Category Archives: Uncategorized

Who Are The ‘Waspi Women’ And Why Are They ‘Owed Compensation’?

Posted on by
Reply

A scathing report has called on the government to compensate women born in the 1950s who were affected by increases to their retirement age.

Equalising the age at which men and women receive their retirement payouts has adversely impacted thousands of women, and ministers should issue compensation up to around £3,000, which could cost the government more than £10bn, the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman has said.

Here’s everything you need to know.

Who are the Waspi women?

The so-called Waspi (Women Against State Pension Inequality) women have been campaigning for fairer retirement payouts.

A generation of women born in the 1950s have been left out of pocket by changes to the state pension age to equalise it across genders.

The issues are related to the changing of women’s state pension age, which changed from 60 to 65, to match up with men.

Both have since changed to 66, and the pension age for both men and women is set to rise again from 66 to 67 between 2026 and 2028.

They have campaigned for compensation after arguing many women weren’t adequately informed about the massive shift.

Some are struggling to pay the bills and others are working through ill health.

More than a quarter of a million women have died since the campaign began almost a decade ago, the campaign has said.

What has happened?

The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman has been investigating the issue for five years.

On Thursday, it published its second report, which concluded that those affected by the changes were not adequately informed, and should receive an apology and payouts.

The ombudsman has asked parliament to intervene and “act swiftly” to make sure a compensation scheme is established.

The watchdog said the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has not acknowledged its failings nor put things right for those affected.

The ombudsman’s report has suggested compensation at level four, ranging between £1,000 and £2,950, could be appropriate for each of those affected.

The report stated: “We recognise the very significant cost to taxpayers of compensating all women affected by DWP’s maladministration.

“Compensating all women born in the 1950s at the level four range would involve spending between around £3.5 billion and £10.5 billion of public funds, though we understand not all of them will have suffered injustice.”

What do the Waspi women say?

WASPI chairwoman Angela Madden said it is “simply unbelievable” that to date the DWP had not acknowledged its failings, nor put things right for those affected.

She said: “One of the affected women is dying every 13 minutes, and we just cannot afford to wait any longer.”

What has the government said?

The government is under no obligation to follow the recommendations.

Both the DWP and the prime minister’s official spokesman said the government will consider the ombudsman’s report and respond to their recommendations formally “in due course”.

A DWP spokesman said: “The government has always been committed to supporting all pensioners in a sustainable way that gives them a dignified retirement whilst also being fair to them and taxpayers.

“The state pension is the foundation of income in retirement and will remain so as we deliver a further 8.5% rise in April which will increase the state pension for 12 million pensioners by £900.”

Share Button

Age Ratings For Films With Sex Scenes And Nudity To Be Raised

Posted on by
Reply

Films that feature sex scenes and nudity are due to have age ratings tightened to align with changing public opinion.

The British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) said that the guidelines for films rated 12A or 12 will be stricter going forward. It comes after the board surveyed 12,000 people as part of its largest-ever public consultation.

“People are calling for a more cautious approach to classifying sex scenes at the border of 12A/12 and 15,” the BBFC shared on its website. Participants were concerned by “the level of sexual detail, nudity and the duration of the sex scenes rated 12A/12” under the guidelines of previous research in 2019. Similar content is now more likely to be rated as a 15.

The board also said higher ratings might be necessary for films that include language with sexual or misogynistic connotations, like “son of a bitch”, “bitch” or “dick”. “The worry is that young viewers may hear and repeat such language. Language such as this may now require a higher age rating,” the BBFC shared.

A total of 33 full-length feature films, 28 trailers and 151 clips from films and TV of varying genres were shown as part of the research.

However, findings did indicate that audiences were happy for classification to be “more lenient towards some sex references at the 15/18 borderline, especially in comic contexts”.

The research also revealed that people are now “slightly more accepting of cannabis misuse” at the 12A/12 rating, so long as it is “not detailed, glamorised or frequent”.

Additionally, respondents were found to be more comfortable with a relaxing of standards in 12A/12 trailers, meaning some may now include an “isolated use of strong language”.

BBFC president Natasha Kaplinsky said in a statement: “At the BBFC, we’re dedicated to ensuring what we do is responsive to the ever-evolving world around us. Since we last asked people across the country what they thought about our standards, society has changed, and opinions have followed – it’s fascinating how this vast body of new research reflects this.

“This is the first Classification Guidelines update I have overseen as President. Not only am I proud and thrilled to launch these findings, but as someone who has always looked to the BBFC for guidance for myself and my family, seeing first-hand the level of dedication and insight that went into this process has been eye-opening and inspiring. Without a doubt, we are truly shaped by you.

Share Button

Andrea Leadsom Suggests Cost Of Living Crisis Is Over As Inflation Fall Has ‘Cheered Everyone Up’

Posted on by
Reply

Andrea Leadsom has suggested the cost of living crisis has “ended” after a fall in the rate of inflation “obviously cheered everyone up”.

On Wednesday, the Office for National Statistics revealed UK inflation has fallen from 4% in January to 3.4% last month, the lowest it’s been since 2021.

While the news is significant given that the measure of the growing cost of goods and services peaked at 11.1% in October 2022, a 41-year high, a decline only means prices are going up at a slower rate, they are not falling.

What’s more, the 3.4% figure is still short of the Bank of England’s target of 2%.

Nonetheless, Conservative minister Leadsom was keen to promote the downward trajectory against the backdrop of Tory unrest.

When asked on Sky News about whether the party was now united, Leadsom said instead: “I think what’s really important is we have seen a fantastic drop in inflation today. That’s what’s really important.

“That has obviously cheered everyone up, it’s what we have been working towards is seeing the cost of living crisis end … seeing people able to take more home in their pay packets or in their salaries every day. That’s the critical point.”

When Rishi Sunak became prime minister, he promised to halve inflation by the end of 2023 – and it ended up being the only one of his five pledges he managed to fulfil.

However, economists question whether government’s can sincerely take credit for getting inflation back under control, not least since central banks control the base interest rate that is the key tool to combat price growth, and ministers blamed global factors when inflation spiralled to record highs.

Share Button

Rwanda Bill Frustration As House Of Lords Inflicts Seven Defeats On Rishi Sunak

Posted on by
Reply

The government is facing more frustration over its controversial plan to send asylum seekers on a one-way trip to Rwanda after the House of Lords inflicted more damage on its flagship legislation.

In the latest set of parliamentary “ping-pong”, peers on Wednesday inserted seven amendments to the Safety of Rwanda Bill in an effort to water down the policy.

It comes after MPs earlier this week removed 10 changes to the bill previously made by the Lords, undermining Rishi Sunak’s hopes to get deportation flights off the ground in the spring.

The defeats mean the legislation is now not likely to pass until after Easter.

The bill, which aims to overcome the Supreme Court’s block on the Rwanda flights, is almost certain to eventually prevail because the unelected Lords can’t overrule elected MPs. But it’s unclear how long the game of “ping-pong” will continue.

Britain and Rwanda signed a deal almost two years ago that would see migrants who cross the English Channel in small boats sent to the East African country, where they would remain permanently. So far, no migrant has been sent to Rwanda under the agreement.

The plan is key to Sunak’s pledge to “stop the boats” bringing unauthorised migrants to the UK. He argues that deporting asylum seekers will deter people from making risky journeys and break the business model of people-smuggling gangs. Just under 30,000 people arrived in Britain in small boats in 2023.

Share Button

What Is The Garrick Club?

Posted on by
Reply

A central London private members’ club has been under the spotlight after its membership list was published in the Guardian newspaper. But what is the Garrick Club, and why is it controversial?

What is the Garrick Club?

The Covent Garden club, named after eighteenth century actor David Garrick, opened in 1831, and is said to have around 1,500 members.

Last week, The Guardian revealed what it describes as “the roll call of (the) British establishment” – a membership list that reportedly includes judges, barristers, MPs, academics, actors and senior figures in the arts.

London’s private members’ clubs are world famous, with some notorious for their men-only rules and strict dress codes. The Garrick is among the best known among scores of clubs across the capital. Other legendary names include Annabel’s, The Groucho Club and the National Liberal Club, with some more political in their membership than others.

So who is actually a member of the Garrick Club?

The Guardian claimed the membership list included King Charles, deputy prime minister Oliver Dowden and Sir Richard Moore, the head of MI6.

Among other names on the members list are actors Matthew Macfadyen, Benedict Cumberbatch and Damian Lewis as well as the chief executive of the Royal Opera House, Alex Beard, and Antonio Pappano, who is now chief conductor of the London Symphony Orchestra.

Others said to be members include Succession star Brian Cox, former England men’s football manager Roy Hodgson and Dire Straits frontman Mark Knopfler. BBC broadcasters John Simpson and Melvyn Bragg are also members, according to the reports.

What’s the controversy?

The row stems from the fact the Garrick Club excludes women, and its refusal to admit female members despite efforts to change the rules. Women can only visit as a guest of a male member.

In 2015, the Garrick’s membership voted 50.5 per cent in favour of allowing female members but the club rules require a two-thirds majority for a change. This year, members will have a chance to vote again on allowing women.

Critics say they have no issue with men hanging out with other men, but have concerns over a club containing so many influential members, highly concentrated in certain professions.

On Wednesday, Simon Case, Britain’s top civil servant, quit the club just a day after being mocked for claiming he had only joined it to help women become members.

Case was asked by a Commons committee how his membership of the Garrick could be squared with his commitment to making the civil service more diverse.

He said: “My position on this one is also clear. If you believe profoundly in reform of an institution, by and large it’s easier to do if you join it to make the change from within rather than chuck rocks from the outside.

“And by the way, maths is also part of this. Every one person who leaves who is in favour of fixing this antediluvian position, every one of us that leaves means these institutions don’t change.

“I think when you want reform you have to participate.”

Meanwhile, MI6 boss Richard Moore also resigned from the club after facing criticism for being a member against the backdrop of the secret service attempting to demonstrate that it is no longer staffed exclusively by white, male Oxbridge graduates.

Share Button

Donald Trump Argues To High Court That He Is Immune From Prosecution In January 6 Case

Posted on by
Reply

WASHINGTON — Donald Trump on Tuesday made his case to the US Supreme Court that his January 6, 2021, coup attempt was part of his official duties as president and is therefore immune from prosecution.

“The president cannot function, and the presidency itself cannot retain its vital independence, if the president faces criminal prosecution for official acts once he leaves office,” Trump lawyer John Sauer wrote in a 67-page brief.

Sauer repeated arguments he and other Trump lawyers had tried previously, including the notion that Trump can only be prosecuted for actions if he has previously been impeached for them by the House and convicted by the Senate.

Trump was impeached by the House over January 6, but the 57 votes to convict in the Senate were 10 shy of the supermajority necessary.

Sauer’s brief states that the lack of previous criminal prosecutions against former presidents for their conduct in office is proof that the legal authority to prosecute Trump for the same does not exist. It did not mention that Trump is the first president in the country’s history to not accept defeat after an election and to attempt to remain in office.

Sauer also repeats the previously tried claim that if Trump is not given immunity, every future president would be similarly at risk of prosecution. “A denial of criminal immunity would incapacitate every future president with de facto blackmail and extortion while in office, and condemn him to years of post-office trauma at the hands of political opponents,” he wrote.

Trump’s claims have previously been rejected by both a trial court and a federal appellate court. A rejection by the Supreme Court — which many legal observers say is likely — could force him to undergo trial on conspiracy and fraud charges in the January 6 case this autumn, just as many voters are starting to pay attention to a coming election in which Trump hopes to regain the White House.

In that scenario, a parade of onetime Trump aides, possibly including former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, would appear on the witness stand almost daily, offering firsthand accounts to the jury and the public about Trump’s actions in the weeks leading up to and on that day, when a mob of his followers attacked the US Capitol to block congressional certification of his 2020 election loss.

Should the high court side with Trump, it would effectively end special counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution against the former president over his coup attempt.

According to Smith, US District Judge Tanya Chutkan and the three judges who heard the case on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, it would also effectively allow presidents to commit all manner of crimes in office by claiming that they were carrying out official duties.

“Whatever immunities a sitting president may enjoy, the United States has only one chief executive at a time, and that position does not confer a lifelong ‘get-out-of-jail-free’ pass,” Chutkan wrote in her December 1, 2023, ruling.

“It would be a striking paradox if the president, who alone is vested with the constitutional duty to ‘take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,’ were the sole officer capable of defying those laws with impunity,” the appeals court judges wrote in their Feb. 6 ruling.

During oral arguments in the case, one of the judges, Florence Pan, got Trump’s lawyer to acknowledge that, under his claim of immunity, a sitting president could order a political opponent to be assassinated by SEAL Team Six and never be prosecuted for it.

Smith’s response to Trump’s brief is due by April 8, and oral arguments in the case are set for April 25. A decision will almost certainly be handed down by the end of the court’s term in late June or early July.

A federal grand jury that indicted Trump last August charged him with conspiring to defraud the United States, conspiring to obstruct an official proceeding, obstructing an official proceeding and conspiring to deprive millions of Americans of having their votes counted.

It is one of four active criminal cases against the presumptive Republican presidential nominee. A second federal prosecution is based on his refusal to turn over secret documents that he took with him to his Florida country club upon leaving the White House; a Georgia state prosecution is based on his attempts to overturn his election loss in that state; and a New York indictment accuses him of falsifying business records to hide hush money payments to a porn star and a Playboy model in the weeks ahead of the 2016 election.

The New York case could go to trial as early as mid-April. If the Supreme Court rules against Trump on his immunity claim, the federal January 6 trial could begin as early as late summer.

Share Button

‘He Just Can’t Do Politics’: Tory Commentator Wants Sunak Out Before Election

Posted on by
Reply

A leading Tory commentator has said Rishi Sunak should not lead the Conservative Party into the general election in the latest bodyblow to the prime minister.

Tim Montgomerie, founder of ConservativeHome, told the BBC’s Daily Politics show that the party was in “freefall” amid the Labour Party’s double-digit poll lead.

It comes amid speculation unsettled Tory MPs are lining up Penny Mordaunt as a replacement for Sunak if he faced a no confidence vote before the general election. On Tuesday night, a Telegraph report suggested Tom Tugendhat is also being discussed as a “unity candidate” to replace the PM.

Montgomerie cited Robert Jenrick’s resignation as immigration minister, when he said Sunak wanted to enact a Rwanda policy “that would be enough to look like he was doing something but wouldn’t actually do something to actually solve the problem”.

“That, I’m afraid, is why I’ve reluctantly taken the decision … I think Rishi Sunak has to go as prime minister before the before the general election, because he just can’t do politics.

“I think he’s a good man, a family man, a decent man in public life for the right reasons.

“I study politics incredibly closely. I don’t really know what he wants to be prime minister for, what his ambition is, what legislation he wants to pass.”

He added: “If we have any chance at the next election of minimising the scale of defeat, we need to go into the election with an agenda for the future of this country. At the moment, I don’t even know what that is.”

Chancellor Jeremy Hunt hinted the prime minister could go to the country in October, but Tory plotters may seek to oust him before then if the party’s fortunes do not improve.

Sunak will face prime minister’s Questions and then a behind-closed-doors appearance in front of the Conservative backbench 1922 Committee on Wednesday.

Share Button

Trump Hints He’d Deport Prince Harry From US Over Drug Use

Posted on by
Reply

Former US President Donald Trump weighed into the recent scrutiny over Prince Harry’s visa, hinting that if he’s reelected, the Duke of Sussex could face deportation over drug use he admitted to in his 2023 memoir.

Trump, the presumed GOP nominee for president, made the warning in a preview of an interview with British broadcaster GB News that’s set to air on Tuesday evening.

“We’ll have to see if they know something about the drugs, and if he lied they’ll have to take appropriate action,” Trump said of the possibility that Harry falsified portions of his visa application that ask about drug use.

In his 2023 memoir, "Spare," Harry admitted to using drugs such as cocaine, marijuana and psilocybin. Trump hinted that Harry could face deportation for his drug use if Trump is reelected.
In his 2023 memoir, “Spare,” Harry admitted to using drugs such as cocaine, marijuana and psilocybin. Trump hinted that Harry could face deportation for his drug use if Trump is reelected.

Since stepping down from official senior royal duties in 2020, the duke’s primary residence has been in California with his two children and his wife, Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex.

But last year, a conservative think tank called the Heritage Foundation sued the Department of Homeland Security for access to Harry’s immigration records, citing admissions in his memoir, Spare, that he’s used cocaine, marijuana and psilocybin. It’s unclear if Harry disclosed the drug use in his visa application. A federal judge is currently deciding whether the records should be made public.

When GB News host Nigel Farage asked Trump to clarify whether he was talking about Harry facing deportation, Trump played coy.

“Oh, I don’t know. You’ll have to tell me. You just have to tell me,” he said. “You would have thought they would have known this a long time ago.”

Other public figures have faced immigration issues over their drug use, including Argentine soccer star Diego Maradona and the late British singer Amy Winehouse.

A spokesperson for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex did not immediately return a request for comment on Trump’s remarks.

Harry said last month that he’s considered becoming an American citizen.

“It’s a thought that has crossed my mind, but it’s not a high priority for me right now,” he told ABC’s Good Morning America.

Share Button

Kate Middleton Spotted Looking ‘Happy, Relaxed And Healthy’ With Prince William

Posted on by
Reply

It seems Kate Middleton has been released from the princess protection programme.

TMZ obtained footage of the Princess of Wales and Prince William out and about a mile from their Adelaide Cottage home in Windsor, England, on Saturday.

The brief clip shows the royal couple decked out in casual gear — with William in a baseball cap and Kate in leggings and a light jacket — hauling bags as they leave a local business called the Windsor Farm Shop.

The video seems to corroborate eyewitnesses’ claims made to the UK tabloid newspaper The Sun in a report on Sunday that the princess was spotted out in the wild.

William and Kate walk together in October 2023 in Marlow, England.
William and Kate walk together in October 2023 in Marlow, England.

Chris Jackson via Getty Images

One bystander told The Sun that Kate appeared to be “happy, relaxed and healthy”.

Although the footage of the couple may seem somewhat banal, Kate hasn’t been photographed publicly since Christmas, leading many people to wonder where one of the highest-profile women in the world could possibly be.

In January, Kensington Palace attempted to quell speculation by announcing the princess had undergone planned abdominal surgery and would resume public duties sometime after Easter.

The Princess of Wales was last photographed at a Christmas morning service with her family at Sandringham Church on Dec. 25, 2023.
The Princess of Wales was last photographed at a Christmas morning service with her family at Sandringham Church on Dec. 25, 2023.

Samir Hussein via Getty Images

Then came the release of a photo of Kate with her three children last week, that brought the speculation to a bizarre peak. As it turned out, the photo appeared to be highly edited, and multiple news agencies, including The Associated Press, withdrew it from publication.

This led some to hypothesise about where Kate could possibly be, which spanned from genuine conspiracy theories to Freaky Friday jokes involving King Charles and Kate.

Share Button

MPs Reverse Lords Amendments To Rwanda Deportation Bill

Posted on by
Reply

MPs have reversed all 10 amendments to Rishi Sunak’s flagship Rwanda legislation – setting up a showdown with the House of Lords over the controversial plan to send asylum seekers on a one-way trip to the east African country.

Using its comfortable Commons majority, the Tory government unpicked changes made to the Safety of Rwanda Bill by the Lords.

Peers inserted a series of amendments designed to water down the legislation, but all 10 were removed by MPs during votes in the Commons on Monday night.

The bill, which aims to overcome the Supreme Court’s block on deportation flights, will return to the Lords on Wednesday as part of the game of parliamentary “ping-pong”.

The government is almost certain to prevail because the unelected Lords can’t overrule elected MPs, and the bill could be passed into law within days.

The prime minister hopes that the first deportation flights will take off in the spring.

Britain and Rwanda signed a deal almost two years ago that would see migrants who cross the English Channel in small boats sent to the East African country, where they would remain permanently. So far, no migrant has been sent to Rwanda under the agreement.

The plan is key to Sunak’s pledge to “stop the boats” bringing unauthorised migrants to the UK. He argues that deporting asylum seekers will deter people from making risky journeys and break the business model of people-smuggling gangs.

Just under 30,000 people arrived in Britain in small boats in 2023.

“We need to make it clear that if you come here illegally, you won’t be able to stay and we will be able to remove you. That is the only way to properly solve the issue of illegal migration,” Sunak told reporters on Monday.

Share Button