Sam Carr

Mother.

[Charlotte Gill @CharlotteCGill]

@KiMcGuinness Do you think it’s okay for US billionaires to interfere in UK democracy?

[Jim Chimirie 🇬🇧 @JChimirie66677]

@DavidGHFrost "The Student Loans Company now admits it has lost track of more than 370,000 graduates owing nearly £13 billion. That scale of failure does not happen by accident. It happens where accountability is absent."
https://t.co/VS95ys5M2k

[Sam Carr @SamCarr85243145]

@andyburnham Will you be personally funding the waste of money you have inflicted on taxpayers by having an unnecessary by-election and now mayoralty election that’s been a huge waste of money and devolution will be too just like it’s been in Wales and Scotland

[Sam Carr @SamCarr85243145]

@SBarrettBar What level of childish is this ffs

[Sam Carr @SamCarr85243145]

@AndyMcDonaldMP Do you understand how businesses will react to it, your lot didn’t understand what would happen when you increased NI, lowered threshold,& increased min wage all at the same time so I doubt whether you understand this either, employees have rights and it’s already difficult.

[Jenny Holland @SemperFemina21]

3/3 So I studied up on the EU, and voted Brexit. The next day, a morbidly obese woman at work cried hysterically. A former friend wrote me hate mail. I was called an idiot at a cocktail party. It was the beginning of the end of my old life, and the start of my new one. Happy anniversary my fellow apostates!

[Alan @A1an_M]

When I was an IT consultant trying to help implement IT projects for clients, I encountered a thing called: "Kotter's 8 Steps for Leading Change".

It looks like this:
1⃣Create A Sense of Urgency (also known in the energy industry as "Create the Burning Platform")
2⃣ Build A Guiding Coalition
3⃣Form A Strategic Vision
4⃣Enlist A Volunteer Army
5⃣Enable Action By Removing Barriers
6⃣ Generate Short-Term Wins
7⃣Sustain Acceleration
8⃣Institute Change

Arranged in a circle, with 8 leading back to 1, since "the only constant is change" as we are constantly told in the corporate world. 🙄

When you remove all the consultancy mumbo-jumbo, the essence of it is this: you won't achieve change if you don't get everyone in your organisation on board, and that won't happen if people don't see the change as urgent.

What's it's really acknowledging is that top-down change often fails.

Unfortunately that isn't the lesson most big corporates and consultancies have taken from it.

The lesson they've taken from it is that the way change should work is:
1. Leadership first needs to decide what change it wants;
2. Leadership then creates a "sense of urgency" by beating the organisation about the head with propaganda about the need for change until they eventually give in;

Only then, they think, will it be possible to deploy the new SAP system or the new HR system or the AI-based customer contact system, and deliver the company to the Promised Land of tiny costs and handsome profits.

Of course this kind of approach simply creates resentment in the organisation. Rather than willingly participate in the change, people are "voluntold" to work on it. The programme is half-heartedly implemented, and doesn't deliver the promised business benefits because it was decided on by people lacking intimate knowledge of how everything actually works and what the real problems are.

If this kind of thing only happened in private industry, it might not be so bad.

Unfortunately we see all around us the signs that it's the approach used by governments as well. Probably because the same consultancies advise them.

Just look at Net Zero. The climate is changing, yes, as it always has. But slowly, not in a linear fashion, and overwhelmingly not caused by CO2 generated by humans (which makes up only 0.0017% of the atmosphere).

What is the actual problem here? The climate is changing, mostly in ways we don't and can't control. What is the solution? Mitigating the effects of the natural changes to the climate, as humans have done every since we walked the planet.

But, for whatever reason, some influential people decided that wasn't going to achieve what they wanted. They decided that CO2 generated by humans had to become seen as some kind of urgent problem.

So they set out on their change journey by "Creating a Sense of Urgency". Convincing us all we are all going to die soon, either of heatstroke or drowning, if we don't stop burning oil.

They Built a Guiding Coalition by getting as many Climate Scientists, governments and media organisations on board and censoring anyone who opposed.

They Formed a Strategic Vision by saying we had to reduce emissions by a completely arbitrary amount and by a completely arbitrary date, otherwise we will all burn up (or be flooded by rising sea levels).

They Enlisted a Volunteer Army rather easily since lots of ordinary people believe everything the media tells them, especially if it causes fear and panic. (And a Swedish teenager truant helped out a lot).

They Enabled Action by Removing Barriers. One of the ways they did this was by bypassing national governments by driving this change through the UN, specifically the IPCC, and setting up quangos which worked directly with local governments, city councils and mayors, like UK100 and C40Cities.

Creating Short-Term Wins is a hard one to judge. If the real objective was for global warming to be slowed down, a short-term win would be some evidence that global warming was, you know, slowing down. It's hard to see through the fog of propaganda but if you look at credible sources, the climate is continuing to warm at a modest, non-emergency rate, mostly in the Northern hemisphere, and mostly at night. No sign of any "short-term wins" here despite all of the climate summits and fossil fuel elimination and renewable energy programmes.

But of course if the real objective is not to change the climate but to transfer wealth, power and control to an already wealthy and powerful elite, and build a huge, profitable but entirely unnecessary global industry out of nowhere - the Net Zero industry - the short-term wins are absolutely everywhere you look.

Sustaining Acceleration - well they do that by continuing to pump out climate fear every time the temperature in Europe rises above 30degC, generating a new cycle of fear and panic and enlisting yet more footsoldiers to the volunteer army.

Of course the end result of this top-down change programme will be exactly the same as in the private sector. Promised benefits not delivered. The climate will continue to change as it always has, despite the puny efforts of humans.

There will be disillusionment all around, especially amongst the volunteer army when they realise.

Aside from the fact that it won't stop the climate changing, none of the Net Zero programme is about protecting the environment, stopping pollution (CO2 is not pollution!), conserving the countryside, preventing over-development, habitat or species loss.

All of that is continuing, much of it driven by "Green" politicians with their pushes for open borders, housing for infinity immigrants, wind turbines and solar panels carpeting the countryside, along with the pylons and large-scale batteries needed for "sustainable" energy.

But by 2050, the people driving the whole thing will have trousered huge financial benefits, and that's what it's all about in the end... 🤑🤑🤑🤑🤑

[Paul Embery @PaulEmbery]

This astonishing story by the Spectator’s @johngconnolly should be seen as a national scandal. After the George Floyd protests, the Treasury – yes, the *Treasury* - ditched its numerical reasoning test for prospective employees because it created an adverse impact on candidate diversity. Utterly staggering.

[Sam Carr @SamCarr85243145]

@SAshworthHayes Any aid being sent to Pakistan should be reduced to compensate his victims and pay for his incarceration and his ongoing keep.

[Jim Chimirie 🇬🇧 @JChimirie66677]

Look closely at how Shabana Mahmood has chosen to frame this. Children playing in a refugee camp. A caption that reads "Britain will always offer sanctuary to those fleeing war and persecution." It is a calculated piece of design, and a deliberate misrepresentation of the policy sitting beneath it.

The Community Sponsorship Scheme is modelled on Canada's programme. Under that model, and confirmed by how Britain's own Homes for Ukraine scheme actually operated, sponsors are permitted to nominate specific individuals. Existing communities in Britain will be able to bring over relatives and connections rather than the scheme allocating places to the most vulnerable refugees on earth. The nationalities prioritised are Sudanese and Eritrean nationals, chosen explicitly, in the Home Office's own words, because they represent the largest groups currently crossing the Channel illegally. This is not a scheme for unaccompanied children in camps. It is a nomination-based route for adults from two specific countries, selected because they are already arriving by other means.

Look closer still. The children are dressed in styles associated with the Syrian refugee crisis, a conflict that drove millions from their homes between 2011 and the fall of Assad in December 2024. That image, however authentic its origin, belongs to a different country and a different chapter than the policy it now illustrates. The emotional weight of one of the defining humanitarian crises of the last fifteen years is being borrowed to sell a 2026 scheme that prioritises Sudan and Eritrea.

"Britain will always offer sanctuary."

Britain has signed accommodation contracts running until 2039. It opened twelve new asylum centres this week without informing the MPs whose constituents will live next to them. It has a four percent removal rate for those who arrive illegally. It has no biometric registry for Sudan or Eritrea, meaning a British family sponsoring a refugee cannot verify identity, criminal history or conflict zone involvement.

In January 2026, fighting engulfed northeast Syria's detention network, which held around 9,000 male ISIS suspects from an estimated 60 countries across al-Hol and other facilities. Up to 200 detainees escaped Shaddadi prison. Syria separately confirmed a mass escape from al-Hol itself, involving relatives of ISIS fighters. Their whereabouts remain unknown. None of that appears anywhere near this image.

"Capped."

The cap is more than 10,000 by 2030, on top of the boats, on top of the asylum claims already running at a 2001 high, on top of the accommodation contracts already signed. Canada's equivalent scheme has resettled more than 390,000 people since 1979, including 30,000 in a single year. A cap that expands is not a cap. It is a starting figure.

The accountability structure deserves the closest scrutiny of all. When a community sponsors a refugee, responsibility for support transfers to the sponsor for the first year. When something goes wrong, the government is insulated. The sponsor bears the consequence. Rhiannon Skye Whyte was stabbed twenty-three times by Deng Chol Majek, a Sudanese man who had entered Britain illegally by small boat three months earlier, in a hotel the government had repurposed as asylum accommodation. The sponsorship scheme does not remove that risk. It redistributes the liability for it, onto private citizens who will have no government resources behind them when something goes wrong.

This image was not designed to inform the public. It was designed to make a specific demographic and accountability policy emotionally unchallengeable by attaching it to the most sympathetic image available, a child playing in a refugee camp that has nothing to do with the countries the policy targets. The public is being deceived, deliberately and by design.

[Sam Carr @SamCarr85243145]

@ShabanaMahmood So Canada is going downhill so we copy them brilliant idea. They should stay in countries close to their own culture.

[Sam Carr @SamCarr85243145]

@DavidGHFrost Great so our own students are paying ridiculous interest on these loans they won’t cut the interest which inhibits our own people having enough disposable income to get on the property ladder or get a decent rental but the EU who owe us millions on unpaid loans already get this🤬

[Sam Carr @SamCarr85243145]

@zoeharcombe Someone needs to ask Andy how much has his vanity project to become PM cost the taxpayers by election and mayoralty costs. The ask if he will pay us back out of his taxpayer funded life

[Gad Saad @GadSaad]

Happy birthday to a truly legendary intellectual!

[🦖Leonora Christina 🦕 🎗️ @JammersMinde]

This is a devastating thread from Sweden.

All based on court papers from muslim girls and women, forced to wear hijabs, burkas and niqabs.

These are the voices we never hear, because they’re too terrified of their husbands, fathers, brothers and sometimes, their mothers.

Remember these voices when you are told they have a choice. Most don’t.

[Martin Lewis @MartinSLewis]

Take Martin’s Good Debt, Bad Debt test!

Part of the National Money Assembly filmed at St Charles 6th form college London and live streamed to over 300 schools and sixth forms by @youngenterprise

[Queen Bee @KingBobIIV]

This is why they're pushing the "everyone is British" line. They're just trying to hide the rape statistics.

[Donna Rachel - The Dissident Councillor 🕊️ @Donna_Rachel_]

Glad to see that people are waking up to what’s happening in Stoke Heath.

I’m the local county councillor. I’ve been asking the council for details and so far they’ve completely stone-walled me - I’ve been forced to put an FOI request in to my own council just to get some answers.

To be clear, the new houses are on an enclosed rural estate of about 80 privately owned family homes; about 150 residents, not in the village itself.

The new homes are right next to a playground, which the children will no longer be able to use. Not will they be able to ride their bikes and scooters on the quiet road.

Dog owners will no longer be able to walk their dogs in the quiet fields surrounding the houses.

Pensioners have said they will be afraid to leave their house.

And two years ago, the council took out the street lights on the stretch of road opposite where the new builds are.

[David Shaw @David90shaw]

🚨 I TOLD YOU! THIS IS THEIR PLAN.

We all read the shocking news that Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has quietly dropped the ban on illegal migrants obtaining British citizenship. 🤡

But here is the real, terrifying plan behind this move that nobody in Westminster is telling you!

With Labour's public support in absolute freefall, the establishment knows they have permanently lost the British working class.

By dropping the 2023 ban and granting citizenship to tens of thousands of illegal small boat arrivals, they are handing them passports, welfare, and most importantly, the right to vote!

Shabana Mahmood is not just letting them stay.

She is actively importing and legalising a brand-new electorate to ensure the Labour uniparty can never be voted out of power again!

They are diluting your vote and using your hard-earned tax money to fund the very people they are using to replace you at the ballot box.

It is a silent, coordinated coup against British democracy.

RT to warn the country and expose this sickening Labour plot! 🔁🇬🇧🔥