Tuesday, July 21, 2026
Reform MP starts digging her own Standards hole
The paper says that Sarah Pochin, the Runcorn MP, said Farage had called a byelection in his Clacton seat so voters could decide whether they backed him or not, and argued that “the media, the British state and the old parties have mounted a vicious and desperate campaign to stop Reform UK”:
She posted on X: “We can’t call a general election, so rather than submit to a kangaroo court in parliament, Nigel Farage has handed the power back to the people of Clacton. P.S. Clacton was once one of the safest Tory seats … now they won’t even field a candidate against him. Wonder why?”
Farage had previously said the investigation into him by the parliamentary standards watchdog was “being used as a political tool” and Reform sources had suggested the commissioner and committee were illegitimate.
However, Pochin’s remarks go further in suggesting that the process is unfair, with a predetermined verdict, and mark an escalation of Farage’s supporters attempting to undermine the standards system.
Her remarks echo those of Boris Johnson, who claimed that the privileges committee was a “kangaroo court” when it found he deliberately misled parliament over Covid rule-breaking in No 10.
The standards commissioner is currently looking into whether Farage should have declared a £5m gift from the Thailand-based businessman Christopher Harborne given to him before the last election. Farage has always said he was not in politics at the time the gift was made.
The inquiry was later widened to look at whether he should have declared support from his friend and fraudster George Cottrell, who provided accommodation at one of the London homes he rented to Farage, and also paid for some social media filming in 2024.
Farage told the Triggernometry podcast over the weekend that it was “totally undeclarable in every single way”.
He acknowledged that the parliamentary standards system could find against him but claimed he had sought advice from a “top international lawyer” who told him the £5m did not need to be declared because it was unconditional and had a document drawn up saying it was given freely.
The rules state that gifts and benefits in kind have to be declared for the 12 months prior to an MP entering parliament, but only if they are political.
It will be interesting to see how the independent Standards Commissioner reacts to being accused of running a vendetta against Farage. It is very possible that Pochin is in breach herself and is digging a very large hole by her comments.
Monday, July 20, 2026
Burnham starts with the low-hanging fruit
The programme was hugely problematic, expensive, a threat to civil liberties, and the embodiment of a touching faith in new technology to solve all our problems.
As the Guardian reports, that the new Labour leader plans to redirect the resources earmarked for the scheme towards tackling the cost of living.
However, the paper adds that it is unclear how much money the decision to scrap the controversial project will save as Starmer’s government did not set out a clear budget for the initiative:
The Office for Budget Responsibility suggested it could cost about £1.8bn, but its estimate was rejected by officials.
Starmer first announced plans for a digital ID scheme last September, as part of plans to combat illegal working. It was planned to be rolled out by 2029.
He said the proposed “Brit card” would be compulsory for those who needed to prove they were allowed to work in the UK amid growing fears about illegal immigration.
The cards were to detail the holder’s residency status, name, date of birth and nationality, alongside their photograph.
Starmer billed the rollout as “an enormous opportunity for the UK” and said the ID cards “will make it tougher to work illegally in this country, making our borders more secure”.
Tony Blair’s government passed legislation designed to facilitate the introduction of ID cards in 2006, to the anger of many privacy campaigners. His plans never came into force and were ultimately scrapped by the coalition government in 2011.
The Tony Blair Institute, set up by the former prime minister after his departure from frontline politics, was one of several Labour-aligned thinktanks to welcome the fresh proposals put forward by Starmer.
“Make no mistake, if the government announces a universal digital ID to help improve our public services, it would be one of the most important steps taken by this or any government to make British citizens’ everyday lives easier and build trust,” its director of government innovation, Alexander Iosad, said.
However, the plans attracted widespread backlash from opposition politicians and civil rights groups.
The Conservative MP David Davis said: “No system is immune to failure, and we have seen time and again governments and tech giants fail to protect people’s personal data. If world-leading companies cannot protect our data, I have little faith that Whitehall would be able to do better.”
It is a good start by Burnham, let's see if he can carry on in that vein.
Sunday, July 19, 2026
Is Farage set to lose Clacton?
The Independent reports that Farage has, in the words of one constituent in Clacton, “gone full conspiracy theory” in explaining to voters there why he has called his surprise by-election:
A look at the local Facebook pages and other forums shows that the contest against Count Binface – and more than 30 other candidates – with all the other main parties boycotting “a fake by-election” is not giving Mr Farage the full support and acclaim he may have hoped for in the Essex town and villages he hopes to represent again.
In his letter explaining why he has called a by-election, Mr Farage has clearly decided not to hold back in his claims that he and his friends are victims of a grand conspiracy involving Labour, the establishment and the media.
In what one constituent described as “a self-pitying diatribe”, he wrote: “Since I was elected, the Labour government, their friends in the media and the establishment in this country have done everything they can to destroy me, my family, the party, our donors and the millions of people like you who support us.”
He went on: “They have vilified us. They have sought to intimidate us. They have made life harder for those around us.”
He claimed the media/establishment conspiracy has “made it increasingly difficult to provide the security my family needs while at the same time publishing stories that make security even more necessary”.
In an oblique reference to his row with Sky News over doorstepping, he alleged his home and family “have been targeted” and declared: “I have had enough!”
But the Reform UK leader did not stop there and instead waded into the weeds of a much deeper conspiracy.
“To make things worse the establishment is now seeking to rewrite the rules of politics itself.”
He alleged that votes for 16-year-olds, and attempts to postpone council elections in Essex because of a local government reorganisation and change donation rules banning foreign donations and cryptocurrency are all designed to “stop Reform”.
There is no mention of the Thailand-based crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne or the £5m donation he gave the Reform UK leader which went undeclared with the parliamentary authorities and Electoral Commission and is now subject to an investigation.
It also failed to mention the convicted criminal George Cottrell, who was an ever-present in Clacton during the general election and part of Mr Farage’s inner circle for more than a decade.
Although the reference to “friends” may have meant “Posh George”, as Mr Cottrell is known.
But Mr Farage claimed: “Week after week politicians and the media have worked together to plant negative stories with the intention of suspending me as your MP. Their aim is to force a by-election so the people of Clacton will vote against me.”
This is why he claims he has asked for an early by-election, while not mentioning that they may have another contest soon if he is suspended.
But he concluded: “This is a contest between the people of Clacton and the entire political establishment.”
His constituents though appear to have spotted the bullshit and spoken out online:
In one local Facebook group, a voter fact-checked the letter using AI.
They said: “Several of the claims are either false or rhetorical dressed up as fact.”
On donations and the delay of the Essex election, they noted: “There is no evidence [they were] specifically targeting Reform.”
On Mr Farage suggesting the establishment “cannot beat us fairly at the ballot box”, they noted: “This is opinion not fact and it’s ageing badly. Recent Ipsos polling shows Reform’s lead over Labour narrowing sharply.”
They also noted that Mr Farage falsely claimed the investigation into him is being run by “the Labour government” when “the actual investigation is being run by the Independent Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards”.
And they noted that the reference to 350 poll leads by Mr Farage is “being used to imply invincibility at exactly the moment his actual polling lead is shrinking”.
Another constituent got more than 3,000 likes for a suggestion: “MP stands for missing person. Farage is throwing a ball for dogs and we are the dog.”
There is also some disquiet over concerns Mr Farage is attempting to weaponise Ann Widdecombe’s murder.
“He even used putting a wreath for Ann’s murder to get on TV, [and] was caught waiting for the cameraman to roll,” said one constituent.
One is tempted to suggest that if the notoriously thin-skinned Reform UK leader can't stand the heat, he should get out of the kitchen. Scrutiny is a normal part of the political process, there is no reason why Farage should be exempt from it.
And if he seeks to bend the rules by using secretive cryptocurrency trnsactions to fund his party and pull in millions of pounds from abroad, then he should expect that those abuses are properly regulated.
Farage's plan is not working out as he hoped, and if Count Binface does well, or even wins, then most of the country will be laughing at a man who seemingly can't stand being laughed at.
Farage's plan is not working out as he hoped, and if Count Binface does well, or even wins, then most of the country will be laughing at a man who seemingly can't stand being laughed at.
Saturday, July 18, 2026
The cinema in a church that became a curry house
They say that after the church's closure, a veteran of the cinema scene in South Wales, Lynn Thomas, bought the building and converted it into Studio Cinemas, which opened in 1977:
Studio Cinemas originally had two screens, but when a third was added, the cinema changed its name to Studios 1-2-3.
Screen 1 was located in the main body of the former church. Screen 2 was located in the former crypt underneath the building, and Screen 3 was placed behind Screen 1 - in the area formerly occupied by the altar.
According to accounts, the 484-capacity complex was a rather DIY affair. People who visited remember that:
* At least some of the seating was salvaged from the Albert Hall and the Carlton (two Swansea cinemas that had already closed, or were on their last legs).
* Two salvaged car speakers were mounted on the walls of Screen 3 and advertised as “Studio Stereo.”
* Projectors were set up on steel file cabinets laid on their side and the old church pews to get the beam above people’s heads.
* In the crypt, the screen was projected using a homemade inverted periscope.
The rather ramshackle nature of the cinema did cause some problems:
In March 1989, Swansea Council pulled up Lynn Thomas about the state of his premises, the front of which was full of rubbish and overgrown with brambles. “It’s a tip, an absolute disgrace,” Councillor Richard Lewis told the public protection committee.
Thomas defended himself, saying that he did tidy the premises daily, but by the evening it was full of discarded rubbish again. As for the brambles, he added that they “are living breathing things, though beauty is in the eye of the beholder… If the council is willing to give me a grant I will do something about it.”
There were complaints about the inside of the cinema too. Two years earlier, The Studio was at risk of losing its license after it was discovered that extensive fire safety work and repairs were required to bring it up to standard. Problems noted included batteries in the boiler room (an explosion risk), loose floorboards, filthy carpets, and fire exit doors that were bolted shut.
Despite all of its troubles, Studio Cinemas survived until the opening of Parc Tawe’s new £5 million 10-screen UCI cinema at the end of September 1989. It closed for its regular annual summer holiday in August, but never re-opened.
Lynn Thomas told The Evening Post in November of that year: “I am considering whether to close down and move elsewhere or re-open after major refurbishment… but so far nothing has been decided.”
Should he re-open, Thomas was concerned that a city like Swansea would not be able to sustain a total of 17 screens across all its cinemas. He added, “… change is inevitable and it may be that after being in a winning situation for 13 years we’re now in a losing situation.”
The Studio Cinemas building was put up for sale in April 1990, with plans at various times for a nightclub, or offices with an underground car park.
It was bought and renovated in the 2000s, becoming a rather smart Indian restaurant called Miahs. However, that business has also closed and the church is now derelict.
Labels: lochist
Friday, July 17, 2026
Reform hypocrisy on 'hurty words'
He talks about his own experience as the son of a former cabinet minister and the protection officers who dominated his formative years, with emergency buttons everywhere and discusses the response of Reform politicians in particular, who, rightly or wrongly, believe that they are all targets and that nobody cares:
Frightened people say foolish things but it’s hard not to notice how closely Reform UK’s response to Widdecombe’s death has matched its broader political messaging. “It’s as though someone in the establishment wants us dead,” said Richard Tice of the authorities’ failure, thus far, to hand out bodyguards. Obviously I haven’t phoned the establishment to check but this strikes me as grandiose. What, all of you? Not just the boss? Even if Britain functioned like Russia, I’m not sure they’d think it worth the bother. What’s more, it appears Nigel Farage was offered protection equal to Kemi Badenoch and turned it down. That doesn’t mean Tice is wrong to be worried. Of course he isn’t. If Widdecombe was at risk, he could be too. Maniacs follow no rules.
So what to do about them? Yesterday, Reform’s party chairman, Zia Yusuf, demanded round-the-clock protection for all 650 MPs. Aside from the expense, the obvious flaw here is that this wouldn’t have helped Widdecombe, who wasn’t one, any more than it would Yusuf himself, who isn’t either. It also only deals with a symptom of the real problem. Because if we really do now live in a country where every MP requires the sort of protection once needed by a small handful of cabinet ministers, then surely that’s the bit to fix.
Here, though, Reform is on tricky ground. Yesterday Yusuf also hit out at rival politicians for “equating us to murderous regimes that butchered tens of millions of people”, on the basis that it might incite violence. I agree with him. I’m not sure he agrees with himself.
Reform, remember, is also the party that put Lucy Connolly on stage, introducing her as “Britain’s favourite political prisoner” after she called for asylum hotels to be firebombed. For two years they led, with sneers, the argument that mere “hurty words” hurt nobody. Meanwhile, Farage has accused Richard Hermer, the attorney-general, of “hating our history and our country” and accused plenty more of plenty more. This very week, Yusuf himself, who seems to be growing increasingly wild, hit back at the former Tory MP Harvey Proctor — who mildly chided Farage for politicising Widdecombe’s death — by publicly denouncing him as “depraved” for a historic gay sex offence that today wouldn’t be illegal. He is also still telling his followers that the Tories “destroyed Britain” and that Andy Burnham is about to destroy it even more. And on, and on.
Either this matters, or it doesn’t. Either maniacs are inspired by incendiary language or they are not. Personally, I think the link is diffuse, but I also think it pretty damn obvious that the more violent and condemnatory our discourse, the more likely it becomes that various maniacs will find focus for their mania.
A week ago, Reform would have called me a snowflake for that. Should their own children come to find themselves living in houses full of buttons they mustn’t press, I wonder if they’ll ever admit, even if only to themselves, that they got this one wrong.
He has a point. Reform politicians have been at the forefront of using this sort of language to demonise people and to encourage people to take matters into their own hands. They say they are victims of establishment hatred, but they are perpetrators as well.
Thursday, July 16, 2026
Has the Chancellor set the tone for a Burnham administration?
The paper adds that reflecting on her two years in the Treasury, Chancellor Reeves urged Britain to be "much bolder" and go "much further" in pursuing closer ties with the bloc:
Ms Reeves also defended her record, stating the economy had "beaten the odds" under her stewardship and she had proven her credibility in "every decision" since Labour was elected.
She concluded by urging incoming prime minister Andy Burnham to balance "radical change" with economic credibility, a mission she said had defined the Labour government and "I know it will remain the mission of the next."
In a speech at Mansion House, Ms Reeves said: “This government has shown that change, indeed radical change, is possible, and the record of the last two years makes clear that governments can achieve that change only when they combine radicalism with credibility.
“I had to earn that credibility in opposition, and I have proven it in government in every action that I have taken as Chancellor.”
Ms Reeves, who has long been a vocal proponent of deepening post-Brexit ties with Brussels, also said the prize of a stronger relationship with the trading bloc would be “immense”.
She called for a UK-EU summit, which was due this month but thrown into doubt after Sir Keir Starmer announced his resignation, to be rescheduled “as soon as possible” to finalise plans for a youth mobility scheme and other agreements on agrifoods and emissions.
Ms Reeves said: “In the age of insecurity in which we live, the economic strength of our country rests on strategic alliances, and no alliance is more important to us than our relationship with the European Union.
“I think that we need to be much bolder and go much further moving towards a trusted economic and security partnership, where the default is the UK is included not excluded, recognising that in the majority of cases, that will be the approach with the greatest benefits for Britain.”
It comes after a period of strained UK-US relations, which deteriorated after Sir Keir Starmer ruled out British involvement in the Iran war.
The future of our relations with the EU are absolutely crucial if we are to revive our economy and benefit from sustained growth. The Rachel Reeves may not retain her job under a Burnham administration but she has set a challenge for her successor and the new Prime Minister that must be responded to positively.
Wednesday, July 15, 2026
Reform adopt the Trump agenda on elections
Reform haven't gone that far yet, though they are not in a position to implement those sort of changes, but an amendment to the elections bill by their MPs certainly seems to be of the same ilk.
Byline Times portrays this amendement as seeking to prevent candidates from using the Irish language, Scottish Gaelic and Cornish on election leaflets, but of course any provision that restricts official literature to just English and Welsh text also undermines attempts to communicate with ethnic minorities in their own language as well, a group that is already having its voting rights affected by the requirement to present ID at polling stations.
The website says that the Reform-backed amendment would mean candidates who use languages that are not English and Welsh would face prison time. It would also impact on the Good Friday Agreement, but that has never been a problem for Reform UK:
New Clause 107 to the Representation of the People Bill – tabled by Reform UK’s deputy leader Richard Tice and co-signed by every sitting Reform MP (including Lee Anderson, Robert Jenrick and Suella Braverman) – would require all election publications material to be “in the English language or the Welsh language” only.
Publishing campaign material in any other language would become a criminal offence – punishable on summary conviction by up to six months’ imprisonment and/or a fine, and becoming an illegal practice for candidates, agents and parties.
The penalties are drafted to apply across the UK – including in Northern Ireland, where the Irish language and Ulster-Scots are protected in law and under the Good Friday Agreement designed to end the decades-long civil war.
The ban on languages other than English or Welsh would appear to criminalise election material published in Irish, used in parts of Northern Ireland, and Scottish Gaelic – including the bilingual leaflets routinely used in constituencies such as Na h-Eileanan an Iar – while exempting Welsh.
Five of six Cornish MPs (four Labour and one Lib Dem) have signed a joint statement at the bottom of this piece, exclusively published by Byline Times, condemning Reform’s proposals.
And the Cornish nationalist party Mebyon Kernow says it is “unbelievable” that MPs from Reform UK have tabled the amendment to the Representation of the People Bill in the House of Commons.
The Scottish National Party has also come out strongly against the proposals. SNP MSP for the Highlands and Islands Maree Todd said: “This despicable anti-Scottish amendment reveals exactly what Reform really thinks of Scotland – and would threaten anyone publishing election materials in Scots or Gaelic with up to six months in prison.
“It’s not even as if this amendment was introduced by one rogue MP – it was tabled by Reform’s Deputy Leader, and co-signed by a number of their MPs.
“Reform must now do the right thing – apologise to the people of Scotland for attempting to criminalise election materials written in the Scottish languages, and immediately withdraw this outrageous amendment.”
An SNP source said “plenty of our election material would fall foul of this – lots of SNP campaign literature, especially in the Western Isles, features Gaelic, even if the materials are not written exclusively in the language, though some are.”
Lots of SNP literature also uses Scots words and phrases, with Scots identified as a distinct language under the European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages. The UK ratified the charter in 2001.
Since there is often overlap, Reform would then presumably have to increase funding for police to identify what they deemed English versus what was Scots.
The SNP has previously offered Gaelic translations of party manifestos, something which would likely be illegal under Reform’s amendment.
Sophia Smith Galer, a language expert and author of How to Kill a Language, told Byline Times the move was “plainly discriminatory.”
“It’s discriminatory not only to the other indigenous languages of the UK affected by this — the ones that aren’t English and Welsh — but also to individuals who could be publishing political literature in any of the migrant languages that also have a home here.”
She added that Reform UK wants to “frame languages as a problem, and as part of a wider problem — multiculturalism.”
“This is part of a broader vilification of languages other than English.”
Britain is a signatory to the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. Smith Galer said it was the defining “instrument we have that protects and promotes language diversity, and minority languages especially… They would take a very dim view of this too.”
A law like this would be “unique in Western Europe,” the linguistics journalist noted. “It’s not something any of our peers has done.”
“What’s funny is that, to police this, you’d probably need multilingual policing. You’d actually require language skills to enforce it. I don’t know if Reform were planning on creating multilingual jobs — I wouldn’t recommend this as the way to go about it — but that’s accidentally what they’ve created.”
This is part of Reform's war on multicultural Britain, an attempt to turn the clock back to an imagined ideal of an all-white, English-speaking UK that never actually existed. Their amendment doesn't just expose their disdain for the country they are meant to represent, but also their ignorance of history and British culture.
Byline Times portrays this amendement as seeking to prevent candidates from using the Irish language, Scottish Gaelic and Cornish on election leaflets, but of course any provision that restricts official literature to just English and Welsh text also undermines attempts to communicate with ethnic minorities in their own language as well, a group that is already having its voting rights affected by the requirement to present ID at polling stations.
The website says that the Reform-backed amendment would mean candidates who use languages that are not English and Welsh would face prison time. It would also impact on the Good Friday Agreement, but that has never been a problem for Reform UK:
New Clause 107 to the Representation of the People Bill – tabled by Reform UK’s deputy leader Richard Tice and co-signed by every sitting Reform MP (including Lee Anderson, Robert Jenrick and Suella Braverman) – would require all election publications material to be “in the English language or the Welsh language” only.
Publishing campaign material in any other language would become a criminal offence – punishable on summary conviction by up to six months’ imprisonment and/or a fine, and becoming an illegal practice for candidates, agents and parties.
The penalties are drafted to apply across the UK – including in Northern Ireland, where the Irish language and Ulster-Scots are protected in law and under the Good Friday Agreement designed to end the decades-long civil war.
The ban on languages other than English or Welsh would appear to criminalise election material published in Irish, used in parts of Northern Ireland, and Scottish Gaelic – including the bilingual leaflets routinely used in constituencies such as Na h-Eileanan an Iar – while exempting Welsh.
Five of six Cornish MPs (four Labour and one Lib Dem) have signed a joint statement at the bottom of this piece, exclusively published by Byline Times, condemning Reform’s proposals.
And the Cornish nationalist party Mebyon Kernow says it is “unbelievable” that MPs from Reform UK have tabled the amendment to the Representation of the People Bill in the House of Commons.
The Scottish National Party has also come out strongly against the proposals. SNP MSP for the Highlands and Islands Maree Todd said: “This despicable anti-Scottish amendment reveals exactly what Reform really thinks of Scotland – and would threaten anyone publishing election materials in Scots or Gaelic with up to six months in prison.
“It’s not even as if this amendment was introduced by one rogue MP – it was tabled by Reform’s Deputy Leader, and co-signed by a number of their MPs.
“Reform must now do the right thing – apologise to the people of Scotland for attempting to criminalise election materials written in the Scottish languages, and immediately withdraw this outrageous amendment.”
An SNP source said “plenty of our election material would fall foul of this – lots of SNP campaign literature, especially in the Western Isles, features Gaelic, even if the materials are not written exclusively in the language, though some are.”
Lots of SNP literature also uses Scots words and phrases, with Scots identified as a distinct language under the European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages. The UK ratified the charter in 2001.
Since there is often overlap, Reform would then presumably have to increase funding for police to identify what they deemed English versus what was Scots.
The SNP has previously offered Gaelic translations of party manifestos, something which would likely be illegal under Reform’s amendment.
Sophia Smith Galer, a language expert and author of How to Kill a Language, told Byline Times the move was “plainly discriminatory.”
“It’s discriminatory not only to the other indigenous languages of the UK affected by this — the ones that aren’t English and Welsh — but also to individuals who could be publishing political literature in any of the migrant languages that also have a home here.”
She added that Reform UK wants to “frame languages as a problem, and as part of a wider problem — multiculturalism.”
“This is part of a broader vilification of languages other than English.”
Britain is a signatory to the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. Smith Galer said it was the defining “instrument we have that protects and promotes language diversity, and minority languages especially… They would take a very dim view of this too.”
A law like this would be “unique in Western Europe,” the linguistics journalist noted. “It’s not something any of our peers has done.”
“What’s funny is that, to police this, you’d probably need multilingual policing. You’d actually require language skills to enforce it. I don’t know if Reform were planning on creating multilingual jobs — I wouldn’t recommend this as the way to go about it — but that’s accidentally what they’ve created.”
This is part of Reform's war on multicultural Britain, an attempt to turn the clock back to an imagined ideal of an all-white, English-speaking UK that never actually existed. Their amendment doesn't just expose their disdain for the country they are meant to represent, but also their ignorance of history and British culture.
Tuesday, July 14, 2026
Are Plaid Cymru serious about government?
The news site says that at a meeting of the British Irish Council on Guernsey on Friday, Plaid Cymru's First Minister Rhun ap Iorwerth said it was "Labour's call" and the proposal was "the offer" because ministers were working under tight financial constraints. But is that good enough from a party that has taken on the responsibiity of government?
The difference between the two parties lies with a single issue, with Plaid Cymru having pitched an extra £80m over two years for pupils with additional learning needs, but Labour holding out for £100m in this supplementary budget alone:
Labour's finance spokesperson Huw Thomas said the party would oppose the budget "as it stands".
Ap Iorwerth told BBC Wales that Labour should "reflect on why they would want to disappoint parents and local authorities... when there was such a comprehensive package on the table".
He added: "It's their call now."
Asked if he would have to go back to Labour with an improved offer, he said: "We have this offer on the table, which is 10 times more than Labour was going to spend on additional learning needs.
"We are ready to move forward with this."
Ap Iorwerth said that his government had pushed the boundaries and were working in a very tight constraint.
In response Huw Thomas said the offer was not enough.
"As it stands we will be opposing it now," he said.
He added: "There are certain things that happen if the supplementary budget isn't passed, but we'll be available to come back and vote for it the following week if that's what Plaid wants to do, if they meet our demands."
This is the first big test for the new minority government and they appear to be failing it badly, choosing instead an oppositional war of words rather than taking responsibility and going back to the negotiating table.
Labour and those other parties who are supporting headteachers and local councils on the issue of ALN funding have a valid case, but more importantly they have the luxury of holding out until they get what they want or something close to it.
Ministers do not have that luxury. The vote on the supplementary budget could be a painful wake-up call for Plaid Cymru.
Monday, July 13, 2026
Binface: the back story
The paper says that the likelihood is that when the residents of Clacton come to cast their votes in the newly announced by-election later this summer, they will have a choice between two main candidates: a man with a habit of spouting (what is, to some) total rubbish and… a sentient bin.
This is because, in a rare show of unity, the major parties have refused to put forward candidates to fight in Clacton. Labour and the Tories alike have disdained Farage’s decision, with Kemi Badenoch describing the by-election as “fake” and Keir Starmer calling it “a desperate political stunt”.
This means that Farage’s only challenger appears to be Count Binface, the intergalactic rubbish basket-wearing alter ego of comedian Jon Harvey, who, over the course of the past decade, has become a strange fixture of British politics, sneaking into the frame of almost every big election. But who is this enigmatic alien?
The paper says that Harvey studied Classics at Oxford before embarking on a writing career, which has seen him work on TV shows such as Have I Got News for You, The Revolution Will Be Televised and Armando Iannucci’s The Thick of It, which surely allowed him to hone his appreciation for the topsy-turvy weirdness of Westminster:
His interest in comedy and politics, he has previously revealed, was fostered by his older brother Dan during a childhood that was often turbulent, Harvey explained in a powerful piece for The Times in 2024. Their dad was an alcoholic, and he wrote, “we suffered it as a secret shame and it burnt us”; the brothers got through it by “wrap[ping] ourselves in a comfort blanket of shared passions”, laughing at old episodes of Blackadder.
In 2015, Dan died unexpectedly at the age of 43 and was posthumously diagnosed with diabetes. Since then, Harvey has admitted, he has struggled with the sense of guilt that so often plagues the suddenly bereaved. “In low moments, my heart thumps with failure. The thought that I could have done something else,” he told The Times. “That I should have tried harder.”
His strange side hustle as a joke candidate, he reckons, emerged as an “admittedly eccentric” means to keep Dan’s spirit alive and “to help his joy continue to radiate”. His first foray into politics was under the guise of Lord Buckethead, a creation inspired by a character from the sci-fi parody Gremloids, a 1984 movie that aimed to spoof Star Wars; Buckethead was their low-budget version of Darth Vader.
Donning a tall black bucket on, erm, his head, Harvey contested the 2017 general election against then-PM Theresa May in her Maidenhead constituency; he earned 249 votes by promising “strong, not entirely stable leadership”.
When Buckethead’s political travails were covered in the media, however, Harvey became embroiled in a copyright row with the writer of Gremloids, and so decided to take on a new cosmic persona, giving himself a slight title bump-up in the process. Count Binface was born.
He went on to stand against Johnson (in 2019) and Sunak (in 2024), as well as taking part in the London mayoral elections twice, with his biggest success coming in 2021, when he earned more votes than far-right group Britain First’s candidate Nick Scanlon. His campaigns tend to be crowdfunded online, with any surplus going to the homelessness charity Shelter.
When he’s not dressing up as a trash can, Harvey lives in Sussex with his wife Sarah, an actor and voice artist, and their two children; in a recent feature for The Times, he revealed how he has been camping out in the living room since their youngest was born, to allow Sarah to peacefully co-sleep with the baby.
And even space aristocracy, it seems, are feeling the pinch of the cost of living crisis. “My wife and I are both freelancers, so our incomes can vary wildly and I’m the primary breadwinner, which brings pressures of its own, especially now I’m a father of two,” he wrote in the same paper earlier this week.
After Farage has spent so long attempting to turn political discourse into theatre, there’s a certain logic to the fact that he now seems about to be joined on that stage by a jester – especially one who might appeal to those who think that politics is, well, rubbish.
It's going to difficult for Farage to argue he is being victimised by the establishment when his chief opponent is an alien with a bin on his head.
Sunday, July 12, 2026
Convicted fraudster was introduced as Farage’s chief of staff
The paper says that others who have been closely involved in the party have also claimed Cottrell arranged the Land Rovers that ferried Reform’s newly elected MPs to parliament, and that he covered the cost of a fundraising lunch with potential donors before the national vote:
Questions about the role of Cottrell – who is a convicted fraudster – and the extent to which he has provided undeclared support for Farage have been building over the past week as the Reform leader comes under unprecedented pressure.
On Wednesday, the Guardian revealed that a loan from Cottrell to Reform’s deputy leader, Richard Tice, was highlighted by bankers in suspicious activity reports. SARs are a way to raise concerns with the National Crime Agency; they are not proof of wrongdoing but flags for further investigation.
Among other SARs about transactions involving Reform was one relating to a £1m donation from Cottrell’s mother, Fiona, to Britain Means Business, a fundraising organisation for the party. The Guardian understands bank staff were not satisfied that the funds had ultimately come from her.
The Times reported this week that Cottrell had given out a business card with his name on and an official email address for Farage and had provided security, accommodation and staffing for the Reform leader before the election.
Tony Mack, who was initially Reform’s candidate for the Essex constituency of Clacton in 2024, told the Guardian that Cottrell was introduced as Farage’s chief of staff during meetings.
“I remember thinking that it was an odd term to use for someone who was unelected at that point,” said Mack, a psychotherapist and charity worker.
Things really are starting to get interesting now.
Saturday, July 11, 2026
The largest abbey in Wales
The Abbey was established in 1129 AD when Richard I de Grenville, one of the Twelve Knights of Glamorgan, gave 8,000 acres of his estate in Glamorgan to Savigniac monks from western Normandy:
The first monks arrived in 1130. Following the merging of the Savigniac order into the Cistercian order in 1147, Neath Abbey also became a Cistercian house. The abbey was ravaged by the Welsh uprisings of the 13th century. During the dissolution of the monasteries by King Henry VIII of England the last abbot, Lleision ap Thomas, managed to buy time through payment of a large fine in 1536, but the abbey was dissolved in 1539. In letters to the Cistercian General Chapter, Lleision served as a spokesman for the Welsh abbeys.
At this time, the abbey was turned into a large estate, initially granted to Richard Williams, although by 1600 it was owned by Sir John Herbert, and had a substantial Tudor mansion occupying a part of the cloisters. The mansion itself was only habitable for 100 years or so, before being abandoned as the site became a scene of industry.
By 1730, some of the buildings were being used for copper smelting, and the rest were abandoned. In the late 18th century, an iron foundry was opened near the abbey ruins by a company owned by the Price, Fox and Tregelles families. The ruined walls of both the Abbey and later mansion were gradually engulfed in quantities of industrial waste. The ownership of the site passed to the Rice family, Barons Dynevor, and it was in the 1920s, under Walter FitzUryan Rice, 7th Baron Dynevor that a local group of amateur archaeologists began the process of uncovering the medieval ruins.
As the site says the site has also had some commercial uses in modern times:
A motorcycle speedway track was constructed in 1962 and the Neath Welsh Dragons rode for one year adjacent to the Abbey. The west side of the Abbey was so close to the banking that the Abbey ruins looked as though it formed part of the track.
The area adjacent to the ruins is used by a car retailer and a number of smaller businesses and workshops.
The site has been used to film several episodes of television series Doctor Who. The Time Lord (played by Matt Smith) and his companion Amy Pond (Karen Gillan) have filmed several times at the site, which was transformed into a complete structure.
The site was also used for shots during the filming of the BBC television series Merlin, for example the castle of the ancient kings where Arthur rediscovered the round table in Series 3 episode 13
The West Glamorgan Archive service currently holds the world-renowned Neath Abbey Ironworks collection, comprising around 8,000 engineering drawings dating from 1792 to 1882.
These ironworks were built by the Quaker firm of Fox and Company of Cornwall in 1792, finally closing in 1885. During its lifetime, the works produced stationary mining engines, railway locomotives, steam and iron sailing ships for customers, mostly in the United Kingdom but sometimes for British and foreign entrepreneurs based on the European continent and much further abroad, in Mexico and Australia for example.
Labels: lochist
Friday, July 10, 2026
Ex-Labour MP tells of being sidelined to enable Starmer parachutist
The news site says that in a statement posted on Facebook on Wednesday, the ex-Labour MP said he wanted to set the record straight “in case there remains any misunderstanding” about his departure from the party after more than 40 years of membership:
Mr Davies represented Swansea West from 2010 until 2024, winning four elections, and previously served as MP for Croydon Central.
He was suspended by Labour in June 2023 after allegations of inappropriate behaviour towards women were published anonymously online — allegations he denied, which did not involve criminal conduct, and which were never tested at a hearing.
Mr Davies says the suspension came a week before he was due to be confirmed as Labour’s Swansea West candidate for the 2024 general election.
In an interview with Nation.Cymru last month, he said the party’s handling of the case amounted to being put on “political death row”.
He says he waited 23 weeks to be told what the complaints against him were — against a six-week standard recommended by the party-commissioned Forde Report — and that no disciplinary hearing was convened in more than a year of suspension.
When the general election was called in May 2024, he says the party refused to hold a hearing in the two weeks before candidate nominations closed — meaning he remained suspended and could not stand as Labour’s candidate.
Mr Davies says he repeatedly asked for the hearing he believed would clear his name, and responded to the complaints within two weeks of finally receiving them.
He resigned from the party after the election, describing its complaints process as one he had “completely lost my trust and confidence” in.
Torsten Bell, now Pensions Minister, was selected as Labour’s Swansea West candidate and elected in July 2024.
The complaints process was overseen by the party’s then executive legal director, Alex Barros-Curtis — who was later selected as Labour’s candidate for the vacant Cardiff West seat, and elected in July 2024.
Mr Davies told Nation.Cymru it was “difficult not to conclude” that the objective of the process “was not to get to the truth of the allegation in an independent forum, but to ensure that I did not stand for re-election”.
In a statement, a Labour Party spokesperson said the party “assesses all complaints thoroughly in line with our rules and procedures”.
Although Davies' statement is inevitably self-serving, it still provides some insight into how the Labour Party operates and the way they create spaces for their favoured parachutists.
Thursday, July 09, 2026
National Crime Agency asked to look at Reform UK funding
The paper says that, separately to the undisclosed £5m gift provided to the Reform leader, Nigel Farage, by a cryptocurrency billionaire shortly before the 2024 general election being reported to the NCA, banking staff judged that transfers of funds between Richard Tice, the party’s deputy leader, a major donor, Fiona Cottrell, and the senior party figure and convicted fraudster George Cottrell, required further investigation:
Suspicious activity reports (SARs) raised by bankers were passed to the NCA for examination.
Tice, via lawyers, threatened to injunct the Guardian to stop it publishing these details.
Without responding to any of the questions put to him, Tice then appears to have shared the allegations contained in the Guardian’s requests for comment with the Telegraph, which wrote them up without credit or contact ahead of publication.
The disclosures have come from a Guardian investigation in which a number of finance industry sources have provided information they believe raises questions over the funding of Reform UK.
...
The Guardian understands finance industry figures have raised at least four SARs relating to concerns about transactions involving senior figures in Reform:
* One relates to a £1m donation made to Britain Means Business, a fundraising organisation for Reform UK, before the last general election. Half of the £1m was then transferred by Tice, as director of the company, to Reform UK. Renamed from Leave Means Leave, Britain Means Business is a company that is used to help fund Reform. The £1m seemingly came from the aristocrat and Reform UK donor Fiona Cottrell. In this instance, the Guardian understands bank staff were not satisfied that the funds had ultimately come from her. The NCA has sought help from a foreign partner agency to trace the original source of the funds.
* Two other SARs relate to a loan from George Cottrell to Tice. The loan was made shortly before Tice finalised a property purchase and made a party donation, and was not repaid until after those two transactions were completed, according to sources. George Cottrell is the son of Fiona Cottrell, and is a convicted fraudster, former deputy treasurer of Ukip and close associate of Farage.
* A fourth relates to the £5m gift from the Thailand-based businessman Christopher Harborne to Farage, which was first revealed by the Guardian in April.
Regulated individuals in some sectors, such as accountants, bankers, real estate agents and solicitors, have a legal obligation to submit SARs to the NCA if they have “knowledge or suspicion of money laundering”. There are rules designed to ensure that SARs are sufficiently detailed for the authorities to be able to investigate them.
SARs are not the same as crime reports or proof of wrongdoing, and are usually regarded as markers for law enforcement agencies to take a more rigorous look and potentially investigate.
The money behind Farage and Reform UK is under acute political and public scrutiny. He is being investigated by the parliamentary standards watchdog over the £5m gift, which Farage has variously described as being needed to pay for lifetime security, and also as a reward for “getting Brexit done”. On Tuesday, he resigned from his Clacton seat to trigger a byelection, in which he will stand. However, this move is likely to only pause, rather than close, the investigation and any potential reprimand.
The prime minister, Keir Starmer, and the Conservative leader, Kemi Badenoch, have led cross-party calls for Farage to “come clean” over his financial affairs.
The filing of the SARs raises questions about whether Electoral Commission rules and the MPs’ code of conduct are being adhered to by Reform, and whether the rules are fit for purpose if, as critics of Farage have suggested, Reform has blurred the boundaries of personal and political finance.
Farage may have resigned to fight a by-election to try and distract attention from these dealings, but they are not going away.
Wednesday, July 08, 2026
Other parties shouldn't play Farage's game
For some reason the Reform UK leader believes that his resignation is part of “sticking two fingers up at the establishment” which will prove that the public wanted him to stay on as an MP.
In fact, it looks more like a blatant attempt to avoid responsibility for his actions, including the failure to declare a £5m gift from the crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne and financial support from his friend and fraudster George Cottrell.
For some reason, Farage believes that the establishment is out to get him, which is ridiculous as there is nobody more establishment than him. How this will play out has to be seen, but already there is speculation that the Reform UK leader will not have things all his own way:
Farage won the seat with a majority of 8,400 in 2024 with the Conservatives coming second and Labour third.
However, he could face a wave of tactical voting against him if there were to be an alliance of progressive parties, and a concerted effort against him by the even further right Restore Britain, led by the former Reform MP Rupert Lowe.
Lowe has not said yet whether his party will fight the byelection, but he criticised Farage’s decision to lead a media circus to Clacton. “Farage has proven one thing today and one thing only – everything that he does is about one person,” he said.
The opposition parties have now indicated that they don't plan to fight the election, not wantng to legitimse the stunt. The Lib Dems have added that Farage is a “Temu Trump” who gave a “self-obsessed diatribe” and had done nothing for his constituents while lining his own pockets.
Of course, the government don't have to keep to Farage's timetable. Ed Davey has already suggested that Nigel Farage’s resignation should be blocked until the Standards Commissioner finishes investigating him so that the people of Clacton have the full facts.
For some reason, Farage believes that the establishment is out to get him, which is ridiculous as there is nobody more establishment than him. How this will play out has to be seen, but already there is speculation that the Reform UK leader will not have things all his own way:
Farage won the seat with a majority of 8,400 in 2024 with the Conservatives coming second and Labour third.
However, he could face a wave of tactical voting against him if there were to be an alliance of progressive parties, and a concerted effort against him by the even further right Restore Britain, led by the former Reform MP Rupert Lowe.
Lowe has not said yet whether his party will fight the byelection, but he criticised Farage’s decision to lead a media circus to Clacton. “Farage has proven one thing today and one thing only – everything that he does is about one person,” he said.
The opposition parties have now indicated that they don't plan to fight the election, not wantng to legitimse the stunt. The Lib Dems have added that Farage is a “Temu Trump” who gave a “self-obsessed diatribe” and had done nothing for his constituents while lining his own pockets.
Of course, the government don't have to keep to Farage's timetable. Ed Davey has already suggested that Nigel Farage’s resignation should be blocked until the Standards Commissioner finishes investigating him so that the people of Clacton have the full facts.
Let's do everything we can to foil Farage's plan and remind him that if he has broken the rules getting re-elected like this in no way wipes the slate clean.
Tuesday, July 07, 2026
Why Plaid should not repeat their badger cull policy
An article by Billie-Jade Thomas, the Senior Public Affairs Manager for the RSPCA, on the Institute for Welsh Affairs site reports that while it is still very much early days for the new Plaid Cymru minority government and the expanded Senedd, tackling Bovine TB (bTB) has already been raised in Plenary on several occasions, by parties for and against badger culling.
She says that the RSPCA has identified the potential introduction of a badger cull as one of the biggest threats to animals in Wales in the coming years, with Plaid Cymru having included references to ‘wildlife control’ in dealing with bTB in their election manifesto:
While we understand – and agree – that effectively managing bTB can have a significant impact on improving farmers’ mental health and wellbeing, as well as the health and welfare of their cattle, we remain firmly opposed to badger culling as the solution. This is based on both scientific and animal welfare evidence.
Badgers are a protected species by law, and are considered one of our most iconic and popular species of native wildlife. Recent polling undertaken by Savanta on behalf of the RSPCA backs this sentiment, with 73% of people in Wales selecting badgers as one of the species they are most concerned about when given a variety to choose from. Furthermore, more than half of those polled (54%) recognised them as ‘iconic British mammals’ when asked what associations they have with badgers, with 43% considering them ‘heavily misunderstood’. Notably, only one in five (20%)* consider them to be ‘disease spreaders’.
Badger culling has been happening in England intensively every year since 2013, which has resulted in over 247,000 badgers being killed as part of its disease prevention programme. However, there is still no scientific consensus that the culling of badgers has been effective in reducing bTB in cattle in England, with the disease still prevalent across the border. While some stakeholders continue to believe that badgers play a major role in the spread of bTB, the science is now clear and there is consensus that this is incorrect. It is now widely recognised that the majority of bTB is transmitted between cattle, with a growing body of robust scientific evidence showing that the majority of infection occurs within and between herds. This was also acknowledged in the UK Government’s new strategy for England which was published on the 10th of June which recommends stricter measures to prevent cattle-cattle infections.
Badger culling has not been used by the Welsh Government since 2012. Still, new herd incidents of bTB in Wales have declined by over 40% since 2010, due, in part, to the various measures put in place over the last decade to limit transfer of the disease between infected cattle. According to the latest quarterly data, herd prevalence is currently at its lowest value since January 2017. New data published on the 17th of June shows a decrease of 23% in relation to new herd instances in Wales covering the 12 months to March 2026. Meanwhile, the number of animals slaughtered also decreased by 21% over the same period. As it stands, almost 95% of herds in Wales are currently free from bTB, under a 14 year programme which focused on reducing cattle-cattle transmission as opposed to culling badgers. While demonstrable progress has been – and is being – made, we agree that more could be done to accelerate Wales’ ambition to be Officially TB Free (OTF). As such, we are calling for farmers to be better supported by the new Welsh Government to take more cost-effective measures such as improved testing – for routine surveillance, as well as pre and post-movement, restricted herd movement, safer trading and enhanced farm biosecurity.
More than half of England’s last estimated badger population was culled in England between 2013 and 2025, with figures from Defra demonstrating that costs associated with culling cost the public purse more than £23.7 million between 2014-2024. Despite this, bTB persists across the border. Due to the failure of badger culling to control the disease, the UK Government confirmed its intention to move away from culling in 2024, and we have since seen an end to 13 years of intensive culling. The UK Government’s change in policy is in line with fulfilling its ambition for England to be Officially TB Free (OTF) by 2038. This in itself signals an acknowledgement that lethal badger control is not needed to achieve bTB eradication.
As Billie Jade says with Wales being home to around 61,000 badgers, if the Welsh Government undertakes a similar trajectory to England’s previous approach in the coming years, thousands of these animals will be killed. However, it is likely that bTB will continue to persist, if we are to learn anything from England’s experience.
None of the experts or the groups set up by the Welsh Government, the Bovine TB Technical Advisory Group (TAG) for Wales and the Bovine TB Eradication Programme Board are advocating a cull. Any changes in Wales’ policy on controlling bTB that involves badger culling have the potential to lead to thousands of animals being killed unnecessarily, without eradicating the disease. Let's hope the new Minister listens.
Monday, July 06, 2026
Farage and the gifts from crypto entrepreneur convicted of fraud
The paper says that Reform MP, Robert Jenrick has admitted that the his leader had accepted staff, security and accommodation from George Cottrell, but claimed they were personal gifts provided before he became an MP and so did not need to be declared:
Jenrick’s comments came after the Sunday Times revealed Cottrell, who was convicted of wire fraud in the US, had hired social media staff for Farage and allowed him to stay in his townhouse near Buckingham Palace.
Asked by the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg whether Cottrell paid for staff to run Farage’s social media presence in 2024, Jenrick said: “Yes, absolutely.”
But he added: “You’re allowed to accept a gift, support, whatever you want to call it, from a personal friend before you’re a member of parliament, if it’s in a purely personal capacity.
“When you’re a news presenter and you’ve just been on the jungle [in the TV programme I’m a Celebrity … Get Me Out of Here!], you do create social media content that’s nothing to do with his job as a member of parliament, because he wasn’t a member of parliament.”
Jenrick also acknowledged Farage stayed in Cottrell’s house “a couple of times” and accepted private security paid for by him. “Reform have been completely open about this,” he said.
The revelations add to questions about how Farage has financed his lifestyle before and since becoming an MP.
The Guardian revealed earlier this year that the Reform leader had failed to declare a £5m donation from the crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne just before he announced his intention to stand for parliament.
Parliamentary rules say that MPs must declare gifts, benefits and hospitality received in the year preceding their election if they could in any way relate to their political activities. There is an exemption, however, for gifts which are provided in a purely personal capacity.
The Liberal Democrats have now written to the parliamentary standards commissioner, who is already investigating the Harborne money, asking him to look into the gifts provided by Cottrell too.
Whether these dodgy connections and obsession with accumulating wealth has any impact on Reform UK's polling has to be seen, but in my view the man is not fit to hold public office.
Sunday, July 05, 2026
Not in our name
The paper says that the plan to attach the flags to brackets on about 180 lamp-posts and other places was agreed in the autumn by Nottinghamshire’s council, won by Nigel Farage’s party in last year’s May elections.
They add that a report by the authority justified the £75,000 cost as a way to “enhance civic pride”, saying the national flag was “seen as embodying national unity and the collective values of all the peoples and communities of the United Kingdom”. This did not go down well with local people:
After some criticism of the scheme and its cost, in December last year Lee Anderson, the Reform MP whose Ashfield seat is in the county and who is close to the council’s leader, Mick Barton, posted a video to social media.
Filming himself in Ashfield at one of the flag sites, along with Barton and James Walker-Gurley, another Nottinghamshire council cabinet member, Anderson said: “There’s been a few people moaning about these in … the usual third-rate media outlets, saying it’s cost £75,000 and it’s a waste of taxpayers’ money.”
He went on: “Let me tell you: yes, it has cost £75,000 to put these up all throughout Nottinghamshire, but the good news is, it will not cost the taxpayer a single penny because we want to get these sponsored by local businesses.
“They’re going to pay for the fitting, the upkeep and the maintenance. And guess what: we’re actually going to make a profit on these … The people who are spouting this nonsense about its costing us a fortune – it’s not costing you a single penny.”
A Nottinghamshire council spokesperson said that, seven months later, no sponsors had been found, with the council paying for the scheme.
The council has also attracted other controversy since Reform took control, notably a row over its ban on speaking to journalists from the area’s biggest local newspaper, which ended only after a threat of legal action.
So much for Reform UK being the party that was going to transform local government.
Saturday, July 04, 2026
Pontywood
Broadway theatre and musical star Ivor Emmanuel, who was also in Zulu, was born in the village as was international opera singer Rebecca Evans, and singer and songwriter Geraint Griffiths who played in Welsh language bands Hergest and Edward H Dafis. The Richard Burton Appreciation Society is also based there.
Now, as Wales-on-line reports, the village has its own version of the iconic Hollywood sign. It is the work of "mature undercover handymen" in the Afan Valley village, who wish to remain anonymous, as part of their work to brighten up the area, which also involves hanging bunting, strimming vegetation, erecting gazebos, and helping at community events.
The paper says that the sign is best seen from the village's aqueduct and featured in last year's film Mr Burton starring Toby Jones.
But that is not all. Another article in Wales-on-line reveals that a striking new mural has been unveiled celebrating Ivor Emmanuel. The beloved musical theatre performer, television star, singer and actor is probably best remembered for his role as Private Owen in the 1964 film Zulu.
The new mural has been painted on the side of The Colliers Arms pub and shows him wearing the famous red tunic he wore in the blockbuster with an inscription alongside which reads: "Men of Harlech stop your dreaming, can't you see their spear points gleaming. See their warriors' pennants streaming to this battlefield."
Wrexham was of course the first Welsh place to install its own 'Hollywood' sign, but that city cannot boast the richness of talent associated with Pontrhydyfen, and their sign has since been dismantled.
Wrexham was of course the first Welsh place to install its own 'Hollywood' sign, but that city cannot boast the richness of talent associated with Pontrhydyfen, and their sign has since been dismantled.
Labels: lochist
Friday, July 03, 2026
Farage in trouble again?
The paper tells us that the Reform UK leader has said his party’s major donor, Christopher Harborne, wanted nothing in exchange for the £15m he donated to the party and the undeclared £5m gift to Farage the Guardian revealed in April.
But, Farage used a private meeting at the Bank to urge its governor, Andrew Bailey, to drop plans for a state-run alternative to the digital currency that has made Harborne, his Thailand-based benefactor, one of the richest people in the world:
As reported by the Guardian last month, Farage told October’s Zebu Live event in London he regarded the Bank’s plans for a digital pound with “total and utter horror”. He recounted the meeting at Threadneedle Street with Bailey. “I asked him straight: ‘Are you still progressing your plans for a British central bank digital currency?’ And the answer was: ‘Yes.’”
His opposition to the “Britcoin” proposal was so strong that, after the meeting last September, he told the Zebu audience of crypto enthusiasts he would be “prepared to go to prison” to stop it.
The Labour MP Phil Brickell, chair of the parliamentary group on anti-corruption and responsible tax, has now reported Farage’s actions to the standards commissioner, asking him to look into the Reform leader’s interactions with the Bank of England.
The standards commissioner, Daniel Greenberg, is already investigating whether Farage should have declared the £5m gift from Harborne, which he received in the months before he returned to parliament.
However, Brickell said this was a separate matter relating to the parliamentary lobbying rules, which are designed to stop MPs making approaches to public officials or ministers on behalf of companies or individuals that pay them.
Speaking to the Guardian, Brickell said: “Farage took a £5m gift from Christopher Harborne – we know that. We also know that he has since used his platform, both publicly and privately, to advance positions that could benefit Mr Harborne’s crypto interests.
“Before meeting the governor of the Bank of England, Farage openly championed Tether, criticised proposed restrictions on stablecoins and vowed to challenge the Bank’s approach. He has since claimed credit for persuading the Bank to soften its position.”
He added: “This is not simply a debate about cryptocurrency. It is about whether an MP who has received millions from one individual should be lobbying for policies that could increase the value and profitability of that [Reform] donor’s investments. Mr Harborne is a major investor in Tether, a company that stood to gain from the weakening of stablecoin restrictions. Harborne also stood to benefit from opposition to a state-backed digital currency that could compete with private stablecoins."
The BBC reports that US President Donald Trump made more than $1.4bn (£1.05bn) last year from business dealings in cryptocurrency, according to his mandatory financial report. In the UK, there are much stricter rules about what politicians can and cannot do in public office.
As reported by the Guardian last month, Farage told October’s Zebu Live event in London he regarded the Bank’s plans for a digital pound with “total and utter horror”. He recounted the meeting at Threadneedle Street with Bailey. “I asked him straight: ‘Are you still progressing your plans for a British central bank digital currency?’ And the answer was: ‘Yes.’”
His opposition to the “Britcoin” proposal was so strong that, after the meeting last September, he told the Zebu audience of crypto enthusiasts he would be “prepared to go to prison” to stop it.
The Labour MP Phil Brickell, chair of the parliamentary group on anti-corruption and responsible tax, has now reported Farage’s actions to the standards commissioner, asking him to look into the Reform leader’s interactions with the Bank of England.
The standards commissioner, Daniel Greenberg, is already investigating whether Farage should have declared the £5m gift from Harborne, which he received in the months before he returned to parliament.
However, Brickell said this was a separate matter relating to the parliamentary lobbying rules, which are designed to stop MPs making approaches to public officials or ministers on behalf of companies or individuals that pay them.
Speaking to the Guardian, Brickell said: “Farage took a £5m gift from Christopher Harborne – we know that. We also know that he has since used his platform, both publicly and privately, to advance positions that could benefit Mr Harborne’s crypto interests.
“Before meeting the governor of the Bank of England, Farage openly championed Tether, criticised proposed restrictions on stablecoins and vowed to challenge the Bank’s approach. He has since claimed credit for persuading the Bank to soften its position.”
He added: “This is not simply a debate about cryptocurrency. It is about whether an MP who has received millions from one individual should be lobbying for policies that could increase the value and profitability of that [Reform] donor’s investments. Mr Harborne is a major investor in Tether, a company that stood to gain from the weakening of stablecoin restrictions. Harborne also stood to benefit from opposition to a state-backed digital currency that could compete with private stablecoins."
The BBC reports that US President Donald Trump made more than $1.4bn (£1.05bn) last year from business dealings in cryptocurrency, according to his mandatory financial report. In the UK, there are much stricter rules about what politicians can and cannot do in public office.
Thursday, July 02, 2026
Calling out the anti-asylum seeker nonsense
The news site says that in a video posted on TikTok by Kiera Marshall she said it was “time to call bullshit” on disinformation and myths circulating about asylum seekers and refugees living in Wales:
The MS listed a number claims made about people seeking sanctuary which she said were false.
Speaking in her social video, Ms Marshall explained that refugees and asylum seekers do not get priority access to the NHS.
“Yes they get free health care, but they are not prioritised over British tax-payers,” she said.
The newly elected Plaid MS also explained that people seeking sanctuary are not eligible for council housing or social housing while their claim is being processed.
Defending the Welsh Government’s Nation of Sanctuary policy, she said that over the past six years less than 0.05% of Wales’ budget had been spent on the scheme.
Reform want to abolish the scheme because the party views it as a “left-wing experiment” that encourages illegal immigration.
The Welsh Government does not control borders or immigration as these are reserved powers handled solely by the UK Government and the Home Office.
The Nation of Sanctuary policy focuses on supporting asylum seekers and refugees by helping them access public services, housing, language lessons, and health care once they are place in Wales by the Home Office.
91% of the £55m spent on the Nation of Sanctuary scheme over six years has gone towards resettling refugees from Ukraine.
Ms Marshall said: “The real issue here isn’t immigration, it’s inequality and its time we stopped blaming people for fleeing wars and conflict and started blaming billionaires and the super rich.”
Will Hayward in his newsletter goes into more detail. He points out that there are 3,308 people awaiting a decision on an asylum application living in Wales, according to the most recent figures released for May 2026, which is fewer than 4% of the 94,000 people seeking refuge who are dispersed around the wider United Kingdom - well below Wales’ population share:
Someone arriving in a country claiming to need sanctuary from war or persecution is legally defined as “seeking asylum”.
People with that status are not allowed to work, so the Home Office provides a very small amount of money to cover the very basic needs of survival and they are given accommodation.
The individual or family doesn’t decide where they are placed, they’re sent wherever there is capacity and the decision is made by the Home Office. That may be Wales, but it could equally be anywhere from Cornwall to Glasgow.
The basic payment is £49.18 a week per person. £7 a day.
That’s to cover everything including food, toiletries, non-prescription medication, clothing, footwear, travel and anything else we might consider a basic need like a mobile phone or access to the internet.
In rare cases, the initial accommodation provides meals in which case the amount of money a person gets will drop to £9.95 a week. If you’re a pregnant mother, or have a child aged one to three, you get an extra £5.25 a week. If you have a baby under one you are given an extra £9.50 a week.
It is difficult to comprehend how little that money is to live on in Wales in 2026.
Importantly, Will Hayward explains that terminology really matters in this debate:
The term “illegal immigrant” isn’t recognised in immigration law and is widely agreed to be a dehumanising way to reference a person.
A person’s immigration status could be unlawful, but a person themselves cannot be “illegal”.
The only way to claim asylum in the UK is to do so once you’re already here. There is no “asylum visa” you can pre-arrange.
That means some people have to travel to the UK through what’s known as an “irregular route” – that might be a channel crossing on a boat. The only other way is to travel to the UK with one type of visa (like a student visa for example). Once in the UK, they can declare themselves to an immigration official and then they are protected by humanitarian law.
If a person has their asylum claim rejected, then they have “no legal right to remain” and they become liable for removal from the country (if their appeal process is exhausted).
There is a lot of misinformation on this subject, it is important to have the facts.
Wednesday, July 01, 2026
Another Farage payday
The paper says that the Reform UK leader has been criticised in the past over his £400,000-a-year second job promoting the idea for Direct Bullion that people should buy physical gold and put it in their pension pots. This latest payment is double his fee from 2025, was received in May and appears in Farage’s latest entry in parliament’s register of interests, published on Tuesday:
Anna Turley, the Labour party chair, said: “He pretends to be on the side of ordinary working people but in truth he’s just in it for himself and will sell his time to the highest bidder.
“He should be focused on putting more pounds back in his Clacton constituents’ pockets rather than racking up payments off the back of gold sales.”
The Reform leader continues to face pressure over a separate £5m gift from Christopher Harborne, the Thailand-based crypto investor who has given millions of pounds to the party.
Farage has said the payment, which the Guardian revealed in April, was a gift and so did not need to be registered under rules requiring MPs to declare any potential interests in the 12 months before their election.
However, he is facing a formal investigation by the parliamentary standards watchdog. He has given a number of different accounts as to why he received the money, first saying it was intended for personal security costs and then that it was a reward for Brexit.
Asked about the payment, which corresponds to an hourly rate of £22,500, a Reform spokesperson said: “As has previously been reported and declared Nigel Farage is a brand ambassador for Direct Bullion.”
Farage received £91,200 from the company for four hours’ work in January 2025 and £135,000 nine months later for an estimated 12 hours of work over three months.
The latest register of interests also records that he received £18,402 for about six hours of presenting for GB News in June. Other declared work includes speaking engagements for Imperial Independent Media, a US-based consulting firm, and social media work for Google and X.
Nice work if you can get it.
