Byline Times Audio Articles

Епізоди

• 
  'Irrational, Ineffective, Dangerous': French Inquiry Condemns UK Border Policy Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE Death and Border Security Don't miss a story Calls for a Parallel UK Public Inquiry 21.08.2026 8хв

  Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen A French parliamentary inquiry has described the UK-France border deal as "irrational, ineffective and dangerous", warning of its consequences for human rights. The inquiry, which was published last month, is the first democratic evaluation of the UK-France border deal since the initial Le Touquet agreement, which allows UK border checks to be carried out on French soil and French checks in the UK, came into force in 2004. The findings have highlighted the violent consequences of the policies implemented in northern France. The inquiry found current border policy to be "irrational from a democratic standpoint, dangerous for human rights, and ineffective regarding their stated objectives". The inquiry has recommended stopping the use of tear gas against children and vulnerable people, as well as addressing the severe living conditions experienced by migrants at the border, such as insufficient access to shelter, sanitation and other fundamental rights. Katie Hall, advocacy lead at Project Play, a charity that supports families and children in northern France, responded to the report's findings: "The conclusions of the French inquiry confirm what we see every day – a situation of violence and inhumanity manufactured by a politics devoid of empathy, funded in no small part by UK taxpayers." The inquiry also found that no public record had been kept of how money from the UK had been spent. This means that since 2018, there are no accounts of how £648 million of UK taxpayers' money has been spent. Ms Hall added: "The UK Government's obsession with borders to distract attention from their failures at home is leading to taxpayers funding serious human rights abuses against men, women and children – with zero transparency about how that money is used." Given that the UK Government is set to spend a further £660 million over the next three-year period ending in 2029, the report calls for "greater transparency of data" to ensure "democratic control". Despite the inquiry's strong condemnation of UK-funded policy, the report has received little coverage in UK mainstream media. Since the time of this article's publication, mainstream outlets such as BBC News, Sky News, Channel 4 News, the Guardian, the Telegraph or the Times have not reported on the inquiry. Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account. SUBSCRIBE TODAY We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe. Since the first agreement in 2004, at least 444 people have died attempting to cross the Channel, including at least 54 children. Despite increasing investment from the UK Government into border security, the frequency of deaths in the Channel has been growing in recent years. Since the previous deal in 2023, when then-Prime Minister Rishi Sunak agreed a £460 million pact with French President Emmanuel Macron, there have been at least 146 deaths and missing persons recorded in the Channel, according to Calais Appeal. Figures compiled by the Centre for Sociodigital Futures at the University of Bristol and Swiss research agency Border Forensics have revealed that deaths in the Channel have risen alongside an increase in spending on border securitisation. Travis Van Isacker, research fellow at the Centre for Sociodigital Futures, told the Independent the significance of these findings: "These distinct but entangled border policing practices have had the cumulative effect of creating more dangerous circumstances for migrants. "They have shown state policies to prevent small boat crossings as being a clear driver in the increased number of deaths amongst migrants in the Channel." The research also argued that increased French policing, a result of t...
• 
  USS Lincoln: 'The Ships Are Breaking Almost as Fast as the People' Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system 21.08.2026 8хв

  Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen The USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72) has been making headlines for all the wrong reasons. After over 260 days without a port visit, and 6 months on station off the coast of Iran, there are reports that sailors are dealing with inoperative toilets, washing machines, and showers. The "heads" (bathrooms) are covered in mildew and black mold. The food is disgusting and portion sizes suggest a starvation diet. The Lincoln and the USS Boxer have also supposedly run out of hygiene products like soap, toothpaste, shampoo, and menstrual products. Conditions are so bad that sailors have attempted suicide by throwing themselves off the ship: the 60-foot fall from the flight deck to the water has the potential to cause serious injuries. The response of the Pentagon was to deny only the most outlandish claims, but not the ones published in the Navy Times and Stars and Stripes. President Trump when asked whether the Lincoln had been left on station for too long, responded in his inimitable way that the there were no problems, and that the deployment wasn't "nearly long enough." There have been people on social media criticising these sailors for being "soft" or weak, but from a historical perspective what they are being subjected to is unprecedented: this is six straight months of combat operations without a port visit, while at the far end of a stretched logistics pipeline. During the Vietnam War, individual continuous stints "on the line" at Yankee Station typically lasted around 30 to 35 days before a carrier headed to a port like Subic Bay in the Philippines for maintenance and rest. However, individual milestones were pushed further— for instance, the USS Ranger (CVA-61) set a notable historical benchmark when it spent a then-record 59 continuous days on Yankee Station in March 1965. Prior to the USS Abraham Lincoln's modern record-breaking stretch, the longest consecutive period a US aircraft carrier had gone without a port visit was 206 days, set by the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN-69) in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, these were not combat operations. Which leads to the second part of the problem for sailors on a carrier in combat operations: which is crew rest. The US Navy surface and submarine fleet has long had a problem with working people beyond the point of exhaustion. During an Operational Reactor Safeguard Exam (ORSE) on board the USS Augusta in 1995, I was working 36 on, 6 off, on 6-hour shifts for two weeks because I wasn't allowed to sleep during the "day" when drills were going on, and that meant that I only got to sleep every other night effectively. At the end of that time frame, I was a hollow-eyed zombie that routinely fell asleep standing up. The Navy determined that fatigue was a major cause in the collisions at sea of the USS John S. McCain and USS Fitzgerald in two separate incidents in the 2010s. These mishaps occurred after only a few weeks' worth of time at sea and the accumulated fatigue. The crew of the USS Abraham Lincoln has been working 18-hour shifts for at least 6 months, if not longer. The fact that combat operations, general quarters, drills, threats of Iranian attack, and other disruptors mean that even this brutal schedule is likely being routinely disrupted. I cannot even begin to imagine the level of tiredness these people are facing, and neither can you: no one has ever had a deployment like this before. Fatigue is not just a symptom of depression; severe physical and mental exhaustion can actively drive depressive states and increase suicide risk. Chronic exhaustion impairs brain function, lowers coping capacity, and makes life feel unmanageable, which deeply amplifies feelings of hopelessness and suicidal ideation. The conditions on the ship only make it worse. Ships haven't been meant to spend 9 months away from port, even in the age of sail. When I deployed to the Gulf on ...
• 
  Wine, Vapes And 'Woke Mental Health' Jibes: Leaked Emails Expose Reform Council Meltdown Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE Don't miss a story The Standards Committee Row Reform UK Tells Its Activists 'Don't Drink and Tweet' Because 'The Biggest Threat to Reform Is the People in It' Comment Reported To Police Reform's Nadhim Zahawi Accused of 'Fantasy' After Falsely Claiming Labour-Backer Dale Vince Bankrolled Count Binface Anti-Woke WhatsApp holding farage to account #reformUNCOVERED Wine, Vapes And 'Woke Mental Health' Jibes: Leaked Emails Expose Reform Council Meltdown Reform Councils Accused of Seeking to Hide LGBT+ Books in Libraries as Unions Fight to Keep Pride on the Shelves Chairman Farage: How Reform UK Operates as a Democratic Party in Name Only Reform's Nadhim Zahawi Accused of 'Fantasy' After Falsely Claiming Labour-Backer Dale Vince Bankrolled Count Binface Reform UK Paid £440,000 to Firms Linked to Party Insiders Nigel Farage Reported to Met Police Over Alleged Misconduct in Public Office Subscribers Get More from JOSIAH 21.08.2026 14хв

  Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen A Reform council has descended into a series of resignations, email leaks and lurid allegations – as a councillor quit the party over the leader allegedly mocking mental health as "woke." Former Reform councillor Kenny Hope – now sitting as an independent – alleges that Durham's Reform council leader Andrew Husband said "mental health is woke" during an April 2026 cabinet working group meeting, while two cabinet members are said to have opened wine and one vaped. Another former Reform councillor – again now sitting as an independent – Cllr Kate Rowland, said a Reform meeting "includ[ed] drinking wine at 3:30 in the afternoon, vaping openly, laughing, joking, showing blatant disinterest, and belittling mental health." "[It] showed an appalling lack of seriousness," she claimed, in council-wide emails shared with Byline Times. Leader Cllr Andrew Husband told this outlet: "I stated Virtue Signalling about mental health in such a way is woke". He did not deny branding some of his colleagues "narcissists". On Tuesday, emails flew around to all councillors between the Reform leader and his own councillors – and former members – concerned about the handling of complaints and the leadership's attitude to mental health issues. Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account. SUBSCRIBE TODAY We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe. Amid a flurry of personal attacks, on Wednesday, Cllr Husband wrote to councillors: "This is a request to quit the spamming. The three amigos [former Reform councillors] have now had multiple warnings about abusing this platform. I will be reaching out to individual group leaders to put this nonsense to bed. "I suggest training for those who don't understand how local government works." He added: "Rest assured the Reform leak has been found so business as usual. These people can't even leak properly." "I will be asking the council to conduct a risk assessment of this abnormal behaviour, for the benefit of members to safeguard against such levels of harassment that we are experiencing. It seems that no lessons have been learned from last month's embarrassing behaviour." Responding to the claims at the heart of the dispute, Cllr Husband continued: "'Mental health is woke?' Random. I mean who even says that? "What is 'woke' is weaponising the mental health card in a standards process to try and call out officer conduct and behaviour. With no powers or local government legislation to underpin this – a fruitless exercise that results in a complete episode of virtue signalling. SIGN UP TO EMAIL UPDATES "Virtue signalling in politics is woke. Google it. I stand by my advice which (previous) standards ignored." A vote of no confidence has now been called by one of the former Reform councillors, Cllr Kenny Hope. Cllr Husband told councillors: "Good luck getting two parties to support this farce. "Regardless, I will enjoy the challenge should it reach the chamber." He also claimed on X Cllr Hope was a "bitter ex reform misfit who was suspended [and] now Restore wannabe nut job." On Thursday morning, the Chief Executive also reportedly sent an email to the all-members distribution list telling councillors their behaviour was unacceptable. The saga follows a row over how a Reform councillor (an independent at the time), Cllr Paul Sexton, was cleared over bullying and harassment claims by a panel with a Reform majority. The one non-Reform councillor on the panel is understood to have found he breached the member's code this January, following a drawn-out process going back to at least 2023. There were four complaints about his alleged treatment of council officers in 2023. However, th...
• 
  Reform Councils Accused of Seeking to Hide LGBT+ Books in Libraries as Unions Fight to Keep Pride on the Shelves Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE Don't miss a story Book Bans Reform UK Tells Its Activists 'Don't Drink and Tweet' Because 'The Biggest Threat to Reform Is the People in It' 'Put Pride Back' Chairman Farage: How Reform UK Operates as a Democratic Party in Name Only holding farage to account #reformUNCOVERED Reform Councils Accused of Seeking to Hide LGBT+ Books in Libraries as Unions Fight to Keep Pride on the Shelves Chairman Farage: How Reform UK Operates as a Democratic Party in Name Only Reform's Nadhim Zahawi Accused of 'Fantasy' After Falsely Claiming Labour-Backer Dale Vince Bankrolled Count Binface Reform UK Paid £440,000 to Firms Linked to Party Insiders Nigel Farage Reported to Met Police Over Alleged Misconduct in Public Office Reform UK Tells Its Activists 'Don't Drink and Tweet' Because 'The Biggest Threat to Reform Is the People in It' Subscribers Get More from JOSIAH 21.08.2026 13хв

  Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen Unions have launched a campaign to defend the "freedom of libraries and librarians" from anti-LGBT+ political interference following a spate of clampdowns by Reform-run councils. In recent months, Reform councillors in the Midlands counties of Staffordshire and Warwickshire have sought to reduce the visibility of LGBTQ+ books and other materials in local libraries. In Staffordshire, library staff have reportedly been instructed not to celebrate Pride and to remove Pride-related displays, events and communications. A spokesperson for the council told this outlet a decision to "review and refocus the use of discretionary library display space" was made by the Reform Cabinet member for culture. "Whilst the review takes place, all displays that do not promote the core library offer or wider council services have been paused or removed. This has included Pride displays but applies to all other discretionary displays too. No books or materials have been removed from library stock, and LGBTQ+ titles and resources remain available to borrow as part of the wider library offer," the spokesperson said. In Warwickshire, the Reform council leader has criticised librarians wearing LGBT+ Pride rainbow lanyards, and displays of books he claims promote "gender ideology". He indicated that new policies for libraries and other public spaces are being developed. It comes as a new report from the Trades Union Congress (TUC), 'LGBT+ Workers – threats to workplace equality and community inclusion', sets out the scale of political hostility to LGBT+ events on Reform-run councils – despite continued public support for diversity and LGBT+ rights. Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account. SUBSCRIBE TODAY We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe. It finds strong public support for maintaining key workplace rights and equality protections. YouGov polling for the report, exclusively seen by Byline Times, suggests 77% of Brits support retaining provisions in the Employment Rights Act 2025 requiring employers to take "all reasonable steps" to prevent sexual harassment and introducing protections from third-party harassment, while 74% support retaining the Equality Act 2010 which enshrines LGBT+ rights in law. "Support for these protections exceeded support for repeal across the wider public, including among Reform voters," the TUC analysis notes. In February 2026, Reform's Deputy Leader and business spokesperson Richard Tice announced plans for a 'Great Repeal Act'. If passed, t would repeal "key legislation that provides workers with fundamental protections," the TUC says, including the Employment Rights Act 2025 and the Equality Act 2010. The union body states: "If Reform were to enact their 'Great Repeal Act' it would remove a range of employment rights, including sick pay, bereavement leave, pregnancy protections and protections against discrimination at work. They could also allow the return of fire-and-rehire practices. "These are not simply regulations; they are hard-won rights that help make work fairer, more secure and more equal." SIGN UP TO EMAIL UPDATES Reform has pledged to introduce a "Women and Motherhood Protection Act" to replace some lost rights, but the details so far are sparse. The majority of LGBT+ respondents (around 300) to the YouGov poll believed that repealing the Equality Act and Human Rights Act would negatively affect LGBT+ workers and lead to "increases in discrimination, bullying, harassment and exclusion at work, alongside wider impacts on mental health, confidence, physical health and work performance." The report notes that Reform-run councils such as Durham and Warwickshire were ...
• 
  Where Are the Climate Protests? Human Rights Group Warns Government Crackdown Is Silencing the Green Movement Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE Don't miss a story Mask-Free Zones and New Offences Is Andy Burnham About to Create a British Constitution? Calls to Change Course holding farage to account #reformUNCOVERED Chairman Farage: How Reform UK Operates as a Democratic Party in Name Only Reform's Nadhim Zahawi Accused of 'Fantasy' After Falsely Claiming Labour-Backer Dale Vince Bankrolled Count Binface Reform UK Paid £440,000 to Firms Linked to Party Insiders Nigel Farage Reported to Met Police Over Alleged Misconduct in Public Office Reform UK Tells Its Activists 'Don't Drink and Tweet' Because 'The Biggest Threat to Reform Is the People in It' Reform Council Leader's Firm Advised £95 Million Project Which His Own Council Is a Partner In Subscribers Get More from JOSIAH 20.08.2026 11хв

  Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen Successive Government clampdowns on the right to protest have had a "chilling effect", human rights campaigners have warned, as large parts of the UK remain in a state of drought, and wildfires continue to rage. The human rights organisation Liberty argues that the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022, the Public Order Act 2023, and the Crime and Policing Act 2026 have significantly curtailed the capacity of the climate movement to participate in protest and other forms of direct action. The Acts include various new restrictions on protest and impose much harsher sentences for people who break these laws. For instance, people found to be in breach of the Public Order Act can also face unlimited fines. In July 2024, five Just Stop Oil activists were sentenced to four to five years for conspiracy to cause a public nuisance under the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act, after discussing an M25 protest on Zoom. Following an appeal supported by Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace UK, the court found the sentences "manifestly excessive" and reduced them. Hundreds more have been arrested for taking part in climate protests. Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account. SUBSCRIBE TODAY We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe. The most recent Home Office data on the use of protest powers was published earlier this year and found that since 2022, around 90% of the protests with police restrictions applied to them were 'environment' related. Liberty has also raised concerns that the Crime and Policing Act 2026 was rushed through before the publication of Lord Macdonald's Independent Review of Public Order and Hate Crime Legislation, which was commissioned by Keir Starmer's Government and is expected to make key recommendations on reforming protest laws. The campaigners argue that protest is critical to a healthy democracy and are urging the new Prime Minister to "change course" from previous governments. A recent Ipsos poll showed that 74% of Britons are concerned about climate change following a severe heatwave summer, up from 69% before the summer. In an interview with Byline Times, Melissa Dring, interim head of policy and campaigns at Liberty, said a spate of anti-protest laws have "layered on new restrictions, new offences and new penalties" onto protestors – from arrest and imprisonment to electronic tagging and unlimited fines in some circumstances – as well as giving police new powers to enforce the law. "We've ended up with quite a confusing situation, both for protesters and for the police in terms of enforcing it. It's difficult for people to know how to protest in a way that is within the bounds of the law, how to do so lawfully and safely. That's why we say it has become harder and riskier for people to protest," she said. SIGN UP TO EMAIL UPDATES The recent Crime and Policing Act is now in force, giving police the power to designate an area as a mask-free zone, so that no one is allowed to wear a face covering within it. Dring said: "There was a defence inserted for health, religious and work purposes – but it's a defence, not an exemption. That means anyone who does wear a mask, for example for health purposes, and happens to be in an area designated as a mask-free zone, can be arrested, and only then, at charging stage or even at court, can they use that defence and say, 'Well, I was wearing a mask for health reasons.'" Other anti-protest laws – passed under both the Conservatives and Labour in recent years – mean "there's a clear line to be drawn between those new restrictions and why we're not seeing really big environmental protests," according to Liberty. The non-...
• 
  Is Andy Burnham About to Create a British Constitution? Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system Burnham Wins in Makerfield: Can the 'Politics of Place' Now Offer an Antidote to the Poverty of Possibility? ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE 19.08.2026 11хв

  Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen On Friday 31 July, Andy Burnham made history, even if he did so in his trademark style. He triggered a process that points in a genuinely radical direction. Yet its destination remains unmapped and uncertain, leaving potential supporters broadly sympathetic yet sceptical. He was speaking in Sheffield. The occasion was the launch of his far-reaching, seven-page Cabinet Statement that proposes to decentralise power across England. It promises legislation that will empower regional mayors to raise their own income as well as having a share of tax revenues as a right. Its ambition is to "fundamentally re-wire the way our country works". The Prime Minister acknowledged that the Cabinet paper points towards "a new constitutional settlement" and "will increase the case for … a written constitution", and "a new clear set of principles about how this country should be run." In saying this Burnham unlocked the safety-catch on the fundamental feature of British rule: that the totality of its arrangements remains uncodified and informal. A feature that ensures our government belongs to those who govern us and not to the people as citizens. It's important to say that Burnham did not pull the trigger. But until that July day, no British prime minister when in office has ever endorsed the possibility of a "written constitution" in a positive fashion – a fact which makes this a watershed moment. Indeed, from what I can work out, no prime minister when in office ever used the phrase 'written constitution' until 1989, when Margaret Thather was obliged to respond to a letter sent to her from the constitutional and electoral reform campaign group Charter 88. Its lead signature was Lady Ewart Biggs. I should admit that I drafted it. Having been on Reform UK's target list as a winnable seat, Andy Burnham's new constituency is a microcosm of Brexit Britain and the failed legacies of Thatcher and Blair. Peter Jukes and Hardeep Matharu paid a visit ahead of its seminal by-election Peter Jukes and Hardeep Matharu Our request: "Basic rights to be entrenched in law; accountable and open government; electoral reform; regional power and a written constitution." Thatcher replied that, "The government consider that our present constitutional arrangements continue to serve us well…" with her unmistakable sense of a Royal 'we'. She added: "the government does not feel that a written constitution in itself changes or guarantees anything: Everything depends on how constitutional guarantees, whether written or unwritten, are interpreted and applied in daily life." An important observation I will return to. Prime Minister Burnham faces a barrel-full of major issues: economic, diplomatic, military, environmental and social. Why should he add to these by unleashing the historic process of a written constitution? What is the problem to which it is the answer? The problem has three parts: First, how do we decentralise the British state to release and empower regional judgment and creativity? Or, to put it negatively, how do we stop what is now the husk of an Empire State throttling our democracy in the all-too-familiar way it is programmed to do? Second, how do we protect and enhance our rights and freedom as citizens? Or, to put it negatively, how do we reverse the attacks on, for example, our right to protest, to privacy on the internet, and to vote? Third, and crucially, how do we restore popular consent to how we are governed? All constitutions, whether written or not, contain the rules for changing the rules. In so doing they establish three things: 1. Relations of power between different part of society: who can do what to whom 2. The liberty and rights of citizens 3. What kind of society the country aspires to be The British state is undergoing a breakdown on all three fronts. Burnham seems most concerned about the first. Many activists care most abo...
• 
  Jason Arday: We Must Rage – Rage Against the Journalism of Cruelty Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system There Will Be Another Jason Arday The Peter Thiel-Linked Race Science Network that Penetrated Cambridge University and Targeted Jason Arday 19.08.2026 13хв

  Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen The death of Jason Arday has prompted an uncomfortable question for British journalism: when does legitimate scrutiny become something cruel and destructive? The 41-year-old resigned from Cambridge University as Professor of Sociology of Education after allegations of plagiarism and questions about aspects of his public biography. Arday denied plagiarism, while acknowledging errors in his work. He described "an unrelenting level of public scrutiny and personal attack", saying that the "relentless accusations, speculation and public commentary have taken a profound toll on me and on those I love". In the days before his death, friends described a man overwhelmed by what had happened. Professor Simon Baron-Cohen, director of Cambridge University's Autism Research Centre, said that Arday told him "they've destroyed my life". He said that "the personal attacks on him have been so immense". Academic and author Kehinde Andrews said that Arday "felt that there was no way out". Arday's family has said that a "campaign of misinformation" became too much for him. London Mayor Sadiq Khan described what happened as "an unacceptable public hounding and campaign of abuse" – "a pernicious public shaming". The Prime Minister called for "a moment for reflection". In that reflection, perhaps we might contemplate the author George Eliot's comment that "cruelty, like every other vice, requires no motive outside itself; it only requires opportunity". And there was plenty of cruelty; white hacks lining up to outdo each other in their cruelty towards Arday. The volume and tone of the attacks on the man were quite shocking. There is no check to fetter power when unfettered power resides in the check Hardeep Matharu In the fortnight before his death, the Spectator published a succession of articles in which its writers repeatedly turned Jason Arday into an object of personal ridicule. On 31 July, Toby Young wrote that "the more I read about Jason Arday… the more convinced I am he's [Sacha Baron Cohen's] greatest creation". He later imagined him as an "Ali G-like character". On 6 August, John Power penned a purported fact-check of Arday as a guide to the claims of "our modern-day Walter Mitty". That same week, the Spectator's Commissioning Editor Lara Brown described Arday as a "charlatan" and wrote that "even in the world of racial grievance peddling, Arday was mediocre". On 10 August, Owen Matthews called him "the serial fantasist poster cry-bully of our times" and dismissed his work as "twaddle". That same day, Peter Wood put Arday in the tradition of "imposters", "tricksters", and "cozeners". On 11 August, Julie Burchill called him "daft Jason Arday" and "the nutty professor". Together, it took on the appearance of a gang of leering, bullying faces crowded over a cowed man, each eager to be the next to weigh in, each finding clever ways to turn their anger and violence into something that might, in a London salon, sound even witty. Clearly, it wasn't to Jason Arday. To add injury to their insult, the Spectator published a piece after it was announced that Arday's body had been found with the headline 'The tragedy of Jason Arday.' In it, Melanie McDonagh said that "in death we all should be remembered in our humanity, even in our flawed humanity. And Jason Arday was very human; he bled". She did not note that it was the Spectator that was there doing the stabbing, the cutting, the slashing, and the gouging. It was not just The Spectator. In the three weeks before Jason Arday's death, the Telegraph published dozens of articles, columns, and news reports about him. "Cambridge's diversity poster boy in plagiarism row" on 24 July. "The Cambridge fantasist is proof that stupid intellectuals…" on 4 August. "Jason Arday reflects a much deeper rot within universities" on 5 August. "Jason Arday is living proof that you reap what you sow" on 6 Aug...
• 
  The Peter Thiel-Linked Race Science Network that Penetrated Cambridge University and Targeted Jason Arday Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system 'A Random Black Person' There Will Be Another Jason Arday The Book that Wasn't Published Charity Runs and 'Seven Up' 'Enjoying Vengeance' The Pioneer Fund Rebrands The Sanctuary Unanswered Questions 18.08.2026 29хв

  Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen Jason Arday, a 41-year-old academic who resigned as Cambridge's Professor of Sociology of Education, was found dead on Friday following intense scrutiny of many aspects of his qualifications and personal life by the majority of the established press. His coordinated targeting by an explicitly anti-black race science network did not come out of nowhere, Byline Times can reveal. Backed by the pro-Trump Silicon Valley billionaire Peter Thiel, this network has spent a decade penetrating Cambridge University before reaching Reform UK, Restore Britain, and the pan-European far-right. This phase of the campaign against Jason Arday began when academic and anti-black racist Nathan Cofnas raised claims of plagiarism in Arday's work in a Substack post last month. The story it fuelled was then dissected in more than 200 articles across the majority of the British press in the weeks that followed, both in print and online. It was striking that many of these articles did not acknowledge that the central accusations were being made by a man who believes that inherited racial differences make black people less intelligent and would leave black people absent from virtually every elite position in public life outside of sport and entertainment. They also did not mention that Cofnas had used the terms "retarded", "illiterate", and "mentally disabled" to describe Jason Arday, while noting that he was "black". Cofnas said that an unidentified male Cambridge faculty member had supplied him with information about Arday. Before even examining Arday's PhD thesis, completed at Liverpool John Moores University, Cofnas had dismissed him as "just another DEI hire", referring to 'Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion' schemes. At the ideological centre of the network is Aporia, an online magazine which serves as the public-facing arm of the Human Diversity Foundation – now known as Polygenic Scores. The Human Diversity Foundation was a rebranded and relaunched version of the Nazi-era Pioneer Fund, which sought to mainstream its eugenics doctrines through Aporia. Tech billionaire Peter Thiel has cultivated ties to key actors in this network: to Cambridge Professor James Orr, through whom he channelled a donation to Cambridge; to Orr's Cambridge circle; to online magazine Quillette which published attacks on Arday; and directly to Nathan Cofnas and Aporia senior editor Noah Carl. Orr linked this infrastructure to politics. Reform UK's Head of Policy, and an advisor to the Free Speech Union organisation, he invited Aporia into national conservatism. At The Sanctuary, a right wing hub in Westminster, Aporia and the Orr-backed Cambridge Scrutonian Society have separate offices provided by cryptobillionaire Ben Delo. Delo gave Reform £4 million in early 2026. He has also sponsored the Free Speech Union. By understanding this network and its ideology, a more accurate picture can be developed of the motivations behind the disproportionate attacks on Jason Arday that continued even after his resignation from Cambridge University. On 21 July, Nathan Cofnas published the article which launched the campaign against Jason Arday. Titled 'DEI Fraud and Cover-Up at Cambridge', he portrayed Arday's appointment to Cambridge University in 2023 as evidence that it had "grabbed a random black person" and abandoned academic standards in pursuit of diversity. On 9 August, Cofnas said that a male faculty member at Cambridge University – who he said he was not allowed to name – had contacted him on 13 June with information about Jason Arday. He referred to this person as a whistleblower who feared professional retaliation. Cofnas then examined Arday's PhD thesis and published his allegations about alleged plagiarism. Liverpool John Moores University (LJMU) had already formally tested the central allegation about Arday's PhD the previous year, following claims by The Times an...
• 
  Chairman Farage: How Reform UK Operates as a Democratic Party in Name Only Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE Don't miss a story The Chairman's Gatekeeping Powers Reform's Nadhim Zahawi Accused of 'Fantasy' After Falsely Claiming Labour-Backer Dale Vince Bankrolled Count Binface An In-Built Majority Reform UK Tells Its Activists 'Don't Drink and Tweet' Because 'The Biggest Threat to Reform Is the People in It' A Snapshot of Nigel Farage's Powers Within Reform UK holding farage to account #reformUNCOVERED Chairman Farage: How Reform UK Operates as a Democratic Party in Name Only Reform's Nadhim Zahawi Accused of 'Fantasy' After Falsely Claiming Labour-Backer Dale Vince Bankrolled Count Binface Reform UK Paid £440,000 to Firms Linked to Party Insiders Nigel Farage Reported to Met Police Over Alleged Misconduct in Public Office Reform UK Tells Its Activists 'Don't Drink and Tweet' Because 'The Biggest Threat to Reform Is the People in It' Reform Council Leader's Firm Advised £95 Million Project Which His Own Council Is a Partner In Subscribers Get More from JOSIAH 18.08.2026 13хв

  Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen In February 2025, Reform's then-Chairman Zia Yusuf wrote: "We are pleased to announce that, as promised, Nigel Farage has handed over ownership of Reform UK to its members. "Reform UK is now a non-profit, with no shareholders, limited by guarantee." Previously, Nigel Farage literally owned Reform UK. He held the vast majority of shares, in a highly unusual arrangement for a political party. Farage pledged to change that. The party remains a company, but the majority-shareholder model is gone, and a formal constitution, member conferences, and voting rights are now in place. Up to a point. Byline Times has got hold of a copy of Reform UK's constitution, adopted in September last year, and it shows that Reform UK is still not the member democracy its leading lights have suggested. Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account. SUBSCRIBE TODAY We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe. The resolution adopting Reform's new constitution states that it "robustly democratises participation within the party by the membership." What the actual constitution itself suggests however is that Reform UK is a DINO – Democracy in Name Only. While the new governing document introduced a party Board, containing (some) elected members, and formalised member ballots for the leadership, Nigel Farage retains an extraordinary degree of power. Some of the arrangements will be familiar to frustrated members of other parties. Motions carried at Reform's conference are advisory only, and simply have to be discussed by the Board. Members vote in internal elections – but those are at the whim of the party Board. Article 4.3 of the constitution notes the Board has absolute discretion over party ballots. But the democratic sheen comes off completely when we look at how Farage could be removed. The answer is: it's almost impossible. To call an emergency general meeting or to issue a vote of no confidence in the leader, requires written requests to Farage's appointed Chairman, currently ex-Conservative MP Lee Anderson, from at least 50% of all members "in good standing" (There is another mechanism to call such a vote, but only once Reform has over 100 MPs). Reform has around 270,000 members, according to recent tallies, meaning around 135,000 members would have to write to Anderson, within 60 days, to demand a no-confidence vote in the Chairman's boss. Imagine, if you will, Lee Anderson combing through 135,000 hand-written letters and deciding if each of the writers are a) members and b) in 'good standing'. SIGN UP TO EMAIL UPDATES Members are deemed of 'good standing' if their subscriptions are up to date, they are not subject to any suspension or exclusion by the party, and they owe no debts to the party older than 30 days and more than £100. The leader-appointed Chairman has extensive powers over what counts as 'good standing'. He can refuse new membership and renewals, revoke membership in specified circumstances, exercise emergency disciplinary powers "in cases of exceptional gravity and urgency", suspend candidates (subject to Board approval after the fact), oversee the membership database and exercise overall responsibility for party organisation. The Discipline Committee of the Board, composed of serving members, calls most of the shots on member suspensions or expulsions – and it is chaired by the party secretary. That role is appointed by Nigel Farage. (There is an appeals process which is more independent, for those who want to keep fighting). Should a no-confidence motion in Farage be called – after meeting that impossibly-high bar – the decision goes to the Board. Farage sits on that Board, and there's no requ...
• 
  UK Government Sues Conservative-Linked VIP Lane PPE Firm for £90 Million Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system Uniserve and the Conservative Connection Matt Hancock and Three Conservative Peers Referred 60 Suppliers Onto the PPE COVID VIP Lane UK Government sues Uniserve for £90m A History of Waste 18.08.2026 16хв

  Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen The Department for Health and Social Care has launched a legal challenge against Uniserve for tens of millions of pounds, claiming the company, which has close ties to the Conservative party, supplied 11 million faulty gowns during the pandemic. The legal action comes as new documents obtained by Byline Times, reveal how Uniserve, and a Conservative MP linked to the company, successfully lobbied ministers to push through the deal, which ultimately left the Government tens of millions of pounds worth of unusable PPE. The deal was hugely controversial due to the involvement of a Conservative peer and the fact that the firm owns an office complex which houses the constituency office of Conservative Party MP and ex-Cabinet Office minister Julia Lopez. The company, owned by businessman Iain Liddell, prides itself on being the "UK's leading logistics & global trade management provider. However, despite the company having no track record of supplying PPE to the NHS, they were awarded multiple contracts in 2020 to provide vast quantities of masks, gloves, aprons, face shields and goggles. Uniserve saw its turnover and profits surge during the pandemic as a result of the contracts, which generated payments of £1.15 billion from the DHSC, up to April 2023. The contracts, valued at £303 million, were made possible after Conservative peer and Cabinet Office minister, Lord Agnew referred Uniserve onto the so-called 'VIP lane' for preferential contracts. It was subsequently discovered that huge volumes of PPE supplied by Uniserve under these deals were not fit for purpose. According to data obtained by Spotlight on Corruption, 182 million items of PPE supplied by Uniserve, totalling £178.5 million were assigned into the 'do not supply' category. Uniserve was also handed a £572m contract in March 2020 to provide freight services to the DHSC. The deal required the firm to assist the Government in delivering PPE located in China and South-East Asia to the UK and included the management of sea freight arriving at Felixstowe – where container storage was causing a major headache for officials due to the shear volume of PPE ordered by the DHSC. A spokesperson for Uniserve said they procure products for customers, and had a global network of contacts that specialise in PPE. "We did not actively sell our procurement services to the DHSC, we were asked to help". New documents released to Byline Times following a lengthy Freedom of Information battle with the Cabinet Office can reveal the true extent of the political lobbying between Conservative party Ministers and Uniserve in the build-up to the huge VIP lane deals being awarded. Despite having no track record of supplying PPE, the lucrative deals were awarded to Uniserve without any competition. The company does however share the same address as former Cabinet Office Minister Julia Lopez MP and is based in her constituency. Liddell and Lopez, who continues to rent an office space from Uniserve, spent years denying they were in contact with each other regarding the PPE deals, in 2020 Uniserve explicitly told reporters at the Guardian, "Uniserve or Mr Liddell were never in contact with Julia Lopez regarding bidding for these contracts." A statement echoed by the then Conservative-controlled Cabinet Office. However in late 2025 the pair finally came clean and admitted that they were in email contact prior to the VIP lane deals being awarded. Lopez declined to explain to the Guardian whether or not she acted on Liddell's email. However, for the first time, Byline Times can reveal what happened next. By March 2020 DHSC and Uniserve were already in discussion over the transportation of medical goods, however attention soon turned to the supply of PPE. Uniserve lobbied Lopez on 02 April 2020, complaining that PPE procurement needed "serious thought" and officials were "taking too long" to deal...
• 
  'Republicans Pushing the 'Red Scare' About Democrats Should Look First at Trump' Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system Trump Went to War In Order to Break Iran and Left It More Powerful Than Before – US Defence Analyst ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE 17.08.2026 11хв

  Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen With their party's popularity in freefall, leading Republicans have identified a new message to unite around. The Democrats, according to House Speaker Mike Johnson, will lead America down "the dark road of death to communism." President Donald Trump, Vance, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, along with religious right leaders such as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's spiritual leader Doug Wilson, have made equally histrionic claims. The Red Scare has returned to America, only this time it is pure farce. Definitions of "communism" are a bit like definitions of pornography: hard to pin down but everyone is pretty sure they know it when they see it. For the Republicans echoing this new midterm strategy, communism just means Democrats. For the donors who fund Trump and the MAGA movement, communism means anything that hints that the gargantuan fortunes they have acquired are anything less than the righteous reward for their genius. For the MAGA faithful, communism happens whenever some big-city or brown progressive person says something critical about the cost-of-living crisis or Papa Trump. For many immigrants from formerly communist regimes, along with those whose political identities were forged by the Cold War, it means rule by thuggish authoritarians claiming to represent 'the people'. Because the term is such a vague catch-all for 'everything that scares me' it proves so useful for the demagogues who now control the Republican Party. The messaging strategy is also circulating in some of the more conservative circles in the UK and the EU. At this year's Alliance for Responsible Citizenship gathering, which drew about 4000 attendees to London's Olympia conference center last June, several speakers merged their praise for Western civilization with dark threats about the spread of communism and its apparent equivalent, socialism. EXCLUSIVE Brynn Tannehill explains how Trump's war has resurrected an Iranian regime that sanctions and drought had been on course to topple Brynn Tannehill "It is almost universally recognised that the West shows the world the way of economic development," said Ignat Solzhenitsyn, a pianist and composer and the son of Aleksandr, the famous Soviet dissident and Nobel laureate. "Socialism of any style and hue leads to a comprehensive destruction of the spiritual essence of man." Like Christian nationalists in the US, he laid the blame on humanism. "The turn effected by the Renaissance," he asserted, led to a "headlong dash from the spirit toward matter" and a "dangerous tilt toward worship of man and material goods." Tell that to the well-dressed attendees who flew business class to this £1500-per-ticket event. The American video producer and podcaster John Papola similarly invoked "communists," "Marxists," and "New Jacobins," along with the insufficiently pious, as the supposed enemies of fathers and families. Where precisely can you find these nefarious types? At the "woke madrasas" otherwise known as America's educational institutions. The history of Red Scares is grim. In the scare of 1918-1920, the federal government under President Woodrow Wilson criminalized political dissent, engaged in warrantless searches as a matter of policy, and put thousands of individuals, many of them immigrants, under detention without due process. (Does any of this sound familiar?) In the 1950s, too, red-baiting deprived thousands of individuals of their civil rights and careers. More than that, Red Scares were used to undermine American movements for civil rights and labor rights, allowing reactionaries to sideline and silence opponents without having to engage with the facts. The Red Scares of earlier times always came wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross. It is no accident that they often invoked the language of religious authoritarianism. If God is on our side, according to the paranoid style of Ameri...
• 
  Reform's Nadhim Zahawi Accused of 'Fantasy' After Falsely Claiming Labour-Backer Dale Vince Bankrolled Count Binface Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE Don't miss a story holding farage to account #reformUNCOVERED Reform's Nadhim Zahawi Accused of 'Fantasy' After Falsely Claiming Labour-Backer Dale Vince Bankrolled Count Binface Reform UK Paid £440,000 to Firms Linked to Party Insiders Nigel Farage Reported to Met Police Over Alleged Misconduct in Public Office Reform UK Tells Its Activists 'Don't Drink and Tweet' Because 'The Biggest Threat to Reform Is the People in It' Reform Council Leader's Firm Advised £95 Million Project Which His Own Council Is a Partner In Nigel Farage Funder George Cottrell's Accountant Co-Invested With Russia-Linked Indicted Cocaine Trafficker Subscribers Get More from JOSIAH 17.08.2026 7хв

  Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen Reform-backer and former Conservative chairman Nadhim Zahawi has been accused of peddling falsehoods on national TV after claiming Farage-rival and comedy candidate Count Binface received "£180,000" from Labour donor and Ecotricity founder Dale Vince. On Friday 14 August, Reform UK's Nadhim Zahawi appeared as a guest on ITV's Good Morning Britain, discussing the Clacton by-election result. The vote saw Reform leader Nigel Farage return to Parliament last Thursday, following the by-election he called to counter standards investigations into his funding. Host Kate Garraway noted that the anti-Farage candidate received 9,455 votes, securing over a quarter of the vote in an election where the main opposition parties did not stand. Reform defector Zahawi replied: "Yeah and he got, by the way, he got I think £180,000 from Dale Vince, who is a big Labour supporter. He got activists from the Conservative Party and from Labour going out to try and knock on doors for him." His statement follows a report in the Telegraph on 9 July stating: "One of Labour's biggest donors has pledged to fund Count Binface in his Clacton by-election battle with Nigel Farage…[Dale Vince] could donate up to £180,050 to Count Binface to spend on campaigning materials during a by-election." However, no donation appears to have been made from the businessman and activist. Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account. SUBSCRIBE TODAY We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe. In a statement on social media, Count Binface – real name Jon Harvey – wrote on Friday Zahawi's claim was "untrue." "Dale Vince has never donated any money to me, and at no point have I asked activists from any other party to knock on doors for me. If anyone did so, it was not at my direction and was of their own volition. "I'm sure Mr Zahawi will want to correct the record at his earliest convenience." Dale Vince told Byline Times Zahawi's claim was: "untrue, totally false, a fantasy." He claimed it was "unconnected with reality and unchecked by anyone at Reform (no-one asked)." Vince added: "Who does that?" The entrepreneur's team is set to contact Zahawi. He confirmed he had donated nothing to Count Binface. "Reform plays fast and loose with the truth, not just dodgy donations. There are five million (secret) reasons why complaining about someone else's funding is just plain daft. Even if it were truth as opposed to fantasy," the green entrepreneur added, referring to crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne's pre-election 'gift' of £5 million to Nigel Farage. SIGN UP TO EMAIL UPDATES A spokesperson for ITV told this outlet it had already issued a clarification on this morning's GMB programme at 6:28am. Presenter Ranvir Singh said: "Before we get into today's stories on Friday's programme, Nadhim Zahawi said that Count Binface had received £180,000 from the businessman Dale Vince and had asked Labour and Conservative Party activists to go and knock on doors for him. While Mr Vince did offer financial support to Count Binface, it was never accepted. Count Binface also says he has never asked activists from other parties to knock on doors for him. We are happy to clarify that position." Zahawi defected to Reform UK this January, claiming he did so to protect free speech. The former Conservative was briefly Chancellor in the dying days of Boris Johnson's premiership, calling for Johnson to resign less than 48 hours after being appointed to the top economic role. Johnson then did resign, only for Zahawi to later endorse calls for the former PM to return to the top job. Zahawi had previously strongly criticised the Reform leader. In 2015, Zahawi told LBC ...
• 
  There Will Be Another Jason Arday 17.08.2026 6хв

  There will be another Jason Arday. We know this. Because the media knows this. We are told the press 'isn't free' if it lacks the impunity to do anything it likes. It is how power protects itself. By declaring it has none. That is why there will be another Jason Arday. It doesn't matter that a 41-year-old took his life after days of disproportionate media coverage even after his resignation from Cambridge University. It doesn't matter that this mass exercise in hate-drenched fury, sneering, and self-righteousness was fuelled by his race and his class – and whether anyone wants to admit this or not. (No one argued that Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng, elected politicians no less, weren't qualified enough to take the economy to the brink). Those in the media know that someone white and/or posh wouldn't be denigrated in the same way. Because none of their actions are treated in this way. No matter the 'truth' of what they say. It doesn't matter that media outlets across the spectrum have had nothing much to write now that his children are without their father. That is not respect. That is the point. News cycles move on. Algorithms attract other eyeballs. Business as usual. It doesn't matter that columnists at a few of these outlets are now writing of their own 'failure' of Jason Arday. Because they will continue to take the money these outlets pay them. And, in doing so, shield these outlets of any blame. It doesn't matter that the rage-bait has moved on on social media platforms designed to ensure that other rage-bait takes its place. Some continue in their attacks. Hate pays. It doesn't matter that a human being was reduced to an object of lustful frenzy upon the instincts of the mob. Not when division and desensitisation is the operating system our dehumanising political-social-media culture runs on. That is why there will be another Jason Arday. Because there is no check to fetter power when unfettered power resides in the check. There is no 'neutral arbiter'. Only a media invested in its own status to shape how we see the world; who is 'up' and who is 'down'; who is 'in' and who is 'out'; what happens to people's lives. Only a media that cries 'public interest' even when it is not: it is the exercise of unchecked power. There was a public interest seven years ago when this publication first reported on the questionable finances of Reform UK's predecessor party and Nigel Farage and his association with a convicted fraudster who is "like a son". No outlet followed up. Now they are fearless watchdogs. After nearly a decade in which Farage has been elevated as the next prime minister-in-waiting, it is time to turn up the scrutiny so as not to get caught out backing the wrong horse. No matter that the horse long bolted because they opened the gate. The media's own interests; and the public interest: different stories, indeed. That is why there's not yet any media interest, enough to establish a public interest, in a follow-up of the six-month investigation, spanning some 20 sources, published by Byline Times last month about the institution the press has been fixated with day after day: Cambridge University. There is not yet any public interest, it seems, in the activities of another – white, middle-class, right-wing – professor there, James Orr, who is simultaneously a public figure in political life as Farage's Head of Policy at Reform. When this publication put to Cambridge the extensive findings of his activities at the university, including concerns around the safeguarding of students, the press office of my alma mater had nothing to say. It passed our questions straight to Orr's lawyers. When we asked it why, its only response – which it said we couldn't publish – was to state that "we are unable to engage with the approach as a legitimate media enquiry". You can read the full investigation here and decide for yourself. (It redacts the name of the property from which Orr operates, and in which he houses students, in Cambri...
• 
  Advance UK's 'Great British' Successor Group Refuses to Rule Out Foreign Funding Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE Who Are GB PAC? Don't miss a story A Police Report, Legal Threats and a Splinter Party: Inside the Demise of Advance UK Money and Mergers Reform UK Tells Its Activists 'Don't Drink and Tweet' Because 'The Biggest Threat to Reform Is the People in It' Talk TV Host André Walker Found Guilty of Assaulting Climate Protester at Pro-Trump Dinner holding farage to account #reformUNCOVERED Reform UK Paid £440,000 to Firms Linked to Party Insiders Nigel Farage Reported to Met Police Over Alleged Misconduct in Public Office Reform UK Tells Its Activists 'Don't Drink and Tweet' Because 'The Biggest Threat to Reform Is the People in It' Reform Council Leader's Firm Advised £95 Million Project Which His Own Council Is a Partner In Nigel Farage Funder George Cottrell's Accountant Co-Invested With Russia-Linked Indicted Cocaine Trafficker How George Cottrell's Reform UK Network in Montenegro Is Tied to Sanctioned Russian Oligarchs Subscribers Get More from JOSIAH 14.08.2026 16хв

  Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen The campaign group replacing Advance UK – a party registered only in December – has refused to rule out foreign funding for its 'Great British' efforts. It comes amid a fiery conflict over the remains of Advance UK, the far-right Reform competitor party that formally deregistered with the Electoral Commission in July. Advance UK was established by Ben Habib, who was the co-deputy leader of Reform UK from October 2023 until he was removed and replaced by Richard Tice in July 2024. Habib quit the party in November 2024, after falling out with leader Nigel Farage and then chairman Zia Yusuf – with businessman Habib backing a hardline stance in favour of mass deportations. Habib, who was born in Pakistan, had also called on far-right MP Rupert Lowe to be readmitted to Reform. On 30 June 2025, Habib took over what was then the Integrity Party, relaunching it as 'Advance UK'. That same day, former Reform MP Rupert Lowe launched his own project, 'Restore Britain' – which soon outflanked the party in every respect. Restore began as a 'pressure group' but formally registered as a party this February, and secured 9% of the vote in the recent Greater Manchester Mayoral election. Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account. SUBSCRIBE TODAY We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe. It is polling around three per cent across Britain and is seen by Reform as a threat to its chances of securing a majority – with Lowe and Nigel Farage recently engaging in a very public spat over potentially working together. This July, Ben Habib announced his intention to merge Advance UK with the non-party campaign group 'Great British PAC', which he chairs. He launched a ballot of members to certify the move. Around 8,000 members voted from the 38,000 potential voters, with the vast majority eventually backing the transfer. Advance UK will continue to exist as a company – with, this outlet understands, around £250,000 in funds – but will no longer be regulated by the Electoral Commission. And it will give cash to GB PAC on a case-by-case basis. GBPAC was set up in 2024 as a pressure group, "in the mold of American political action committees", as Hope Not Hate puts it. The group writes: "GB PAC spends much of its time opposing the government's Chagos Islands deal with Mauritius. It has also supported Tommy Robinson events and a protest opposing puberty blockers for trans youth. "Plans to launch an academy to teach future right-wing leaders, host a conference, and publish a list of legislation it wishes to overturn appear to have stalled," the anti-hate group said in a February briefing. Its advisory group includes far-right activists like Carl Benjamin (AKA YouTuber Sargon of Akkad). Despite Habib's stated aversion to 'ethno-nationalism', a regional director of GBPAC has previously shared a website containing Hitler's speeches and pointed his online followers towards a video asserting Hitler "never ordered the extermination of a single Jew". Another, the group's England director has also bemoaned the supposed decline of the British "gene pool", writing on X: "By importing loads of sub Saharan Africans plus Muslims that inter breed the IQ is in severe decline." GBPAC's founder and sole director Claire Bullivant told this outlet Advance UK's funds were "not being transferred to GBP Corporation Limited or to Claire Bullivant personally, nor is the Great British PAC acquiring that sum [£432,000 outlined in the last accounts] as part of the arrangements between the organisations." "We understand that Ben Habib and the Advance UK College will determine how any remaining funds should properly be applied, including potentiall...
• 
  Reform UK Paid £440,000 to Firms Linked to Party Insiders Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE Don't miss a story Oak Hall Studios and David Bull Goon Squad and Archie Manners Nigel Farage Reported to Met Police Over Alleged Misconduct in Public Office Loans and Past Revelations holding farage to account #reformUNCOVERED Reform UK Paid £440,000 to Firms Linked to Party Insiders Nigel Farage Reported to Met Police Over Alleged Misconduct in Public Office Reform UK Tells Its Activists 'Don't Drink and Tweet' Because 'The Biggest Threat to Reform Is the People in It' Reform Council Leader's Firm Advised £95 Million Project Which His Own Council Is a Partner In Nigel Farage Funder George Cottrell's Accountant Co-Invested With Russia-Linked Indicted Cocaine Trafficker How George Cottrell's Reform UK Network in Montenegro Is Tied to Sanctioned Russian Oligarchs Subscribers Get More from JOSIAH 14.08.2026 12хв

  Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen Reform UK paid at least £440,000 to firms with directors linked to the party since 2023, Byline Times can reveal. 'Electoral Commission filings show that Nigel Farage's party paid over £72,000 to Touchpoint Strategy, a 'media strategy and crisis consulting' firm for 'market research/canvassing' work around the 2024 general election. Companies House filings show that Touchpoint was only founded in March 2024. Within three months, Reform UK spent £72,000 with the firm.' Touchpoint has never filed any accounts, and its most recent filings were due in December 2025 but are still not published. The firm also received a compulsory strike-off notice in February 2026, which has now been suspended. The firm has two directors, Josephmarie Gerard John Dulston and Tess Wheldon. Dulston is a Reform Party activist who stood as a local Reform candidate in the May 2025 elections for Market Drayton South, under the name he commonly goes by – Joseph Robertson. He was appointed as a director in July 2024, after the June spending by Reform. Robertson is a key figure in Liz Truss's CPAC Great Britain (CPAC-GB), a conference group attempting to import MAGA-style politics via its home-grown largest annual conference to the UK. Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account. SUBSCRIBE TODAY We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe. Robertson is also a former member of the anti-LGBTQ and anti-abortion Orthodox Conservatives, and appeared alongside Nigel Farage at the 2025 UK launch of the Heartland Institute, an American climate denial think tank. Tess Wheldon, who has also worked as an analyst for rural policy at the Orthodox Conservative group, was an influential voice during the farmers protests during the early days of the Labour government. Touchpoint was behind the organising of the recent CPAC-GB conference, which, in bringing together members of the global far right, vowed to "Save Britain, save the West". Both Robertson and Wheldon are listed as its only directors on Companies House. Robertson has previously said in interviews with a Swedish media outlet that "there are essentially parts of the UK where Sharia Law is being enforced", and Wheldon has described abortion as murder on Instagram, as well as perpetuating the debunked claim that recent reforms to abortion legislation in the UK legalise "abortion up to birth". Filings also show that Reform has paid another firm, Jupiter Visual Communications Limited, over £125,600 for work on 'rallies and other events', 'campaign broadcasts', and other general administration costs between August 2023 and July 2024. Jupiter Visual Communications itself later went on to become a Reform donor, with the company giving £50,000 to the party in January 2026. It is, this outlet understands, the first time it has emerged that a supplier paid by Reform UK has then gone on to donate to the party. However, this isn't its only link to the party. One of the directors, Bennett Ingram Harley Moss – AKA Ben Moss – also sits as a director of another Reform-donating business, Prema Properties, which between September 2024 and April 2025 gave £50,000 to Reform. Ben Moss has also promoted CPAC-GB on his LinkedIn page. SIGN UP TO EMAIL UPDATES Another firm that Reform has paid for campaign broadcasts and 'overheads and general administration' costs, to the tune of £202,000 between January 2023 and July 2024, is Oak Hall Studios. The sole director of the company is Dr David Bull, who was party Chairman between June 2025 through to May 2026, also formerly sitting as deputy leader from 2021 to 2023. Bull was also a former Brexit Party MEP and is a regular fixture as a commentator on GB ...
• 
  Talk TV Host André Walker Found Guilty of Assaulting Climate Protester at Pro-Trump Dinner Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE No Evidence of Threat to Art Don't miss a story Ill-Judged YouTube Videos News UK Keeps André Walker on Air Despite Talk Presenter's Assault Trial Over Trump Dinner Clash Talk TV Presenter Dragged Climate Activist Into Room and Assaulted Him During Pro-Trump Dinner, Court Told 'You Should Rightly Be Ashamed' TalkTV Presenter Accused of Assault After Dragging Climate Protester From UK Trump Dinner holding farage to account #reformUNCOVERED Nigel Farage Reported to Met Police Over Alleged Misconduct in Public Office Reform UK Tells Its Activists 'Don't Drink and Tweet' Because 'The Biggest Threat to Reform Is the People in It' Reform Council Leader's Firm Advised £95 Million Project Which His Own Council Is a Partner In Nigel Farage Funder George Cottrell's Accountant Co-Invested With Russia-Linked Indicted Cocaine Trafficker How George Cottrell's Reform UK Network in Montenegro Is Tied to Sanctioned Russian Oligarchs Elections Watchdog Assesses Reform UK's £30,000 Private Flights Donation Subscribers Get More from JOSIAH 13.08.2026 13хв

  Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen Presenter André Walker, who works for the Rupert Murdoch-owned Talk station, has been found guilty of assault, after dragging a protester into a room without CCTV at a Republicans Overseas dinner during Donald Trump's state visit. The pro-Trump dinner at Windsor Guildhall on 16 September 2025 saw two Fossil Free London activists stand up at the front and chant "If you drill baby drill, how many will you kill?" while holding banners. While the female protester was led to a nearby entrance, Mr Walker dragged NHS doctor Kush Naker through the middle of the room and into a side room — which, in a YouTube video after the incident, he mentioned had no CCTV, while putting his thumbs up and grinning. Dr Naker accused Mr Walker of pinning him on the ground and attempting to punch him, knee him in the groin and strangle him, efforts Dr Naker told the court he had to overpower. Mr Walker repeatedly said "I'm nearly 50" while visibly out of breath when a camera did eventually enter the room. At a judgment hearing at Reading Magistrates' Court today, District Judge (Magistrates' Court) Pankhania told the pro-Trump YouTuber and News UK presenter: "I am satisfied that the defendant attempted to punch Dr Naker." The judge found of the attempted punches: "I am not satisfied that any of those landed" — but Mr Walker's actions amounted to assault nonetheless. Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account. SUBSCRIBE TODAY We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe. In a hearing on 30 July, which this outlet also covered, Mr Walker and his defence, former Conservative justice secretary Sir Robert Buckland KC, attempted to claim the Talk host was trying to defend the paintings from the protesters. But no evidence was given that they would attempt to do so. The judge found: "Dr Naker didn't have a bag or anything in his hands when he stood up. His back was to the painting. At no point before his approach does he turn to the many pieces of art." "There is no evidence that any of the protesters threatened to cause damage… There is no evidence in the Mayor's Parlour [the private side-room] that Dr Naker moved towards the art or threatened to move." The judge found that Mr Walker "did not reasonably hold the belief that he needed to defend the artwork" — and that this defence only emerged strongly three months after the incident. SIGN UP TO EMAIL UPDATES Mr Walker appeared to have added to his problems by publishing prolifically on YouTube about the trial and the incident. The judge found: "The YouTube video is instructive about the defendant's mind." In one video immediately after the assault, Walker described "having a fight with the protesters", mentioned the artwork briefly but nothing further, grinned with a double thumbs-up about the lack of CCTV, called the protesters terrorists, and asked for donations to his Patriot Fund. "I do not find that the artwork threat was genuinely held," the judge said. The judge also noted that Mr Walker "admitted in his police interview that he may have used unreasonable force." The prosecution stated that Walker "dragged Dr Naker into the Mayor's Parlour, held him down, kneeling on him, and made some punches which did not connect". She submitted to the court that the dragging and kneeling on Dr Naker — neither of which was contested — amounted to substantial force. EXCLUSIVE EXCLUSIVE: André Walker, accused of assault by beating over a clash with a Fossil Free London activist during the President's state visit, continues to front shows for the Murdoch-owned station Josiah Mortimer Dr Naker reported having a sore wrist, a sore jaw and a sore tongue after the incident, as well as...
• 
  A Police Report, Legal Threats and a Splinter Party: Inside the Demise of Advance UK Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE Don't miss a story Nigel Farage Reported to Met Police Over Alleged Misconduct in Public Office Habib's Defence Reform UK Tells Its Activists 'Don't Drink and Tweet' Because 'The Biggest Threat to Reform Is the People in It' Who Owns the Remains? holding farage to account #reformUNCOVERED Nigel Farage Reported to Met Police Over Alleged Misconduct in Public Office Reform UK Tells Its Activists 'Don't Drink and Tweet' Because 'The Biggest Threat to Reform Is the People in It' Reform Council Leader's Firm Advised £95 Million Project Which His Own Council Is a Partner In Nigel Farage Funder George Cottrell's Accountant Co-Invested With Russia-Linked Indicted Cocaine Trafficker How George Cottrell's Reform UK Network in Montenegro Is Tied to Sanctioned Russian Oligarchs Elections Watchdog Assesses Reform UK's £30,000 Private Flights Donation Subscribers Get More from JOSIAH 13.08.2026 13хв

  Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen The wind-up of Advance UK has led to legal threats and recriminations between former activists and senior figures – with Byline Times able to reveal that party founder Ben Habib reported his own Chief Operating Officer to the police. Advance UK, a competitor party to Reform and Restore Britain, formally deregistered with the Electoral Commission in July, amid fears it would only haemorrhage support to Rupert Lowe MP's Restore Britain. It was set up by businessman Ben Habib, who was the co-deputy leader of Reform UK from October 2023 until he was removed and replaced by Richard Tice in July 2024. Habib quit Reform in November 2024, after falling out with leader Nigel Farage and then chairman Zia Yusuf – with Habib backing a hardline stance in favour of mass deportations. Habib, who was born in Pakistan, had also called on far-right MP Rupert Lowe to be readmitted to Reform. On 30 June 2025, Habib took over what was then the Integrity Party, relaunching it as 'Advance UK'. That same day, former Reform MP Rupert Lowe launched his own project, 'Restore Britain' – which soon outflanked the party in every respect. Restore began as a 'pressure group' but formally registered as a party this February, and secured 9% of the vote in the recent Greater Manchester Mayoral election. This July, Ben Habib announced his intention to merge Advance UK with the non-party campaign group 'Great British PAC', which he chairs. He launched a ballot of members to certify the move. In an extraordinary intervention, Tim Power, the party's Chief Operating Officer, wrote to all members shortly after the ballot went out, saying: "I am writing to inform you that the membership ballot launched on 5 June 2026 has been cancelled… Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account. SUBSCRIBE TODAY We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe. "The ballot was not conducted in accordance with that Constitution…Any decision to de-register the Party or merge it with another organisation requires a special resolution – a 75% supermajority – of a properly constituted College of Electors under Articles 1.7 and 2. The College has never been properly constituted." He added: "Advance UK is a company limited by guarantee. This means the Party's assets – its funds, its membership database, its intellectual property and its brand – are held for the benefit of the Party's objects as a registered political party. They do not belong to any individual and cannot simply be transferred to another organisation" – i.e. Great British PAC. "GBPAC is not a registered political party. It does not stand candidates in elections. Its objects are materially different from those of Advance UK," Power wrote. He also claimed "any transfer of member personal data to GBPAC would require the individual consent of each member under UK GDPR. No such consent has been obtained." Power told Advance UK members: "What has happened over the last few days has exposed serious governance failings within this Party – failings that should have been addressed months ago and were not. "A Board of Directors should have been properly constituted. A Treasurer should have been appointed. A College of Electors should have been properly elected by you, the membership, for the first time. None of that happened. And the result is that the Party arrived at this moment without the governance structures it needed to handle a decision of this magnitude properly." SIGN UP TO EMAIL UPDATES Ben Habib soon restated the ballot, claiming Power was "wrong on all points and should be ignored." He claimed the party was considering the "legal position." Around 8,000 members voted from the 38,000 potenti...
• 
  How Ukraine Is Now Targeting the Russian Economy Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system Nigel Farage Funder George Cottrell's Accountant Co-Invested With Russia-Linked Indicted Cocaine Trafficker ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE 12.08.2026 9хв

  Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen In the last month, Ukraine has set its sights on a new target in Russia, a business by the name of Wildberries. This company is an e-commerce giant, the largest of its kind in Russia, with a market share of almost half of all online retail. At the heart of its business is a network of massive warehouse facilities. When the warehouses burn in the aftermath of Ukrainian drone strikes the footage shows smoke plumes that billow for miles. There are many valid reasons behind why Wildberries became a focus of Ukraine long-range drone warfare, alongside the continuing attacks on oil and gas infrastructure and strikes to military facilities manufacturing parts for Russia's deadly ballistic missiles. As the sanctioned Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska recently said, "the old maxim is that if you owe the bank a million, that's your problem. If you owe the bank a billion, that's their problem." Wildberries has borrowed heavily to build its business, it owes not a billion, but lots of billions. $18.4 billion, more or less. Put simply, the intent of Ukraine's Wildberries strategy is to ratchet up pressure on the banking sphere. Much of the lending to Wildberries has come from VTB Bank, a state-owned bank, indicating the strategic importance of this company to the Kremlin. If a business is strategically important to the Kremlin, it is strategically important to Ukraine too. EXCLUSIVE The accountancy firm that administers George Cottrell's Montenegro company, has invested in a property development with the alleged ringleader of the country's largest money laundering cartel Nafeez Ahmed So far, the attacks on the warehouse network have destroyed 10 of the 15 largest warehouses that the group operates, another 3 in the top 15 have also been severely damaged and are offline. With such a significant impact on its operations (another 5 of the next tier of 15 warehouses by size have also been destroyed) there's no doubt that this company will be facing difficulty servicing its mountain of debt. This, and a combination of other factors, are leading towards a crisis in the wider banking sector. While the main business cannot repay its debts, Wildberries acted as an incubator for many small and medium-sized businesses. Approximately 500,000 individual traders use the services (storage, delivery, hosting of their stores, payment processing, etc.) of Wildberries, and many of them face bankruptcy with their goods having gone up in smoke. Interestingly, a week before the Ukrainian strike campaign began, the company changed their Terms & Conditions to state that they would not be liable for losses caused by drone damage. Maybe they'd been tipped off. But entrepreneurs across Russia have lost their incomes. Those potential new bankruptcies will likely all have bank exposure too. They'll certainly not be contributing to the tax revenue that the state depends on. Bankruptcies in Russia were already up 30% year-on-year in the first quarter of 2026, a sign of the pressures Vladimir Putin's "Special Military Operation" is putting on the economy as a whole. In fact, the only part of the Russian economy that has shown any sign of growth over the last few years has been the war economy. Wars are expensive things, but where does the money come from for the war economy? Well, again, the answer is the banks. At the beginning of the war, Putin signed an order instructing banks to extend loans to defence contractors on preferential terms established by the Government. As a result, the war-linked loan book amounted to 58% of all commercial lending in 2025. While financing of consumer-related businesses fell from 31% pre-war to 20% of the loan portfolio in 2025. At some point those loans are going to mature, or will require refinancing. How much – considering the high probability of the contractors themselves being picked clean of anything of value by their owne...
• 
  Tommy Robinson and the London News Website Linked to a Putin-Backed Propaganda Network 02.02.2026 14хв

  Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system SUBSCRIBE TODAY In February 2020, far-right activist Stephen Yaxley-Lennon ('Tommy Robinson') travelled to Moscow and St Petersburg, giving interviews to Kremlin-backed broadcaster RT and meeting figures linked to Russian nationalist movements. Since then, questions have long swirled about his Russian connections and the sources of his funding amid mounting legal debts. Byline Times can now reveal that years before that trip to Russia, Robinson was hired as a "goodwill ambassador" for an unregistered charity fronting a secretive Russian propaganda network that worked directly for President Vladimir Putin's administration, and has ties to a sanctioned Russian state-linked oil giant. The unregistered charity – the MMBF Trust – is part of a network centred around the London Post. At first glance, the London Post resembles a local news website covering UK gambling regulations and London restaurant reviews. It has featured articles about Borough Market's grocery ordering service, and good spots for ramen. But sources who spoke to Byline Times described it as part of what intelligence analysts call a 'black PR' operation: coordinated disinformation campaigns designed to manipulate public opinion while concealing their true sponsors. Robinson's appointment to the unregistered charity was first reported by anti-extremism organisation Hope Not Hate in 2017. Last year, Press Gazette revealed that the London Post – which had announced the appointment – had surprising Russia links. Byline Times can now reveal further details about the suspected funding behind the website, including cryptocurrency payment trails to Russian 'black PR' agents, and ties to major Russian state enterprises. The site's Russian backers operate through a company called Moscow Media Group. Its subsidiary, MMG Brainstorming, has publicly advertised its work for Putin's presidential office, the State Duma, the Federation Council, and various Russian Government ministries and agencies. Moscow Media Group also has ties to a wide range of Russian state-backed energy and infrastructure enterprises, including to the sanctioned Russian oil company Gazprom Neft. 'Domestic Terrorism': ICE Contractor Palantir's Tools for Tracking Dissent Peter Thiel's controversial data firm – which holds contracts with the UK's NHS and Ministry of Defence – researched protest prediction for the US Army before agreeing to build ICE's data platform to conduct mass deportation. Are its tools now targeting democratic dissent as well as illegal immigration? Nafeez Ahmed The Unregistered Charity The public face behind the London Post is a Zimbabwean-English film producer named Matthew C Martino (also known as Mathetes Chihwai). Martino runs a UK-based entity called the Matthew Martino Benevolent Fund (MMBF Trust), the website of which states that it is a charity supporting filmmakers and others who wish to study or work in the performing arts. However, the organisation neither registered with the UK's Charity Commission nor provided any notable support to filmmakers. In 2017, the MMBF Trust made waves on social media when the London Post announced Tommy Robinson as its new goodwill ambassador. Robinson, the co-founder of the English Defence League, is a convicted fraudster whose disinformation helped fuel the 2024 Southport riots which involved unprecedented racist violence. According to the London Post's announcement, Robinson was hired by the MMBF Trust to help oversee a £100,000 arts grant programme that would launch in February 2018. The nature of the work Robinson undertook for the MMBF Trust is unclear. But the charity appears to have been a front to provide legitimacy to a Russian-backed propaganda operation. The 2Trom Network The London Post is part of a media consortium of ostensibly British news organisations, operating under an entity called 2Trom News Group. Although inco...
• 
  Keir Starmer's Brutal Treatment of Andy Burnham Has Destroyed All Illusions About His Premiership 30.01.2026 6хв

  Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system SUBSCRIBE TODAY "The enemy has only images and illusions… behind which he hides his true motives. Destroy the image and you will break the enemy." — Shaolin Master to Bruce Lee, Enter the Dragon That line appears at the very start of Enter the Dragon, delivered before a punch is thrown. It frames the entire film. The struggle it describes is not one of brute force, but of credibility. Power, Bruce Lee's Shaolin master suggests, rarely confronts you directly. It shelters behind images. Strip those away, and what remains is exposed. It is difficult for me not to think about that line when looking at what has just happened inside the Labour Party. For years, the Labour right under Sir Keir Starmer's leadership has carefully cultivated an image. The staging is familiar: the Union Jack backdrop, the language of seriousness, duty, restraint and responsibility. Even the careful emphasis on titles and institutional roles plays its part. The claim is not merely of competence, but of public duty. That power is exercised reluctantly. That decisions are taken in the national interest, not out of factional advantage. That this is public service, not politics as usual. That image has mattered because it has functioned as legitimacy. It reassured voters, quietened dissent and disarmed critics. It suggested that whatever internal disagreements existed, those in charge were acting from a higher sense of responsibility. But images only work if behaviour sustains them. Freebiegate and repeated policy U-turns have already eroded that credibility. But the decision to block Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham from the Gorton and Denton by-election did something more profound. It did not simply remove a political obstacle. It punctured the image itself, publicly and unmistakably. Keir Starmer's Labour Government Is Much Better Than the Media Admits There is a deep disconnect between the Government's actions to improve the country and its standing in the polls, argues Professor Chris Painter Professor Chris Painter This was not persuasion. It was not democratic judgement. It was not even subtle strategy. It was the open deployment of bureaucratic power to neutralise a figure whose authority rests on precisely the things the leadership claims to value: electoral success, public trust and a strong local mandate. In that moment, the illusion failed. When power reaches for administrative force rather than argument or consent, it reveals its true priorities. What was exposed here was not country before party, but self-preservation. Not public service, but control. Not national interest, but institutional self-interest. Once that becomes visible, the language no longer works. The symbolism no longer covers the act. Claims of seriousness and duty ring hollow when set against naked factional enforcement. This is not simply about Andy Burnham as an individual. It is about what happens when a political leadership becomes more invested in managing threats to itself than in advancing a project rooted in democratic confidence. When maintaining control becomes an end in itself, rather than a means to serve a wider purpose. MPs may spend much of their lives inside the Westminster bubble, but we are never fully enclosed by it. We return each week to our constituencies. We sit in surgeries. We hear frustration, anger and disillusionment unfiltered. We see how political decisions land beyond the chamber and the lobby briefings. What Keir Starmer Should Have Done With Andy Burnham The PM's decision to block Burnham from standing in the Gorton and Denton by-election risks handing the seat to Nigel Farage, and ultimately triggering his own downfall. It didn't have to be this way, argues Adam Bienkov Adam Bienkov It is in that space, between Westminster and the country, that legitimacy is tested. When MPs themselves begin to conclude, alongside the public, that th...