28 years ago, Karl Bushby left the UK in an attempt to become the first person to circumnavigate the world on foot.
Yesterday, he arrived in Dover for the final leg of his journey to his motherโs home in Hull.
Never been to the opera before?
Nowโs your chance. Weโre giving away 70,000 free tickets to the @MetOpera at the iconic Lincoln Center. Go to https://t.co/LpKzEcL0V5 to enter the lottery. Thereโs not a bad seat in the house.
The facts behind our work in the Channel.
In 2024, our crews launched 114 times to Channel crossings โ that's just 1.2% of our total launches.
Our core purpose is to save lives at sea. Anyone can drown, but no one should.
Personally, I think this is nonsense. I will break down what I think is happening in this video.
It appears that Jeff Banks is a longtime Reform supporter, so Nigel is granting him two favors. The first is the opportunity to secure a contract to produce Reform's merch. The second is the opportunity to appear in this video, which effectively functions as an advertisement.
I think it is a mischaracterization to call Jeff Banks a "designer." A more apt term is "businessman." There's nothing inherently wrong with being a businessman, but if we were to survey everyone in the menswear industry, the greatest concentration of hucksters would be in this category.
For decades now, Jeff Banks has been sourcing his production in low-wage countries and then importing those items into Britain, which in turn undercuts British production. For instance, this shirt pictured below, which was made in China. To be clear: there is nothing inherently wrong with Chinese production. Some of it can be quite high-quality. But when someone arrives in the country with only the intention of maximizing profits, quality is not their central concern.
If Nigel actually cared about British manufacturing, he could have contacted @paddygrant, who has been a champion in this area for decades. While Jeff Banks was outsourcing his production, Patrick was not only manufacturing in the UK, but also saving British factories. In 2015, he saved the Blackburn factory Cookson & Clegg from closure by purchasing the operation and saving countless jobs. That factory could have easily made Reform's merch. And the money would have gone to someone who has been a genuine champion of UK manufacturing.
Jeff Banks claims that it's a "nightmare" to produce neckties in the UK, so he had to go to Como, Italy to get his silk. This is the sort of lie you can expect from a huckster who is principally concerned with profits, not British jobs.
I'm sure he knows that Macclesfield has a long tradition of producing British silk. Adamley still produces there, as you can see in the third slide. Some of their designs are inspired by David Evans's archival prints, which would have given Nigel and his team the opportunity to promote a long-forgotten British tradition. (I will save the story for David Evans for another time). These Macclesfield silks could have been given to Drake's, a domestic British neckwear producer.
Yes, this would have been expensive for the end consumer. But this is what you would have had to tell Reform supporters: if you want genuine, high-quality British manufacturing, it will cost you.
Jeff Banks doesn't take this route with his production because he knows supposed "British patriots" are often cheap bastards, much like their American counterparts. So he cuts corners where he can. By cutting costs in this way, you undercut actual British producers. Consumers see this advertisement, go to Jeff Banks, and see that the goods are cheap. They then wonder why British manufacturers are charging so much more.
Unfortunately, this corner of the market is full of hucksters who are not real patriots. Nigel promotes this guy in return for his support, which brings consumers to him, helping line his pockets โย much of it cheap imports. If you want real British-made clothing, there is no shortage of options. But you have to be serious about supporting domestic craftspeople and factory workers.
Just in, an official response from NHS England regarding the publicโs right to opt out of their Palantir-run โFederated Data Platformโ:
NHS England has told us, in writing, that you cannot opt out of Palantir's platform.
On 28 August, NHS England's Data Protection Officer answered our demand for a formal review of the Federated Data Platform, the system Palantir built and runs under a 330 million pound contract. He refused the review. What he confirmed instead should alarm every patient in England.
"There is no opt out mechanism in place specifically for NHS FDP." That is a direct quote. The National Data Opt-Out, which millions of us registered precisely to keep our confidential records out of schemes like this, "does not apply" to anything NHS England does on the platform. Every single use falls under a legal exemption. The opt-out you registered protects you from nothing here.
Your last remaining right, the right to object under the UK GDPR, has been refused in advance. For most of the data, NHS England says the right simply does not apply. For the rest, it claims "compelling legitimate grounds" for every patient at once, before anyone has even objected. The law requires that right to be weighed one person at a time. A right refused for everyone, in advance, is not a right. It is a decision they made about your body's data without you.
The letter concedes that Palantir "has access to patient data", including identifiable records. The only safeguard offered against misuse is that it "would potentially be a criminal offence". And the DPO describes patient records with names removed as data in which nobody can be "directly or indirectly identified". That is the definition of anonymous data, and it is wrong in law. Pseudonymised records can be traced back to you, which is exactly why the law still protects them.
Nearly three years into the contract, no independent evaluation has reported. Asked to answer the published studies showing hospitals are not benefiting, NHS England offered its own case studies, "user stories" and "a video animation".
EXCLUSIVE: Cofnas was unfit for his Uni job, say peers
Staff said in leaked emails to the Canary that even Cofnas's presence detracted from their work, as they had to counter the 'flood of shit' pouring from him. @skwawkbox reports
https://t.co/0Kdekt221P
https://t.co/0Kdekt221P
About our complaint campaign against the media for their hounding of Dr. Jason Arday: IPSO have a 72 hour verification limit. If you do not confirm each complaint, they will dismiss it.
Thousands of you most likely opted into lodging five IPSO complaints in one go: The Sun, Daily Mail, The Telegraph, The Spectator, and The Times.
You will have received five IPSO emails. You need to click on each link they send you so that it is officially accepted as a complaint.
๐จ New analysis: Which journalists hounded Dr Jason Arday the most in the 22 days leading up to his death?
- Albert Tait / The Telegraph: 14 articles
- Gordon Rayner / The Telegraph: 12 articles
- Emma Yeomans / The Times: 8 articles
- Janet Eastham / The Telegraph: 6 articles
- Jack Hardy / Daily Mail: 6 articles
- Eleanor Harding / Daily Mail: 6 articles
- Lanre Bakare / The Guardian: 6 articles
- Richard Adams / The Guardian: 6 articles
- Georgia Lambert / The Times: 5 articles
- Tom Williams / THE: 5 articles
- Nicola Woolcock / The Times: 4 articles
Dozens of articles were nameless editorials and op-eds in what was a concerted, systemic effort to defame and destroy a Black man's life.
It wasn't just about getting him fired from Cambridge University. Post-resignation, the papers savagely increased the rate of articles they published about him.
The papers, of course, need to be held to account. 150,000 emails and IPSO complaints have already been filed against them on our action campaign.
But the individuals who wrote the articles should also be held to account. 14 articles about one man in 22 days is not journalism.
Albert Tait is not a journalist. Gordon Rayner is not a journalist. Emma Yeomans is not a journalist.
Journalism means informing readers on matters of public interest. Journalism means sticking to honest principles and conducting your investigations ethically, taking care not to spread misinformation or sensationalism.
How many articles did these journalists write about Peter Mandelson's leaking of sensitive government information to child sex predator Jeffrey Epstein?
How many articles did they write about William OโReilly, Ros Holmes, David Latchman, and Nicola Morrison? Who have all been found guilty of plagiarism?
Note: numbers are based on our corpus of articles, in which we have counted 249 articles about Dr Jason Arday.
Full analysis here: https://t.co/WEjc8Bpd9K
๐จ WATCH: Count Binface responds to Nigel Farage calling him the "establishment candidate"
"That's interesting, isn't it? Because one of the candidates was a sitting MP, formerly an MEP and the architect of Brexit... if that's not the establishment, I'd like to know what is"
"Even if I got 12%, 1 in 8 people in Clacton would rather vote for a space warrior shaped like a bin than Nigel Farage. That would be interesting, wouldn't it"
Count Binface speaks to Sky's @JonCraig as counting continues in Clacton
https://t.co/MVXBDydaRc
๐บ Sky 501
Itโs election week! At this important moment I would like to address your entire planet with a message to the people of Earth. And I think I found the perfect place to do it.