Michael Unsworth🇳🇮🇺🇦#xx

Retired from the money business a long time ago. Founder Korkyra Baroque Festival. Owner of Lesic Dimitri Palace and Restaurant.

[(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges]

The other thing about Darren Jones. He attempted to cover up his message to Peter Mandelson. He's literally the Minister responsible for ensuring the Government complies with parliament's demand all messages between Mandeslon and Ministers are published.

[J.K. Rowling @jk_rowling]

1. Women’s spaces are for women. It’s irrelevant how the women look.

2. Men don’t belong in women’s spaces. It’s irrelevant how the men look.

3. Most trans-identified men would give at least one ball to look like Sharron Davies.

[David Davis MP @DavidDavisMP]

The big question in all of this is why were these messages between Darren Jones and Peter Mandelson not released on Monday alongside all the other Humble Address documents?

The Humble Address is clear that "electronic communications… between Lord Mandelson and ministers… during his time as Ambassador" must be released to Parliament - that is exactly what these messages between Darren Jones and Peter Mandelson are.

The Cabinet Office, which Darren Jones is in charge of, oversees this process, and it is beginning to look as though that department cannot be trusted to make politically sensitive decisions.

In my mind, we now need an independent third party, not subject to the pressures of the Government, to review this matter.

The most natural option would be for the National Audit Office to look at this. When I was chair of the Public Accounts Committee, the NAO had access to every single document in government no matter how highly classified.

The NAO could review the information and documents the Government holds and provide reassurance that the demands of the Humble Address are being properly complied with.

https://t.co/BXZKw3DoyR

[Luke Tryl @LukeTryl]

Where do you think, you stack up against the public on a series of traits? The average Brit thinks they are more intelligent, funny & espeically kind than average, thinks they’re average on attractiveness & less wealthy. The average Labour voter rates themselves higher on all.

[Sarah Vine @WestminsterWAG]

Does he want them to wear yellow armbands too?

[Matt Cartoons @MattCartoonist]

My latest cartoon for tomorrow's Telegraph
Buy a print of my cartoons at https://t.co/ILFJjPmckx
Original artwork from https://t.co/bVPAkgE34y

[Tim Shipman @ShippersUnbound]

EXCLUSIVE: Darren Jones
🔥 praised Mandelson the day he was fired
🔥was rude about Reeves
🔥took several swipes at Jonny Reynolds
🔥bemoaned the influence of the trade unions
BUT none of these messages made it into the public disclosure on Monday. Fancy that! https://t.co/BFIKlQR2Gt

[Toby Young @toadmeister]

MPs have signed off their own bumper 5% pay hike and expenses boost despite Treasury warnings that the move was "unjustified" and would be rejected for a Government department. https://t.co/nRZh0Eawry

[The Free Speech Union @SpeechUnion]

The Government’s official definition of Islamophobia — repackaged as “anti-Muslim hostility” — was published in March.

The Free Speech Union warned from the outset that it would have a chilling effect on free speech and stifle legitimate criticism of Islam. The decision to classify prejudicial stereotyping as a form of “anti-Muslim hostility” will also deter people — including public officials — from speaking out about the grooming gangs scandal and Islamist extremism.

We also predicted that, despite being a non-statutory definition, it would serve as a gold-embossed invitation for public bodies to produce guidance that goes even further.

South Wales Police are now zealously enforcing their own bespoke Islamic blasphemy law, instructing officers to record any conversation that goes beyond what they deem “legitimate” discussion of Islam.

Why should police officers be given the power to decide what constitutes acceptable speech about a religion and its followers in a country where blasphemy laws were abolished in 2008?

These incidents will be logged as “anti-social behaviour incidents” — the successor to the draconian non-crime hate incident regime. They could appear on an enhanced DBS check and potentially prevent someone from getting a job.

The Free Speech Union has written to South Wales Police demanding that this guidance be withdrawn. If they refuse, we have warned that we will seek judicial review.

Watch FSU External Affairs Officer @_ConnieShaw on @TalkTV 👇

[The Free Speech Union @SpeechUnion]

Today in the House of Lords, General Secretary of the Free Speech Union, Lord Young, spoke in a debate on the impact that harassment and intimidation is having on the recruitment, retention and wellbeing of local councillors.

Since the FSU was founded in 2020, we have taken on 317 cases relating to local government. Of those, 141 involved members of the public who faced complaints from councillors or council employees.

The FSU has identified a concerning pattern. When members of the public express views that councillors find disagreeable — but which are protected under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) — they are often subjected to complaints that can have serious consequences. These complaints are frequently framed as allegations of harassment, misinformation or hate speech.

Lord Young highlighted two examples. In one case, a grandmother was visited by two officers from Greater Manchester Police after calling for two local Labour councillors to resign when it emerged that they had shared WhatsApp messages expressing the hope that a local resident would die.

In another, a member of the public objected to a 20mph speed limit at a parish council meeting. Two Green councillors then complained that his comments amounted to “harassment”.

We must ensure that local government complaints procedures are not weaponised for political purposes or used to suppress legitimate criticism of elected representatives.

Watch Lord Young below 👇

[Emma Harriet Nicholson @Baroness_Nichol]

A big Trades Union seems ignorant on Employment Law

[Sharron Davies HoL MBE @sharrond62]

The general public do not want males in their little girls changing rooms or sports. It’s barbaric incarcerating a male sex offender in a woman’s prison. It is not beyond any business to find a third space. Or sports to find fair room for all.

[Jim Chimirie 🇬🇧 @JChimirie66677]

.@nazirafzal, nobody is disputing those figures. The question is what explains them.

Black people account for 35 percent of knife possession arrests in England and Wales despite comprising four percent of the population. That is a nine fold overrepresentation. Officers stop and search where knives are most likely to be found. The disproportionality in stop and search reflects the disproportionality in knife carrying. That is not racist policing. That is policing following the evidence to where the harm is concentrated. The communities most devastated by knife crime in Britain are Black communities. Reducing stop and search in those communities does not protect Black lives. It costs them.

And yes there is a race issue in British policing. Rick Prior, the head of the Metropolitan Police Federation, said exactly that. He said his officers were increasingly nervous about challenging people from some ethnic minorities for fear of being labelled racist. Mukund Krishna suspended him for it. The High Court ruled that suspension unlawful. Prior was vindicated. Krishna has since been arrested on suspicion of fraud.

The race issue in British policing is documented in the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary Race Action Plan 2024 to 2026, which commits to pursuing offenders who cause harm to ethnic minority communities specifically, not all communities equally. It is documented in the College of Policing's practice bank which publishes anti-racism training covering white privilege and white fragility as approved national practice. It is documented on the body cam footage of Henry Nowak's final minutes.

The race issue in British policing is not that officers stop too many Black people. It is that the training designed to address that concern has produced officers who treat a racism accusation as more urgent than a dying boy's pleas for help. Henry Nowak is the race issue in British policing. And it is the one nobody in your position wants to name.

[Zac Goldsmith @ZacGoldsmith]

It’s appalling to see people like Jenrick & Braverman - both of whom are intelligent and know Kemi very well- actively lying about what Kemi said.

They know she has been rock solid on identity politics forever. They have seen the full quote from which this nonsense has been extracted and warped. They know this attack is based on something that is not only wrong, it is the opposite of the truth.

They insult their members, who they presumably think aren’t capable of spotting the obvious lie. And they position Reform as just another grubby grasping lying political entity.

They should retract and apologise

[Julia Hartley-Brewer @JuliaHB1]

Not on your knees yet, Prime Minister?

[Neil O'Brien @NeilDotObrien]

Given that some people are now trying to *completely* re-write history it is worth recalling which minister got lots of flack back in 2020 for attacking critical race theory.

[Conservatives @Conservatives]

Watch in full: @KemiBadenoch's powerful response to the murder of Henry Nowak and the shocking police bodycam footage ⬇️

[Nick Timothy MP @NJ_Timothy]

The murder of Henry Nowak shows how law enforcement is corrupted by political correctness.

And it's far from the only case.

We need to dismantle the whole structure of identity politics - and return us to equality before the law.

[Claire Coutinho @ClaireCoutinho]

I’m starting to worry that the Labour Energy team can’t read.

This is not a report about jobs that only exist because of Net Zero.

A sizeable chunk of the jobs included are ‘waste and recycling’ and nuclear power. To state the obvious, we had those before Net Zero.

They aren’t explicit, but they appear to also include burning trees at Drax, which nobody thinks is green but which our Net Zero legislation forces us to do.

It also includes water monitoring and soil restoration - again, nothing to do with Net Zero.

It includes jobs which are not strictly a result of Net Zero, but ‘are not in conflict with it’ - for example, solar panels on roofs, or engineering consultancies. But again, there is no evidence that these jobs would not exist regardless. China, the world’s largest polluter, and the US, which doesn’t have a net zero target, have an abundance of clean tech jobs.

The problem is not clean tech, it is legislation which forces you to pick decarbonisation *when it does not work for the economy or living standards*.

If industries are paid through extremely expensive subsidies on everyone’s energy bills, of course they will be raising private capital - it’s a rent seekers’ paradise - but is that positive for the economy overall?

This is almost as bad as their ‘independent evidence’ that Clean Power 2030 would cut bills, which also turned out to be pure garbage.

For all of those repeating the Labour lines, please at least do the basics of reading the report.

[The Free Speech Union @SpeechUnion]

🚨 South Wales Police are zealously enforcing their own definition of Islamophobia in a way that threatens free speech.

The force has instructed staff to log anything that goes beyond what it considers a “legitimate” discussion of Islam.

This subjective definition gives officers the power to decide what constitutes acceptable speech and risks having a chilling effect on free expression.

The Free Speech Union has written to South Wales Police calling on them to withdraw the guidance. If they fail to do so, we have threatened legal action by way of judicial review.

FSU General Secretary Lord Young said South Wales Police risked “penalising people for expressing misgivings about Islam”, contrary to free speech protections enshrined in law. Britain’s blasphemy laws were abolished by Parliament in 2008.

Lord Young added: “The Government was careful to include free speech safeguards in its official definition of anti-Muslim hostility, making clear that it was not intended to inhibit criticism of Islam or Islamic religious practices, such as ritual public prayer.

“Our concern is that police forces and other public bodies adopting the definition will gold-plate it, ignoring those safeguards and penalising people for expressing misgivings about Islam, even when those views are rooted in evidence rather than prejudice.

“In particular, we are concerned that the default police response to reports of anti-Muslim hostility — even where they clearly fall outside the definition — will be to record them as ‘anti-social behaviour incidents’, the new name for ‘non-crime hate incidents’. Those records may then be disclosed in enhanced DBS checks.”

The Government announced its official definition of “anti-Muslim hostility” in March, alongside plans to appoint an Islamophobia tsar.

South Wales Police’s interpretation adds an extra phrase to the Government’s definition that could have a chilling effect on free speech and potentially affect people’s employment prospects.

As a result of this policy, individuals may be unable to predict whether their lawful speech or beliefs will be recorded by the police, or how any resulting record may be used, retained or relied upon.

We understand that several other police forces have adopted their own definitions of Islamophobia.

Read more below 👇