Peter Black

If anybody was wondering how it is that we have a £22 billion black hole in he UK government finances. then look no further than here.

The Independent reports that Keir Starmer has come under pressure to publish the true costs of Brexit after a minister confirmed Britain has spent £24bn alone withdrawing from the EU – with a further £6.4bn still to pay. Treasury minister Tulip Siddiq replied to a parliamentary question to say that Britain has paid the EU £23.8bn as part of its “financial settlement” agreement.

Naturally this has created waves, even though I think we all suspected that this was the sort of ball park figure that Brexit had cost us:

Best for Britain chief executive Naomi Smith told The Independent: “Exiting the European Union not only cost the UK vast amounts of money, but economic growth, opportunities for young people, influence on the world stage, and much more.

“But this government has the opportunity to reverse that downwards trend, building on a strong start to bring us closer to the EU through policies like beneficial alignment and a reciprocal youth mobility scheme.”

Deputy chief executive of campaign group the European Movement, Emma Knaggs, told The Independent: “It’s encouraging to see more data being shared about the cost of the UK’s exit from the EU. However, we remain in the dark about the full extent of the impact of leaving the EU and its repercussions on areas such as the economy, the NHS, the cost of living and UK businesses, to name just a few. We need an independent, forward-looking inquiry on the UK’s relationship with Europe to identify those opportunities and rebuild those closer bonds.”

Despite this Labour are still sitting behind their red lines of not rejoining the single market or the customs union, a position that is doing irreparable damage to the UK economy and its future prospects. 

The Independent reports on a warning by a senior MP that ministers and AI developers are locked in an “arms race” with criminals and rogue states attempting to use the technology for harm.

They say that Chi Onwurah, who chairs the science, innovation and technology committee, has told the paper that the “creativity and focus of criminal enterprises on adopting technology is unimaginable”. 

The Irish Examiner reports on the view of the Lord Mayor of the City of London that the UK's departure from the European Union cost London's financial centre about 40,000 jobs, a far deeper impact from Brexit than previous estimates:

Michael Mainelli said Dublin had gained most, attracting 10,000 positions, while cities such as Milan, Paris and Amsterdam had also benefited from jobs migrating from London after Britain voted to quit the EU trading bloc in 2016.

"Brexit was a disaster," said Mainelli, the ceremonial head of London's City financial centre, which stretches over a square mile including the Bank of England, international banks and insurers. "We had 525,000 workers in 2016. My estimate is that we lost just short of 40,000."

The tally by Mainelli, who spent years charting the fortunes of Britain's financial centre before becoming Lord Mayor and has contact with hundreds of City firms, is far higher than the 7,000 jobs that consultants at EY calculated had left London for the European Union by 2022.

But he said the City of London was growing, including in fields beyond finance, with new jobs that compensated for the fall-out of Brexit. Worker numbers have swelled to 615,000 as insurers and data analysis sectors grow, he said.

Nonetheless, his estimate underscores the scale of the fall-out, as Britain seeks to rebuild bridges to continental Europe.

"The City voted 70-30 to remain. We did not want it," Mainelli said, adding that he had redoubled his efforts to "engage more" with Europe, making nine visits to countries in the region this year.

His push to bolster relations with the continent comes amid a wider economic slowdown in Britain, which has been riven by disagreement over its departure from the European Union.

Although some hoped that Brexit would give London the freedom to reduce immigration, ditch large amounts of EU regulation and bolster the economy, immigration rose, regulation proved hard to untangle and the economy slowed.

Keir Starmer, Britain's new prime minister, has sought to rebuild relations with continental Europe, damaged by years of fractious Brexit negotiations.

Starmer wants to remove some blocks to doing business with EU countries, including a mutual recognition agreement of professional qualifications, but has ruled out a return to the bloc's single market.

Mainelli said "there's a lot more we could do on visas" to help the City. "We're also working on bilateral trade deals with Germany," he said.

Long the jewel in the British industrial crown, the country's financial sector has also been in decline.

Economic output in the heart of Britain's financial sector, including banks and wealth funds, has fallen by more than 15% since late 2019, just before the UK formally left the EU.

Overall, financial services output in Britain has fallen by 1% since late 2019 — a stark contrast with France and Germany, where it has increased by 8%, and Ireland's 18% growth, national account data shows.

British financial services exports have been overtaken by other business services, such as law or advertising.

Britain's official budget forecaster said in March that its prediction Brexit would cause trade volumes to shrink by 15% was "broadly on track".

Most Britons think Brexit has been a failure so far, according to recent opinion polls, but proponents say Britain has greater freedom to pursue its own path outside the EU. They point to Germany's economic downturn and political turmoil in France as evidence of the bloc's shortcomings.

Surely, it is time for this new Labour government to start repairing the damage by rejoining the single market.

The Guardian reports that Angela Rayner and Rachel Reeves are at loggerheads over a major programme of social housebuilding, in the latest sign of cabinet tensions over this month’s budget.

The paper says that as housing secretary, Raynor has been pushing Reeves for billions of pounds more for affordable housing, which she argues will be needed to hit Labour’s target of building 1.5m new homes across five years. However, the Chancellor has made it clear that there will not be enough money available in this spending review for an immediate cash injection:

The standoff is the latest sign of the tensions across cabinet over both the budget and spending review, with several cabinet ministers yet to sign off on their individual departmental settlements.

Rayner is understood to have stressed to the chancellor that social housing should not just be seen as do-gooding but as a key part of the government’s growth agenda.

She told a panel during the Labour conference last month: “I actually think it’s a moral mission with the Labour government to recognise the problem and to build the social housing we need … But hopefully at the spending review, you’ll see that this government is really serious that we’re going to build those houses we desperately need.”

Treasury sources say, however, that they are not able to accommodate every department’s demands given the tight spending constraints.

...

Sources have told the Guardian that Rayner had asked for an immediate top-up to the affordable homes programme, a government scheme which allocates £11.5bn to local authorities and housing associations over five years.

The programme is due to expire in 2026, but sources in the housing industry said it was already running out and needed an immediate boost of up to £2bn. They pointed out that Michael Gove handed back nearly that amount to the Treasury last year after struggling to find projects to spend it on.

Kate Henderson, the chief executive of the National Housing Federation, said: “To deliver affordable and social housing at the levels needed, at the autumn budget we need … an urgent top-up in affordable housing funding, and commitment to a new multi-year affordable housing programme which prioritises funding for social rented homes.”

Polly Neate, the chief executive of Shelter, said: “This government was elected on a promise to deliver the biggest increase in social housing in a generation. The only way to do this is through serious investment and by recognising housing as fundamental to communities and growth and counting it as critical infrastructure.”

Government insiders said that while the chancellor had ruled out an immediate top-up to the programme, she had not made a decision on how large it should be after 2026.

Housing industry groups say that hitting the government’s annual housing targets would mean building 90,000 social-rent homes a year for the poorest households, at a cost to the government of about £11bn. However, lobbying groups admit they would be happy to settle for closer to £4bn a year – double the current allocation.

When I wrote about Labour's housing targets back in August I said that the real issue is affordability, something that ministers cannot rely on the private sector to enable. I added that if Labour are serious about providing homes where they are most needed then they will need to provide significant amounts of public subsidy and ensure that local councils and housing associations are sufficiently resourced to build the social housing that is required. They will also need to invest in infrastructure. This target cannot be met on the cheap.

IF they don't bite that bullet straight away then they may as well say goodbye to meeting their targets.

The Mirror reports that a major report from the Refugee Council has found Labour inherited an asylum system in 'meltdown' that had been brought to a 'near-standstill' due to Conservative mismanagement.

The report says that without Keir Starmer’s decision to scrap the Rwanda plan and kick-start asylum decision making, the backlog of people waiting for an initial judgement could have ballooned to over 177,000 by January - higher than in the pandemic:

According to the report’s analysis, 70% of those who crossed the channel in the year up to June would be expected to be recognised as refugees - yet 96% of those claims were outstanding when the election was called. The backlog is now projected to be closer to 118,000 under Labour - some 59,000 fewer cases than if no action had been taken. Researchers say this could generate savings of up to £240million in asylum support.

In total the report found that just over half of people - some 62,000 - whose asylum claims can now be processed may be recognised as refugees. One in 10 of those who were waiting for an initial decision at the end of June were Afghan nationals, and a third of the people came from either Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Eritrea or Syria – all countries whose nationals have a very high likelihood of being recognised as a refugee.

The Refugee Council warned that other “immediate challenges” Labour must now address to move from a “rescue” approach of the asylum system to “recovery and long term reform”. It warned that homelessness among refugees increased by 253% between July 2023 and March 2024 as a result of a push to clear the backlog.

And its report also raised concerns about a growing backlog of asylum appeals as a result of decision making being sped up. It also said safe routes to the UK must be reviewed and expanded as it warned that 2024 has already become the deadliest year for small boat crossings.

The report recommends Labour completely repeal the Illegal Migration Act, which became law last year(2023) and is blamed for the asylum system’s productivity sinking to its lowest point since the Covid pandemic. Mr Starmer’s government has already amended the law, which is helping to speed up decision making of asylum claims.

Despite this the Tories remain in denial. The current crisis in the UK asylum system is down to them and their thinly disguise small Englander policies, isn't it time they re-evaluated their approach?

Just when you thought the Labour freebie scandal had died a death, the Guardian reports that ministers have continued to declare free tickets to Taylor Swift, football matches and loans of clothing, according to the latest register of MPs’ interests, amid the controversy over Keir Starmer accepting hospitality.

The paper says that Peter Kyle, the science secretary, revealed that he accepted two free tickets to a Taylor Swift concert in August worth more than £500, courtesy of the Football Association:

Others to reveal hospitality include Ian Murray, the Scottish secretary, who accepted £320 of tickets to a Liverpool v Bournemouth football match in September thanks to Salmon Scotland, where he had a meeting with the chief executive of the industry body.

Lucy Powell, the leader of the House of Commons, took £570 of Davis Cup tennis tickets in September, in her capacity as MP for Manchester Central, where the match was played.

Lisa Nandy, the culture secretary, also declared that she had accepted a free loan of clothing from a fashion PR firm called 223 Agency, which was below registrable value.

It is understood Nandy borrowed an outfit from UK designer Edeline Lee to signal her support as culture secretary for British fashion design, and that the outfit has since been returned.

The row over Starmer accepting more than £100,000 in free tickets and other gifts such as clothing while he was an MP has dogged the prime minister’s first few months in office. He attempted to draw a line under it by pledging to pay back £6,000 of tickets and gifts, including those to a Taylor Swift concert donated by her label Universal Music.

However, he has made it clear that his decision to pay back the value of some tickets did not apply to other ministers, and that it was a personal choice while new rules on ministerial acceptance of benefits are being drawn up.

Will it ever end?

Half of my social media timelines at the moment are questioning why Starmer going to a Taylor Swift concert is even a story. It's not news, they say, it is just tittle tattle. Well, yes it is, but in politics tittle tattle counts and if you are naive enough to put on a fully-justified police escort for a superstar performer, and then accept freebie tickets that enable you to meet her backstage then frankly, you shouldn't complain.

It is precisely because the opposition and their allies in the media are able to tie up the freebie misjudgement with the police escort that it is still a story. They are able to suggest that special treatment was given to Swift in exchange for personal favours. In fact the two are not likely to be related, but the fact Labour has left themselves open to the implication means that the story has legs and boy, is it running.

Even the Guardian, a paper of the centre-left that would normally take Starmer's side, is reporting it. They quote No.10 sources to record that Keir Starmer met Taylor Swift at one of her London concerts days after a decision was taken to grant her a “blue light” police escort.

They say that the prime minister and his family had a 10-minute meeting with the pop megastar and her mother, Andrea, backstage at Wembley on 20 August, with the conversation covering the Southport murders, which took place at a Swift-themed holiday club:

The Guardian has been told that there was no discussion of the police motorbike convoy that had been provided for Swift and her entourage, and which Downing Street has repeatedly insisted was an operational matter for Scotland Yard.

No 10 had initially declined to comment when asked if Starmer had met the billionaire pop star when he and his family were invited on 16 August to the Wembley gig by Universal Music, but the “brush-by” was confirmed after it was reported by the Sun.

It was also reported that Swift was given convoys to the stadium for five gigs from 15 August, despite initial police reservations, with her mother negotiating arrangements directly with former No 10 chief of staff Sue Gray.

Downing Street has denied that Starmer received the free tickets as a “thank you” for the singer getting a police escort to her concerts. “I completely reject that characterisation,” his spokesperson said. “It’s ultimately up to the police to take operational decisions in relation to these big events.”

Starmer declared the tickets, worth £2,800, to the final night of the Eras tour in London in line with the parliamentary rules, but later paid them back following weeks of criticism over accepting thousands of pounds worth of freebies.

No 10 has faced repeated questions over the decision to give Swift and her entourage a police convoy by the Special Escort Group (SEG), a specialist unit of the Metropolitan police usually reserved for the royal family and senior politicians.

Downing Street says the move, which came after the pop star pulled out of three planned concerts in Vienna when police foiled a terror plot, was an operational matter for police.

However, the police decision was reportedly changed after representations from Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London, and Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, about the economic repercussions if the huge concerts were called off.

Starmer’s spokesperson did not deny that No 10 potentially had had conversations with Swift’s team, saying “conversation and dialogue” about such security matters was completely routine.

Among the donations Starmer repaid was £598 for two tickets to Swift’s Wembley concert five days earlier, paid for by the Football Association, which owns the stadium. He did not attend this concert, with the register of MPs’ interests saying these were “offered to and accepted by family members”.

Cooper also attended one of Swift’s Wembley concerts with her husband, the former Labour minister Ed Balls, who was offered tickets by the star’s record company.

The paper adds that some government insiders have acknowledged that the public is holding Labour ministers to a higher standard, after they won the election promising they would run the country in the service of working people, and be different from their predecessors.

That is certainly true and the sooner Labour acknowledge that and act accordingly they will have a chance to move the agenda on.

In Labour's mixed-up world the so-called closer co-operation between the Welsh Labour Government and their party colleagues in Westminster has not got off to a good start, at least when it comes to dentistry.

The BBC reports on comments by the Secretary of State for Wales that defy belief, namely her remarks to the Labour Party Conference that the "UK government will take inspiration from Wales on dentistry, where reforms have already unlocked almost 400,000 appointments in the last two years".

Meanwhile, a Welsh MP, Stephen Kinnock has been given the role of managing dentistry in England, to the extent that he tweeted on 14th August that NHS dentistry is broken. and he is working to provide 700,000 more urgent dental appointments, recruit new dentists and reform the dental contract. None of this will benefit his own constituents as they are already suffering under Welsh Labour.

Labour politicians have said Wales has created 400,000 appointments over the past two years, but the British Dental Association (BDA) said that did not take into account the needs of individual patients, while one patient said he had been suffering dental pain for years:

Matty Parry from Old Colwyn, Conwy county, said he had been pushed from one dentist to another while having dental pain for five years.

He is still trying to register for treatment but has been told by one dentist that could mean another two-and-a-half years of waiting.

"It's a shambles," he said.

"It’s horrendous how people can't get a dentist.

"They probably need to do more courses, they need to promote it more, to train people up."

He said paying for treatment was "unreal".

"I know people that have spent thousands of pounds on treatment, when really should it be that much?"

In fact, the latest available figures from the Welsh and UK governments show how dental treatment levels have recovered since Covid. England completed 85% of the average number of courses of treatment being done pre-Covid, but in Wales that figure was much lower, at 58%. The article continues:

Dr Russell Gidney, who runs a dental practice in Chepstow, Monmouthshire, and is a leading member of the BDA, said colleagues were abandoning their NHS contracts because of the targets they were being set, and the financial clawbacks they face if they do not treat enough patients.

He said it meant meeting targets were more important than giving people the treatment they need.

"The Welsh dental service is struggling to cope," he said.
~ "There are patient numbers being seen but, because practices are being pushed towards numbers of patients - although that statistic looks good - actually, what they're able to deliver on most patients, is suffering.

"It really is whitewashing the problems that are happening underneath."

On Wales being held up as an example to England, Dr Gidney said: "Fundamentally, I find it laughable.

"We've seen more clawback applied to practice since Covid.

"We see more practices hand back their contracts every year than we saw in several years pre-Covid.

"Dentists aren't happy because they can't take care of their patients.

"They can't make the business work as they want to, and fundamentally, where it carries on as it is, it is causing the patients to suffer as well."

Labour's record on dental treatment in Wales is appalling. thousands of patients are unable to access NHS care and the whole profession is struggling. If England is bad, then Wales is worse. Perhaps Ministers should look to their own record before spinning differently.

The Times reports that Reform UK has been trying to flog tours of parliament with an MP for a whopping £300 in a clear breach of House of Commons rules.

They say that a fundraising email was sent to some activists offering the tours for up to £300 as part of a drive to raise money despite there being strict rules around how MPs can use their access to parliament for financial gain:

The Times has been told an email to Reform supporters in one region was sent out in recent weeks advertising a Christmas party for supporters at a central London bar and nightclub. Tickets were sold as a fundraiser; however, there was an optional extra that advertised a “package” involving a tour of parliament with an MP.

A source said it was “a bit rich of Reform to have attacked Keir Starmer over freebies” given the attempt by a party organiser to “make money off their five MPs”.

Reform MPs are said to have been unaware of the arrangement until one of those who purchased the ticket got in touch with them. In a statement, Reform said the email was sent in error by a volunteer regional organiser. A party spokesman said: “This event was set up without our knowledge by the local branch who did not know the rules.

“Ticket holders are being offered a refund.”

Oops!

I was on holiday when the final vote by MPs excluded favourite, James Cleverly from the deciding members ballot for Tory leader so didn't have an opportunity to comment on it. The outcome means that whatever the final result the Conservatives are set to move even further to the right to the extent that they might as well just rename themselves as 'Reform' and invite Nigel Farage to take the reins instead.

One of the choices now is Robert Jenrick, whose supporters were selling baseball caps at Tory Conference emblazoned with the legend 'Bobby J'. I read one report in which a supporter commented that they called him 'BJ' for short. The remaining choice is Kemi Badenoch or Bad Enoc as I prefer to call her. Botb are figures on the right with, in my judgement, a poor record in government. It is difficult to see either of them enthusing the centre right voters they lost at the last election.

And then as if to put the cherry on the top of the madness, the Independent reports that Robert Jenrick has promised to make Jacob Rees-Mogg Tory party chairman if he wins the Conservative Party leadership election:

Mr Jenrick on Sunday said he would appoint the Boris Johnson loyalist despite him losing his seat in the July election.

“One of my first acts as leader would be to appoint him as chairman of the party so we can truly reform and democratise our party,” Mr Jenrick said.

“Together we will empower members and restore the respect that has been so sorely lacking in recent years,” he added.

You can see straight away that Bobbt J has the common touch. Let's hope he wins, because with him and Rees-Mogg helming the Tory Party the Liberal Democrats could well do even better next time.

Let's be clear about this, Starmer's government is in no way comparable to JFK's camelot, but that is where this obsession with the first 100 days of an administration originated and Labour MPs are keen to jump onto the bandwagon and get their spin out there in the hope of convincing people that things have not been so shambolic after all.

My MP in Swansea West has been no exception, posting on Facebook what I can only assume is an agreed script sent out to him and others by Labour spin-doctors. So let's look at the claims in more detail:

1. He says he has been busy raising vital questions about child poverty, the future of Port Talbot and the success of our universities with the Government. And yet he voted against lifting the two-child cap on child benefit, the much heralded deal on Tata steel in Port Talbot was basically identical to the one negotiated by the former Tory government and condemned as inadequate by Labour MPs, while the signals we are getting from Labour ministers is that there are no plans to lift the visa restrictions that have effectively crippled the finances of so many UK universities.

2. Locally, he says, he is holding regular surgeries, knocking on doors, and talking to families, businesses and charities about what they need to thrive. Well yes, but isn't that the job, and where are these surgeries being advertised? As far as I can see he hasn't yet got a website or a constituency office. They don't appear to have been advertised on his social media platforms either.

3. And so to the nitty gritty - Labour, he says, have launched the biggest upgrade to workers’ rights in a generation, to end exploitative zero-hours contracts and provide sick pay from day one. That is welcome. We await the passage of the bill into law.

4. He claims that Labour have set up Great British Energy, a publicly owned renewable energy company that will bring down bills. Well, no, they have mooted this development, and a bill is going through Parliament, which is good, but it is by no means a reality yet.

5. And when he says that the government have legislated to bring the UK's railways back into public ownership so we can drive up standards, the implication is that this is now law. In fact the bill is still at committee stage as far as I can see. So, not yet an achievement, but work in progress and, again, welcome when if finally materialises as legislation.

6. He says that the government has brought the Renters' Rights Bill to Parliament, which will end the disgraceful discrimination against households who have children or receive benefits. This is also welcome and I look forward to it becoming law.

7. Finally, the really big one; the claim that Labour have got the public finances back under control after discovering the Tories’ £22bn black hole. Well given that we haven't had a budget yet, I think this one has to go down as hyperbole. What Labour have in fact done is to save several billion pounds by axing the winter fuel allowance for millions of pensioners. The reputed £22 billion black hole is still there and if this Guardian article is right, the nee Chancellor of the Exchequer has locked herself away while she tries to square the many pledges on taxes she made in opposition with the demands of her party to invest in public services, while filling the financial void left by her predecessor.

The paper says that, amid the gathering turmoil and, some would say, lack of clear sense of direction, cabinet ministers have been itching to make announcements or least float ideas, but without knowing if they will be given money to do so, either in the budget or next spring’s spending review, it has not been possible:

The party promised not to raise taxes for working people and so ruled out increasing their income tax, VAT or national insurance. It also boldly pledged to spur new growth and create the fastest growing economy in the G7.

The promises did not end there. Since the election Starmer has said again and again that there will be no return to Tory austerity and no broad-based cuts to public services.

Now the time to begin to deliver growth and repair public services while not raising working peoples’ taxes is only 17 days away.

One former Tory cabinet minister put it this way: “They have said they will not go back to austerity and that they will rebuild services while not raising tax on working people, but they are going to have to find the money from somewhere.

“We are talking huge sums. The Institute for Fiscal Studies says they need to raise £25bn in taxes. But if they are going to achieve that and keep to their promises all the choices are going to be really difficult.

“They have made life much harder for themselves because they have ruled out putting up income tax, VAT or increasing working people’s national insurance. Between them that is about 75% of all revenue.”

He added: “They kind of muddled through in the run-up to the election saying it would all come from economic growth, but that was never really sustainable as you never can rely on growth.”

Meanwhile, Labour appear to have to put two of the most pressing problems facing the UK on the back burner. There are no plans to address the crisis in social care that is crippling much of the NHS, nor do they seem to be rushing to find ways to clean up our rivers and seas from the huge amount of sewage that has been pumped into them by the water companies.

And there is the chaos at the heart of 10 Downing Street, with Starmer's Chief of Staff sacked after ninety-plus days after a power struggle, not to mention the row over freebies that has shown voters that when it comes down to it, this Labour government are just as bad as the Tories in seeking to exploit the benefits of their position.

The first 100 days may well have amounted to a starting point but they are far from the nirvana being touted by Labour MPs. I will be generous and award them 4 out of 10.

I havent seen this in the Welsh media, but one national newspaper, which is normally keen to publish Welsh Tory press releases claims that the Welsh Government spent a dizzying £1.5 million on hospitality between 2022 and 2023, including £15,000 at a swanky New York restaurant.

They say that the Welsh Government used procurement cards to spend £1,494,599, 81% more than the £821,871 racked up the previous year. The official figures show bills included £7,949 and £15,933 at Zou Zou’s in Manhattan, where dishes include a lobster kebab at £39 ($51) a pop and fire-roasted lamb, costing £99 ($130).

Other expenditure included £5,158, which was spent at the exclusive Soho House in West Hollywood, a members-only club which is billed as a retreat for “creative thinkers”. Menus at the club feature items such as a £42 truffle pizza. While it is unclear what the specific expenditure actually covered, transactions were listed under “exhibitions and events”.

Extra spending included £2,912 on products from GoPro, which is known for its extreme sports cameras, plus a £625 limousine service in Canada, and £178 at a Texan BBQ restaurant. A total exceeding £2,000 was spent on a French catering firm in April, while £256 went towards an alcohol retailer in the US.

Irrespective of the source of this article, the official government spokesperson neither denies the facts nor offers an explanation for them.

Could Labour have handled the donations and gift scandal any worse? I don't think they could. Their media management of this ongoing crisis is the spin doctor equivalent of standing in a hole and digging furiously.

Far be it from me to tell them what they should have done, but if they had got all of the facts out in the open on day one, apologised and changed the rules in double quick time so that it couldnt happen again, it is possible that the whole affair would have fizzled out by now and ministers could be concentrating on their agenda instead of constantly explaining themselves in an effort to move on. 

I am currently reading James O'Brien's book 'How they broke Britain' in which he recounts how David Cameron was reported to have met with Rupert Murdoch's executives on 26 separate occasions during his first 15 months in office, while Gordon Brown and Tony Blair also worked assidiously to woo the media magnate.

Despite this chumminess, Cameron couldn't avoid setting up the Leveson Inquiry following the revelation that missing school girl, Milly Dowler's voicemail had been hacked by journalists working for the News of the World. 

Wednesday, October 02, 2024

Breeding for Britain

Tuesday, October 01, 2024

Fracking hell