreen Larry Callies, founder of the Black Cowboy Museum, in Rosenberg on 20 May 2021. Photograph: Elizabeth Conley/Houston Chronicle/Hearst Newspapers/Getty Images Today, it seems like modern Black cowboys and cowgirls are everywhere. Who could miss Beyoncé starring as a red-white-and-blue rodeo queen on the cover of her Cowboy Carter album? Her embrace of equestrian symbols shines a spotlight on those who have quietly kept the Black cowboy legacy alive: community equestrian clubs like Compton Cowboys and Chicago’s Broken Arrow Horseback Riding Club, modern Buffalo Soldier units, as well as local and traveling Black rodeos like the Bill Pickett invitational rodeo. Since 1984, the rodeo has crisscrossed the US, sharing the riding and roping talents of Black cowgirls and cowboys with audiences from New York to Florida and Dallas to Los Angeles. It raises the question: why did it take so long? “It’s hard to wake up a nation to history,” says actor and activist Glynn Turman, who recently wrapped up filming on Kevin Costner’s new western film series Horizon: An American Saga . “There’s a history that has always been suppressed when it comes to our culture,” Turman says. “It’s an ongoing assault.” View image in fullscreen The Bill Pickett invitational rodeo in Conyers, Georgia, in 2019. While everyone knows about George Washington’s cherry tree, few know the story of William Lee, the enslaved Black man who managed the general’s hunting expeditions and rode with him in revolutionary war battles. A century later, the invisibility of Black men and women who settled the west from the late 1860s to the 1890s is seen as part of the post-civil war backlash against Black economic and political gains. “Racism reached its zenith in the early 20th century in the US, so the things Black people have done have been swept under the rug,” says Art T Burton, a western historian. 7:35 Why the first US cowboys were black Many Americans are surprised to learn that many enslaved Black men and women did the dangerous work of taming wild horses for white folks to ride and herding cattle, says Mia Mask, a film historian at New York’s Vassar College. They would compete on weekends to see who was the best at calf roping and riding, which grew into rodeos for prize money. Black men turned working with horses into careers once they were free. View image in fullscreen American cowboy Bill Pickett (1870–1932) astride his horse, Spradley, early 20th century. Photograph: Oklahoma Historical Society/Getty Images That absence extended to decades of pop-culture movies and TV shows that told the story of the west. “It’s been a whitewashing of American cinema, and the western genre is part of that,” Mask says. “I’m always reminding folks that films are not the same as history, but films are where a lot of people become interested in learning more about history.” When Black people were included in early western sagas, they inhabited demeaning, stereotypical roles: childlike, shuffling servants and strong silent workers. An early exception was Bill Pickett, a formerly enslaved man from Texas who invented rodeo steer wrestling and tamed wild horses with his brothers. Pickett became a western show performer and starred in a pair of movies in the 1920s. Another pioneer was Herb Jeffries, AKA the Sepia Singing Cowboy, a baritone jazz singer and actor who starred in Black westerns in the 1930s. But most Black actors didn’t get to star in major movies until the 1960s when, for example, Sidney Poitier appeared in Duel at Diablo. And we now know that the Lone Ranger, a traveling white hero named Reed featured in movies, TV and radio dramas, was almost certainly inspired by legendary Black lawman Bass Reeves. In his 32-year career, deputy US marshal Reeves fought crime with several Native American partners and handed out silver dollars. “Bass Reeves is the closest person to resemble the Lone Ranger,” says Burton. “[He’s] much bigger. He is undoubtedly the greatest frontier hero in US history.” Burton detailed his adventures in the 2008 biography Black Gun, Silver Star: The Life and Legend of Frontier Marshal Bass Reeves, and David Oyelowo is starring in a Bass Reeves series on Peacock. So what changed? It’s always difficult to pin down when an awakening starts. Like a game of cultural Rashomon , every equestrian has a different perspective on what helped Black cowboy culture surface. Callies believes it started in 2017 when he appeared in the first season of the food history show High on the Hog . That’s when he shared the origin of the word “cowboy”, originally an insult reserved for Black men who worked with cattle. View image in fullscreen A cowboy prepares a horse to be loaded into a trailer at the end of the Bill Pickett invitational rodeo in Las Vegas, Nevada, in 2021. Photograph: Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times/Getty Images The following year, Chicago-area folk musician Dom Flemons released Black Cowboys , a storytelling album of Black people who shaped the west. “The Black cowboy story is so beautiful because it’s tangible and relatable,” Flemons says. He notes that March 2019 was when Bri Malandro, a Dallas woman, started the Instagram account @theyeehawagenda . It documents happenings in Black, queer, cowgirl and celebrity worlds that helped bring about the current moment, including Black Rodeo, a 1972 documentary about Muhammad Ali visiting the first Black rodeo in New York City, and Pharrell Williams’ 2024 western collection for Louis Vuitton that hit Paris runways. In April 2019, Lil Nas X paired with Billy Ray Cyrus to remix Old Town Road, a catchy, rap-country fusion that crowned Top 100 charts by Rolling Stone and Billboard. The song stirred controversy when Billboard pulled it from the country charts, saying “it does not embrace enough elements of today’s country music”. Still, Mask believes that viral images of George Floyd protests in the summer of 2020 made urban equestrians in places like Philadelphia, Los Angeles and Oakland impossible to ignore. “For BLM, people came out to protest with their horses in a way that prevented the containment and intimidation of Black protesters,” Mask says. “That puts the protest in a different context.” As Oakland cowgirl Brianna Noble noted in 2020 : “I’m just another protester if I go down there alone, but no one can ignore a Black woman sitting on top of a horse.” View image in fullscreen Brianna Noble rides her horse Dapper Dan through downtown Oakland, California, on 29 May 2020. Photograph: Noah Berger/AP Modern movies like Concrete Cowboy (2020), The Harder They Fall (2021) and Nope (2022) brought diverse Black equestrians to the big screen. But for the past 40 years, the Bill Pickett invitational rodeo, which travels the nation, has been the most enduring reminder of Black equestrian history. Margo LaDrew, the rodeo’s national director of business development, says demand for tickets boomed in 2021, after the rodeo first aired on national TV thanks to a partnership with the Professional Bull Riders. “It happened to be the same day Juneteenth became a national holiday,” she says. People loved seeing the rodeo open with the Black national anthem, hearing the popular R&B music, and learning the history of the Buffalo Soldiers and Bill Pickett from the announcer. “We tell history at our rodeo,” says LaDrew. “Looking at those kids’ faces when they come to the rodeo and they see cowboys in those outfits and they’re roping, we have heroes.” Turman, co-grand marshal for Bill Pickett rodeos for nearly 40 years, believes Black people will keep flocking to the rodeos and donning western wear because they appreciate seeing people who look like them embodying the heroic cowboy ideal. “It’s respect for your fellow man, a straight-up honesty,” says Turman, who also founded Camp Gid D Up to teach horse skills and values to urban kids in southern California. “It’s being able to look another person in the eye and speak directly with a firm handshake. And there’s a certain respect for the animals that are your partner in your work.” View image in fullscreen Actor Glynn Turman during the MLK Jr 34th Kingdom Day parade on 21 January 2019 in Los Angeles, California. Photograph: Chelsea Guglielmino/Getty Images After collaborating on Concrete Cowboy, Philadelphia equestrian Erin Brown partnered with filmmakers Ricky Staub and Dan Walser from Neighborhood Film Co to create the Philadelphia Urban Riding Academy. They teach riding skills to anyone interested to “help preserve the history and culture of urban cowboys in Philadelphia”. Brown, AKA the Concrete Cowgirl, was just seven when she started winning equestrian hunter-jumper timed trials. Riding at the Fletcher Street stables with her father, an ironworker who owns a welding company, helped her get over her shyness. It also kept her safe. “A lot of my peers are no longer here due to gun violence and drug overdoses,” she says. “I had a responsibility to go to the barn every day and take care of my horse, so I wasn’t engaging in a lot of what my peers were doing.” For all the current trendiness , Randy Savvy, the spokesperson for the Compton Cowboys, says he believes the vitality of Black cowboy culture is expanding horizons for Black youths, just like when they first saw Barack Obama in the White House. “The kids in the community get fed a very particular image of who we are, who we’re supposed to end up becoming, and what we’re supposed to be interested in,” Savvy says. “And it’s such a refreshing, eye-opening shock value thing to see a Black cowboy. It opens their minds up.” This article is more than 1 year old ‘A history that’s been suppressed’: the Black cowboy story is 200 years old This article is more than 1 year old Historians estimate a quarter of settlers of the US west were Black, moving cattle on horseback, settling towns and keeping the peace View image in fullscreen The Bill Pickett invitational rodeo in Conyers, Georgia, in 2019. Photograph: Diwang Valdez/Rolling Stone/Penske Media/Getty Images When Larry Callies went to the movies as a boy in Rosenberg, Texas, the heroes riding horses and wearing 10-gallon hats were all white men. But the real cowboys Callies knew were Black. His great-grandfather Lavel Callies was an enslaved cowboy who worked with horses professionally after emancipation. “We’re cowboys for three generations back,” says Callies, 71, who runs the Black Cowboy Museum . Historians estimate that 20% to 25% of the people who settled the continental US west – a region from Washington state to Montana and New Mexico to California – were Black men and women. They moved cattle on horseback, settled towns, kept the peace and delivered the mail in the wild, wild west. But Black cowgirls and cowboys have been pretty much invisible to most. For nearly 200 years, two separate cowboy narratives, one Black and one white, have trotted side by side in the US. The two have rarely crossed paths. Until now. View image in fullscreen Larry Callies, founder of the Black Cowboy Museum, in Rosenberg on 20 May 2021. Photograph: Elizabeth Conley/Houston Chronicle/Hearst Newspapers/Getty Images Today, it seems like modern Black cowboys and cowgirls are everywhere. Who could miss Beyoncé starring as a red-white-and-blue rodeo queen on the cover of her Cowboy Carter album? Her embrace of equestrian symbols shines a spotlight on those who have quietly kept the Black cowboy legacy alive: community equestrian clubs like Compton Cowboys and Chicago’s Broken Arrow Horseback Riding Club, modern Buffalo Soldier units, as well as local and traveling Black rodeos like the Bill Pickett invitational rodeo. Since 1984, the rodeo has crisscrossed the US, sharing the riding and roping talents of Black cowgirls and cowboys with audiences from New York to Florida and Dallas to Los Angeles. It raises the question: why did it take so long? “It’s hard to wake up a nation to history,” says actor and activist Glynn Turman, who recently wrapped up filming on Kevin Costner’s new western film series Horizon: An American Saga . “There’s a history that has always been suppressed when it comes to our culture,” Turman says. “It’s an ongoing assault.” View image in fullscreen The Bill Pickett invitational rodeo in Conyers, Georgia, in 2019. While everyone knows about George Washington’s cherry tree, few know the story of William Lee, the enslaved Black man who managed the general’s hunting expeditions and rode with him in revolutionary war battles. A century later, the invisibility of Black men and women who settled the west from the late 1860s to the 1890s is seen as part of the post-civil war backlash against Black economic and political gains. “Racism reached its zenith in the early 20th century in the US, so the things Black people have done have been swept under the rug,” says Art T Burton, a western historian. 7:35 Why the first US cowboys were black Many Americans are surprised to learn that many enslaved Black men and women did the dangerous work of taming wild horses for white folks to ride and herding cattle, says Mia Mask, a film historian at New York’s Vassar College. They would compete on weekends to see who was the best at calf roping and riding, which grew into rodeos for prize money. Black men turned working with horses into careers once they were free. View image in fullscreen American cowboy Bill Pickett (1870–1932) astride his horse, Spradley, early 20th century. Photograph: Oklahoma Historical Society/Getty Images That absence extended to decades of pop-culture movies and TV shows that told the story of the west. “It’s been a whitewashing of American cinema, and the western genre is part of that,” Mask says. “I’m always reminding folks that films are not the same as history, but films are where a lot of people become interested in learning more about history.” When Black people were included in early western sagas, they inhabited demeaning, stereotypical roles: childlike, shuffling servants and strong silent workers. An early exception was Bill Pickett, a formerly enslaved man from Texas who invented rodeo steer wrestling and tamed wild horses with his brothers. Pickett became a western show performer and starred in a pair of movies in the 1920s. Another pioneer was Herb Jeffries, AKA the Sepia Singing Cowboy, a baritone jazz singer and actor who starred in Black westerns in the 1930s. But most Black actors didn’t get to star in major movies until the 1960s when, for example, Sidney Poitier appeared in Duel at Diablo. And we now know that the Lone Ranger, a traveling white hero named Reed featured in movies, TV and radio dramas, was almost certainly inspired by legendary Black lawman Bass Reeves. In his 32-year career, deputy US marshal Reeves fought crime with several Native American partners and handed out silver dollars. “Bass Reeves is the closest person to resemble the Lone Ranger,” says Burton. “[He’s] much bigger. He is undoubtedly the greatest frontier hero in US history.” Burton detailed his adventures in the 2008 biography Black Gun, Silver Star: The Life and Legend of Frontier Marshal Bass Reeves, and David Oyelowo is starring in a Bass Reeves series on Peacock. So what changed? It’s always difficult to pin down when an awakening starts. Like a game of cultural Rashomon , every equestrian has a different perspective on what helped Black cowboy culture surface. Callies believes it started in 2017 when he appeared in the first season of the food history show High on the Hog . That’s when he shared the origin of the word “cowboy”, originally an insult reserved for Black men who worked with cattle. View image in fullscreen A cowboy prepares a horse to be loaded into a trailer at the end of the Bill Pickett invitational rodeo in Las Vegas, Nevada, in 2021. Photograph: Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times/Getty Images The following year, Chicago-area folk musician Dom Flemons released Black Cowboys , a storytelling album of Black people who shaped the west. “The Black cowboy story is so beautiful because it’s tangible and relatable,” Flemons says. He notes that March 2019 was when Bri Malandro, a Dallas woman, started the Instagram account @theyeehawagenda . It documents happenings in Black, queer, cowgirl and celebrity worlds that helped bring about the current moment, including Black Rodeo, a 1972 documentary about Muhammad Ali visiting the first Black rodeo in New York City, and Pharrell Williams’ 2024 western collection for Louis Vuitton that hit Paris runways. In April 2019, Lil Nas X paired with Billy Ray Cyrus to remix Old Town Road, a catchy, rap-country fusion that crowned Top 100 charts by Rolling Stone and Billboard. The song stirred controversy when Billboard pulled it from the country charts, saying “it does not embrace enough elements of today’s country music”. Still, Mask believes that viral images of George Floyd protests in the summer of 2020 made urban equestrians in places like Philadelphia, Los Angeles and Oakland impossible to ignore. “For BLM, people came out to protest with their horses in a way that prevented the containment and intimidation of Black protesters,” Mask says. “That puts the protest in a different context.” As Oakland cowgirl Brianna Noble noted in 2020 : “I’m just another protester if I go down there alone, but no one can ignore a Black woman sitting on top of a horse.” View image in fullscreen Brianna Noble rides her horse Dapper Dan through downtown Oakland, California, on 29 May 2020. Photograph: Noah Berger/AP Modern movies like Concrete Cowboy (2020), The Harder They Fall (2021) and Nope (2022) brought diverse Black equestrians to the big screen. But for the past 40 years, the Bill Pickett invitational rodeo, which travels the nation, has been the most enduring reminder of Black equestrian history. Margo LaDrew, the rodeo’s national director of business development, says demand for tickets boomed in 2021, after the rodeo first aired on national TV thanks to a partnership with the Professional Bull Riders. “It happened to be the same day Juneteenth became a national holiday,” she says. People loved seeing the rodeo open with the Black national anthem, hearing the popular R&B music, and learning the history of the Buffalo Soldiers and Bill Pickett from the announcer. “We tell history at our rodeo,” says LaDrew. “Looking at those kids’ faces when they come to the rodeo and they see cowboys in those outfits and they’re roping, we have heroes.” Turman, co-grand marshal for Bill Pickett rodeos for nearly 40 years, believes Black people will keep flocking to the rodeos and donning western wear because they appreciate seeing people who look like them embodying the heroic cowboy ideal. “It’s respect for your fellow man, a straight-up honesty,” says Turman, who also founded Camp Gid D Up to teach horse skills and values to urban kids in southern California. “It’s being able to look another person in the eye and speak directly with a firm handshake. And there’s a certain respect for the animals that are your partner in your work.” View image in fullscreen Actor Glynn Turman during the MLK Jr 34th Kingdom Day parade on 21 January 2019 in Los Angeles, California. Photograph: Chelsea Guglielmino/Getty Images After collaborating on Concrete Cowboy, Philadelphia equestrian Erin Brown partnered with filmmakers Ricky Staub and Dan Walser from Neighborhood Film Co to create the Philadelphia Urban Riding Academy. They teach riding skills to anyone interested to “help preserve the history and culture of urban cowboys in Philadelphia”. Brown, AKA the Concrete Cowgirl, was just seven when she started winning equestrian hunter-jumper timed trials. Riding at the Fletcher Street stables with her father, an ironworker who owns a welding company, helped her get over her shyness. It also kept her safe. “A lot of my peers are no longer here due to gun violence and drug overdoses,” she says. “I had a responsibility to go to the barn every day and take care of my horse, so I wasn’t engaging in a lot of what my peers were doing.” For all the current trendiness , Randy Savvy, the spokesperson for the Compton Cowboys, says he believes the vitality of Black cowboy culture is expanding horizons for Black youths, just like when they first saw Barack Obama in the White House. “The kids in the community get fed a very particular image of who we are, who we’re supposed to end up becoming, and what we’re supposed to be interested in,” Savvy says. “And it’s such a refreshing, eye-opening shock value thing to see a Black cowboy. It opens their minds up.” This article is more than 1 year old ‘A history that’s been suppressed’: the Black cowboy story is 200 years old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘A history that’s been suppressed’: the Black cowboy story is 200 years old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘A history that’s been suppressed’: the Black cowboy story is 200 years old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Historians estimate a quarter of settlers of the US west were Black, moving cattle on horseback, settling towns and keeping the peace Historians estimate a quarter of settlers of the US west were Black, moving cattle on horseback, settling towns and keeping the peace Historians estimate a quarter of settlers of the US west were Black, moving cattle on horseback, settling towns and keeping the peace View image in fullscreen The Bill Pickett invitational rodeo in Conyers, Georgia, in 2019. Photograph: Diwang Valdez/Rolling Stone/Penske Media/Getty Images When Larry Callies went to the movies as a boy in Rosenberg, Texas, the heroes riding horses and wearing 10-gallon hats were all white men. But the real cowboys Callies knew were Black. His great-grandfather Lavel Callies was an enslaved cowboy who worked with horses professionally after emancipation. “We’re cowboys for three generations back,” says Callies, 71, who runs the Black Cowboy Museum . Historians estimate that 20% to 25% of the people who settled the continental US west – a region from Washington state to Montana and New Mexico to California – were Black men and women. They moved cattle on horseback, settled towns, kept the peace and delivered the mail in the wild, wild west. But Black cowgirls and cowboys have been pretty much invisible to most. For nearly 200 years, two separate cowboy narratives, one Black and one white, have trotted side by side in the US. The two have rarely crossed paths. Until now. View image in fullscreen Larry Callies, founder of the Black Cowboy Museum, in Rosenberg on 20 May 2021. Photograph: Elizabeth Conley/Houston Chronicle/Hearst Newspapers/Getty Images Today, it seems like modern Black cowboys and cowgirls are everywhere. Who could miss Beyoncé starring as a red-white-and-blue rodeo queen on the cover of her Cowboy Carter album? Her embrace of equestrian symbols shines a spotlight on those who have quietly kept the Black cowboy legacy alive: community equestrian clubs like Compton Cowboys and Chicago’s Broken Arrow Horseback Riding Club, modern Buffalo Soldier units, as well as local and traveling Black rodeos like the Bill Pickett invitational rodeo. Since 1984, the rodeo has crisscrossed the US, sharing the riding and roping talents of Black cowgirls and cowboys with audiences from New York to Florida and Dallas to Los Angeles. It raises the question: why did it take so long? “It’s hard to wake up a nation to history,” says actor and activist Glynn Turman, who recently wrapped up filming on Kevin Costner’s new western film series Horizon: An American Saga . “There’s a history that has always been suppressed when it comes to our culture,” Turman says. “It’s an ongoing assault.” View image in fullscreen The Bill Pickett invitational rodeo in Conyers, Georgia, in 2019. While everyone knows about George Washington’s cherry tree, few know the story of William Lee, the enslaved Black man who managed the general’s hunting expeditions and rode with him in revolutionary war battles. A century later, the invisibility of Black men and women who settled the west from the late 1860s to the 1890s is seen as part of the post-civil war backlash against Black economic and political gains. “Racism reached its zenith in the early 20th century in the US, so the things Black people have done have been swept under the rug,” says Art T Burton, a western historian. 7:35 Why the first US cowboys were black Many Americans are surprised to learn that many enslaved Black men and women did the dangerous work of taming wild horses for white folks to ride and herding cattle, says Mia Mask, a film historian at New York’s Vassar College. They would compete on weekends to see who was the best at calf roping and riding, which grew into rodeos for prize money. Black men turned working with horses into careers once they were free. View image in fullscreen American cowboy Bill Pickett (1870–1932) astride his horse, Spradley, early 20th century. Photograph: Oklahoma Historical Society/Getty Images That absence extended to decades of pop-culture movies and TV shows that told the story of the west. “It’s been a whitewashing of American cinema, and the western genre is part of that,” Mask says. “I’m always reminding folks that films are not the same as history, but films are where a lot of people become interested in learning more about history.” When Black people were included in early western sagas, they inhabited demeaning, stereotypical roles: childlike, shuffling servants and strong silent workers. An early exception was Bill Pickett, a formerly enslaved man from Texas who invented rodeo steer wrestling and tamed wild horses with his brothers. Pickett became a western show performer and starred in a pair of movies in the 1920s. Another pioneer was Herb Jeffries, AKA the Sepia Singing Cowboy, a baritone jazz singer and actor who starred in Black westerns in the 1930s. But most Black actors didn’t get to star in major movies until the 1960s when, for example, Sidney Poitier appeared in Duel at Diablo. And we now know that the Lone Ranger, a traveling white hero named Reed featured in movies, TV and radio dramas, was almost certainly inspired by legendary Black lawman Bass Reeves. In his 32-year career, deputy US marshal Reeves fought crime with several Native American partners and handed out silver dollars. “Bass Reeves is the closest person to resemble the Lone Ranger,” says Burton. “[He’s] much bigger. He is undoubtedly the greatest frontier hero in US history.” Burton detailed his adventures in the 2008 biography Black Gun, Silver Star: The Life and Legend of Frontier Marshal Bass Reeves, and David Oyelowo is starring in a Bass Reeves series on Peacock. So what changed? It’s always difficult to pin down when an awakening starts. Like a game of cultural Rashomon , every equestrian has a different perspective on what helped Black cowboy culture surface. Callies believes it started in 2017 when he appeared in the first season of the food history show High on the Hog . That’s when he shared the origin of the word “cowboy”, originally an insult reserved for Black men who worked with cattle. View image in fullscreen A cowboy prepares a horse to be loaded into a trailer at the end of the Bill Pickett invitational rodeo in Las Vegas, Nevada, in 2021. Photograph: Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times/Getty Images The following year, Chicago-area folk musician Dom Flemons released Black Cowboys , a storytelling album of Black people who shaped the west. “The Black cowboy story is so beautiful because it’s tangible and relatable,” Flemons says. He notes that March 2019 was when Bri Malandro, a Dallas woman, started the Instagram account @theyeehawagenda . It documents happenings in Black, queer, cowgirl and celebrity worlds that helped bring about the current moment, including Black Rodeo, a 1972 documentary about Muhammad Ali visiting the first Black rodeo in New York City, and Pharrell Williams’ 2024 western collection for Louis Vuitton that hit Paris runways. In April 2019, Lil Nas X paired with Billy Ray Cyrus to remix Old Town Road, a catchy, rap-country fusion that crowned Top 100 charts by Rolling Stone and Billboard. The song stirred controversy when Billboard pulled it from the country charts, saying “it does not embrace enough elements of today’s country music”. Still, Mask believes that viral images of George Floyd protests in the summer of 2020 made urban equestrians in places like Philadelphia, Los Angeles and Oakland impossible to ignore. “For BLM, people came out to protest with their horses in a way that prevented the containment and intimidation of Black protesters,” Mask says. “That puts the protest in a different context.” As Oakland cowgirl Brianna Noble noted in 2020 : “I’m just another protester if I go down there alone, but no one can ignore a Black woman sitting on top of a horse.” View image in fullscreen Brianna Noble rides her horse Dapper Dan through downtown Oakland, California, on 29 May 2020. Photograph: Noah Berger/AP Modern movies like Concrete Cowboy (2020), The Harder They Fall (2021) and Nope (2022) brought diverse Black equestrians to the big screen. But for the past 40 years, the Bill Pickett invitational rodeo, which travels the nation, has been the most enduring reminder of Black equestrian history. Margo LaDrew, the rodeo’s national director of business development, says demand for tickets boomed in 2021, after the rodeo first aired on national TV thanks to a partnership with the Professional Bull Riders. “It happened to be the same day Juneteenth became a national holiday,” she says. People loved seeing the rodeo open with the Black national anthem, hearing the popular R&B music, and learning the history of the Buffalo Soldiers and Bill Pickett from the announcer. “We tell history at our rodeo,” says LaDrew. “Looking at those kids’ faces when they come to the rodeo and they see cowboys in those outfits and they’re roping, we have heroes.” Turman, co-grand marshal for Bill Pickett rodeos for nearly 40 years, believes Black people will keep flocking to the rodeos and donning western wear because they appreciate seeing people who look like them embodying the heroic cowboy ideal. “It’s respect for your fellow man, a straight-up honesty,” says Turman, who also founded Camp Gid D Up to teach horse skills and values to urban kids in southern California. “It’s being able to look another person in the eye and speak directly with a firm handshake. And there’s a certain respect for the animals that are your partner in your work.” View image in fullscreen Actor Glynn Turman during the MLK Jr 34th Kingdom Day parade on 21 January 2019 in Los Angeles, California. Photograph: Chelsea Guglielmino/Getty Images After collaborating on Concrete Cowboy, Philadelphia equestrian Erin Brown partnered with filmmakers Ricky Staub and Dan Walser from Neighborhood Film Co to create the Philadelphia Urban Riding Academy. They teach riding skills to anyone interested to “help preserve the history and culture of urban cowboys in Philadelphia”. Brown, AKA the Concrete Cowgirl, was just seven when she started winning equestrian hunter-jumper timed trials. Riding at the Fletcher Street stables with her father, an ironworker who owns a welding company, helped her get over her shyness. It also kept her safe. “A lot of my peers are no longer here due to gun violence and drug overdoses,” she says. “I had a responsibility to go to the barn every day and take care of my horse, so I wasn’t engaging in a lot of what my peers were doing.” For all the current trendiness , Randy Savvy, the spokesperson for the Compton Cowboys, says he believes the vitality of Black cowboy culture is expanding horizons for Black youths, just like when they first saw Barack Obama in the White House. “The kids in the community get fed a very particular image of who we are, who we’re supposed to end up becoming, and what we’re supposed to be interested in,” Savvy says. “And it’s such a refreshing, eye-opening shock value thing to see a Black cowboy. It opens their minds up.” View image in fullscreen The Bill Pickett invitational rodeo in Conyers, Georgia, in 2019. Photograph: Diwang Valdez/Rolling Stone/Penske Media/Getty Images When Larry Callies went to the movies as a boy in Rosenberg, Texas, the heroes riding horses and wearing 10-gallon hats were all white men. But the real cowboys Callies knew were Black. His great-grandfather Lavel Callies was an enslaved cowboy who worked with horses professionally after emancipation. “We’re cowboys for three generations back,” says Callies, 71, who runs the Black Cowboy Museum . Historians estimate that 20% to 25% of the people who settled the continental US west – a region from Washington state to Montana and New Mexico to California – were Black men and women. They moved cattle on horseback, settled towns, kept the peace and delivered the mail in the wild, wild west. But Black cowgirls and cowboys have been pretty much invisible to most. For nearly 200 years, two separate cowboy narratives, one Black and one white, have trotted side by side in the US. The two have rarely crossed paths. Until now. View image in fullscreen Larry Callies, founder of the Black Cowboy Museum, in Rosenberg on 20 May 2021. Photograph: Elizabeth Conley/Houston Chronicle/Hearst Newspapers/Getty Images Today, it seems like modern Black cowboys and cowgirls are everywhere. Who could miss Beyoncé starring as a red-white-and-blue rodeo queen on the cover of her Cowboy Carter album? Her embrace of equestrian symbols shines a spotlight on those who have quietly kept the Black cowboy legacy alive: community equestrian clubs like Compton Cowboys and Chicago’s Broken Arrow Horseback Riding Club, modern Buffalo Soldier units, as well as local and traveling Black rodeos like the Bill Pickett invitational rodeo. Since 1984, the rodeo has crisscrossed the US, sharing the riding and roping talents of Black cowgirls and cowboys with audiences from New York to Florida and Dallas to Los Angeles. It raises the question: why did it take so long? “It’s hard to wake up a nation to history,” says actor and activist Glynn Turman, who recently wrapped up filming on Kevin Costner’s new western film series Horizon: An American Saga . “There’s a history that has always been suppressed when it comes to our culture,” Turman says. “It’s an ongoing assault.” View image in fullscreen The Bill Pickett invitational rodeo in Conyers, Georgia, in 2019. While everyone knows about George Washington’s cherry tree, few know the story of William Lee, the enslaved Black man who managed the general’s hunting expeditions and rode with him in revolutionary war battles. A century later, the invisibility of Black men and women who settled the west from the late 1860s to the 1890s is seen as part of the post-civil war backlash against Black economic and political gains. “Racism reached its zenith in the early 20th century in the US, so the things Black people have done have been swept under the rug,” says Art T Burton, a western historian. 7:35 Why the first US cowboys were black Many Americans are surprised to learn that many enslaved Black men and women did the dangerous work of taming wild horses for white folks to ride and herding cattle, says Mia Mask, a film historian at New York’s Vassar College. They would compete on weekends to see who was the best at calf roping and riding, which grew into rodeos for prize money. Black men turned working with horses into careers once they were free. View image in fullscreen American cowboy Bill Pickett (1870–1932) astride his horse, Spradley, early 20th century. Photograph: Oklahoma Historical Society/Getty Images That absence extended to decades of pop-culture movies and TV shows that told the story of the west. “It’s been a whitewashing of American cinema, and the western genre is part of that,” Mask says. “I’m always reminding folks that films are not the same as history, but films are where a lot of people become interested in learning more about history.” When Black people were included in early western sagas, they inhabited demeaning, stereotypical roles: childlike, shuffling servants and strong silent workers. An early exception was Bill Pickett, a formerly enslaved man from Texas who invented rodeo steer wrestling and tamed wild horses with his brothers. Pickett became a western show performer and starred in a pair of movies in the 1920s. A
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
‘Free Bella’: campaigners fight to save lonely beluga whale from Seoul mall
Bella in the Lotte World Tower’s bare and cramped aquarium. Beluga whales can live for 50 years in the wild but her two male companions died aged five and 12. Photograph: Hot Pink Dolphins View image in fullscreen Bella in the Lotte World Tower’s bare and cramped aquarium. Beluga whales can live for 50 years in the wild but her two male companions died aged five and 12. Photograph: Hot Pink Dolphins This article is more than 1 year old ‘Free Bella’: campaigners fight to save lonely beluga whale from Seoul mall This article is more than 1 year old Five years after her last companion died and the aquarium’s owner pledged to free her, Bella still languishes in a tiny tank amid shops In the heart of Seoul, amid the luxury shops at the foot of the world’s sixth-tallest skyscraper , a lone beluga whale named Bella swims aimlessly in a tiny, lifeless tank, where she has been trapped for a decade. Her plight is urgent, with campaigners racing to rescue her from the bare tank in a glitzy shopping centre in South Korea’s capital before it is too late. Referring to the Lotte Group, which owns the aquarium where she lives, Jo Yak-gol, of the marine environmentalist group Hot Pink Dolphins , said: “Almost five years have passed since they said they would release her.” An international petition has been launched to demand her release. Bella’s story started in 2013, when she was captured in the Arctic Ocean off the coast of Russia at the age of two. Along with two male belugas, Bello and Belli, she was sold to the aquarium, housed in a mega-mall beneath the 555-metre-high Lotte World Tower, which is owned by one of South Korea’s largest conglomerates. Tragedy struck in 2016 when Bello died prematurely at the age of five (their average lifespan in the wild is 35 to 50 years), followed by the death of 12-year-old Belli in 2019. A public outcry ensued that led to Lotte pledging to release Bella soon after the second death and again in 2021 . But such efforts have repeatedly stalled , for reasons including the Covid pandemic. When the Guardian visited the aquarium, Bella was seen switching between aimless spinning and floating motionlessly in her 1,224-tonne tank. The whales can grow to 5.5 metres (18ft) long but the tank is only 7 metres deep. “She lacks stimulation and is showing signs of a mental illness,” said Jo. View image in fullscreen Jo Yak-gol, centre, co-founder of Hot Pink Dolphins, with other animal-rights protesters outside the Lotte tower, where the whale is kept in an aquarium amid shops. Photograph: Raphael Rashid Dr Valeria Vergara , the co-director of the Raincoast Conservation Foundation’s cetacean research programme, said belugas are highly intelligent and social. “They cooperate with each other to the point of helping raise each other’s young,” she said. “They have long lives, and, of course, they have a very complex communication system,” said the marine biologist, who has studied beluga whales for more than two decades. “Keeping such beings in captivity is simply unethical.” The aquarium industry is thriving, in South Korea and elsewhere in Asia. Lotte’s aquarium in Seoul is one of the largest in the region, attracting millions of visitors since it opened in 2014. Last December, South Korea banned buying whales and dolphins for display. However, the law does not apply retroactively, meaning that animals already in captivity, such as Bella, can be kept. Campaigners have been calling on Lotte to close the Seoul exhibit entirely. Bella is one of five captive belugas in South Korea, alongside one at Aqua Planet Yeosu and three others at Geoje Sea World . Until recently, the latter offered packages where visitors could pay to ride on the whales ; these have since been outlawed. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion ‘You lied to us’: did the real-life saga behind Free Willy change the story for orcas in captivity? Read more Bella’s transfer to a seaside sanctuary is “the only ethical option”, according to Vergara. Having been removed from her natural habitat at such a young age, Bella could not survive in the open ocean. Belugas learn necessary skills such as hunting, migrating and communicating from their social groups. “Captivity is cruel, and returning her to the wild is out of the question,” Vergara said. In a statement, Lotte World Aquarium said it was working to protect animal rights and was “ready to send the beluga whale at any time”. It said it was having discussions with a committee composed of the oceans and fisheries ministry, animal rights groups and whale experts to carry out Bella’s release “based on a scientific and practical plan”. It added that it was looking at a sanctuary in Iceland and planned sanctuaries in Norway and Canada as options. Amid the bureaucratic tangle and different offers from sanctuaries, Bella remains in her tank. Lotte did not respond to a question about her wellbeing. Outside Lotte World Tower, the Hot Pink Dolphins group are still protesting, demanding: “Free Bella now!” Explore more on these topics Whales Seascape: the state of our oceans Cetaceans Marine life Wildlife Zoos South Korea Asia Pacific news Share Reuse this content Bella in the Lotte World Tower’s bare and cramped aquarium. Beluga whales can live for 50 years in the wild but her two male companions died aged five and 12. Photograph: Hot Pink Dolphins View image in fullscreen Bella in the Lotte World Tower’s bare and cramped aquarium. Beluga whales can live for 50 years in the wild but her two male companions died aged five and 12. Photograph: Hot Pink Dolphins This article is more than 1 year old ‘Free Bella’: campaigners fight to save lonely beluga whale from Seoul mall This article is more than 1 year old Five years after her last companion died and the aquarium’s owner pledged to free her, Bella still languishes in a tiny tank amid shops In the heart of Seoul, amid the luxury shops at the foot of the world’s sixth-tallest skyscraper , a lone beluga whale named Bella swims aimlessly in a tiny, lifeless tank, where she has been trapped for a decade. Her plight is urgent, with campaigners racing to rescue her from the bare tank in a glitzy shopping centre in South Korea’s capital before it is too late. Referring to the Lotte Group, which owns the aquarium where she lives, Jo Yak-gol, of the marine environmentalist group Hot Pink Dolphins , said: “Almost five years have passed since they said they would release her.” An international petition has been launched to demand her release. Bella’s story started in 2013, when she was captured in the Arctic Ocean off the coast of Russia at the age of two. Along with two male belugas, Bello and Belli, she was sold to the aquarium, housed in a mega-mall beneath the 555-metre-high Lotte World Tower, which is owned by one of South Korea’s largest conglomerates. Tragedy struck in 2016 when Bello died prematurely at the age of five (their average lifespan in the wild is 35 to 50 years), followed by the death of 12-year-old Belli in 2019. A public outcry ensued that led to Lotte pledging to release Bella soon after the second death and again in 2021 . But such efforts have repeatedly stalled , for reasons including the Covid pandemic. When the Guardian visited the aquarium, Bella was seen switching between aimless spinning and floating motionlessly in her 1,224-tonne tank. The whales can grow to 5.5 metres (18ft) long but the tank is only 7 metres deep. “She lacks stimulation and is showing signs of a mental illness,” said Jo. View image in fullscreen Jo Yak-gol, centre, co-founder of Hot Pink Dolphins, with other animal-rights protesters outside the Lotte tower, where the whale is kept in an aquarium amid shops. Photograph: Raphael Rashid Dr Valeria Vergara , the co-director of the Raincoast Conservation Foundation’s cetacean research programme, said belugas are highly intelligent and social. “They cooperate with each other to the point of helping raise each other’s young,” she said. “They have long lives, and, of course, they have a very complex communication system,” said the marine biologist, who has studied beluga whales for more than two decades. “Keeping such beings in captivity is simply unethical.” The aquarium industry is thriving, in South Korea and elsewhere in Asia. Lotte’s aquarium in Seoul is one of the largest in the region, attracting millions of visitors since it opened in 2014. Last December, South Korea banned buying whales and dolphins for display. However, the law does not apply retroactively, meaning that animals already in captivity, such as Bella, can be kept. Campaigners have been calling on Lotte to close the Seoul exhibit entirely. Bella is one of five captive belugas in South Korea, alongside one at Aqua Planet Yeosu and three others at Geoje Sea World . Until recently, the latter offered packages where visitors could pay to ride on the whales ; these have since been outlawed. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion ‘You lied to us’: did the real-life saga behind Free Willy change the story for orcas in captivity? Read more Bella’s transfer to a seaside sanctuary is “the only ethical option”, according to Vergara. Having been removed from her natural habitat at such a young age, Bella could not survive in the open ocean. Belugas learn necessary skills such as hunting, migrating and communicating from their social groups. “Captivity is cruel, and returning her to the wild is out of the question,” Vergara said. In a statement, Lotte World Aquarium said it was working to protect animal rights and was “ready to send the beluga whale at any time”. It said it was having discussions with a committee composed of the oceans and fisheries ministry, animal rights groups and whale experts to carry out Bella’s release “based on a scientific and practical plan”. It added that it was looking at a sanctuary in Iceland and planned sanctuaries in Norway and Canada as options. Amid the bureaucratic tangle and different offers from sanctuaries, Bella remains in her tank. Lotte did not respond to a question about her wellbeing. Outside Lotte World Tower, the Hot Pink Dolphins group are still protesting, demanding: “Free Bella now!” Explore more on these topics Whales Seascape: the state of our oceans Cetaceans Marine life Wildlife Zoos South Korea Asia Pacific news Share Reuse this content Bella in the Lotte World Tower’s bare and cramped aquarium. Beluga whales can live for 50 years in the wild but her two male companions died aged five and 12. Photograph: Hot Pink Dolphins View image in fullscreen Bella in the Lotte World Tower’s bare and cramped aquarium. Beluga whales can live for 50 years in the wild but her two male companions died aged five and 12. Photograph: Hot Pink Dolphins Bella in the Lotte World Tower’s bare and cramped aquarium. Beluga whales can live for 50 years in the wild but her two male companions died aged five and 12. Photograph: Hot Pink Dolphins View image in fullscreen Bella in the Lotte World Tower’s bare and cramped aquarium. Beluga whales can live for 50 years in the wild but her two male companions died aged five and 12. Photograph: Hot Pink Dolphins Bella in the Lotte World Tower’s bare and cramped aquarium. Beluga whales can live for 50 years in the wild but her two male companions died aged five and 12. Photograph: Hot Pink Dolphins View image in fullscreen Bella in the Lotte World Tower’s bare and cramped aquarium. Beluga whales can live for 50 years in the wild but her two male companions died aged five and 12. Photograph: Hot Pink Dolphins Bella in the Lotte World Tower’s bare and cramped aquarium. Beluga whales can live for 50 years in the wild but her two male companions died aged five and 12. Photograph: Hot Pink Dolphins View image in fullscreen Bella in the Lotte World Tower’s bare and cramped aquarium. Beluga whales can live for 50 years in the wild but her two male companions died aged five and 12. Photograph: Hot Pink Dolphins Bella in the Lotte World Tower’s bare and cramped aquarium. Beluga whales can live for 50 years in the wild but her two male companions died aged five and 12. Photograph: Hot Pink Dolphins Bella in the Lotte World Tower’s bare and cramped aquarium. Beluga whales can live for 50 years in the wild but her two male companions died aged five and 12. Photograph: Hot Pink Dolphins This article is more than 1 year old ‘Free Bella’: campaigners fight to save lonely beluga whale from Seoul mall This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Free Bella’: campaigners fight to save lonely beluga whale from Seoul mall This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ‘Free Bella’: campaigners fight to save lonely beluga whale from Seoul mall This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Five years after her last companion died and the aquarium’s owner pledged to free her, Bella still languishes in a tiny tank amid shops Five years after her last companion died and the aquarium’s owner pledged to free her, Bella still languishes in a tiny tank amid shops Five years after her last companion died and the aquarium’s owner pledged to free her, Bella still languishes in a tiny tank amid shops In the heart of Seoul, amid the luxury shops at the foot of the world’s sixth-tallest skyscraper , a lone beluga whale named Bella swims aimlessly in a tiny, lifeless tank, where she has been trapped for a decade. Her plight is urgent, with campaigners racing to rescue her from the bare tank in a glitzy shopping centre in South Korea’s capital before it is too late. Referring to the Lotte Group, which owns the aquarium where she lives, Jo Yak-gol, of the marine environmentalist group Hot Pink Dolphins , said: “Almost five years have passed since they said they would release her.” An international petition has been launched to demand her release. Bella’s story started in 2013, when she was captured in the Arctic Ocean off the coast of Russia at the age of two. Along with two male belugas, Bello and Belli, she was sold to the aquarium, housed in a mega-mall beneath the 555-metre-high Lotte World Tower, which is owned by one of South Korea’s largest conglomerates. Tragedy struck in 2016 when Bello died prematurely at the age of five (their average lifespan in the wild is 35 to 50 years), followed by the death of 12-year-old Belli in 2019. A public outcry ensued that led to Lotte pledging to release Bella soon after the second death and again in 2021 . But such efforts have repeatedly stalled , for reasons including the Covid pandemic. When the Guardian visited the aquarium, Bella was seen switching between aimless spinning and floating motionlessly in her 1,224-tonne tank. The whales can grow to 5.5 metres (18ft) long but the tank is only 7 metres deep. “She lacks stimulation and is showing signs of a mental illness,” said Jo. View image in fullscreen Jo Yak-gol, centre, co-founder of Hot Pink Dolphins, with other animal-rights protesters outside the Lotte tower, where the whale is kept in an aquarium amid shops. Photograph: Raphael Rashid Dr Valeria Vergara , the co-director of the Raincoast Conservation Foundation’s cetacean research programme, said belugas are highly intelligent and social. “They cooperate with each other to the point of helping raise each other’s young,” she said. “They have long lives, and, of course, they have a very complex communication system,” said the marine biologist, who has studied beluga whales for more than two decades. “Keeping such beings in captivity is simply unethical.” The aquarium industry is thriving, in South Korea and elsewhere in Asia. Lotte’s aquarium in Seoul is one of the largest in the region, attracting millions of visitors since it opened in 2014. Last December, South Korea banned buying whales and dolphins for display. However, the law does not apply retroactively, meaning that animals already in captivity, such as Bella, can be kept. Campaigners have been calling on Lotte to close the Seoul exhibit entirely. Bella is one of five captive belugas in South Korea, alongside one at Aqua Planet Yeosu and three others at Geoje Sea World . Until recently, the latter offered packages where visitors could pay to ride on the whales ; these have since been outlawed. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion ‘You lied to us’: did the real-life saga behind Free Willy change the story for orcas in captivity? Read more Bella’s transfer to a seaside sanctuary is “the only ethical option”, according to Vergara. Having been removed from her natural habitat at such a young age, Bella could not survive in the open ocean. Belugas learn necessary skills such as hunting, migrating and communicating from their social groups. “Captivity is cruel, and returning her to the wild is out of the question,” Vergara said. In a statement, Lotte World Aquarium said it was working to protect animal rights and was “ready to send the beluga whale at any time”. It said it was having discussions with a committee composed of the oceans and fisheries ministry, animal rights groups and whale experts to carry out Bella’s release “based on a scientific and practical plan”. It added that it was looking at a sanctuary in Iceland and planned sanctuaries in Norway and Canada as options. Amid the bureaucratic tangle and different offers from sanctuaries, Bella remains in her tank. Lotte did not respond to a question about her wellbeing. Outside Lotte World Tower, the Hot Pink Dolphins group are still protesting, demanding: “Free Bella now!” Explore more on these topics Whales Seascape: the state of our oceans Cetaceans Marine life Wildlife Zoos South Korea Asia Pacific news Share Reuse this content In the heart of Seoul, amid the luxury shops at the foot of the world’s sixth-tallest skyscraper , a lone beluga whale named Bella swims aimlessly in a tiny, lifeless tank, where she has been trapped for a decade. Her plight is urgent, with campaigners racing to rescue her from the bare tank in a glitzy shopping centre in South Korea’s capital before it is too late. Referring to the Lotte Group, which owns the aquarium where she lives, Jo Yak-gol, of the marine environmentalist group Hot Pink Dolphins , said: “Almost five years have passed since they said they would release her.” An international petition has been launched to demand her release. Bella’s story started in 2013, when she was captured in the Arctic Ocean off the coast of Russia at the age of two. Along with two male belugas, Bello and Belli, she was sold to the aquarium, housed in a mega-mall beneath the 555-metre-high Lotte World Tower, which is owned by one of South Korea’s largest conglomerates. Tragedy struck in 2016 when Bello died prematurely at the age of five (their average lifespan in the wild is 35 to 50 years), followed by the death of 12-year-old Belli in 2019. A public outcry ensued that led to Lotte pledging to release Bella soon after the second death and again in 2021 . But such efforts have repeatedly stalled , for reasons including the Covid pandemic. When the Guardian visited the aquarium, Bella was seen switching between aimless spinning and floating motionlessly in her 1,224-tonne tank. The whales can grow to 5.5 metres (18ft) long but the tank is only 7 metres deep. “She lacks stimulation and is showing signs of a mental illness,” said Jo. View image in fullscreen Jo Yak-gol, centre, co-founder of Hot Pink Dolphins, with other animal-rights protesters outside the Lotte tower, where the whale is kept in an aquarium amid shops. Photograph: Raphael Rashid Dr Valeria Vergara , the co-director of the Raincoast Conservation Foundation’s cetacean research programme, said belugas are highly intelligent and social. “They cooperate with each other to the point of helping raise each other’s young,” she said. “They have long lives, and, of course, they have a very complex communication system,” said the marine biologist, who has studied beluga whales for more than two decades. “Keeping such beings in captivity is simply unethical.” The aquarium industry is thriving, in South Korea and elsewhere in Asia. Lotte’s aquarium in Seoul is one of the largest in the region, attracting millions of visitors since it opened in 2014. Last December, South Korea banned buying whales and dolphins for display. However, the law does not apply retroactively, meaning that animals already in captivity, such as Bella, can be kept. Campaigners have been calling on Lotte to close the Seoul exhibit entirely. Bella is one of five captive belugas in South Korea, alongside one at Aqua Planet Yeosu and three others at Geoje Sea World . Until recently, the latter offered packages where visitors could pay to ride on the whales ; these have since been outlawed. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion ‘You lied to us’: did the real-life saga behind Free Willy change the story for orcas in captivity? Read more Bella’s transfer to a seaside sanctuary is “the only ethical option”, according to Vergara. Having been removed from her natural habitat at such a young age, Bella could not survive in the open ocean. Belugas learn necessary skills such as hunting, migrating and communicating from their social groups. “Captivity is cruel, and returning her to the wild is out of the question,” Vergara said. In a statement, Lotte World Aquarium said it was working to protect animal rights and was “ready to send the beluga whale at any time”. It said it was having discussions with a committee composed of the oceans and fisheries ministry, animal rights groups and whale experts to carry out Bella’s release “based on a scientific and practical plan”. It added that it was looking at a sanctuary in Iceland and planned sanctuaries in Norway and Canada as options. Amid the bureaucratic tangle and different offers from sanctuaries, Bella remains in her tank. Lotte did not respond to a question about her wellbeing. Outside Lotte World Tower, the Hot Pink Dolphins group are still protesting, demanding: “Free Bella now!” Explore more on these topics Whales Seascape: the state of our oceans Cetaceans Marine life Wildlife Zoos South Korea Asia Pacific news Share Reuse this content In the heart of Seoul, amid the luxury shops at the foot of the world’s sixth-tallest skyscraper , a lone beluga whale named Bella swims aimlessly in a tiny, lifeless tank, where she has been trapped for a decade. Her plight is urgent, with campaigners racing to rescue her from the bare tank in a glitzy shopping centre in South Korea’s capital before it is too late. Referring to the Lotte Group, which owns the aquarium where she lives, Jo Yak-gol, of the marine environmentalist group Hot Pink Dolphins , said: “Almost five years have passed since they said they would release her.” An international petition has been launched to demand her release. Bella’s story started in 2013, when she was captured in the Arctic Ocean off the coast of Russia at the age of two. Along with two male belugas, Bello and Belli, she was sold to the aquarium, housed in a mega-mall beneath the 555-metre-high Lotte World Tower, which is owned by one of South Korea’s largest conglomerates. Tragedy struck in 2016 when Bello died prematurely at the age of five (their average lifespan in the wild is 35 to 50 years), followed by the death of 12-year-old Belli in 2019. A public outcry ensued that led to Lotte pledging to release Bella soon after the second death and again in 2021 . But such efforts have repeatedly stalled , for reasons including the Covid pandemic. When the Guardian visited the aquarium, Bella was seen switching between aimless spinning and floating motionlessly in her 1,224-tonne tank. The whales can grow to 5.5 metres (18ft) long but the tank is only 7 metres deep. “She lacks stimulation and is showing signs of a mental illness,” said Jo. View image in fullscreen Jo Yak-gol, centre, co-founder of Hot Pink Dolphins, with other animal-rights protesters outside the Lotte tower, where the whale is kept in an aquarium amid shops. Photograph: Raphael Rashid Dr Valeria Vergara , the co-director of the Raincoast Conservation Foundation’s cetacean research programme, said belugas are highly intelligent and social. “They cooperate with each other to the point of helping raise each other’s young,” she said. “They have long lives, and, of course, they have a very complex communication system,” said the marine biologist, who has studied beluga whales for more than two decades. “Keeping such beings in captivity is simply unethical.” The aquarium industry is thriving, in South Korea and elsewhere in Asia. Lotte’s aquarium in Seoul is one of the largest in the region, attracting millions of visitors since it opened in 2014. Last December, South Korea banned buying whales and dolphins for display. However, the law does not apply retroactively, meaning that animals already in captivity, such as Bella, can be kept. Campaigners have been calling on Lotte to close the Seoul exhibit entirely. Bella is one of five captive belugas in South Korea, alongside one at Aqua Planet Yeosu and three others at Geoje Sea World . Until recently, the latter offered packages where visitors could pay to ride on the whales ; these have since been outlawed. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion ‘You lied to us’: did the real-life saga behind Free Willy change the story for orcas in captivity? Read more Bella’s transfer to a seaside sanctuary is “the only ethical option”, according to Vergara. Having been removed from her natural habitat at such a young age, Bella could not survive in the open ocean. Belugas learn necessary skills such as hunting, migrating and communicating from their social groups. “Captivity is cruel, and returning her to the wild is out of the question,” Vergara said. In a statement, Lotte World Aquarium said it was working to protect animal rights and was “ready to send the beluga whale at any time”. It said it was having discussions with a committee composed of the oceans and fisheries ministry, animal rights groups and whale experts to carry out Bella’s release “based on a scientific and practical plan”. It added that it was looking at a sanctuary in Iceland and planned sanctuaries in Norway and Canada as options. Amid the bureaucratic tangle and different offers from sanctuaries, Bella remains in her tank. Lotte did not respond to a question about her wellbeing. Outside Lotte World Tower, the Hot Pink Dolphins group are still protesting, demanding: “Free Bella now!” In the heart of Seoul, amid the luxury shops at the foot of the world’s sixth-tallest skyscraper , a lone beluga whale named Bella swims aimlessly in a tiny, lifeless tank, where she has been trapped for a decade. Her plight is urgent, with campaigners racing to rescue her from the bare tank in a glitzy shopping centre in South Korea’s capital before it is too late. Referring to the Lotte Group, which owns the aquarium where she lives, Jo Yak-gol, of the marine environmentalist group Hot Pink Dolphins , said: “Almost five years have passed since they said they would release her.” An international petition has been launched to demand her release. Bella’s story started in 2013, when she was captured in the Arctic Ocean off the coast of Russia at the age of two. Along with two male belugas, Bello and Belli, she was sold to the aquarium, housed in a mega-mall beneath the 555-metre-high Lotte World Tower, which is owned by one of South Korea’s largest conglomerates. Tragedy struck in 2016 when Bello died prematurely at the age of five (their average lifespan in the wild is 35 to 50 years), followed by the death of 12-year-old Belli in 2019. A public outcry ensued that led to Lotte pledging to release Bella soon after the second death and again in 2021 . But such efforts have repeatedly stalled , for reasons including the Covid pandemic. When the Guardian visited the aquarium, Bella was seen switching between aimless spinning and floating motionlessly in her 1,224-tonne tank. The whales can grow to 5.5 metres (18ft) long but the tank is only 7 metres deep. “She lacks stimulation and is showing signs of a mental illness,” said Jo. View image in fullscreen Jo Yak-gol, centre, co-founder of Hot Pink Dolphins, with other animal-rights protesters outside the Lotte tower, where the whale is kept in an aquarium amid shops. Photograph: Raphael Rashid Dr Valeria Vergara , the co-director of the Raincoast Conservation Foundation’s cetacean research programme, said belugas are highly intelligent and social. “They cooperate with each other to the point of helping raise each other’s young,” she said. “They have long lives, and, of course, they have a very complex communication system,” said the marine biologist, who has studied beluga whales for more than two decades. “Keeping such beings in captivity is simply unethical.” The aquarium industry is thriving, in South Korea and elsewhere in Asia. Lotte’s aquarium in Seoul is one of the largest in the region, attracting millions of visitors since it opened in 2014. Last December, South Korea banned buying whales and dolphins for display. However, the law does not apply retroactively, meaning that animals already in captivity, such as Bella, can be kept. Campaigners have been calling on Lotte to close the Seoul exhibit entirely. Bella is one of five captive belugas in South Korea, alongside one at Aqua Planet Yeosu and three others at Geoje Sea World . Until recently, the latter offered packages where visitors could pay to ride on the whales ; these have since been outlawed. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion ‘You lied to us’: did the real-life saga behind Free Willy change the story for orcas in captivity? Read more Bella’s transfer to a seaside sanctuary is “the only ethical option”, according to Vergara. Having been removed from her natural habitat at such a young age, Bella could not survive in the open ocean. Belugas learn necessary skills such as hunting, migrating and communicating from their social groups. “Captivity is cruel, and returning her to the wild is out of the question,” Vergara said. In a statement, Lotte World Aquarium said it was working to protect animal rights and was “ready to send the beluga whale at any time”. It said it was having discussions with a committee composed of the oceans and fisheries ministry, animal rights groups and whale experts to carry out Bella’s release “based on a scientific and practical plan”. It added that it was looking at a sanctuary in Iceland and planned sanctuaries in Norway and Canada as options. Amid the bureaucratic tangle and different offers from sanctuaries, Bella remains in her tank. Lotte did not respond to a question about her wellbeing. Outside Lotte World Tower, the Hot Pink Dolphins group are still protesting, demanding: “Free Bella now!” In the heart of Seoul, amid the luxury shops at the foot of the world’s sixth-tallest skyscraper , a lone beluga whale named Bella swims aimlessly in a tiny, lifeless tank, where she has been trapped for a decade. Her plight is urgent, with campaigners racing to rescue her from the bare tank in a glitzy shopping centre in South Korea’s capital before it is too late. Referring to the Lotte Group, which owns the aquarium where she lives, Jo Yak-gol, of the marine environmentalist group Hot Pink Dolphins , said: “Almost five years have passed since they said they would release her.” An international petition has been launched to demand her release. Bella’s story started in 2013, when she was captured in the Arctic Ocean off the coast of Russia at the age of two. Along with two male belugas, Bello and Belli, she was sold to the aquarium, housed in a mega-mall beneath the 555-metre-high Lotte World Tower, which is owned by one of South Korea’s largest conglomerates. Tragedy struck in 2016 when Bello died prematurely at the age of five (their average lifespan in the wild is 35 to 50 years), followed by the death of 12-year-old Belli in 2019. A public outcry ensued that led to Lotte pledging to release Bella soon after the second death and again in 2021 . But such efforts have repeatedly stalled , for reasons including the Covid pandemic. When the Guardian visited the aquarium, Bella was seen switching between aimless spinning and floating motionlessly in her 1,224-tonne tank. The whales can grow to 5.5 metres (18ft) long but the tank is only 7 metres deep. “She lacks stimulation and is showing signs of a mental illness,” said Jo. Dr Valeria Vergara , the co-director of the Raincoast Conservation Foundation’s cetacean research programme, said belugas are highly intelligent and social. “They cooperate with each other to the point of helping raise each other’s young,” she said. “They have long lives, and, of course, they have a very complex communication system,” said the marine biologist, who has studied beluga whales for more than two decades. “Keeping such beings in captivity is simply unethical.” The aquarium industry is thriving, in South Korea and elsewhere in Asia. Lotte’s aquarium in Seoul is one of the largest in the region, attracting millions of visitors since it opened in 2014. Last December, South Korea banned buying whales and dolphins for display. However, the law does not apply retroactively, meaning that animals already in captivity, such as Bella, can be kept. Campaigners have been calling on Lotte to close the Seoul exhibit entirely. Bella is one of five captive belugas in South Korea, alongside one at Aqua Planet Yeosu and three others at Geoje Sea World . Until recently, the latter offered packages where visitors could pay to ride on the whales ; these have since been outlawed. ‘You lied to us’: did the real-life saga behind Free Willy change the story for orcas in captivity? Read more ‘You lied to us’: did the real-life saga behind Free Willy change the story for orcas in captivity? Read more ‘You lied to us’: did the real-life saga behind Free Willy change the story for orcas in captivity? Read more ‘You lied to us’: did the real-life saga behind Free Willy change the story for orcas in captivity? ‘You lied to us’: did the real-life saga behind Free Willy change the story for orcas in captivity? Bella’s transfer to a seaside sanctuary is “the only ethical option”, according to Vergara. Having been removed from her natural habitat at such a young age, Bella could not survive in the open ocean. Belugas learn necessary skills such as hunting, migrating and communicating from their social groups. “Captivity is cruel, and returning her to the wild is out of the question,” Vergara said. In a statement, Lotte World Aquarium said it was working to protect animal rights and was “ready to send the beluga whale at any time”. It said it was having discussions with a committee composed of the oceans and fisheries ministry, animal rights groups and whale experts to carry out Bella’s release “based on a scientific and practical plan”. It added that it was looking at a sanctuary in Iceland and planned sanctuaries in Norway and Canada as options. Amid the bureaucratic tangle and different offers from sanctuaries, Bella remains in her tank. Lotte did not respond to a question about her wellbeing. Outside Lotte World Tower, the Hot Pink Dolphins group are still protesting, demanding: “Free Bella now!” Explore more on these topics Whales Seascape: the state of our oceans Cetaceans Marine life Wildlife Zoos South Korea Asia Pacific news Share Reuse this content Whales Seascape: the state of our oceans Cetaceans Marine life Wildlife Zoos South Korea Asia Pacific news |
ICC prosecutor seeks arrest warrants for Israeli PM and Hamas officials for war crimes
5:17 ICC prosecutor requests arrest warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant and three Hamas leaders – video This article is more than 1 year old ICC prosecutor seeks arrest warrants for Israeli PM and Hamas officials for war crimes This article is more than 1 year old Karim Khan applies for warrants relating to alleged crimes committed during 7 October attack and ensuing war in Gaza Explainer: will ICC approve arrest warrants for Israel and Hamas leaders? The chief prosecutor of the international criminal court has said he is seeking arrest warrants for senior Hamas and Israeli officials for war crimes and crimes against humanity, including the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu , and his defence minister, Yoav Gallant. Karim Khan said his office had applied to the world court’s pre-trial chamber for arrest warrants for the military and political leaders on both sides for crimes committed during Hamas’s 7 October attack and the ensuing war in Gaza. He named Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas chief in Gaza, and Mohammed Deif, the commander of its military wing, considered to be the masterminds of the 7 October assault, as well as Ismail Haniyeh, the leader of the group’s political bureau, who is based in Qatar, as wanted for crimes of extermination, murder, hostage-taking, rape, sexual assault and torture. In an extraordinary rebuke of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and its conduct in the war in Gaza, Netanyahu and Gallant are accused of extermination, causing starvation as a method of war, the denial of humanitarian relief supplies and deliberately targeting civilians. Monday’s statement notably does not include any Israel Defense Forces (IDF) officials, such as its chief of staff, Lt Gen Herzi Halevi, focusing instead on political decision-making. Khan, the British ICC prosecutor, must request the warrants for the Hamas and Israeli suspects from a pre-trial panel of three judges, who take on average two months to consider the evidence and determine if the proceedings can move forward. The ICC has previously issued warrants for Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Muammar Gaddafi of Libya, the Ugandan warlord Joseph Kony and the former president of Sudan Omar al-Bashir, but no leader of a “western-style” democracy has ever been issued a warrant. While there is no imminent likelihood of prosecution, since Israel is not a member of the court, ICC warrants could put Israeli officials at risk of arrest abroad, further deepening the country’s growing international isolation over its conduct in the war in Gaza . The move also presents fresh challenges for Israel’s western allies, who are already struggling to reconcile support for the Jewish state with growing evidence of war crimes in the seven-month-old conflict and respect for the post-second world war rules-based order. Netanyahu described the prosecutor’s accusations against him as a “disgrace”, saying: “I reject with disgust The Hague prosecutor’s comparison between democratic Israel and the mass murderers of Hamas. “With what audacity do you dare compare the monsters of Hamas to the soldiers of the IDF, the most moral army in the world?” Joe Biden, the US president, described the move as “outrageous” in a statement, adding: “Whatever this prosecutor might imply, there is no equivalence – none – between Israel and Hamas. We will always stand with Israel against threats to its security.” About 1,200 people, mostly civilians, were killed on 7 October, and about 35,000 people have been killed in the war in Gaza, according to the Palestinian health ministry, which does not differentiate between civilian and combatant deaths. “The world was shocked on 7 October when people were ripped from their homes, from their bedrooms in different kibbutzim … people have suffered enormously,” Khan told CNN on Monday. “We have a variety of evidence to support the applications we’ve submitted to the judges.” “These acts demand accountability,” Khan’s office said in a statement. The world’s top court decided in 2021 that it had a mandate to investigate violence and war crimes committed by Israel and Palestinian factions in events dating back to 2014, although Israel is not a member of the court and does not recognise its authority. Many in Israel have long maintained that the UN and associated bodies are biased against the Jewish state. Khan visited the Egyptian side of the Rafah border crossing into Gaza in late October, and Israel and the West Bank in December, and had made clear that the scope of his office’s investigation would be expanded to include 7 October and its aftermath. Last month, Netanyahu was publicly panic-stricken by the prospect of an ICC prosecution , and reportedly appealed to his ally Biden to intervene in any potential international legal action against Israel. The ICC investigation into Palestine was opposed by the US and UK before it opened in 2021, and both states have supported Israel’s right to defend itself even as the scale of death and destruction in Gaza has led to protests and political fallout at home. “We reject the prosecutor’s equivalence of Israel with Hamas,” said the US secretary of state, Antony Blinken. “The ICC arrest decisions could jeopardise efforts to reach a ceasefire agreement, hostage deal and to increase humanitarian aid in Gaza.” A UK government spokesperson said that London “does not believe that seeking warrants will help get hostages out, get aid in, or deliver a sustainable ceasefire”. Daniel Machover, a co-founder of Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights, said: “This is massive news, albeit the wait to get to this point has been too long. The rule of law must now be upheld. The list of potential Israeli defendants is insufficient and the international crimes associated with settlements in the West Bank are notably absent but hopefully the ICC chamber will grant the application as soon as possible and more charges and defendants will be added. “While not a single life has yet been saved or injury prevented through the application of the rule of criminal law, let’s hope for a deterrent effect from now.” Condemnation of Khan’s decision from across the Israeli political spectrum was swift. The Israeli opposition leader, Yair Lapid, called the ICC’s actions a “disaster”. Benny Gantz, a former military chief and member of Israel’s war cabinet alongside Netanyahu and Gallant, criticised the ICC’s announcement, saying Israel fought with “one of the strictest” moral codes and had a “robust judiciary capable of investigating itself”. Khan suggested heavily in his statement that Israel’s judicial system “shields suspects”. Last year’s conviction rate for Palestinians tried in Israeli military courts was 96%, while fewer than 1% of complaints against Israeli soldiers ended in a conviction, according to the US Department of State’s annual human rights report. Hamas, too, was critical of Khan’s announcement. The ICC prosecutor’s decision “equates the victim with the executioner”, the senior Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters. .The US Republican party is all but certain to pursue sanctions against members of the ICC as a result of Khan’s announcement; a dozen Republican senators wrote a letter earlier this month warning his office: “Target Israel and we will target you.” Sanctions were levied by the Trump administration over the court’s investigations into Israel and US actions in Afghanistan, but later reversed by Joe Biden. In 2021, Khan decided to drop the US from the ICC’s Afghanistan file. In his statement, Khan made clear he was aware of the historic importance and potential ramifications of the decision. “If we do not demonstrate our willingness to apply the law equally, if it is seen as being applied selectively, we will be creating the conditions for its collapse,” he said. “Now, more than ever, we must collectively demonstrate that international humanitarian law, the foundational baseline for human conduct during conflict, applies to all individuals and applies equally across the situations addressed by my office and the court. This is how we will prove, tangibly, that the lives of all human beings have equal value.” Israel is facing two other major international legal cases over its actions towards Palestinians. In December, South Africa filed a case against Israel at the international court of justice (ICJ) , alleging that its campaign in Gaza breached the UN’s genocide convention, set up in 1948 in the aftermath of the Holocaust. Israel denies those charges. The ICJ only hears cases between states, so it has no jurisdiction over Hamas. Explore more on these topics International criminal court Benjamin Netanyahu Hamas Palestine Israel-Gaza war Israel Middle East and north Africa news Share Reuse this content 5:17 ICC prosecutor requests arrest warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant and three Hamas leaders – video This article is more than 1 year old ICC prosecutor seeks arrest warrants for Israeli PM and Hamas officials for war crimes This article is more than 1 year old Karim Khan applies for warrants relating to alleged crimes committed during 7 October attack and ensuing war in Gaza Explainer: will ICC approve arrest warrants for Israel and Hamas leaders? The chief prosecutor of the international criminal court has said he is seeking arrest warrants for senior Hamas and Israeli officials for war crimes and crimes against humanity, including the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu , and his defence minister, Yoav Gallant. Karim Khan said his office had applied to the world court’s pre-trial chamber for arrest warrants for the military and political leaders on both sides for crimes committed during Hamas’s 7 October attack and the ensuing war in Gaza. He named Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas chief in Gaza, and Mohammed Deif, the commander of its military wing, considered to be the masterminds of the 7 October assault, as well as Ismail Haniyeh, the leader of the group’s political bureau, who is based in Qatar, as wanted for crimes of extermination, murder, hostage-taking, rape, sexual assault and torture. In an extraordinary rebuke of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and its conduct in the war in Gaza, Netanyahu and Gallant are accused of extermination, causing starvation as a method of war, the denial of humanitarian relief supplies and deliberately targeting civilians. Monday’s statement notably does not include any Israel Defense Forces (IDF) officials, such as its chief of staff, Lt Gen Herzi Halevi, focusing instead on political decision-making. Khan, the British ICC prosecutor, must request the warrants for the Hamas and Israeli suspects from a pre-trial panel of three judges, who take on average two months to consider the evidence and determine if the proceedings can move forward. The ICC has previously issued warrants for Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Muammar Gaddafi of Libya, the Ugandan warlord Joseph Kony and the former president of Sudan Omar al-Bashir, but no leader of a “western-style” democracy has ever been issued a warrant. While there is no imminent likelihood of prosecution, since Israel is not a member of the court, ICC warrants could put Israeli officials at risk of arrest abroad, further deepening the country’s growing international isolation over its conduct in the war in Gaza . The move also presents fresh challenges for Israel’s western allies, who are already struggling to reconcile support for the Jewish state with growing evidence of war crimes in the seven-month-old conflict and respect for the post-second world war rules-based order. Netanyahu described the prosecutor’s accusations against him as a “disgrace”, saying: “I reject with disgust The Hague prosecutor’s comparison between democratic Israel and the mass murderers of Hamas. “With what audacity do you dare compare the monsters of Hamas to the soldiers of the IDF, the most moral army in the world?” Joe Biden, the US president, described the move as “outrageous” in a statement, adding: “Whatever this prosecutor might imply, there is no equivalence – none – between Israel and Hamas. We will always stand with Israel against threats to its security.” About 1,200 people, mostly civilians, were killed on 7 October, and about 35,000 people have been killed in the war in Gaza, according to the Palestinian health ministry, which does not differentiate between civilian and combatant deaths. “The world was shocked on 7 October when people were ripped from their homes, from their bedrooms in different kibbutzim … people have suffered enormously,” Khan told CNN on Monday. “We have a variety of evidence to support the applications we’ve submitted to the judges.” “These acts demand accountability,” Khan’s office said in a statement. The world’s top court decided in 2021 that it had a mandate to investigate violence and war crimes committed by Israel and Palestinian factions in events dating back to 2014, although Israel is not a member of the court and does not recognise its authority. Many in Israel have long maintained that the UN and associated bodies are biased against the Jewish state. Khan visited the Egyptian side of the Rafah border crossing into Gaza in late October, and Israel and the West Bank in December, and had made clear that the scope of his office’s investigation would be expanded to include 7 October and its aftermath. Last month, Netanyahu was publicly panic-stricken by the prospect of an ICC prosecution , and reportedly appealed to his ally Biden to intervene in any potential international legal action against Israel. The ICC investigation into Palestine was opposed by the US and UK before it opened in 2021, and both states have supported Israel’s right to defend itself even as the scale of death and destruction in Gaza has led to protests and political fallout at home. “We reject the prosecutor’s equivalence of Israel with Hamas,” said the US secretary of state, Antony Blinken. “The ICC arrest decisions could jeopardise efforts to reach a ceasefire agreement, hostage deal and to increase humanitarian aid in Gaza.” A UK government spokesperson said that London “does not believe that seeking warrants will help get hostages out, get aid in, or deliver a sustainable ceasefire”. Daniel Machover, a co-founder of Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights, said: “This is massive news, albeit the wait to get to this point has been too long. The rule of law must now be upheld. The list of potential Israeli defendants is insufficient and the international crimes associated with settlements in the West Bank are notably absent but hopefully the ICC chamber will grant the application as soon as possible and more charges and defendants will be added. “While not a single life has yet been saved or injury prevented through the application of the rule of criminal law, let’s hope for a deterrent effect from now.” Condemnation of Khan’s decision from across the Israeli political spectrum was swift. The Israeli opposition leader, Yair Lapid, called the ICC’s actions a “disaster”. Benny Gantz, a former military chief and member of Israel’s war cabinet alongside Netanyahu and Gallant, criticised the ICC’s announcement, saying Israel fought with “one of the strictest” moral codes and had a “robust judiciary capable of investigating itself”. Khan suggested heavily in his statement that Israel’s judicial system “shields suspects”. Last year’s conviction rate for Palestinians tried in Israeli military courts was 96%, while fewer than 1% of complaints against Israeli soldiers ended in a conviction, according to the US Department of State’s annual human rights report. Hamas, too, was critical of Khan’s announcement. The ICC prosecutor’s decision “equates the victim with the executioner”, the senior Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters. .The US Republican party is all but certain to pursue sanctions against members of the ICC as a result of Khan’s announcement; a dozen Republican senators wrote a letter earlier this month warning his office: “Target Israel and we will target you.” Sanctions were levied by the Trump administration over the court’s investigations into Israel and US actions in Afghanistan, but later reversed by Joe Biden. In 2021, Khan decided to drop the US from the ICC’s Afghanistan file. In his statement, Khan made clear he was aware of the historic importance and potential ramifications of the decision. “If we do not demonstrate our willingness to apply the law equally, if it is seen as being applied selectively, we will be creating the conditions for its collapse,” he said. “Now, more than ever, we must collectively demonstrate that international humanitarian law, the foundational baseline for human conduct during conflict, applies to all individuals and applies equally across the situations addressed by my office and the court. This is how we will prove, tangibly, that the lives of all human beings have equal value.” Israel is facing two other major international legal cases over its actions towards Palestinians. In December, South Africa filed a case against Israel at the international court of justice (ICJ) , alleging that its campaign in Gaza breached the UN’s genocide convention, set up in 1948 in the aftermath of the Holocaust. Israel denies those charges. The ICJ only hears cases between states, so it has no jurisdiction over Hamas. Explore more on these topics International criminal court Benjamin Netanyahu Hamas Palestine Israel-Gaza war Israel Middle East and north Africa news Share Reuse this content 5:17 ICC prosecutor requests arrest warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant and three Hamas leaders – video 5:17 ICC prosecutor requests arrest warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant and three Hamas leaders – video 5:17 ICC prosecutor requests arrest warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant and three Hamas leaders – video 5:17 ICC prosecutor requests arrest warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant and three Hamas leaders – video This article is more than 1 year old ICC prosecutor seeks arrest warrants for Israeli PM and Hamas officials for war crimes This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ICC prosecutor seeks arrest warrants for Israeli PM and Hamas officials for war crimes This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old ICC prosecutor seeks arrest warrants for Israeli PM and Hamas officials for war crimes This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Karim Khan applies for warrants relating to alleged crimes committed during 7 October attack and ensuing war in Gaza Explainer: will ICC approve arrest warrants for Israel and Hamas leaders? Karim Khan applies for warrants relating to alleged crimes committed during 7 October attack and ensuing war in Gaza Explainer: will ICC approve arrest warrants for Israel and Hamas leaders? Karim Khan applies for warrants relating to alleged crimes committed during 7 October attack and ensuing war in Gaza The chief prosecutor of the international criminal court has said he is seeking arrest warrants for senior Hamas and Israeli officials for war crimes and crimes against humanity, including the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu , and his defence minister, Yoav Gallant. Karim Khan said his office had applied to the world court’s pre-trial chamber for arrest warrants for the military and political leaders on both sides for crimes committed during Hamas’s 7 October attack and the ensuing war in Gaza. He named Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas chief in Gaza, and Mohammed Deif, the commander of its military wing, considered to be the masterminds of the 7 October assault, as well as Ismail Haniyeh, the leader of the group’s political bureau, who is based in Qatar, as wanted for crimes of extermination, murder, hostage-taking, rape, sexual assault and torture. In an extraordinary rebuke of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and its conduct in the war in Gaza, Netanyahu and Gallant are accused of extermination, causing starvation as a method of war, the denial of humanitarian relief supplies and deliberately targeting civilians. Monday’s statement notably does not include any Israel Defense Forces (IDF) officials, such as its chief of staff, Lt Gen Herzi Halevi, focusing instead on political decision-making. Khan, the British ICC prosecutor, must request the warrants for the Hamas and Israeli suspects from a pre-trial panel of three judges, who take on average two months to consider the evidence and determine if the proceedings can move forward. The ICC has previously issued warrants for Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Muammar Gaddafi of Libya, the Ugandan warlord Joseph Kony and the former president of Sudan Omar al-Bashir, but no leader of a “western-style” democracy has ever been issued a warrant. While there is no imminent likelihood of prosecution, since Israel is not a member of the court, ICC warrants could put Israeli officials at risk of arrest abroad, further deepening the country’s growing international isolation over its conduct in the war in Gaza . The move also presents fresh challenges for Israel’s western allies, who are already struggling to reconcile support for the Jewish state with growing evidence of war crimes in the seven-month-old conflict and respect for the post-second world war rules-based order. Netanyahu described the prosecutor’s accusations against him as a “disgrace”, saying: “I reject with disgust The Hague prosecutor’s comparison between democratic Israel and the mass murderers of Hamas. “With what audacity do you dare compare the monsters of Hamas to the soldiers of the IDF, the most moral army in the world?” Joe Biden, the US president, described the move as “outrageous” in a statement, adding: “Whatever this prosecutor might imply, there is no equivalence – none – between Israel and Hamas. We will always stand with Israel against threats to its security.” About 1,200 people, mostly civilians, were killed on 7 October, and about 35,000 people have been killed in the war in Gaza, according to the Palestinian health ministry, which does not differentiate between civilian and combatant deaths. “The world was shocked on 7 October when people were ripped from their homes, from their bedrooms in different kibbutzim … people have suffered enormously,” Khan told CNN on Monday. “We have a variety of evidence to support the applications we’ve submitted to the judges.” “These acts demand accountability,” Khan’s office said in a statement. The world’s top court decided in 2021 that it had a mandate to investigate violence and war crimes committed by Israel and Palestinian factions in events dating back to 2014, although Israel is not a member of the court and does not recognise its authority. Many in Israel have long maintained that the UN and associated bodies are biased against the Jewish state. Khan visited the Egyptian side of the Rafah border crossing into Gaza in late October, and Israel and the West Bank in December, and had made clear that the scope of his office’s investigation would be expanded to include 7 October and its aftermath. Last month, Netanyahu was publicly panic-stricken by the prospect of an ICC prosecution , and reportedly appealed to his ally Biden to intervene in any potential international legal action against Israel. The ICC investigation into Palestine was opposed by the US and UK before it opened in 2021, and both states have supported Israel’s right to defend itself even as the scale of death and destruction in Gaza has led to protests and political fallout at home. “We reject the prosecutor’s equivalence of Israel with Hamas,” said the US secretary of state, Antony Blinken. “The ICC arrest decisions could jeopardise efforts to reach a ceasefire agreement, hostage deal and to increase humanitarian aid in Gaza.” A UK government spokesperson said that London “does not believe that seeking warrants will help get hostages out, get aid in, or deliver a sustainable ceasefire”. Daniel Machover, a co-founder of Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights, said: “This is massive news, albeit the wait to get to this point has been too long. The rule of law must now be upheld. The list of potential Israeli defendants is insufficient and the international crimes associated with settlements in the West Bank are notably absent but hopefully the ICC chamber will grant the application as soon as possible and more charges and defendants will be added. “While not a single life has yet been saved or injury prevented through the application of the rule of criminal law, let’s hope for a deterrent effect from now.” Condemnation of Khan’s decision from across the Israeli political spectrum was swift. The Israeli opposition leader, Yair Lapid, called the ICC’s actions a “disaster”. Benny Gantz, a former military chief and member of Israel’s war cabinet alongside Netanyahu and Gallant, criticised the ICC’s announcement, saying Israel fought with “one of the strictest” moral codes and had a “robust judiciary capable of investigating itself”. Khan suggested heavily in his statement that Israel’s judicial system “shields suspects”. Last year’s conviction rate for Palestinians tried in Israeli military courts was 96%, while fewer than 1% of complaints against Israeli soldiers ended in a conviction, according to the US Department of State’s annual human rights report. Hamas, too, was critical of Khan’s announcement. The ICC prosecutor’s decision “equates the victim with the executioner”, the senior Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters. .The US Republican party is all but certain to pursue sanctions against members of the ICC as a result of Khan’s announcement; a dozen Republican senators wrote a letter earlier this month warning his office: “Target Israel and we will target you.” Sanctions were levied by the Trump administration over the court’s investigations into Israel and US actions in Afghanistan, but later reversed by Joe Biden. In 2021, Khan decided to drop the US from the ICC’s Afghanistan file. In his statement, Khan made clear he was aware of the historic importance and potential ramifications of the decision. “If we do not demonstrate our willingness to apply the law equally, if it is seen as being applied selectively, we will be creating the conditions for its collapse,” he said. “Now, more than ever, we must collectively demonstrate that international humanitarian law, the foundational baseline for human conduct during conflict, applies to all individuals and applies equally across the situations addressed by my office and the court. This is how we will prove, tangibly, that the lives of all human beings have equal value.” Israel is facing two other major international legal cases over its actions towards Palestinians. In December, South Africa filed a case against Israel at the international court of justice (ICJ) , alleging that its campaign in Gaza breached the UN’s genocide convention, set up in 1948 in the aftermath of the Holocaust. Israel denies those charges. The ICJ only hears cases between states, so it has no jurisdiction over Hamas. Explore more on these topics International criminal court Benjamin Netanyahu Hamas Palestine Israel-Gaza war Israel Middle East and north Africa news Share Reuse this content The chief prosecutor of the international criminal court has said he is seeking arrest warrants for senior Hamas and Israeli officials for war crimes and crimes against humanity, including the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu , and his defence minister, Yoav Gallant. Karim Khan said his office had applied to the world court’s pre-trial chamber for arrest warrants for the military and political leaders on both sides for crimes committed during Hamas’s 7 October attack and the ensuing war in Gaza. He named Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas chief in Gaza, and Mohammed Deif, the commander of its military wing, considered to be the masterminds of the 7 October assault, as well as Ismail Haniyeh, the leader of the group’s political bureau, who is based in Qatar, as wanted for crimes of extermination, murder, hostage-taking, rape, sexual assault and torture. In an extraordinary rebuke of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and its conduct in the war in Gaza, Netanyahu and Gallant are accused of extermination, causing starvation as a method of war, the denial of humanitarian relief supplies and deliberately targeting civilians. Monday’s statement notably does not include any Israel Defense Forces (IDF) officials, such as its chief of staff, Lt Gen Herzi Halevi, focusing instead on political decision-making. Khan, the British ICC prosecutor, must request the warrants for the Hamas and Israeli suspects from a pre-trial panel of three judges, who take on average two months to consider the evidence and determine if the proceedings can move forward. The ICC has previously issued warrants for Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Muammar Gaddafi of Libya, the Ugandan warlord Joseph Kony and the former president of Sudan Omar al-Bashir, but no leader of a “western-style” democracy has ever been issued a warrant. While there is no imminent likelihood of prosecution, since Israel is not a member of the court, ICC warrants could put Israeli officials at risk of arrest abroad, further deepening the country’s growing international isolation over its conduct in the war in Gaza . The move also presents fresh challenges for Israel’s western allies, who are already struggling to reconcile support for the Jewish state with growing evidence of war crimes in the seven-month-old conflict and respect for the post-second world war rules-based order. Netanyahu described the prosecutor’s accusations against him as a “disgrace”, saying: “I reject with disgust The Hague prosecutor’s comparison between democratic Israel and the mass murderers of Hamas. “With what audacity do you dare compare the monsters of Hamas to the soldiers of the IDF, the most moral army in the world?” Joe Biden, the US president, described the move as “outrageous” in a statement, adding: “Whatever this prosecutor might imply, there is no equivalence – none – between Israel and Hamas. We will always stand with Israel against threats to its security.” About 1,200 people, mostly civilians, were killed on 7 October, and about 35,000 people have been killed in the war in Gaza, according to the Palestinian health ministry, which does not differentiate between civilian and combatant deaths. “The world was shocked on 7 October when people were ripped from their homes, from their bedrooms in different kibbutzim … people have suffered enormously,” Khan told CNN on Monday. “We have a variety of evidence to support the applications we’ve submitted to the judges.” “These acts demand accountability,” Khan’s office said in a statement. The world’s top court decided in 2021 that it had a mandate to investigate violence and war crimes committed by Israel and Palestinian factions in events dating back to 2014, although Israel is not a member of the court and does not recognise its authority. Many in Israel have long maintained that the UN and associated bodies are biased against the Jewish state. Khan visited the Egyptian side of the Rafah border crossing into Gaza in late October, and Israel and the West Bank in December, and had made clear that the scope of his office’s investigation would be expanded to include 7 October and its aftermath. Last month, Netanyahu was publicly panic-stricken by the prospect of an ICC prosecution , and reportedly appealed to his ally Biden to intervene in any potential international legal action against Israel. The ICC investigation into Palestine was opposed by the US and UK before it opened in 2021, and both states have supported Israel’s right to defend itself even as the scale of death and destruction in Gaza has led to protests and political fallout at home. “We reject the prosecutor’s equivalence of Israel with Hamas,” said the US secretary of state, Antony Blinken. “The ICC arrest decisions could jeopardise efforts to reach a ceasefire agreement, hostage deal and to increase humanitarian aid in Gaza.” A UK government spokesperson said that London “does not believe that seeking warrants will help get hostages out, get aid in, or deliver a sustainable ceasefire”. Daniel Machover, a co-founder of Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights, said: “This is massive news, albeit the wait to get to this point has been too long. The rule of law must now be upheld. The list of potential Israeli defendants is insufficient and the international crimes associated with settlements in the West Bank are notably absent but hopefully the ICC chamber will grant the application as soon as possible and more charges and defendants will be added. “While not a single life has yet been saved or injury prevented through the application of the rule of criminal law, let’s hope for a deterrent effect from now.” Condemnation of Khan’s decision from across the Israeli political spectrum was swift. The Israeli opposition leader, Yair Lapid, called the ICC’s actions a “disaster”. Benny Gantz, a former military chief and member of Israel’s war cabinet alongside Netanyahu and Gallant, criticised the ICC’s announcement, saying Israel fought with “one of the strictest” moral codes and had a “robust judiciary capable of investigating itself”. Khan suggested heavily in his statement that Israel’s judicial system “shields suspects”. Last year’s conviction rate for Palestinians tried in Israeli military courts was 96%, while fewer than 1% of complaints against Israeli soldiers ended in a conviction, according to the US Department of State’s annual human rights report. Hamas, too, was critical of Khan’s announcement. The ICC prosecutor’s decision “equates the victim with the executioner”, the senior Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters. .The US Republican party is all but certain to pursue sanctions against members of the ICC as a result of Khan’s announcement; a dozen Republican senators wrote a letter earlier this month warning his office: “Target Israel and we will target you.” Sanctions were levied by the Trump administration over the court’s investigations into Israel and US actions in Afghanistan, but later reversed by Joe Biden. In 2021, Khan decided to drop the US from the ICC’s Afghanistan file. In his statement, Khan made clear he was aware of the historic importance and potential ramifications of the decision. “If we do not demonstrate our willingness to apply the law equally, if it is seen as being applied selectively, we will be creating the conditions for its collapse,” he said. “Now, more than ever, we must collectively demonstrate that international humanitarian law, the foundational baseline for human conduct during conflict, applies to all individuals and applies equally across the situations addressed by my office and the court. This is how we will prove, tangibly, that the lives of all human beings have equal value.” Israel is facing two other major international legal cases over its actions towards Palestinians. In December, South Africa filed a case against Israel at the international court of justice (ICJ) , alleging that its campaign in Gaza breached the UN’s genocide convention, set up in 1948 in the aftermath of the Holocaust. Israel denies those charges. The ICJ only hears cases between states, so it has no jurisdiction over Hamas. Explore more on these topics International criminal court Benjamin Netanyahu Hamas Palestine Israel-Gaza war Israel Middle East and north Africa news Share Reuse this content The chief prosecutor of the international criminal court has said he is seeking arrest warrants for senior Hamas and Israeli officials for war crimes and crimes against humanity, including the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu , and his defence minister, Yoav Gallant. Karim Khan said his office had applied to the world court’s pre-trial chamber for arrest warrants for the military and political leaders on both sides for crimes committed during Hamas’s 7 October attack and the ensuing war in Gaza. He named Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas chief in Gaza, and Mohammed Deif, the commander of its military wing, considered to be the masterminds of the 7 October assault, as well as Ismail Haniyeh, the leader of the group’s political bureau, who is based in Qatar, as wanted for crimes of extermination, murder, hostage-taking, rape, sexual assault and torture. In an extraordinary rebuke of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and its conduct in the war in Gaza, Netanyahu and Gallant are accused of extermination, causing starvation as a method of war, the denial of humanitarian relief supplies and deliberately targeting civilians. Monday’s statement notably does not include any Israel Defense Forces (IDF) officials, such as its chief of staff, Lt Gen Herzi Halevi, focusing instead on political decision-making. Khan, the British ICC prosecutor, must request the warrants for the Hamas and Israeli suspects from a pre-trial panel of three judges, who take on average two months to consider the evidence and determine if the proceedings can move forward. The ICC has previously issued warrants for Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Muammar Gaddafi of Libya, the Ugandan warlord Joseph Kony and the former president of Sudan Omar al-Bashir, but no leader of a “western-style” democracy has ever been issued a warrant. While there is no imminent likelihood of prosecution, since Israel is not a member of the court, ICC warrants could put Israeli officials at risk of arrest abroad, further deepening the country’s growing international isolation over its conduct in the war in Gaza . The move also presents fresh challenges for Israel’s western allies, who are already struggling to reconcile support for the Jewish state with growing evidence of war crimes in the seven-month-old conflict and respect for the post-second world war rules-based order. Netanyahu described the prosecutor’s accusations against him as a “disgrace”, saying: “I reject with disgust The Hague prosecutor’s comparison between democratic Israel and the mass murderers of Hamas. “With what audacity do you dare compare the monsters of Hamas to the soldiers of the IDF, the most moral army in the world?” Joe Biden, the US president, described the move as “outrageous” in a statement, adding: “Whatever this prosecutor might imply, there is no equivalence – none – between Israel and Hamas. We will always stand with Israel against threats to its security.” About 1,200 people, mostly civilians, were killed on 7 October, and about 35,000 people have been killed in the war in Gaza, according to the Palestinian health ministry, which does not differentiate between civilian and combatant deaths. “The world was shocked on 7 October when people were ripped from their homes, from their bedrooms in different kibbutzim … people have suffered enormously,” Khan told CNN on Monday. “We have a variety of evidence to support the applications we’ve submitted to the judges.” “These acts demand accountability,” Khan’s office said in a statement. The world’s top court decided in 2021 that it had a mandate to investigate violence and war crimes committed by Israel and Palestinian factions in events dating back to 2014, although Israel is not a member of the court and does not recognise its authority. Many in Israel have long maintained that the UN and associated bodies are biased against the Jewish state. Khan visited the Egyptian side of the Rafah border crossing into Gaza in late October, and Israel and the West Bank in December, and had made clear that the scope of his office’s investigation would be expanded to include 7 October and its aftermath. Last month, Netanyahu was publicly panic-stricken by the prospect of an ICC prosecution , and reportedly appealed to his ally Biden to intervene in any potential international legal action against Israel. The ICC investigation into Palestine was opposed by the US and UK before it opened in 2021, and both states have supported Israel’s right to defend itself even as the scale of death and destruction in Gaza has led to protests and political fallout at home. “We reject the prosecutor’s equivalence of Israel with Hamas,” said the US secretary of state, Antony Blinken. “The ICC arrest decisions could jeopardise efforts to reach a ceasefire agreement, hostage deal and to increase humanitarian aid in Gaza.” A UK government spokesperson said that London “does not believe that seeking warrants will help get hostages out, get aid in, or deliver a sustainable ceasefire”. Daniel Machover, a co-founder of Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights, said: “This is massive news, albeit the wait to get to this point has been too long. The rule of law must now be upheld. The list of potential Israeli defendants is insufficient and the international crimes associated with settlements in the West Bank are notably absent but hopefully the ICC chamber will grant the application as soon as possible and more charges and defendants will be added. “While not a single life has yet been saved or injury prevented through the application of the rule of criminal law, let’s hope for a deterrent effect from now.” Condemnation of Khan’s decision from across the Israeli political spectrum was swift. The Israeli opposition leader, Yair Lapid, called the ICC’s actions a “disaster”. Benny Gantz, a former military chief and member of Israel’s war cabinet alongside Netanyahu and Gallant, criticised the ICC’s announcement, saying Israel fought with “one of the strictest” moral codes and had a “robust judiciary capable of investigating itself”. Khan suggested heavily in his statement that Israel’s judicial system “shields suspects”. Last year’s conviction rate for Palestinians tried in Israeli military courts was 96%, while fewer than 1% of complaints against Israeli soldiers ended in a conviction, according to the US Department of State’s annual human rights report. Hamas, too, was critical of Khan’s announcement. The ICC prosecutor’s decision “equates the victim with the executioner”, the senior Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters. .The US Republican party is all but certain to pursue sanctions against members of the ICC as a result of Khan’s announcement; a dozen Republican senators wrote a letter earlier this month warning his office: “Target Israel and we will target you.” Sanctions were levied by the Trump administration over the court’s investigations into Israel and US actions in Afghanistan, but later reversed by Joe Biden. In 2021, Khan decided to drop the US from the ICC’s Afghanistan file. In his statement, Khan made clear he was aware of the historic importance and potential ramifications of the decision. “If we do not demonstrate our willingness to apply the law equally, if it is seen as being applied selectively, we will be creating the conditions for its collapse,” he said. “Now, more than ever, we must collectively demonstrate that international humanitarian law, the foundational baseline for human conduct during conflict, applies to all individuals and applies equally across the situations addressed by my office and the court. This is how we will prove, tangibly, that the lives of all human beings have equal value.” Israel is facing two other major international legal cases over its actions towards Palestinians. In December, South Africa filed a case against Israel at the international court of justice (ICJ) , alleging that its campaign in Gaza breached the UN’s genocide convention, set up in 1948 in the aftermath of the Holocaust. Israel denies those charges. The ICJ only hears cases between states, so it has no jurisdiction over Hamas. The chief prosecutor of the international criminal court has said he is seeking arrest warrants for senior Hamas and Israeli officials for war crimes and crimes against humanity, including the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu , and his defence minister, Yoav Gallant. Karim Khan said his office had applied to the world court’s pre-trial chamber for arrest warrants for the military and political leaders on both sides for crimes committed during Hamas’s 7 October attack and the ensuing war in Gaza. He named Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas chief in Gaza, and Mohammed Deif, the commander of its military wing, considered to be the masterminds of the 7 October assault, as well as Ismail Haniyeh, the leader of the group’s political bureau, who is based in Qatar, as wanted for crimes of extermination, murder, hostage-taking, rape, sexual assault and torture. In an extraordinary rebuke of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and its conduct in the war in Gaza, Netanyahu and Gallant are accused of extermination, causing starvation as a method of war, the denial of humanitarian relief supplies and deliberately targeting civilians. Monday’s statement notably does not include any Israel Defense Forces (IDF) officials, such as its chief of staff, Lt Gen Herzi Halevi, focusing instead on political decision-making. Khan, the British ICC prosecutor, must request the warrants for the Hamas and Israeli suspects from a pre-trial panel of three judges, who take on average two months to consider the evidence and determine if the proceedings can move forward. The ICC has previously issued warrants for Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Muammar Gaddafi of Libya, the Ugandan warlord Joseph Kony and the former president of Sudan Omar al-Bashir, but no leader of a “western-style” democracy has ever been issued a warrant. While there is no imminent likelihood of prosecution, since Israel is not a member of the court, ICC warrants could put Israeli officials at risk of arrest abroad, further deepening the country’s growing international isolation over its conduct in the war in Gaza . The move also presents fresh challenges for Israel’s western allies, who are already struggling to reconcile support for the Jewish state with growing evidence of war crimes in the seven-month-old conflict and respect for the post-second world war rules-based order. Netanyahu described the prosecutor’s accusations against him as a “disgrace”, saying: “I reject with disgust The Hague prosecutor’s comparison between democratic Israel and the mass murderers of Hamas. “With what audacity do you dare compare the monsters of Hamas to the soldiers of the IDF, the most moral army in the world?” Joe Biden, the US president, described the move as “outrageous” in a statement, adding: “Whatever this prosecutor might imply, there is no equivalence – none – between Israel and Hamas. We will always stand with Israel against threats to its security.” About 1,200 people, mostly civilians, were killed on 7 October, and about 35,000 people have been killed in the war in Gaza, according to the Palestinian health ministry, which does not differentiate between civilian and combatant deaths. “The world was shocked on 7 October when people were ripped from their homes, from their bedrooms in different kibbutzim … people have suffered enormously,” Khan told CNN on Monday. “We have a variety of evidence to support the applications we’ve submitted to the judges.” “These acts demand accountability,” Khan’s office said in a statement. The world’s top court decided in 2021 that it had a mandate to investigate violence and war crimes committed by Israel and Palestinian factions in events dating back to 2014, although Israel is not a member of the court and does not recognise its authority. Many in Israel have long maintained that the UN and associated bodies are biased against the Jewish state. Khan visited the Egyptian side of the Rafah border crossing into Gaza in late October, and Israel and the West Bank in December, and had made clear that the scope of his office’s investigation would be expanded to include 7 October and its aftermath. Last month, Netanyahu was publicly panic-stricken by the prospect of an ICC prosecution , and reportedly appealed to his ally Biden to intervene in any potential international legal action against Israel. The ICC investigation into Palestine was opposed by the US and UK before it opened in 2021, and both states have supported Israel’s right to defend itself even as the scale of death and destruction in Gaza has led to protests and political fallout at home. “We reject the prosecutor’s equivalence of Israel with Hamas,” said the US secretary of state, Antony Blinken. “The ICC arrest decisions could jeopardise efforts to reach a ceasefire agreement, hostage deal and to increase humanitarian aid in Gaza.” A UK government spokesperson said that London “does not believe that seeking warrants will help get hostages out, get aid in, or deliver a sustainable ceasefire”. Daniel Machover, a co-founder of Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights, said: “This is massive news, albeit the wait to get to this point has been too long. The rule of law must now be upheld. The list of potential Israeli defendants is insufficient and the international crimes associated with settlements
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
Labour urged to focus on Midlands in plan for new towns
Angela Rayner said a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for ‘a new generation of new towns’. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA View image in fullscreen Angela Rayner said a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for ‘a new generation of new towns’. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA This article is more than 1 year old Labour urged to focus on Midlands in plan for new towns This article is more than 1 year old Planning experts are considering areas near Nottingham, Stafford and Northampton for housebuilding drive Labour’s plan for new towns looks likely to focus on the Midlands as much as England’s overcrowded south-east, with planners already considering areas near Nottingham, Stafford and Northampton, the Guardian understands. Close to the M1 and M6 motorways, some of the locations have the advantage of being in areas of Labour local political control, giving Keir Starmer’s government a better chance of delivering on its promise to have the first homes built by the end of a first Labour term. One planner involved in early thinking said other potential sites included either side of the Thames estuary, where a new road bridge from Essex to Kent could open in 2031 if approved. On the Essex bank, Labour recently took control of Thurrock council. There have long been plans to build more on the Kent side, where a doubling of the size of Ebbsfleet is also understood to be a possibility. Labour has yet to consider specific sites and its deputy leader, Angela Rayner, told a property conference in Leeds on Tuesday that a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for “a new generation of new towns”. Another location mooted by planners engaged in the issue is in south Hampshire. Labour will face a choice over how far to press ahead with a 150,000-home extension to Cambridge, which has been championed by Michael Gove, the secretary of state of levelling up, housing and communities, but opposed by local leaders . The latest new towns initiative comes after years in which England has built too few houses to meet demand. But it is likely to set a Labour government on course for vociferous opposition. Attempts by David Cameron’s government to build a new generation of “garden cities” fizzled out, while Gordon Brown’s eco-towns vision fell foul of local protests. She said they would be “inspired by garden suburbs like Hale in Manchester, Roundhay in Leeds and the 120-year-old garden city project of Ebenezer Howard, which delivered the Letchworth and Welwyn model communities in Hertfordshire.” Rayner pledged that a list of projects would be announced within the first year of a Starmer-led government. The examples of Hale and Roundhay suggest some will be extensions to existing major settlements, while the garden city model would suggest some will be standalone towns. Rayner said a new towns code would require at least 40% of homes to be affordable; buildings should have “character”, designed with reference to local history and in tree-lined streets; there would be guaranteed public transport, doctors’ surgeries and schools, and access to nature and play areas. The shadow of the last Labour government’s attempt to build the first genuine generation of new towns since the 1970s hangs over the latest initiative. Residents in one of the few projects to be delivered as part of the eco-towns scheme, the 10,000-home Northstowe in Cambridgeshire, have recently complained about the lack of community facilities, shops or health centres and said it has “no heart”. One former Downing Street housing adviser said Labour should focus on extending existing towns and cities rather than building new towns like Milton Keynes. “We have a lot of towns and cities that are too small and what we need is urban extensions,” said Toby Lloyd, a housing adviser to Theresa May. “When they talk about new towns, it doesn’t necessarily mean whole standalone settlements in the middle of nowhere.” Planning experts have previously identified Oxford, Norwich, Reading and Stratford-upon-Avon as possible locations for extensions, along with Taunton, Exeter, Harrogate, Preston, Carlisle and Guildford. Extending towns has the benefit of proximity to existing rail infrastructure, but land assembly can be more complicated. A source familiar with sites with potential for new towns said there could be new settlements between Derby and Nottingham, between Bedford and Northampton and between Stafford and Stoke. Landlords selling up leaving 2,000 households a month in England facing homelessness Read more Starmer has previously said he is willing to build on “grey belt”, which Labour defined as poor-quality greenbelt such as disused car parks, petrol stations or industrial sites. Last week polling showed 67% of people support using such land, while only 31% would prioritise housing at the expense of building on the green belt. The Town and Country Planning Association urged Labour to adopt “a strategic and transparent approach to identifying locations” as part of efforts to build public trust after previous ambitious plans for new towns became politically impossible to deliver. Katy Lock, the association’s director of communities, said: “Learning from the past requires any future government new towns programme to be ambitious about innovative design standards such as net zero housing; have a strategic and transparent approach to identifying locations; be committed to building public trust in the consent process; and above all ensure residents have a powerful voice in the long-term stewardship of their community.” Explore more on these topics Labour Housing Communities news Share Reuse this content Angela Rayner said a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for ‘a new generation of new towns’. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA View image in fullscreen Angela Rayner said a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for ‘a new generation of new towns’. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA This article is more than 1 year old Labour urged to focus on Midlands in plan for new towns This article is more than 1 year old Planning experts are considering areas near Nottingham, Stafford and Northampton for housebuilding drive Labour’s plan for new towns looks likely to focus on the Midlands as much as England’s overcrowded south-east, with planners already considering areas near Nottingham, Stafford and Northampton, the Guardian understands. Close to the M1 and M6 motorways, some of the locations have the advantage of being in areas of Labour local political control, giving Keir Starmer’s government a better chance of delivering on its promise to have the first homes built by the end of a first Labour term. One planner involved in early thinking said other potential sites included either side of the Thames estuary, where a new road bridge from Essex to Kent could open in 2031 if approved. On the Essex bank, Labour recently took control of Thurrock council. There have long been plans to build more on the Kent side, where a doubling of the size of Ebbsfleet is also understood to be a possibility. Labour has yet to consider specific sites and its deputy leader, Angela Rayner, told a property conference in Leeds on Tuesday that a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for “a new generation of new towns”. Another location mooted by planners engaged in the issue is in south Hampshire. Labour will face a choice over how far to press ahead with a 150,000-home extension to Cambridge, which has been championed by Michael Gove, the secretary of state of levelling up, housing and communities, but opposed by local leaders . The latest new towns initiative comes after years in which England has built too few houses to meet demand. But it is likely to set a Labour government on course for vociferous opposition. Attempts by David Cameron’s government to build a new generation of “garden cities” fizzled out, while Gordon Brown’s eco-towns vision fell foul of local protests. She said they would be “inspired by garden suburbs like Hale in Manchester, Roundhay in Leeds and the 120-year-old garden city project of Ebenezer Howard, which delivered the Letchworth and Welwyn model communities in Hertfordshire.” Rayner pledged that a list of projects would be announced within the first year of a Starmer-led government. The examples of Hale and Roundhay suggest some will be extensions to existing major settlements, while the garden city model would suggest some will be standalone towns. Rayner said a new towns code would require at least 40% of homes to be affordable; buildings should have “character”, designed with reference to local history and in tree-lined streets; there would be guaranteed public transport, doctors’ surgeries and schools, and access to nature and play areas. The shadow of the last Labour government’s attempt to build the first genuine generation of new towns since the 1970s hangs over the latest initiative. Residents in one of the few projects to be delivered as part of the eco-towns scheme, the 10,000-home Northstowe in Cambridgeshire, have recently complained about the lack of community facilities, shops or health centres and said it has “no heart”. One former Downing Street housing adviser said Labour should focus on extending existing towns and cities rather than building new towns like Milton Keynes. “We have a lot of towns and cities that are too small and what we need is urban extensions,” said Toby Lloyd, a housing adviser to Theresa May. “When they talk about new towns, it doesn’t necessarily mean whole standalone settlements in the middle of nowhere.” Planning experts have previously identified Oxford, Norwich, Reading and Stratford-upon-Avon as possible locations for extensions, along with Taunton, Exeter, Harrogate, Preston, Carlisle and Guildford. Extending towns has the benefit of proximity to existing rail infrastructure, but land assembly can be more complicated. A source familiar with sites with potential for new towns said there could be new settlements between Derby and Nottingham, between Bedford and Northampton and between Stafford and Stoke. Landlords selling up leaving 2,000 households a month in England facing homelessness Read more Starmer has previously said he is willing to build on “grey belt”, which Labour defined as poor-quality greenbelt such as disused car parks, petrol stations or industrial sites. Last week polling showed 67% of people support using such land, while only 31% would prioritise housing at the expense of building on the green belt. The Town and Country Planning Association urged Labour to adopt “a strategic and transparent approach to identifying locations” as part of efforts to build public trust after previous ambitious plans for new towns became politically impossible to deliver. Katy Lock, the association’s director of communities, said: “Learning from the past requires any future government new towns programme to be ambitious about innovative design standards such as net zero housing; have a strategic and transparent approach to identifying locations; be committed to building public trust in the consent process; and above all ensure residents have a powerful voice in the long-term stewardship of their community.” Explore more on these topics Labour Housing Communities news Share Reuse this content Angela Rayner said a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for ‘a new generation of new towns’. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA View image in fullscreen Angela Rayner said a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for ‘a new generation of new towns’. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA Angela Rayner said a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for ‘a new generation of new towns’. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA View image in fullscreen Angela Rayner said a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for ‘a new generation of new towns’. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA Angela Rayner said a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for ‘a new generation of new towns’. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA View image in fullscreen Angela Rayner said a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for ‘a new generation of new towns’. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA Angela Rayner said a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for ‘a new generation of new towns’. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA View image in fullscreen Angela Rayner said a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for ‘a new generation of new towns’. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA Angela Rayner said a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for ‘a new generation of new towns’. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA Angela Rayner said a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for ‘a new generation of new towns’. Photograph: Joe Giddens/PA This article is more than 1 year old Labour urged to focus on Midlands in plan for new towns This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Labour urged to focus on Midlands in plan for new towns This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Labour urged to focus on Midlands in plan for new towns This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Planning experts are considering areas near Nottingham, Stafford and Northampton for housebuilding drive Planning experts are considering areas near Nottingham, Stafford and Northampton for housebuilding drive Planning experts are considering areas near Nottingham, Stafford and Northampton for housebuilding drive Labour’s plan for new towns looks likely to focus on the Midlands as much as England’s overcrowded south-east, with planners already considering areas near Nottingham, Stafford and Northampton, the Guardian understands. Close to the M1 and M6 motorways, some of the locations have the advantage of being in areas of Labour local political control, giving Keir Starmer’s government a better chance of delivering on its promise to have the first homes built by the end of a first Labour term. One planner involved in early thinking said other potential sites included either side of the Thames estuary, where a new road bridge from Essex to Kent could open in 2031 if approved. On the Essex bank, Labour recently took control of Thurrock council. There have long been plans to build more on the Kent side, where a doubling of the size of Ebbsfleet is also understood to be a possibility. Labour has yet to consider specific sites and its deputy leader, Angela Rayner, told a property conference in Leeds on Tuesday that a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for “a new generation of new towns”. Another location mooted by planners engaged in the issue is in south Hampshire. Labour will face a choice over how far to press ahead with a 150,000-home extension to Cambridge, which has been championed by Michael Gove, the secretary of state of levelling up, housing and communities, but opposed by local leaders . The latest new towns initiative comes after years in which England has built too few houses to meet demand. But it is likely to set a Labour government on course for vociferous opposition. Attempts by David Cameron’s government to build a new generation of “garden cities” fizzled out, while Gordon Brown’s eco-towns vision fell foul of local protests. She said they would be “inspired by garden suburbs like Hale in Manchester, Roundhay in Leeds and the 120-year-old garden city project of Ebenezer Howard, which delivered the Letchworth and Welwyn model communities in Hertfordshire.” Rayner pledged that a list of projects would be announced within the first year of a Starmer-led government. The examples of Hale and Roundhay suggest some will be extensions to existing major settlements, while the garden city model would suggest some will be standalone towns. Rayner said a new towns code would require at least 40% of homes to be affordable; buildings should have “character”, designed with reference to local history and in tree-lined streets; there would be guaranteed public transport, doctors’ surgeries and schools, and access to nature and play areas. The shadow of the last Labour government’s attempt to build the first genuine generation of new towns since the 1970s hangs over the latest initiative. Residents in one of the few projects to be delivered as part of the eco-towns scheme, the 10,000-home Northstowe in Cambridgeshire, have recently complained about the lack of community facilities, shops or health centres and said it has “no heart”. One former Downing Street housing adviser said Labour should focus on extending existing towns and cities rather than building new towns like Milton Keynes. “We have a lot of towns and cities that are too small and what we need is urban extensions,” said Toby Lloyd, a housing adviser to Theresa May. “When they talk about new towns, it doesn’t necessarily mean whole standalone settlements in the middle of nowhere.” Planning experts have previously identified Oxford, Norwich, Reading and Stratford-upon-Avon as possible locations for extensions, along with Taunton, Exeter, Harrogate, Preston, Carlisle and Guildford. Extending towns has the benefit of proximity to existing rail infrastructure, but land assembly can be more complicated. A source familiar with sites with potential for new towns said there could be new settlements between Derby and Nottingham, between Bedford and Northampton and between Stafford and Stoke. Landlords selling up leaving 2,000 households a month in England facing homelessness Read more Starmer has previously said he is willing to build on “grey belt”, which Labour defined as poor-quality greenbelt such as disused car parks, petrol stations or industrial sites. Last week polling showed 67% of people support using such land, while only 31% would prioritise housing at the expense of building on the green belt. The Town and Country Planning Association urged Labour to adopt “a strategic and transparent approach to identifying locations” as part of efforts to build public trust after previous ambitious plans for new towns became politically impossible to deliver. Katy Lock, the association’s director of communities, said: “Learning from the past requires any future government new towns programme to be ambitious about innovative design standards such as net zero housing; have a strategic and transparent approach to identifying locations; be committed to building public trust in the consent process; and above all ensure residents have a powerful voice in the long-term stewardship of their community.” Explore more on these topics Labour Housing Communities news Share Reuse this content Labour’s plan for new towns looks likely to focus on the Midlands as much as England’s overcrowded south-east, with planners already considering areas near Nottingham, Stafford and Northampton, the Guardian understands. Close to the M1 and M6 motorways, some of the locations have the advantage of being in areas of Labour local political control, giving Keir Starmer’s government a better chance of delivering on its promise to have the first homes built by the end of a first Labour term. One planner involved in early thinking said other potential sites included either side of the Thames estuary, where a new road bridge from Essex to Kent could open in 2031 if approved. On the Essex bank, Labour recently took control of Thurrock council. There have long been plans to build more on the Kent side, where a doubling of the size of Ebbsfleet is also understood to be a possibility. Labour has yet to consider specific sites and its deputy leader, Angela Rayner, told a property conference in Leeds on Tuesday that a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for “a new generation of new towns”. Another location mooted by planners engaged in the issue is in south Hampshire. Labour will face a choice over how far to press ahead with a 150,000-home extension to Cambridge, which has been championed by Michael Gove, the secretary of state of levelling up, housing and communities, but opposed by local leaders . The latest new towns initiative comes after years in which England has built too few houses to meet demand. But it is likely to set a Labour government on course for vociferous opposition. Attempts by David Cameron’s government to build a new generation of “garden cities” fizzled out, while Gordon Brown’s eco-towns vision fell foul of local protests. She said they would be “inspired by garden suburbs like Hale in Manchester, Roundhay in Leeds and the 120-year-old garden city project of Ebenezer Howard, which delivered the Letchworth and Welwyn model communities in Hertfordshire.” Rayner pledged that a list of projects would be announced within the first year of a Starmer-led government. The examples of Hale and Roundhay suggest some will be extensions to existing major settlements, while the garden city model would suggest some will be standalone towns. Rayner said a new towns code would require at least 40% of homes to be affordable; buildings should have “character”, designed with reference to local history and in tree-lined streets; there would be guaranteed public transport, doctors’ surgeries and schools, and access to nature and play areas. The shadow of the last Labour government’s attempt to build the first genuine generation of new towns since the 1970s hangs over the latest initiative. Residents in one of the few projects to be delivered as part of the eco-towns scheme, the 10,000-home Northstowe in Cambridgeshire, have recently complained about the lack of community facilities, shops or health centres and said it has “no heart”. One former Downing Street housing adviser said Labour should focus on extending existing towns and cities rather than building new towns like Milton Keynes. “We have a lot of towns and cities that are too small and what we need is urban extensions,” said Toby Lloyd, a housing adviser to Theresa May. “When they talk about new towns, it doesn’t necessarily mean whole standalone settlements in the middle of nowhere.” Planning experts have previously identified Oxford, Norwich, Reading and Stratford-upon-Avon as possible locations for extensions, along with Taunton, Exeter, Harrogate, Preston, Carlisle and Guildford. Extending towns has the benefit of proximity to existing rail infrastructure, but land assembly can be more complicated. A source familiar with sites with potential for new towns said there could be new settlements between Derby and Nottingham, between Bedford and Northampton and between Stafford and Stoke. Landlords selling up leaving 2,000 households a month in England facing homelessness Read more Starmer has previously said he is willing to build on “grey belt”, which Labour defined as poor-quality greenbelt such as disused car parks, petrol stations or industrial sites. Last week polling showed 67% of people support using such land, while only 31% would prioritise housing at the expense of building on the green belt. The Town and Country Planning Association urged Labour to adopt “a strategic and transparent approach to identifying locations” as part of efforts to build public trust after previous ambitious plans for new towns became politically impossible to deliver. Katy Lock, the association’s director of communities, said: “Learning from the past requires any future government new towns programme to be ambitious about innovative design standards such as net zero housing; have a strategic and transparent approach to identifying locations; be committed to building public trust in the consent process; and above all ensure residents have a powerful voice in the long-term stewardship of their community.” Explore more on these topics Labour Housing Communities news Share Reuse this content Labour’s plan for new towns looks likely to focus on the Midlands as much as England’s overcrowded south-east, with planners already considering areas near Nottingham, Stafford and Northampton, the Guardian understands. Close to the M1 and M6 motorways, some of the locations have the advantage of being in areas of Labour local political control, giving Keir Starmer’s government a better chance of delivering on its promise to have the first homes built by the end of a first Labour term. One planner involved in early thinking said other potential sites included either side of the Thames estuary, where a new road bridge from Essex to Kent could open in 2031 if approved. On the Essex bank, Labour recently took control of Thurrock council. There have long been plans to build more on the Kent side, where a doubling of the size of Ebbsfleet is also understood to be a possibility. Labour has yet to consider specific sites and its deputy leader, Angela Rayner, told a property conference in Leeds on Tuesday that a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for “a new generation of new towns”. Another location mooted by planners engaged in the issue is in south Hampshire. Labour will face a choice over how far to press ahead with a 150,000-home extension to Cambridge, which has been championed by Michael Gove, the secretary of state of levelling up, housing and communities, but opposed by local leaders . The latest new towns initiative comes after years in which England has built too few houses to meet demand. But it is likely to set a Labour government on course for vociferous opposition. Attempts by David Cameron’s government to build a new generation of “garden cities” fizzled out, while Gordon Brown’s eco-towns vision fell foul of local protests. She said they would be “inspired by garden suburbs like Hale in Manchester, Roundhay in Leeds and the 120-year-old garden city project of Ebenezer Howard, which delivered the Letchworth and Welwyn model communities in Hertfordshire.” Rayner pledged that a list of projects would be announced within the first year of a Starmer-led government. The examples of Hale and Roundhay suggest some will be extensions to existing major settlements, while the garden city model would suggest some will be standalone towns. Rayner said a new towns code would require at least 40% of homes to be affordable; buildings should have “character”, designed with reference to local history and in tree-lined streets; there would be guaranteed public transport, doctors’ surgeries and schools, and access to nature and play areas. The shadow of the last Labour government’s attempt to build the first genuine generation of new towns since the 1970s hangs over the latest initiative. Residents in one of the few projects to be delivered as part of the eco-towns scheme, the 10,000-home Northstowe in Cambridgeshire, have recently complained about the lack of community facilities, shops or health centres and said it has “no heart”. One former Downing Street housing adviser said Labour should focus on extending existing towns and cities rather than building new towns like Milton Keynes. “We have a lot of towns and cities that are too small and what we need is urban extensions,” said Toby Lloyd, a housing adviser to Theresa May. “When they talk about new towns, it doesn’t necessarily mean whole standalone settlements in the middle of nowhere.” Planning experts have previously identified Oxford, Norwich, Reading and Stratford-upon-Avon as possible locations for extensions, along with Taunton, Exeter, Harrogate, Preston, Carlisle and Guildford. Extending towns has the benefit of proximity to existing rail infrastructure, but land assembly can be more complicated. A source familiar with sites with potential for new towns said there could be new settlements between Derby and Nottingham, between Bedford and Northampton and between Stafford and Stoke. Landlords selling up leaving 2,000 households a month in England facing homelessness Read more Starmer has previously said he is willing to build on “grey belt”, which Labour defined as poor-quality greenbelt such as disused car parks, petrol stations or industrial sites. Last week polling showed 67% of people support using such land, while only 31% would prioritise housing at the expense of building on the green belt. The Town and Country Planning Association urged Labour to adopt “a strategic and transparent approach to identifying locations” as part of efforts to build public trust after previous ambitious plans for new towns became politically impossible to deliver. Katy Lock, the association’s director of communities, said: “Learning from the past requires any future government new towns programme to be ambitious about innovative design standards such as net zero housing; have a strategic and transparent approach to identifying locations; be committed to building public trust in the consent process; and above all ensure residents have a powerful voice in the long-term stewardship of their community.” Labour’s plan for new towns looks likely to focus on the Midlands as much as England’s overcrowded south-east, with planners already considering areas near Nottingham, Stafford and Northampton, the Guardian understands. Close to the M1 and M6 motorways, some of the locations have the advantage of being in areas of Labour local political control, giving Keir Starmer’s government a better chance of delivering on its promise to have the first homes built by the end of a first Labour term. One planner involved in early thinking said other potential sites included either side of the Thames estuary, where a new road bridge from Essex to Kent could open in 2031 if approved. On the Essex bank, Labour recently took control of Thurrock council. There have long been plans to build more on the Kent side, where a doubling of the size of Ebbsfleet is also understood to be a possibility. Labour has yet to consider specific sites and its deputy leader, Angela Rayner, told a property conference in Leeds on Tuesday that a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for “a new generation of new towns”. Another location mooted by planners engaged in the issue is in south Hampshire. Labour will face a choice over how far to press ahead with a 150,000-home extension to Cambridge, which has been championed by Michael Gove, the secretary of state of levelling up, housing and communities, but opposed by local leaders . The latest new towns initiative comes after years in which England has built too few houses to meet demand. But it is likely to set a Labour government on course for vociferous opposition. Attempts by David Cameron’s government to build a new generation of “garden cities” fizzled out, while Gordon Brown’s eco-towns vision fell foul of local protests. She said they would be “inspired by garden suburbs like Hale in Manchester, Roundhay in Leeds and the 120-year-old garden city project of Ebenezer Howard, which delivered the Letchworth and Welwyn model communities in Hertfordshire.” Rayner pledged that a list of projects would be announced within the first year of a Starmer-led government. The examples of Hale and Roundhay suggest some will be extensions to existing major settlements, while the garden city model would suggest some will be standalone towns. Rayner said a new towns code would require at least 40% of homes to be affordable; buildings should have “character”, designed with reference to local history and in tree-lined streets; there would be guaranteed public transport, doctors’ surgeries and schools, and access to nature and play areas. The shadow of the last Labour government’s attempt to build the first genuine generation of new towns since the 1970s hangs over the latest initiative. Residents in one of the few projects to be delivered as part of the eco-towns scheme, the 10,000-home Northstowe in Cambridgeshire, have recently complained about the lack of community facilities, shops or health centres and said it has “no heart”. One former Downing Street housing adviser said Labour should focus on extending existing towns and cities rather than building new towns like Milton Keynes. “We have a lot of towns and cities that are too small and what we need is urban extensions,” said Toby Lloyd, a housing adviser to Theresa May. “When they talk about new towns, it doesn’t necessarily mean whole standalone settlements in the middle of nowhere.” Planning experts have previously identified Oxford, Norwich, Reading and Stratford-upon-Avon as possible locations for extensions, along with Taunton, Exeter, Harrogate, Preston, Carlisle and Guildford. Extending towns has the benefit of proximity to existing rail infrastructure, but land assembly can be more complicated. A source familiar with sites with potential for new towns said there could be new settlements between Derby and Nottingham, between Bedford and Northampton and between Stafford and Stoke. Landlords selling up leaving 2,000 households a month in England facing homelessness Read more Starmer has previously said he is willing to build on “grey belt”, which Labour defined as poor-quality greenbelt such as disused car parks, petrol stations or industrial sites. Last week polling showed 67% of people support using such land, while only 31% would prioritise housing at the expense of building on the green belt. The Town and Country Planning Association urged Labour to adopt “a strategic and transparent approach to identifying locations” as part of efforts to build public trust after previous ambitious plans for new towns became politically impossible to deliver. Katy Lock, the association’s director of communities, said: “Learning from the past requires any future government new towns programme to be ambitious about innovative design standards such as net zero housing; have a strategic and transparent approach to identifying locations; be committed to building public trust in the consent process; and above all ensure residents have a powerful voice in the long-term stewardship of their community.” Labour’s plan for new towns looks likely to focus on the Midlands as much as England’s overcrowded south-east, with planners already considering areas near Nottingham, Stafford and Northampton, the Guardian understands. Close to the M1 and M6 motorways, some of the locations have the advantage of being in areas of Labour local political control, giving Keir Starmer’s government a better chance of delivering on its promise to have the first homes built by the end of a first Labour term. One planner involved in early thinking said other potential sites included either side of the Thames estuary, where a new road bridge from Essex to Kent could open in 2031 if approved. On the Essex bank, Labour recently took control of Thurrock council. There have long been plans to build more on the Kent side, where a doubling of the size of Ebbsfleet is also understood to be a possibility. Labour has yet to consider specific sites and its deputy leader, Angela Rayner, told a property conference in Leeds on Tuesday that a Labour government would ask an independent taskforce to choose the right sites for “a new generation of new towns”. Another location mooted by planners engaged in the issue is in south Hampshire. Labour will face a choice over how far to press ahead with a 150,000-home extension to Cambridge, which has been championed by Michael Gove, the secretary of state of levelling up, housing and communities, but opposed by local leaders . The latest new towns initiative comes after years in which England has built too few houses to meet demand. But it is likely to set a Labour government on course for vociferous opposition. Attempts by David Cameron’s government to build a new generation of “garden cities” fizzled out, while Gordon Brown’s eco-towns vision fell foul of local protests. She said they would be “inspired by garden suburbs like Hale in Manchester, Roundhay in Leeds and the 120-year-old garden city project of Ebenezer Howard, which delivered the Letchworth and Welwyn model communities in Hertfordshire.” Rayner pledged that a list of projects would be announced within the first year of a Starmer-led government. The examples of Hale and Roundhay suggest some will be extensions to existing major settlements, while the garden city model would suggest some will be standalone towns. Rayner said a new towns code would require at least 40% of homes to be affordable; buildings should have “character”, designed with reference to local history and in tree-lined streets; there would be guaranteed public transport, doctors’ surgeries and schools, and access to nature and play areas. The shadow of the last Labour government’s attempt to build the first genuine generation of new towns since the 1970s hangs over the latest initiative. Residents in one of the few projects to be delivered as part of the eco-towns scheme, the 10,000-home Northstowe in Cambridgeshire, have recently complained about the lack of community facilities, shops or health centres and said it has “no heart”. One former Downing Street housing adviser said Labour should focus on extending existing towns and cities rather than building new towns like Milton Keynes. “We have a lot of towns and cities that are too small and what we need is urban extensions,” said Toby Lloyd, a housing adviser to Theresa May. “When they talk about new towns, it doesn’t necessarily mean whole standalone settlements in the middle of nowhere.” Planning experts have previously identified Oxford, Norwich, Reading and Stratford-upon-Avon as possible locations for extensions, along with Taunton, Exeter, Harrogate, Preston, Carlisle and Guildford. Extending towns has the benefit of proximity to existing rail infrastructure, but land assembly can be more complicated. A source familiar with sites with potential for new towns said there could be new settlements between Derby and Nottingham, between Bedford and Northampton and between Stafford and Stoke. Landlords selling up leaving 2,000 households a month in England facing homelessness Read more Landlords selling up leaving 2,000 households a month in England facing homelessness Read more Landlords selling up leaving 2,000 households a month in England facing homelessness Read more Landlords selling up leaving 2,000 households a month in England facing homelessness Landlords selling up leaving 2,000 households a month in England facing homelessness Starmer has previously said he is willing to build on “grey belt”, which Labour defined as poor-quality greenbelt such as disused car parks, petrol stations or industrial sites. Last week polling showed 67% of people support using such land, while only 31% would prioritise housing at the expense of building on the green belt. The Town and Country Planning Association urged Labour to adopt “a strategic and transparent approach to identifying locations” as part of efforts to build public trust after previous ambitious plans for new towns became politically impossible to deliver. Katy Lock, the association’s director of communities, said: “Learning from the past requires any future government new towns programme to be ambitious about innovative design standards such as net zero housing; have a strategic and transparent approach to identifying locations; be committed to building public trust in the consent process; and above all ensure residents have a powerful voice in the long-term stewardship of their community.” Explore more on these topics Labour Housing Communities news Share Reuse this content |
The Govester goes rogue and veers from history lecture to full-on rant
If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA View image in fullscreen If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA This article is more than 1 year old The Govester goes rogue and veers from history lecture to full-on rant This article is more than 1 year old John Crace Giving a keynote speech about antisemitism, the minister let himself show his real self – his nasty self W ith Michael Gove it’s all about the drugs. Always has been. How to find exactly the right dosage to keep himself more or less stable. And in the past year that has sometimes become a near on impossible task. Mikey has all but given up the day job as secretary of state for levelling up. His department has even been forced to hand back money that had been earmarked for key projects as he hadn’t got round to spending it. Truth is that the Govester has been spending more and more time in the crack den he has had built on his department’s roof. Most days he just stares into the abyss that is the chaos that he and the Conservative government have caused over the last 14 years. There will be a reckoning and Mikey can scarcely bear to pay the price. Occasionally, though, he can be tempted out of his stupor to engage with the real world. Always a nervy time for his minders as they are never quite sure which Govester they are going to get. The sweaty, wild-eyed, manic version or the near comatose, morose, self-pitying man. The early signs were not good. Mikey had been due to give a keynote speech about antisemitism at a Jewish community centre in north London at 10am. Journalists and delegates had been told to arrive between 9 and 9.30. But by 10.20 there was still no sign of the Govester. Just intermittent bursts of chillout music played through the hall’s loudspeakers. Backstage, the minders were working overtime. Whatever they are getting paid, it’s not enough. Miraculously, the minister eventually appeared. A triumph in itself. The organisers let out a large sigh of relief. The first hurdle had been successfully negotiated. And the second. Because when Mikey started speaking he initially sounded totally plausible. A bit detached, in a slightly too pleased with himself undergraduate at the Oxford Union kind of way, but that’s always been his style. Less a speech and more a punchy history lecture. Preaching to the converted. For the first 25 minutes there was little for anyone to argue with as he went through the formation of the state of Israel, the Jews’ search for a home, and antisemitism past and present. If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Rather, he seemed bemused that no one was actually doing anything about the racist abuse. Still, the drugs were just about working. Until they weren’t. Maybe it was just a nasty comedown but then Mikey went rogue. Allowed himself to show his real self. His nasty self. Is there any other? He may fancy himself as a libertarian but he doesn’t have a liberal bone in his body. The Govester would fit in quite nicely in the modern Chinese Communist party. The only good protester was a dead protester. Bring on the tanks. Tell the police to stop being so goddamned nice. Crack some skulls. Inside every protesting university student lurked a secret lefty antisemite. Mikey did name a few rightwing antisemites in the interests of balance but his contempt was all reserved for those on the left. The bien pensants who cloak their antisemitism in rubbish about wanting a peaceful resolution to the war in Gaza. Next the Govester singled out Kemi Badenoch for special praise. She was right to hate the young, the poor, the disabled, pretty much everyone. Almost certainly the kiss of death for Kemi’s leadership ambitions. Mikey has never knowingly backed a winner. He ended in full-on rant. He refused to acknowledge the jurisdiction of the international criminal court. How dare it cite Benjamin Netanyahu. It was only meant to go for terrorists and rogue states. Not for democracies that might have broken the rules. That was much too close to home. If they could go for Bibi they could go for anyone. Maybe even us. His minders hastily bundled him into the car before he could do any more damage. Still, the Govester wasn’t the only minister out and about pursuing his own eclectic agenda. The work and pensions secretary, Mel Stride, was at a jobcentre in south London on a one-man mission to get the unemployed back to work. He didn’t seem to realise that it had been 14 years of Tory government that had led to this. Still, best not to tell him now. It might blow his mind. “British jobs for British workers,” he declared. Or more accurately, “British jobs for British shirkers”. For Stride was most keen for all those lazy bastards who have been claiming benefits for imaginary ailments to fill the shit jobs that we used to get foreigners to do. Given that Caring Mel is himself likely to be unemployed after the next election, maybe he could try his hand at looking after dementia patients. Except, these jobs were never intended for people like him. Nor was Stride in any mood to back down on bankrupting people whose earnings had inadvertently exceeded the carer’s allowance limit. “I care as much as any other person would,” he said. Though not enough to do anything about it. If you snooze, you lose. People should learn to keep better track of their own finances. You got the feeling Stride couldn’t wait for the Tories to lose the next election. Let someone else deal with the workshy riff-raff. Meanwhile in the Commons, the Treasury minister John Glen was outlining the details of the government’s proposed compensation scheme for those affected by the contaminated blood scandal. On Monday, the prime minister had said how sorry he was for the failures of successive governments. It wasn’t clear if he included his own in that. By Tuesday the scale of that apology was apparent on the Tory benches. The government benches were barely a quarter full. Glen did his best to make it sound as if he was sincere in his belief that this should never happen again. He probably even meant it. MPs have very short-term selective memories when it suits them. Believe they are of a higher moral order than their predecessors as they wash away the sins of the past. Only, we all know we will back here saying the same things all over again within a matter of years. If not months. Where is the grand, futile gesture? The one that might signify real change. A minister resigning on behalf of all those ministers who got away with it. That would take courage. Integrity. Pigs might fly. Explore more on these topics Michael Gove The politics sketch Conservatives comment Share Reuse this content If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA View image in fullscreen If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA This article is more than 1 year old The Govester goes rogue and veers from history lecture to full-on rant This article is more than 1 year old John Crace Giving a keynote speech about antisemitism, the minister let himself show his real self – his nasty self W ith Michael Gove it’s all about the drugs. Always has been. How to find exactly the right dosage to keep himself more or less stable. And in the past year that has sometimes become a near on impossible task. Mikey has all but given up the day job as secretary of state for levelling up. His department has even been forced to hand back money that had been earmarked for key projects as he hadn’t got round to spending it. Truth is that the Govester has been spending more and more time in the crack den he has had built on his department’s roof. Most days he just stares into the abyss that is the chaos that he and the Conservative government have caused over the last 14 years. There will be a reckoning and Mikey can scarcely bear to pay the price. Occasionally, though, he can be tempted out of his stupor to engage with the real world. Always a nervy time for his minders as they are never quite sure which Govester they are going to get. The sweaty, wild-eyed, manic version or the near comatose, morose, self-pitying man. The early signs were not good. Mikey had been due to give a keynote speech about antisemitism at a Jewish community centre in north London at 10am. Journalists and delegates had been told to arrive between 9 and 9.30. But by 10.20 there was still no sign of the Govester. Just intermittent bursts of chillout music played through the hall’s loudspeakers. Backstage, the minders were working overtime. Whatever they are getting paid, it’s not enough. Miraculously, the minister eventually appeared. A triumph in itself. The organisers let out a large sigh of relief. The first hurdle had been successfully negotiated. And the second. Because when Mikey started speaking he initially sounded totally plausible. A bit detached, in a slightly too pleased with himself undergraduate at the Oxford Union kind of way, but that’s always been his style. Less a speech and more a punchy history lecture. Preaching to the converted. For the first 25 minutes there was little for anyone to argue with as he went through the formation of the state of Israel, the Jews’ search for a home, and antisemitism past and present. If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Rather, he seemed bemused that no one was actually doing anything about the racist abuse. Still, the drugs were just about working. Until they weren’t. Maybe it was just a nasty comedown but then Mikey went rogue. Allowed himself to show his real self. His nasty self. Is there any other? He may fancy himself as a libertarian but he doesn’t have a liberal bone in his body. The Govester would fit in quite nicely in the modern Chinese Communist party. The only good protester was a dead protester. Bring on the tanks. Tell the police to stop being so goddamned nice. Crack some skulls. Inside every protesting university student lurked a secret lefty antisemite. Mikey did name a few rightwing antisemites in the interests of balance but his contempt was all reserved for those on the left. The bien pensants who cloak their antisemitism in rubbish about wanting a peaceful resolution to the war in Gaza. Next the Govester singled out Kemi Badenoch for special praise. She was right to hate the young, the poor, the disabled, pretty much everyone. Almost certainly the kiss of death for Kemi’s leadership ambitions. Mikey has never knowingly backed a winner. He ended in full-on rant. He refused to acknowledge the jurisdiction of the international criminal court. How dare it cite Benjamin Netanyahu. It was only meant to go for terrorists and rogue states. Not for democracies that might have broken the rules. That was much too close to home. If they could go for Bibi they could go for anyone. Maybe even us. His minders hastily bundled him into the car before he could do any more damage. Still, the Govester wasn’t the only minister out and about pursuing his own eclectic agenda. The work and pensions secretary, Mel Stride, was at a jobcentre in south London on a one-man mission to get the unemployed back to work. He didn’t seem to realise that it had been 14 years of Tory government that had led to this. Still, best not to tell him now. It might blow his mind. “British jobs for British workers,” he declared. Or more accurately, “British jobs for British shirkers”. For Stride was most keen for all those lazy bastards who have been claiming benefits for imaginary ailments to fill the shit jobs that we used to get foreigners to do. Given that Caring Mel is himself likely to be unemployed after the next election, maybe he could try his hand at looking after dementia patients. Except, these jobs were never intended for people like him. Nor was Stride in any mood to back down on bankrupting people whose earnings had inadvertently exceeded the carer’s allowance limit. “I care as much as any other person would,” he said. Though not enough to do anything about it. If you snooze, you lose. People should learn to keep better track of their own finances. You got the feeling Stride couldn’t wait for the Tories to lose the next election. Let someone else deal with the workshy riff-raff. Meanwhile in the Commons, the Treasury minister John Glen was outlining the details of the government’s proposed compensation scheme for those affected by the contaminated blood scandal. On Monday, the prime minister had said how sorry he was for the failures of successive governments. It wasn’t clear if he included his own in that. By Tuesday the scale of that apology was apparent on the Tory benches. The government benches were barely a quarter full. Glen did his best to make it sound as if he was sincere in his belief that this should never happen again. He probably even meant it. MPs have very short-term selective memories when it suits them. Believe they are of a higher moral order than their predecessors as they wash away the sins of the past. Only, we all know we will back here saying the same things all over again within a matter of years. If not months. Where is the grand, futile gesture? The one that might signify real change. A minister resigning on behalf of all those ministers who got away with it. That would take courage. Integrity. Pigs might fly. Explore more on these topics Michael Gove The politics sketch Conservatives comment Share Reuse this content If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA View image in fullscreen If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA View image in fullscreen If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA View image in fullscreen If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA View image in fullscreen If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA This article is more than 1 year old The Govester goes rogue and veers from history lecture to full-on rant This article is more than 1 year old John Crace This article is more than 1 year old The Govester goes rogue and veers from history lecture to full-on rant This article is more than 1 year old John Crace This article is more than 1 year old The Govester goes rogue and veers from history lecture to full-on rant This article is more than 1 year old John Crace This article is more than 1 year old The Govester goes rogue and veers from history lecture to full-on rant This article is more than 1 year old John Crace This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Giving a keynote speech about antisemitism, the minister let himself show his real self – his nasty self Giving a keynote speech about antisemitism, the minister let himself show his real self – his nasty self Giving a keynote speech about antisemitism, the minister let himself show his real self – his nasty self W ith Michael Gove it’s all about the drugs. Always has been. How to find exactly the right dosage to keep himself more or less stable. And in the past year that has sometimes become a near on impossible task. Mikey has all but given up the day job as secretary of state for levelling up. His department has even been forced to hand back money that had been earmarked for key projects as he hadn’t got round to spending it. Truth is that the Govester has been spending more and more time in the crack den he has had built on his department’s roof. Most days he just stares into the abyss that is the chaos that he and the Conservative government have caused over the last 14 years. There will be a reckoning and Mikey can scarcely bear to pay the price. Occasionally, though, he can be tempted out of his stupor to engage with the real world. Always a nervy time for his minders as they are never quite sure which Govester they are going to get. The sweaty, wild-eyed, manic version or the near comatose, morose, self-pitying man. The early signs were not good. Mikey had been due to give a keynote speech about antisemitism at a Jewish community centre in north London at 10am. Journalists and delegates had been told to arrive between 9 and 9.30. But by 10.20 there was still no sign of the Govester. Just intermittent bursts of chillout music played through the hall’s loudspeakers. Backstage, the minders were working overtime. Whatever they are getting paid, it’s not enough. Miraculously, the minister eventually appeared. A triumph in itself. The organisers let out a large sigh of relief. The first hurdle had been successfully negotiated. And the second. Because when Mikey started speaking he initially sounded totally plausible. A bit detached, in a slightly too pleased with himself undergraduate at the Oxford Union kind of way, but that’s always been his style. Less a speech and more a punchy history lecture. Preaching to the converted. For the first 25 minutes there was little for anyone to argue with as he went through the formation of the state of Israel, the Jews’ search for a home, and antisemitism past and present. If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Rather, he seemed bemused that no one was actually doing anything about the racist abuse. Still, the drugs were just about working. Until they weren’t. Maybe it was just a nasty comedown but then Mikey went rogue. Allowed himself to show his real self. His nasty self. Is there any other? He may fancy himself as a libertarian but he doesn’t have a liberal bone in his body. The Govester would fit in quite nicely in the modern Chinese Communist party. The only good protester was a dead protester. Bring on the tanks. Tell the police to stop being so goddamned nice. Crack some skulls. Inside every protesting university student lurked a secret lefty antisemite. Mikey did name a few rightwing antisemites in the interests of balance but his contempt was all reserved for those on the left. The bien pensants who cloak their antisemitism in rubbish about wanting a peaceful resolution to the war in Gaza. Next the Govester singled out Kemi Badenoch for special praise. She was right to hate the young, the poor, the disabled, pretty much everyone. Almost certainly the kiss of death for Kemi’s leadership ambitions. Mikey has never knowingly backed a winner. He ended in full-on rant. He refused to acknowledge the jurisdiction of the international criminal court. How dare it cite Benjamin Netanyahu. It was only meant to go for terrorists and rogue states. Not for democracies that might have broken the rules. That was much too close to home. If they could go for Bibi they could go for anyone. Maybe even us. His minders hastily bundled him into the car before he could do any more damage. Still, the Govester wasn’t the only minister out and about pursuing his own eclectic agenda. The work and pensions secretary, Mel Stride, was at a jobcentre in south London on a one-man mission to get the unemployed back to work. He didn’t seem to realise that it had been 14 years of Tory government that had led to this. Still, best not to tell him now. It might blow his mind. “British jobs for British workers,” he declared. Or more accurately, “British jobs for British shirkers”. For Stride was most keen for all those lazy bastards who have been claiming benefits for imaginary ailments to fill the shit jobs that we used to get foreigners to do. Given that Caring Mel is himself likely to be unemployed after the next election, maybe he could try his hand at looking after dementia patients. Except, these jobs were never intended for people like him. Nor was Stride in any mood to back down on bankrupting people whose earnings had inadvertently exceeded the carer’s allowance limit. “I care as much as any other person would,” he said. Though not enough to do anything about it. If you snooze, you lose. People should learn to keep better track of their own finances. You got the feeling Stride couldn’t wait for the Tories to lose the next election. Let someone else deal with the workshy riff-raff. Meanwhile in the Commons, the Treasury minister John Glen was outlining the details of the government’s proposed compensation scheme for those affected by the contaminated blood scandal. On Monday, the prime minister had said how sorry he was for the failures of successive governments. It wasn’t clear if he included his own in that. By Tuesday the scale of that apology was apparent on the Tory benches. The government benches were barely a quarter full. Glen did his best to make it sound as if he was sincere in his belief that this should never happen again. He probably even meant it. MPs have very short-term selective memories when it suits them. Believe they are of a higher moral order than their predecessors as they wash away the sins of the past. Only, we all know we will back here saying the same things all over again within a matter of years. If not months. Where is the grand, futile gesture? The one that might signify real change. A minister resigning on behalf of all those ministers who got away with it. That would take courage. Integrity. Pigs might fly. Explore more on these topics Michael Gove The politics sketch Conservatives comment Share Reuse this content W ith Michael Gove it’s all about the drugs. Always has been. How to find exactly the right dosage to keep himself more or less stable. And in the past year that has sometimes become a near on impossible task. Mikey has all but given up the day job as secretary of state for levelling up. His department has even been forced to hand back money that had been earmarked for key projects as he hadn’t got round to spending it. Truth is that the Govester has been spending more and more time in the crack den he has had built on his department’s roof. Most days he just stares into the abyss that is the chaos that he and the Conservative government have caused over the last 14 years. There will be a reckoning and Mikey can scarcely bear to pay the price. Occasionally, though, he can be tempted out of his stupor to engage with the real world. Always a nervy time for his minders as they are never quite sure which Govester they are going to get. The sweaty, wild-eyed, manic version or the near comatose, morose, self-pitying man. The early signs were not good. Mikey had been due to give a keynote speech about antisemitism at a Jewish community centre in north London at 10am. Journalists and delegates had been told to arrive between 9 and 9.30. But by 10.20 there was still no sign of the Govester. Just intermittent bursts of chillout music played through the hall’s loudspeakers. Backstage, the minders were working overtime. Whatever they are getting paid, it’s not enough. Miraculously, the minister eventually appeared. A triumph in itself. The organisers let out a large sigh of relief. The first hurdle had been successfully negotiated. And the second. Because when Mikey started speaking he initially sounded totally plausible. A bit detached, in a slightly too pleased with himself undergraduate at the Oxford Union kind of way, but that’s always been his style. Less a speech and more a punchy history lecture. Preaching to the converted. For the first 25 minutes there was little for anyone to argue with as he went through the formation of the state of Israel, the Jews’ search for a home, and antisemitism past and present. If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Rather, he seemed bemused that no one was actually doing anything about the racist abuse. Still, the drugs were just about working. Until they weren’t. Maybe it was just a nasty comedown but then Mikey went rogue. Allowed himself to show his real self. His nasty self. Is there any other? He may fancy himself as a libertarian but he doesn’t have a liberal bone in his body. The Govester would fit in quite nicely in the modern Chinese Communist party. The only good protester was a dead protester. Bring on the tanks. Tell the police to stop being so goddamned nice. Crack some skulls. Inside every protesting university student lurked a secret lefty antisemite. Mikey did name a few rightwing antisemites in the interests of balance but his contempt was all reserved for those on the left. The bien pensants who cloak their antisemitism in rubbish about wanting a peaceful resolution to the war in Gaza. Next the Govester singled out Kemi Badenoch for special praise. She was right to hate the young, the poor, the disabled, pretty much everyone. Almost certainly the kiss of death for Kemi’s leadership ambitions. Mikey has never knowingly backed a winner. He ended in full-on rant. He refused to acknowledge the jurisdiction of the international criminal court. How dare it cite Benjamin Netanyahu. It was only meant to go for terrorists and rogue states. Not for democracies that might have broken the rules. That was much too close to home. If they could go for Bibi they could go for anyone. Maybe even us. His minders hastily bundled him into the car before he could do any more damage. Still, the Govester wasn’t the only minister out and about pursuing his own eclectic agenda. The work and pensions secretary, Mel Stride, was at a jobcentre in south London on a one-man mission to get the unemployed back to work. He didn’t seem to realise that it had been 14 years of Tory government that had led to this. Still, best not to tell him now. It might blow his mind. “British jobs for British workers,” he declared. Or more accurately, “British jobs for British shirkers”. For Stride was most keen for all those lazy bastards who have been claiming benefits for imaginary ailments to fill the shit jobs that we used to get foreigners to do. Given that Caring Mel is himself likely to be unemployed after the next election, maybe he could try his hand at looking after dementia patients. Except, these jobs were never intended for people like him. Nor was Stride in any mood to back down on bankrupting people whose earnings had inadvertently exceeded the carer’s allowance limit. “I care as much as any other person would,” he said. Though not enough to do anything about it. If you snooze, you lose. People should learn to keep better track of their own finances. You got the feeling Stride couldn’t wait for the Tories to lose the next election. Let someone else deal with the workshy riff-raff. Meanwhile in the Commons, the Treasury minister John Glen was outlining the details of the government’s proposed compensation scheme for those affected by the contaminated blood scandal. On Monday, the prime minister had said how sorry he was for the failures of successive governments. It wasn’t clear if he included his own in that. By Tuesday the scale of that apology was apparent on the Tory benches. The government benches were barely a quarter full. Glen did his best to make it sound as if he was sincere in his belief that this should never happen again. He probably even meant it. MPs have very short-term selective memories when it suits them. Believe they are of a higher moral order than their predecessors as they wash away the sins of the past. Only, we all know we will back here saying the same things all over again within a matter of years. If not months. Where is the grand, futile gesture? The one that might signify real change. A minister resigning on behalf of all those ministers who got away with it. That would take courage. Integrity. Pigs might fly. Explore more on these topics Michael Gove The politics sketch Conservatives comment Share Reuse this content W ith Michael Gove it’s all about the drugs. Always has been. How to find exactly the right dosage to keep himself more or less stable. And in the past year that has sometimes become a near on impossible task. Mikey has all but given up the day job as secretary of state for levelling up. His department has even been forced to hand back money that had been earmarked for key projects as he hadn’t got round to spending it. Truth is that the Govester has been spending more and more time in the crack den he has had built on his department’s roof. Most days he just stares into the abyss that is the chaos that he and the Conservative government have caused over the last 14 years. There will be a reckoning and Mikey can scarcely bear to pay the price. Occasionally, though, he can be tempted out of his stupor to engage with the real world. Always a nervy time for his minders as they are never quite sure which Govester they are going to get. The sweaty, wild-eyed, manic version or the near comatose, morose, self-pitying man. The early signs were not good. Mikey had been due to give a keynote speech about antisemitism at a Jewish community centre in north London at 10am. Journalists and delegates had been told to arrive between 9 and 9.30. But by 10.20 there was still no sign of the Govester. Just intermittent bursts of chillout music played through the hall’s loudspeakers. Backstage, the minders were working overtime. Whatever they are getting paid, it’s not enough. Miraculously, the minister eventually appeared. A triumph in itself. The organisers let out a large sigh of relief. The first hurdle had been successfully negotiated. And the second. Because when Mikey started speaking he initially sounded totally plausible. A bit detached, in a slightly too pleased with himself undergraduate at the Oxford Union kind of way, but that’s always been his style. Less a speech and more a punchy history lecture. Preaching to the converted. For the first 25 minutes there was little for anyone to argue with as he went through the formation of the state of Israel, the Jews’ search for a home, and antisemitism past and present. If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Rather, he seemed bemused that no one was actually doing anything about the racist abuse. Still, the drugs were just about working. Until they weren’t. Maybe it was just a nasty comedown but then Mikey went rogue. Allowed himself to show his real self. His nasty self. Is there any other? He may fancy himself as a libertarian but he doesn’t have a liberal bone in his body. The Govester would fit in quite nicely in the modern Chinese Communist party. The only good protester was a dead protester. Bring on the tanks. Tell the police to stop being so goddamned nice. Crack some skulls. Inside every protesting university student lurked a secret lefty antisemite. Mikey did name a few rightwing antisemites in the interests of balance but his contempt was all reserved for those on the left. The bien pensants who cloak their antisemitism in rubbish about wanting a peaceful resolution to the war in Gaza. Next the Govester singled out Kemi Badenoch for special praise. She was right to hate the young, the poor, the disabled, pretty much everyone. Almost certainly the kiss of death for Kemi’s leadership ambitions. Mikey has never knowingly backed a winner. He ended in full-on rant. He refused to acknowledge the jurisdiction of the international criminal court. How dare it cite Benjamin Netanyahu. It was only meant to go for terrorists and rogue states. Not for democracies that might have broken the rules. That was much too close to home. If they could go for Bibi they could go for anyone. Maybe even us. His minders hastily bundled him into the car before he could do any more damage. Still, the Govester wasn’t the only minister out and about pursuing his own eclectic agenda. The work and pensions secretary, Mel Stride, was at a jobcentre in south London on a one-man mission to get the unemployed back to work. He didn’t seem to realise that it had been 14 years of Tory government that had led to this. Still, best not to tell him now. It might blow his mind. “British jobs for British workers,” he declared. Or more accurately, “British jobs for British shirkers”. For Stride was most keen for all those lazy bastards who have been claiming benefits for imaginary ailments to fill the shit jobs that we used to get foreigners to do. Given that Caring Mel is himself likely to be unemployed after the next election, maybe he could try his hand at looking after dementia patients. Except, these jobs were never intended for people like him. Nor was Stride in any mood to back down on bankrupting people whose earnings had inadvertently exceeded the carer’s allowance limit. “I care as much as any other person would,” he said. Though not enough to do anything about it. If you snooze, you lose. People should learn to keep better track of their own finances. You got the feeling Stride couldn’t wait for the Tories to lose the next election. Let someone else deal with the workshy riff-raff. Meanwhile in the Commons, the Treasury minister John Glen was outlining the details of the government’s proposed compensation scheme for those affected by the contaminated blood scandal. On Monday, the prime minister had said how sorry he was for the failures of successive governments. It wasn’t clear if he included his own in that. By Tuesday the scale of that apology was apparent on the Tory benches. The government benches were barely a quarter full. Glen did his best to make it sound as if he was sincere in his belief that this should never happen again. He probably even meant it. MPs have very short-term selective memories when it suits them. Believe they are of a higher moral order than their predecessors as they wash away the sins of the past. Only, we all know we will back here saying the same things all over again within a matter of years. If not months. Where is the grand, futile gesture? The one that might signify real change. A minister resigning on behalf of all those ministers who got away with it. That would take courage. Integrity. Pigs might fly. Explore more on these topics Michael Gove The politics sketch Conservatives comment Share Reuse this content W ith Michael Gove it’s all about the drugs. Always has been. How to find exactly the right dosage to keep himself more or less stable. And in the past year that has sometimes become a near on impossible task. Mikey has all but given up the day job as secretary of state for levelling up. His department has even been forced to hand back money that had been earmarked for key projects as he hadn’t got round to spending it. Truth is that the Govester has been spending more and more time in the crack den he has had built on his department’s roof. Most days he just stares into the abyss that is the chaos that he and the Conservative government have caused over the last 14 years. There will be a reckoning and Mikey can scarcely bear to pay the price. Occasionally, though, he can be tempted out of his stupor to engage with the real world. Always a nervy time for his minders as they are never quite sure which Govester they are going to get. The sweaty, wild-eyed, manic version or the near comatose, morose, self-pitying man. The early signs were not good. Mikey had been due to give a keynote speech about antisemitism at a Jewish community centre in north London at 10am. Journalists and delegates had been told to arrive between 9 and 9.30. But by 10.20 there was still no sign of the Govester. Just intermittent bursts of chillout music played through the hall’s loudspeakers. Backstage, the minders were working overtime. Whatever they are getting paid, it’s not enough. Miraculously, the minister eventually appeared. A triumph in itself. The organisers let out a large sigh of relief. The first hurdle had been successfully negotiated. And the second. Because when Mikey started speaking he initially sounded totally plausible. A bit detached, in a slightly too pleased with himself undergraduate at the Oxford Union kind of way, but that’s always been his style. Less a speech and more a punchy history lecture. Preaching to the converted. For the first 25 minutes there was little for anyone to argue with as he went through the formation of the state of Israel, the Jews’ search for a home, and antisemitism past and present. If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Rather, he seemed bemused that no one was actually doing anything about the racist abuse. Still, the drugs were just about working. Until they weren’t. Maybe it was just a nasty comedown but then Mikey went rogue. Allowed himself to show his real self. His nasty self. Is there any other? He may fancy himself as a libertarian but he doesn’t have a liberal bone in his body. The Govester would fit in quite nicely in the modern Chinese Communist party. The only good protester was a dead protester. Bring on the tanks. Tell the police to stop being so goddamned nice. Crack some skulls. Inside every protesting university student lurked a secret lefty antisemite. Mikey did name a few rightwing antisemites in the interests of balance but his contempt was all reserved for those on the left. The bien pensants who cloak their antisemitism in rubbish about wanting a peaceful resolution to the war in Gaza. Next the Govester singled out Kemi Badenoch for special praise. She was right to hate the young, the poor, the disabled, pretty much everyone. Almost certainly the kiss of death for Kemi’s leadership ambitions. Mikey has never knowingly backed a winner. He ended in full-on rant. He refused to acknowledge the jurisdiction of the international criminal court. How dare it cite Benjamin Netanyahu. It was only meant to go for terrorists and rogue states. Not for democracies that might have broken the rules. That was much too close to home. If they could go for Bibi they could go for anyone. Maybe even us. His minders hastily bundled him into the car before he could do any more damage. Still, the Govester wasn’t the only minister out and about pursuing his own eclectic agenda. The work and pensions secretary, Mel Stride, was at a jobcentre in south London on a one-man mission to get the unemployed back to work. He didn’t seem to realise that it had been 14 years of Tory government that had led to this. Still, best not to tell him now. It might blow his mind. “British jobs for British workers,” he declared. Or more accurately, “British jobs for British shirkers”. For Stride was most keen for all those lazy bastards who have been claiming benefits for imaginary ailments to fill the shit jobs that we used to get foreigners to do. Given that Caring Mel is himself likely to be unemployed after the next election, maybe he could try his hand at looking after dementia patients. Except, these jobs were never intended for people like him. Nor was Stride in any mood to back down on bankrupting people whose earnings had inadvertently exceeded the carer’s allowance limit. “I care as much as any other person would,” he said. Though not enough to do anything about it. If you snooze, you lose. People should learn to keep better track of their own finances. You got the feeling Stride couldn’t wait for the Tories to lose the next election. Let someone else deal with the workshy riff-raff. Meanwhile in the Commons, the Treasury minister John Glen was outlining the details of the government’s proposed compensation scheme for those affected by the contaminated blood scandal. On Monday, the prime minister had said how sorry he was for the failures of successive governments. It wasn’t clear if he included his own in that. By Tuesday the scale of that apology was apparent on the Tory benches. The government benches were barely a quarter full. Glen did his best to make it sound as if he was sincere in his belief that this should never happen again. He probably even meant it. MPs have very short-term selective memories when it suits them. Believe they are of a higher moral order than their predecessors as they wash away the sins of the past. Only, we all know we will back here saying the same things all over again within a matter of years. If not months. Where is the grand, futile gesture? The one that might signify real change. A minister resigning on behalf of all those ministers who got away with it. That would take courage. Integrity. Pigs might fly. W ith Michael Gove it’s all about the drugs. Always has been. How to find exactly the right dosage to keep himself more or less stable. And in the past year that has sometimes become a near on impossible task. Mikey has all but given up the day job as secretary of state for levelling up. His department has even been forced to hand back money that had been earmarked for key projects as he hadn’t got round to spending it. Truth is that the Govester has been spending more and more time in the crack den he has had built on his department’s roof. Most days he just stares into the abyss that is the chaos that he and the Conservative government have caused over the last 14 years. There will be a reckoning and Mikey can scarcely bear to pay the price. Occasionally, though, he can be tempted out of his stupor to engage with the real world. Always a nervy time for his minders as they are never quite sure which Govester they are going to get. The sweaty, wild-eyed, manic version or the near comatose, morose, self-pitying man. The early signs were not good. Mikey had been due to give a keynote speech about antisemitism at a Jewish community centre in north London at 10am. Journalists and delegates had been told to arrive between 9 and 9.30. But by 10.20 there was still no sign of the Govester. Just intermittent bursts of chillout music played through the hall’s loudspeakers. Backstage, the minders were working overtime. Whatever they are getting paid, it’s not enough. Miraculously, the minister eventually appeared. A triumph in itself. The organisers let out a large sigh of relief. The first hurdle had been successfully negotiated. And the second. Because when Mikey started speaking he initially sounded totally plausible. A bit detached, in a slightly too pleased with himself undergraduate at the Oxford Union kind of way, but that’s always been his style. Less a speech and more a punchy history lecture. Preaching to the converted. For the first 25 minutes there was little for anyone to argue with as he went through the formation of the state of Israel, the Jews’ search for a home, and antisemitism past and present. If you had to make a criticism, it was that the Govester had forgotten he was meant to be a politician. Rather, he seemed bemused that no one was actually doing anything about the racist abuse. Still, the drugs were just about working. Until they weren’t. Maybe it was just a nasty comedown but then Mikey went rogue. Allowed himself to show his real self. His nasty self. Is there any other? He may fancy himself as a libertarian but he doesn’t have a liberal bone in his body. The Govester would fit in quite nicely in the modern Chinese Communist party. The only good protester was a dead protester. Bring on the tanks. Tell the police to stop being so goddamned nice. Crack some skulls. Inside every protesting university student lurked a secret lefty antisemite. Mikey did name a few rightwing antisemites in the interests of balance but his contempt was all reserved for those on the left. The bien pensants who cloak their antisemitism in rubbish about wanting a peaceful resolution to the war in Gaza. Next the Govester singled out Kemi Badenoch for special praise. She was right to hate the young, the poor, the disabled, pretty much everyone. Almost certainly the kiss of death for Kemi’s leadership ambitions. Mikey has never knowingly backed a winner. He ended in full-on rant. He refused to acknowledge the jurisdiction of the international criminal court. How dare it cite Benjamin Netanyahu. It was only meant to go for terrorists and rogue states. Not for democracies that might have broken the rules. That was much too close to home. If they could go for Bibi they could go for anyone. Maybe even us. His minders hastily bundled him into the car before he could do any more damage. Still, the Govester wasn’t the only minister out and about pursuing his own eclectic agenda. The work and pensions secretary, Mel Stride, was at a jobcentre in south London on a one-man mission to get the unemployed back to work. He didn’t seem to realise that it had been 14 years of Tory government that had led to this. Still, best not to tell him now. It might blow his mind. “British jobs for British workers,” he declared. Or more accurately, “British jobs for British shirkers”. For Stride was most keen for all those lazy bastards who have been claiming benefits for imaginary ailments to fill the shit jobs that we used to get foreigners to do. Given that Caring Mel is himself likely to be unemployed after the next election, maybe he could try his hand at looking after dementia patients. Except, these jobs were never intended for people like him. Nor was Stride in any mood to back down on bankrupting people whose earnings had inadvertently exceeded the carer’s allowance limit. “I care as much as any other person would,” he said. Though not enough to do anything about it. If you snooze, you lose. People should learn to keep better track of their own finances. You got the feeling Stride couldn’t wait for the Tories to lose the next election. Let someone else deal with the workshy riff-raff. Meanwhile in the Commons, the Treasury minister John Glen was outlining the details of the government’s proposed compensation scheme for those affected by the contaminated blood scandal. On Monday, the prime minister had said how sorry he was for the failures of successive governments. It wasn’t clear if he included his own in that. By Tuesday the scale of that apology was apparent on the Tory benches. The government benches were barely a quarter full. Glen did his best to make it sound as if he was sincere in his belief that this should never happen again. He probably even meant it. MPs have very short-term selective memories when it suits them. Believe they are of a higher moral order than their predecessors as they wash away the sins of the past. Only, we all know we will back here saying the same things all over again within a matter of years. If not months. Where is the grand, futile gesture? The one that might signify real change. A minister resigning on behalf of all those ministers who got away with it. That would take courage. Integrity. Pigs might fly. W ith Michael Gove it’s all about the drugs. Always has been. How to find exactly the right dosage to keep himself more or less stable. And in the past year that has sometimes become a near on impossible task. Mikey has all but given up the day job as secretary of state for levelling up. His department has even been forced to hand back money that had been earmarked for key projects as he hadn’t got round to spending it. Truth is that the Govester has been spending more and more time in the crack den he has had built on his department’s roof. Most days he just stares into the abyss that is the chaos that he and the Conservative government have caused over the last 14 years. There will be a reckoning and Mikey can scarcely bear to pay the price. Occasionally, though, he can be tempted out of his stupor to engage with the real world. Always a nervy time for his minders as they are never quite sure which Govester they are going to get. The sweaty, wild-eyed, manic version or the near comatose, morose, self-pitying man. The early signs were not good. Mikey had been due to give a keynote speech about antisemitism at a Jewish community centre in north London at 10am. Journalists and delegates had been told to arrive between 9 and 9.30. But by 10.20 there was sti
[TRONCATO per limite Google Sheets] |
Suella Braverman acted unlawfully by making it easier to criminalise protests, court rules
A police officer argues with protesters surrounding a bus that was to be used to carry asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south London. Photograph: Carl Court/Getty Images View image in fullscreen A police officer argues with protesters surrounding a bus that was to be used to carry asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south London. Photograph: Carl Court/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Suella Braverman acted unlawfully by making it easier to criminalise protests, court rules This article is more than 1 year old Former home secretary used ‘Henry VIII powers’ to lower threshold for police restricting protests The former home secretary Suella Braverman acted unlawfully in making it easier for the police to criminalise peaceful protests, the high court has ruled. She was found to have both acted outside her powers and to have failed to consult properly over regulations that would be likely to increase prosecutions of protesters by a third. Hundreds of protesters have been arrested since the government redefined the sort of protest that could be restricted by the police, allowing it where there is merely a “more than minor” hindrance to people’s daily lives. Those prosecuted included the climate activist Greta Thunberg, who was acquitted of all charges in a hearing in February 2024. In their judgment, Lord Justice Green and Mr Justice Kerr said the government had overreached in defining “serious disruption” as merely “more than minor” and that it had been wrong to consult only with law enforcement agencies about the repercussions of the change. The Home Office said it would appeal against the ruling. The high court has suspended the reversal of the measures until after the outcome of the appeal. Shortly before her resignation last year, Braverman used so-called Henry VIII powers to lower the threshold for the police to impose restrictions on protests. Regulations brought in by such means, named in reference to the monarch’s preference for legislating directly by proclamation, are subject to minimal parliamentary scrutiny and decided on an “all or nothing” basis without amendments. The change, redefining what could be regarded as “serious disruption” and therefore liable to conditions, had been made after the House of Lords had rejected the same change, proposed months earlier in a heavily debated and scrutinised new Public Order Act. In their legal challenge to the regulations, the National Council for Civil Liberties, also known as Liberty , argued that they represented “a constitutionally unprecedented attempt on the part of the executive to achieve by the back door through delegated legislation what it was unable to achieve by the front”. In justifying the government’s move, the current home secretary, James Cleverly, had argued that no new offences or powers of a criminal nature had been created. Green and Kerr said that while “technically correct”, the home secretary’s regulations had increased the risk to protesters of being judged to have acted criminally. They found that the “government was aware that this was likely to increase the number of conditions imposed by the police by up to 50% and that prosecutions would increase by circa one-third”. They wrote: “We find no sensible difference between amending a criminal offence in a manner that increases the number of people likely to be prosecuted and amending the legal framework for the application of an offence which has the effect of increasing the number of people likely to be prosecuted.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion They also said that the government’s consultation, which had been limited to the law enforcement agencies, had been inadequate as it failed to engage with any organisations that would oppose the measures. Conducting a fair consultation “would not have been unduly burdensome”, the court ruled. “Government consultations are relatively short in duration.” Liberty has called on the police to refrain from using the powers until the appeal has been heard and for prosecutions under the law to be put on hold pending the appeal. Akiko Hart, Liberty’s director, said: “This ruling is a huge victory for democracy, and sets down an important marker to show that the government cannot step outside of the law to do whatever it wants. “We all have the right to speak out on the issues we believe in, and it’s vital that the government respects that. “These dangerous powers were rejected by parliament yet still sneaked through the back door with the clear intention of stopping protesters that the government did not personally agree with, and were so vaguely worded that it meant that the police were given almost unlimited powers to shut down any other protest too. “This judgment sends a clear message that accountability matters, and that those in power must make decisions that respect our rights.” Explore more on these topics Police Protest UK civil liberties Home Office Suella Braverman news Share Reuse this content A police officer argues with protesters surrounding a bus that was to be used to carry asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south London. Photograph: Carl Court/Getty Images View image in fullscreen A police officer argues with protesters surrounding a bus that was to be used to carry asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south London. Photograph: Carl Court/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Suella Braverman acted unlawfully by making it easier to criminalise protests, court rules This article is more than 1 year old Former home secretary used ‘Henry VIII powers’ to lower threshold for police restricting protests The former home secretary Suella Braverman acted unlawfully in making it easier for the police to criminalise peaceful protests, the high court has ruled. She was found to have both acted outside her powers and to have failed to consult properly over regulations that would be likely to increase prosecutions of protesters by a third. Hundreds of protesters have been arrested since the government redefined the sort of protest that could be restricted by the police, allowing it where there is merely a “more than minor” hindrance to people’s daily lives. Those prosecuted included the climate activist Greta Thunberg, who was acquitted of all charges in a hearing in February 2024. In their judgment, Lord Justice Green and Mr Justice Kerr said the government had overreached in defining “serious disruption” as merely “more than minor” and that it had been wrong to consult only with law enforcement agencies about the repercussions of the change. The Home Office said it would appeal against the ruling. The high court has suspended the reversal of the measures until after the outcome of the appeal. Shortly before her resignation last year, Braverman used so-called Henry VIII powers to lower the threshold for the police to impose restrictions on protests. Regulations brought in by such means, named in reference to the monarch’s preference for legislating directly by proclamation, are subject to minimal parliamentary scrutiny and decided on an “all or nothing” basis without amendments. The change, redefining what could be regarded as “serious disruption” and therefore liable to conditions, had been made after the House of Lords had rejected the same change, proposed months earlier in a heavily debated and scrutinised new Public Order Act. In their legal challenge to the regulations, the National Council for Civil Liberties, also known as Liberty , argued that they represented “a constitutionally unprecedented attempt on the part of the executive to achieve by the back door through delegated legislation what it was unable to achieve by the front”. In justifying the government’s move, the current home secretary, James Cleverly, had argued that no new offences or powers of a criminal nature had been created. Green and Kerr said that while “technically correct”, the home secretary’s regulations had increased the risk to protesters of being judged to have acted criminally. They found that the “government was aware that this was likely to increase the number of conditions imposed by the police by up to 50% and that prosecutions would increase by circa one-third”. They wrote: “We find no sensible difference between amending a criminal offence in a manner that increases the number of people likely to be prosecuted and amending the legal framework for the application of an offence which has the effect of increasing the number of people likely to be prosecuted.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion They also said that the government’s consultation, which had been limited to the law enforcement agencies, had been inadequate as it failed to engage with any organisations that would oppose the measures. Conducting a fair consultation “would not have been unduly burdensome”, the court ruled. “Government consultations are relatively short in duration.” Liberty has called on the police to refrain from using the powers until the appeal has been heard and for prosecutions under the law to be put on hold pending the appeal. Akiko Hart, Liberty’s director, said: “This ruling is a huge victory for democracy, and sets down an important marker to show that the government cannot step outside of the law to do whatever it wants. “We all have the right to speak out on the issues we believe in, and it’s vital that the government respects that. “These dangerous powers were rejected by parliament yet still sneaked through the back door with the clear intention of stopping protesters that the government did not personally agree with, and were so vaguely worded that it meant that the police were given almost unlimited powers to shut down any other protest too. “This judgment sends a clear message that accountability matters, and that those in power must make decisions that respect our rights.” Explore more on these topics Police Protest UK civil liberties Home Office Suella Braverman news Share Reuse this content A police officer argues with protesters surrounding a bus that was to be used to carry asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south London. Photograph: Carl Court/Getty Images View image in fullscreen A police officer argues with protesters surrounding a bus that was to be used to carry asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south London. Photograph: Carl Court/Getty Images A police officer argues with protesters surrounding a bus that was to be used to carry asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south London. Photograph: Carl Court/Getty Images View image in fullscreen A police officer argues with protesters surrounding a bus that was to be used to carry asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south London. Photograph: Carl Court/Getty Images A police officer argues with protesters surrounding a bus that was to be used to carry asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south London. Photograph: Carl Court/Getty Images View image in fullscreen A police officer argues with protesters surrounding a bus that was to be used to carry asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south London. Photograph: Carl Court/Getty Images A police officer argues with protesters surrounding a bus that was to be used to carry asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south London. Photograph: Carl Court/Getty Images View image in fullscreen A police officer argues with protesters surrounding a bus that was to be used to carry asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south London. Photograph: Carl Court/Getty Images A police officer argues with protesters surrounding a bus that was to be used to carry asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south London. Photograph: Carl Court/Getty Images A police officer argues with protesters surrounding a bus that was to be used to carry asylum seekers from a hotel in Peckham, south London. Photograph: Carl Court/Getty Images This article is more than 1 year old Suella Braverman acted unlawfully by making it easier to criminalise protests, court rules This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Suella Braverman acted unlawfully by making it easier to criminalise protests, court rules This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Suella Braverman acted unlawfully by making it easier to criminalise protests, court rules This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Former home secretary used ‘Henry VIII powers’ to lower threshold for police restricting protests Former home secretary used ‘Henry VIII powers’ to lower threshold for police restricting protests Former home secretary used ‘Henry VIII powers’ to lower threshold for police restricting protests The former home secretary Suella Braverman acted unlawfully in making it easier for the police to criminalise peaceful protests, the high court has ruled. She was found to have both acted outside her powers and to have failed to consult properly over regulations that would be likely to increase prosecutions of protesters by a third. Hundreds of protesters have been arrested since the government redefined the sort of protest that could be restricted by the police, allowing it where there is merely a “more than minor” hindrance to people’s daily lives. Those prosecuted included the climate activist Greta Thunberg, who was acquitted of all charges in a hearing in February 2024. In their judgment, Lord Justice Green and Mr Justice Kerr said the government had overreached in defining “serious disruption” as merely “more than minor” and that it had been wrong to consult only with law enforcement agencies about the repercussions of the change. The Home Office said it would appeal against the ruling. The high court has suspended the reversal of the measures until after the outcome of the appeal. Shortly before her resignation last year, Braverman used so-called Henry VIII powers to lower the threshold for the police to impose restrictions on protests. Regulations brought in by such means, named in reference to the monarch’s preference for legislating directly by proclamation, are subject to minimal parliamentary scrutiny and decided on an “all or nothing” basis without amendments. The change, redefining what could be regarded as “serious disruption” and therefore liable to conditions, had been made after the House of Lords had rejected the same change, proposed months earlier in a heavily debated and scrutinised new Public Order Act. In their legal challenge to the regulations, the National Council for Civil Liberties, also known as Liberty , argued that they represented “a constitutionally unprecedented attempt on the part of the executive to achieve by the back door through delegated legislation what it was unable to achieve by the front”. In justifying the government’s move, the current home secretary, James Cleverly, had argued that no new offences or powers of a criminal nature had been created. Green and Kerr said that while “technically correct”, the home secretary’s regulations had increased the risk to protesters of being judged to have acted criminally. They found that the “government was aware that this was likely to increase the number of conditions imposed by the police by up to 50% and that prosecutions would increase by circa one-third”. They wrote: “We find no sensible difference between amending a criminal offence in a manner that increases the number of people likely to be prosecuted and amending the legal framework for the application of an offence which has the effect of increasing the number of people likely to be prosecuted.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion They also said that the government’s consultation, which had been limited to the law enforcement agencies, had been inadequate as it failed to engage with any organisations that would oppose the measures. Conducting a fair consultation “would not have been unduly burdensome”, the court ruled. “Government consultations are relatively short in duration.” Liberty has called on the police to refrain from using the powers until the appeal has been heard and for prosecutions under the law to be put on hold pending the appeal. Akiko Hart, Liberty’s director, said: “This ruling is a huge victory for democracy, and sets down an important marker to show that the government cannot step outside of the law to do whatever it wants. “We all have the right to speak out on the issues we believe in, and it’s vital that the government respects that. “These dangerous powers were rejected by parliament yet still sneaked through the back door with the clear intention of stopping protesters that the government did not personally agree with, and were so vaguely worded that it meant that the police were given almost unlimited powers to shut down any other protest too. “This judgment sends a clear message that accountability matters, and that those in power must make decisions that respect our rights.” Explore more on these topics Police Protest UK civil liberties Home Office Suella Braverman news Share Reuse this content The former home secretary Suella Braverman acted unlawfully in making it easier for the police to criminalise peaceful protests, the high court has ruled. She was found to have both acted outside her powers and to have failed to consult properly over regulations that would be likely to increase prosecutions of protesters by a third. Hundreds of protesters have been arrested since the government redefined the sort of protest that could be restricted by the police, allowing it where there is merely a “more than minor” hindrance to people’s daily lives. Those prosecuted included the climate activist Greta Thunberg, who was acquitted of all charges in a hearing in February 2024. In their judgment, Lord Justice Green and Mr Justice Kerr said the government had overreached in defining “serious disruption” as merely “more than minor” and that it had been wrong to consult only with law enforcement agencies about the repercussions of the change. The Home Office said it would appeal against the ruling. The high court has suspended the reversal of the measures until after the outcome of the appeal. Shortly before her resignation last year, Braverman used so-called Henry VIII powers to lower the threshold for the police to impose restrictions on protests. Regulations brought in by such means, named in reference to the monarch’s preference for legislating directly by proclamation, are subject to minimal parliamentary scrutiny and decided on an “all or nothing” basis without amendments. The change, redefining what could be regarded as “serious disruption” and therefore liable to conditions, had been made after the House of Lords had rejected the same change, proposed months earlier in a heavily debated and scrutinised new Public Order Act. In their legal challenge to the regulations, the National Council for Civil Liberties, also known as Liberty , argued that they represented “a constitutionally unprecedented attempt on the part of the executive to achieve by the back door through delegated legislation what it was unable to achieve by the front”. In justifying the government’s move, the current home secretary, James Cleverly, had argued that no new offences or powers of a criminal nature had been created. Green and Kerr said that while “technically correct”, the home secretary’s regulations had increased the risk to protesters of being judged to have acted criminally. They found that the “government was aware that this was likely to increase the number of conditions imposed by the police by up to 50% and that prosecutions would increase by circa one-third”. They wrote: “We find no sensible difference between amending a criminal offence in a manner that increases the number of people likely to be prosecuted and amending the legal framework for the application of an offence which has the effect of increasing the number of people likely to be prosecuted.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion They also said that the government’s consultation, which had been limited to the law enforcement agencies, had been inadequate as it failed to engage with any organisations that would oppose the measures. Conducting a fair consultation “would not have been unduly burdensome”, the court ruled. “Government consultations are relatively short in duration.” Liberty has called on the police to refrain from using the powers until the appeal has been heard and for prosecutions under the law to be put on hold pending the appeal. Akiko Hart, Liberty’s director, said: “This ruling is a huge victory for democracy, and sets down an important marker to show that the government cannot step outside of the law to do whatever it wants. “We all have the right to speak out on the issues we believe in, and it’s vital that the government respects that. “These dangerous powers were rejected by parliament yet still sneaked through the back door with the clear intention of stopping protesters that the government did not personally agree with, and were so vaguely worded that it meant that the police were given almost unlimited powers to shut down any other protest too. “This judgment sends a clear message that accountability matters, and that those in power must make decisions that respect our rights.” Explore more on these topics Police Protest UK civil liberties Home Office Suella Braverman news Share Reuse this content The former home secretary Suella Braverman acted unlawfully in making it easier for the police to criminalise peaceful protests, the high court has ruled. She was found to have both acted outside her powers and to have failed to consult properly over regulations that would be likely to increase prosecutions of protesters by a third. Hundreds of protesters have been arrested since the government redefined the sort of protest that could be restricted by the police, allowing it where there is merely a “more than minor” hindrance to people’s daily lives. Those prosecuted included the climate activist Greta Thunberg, who was acquitted of all charges in a hearing in February 2024. In their judgment, Lord Justice Green and Mr Justice Kerr said the government had overreached in defining “serious disruption” as merely “more than minor” and that it had been wrong to consult only with law enforcement agencies about the repercussions of the change. The Home Office said it would appeal against the ruling. The high court has suspended the reversal of the measures until after the outcome of the appeal. Shortly before her resignation last year, Braverman used so-called Henry VIII powers to lower the threshold for the police to impose restrictions on protests. Regulations brought in by such means, named in reference to the monarch’s preference for legislating directly by proclamation, are subject to minimal parliamentary scrutiny and decided on an “all or nothing” basis without amendments. The change, redefining what could be regarded as “serious disruption” and therefore liable to conditions, had been made after the House of Lords had rejected the same change, proposed months earlier in a heavily debated and scrutinised new Public Order Act. In their legal challenge to the regulations, the National Council for Civil Liberties, also known as Liberty , argued that they represented “a constitutionally unprecedented attempt on the part of the executive to achieve by the back door through delegated legislation what it was unable to achieve by the front”. In justifying the government’s move, the current home secretary, James Cleverly, had argued that no new offences or powers of a criminal nature had been created. Green and Kerr said that while “technically correct”, the home secretary’s regulations had increased the risk to protesters of being judged to have acted criminally. They found that the “government was aware that this was likely to increase the number of conditions imposed by the police by up to 50% and that prosecutions would increase by circa one-third”. They wrote: “We find no sensible difference between amending a criminal offence in a manner that increases the number of people likely to be prosecuted and amending the legal framework for the application of an offence which has the effect of increasing the number of people likely to be prosecuted.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion They also said that the government’s consultation, which had been limited to the law enforcement agencies, had been inadequate as it failed to engage with any organisations that would oppose the measures. Conducting a fair consultation “would not have been unduly burdensome”, the court ruled. “Government consultations are relatively short in duration.” Liberty has called on the police to refrain from using the powers until the appeal has been heard and for prosecutions under the law to be put on hold pending the appeal. Akiko Hart, Liberty’s director, said: “This ruling is a huge victory for democracy, and sets down an important marker to show that the government cannot step outside of the law to do whatever it wants. “We all have the right to speak out on the issues we believe in, and it’s vital that the government respects that. “These dangerous powers were rejected by parliament yet still sneaked through the back door with the clear intention of stopping protesters that the government did not personally agree with, and were so vaguely worded that it meant that the police were given almost unlimited powers to shut down any other protest too. “This judgment sends a clear message that accountability matters, and that those in power must make decisions that respect our rights.” The former home secretary Suella Braverman acted unlawfully in making it easier for the police to criminalise peaceful protests, the high court has ruled. She was found to have both acted outside her powers and to have failed to consult properly over regulations that would be likely to increase prosecutions of protesters by a third. Hundreds of protesters have been arrested since the government redefined the sort of protest that could be restricted by the police, allowing it where there is merely a “more than minor” hindrance to people’s daily lives. Those prosecuted included the climate activist Greta Thunberg, who was acquitted of all charges in a hearing in February 2024. In their judgment, Lord Justice Green and Mr Justice Kerr said the government had overreached in defining “serious disruption” as merely “more than minor” and that it had been wrong to consult only with law enforcement agencies about the repercussions of the change. The Home Office said it would appeal against the ruling. The high court has suspended the reversal of the measures until after the outcome of the appeal. Shortly before her resignation last year, Braverman used so-called Henry VIII powers to lower the threshold for the police to impose restrictions on protests. Regulations brought in by such means, named in reference to the monarch’s preference for legislating directly by proclamation, are subject to minimal parliamentary scrutiny and decided on an “all or nothing” basis without amendments. The change, redefining what could be regarded as “serious disruption” and therefore liable to conditions, had been made after the House of Lords had rejected the same change, proposed months earlier in a heavily debated and scrutinised new Public Order Act. In their legal challenge to the regulations, the National Council for Civil Liberties, also known as Liberty , argued that they represented “a constitutionally unprecedented attempt on the part of the executive to achieve by the back door through delegated legislation what it was unable to achieve by the front”. In justifying the government’s move, the current home secretary, James Cleverly, had argued that no new offences or powers of a criminal nature had been created. Green and Kerr said that while “technically correct”, the home secretary’s regulations had increased the risk to protesters of being judged to have acted criminally. They found that the “government was aware that this was likely to increase the number of conditions imposed by the police by up to 50% and that prosecutions would increase by circa one-third”. They wrote: “We find no sensible difference between amending a criminal offence in a manner that increases the number of people likely to be prosecuted and amending the legal framework for the application of an offence which has the effect of increasing the number of people likely to be prosecuted.” skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion They also said that the government’s consultation, which had been limited to the law enforcement agencies, had been inadequate as it failed to engage with any organisations that would oppose the measures. Conducting a fair consultation “would not have been unduly burdensome”, the court ruled. “Government consultations are relatively short in duration.” Liberty has called on the police to refrain from using the powers until the appeal has been heard and for prosecutions under the law to be put on hold pending the appeal. Akiko Hart, Liberty’s director, said: “This ruling is a huge victory for democracy, and sets down an important marker to show that the government cannot step outside of the law to do whatever it wants. “We all have the right to speak out on the issues we believe in, and it’s vital that the government respects that. “These dangerous powers were rejected by parliament yet still sneaked through the back door with the clear intention of stopping protesters that the government did not personally agree with, and were so vaguely worded that it meant that the police were given almost unlimited powers to shut down any other protest too. “This judgment sends a clear message that accountability matters, and that those in power must make decisions that respect our rights.” The former home secretary Suella Braverman acted unlawfully in making it easier for the police to criminalise peaceful protests, the high court has ruled. She was found to have both acted outside her powers and to have failed to consult properly over regulations that would be likely to increase prosecutions of protesters by a third. Hundreds of protesters have been arrested since the government redefined the sort of protest that could be restricted by the police, allowing it where there is merely a “more than minor” hindrance to people’s daily lives. Those prosecuted included the climate activist Greta Thunberg, who was acquitted of all charges in a hearing in February 2024. In their judgment, Lord Justice Green and Mr Justice Kerr said the government had overreached in defining “serious disruption” as merely “more than minor” and that it had been wrong to consult only with law enforcement agencies about the repercussions of the change. The Home Office said it would appeal against the ruling. The high court has suspended the reversal of the measures until after the outcome of the appeal. Shortly before her resignation last year, Braverman used so-called Henry VIII powers to lower the threshold for the police to impose restrictions on protests. Regulations brought in by such means, named in reference to the monarch’s preference for legislating directly by proclamation, are subject to minimal parliamentary scrutiny and decided on an “all or nothing” basis without amendments. The change, redefining what could be regarded as “serious disruption” and therefore liable to conditions, had been made after the House of Lords had rejected the same change, proposed months earlier in a heavily debated and scrutinised new Public Order Act. In their legal challenge to the regulations, the National Council for Civil Liberties, also known as Liberty , argued that they represented “a constitutionally unprecedented attempt on the part of the executive to achieve by the back door through delegated legislation what it was unable to achieve by the front”. In justifying the government’s move, the current home secretary, James Cleverly, had argued that no new offences or powers of a criminal nature had been created. Green and Kerr said that while “technically correct”, the home secretary’s regulations had increased the risk to protesters of being judged to have acted criminally. They found that the “government was aware that this was likely to increase the number of conditions imposed by the police by up to 50% and that prosecutions would increase by circa one-third”. They wrote: “We find no sensible difference between amending a criminal offence in a manner that increases the number of people likely to be prosecuted and amending the legal framework for the application of an offence which has the effect of increasing the number of people likely to be prosecuted.” They also said that the government’s consultation, which had been limited to the law enforcement agencies, had been inadequate as it failed to engage with any organisations that would oppose the measures. Conducting a fair consultation “would not have been unduly burdensome”, the court ruled. “Government consultations are relatively short in duration.” Liberty has called on the police to refrain from using the powers until the appeal has been heard and for prosecutions under the law to be put on hold pending the appeal. Akiko Hart, Liberty’s director, said: “This ruling is a huge victory for democracy, and sets down an important marker to show that the government cannot step outside of the law to do whatever it wants. “We all have the right to speak out on the issues we believe in, and it’s vital that the government respects that. “These dangerous powers were rejected by parliament yet still sneaked through the back door with the clear intention of stopping protesters that the government did not personally agree with, and were so vaguely worded that it meant that the police were given almost unlimited powers to shut down any other protest too. “This judgment sends a clear message that accountability matters, and that those in power must make decisions that respect our rights.” Explore more on these topics Police Protest UK civil liberties Home Office Suella Braverman news Share Reuse this content Police Protest UK civil liberties Home Office Suella Braverman news |
Things can only get wetter: D:Ream song drowns out Sunak’s damp election announcement
0:29 D:Ream Things Can Only Get Better blares out during Sunak’s election announcement – video This article is more than 1 year old Things can only get wetter: D:Ream song drowns out Sunak’s damp election announcement This article is more than 1 year old PM makes announcement to sound of song synonymous with Labour’s 1997 election landslide Rishi Sunak has finally ripped the plaster off and called a general election. He must have thought things could only get better. Sadly for him, it appeared they could only get wetter. How we made D:Ream’s election anthem Things Can Only Get Better Read more The prime minister announced his decision to call a general election on 4 July in the driving rain and with the sound of the song Things Can Only Get Better, synonymous with Labour’s 1997 election landslide, blaring from a boombox in the background. The anti-Brexit campaigner Steve Bray, whose longstanding protest outside parliament has been the backing track to many a political TV interview, said he chose the tune because it was the “top trolling song for the Conservatives”. “I thought about what would be the best trolling tune if he announced the election,” he said. “And of course, it had to be Things Can Only Get Better. Because everybody can relate to that and the 1997 election. “I didn’t do it for Labour. I did it because it was the top trolling song for the Conservatives.” What is the song? First released in 1993, Things Can Only Get Better by D:Ream initially only reached No 24 in the UK charts. Peter Cunnah and Al Mackenzie were the band’s lead members, and the science broadcaster Brian Cox was among its live lineup. The song climbed to No 1 in the charts in 1994 after the band toured with Take That. Things Can Only Get Better by D:Ream Why did Labour use the song in their 1997 campaign? The Red Flag, a song first written in 1889 and adopted by socialist movements around the world, was the campaign song of choice for Labour leaders before Tony Blair . In an attempt to show the party under Blair was modern and dynamic, Things Will Only Get Better was made Labour’s official campaign song during the party’s 1997 campaign. The change worked. The song re-entered the Top 20. How was the song used in the campaign? D:Ream lead singer Cunnah sang the song at several rallies. The song was also used in a now famous party political broadcast that showed voters from all stripes heading to the ballot box on a bright, picturesque day led by a mysteriously out-of-frame man dressed in a smart-casual blue shirt who was revealed at the end to be Blair himself. Cunnah said he got a bearhug from Alastair Campbell when Labour won in 1997. He said: “It hurt – he’s a big man. I met Tony Blair several times. He plays guitar and loved the song. He was always asking me what the chords were.” Why is the song still so popular with the Labour party? The song is not only a classic – it harks back to a time when Labour was in the ascent. The song was sung at the 2022 Labour conference by delegates and referenced in a conference speech by the Labour leader, Keir Starmer, in 2023. Predictions of a Labour landslide like the one seen in 1997 have led to comparisons between Starmer and Blair, though some have warned that Blair in 1997 was more personally popular than Starmer is in 2024. In March, a YouGov poll found that Starmer had a net approval rating of -24%. That same month in 1997, Blair had a rating of +22 going into the general election. Explore more on these topics General election 2024 Rishi Sunak Labour Tony Blair features Share Reuse this content 0:29 D:Ream Things Can Only Get Better blares out during Sunak’s election announcement – video This article is more than 1 year old Things can only get wetter: D:Ream song drowns out Sunak’s damp election announcement This article is more than 1 year old PM makes announcement to sound of song synonymous with Labour’s 1997 election landslide Rishi Sunak has finally ripped the plaster off and called a general election. He must have thought things could only get better. Sadly for him, it appeared they could only get wetter. How we made D:Ream’s election anthem Things Can Only Get Better Read more The prime minister announced his decision to call a general election on 4 July in the driving rain and with the sound of the song Things Can Only Get Better, synonymous with Labour’s 1997 election landslide, blaring from a boombox in the background. The anti-Brexit campaigner Steve Bray, whose longstanding protest outside parliament has been the backing track to many a political TV interview, said he chose the tune because it was the “top trolling song for the Conservatives”. “I thought about what would be the best trolling tune if he announced the election,” he said. “And of course, it had to be Things Can Only Get Better. Because everybody can relate to that and the 1997 election. “I didn’t do it for Labour. I did it because it was the top trolling song for the Conservatives.” What is the song? First released in 1993, Things Can Only Get Better by D:Ream initially only reached No 24 in the UK charts. Peter Cunnah and Al Mackenzie were the band’s lead members, and the science broadcaster Brian Cox was among its live lineup. The song climbed to No 1 in the charts in 1994 after the band toured with Take That. Things Can Only Get Better by D:Ream Why did Labour use the song in their 1997 campaign? The Red Flag, a song first written in 1889 and adopted by socialist movements around the world, was the campaign song of choice for Labour leaders before Tony Blair . In an attempt to show the party under Blair was modern and dynamic, Things Will Only Get Better was made Labour’s official campaign song during the party’s 1997 campaign. The change worked. The song re-entered the Top 20. How was the song used in the campaign? D:Ream lead singer Cunnah sang the song at several rallies. The song was also used in a now famous party political broadcast that showed voters from all stripes heading to the ballot box on a bright, picturesque day led by a mysteriously out-of-frame man dressed in a smart-casual blue shirt who was revealed at the end to be Blair himself. Cunnah said he got a bearhug from Alastair Campbell when Labour won in 1997. He said: “It hurt – he’s a big man. I met Tony Blair several times. He plays guitar and loved the song. He was always asking me what the chords were.” Why is the song still so popular with the Labour party? The song is not only a classic – it harks back to a time when Labour was in the ascent. The song was sung at the 2022 Labour conference by delegates and referenced in a conference speech by the Labour leader, Keir Starmer, in 2023. Predictions of a Labour landslide like the one seen in 1997 have led to comparisons between Starmer and Blair, though some have warned that Blair in 1997 was more personally popular than Starmer is in 2024. In March, a YouGov poll found that Starmer had a net approval rating of -24%. That same month in 1997, Blair had a rating of +22 going into the general election. Explore more on these topics General election 2024 Rishi Sunak Labour Tony Blair features Share Reuse this content 0:29 D:Ream Things Can Only Get Better blares out during Sunak’s election announcement – video 0:29 D:Ream Things Can Only Get Better blares out during Sunak’s election announcement – video 0:29 D:Ream Things Can Only Get Better blares out during Sunak’s election announcement – video 0:29 D:Ream Things Can Only Get Better blares out during Sunak’s election announcement – video This article is more than 1 year old Things can only get wetter: D:Ream song drowns out Sunak’s damp election announcement This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Things can only get wetter: D:Ream song drowns out Sunak’s damp election announcement This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Things can only get wetter: D:Ream song drowns out Sunak’s damp election announcement This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old PM makes announcement to sound of song synonymous with Labour’s 1997 election landslide PM makes announcement to sound of song synonymous with Labour’s 1997 election landslide PM makes announcement to sound of song synonymous with Labour’s 1997 election landslide Rishi Sunak has finally ripped the plaster off and called a general election. He must have thought things could only get better. Sadly for him, it appeared they could only get wetter. How we made D:Ream’s election anthem Things Can Only Get Better Read more The prime minister announced his decision to call a general election on 4 July in the driving rain and with the sound of the song Things Can Only Get Better, synonymous with Labour’s 1997 election landslide, blaring from a boombox in the background. The anti-Brexit campaigner Steve Bray, whose longstanding protest outside parliament has been the backing track to many a political TV interview, said he chose the tune because it was the “top trolling song for the Conservatives”. “I thought about what would be the best trolling tune if he announced the election,” he said. “And of course, it had to be Things Can Only Get Better. Because everybody can relate to that and the 1997 election. “I didn’t do it for Labour. I did it because it was the top trolling song for the Conservatives.” What is the song? First released in 1993, Things Can Only Get Better by D:Ream initially only reached No 24 in the UK charts. Peter Cunnah and Al Mackenzie were the band’s lead members, and the science broadcaster Brian Cox was among its live lineup. The song climbed to No 1 in the charts in 1994 after the band toured with Take That. Things Can Only Get Better by D:Ream Why did Labour use the song in their 1997 campaign? The Red Flag, a song first written in 1889 and adopted by socialist movements around the world, was the campaign song of choice for Labour leaders before Tony Blair . In an attempt to show the party under Blair was modern and dynamic, Things Will Only Get Better was made Labour’s official campaign song during the party’s 1997 campaign. The change worked. The song re-entered the Top 20. How was the song used in the campaign? D:Ream lead singer Cunnah sang the song at several rallies. The song was also used in a now famous party political broadcast that showed voters from all stripes heading to the ballot box on a bright, picturesque day led by a mysteriously out-of-frame man dressed in a smart-casual blue shirt who was revealed at the end to be Blair himself. Cunnah said he got a bearhug from Alastair Campbell when Labour won in 1997. He said: “It hurt – he’s a big man. I met Tony Blair several times. He plays guitar and loved the song. He was always asking me what the chords were.” Why is the song still so popular with the Labour party? The song is not only a classic – it harks back to a time when Labour was in the ascent. The song was sung at the 2022 Labour conference by delegates and referenced in a conference speech by the Labour leader, Keir Starmer, in 2023. Predictions of a Labour landslide like the one seen in 1997 have led to comparisons between Starmer and Blair, though some have warned that Blair in 1997 was more personally popular than Starmer is in 2024. In March, a YouGov poll found that Starmer had a net approval rating of -24%. That same month in 1997, Blair had a rating of +22 going into the general election. Explore more on these topics General election 2024 Rishi Sunak Labour Tony Blair features Share Reuse this content Rishi Sunak has finally ripped the plaster off and called a general election. He must have thought things could only get better. Sadly for him, it appeared they could only get wetter. How we made D:Ream’s election anthem Things Can Only Get Better Read more The prime minister announced his decision to call a general election on 4 July in the driving rain and with the sound of the song Things Can Only Get Better, synonymous with Labour’s 1997 election landslide, blaring from a boombox in the background. The anti-Brexit campaigner Steve Bray, whose longstanding protest outside parliament has been the backing track to many a political TV interview, said he chose the tune because it was the “top trolling song for the Conservatives”. “I thought about what would be the best trolling tune if he announced the election,” he said. “And of course, it had to be Things Can Only Get Better. Because everybody can relate to that and the 1997 election. “I didn’t do it for Labour. I did it because it was the top trolling song for the Conservatives.” What is the song? First released in 1993, Things Can Only Get Better by D:Ream initially only reached No 24 in the UK charts. Peter Cunnah and Al Mackenzie were the band’s lead members, and the science broadcaster Brian Cox was among its live lineup. The song climbed to No 1 in the charts in 1994 after the band toured with Take That. Things Can Only Get Better by D:Ream Why did Labour use the song in their 1997 campaign? The Red Flag, a song first written in 1889 and adopted by socialist movements around the world, was the campaign song of choice for Labour leaders before Tony Blair . In an attempt to show the party under Blair was modern and dynamic, Things Will Only Get Better was made Labour’s official campaign song during the party’s 1997 campaign. The change worked. The song re-entered the Top 20. How was the song used in the campaign? D:Ream lead singer Cunnah sang the song at several rallies. The song was also used in a now famous party political broadcast that showed voters from all stripes heading to the ballot box on a bright, picturesque day led by a mysteriously out-of-frame man dressed in a smart-casual blue shirt who was revealed at the end to be Blair himself. Cunnah said he got a bearhug from Alastair Campbell when Labour won in 1997. He said: “It hurt – he’s a big man. I met Tony Blair several times. He plays guitar and loved the song. He was always asking me what the chords were.” Why is the song still so popular with the Labour party? The song is not only a classic – it harks back to a time when Labour was in the ascent. The song was sung at the 2022 Labour conference by delegates and referenced in a conference speech by the Labour leader, Keir Starmer, in 2023. Predictions of a Labour landslide like the one seen in 1997 have led to comparisons between Starmer and Blair, though some have warned that Blair in 1997 was more personally popular than Starmer is in 2024. In March, a YouGov poll found that Starmer had a net approval rating of -24%. That same month in 1997, Blair had a rating of +22 going into the general election. Explore more on these topics General election 2024 Rishi Sunak Labour Tony Blair features Share Reuse this content Rishi Sunak has finally ripped the plaster off and called a general election. He must have thought things could only get better. Sadly for him, it appeared they could only get wetter. How we made D:Ream’s election anthem Things Can Only Get Better Read more The prime minister announced his decision to call a general election on 4 July in the driving rain and with the sound of the song Things Can Only Get Better, synonymous with Labour’s 1997 election landslide, blaring from a boombox in the background. The anti-Brexit campaigner Steve Bray, whose longstanding protest outside parliament has been the backing track to many a political TV interview, said he chose the tune because it was the “top trolling song for the Conservatives”. “I thought about what would be the best trolling tune if he announced the election,” he said. “And of course, it had to be Things Can Only Get Better. Because everybody can relate to that and the 1997 election. “I didn’t do it for Labour. I did it because it was the top trolling song for the Conservatives.” What is the song? First released in 1993, Things Can Only Get Better by D:Ream initially only reached No 24 in the UK charts. Peter Cunnah and Al Mackenzie were the band’s lead members, and the science broadcaster Brian Cox was among its live lineup. The song climbed to No 1 in the charts in 1994 after the band toured with Take That. Things Can Only Get Better by D:Ream Why did Labour use the song in their 1997 campaign? The Red Flag, a song first written in 1889 and adopted by socialist movements around the world, was the campaign song of choice for Labour leaders before Tony Blair . In an attempt to show the party under Blair was modern and dynamic, Things Will Only Get Better was made Labour’s official campaign song during the party’s 1997 campaign. The change worked. The song re-entered the Top 20. How was the song used in the campaign? D:Ream lead singer Cunnah sang the song at several rallies. The song was also used in a now famous party political broadcast that showed voters from all stripes heading to the ballot box on a bright, picturesque day led by a mysteriously out-of-frame man dressed in a smart-casual blue shirt who was revealed at the end to be Blair himself. Cunnah said he got a bearhug from Alastair Campbell when Labour won in 1997. He said: “It hurt – he’s a big man. I met Tony Blair several times. He plays guitar and loved the song. He was always asking me what the chords were.” Why is the song still so popular with the Labour party? The song is not only a classic – it harks back to a time when Labour was in the ascent. The song was sung at the 2022 Labour conference by delegates and referenced in a conference speech by the Labour leader, Keir Starmer, in 2023. Predictions of a Labour landslide like the one seen in 1997 have led to comparisons between Starmer and Blair, though some have warned that Blair in 1997 was more personally popular than Starmer is in 2024. In March, a YouGov poll found that Starmer had a net approval rating of -24%. That same month in 1997, Blair had a rating of +22 going into the general election. Rishi Sunak has finally ripped the plaster off and called a general election. He must have thought things could only get better. Sadly for him, it appeared they could only get wetter. How we made D:Ream’s election anthem Things Can Only Get Better Read more The prime minister announced his decision to call a general election on 4 July in the driving rain and with the sound of the song Things Can Only Get Better, synonymous with Labour’s 1997 election landslide, blaring from a boombox in the background. The anti-Brexit campaigner Steve Bray, whose longstanding protest outside parliament has been the backing track to many a political TV interview, said he chose the tune because it was the “top trolling song for the Conservatives”. “I thought about what would be the best trolling tune if he announced the election,” he said. “And of course, it had to be Things Can Only Get Better. Because everybody can relate to that and the 1997 election. “I didn’t do it for Labour. I did it because it was the top trolling song for the Conservatives.” What is the song? First released in 1993, Things Can Only Get Better by D:Ream initially only reached No 24 in the UK charts. Peter Cunnah and Al Mackenzie were the band’s lead members, and the science broadcaster Brian Cox was among its live lineup. The song climbed to No 1 in the charts in 1994 after the band toured with Take That. Things Can Only Get Better by D:Ream Why did Labour use the song in their 1997 campaign? The Red Flag, a song first written in 1889 and adopted by socialist movements around the world, was the campaign song of choice for Labour leaders before Tony Blair . In an attempt to show the party under Blair was modern and dynamic, Things Will Only Get Better was made Labour’s official campaign song during the party’s 1997 campaign. The change worked. The song re-entered the Top 20. How was the song used in the campaign? D:Ream lead singer Cunnah sang the song at several rallies. The song was also used in a now famous party political broadcast that showed voters from all stripes heading to the ballot box on a bright, picturesque day led by a mysteriously out-of-frame man dressed in a smart-casual blue shirt who was revealed at the end to be Blair himself. Cunnah said he got a bearhug from Alastair Campbell when Labour won in 1997. He said: “It hurt – he’s a big man. I met Tony Blair several times. He plays guitar and loved the song. He was always asking me what the chords were.” Why is the song still so popular with the Labour party? The song is not only a classic – it harks back to a time when Labour was in the ascent. The song was sung at the 2022 Labour conference by delegates and referenced in a conference speech by the Labour leader, Keir Starmer, in 2023. Predictions of a Labour landslide like the one seen in 1997 have led to comparisons between Starmer and Blair, though some have warned that Blair in 1997 was more personally popular than Starmer is in 2024. In March, a YouGov poll found that Starmer had a net approval rating of -24%. That same month in 1997, Blair had a rating of +22 going into the general election. Rishi Sunak has finally ripped the plaster off and called a general election. He must have thought things could only get better. Sadly for him, it appeared they could only get wetter. How we made D:Ream’s election anthem Things Can Only Get Better Read more How we made D:Ream’s election anthem Things Can Only Get Better Read more How we made D:Ream’s election anthem Things Can Only Get Better Read more How we made D:Ream’s election anthem Things Can Only Get Better How we made D:Ream’s election anthem Things Can Only Get Better The prime minister announced his decision to call a general election on 4 July in the driving rain and with the sound of the song Things Can Only Get Better, synonymous with Labour’s 1997 election landslide, blaring from a boombox in the background. The anti-Brexit campaigner Steve Bray, whose longstanding protest outside parliament has been the backing track to many a political TV interview, said he chose the tune because it was the “top trolling song for the Conservatives”. “I thought about what would be the best trolling tune if he announced the election,” he said. “And of course, it had to be Things Can Only Get Better. Because everybody can relate to that and the 1997 election. “I didn’t do it for Labour. I did it because it was the top trolling song for the Conservatives.” First released in 1993, Things Can Only Get Better by D:Ream initially only reached No 24 in the UK charts. Peter Cunnah and Al Mackenzie were the band’s lead members, and the science broadcaster Brian Cox was among its live lineup. The song climbed to No 1 in the charts in 1994 after the band toured with Take That. Things Can Only Get Better by D:Ream The Red Flag, a song first written in 1889 and adopted by socialist movements around the world, was the campaign song of choice for Labour leaders before Tony Blair . In an attempt to show the party under Blair was modern and dynamic, Things Will Only Get Better was made Labour’s official campaign song during the party’s 1997 campaign. The change worked. The song re-entered the Top 20. D:Ream lead singer Cunnah sang the song at several rallies. The song was also used in a now famous party political broadcast that showed voters from all stripes heading to the ballot box on a bright, picturesque day led by a mysteriously out-of-frame man dressed in a smart-casual blue shirt who was revealed at the end to be Blair himself. Cunnah said he got a bearhug from Alastair Campbell when Labour won in 1997. He said: “It hurt – he’s a big man. I met Tony Blair several times. He plays guitar and loved the song. He was always asking me what the chords were.” The song is not only a classic – it harks back to a time when Labour was in the ascent. The song was sung at the 2022 Labour conference by delegates and referenced in a conference speech by the Labour leader, Keir Starmer, in 2023. Predictions of a Labour landslide like the one seen in 1997 have led to comparisons between Starmer and Blair, though some have warned that Blair in 1997 was more personally popular than Starmer is in 2024. In March, a YouGov poll found that Starmer had a net approval rating of -24%. That same month in 1997, Blair had a rating of +22 going into the general election. Explore more on these topics General election 2024 Rishi Sunak Labour Tony Blair features Share Reuse this content General election 2024 Rishi Sunak Labour Tony Blair features |
General election 2024: Sunak says Labour taking victory for granted as Starmer calls on voters to ‘stop the chaos’ on 4 July – live
Rishi Sunak is going into the election as the underdog, and he embraced this stance in his speech to the Tory rally. He said that Labour wanted people to think “this election is over before it’s even begun”, but that “the British people are going to show Labour that they don’t take too kindly to being taken for granted”. That it not a message that a party would use if it were in a strong position. But sometimes voters punish hubris, and there may be some who are susceptible to the message that Labour is taking them for granted. Sunak did not resort to arguing that people should vote Tory to deny Labour a big majority (an argument that some Tory advisers have reportedly toyed with, and one that some Labour MPs deployed successfully the other way round early in the 2017 campaign). But this campaign has only just started. If things get desperate, it might be a line some Tories use. That is all from me for tonight. Donna Ferguson is taking over now. |
Nigerian students at Teesside University ordered to leave UK after currency crash
Teesside University said it had ‘no choice’ as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. Photograph: Teeside University View image in fullscreen Teesside University said it had ‘no choice’ as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. Photograph: Teeside University This article is more than 1 year old Nigerian students at Teesside University ordered to leave UK after currency crash This article is more than 1 year old University informs Home Office and withdraws sponsorship from those struggling with fees after drop in value of naira Nigerian students at a UK university say they are devastated after some were thrown off their course and ordered to leave the UK when they got behind on their fees because of a currency crash. Teesside University withdrew students who missed their fee instalments and informed the Home Office, after some students’ savings were wiped out when the value of Nigeria’s naira crashed. The students, some who say they have been contacted by debt collection agencies, protested outside the campus on Tuesday, accusing the university of being “heartless”. The university said it had “no choice” as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. It said it had made every effort to help the affected students, including with bespoke payment plans. The BBC said a group of 60 students asked the university for help after they defaulted on their fees when their savings were wiped out. Adenike Ibrahim told the BBC she was close to handing in her dissertation when she was kicked off her course because she was unable to make a payment. ‘Self-defeating’: senior Tories warn Sunak against clampdown on international students Read more Despite having now paid her fees in full, she will have to leave the UK with her young son and cannot re-enrol. “I did default [on payments], but I’d already paid 90% of my tuition fees and I went to all of my classes,” she told the broadcaster. “I called them and asked to reach an agreement, but they do not care what happens to their students.” Nigeria is facing a severe economic crisis after the value of its currency dropped sharply amid reforms introduced by the president, Bola Tinubu, who came into office a year ago, aimed at balancing its economy. It is experiencing nearly 30% inflation, with the price of some key goods, such as rice, more than doubling in less than a year. Many Nigerians are sharing pictures and videos online showing them reducing portion sizes and eating food that would normally be fed to livestock, in order to get by. A university spokesperson said: “Teesside University is proud to be a global institution with a diverse student population but is also very aware of its obligations regarding visa issuance and compliance. These strict external regulations ensure that the university fully supports a robust immigration system and is outside of the university’s control.” The Home Office said a decision to offer or withdraw visa sponsorship rested with the sponsoring institution. It said when a visa was shortened or cancelled, individuals should “take steps to regularise their stay or make arrangements to leave the UK”. In a letter, the Home Office told the students they did not have a right to appeal. Explore more on these topics International students Teesside University Nigeria Home Office Tuition fees Higher education Students news Share Reuse this content Teesside University said it had ‘no choice’ as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. Photograph: Teeside University View image in fullscreen Teesside University said it had ‘no choice’ as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. Photograph: Teeside University This article is more than 1 year old Nigerian students at Teesside University ordered to leave UK after currency crash This article is more than 1 year old University informs Home Office and withdraws sponsorship from those struggling with fees after drop in value of naira Nigerian students at a UK university say they are devastated after some were thrown off their course and ordered to leave the UK when they got behind on their fees because of a currency crash. Teesside University withdrew students who missed their fee instalments and informed the Home Office, after some students’ savings were wiped out when the value of Nigeria’s naira crashed. The students, some who say they have been contacted by debt collection agencies, protested outside the campus on Tuesday, accusing the university of being “heartless”. The university said it had “no choice” as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. It said it had made every effort to help the affected students, including with bespoke payment plans. The BBC said a group of 60 students asked the university for help after they defaulted on their fees when their savings were wiped out. Adenike Ibrahim told the BBC she was close to handing in her dissertation when she was kicked off her course because she was unable to make a payment. ‘Self-defeating’: senior Tories warn Sunak against clampdown on international students Read more Despite having now paid her fees in full, she will have to leave the UK with her young son and cannot re-enrol. “I did default [on payments], but I’d already paid 90% of my tuition fees and I went to all of my classes,” she told the broadcaster. “I called them and asked to reach an agreement, but they do not care what happens to their students.” Nigeria is facing a severe economic crisis after the value of its currency dropped sharply amid reforms introduced by the president, Bola Tinubu, who came into office a year ago, aimed at balancing its economy. It is experiencing nearly 30% inflation, with the price of some key goods, such as rice, more than doubling in less than a year. Many Nigerians are sharing pictures and videos online showing them reducing portion sizes and eating food that would normally be fed to livestock, in order to get by. A university spokesperson said: “Teesside University is proud to be a global institution with a diverse student population but is also very aware of its obligations regarding visa issuance and compliance. These strict external regulations ensure that the university fully supports a robust immigration system and is outside of the university’s control.” The Home Office said a decision to offer or withdraw visa sponsorship rested with the sponsoring institution. It said when a visa was shortened or cancelled, individuals should “take steps to regularise their stay or make arrangements to leave the UK”. In a letter, the Home Office told the students they did not have a right to appeal. Explore more on these topics International students Teesside University Nigeria Home Office Tuition fees Higher education Students news Share Reuse this content Teesside University said it had ‘no choice’ as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. Photograph: Teeside University View image in fullscreen Teesside University said it had ‘no choice’ as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. Photograph: Teeside University Teesside University said it had ‘no choice’ as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. Photograph: Teeside University View image in fullscreen Teesside University said it had ‘no choice’ as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. Photograph: Teeside University Teesside University said it had ‘no choice’ as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. Photograph: Teeside University View image in fullscreen Teesside University said it had ‘no choice’ as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. Photograph: Teeside University Teesside University said it had ‘no choice’ as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. Photograph: Teeside University View image in fullscreen Teesside University said it had ‘no choice’ as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. Photograph: Teeside University Teesside University said it had ‘no choice’ as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. Photograph: Teeside University Teesside University said it had ‘no choice’ as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. Photograph: Teeside University This article is more than 1 year old Nigerian students at Teesside University ordered to leave UK after currency crash This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Nigerian students at Teesside University ordered to leave UK after currency crash This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old Nigerian students at Teesside University ordered to leave UK after currency crash This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old This article is more than 1 year old University informs Home Office and withdraws sponsorship from those struggling with fees after drop in value of naira University informs Home Office and withdraws sponsorship from those struggling with fees after drop in value of naira University informs Home Office and withdraws sponsorship from those struggling with fees after drop in value of naira Nigerian students at a UK university say they are devastated after some were thrown off their course and ordered to leave the UK when they got behind on their fees because of a currency crash. Teesside University withdrew students who missed their fee instalments and informed the Home Office, after some students’ savings were wiped out when the value of Nigeria’s naira crashed. The students, some who say they have been contacted by debt collection agencies, protested outside the campus on Tuesday, accusing the university of being “heartless”. The university said it had “no choice” as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. It said it had made every effort to help the affected students, including with bespoke payment plans. The BBC said a group of 60 students asked the university for help after they defaulted on their fees when their savings were wiped out. Adenike Ibrahim told the BBC she was close to handing in her dissertation when she was kicked off her course because she was unable to make a payment. ‘Self-defeating’: senior Tories warn Sunak against clampdown on international students Read more Despite having now paid her fees in full, she will have to leave the UK with her young son and cannot re-enrol. “I did default [on payments], but I’d already paid 90% of my tuition fees and I went to all of my classes,” she told the broadcaster. “I called them and asked to reach an agreement, but they do not care what happens to their students.” Nigeria is facing a severe economic crisis after the value of its currency dropped sharply amid reforms introduced by the president, Bola Tinubu, who came into office a year ago, aimed at balancing its economy. It is experiencing nearly 30% inflation, with the price of some key goods, such as rice, more than doubling in less than a year. Many Nigerians are sharing pictures and videos online showing them reducing portion sizes and eating food that would normally be fed to livestock, in order to get by. A university spokesperson said: “Teesside University is proud to be a global institution with a diverse student population but is also very aware of its obligations regarding visa issuance and compliance. These strict external regulations ensure that the university fully supports a robust immigration system and is outside of the university’s control.” The Home Office said a decision to offer or withdraw visa sponsorship rested with the sponsoring institution. It said when a visa was shortened or cancelled, individuals should “take steps to regularise their stay or make arrangements to leave the UK”. In a letter, the Home Office told the students they did not have a right to appeal. Explore more on these topics International students Teesside University Nigeria Home Office Tuition fees Higher education Students news Share Reuse this content Nigerian students at a UK university say they are devastated after some were thrown off their course and ordered to leave the UK when they got behind on their fees because of a currency crash. Teesside University withdrew students who missed their fee instalments and informed the Home Office, after some students’ savings were wiped out when the value of Nigeria’s naira crashed. The students, some who say they have been contacted by debt collection agencies, protested outside the campus on Tuesday, accusing the university of being “heartless”. The university said it had “no choice” as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. It said it had made every effort to help the affected students, including with bespoke payment plans. The BBC said a group of 60 students asked the university for help after they defaulted on their fees when their savings were wiped out. Adenike Ibrahim told the BBC she was close to handing in her dissertation when she was kicked off her course because she was unable to make a payment. ‘Self-defeating’: senior Tories warn Sunak against clampdown on international students Read more Despite having now paid her fees in full, she will have to leave the UK with her young son and cannot re-enrol. “I did default [on payments], but I’d already paid 90% of my tuition fees and I went to all of my classes,” she told the broadcaster. “I called them and asked to reach an agreement, but they do not care what happens to their students.” Nigeria is facing a severe economic crisis after the value of its currency dropped sharply amid reforms introduced by the president, Bola Tinubu, who came into office a year ago, aimed at balancing its economy. It is experiencing nearly 30% inflation, with the price of some key goods, such as rice, more than doubling in less than a year. Many Nigerians are sharing pictures and videos online showing them reducing portion sizes and eating food that would normally be fed to livestock, in order to get by. A university spokesperson said: “Teesside University is proud to be a global institution with a diverse student population but is also very aware of its obligations regarding visa issuance and compliance. These strict external regulations ensure that the university fully supports a robust immigration system and is outside of the university’s control.” The Home Office said a decision to offer or withdraw visa sponsorship rested with the sponsoring institution. It said when a visa was shortened or cancelled, individuals should “take steps to regularise their stay or make arrangements to leave the UK”. In a letter, the Home Office told the students they did not have a right to appeal. Explore more on these topics International students Teesside University Nigeria Home Office Tuition fees Higher education Students news Share Reuse this content Nigerian students at a UK university say they are devastated after some were thrown off their course and ordered to leave the UK when they got behind on their fees because of a currency crash. Teesside University withdrew students who missed their fee instalments and informed the Home Office, after some students’ savings were wiped out when the value of Nigeria’s naira crashed. The students, some who say they have been contacted by debt collection agencies, protested outside the campus on Tuesday, accusing the university of being “heartless”. The university said it had “no choice” as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. It said it had made every effort to help the affected students, including with bespoke payment plans. The BBC said a group of 60 students asked the university for help after they defaulted on their fees when their savings were wiped out. Adenike Ibrahim told the BBC she was close to handing in her dissertation when she was kicked off her course because she was unable to make a payment. ‘Self-defeating’: senior Tories warn Sunak against clampdown on international students Read more Despite having now paid her fees in full, she will have to leave the UK with her young son and cannot re-enrol. “I did default [on payments], but I’d already paid 90% of my tuition fees and I went to all of my classes,” she told the broadcaster. “I called them and asked to reach an agreement, but they do not care what happens to their students.” Nigeria is facing a severe economic crisis after the value of its currency dropped sharply amid reforms introduced by the president, Bola Tinubu, who came into office a year ago, aimed at balancing its economy. It is experiencing nearly 30% inflation, with the price of some key goods, such as rice, more than doubling in less than a year. Many Nigerians are sharing pictures and videos online showing them reducing portion sizes and eating food that would normally be fed to livestock, in order to get by. A university spokesperson said: “Teesside University is proud to be a global institution with a diverse student population but is also very aware of its obligations regarding visa issuance and compliance. These strict external regulations ensure that the university fully supports a robust immigration system and is outside of the university’s control.” The Home Office said a decision to offer or withdraw visa sponsorship rested with the sponsoring institution. It said when a visa was shortened or cancelled, individuals should “take steps to regularise their stay or make arrangements to leave the UK”. In a letter, the Home Office told the students they did not have a right to appeal. Nigerian students at a UK university say they are devastated after some were thrown off their course and ordered to leave the UK when they got behind on their fees because of a currency crash. Teesside University withdrew students who missed their fee instalments and informed the Home Office, after some students’ savings were wiped out when the value of Nigeria’s naira crashed. The students, some who say they have been contacted by debt collection agencies, protested outside the campus on Tuesday, accusing the university of being “heartless”. The university said it had “no choice” as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. It said it had made every effort to help the affected students, including with bespoke payment plans. The BBC said a group of 60 students asked the university for help after they defaulted on their fees when their savings were wiped out. Adenike Ibrahim told the BBC she was close to handing in her dissertation when she was kicked off her course because she was unable to make a payment. ‘Self-defeating’: senior Tories warn Sunak against clampdown on international students Read more Despite having now paid her fees in full, she will have to leave the UK with her young son and cannot re-enrol. “I did default [on payments], but I’d already paid 90% of my tuition fees and I went to all of my classes,” she told the broadcaster. “I called them and asked to reach an agreement, but they do not care what happens to their students.” Nigeria is facing a severe economic crisis after the value of its currency dropped sharply amid reforms introduced by the president, Bola Tinubu, who came into office a year ago, aimed at balancing its economy. It is experiencing nearly 30% inflation, with the price of some key goods, such as rice, more than doubling in less than a year. Many Nigerians are sharing pictures and videos online showing them reducing portion sizes and eating food that would normally be fed to livestock, in order to get by. A university spokesperson said: “Teesside University is proud to be a global institution with a diverse student population but is also very aware of its obligations regarding visa issuance and compliance. These strict external regulations ensure that the university fully supports a robust immigration system and is outside of the university’s control.” The Home Office said a decision to offer or withdraw visa sponsorship rested with the sponsoring institution. It said when a visa was shortened or cancelled, individuals should “take steps to regularise their stay or make arrangements to leave the UK”. In a letter, the Home Office told the students they did not have a right to appeal. Nigerian students at a UK university say they are devastated after some were thrown off their course and ordered to leave the UK when they got behind on their fees because of a currency crash. Teesside University withdrew students who missed their fee instalments and informed the Home Office, after some students’ savings were wiped out when the value of Nigeria’s naira crashed. The students, some who say they have been contacted by debt collection agencies, protested outside the campus on Tuesday, accusing the university of being “heartless”. The university said it had “no choice” as failure to pay was a breach of visa sponsorship rules. It said it had made every effort to help the affected students, including with bespoke payment plans. The BBC said a group of 60 students asked the university for help after they defaulted on their fees when their savings were wiped out. Adenike Ibrahim told the BBC she was close to handing in her dissertation when she was kicked off her course because she was unable to make a payment. ‘Self-defeating’: senior Tories warn Sunak against clampdown on international students Read more ‘Self-defeating’: senior Tories warn Sunak against clampdown on international students Read more ‘Self-defeating’: senior Tories warn Sunak against clampdown on international students Read more ‘Self-defeating’: senior Tories warn Sunak against clampdown on international students ‘Self-defeating’: senior Tories warn Sunak against clampdown on international students Despite having now paid her fees in full, she will have to leave the UK with her young son and cannot re-enrol. “I did default [on payments], but I’d already paid 90% of my tuition fees and I went to all of my classes,” she told the broadcaster. “I called them and asked to reach an agreement, but they do not care what happens to their students.” Nigeria is facing a severe economic crisis after the value of its currency dropped sharply amid reforms introduced by the president, Bola Tinubu, who came into office a year ago, aimed at balancing its economy. It is experiencing nearly 30% inflation, with the price of some key goods, such as rice, more than doubling in less than a year. Many Nigerians are sharing pictures and videos online showing them reducing portion sizes and eating food that would normally be fed to livestock, in order to get by. A university spokesperson said: “Teesside University is proud to be a global institution with a diverse student population but is also very aware of its obligations regarding visa issuance and compliance. These strict external regulations ensure that the university fully supports a robust immigration system and is outside of the university’s control.” The Home Office said a decision to offer or withdraw visa sponsorship rested with the sponsoring institution. It said when a visa was shortened or cancelled, individuals should “take steps to regularise their stay or make arrangements to leave the UK”. In a letter, the Home Office told the students they did not have a right to appeal. Explore more on these topics International students Teesside University Nigeria Home Office Tuition fees Higher education Students news Share Reuse this content International students Teesside University Nigeria Home Office Tuition fees Higher education Students news |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.