JAMES RAMSHAW

[SOI media 🇬🇧 @MediaSOI]

This is Marie-France van Heel, she is a director of Be.EV & Iduna Infrastructure, she is also Chief Marketing and Customer Officer for Octopus Energy. In her capacity on both these rolls she secured a contract to supply EV infrastructure and supply energy to Greater Manchester Combined Authority, the famous “Bus” project the now ex mayor of Manchester keeps banging on about. One thing that he possibly fails to shout about is the this woman that got this contract is in fact Andy Burnham’s wife

[Kevin Pietersen🦏 @KP24]

Can someone please explain to me how someone who wasn’t even a member of parliament last week, is now being seriously mentioned to be in the new prime minister here in UK?
How?
Who is he?
Where’s he come from?

[Pete Sanford @PeteSanford]

THE MILIBAND BROTHERS: CRIME SYNDICATE

THE TIMELINE THAT NOW DEMANDS ANSWERS**

And why today’s asbestos revelation makes Miliband’s silence untenable...

For more than a year, the government has insisted that the UK–China “clean energy partnership” is nothing unusual — just routine cooperation, nothing to see here.

But the timeline tells a very different story, and today’s news about asbestos found IN Chinese‑manufactured wind turbines turns this from a policy debate into a public‑safety and national‑security issue.

Here is the sequence of events that now requires full transparency.

🔹 March 2025 — Ed Miliband signs a Memorandum of Understanding with China

He travels to Beijing and signs a wide‑ranging MoU covering:

- Offshore wind
- Electricity grids
- Battery storage
- Carbon capture
- Hydrogen

These are not minor areas. These are **critical national‑infrastructure sectors**.

🔹 March 2025 – February 2026 — The MoU is kept out of public view**

For almost a year, the agreement is not published, not debated in Parliament, and not disclosed to the public.

No press release.
No ministerial statement.
No scrutiny.

🔹 27 February 2026 — The MoU is quietly released.

No announcement. No explanation.
It simply appears on a government website.

The timing and the silence raise immediate questions.

🔹 Spring 2026 — Miliband repeatedly refuses to release the full details.

Across multiple interviews, he:

- Dodges direct questions
- Repeats scripted lines about “normal cooperation”
- Avoids explaining what China gains
- Avoids explaining what UK infrastructure China may influence
- Refuses to publish the full text or annexes

This is not transparency
This is avoidance

🔹 June 2026 — RUSI warns of deepening UK dependence on Chinese supply chains
A respected defence think tank warns that the UK’s offshore‑wind expansion risks:

- Strategic dependence
- Supply‑chain vulnerability
- Loss of control over critical components

Miliband does not address these warnings directly.

🔹 TODAY —

Asbestos found in Chinese‑manufactured wind turbines
This is the moment everything changes.

Asbestos is banned in the UK.
It is a known carcinogen
Its presence in imported turbine components is a **major regulatory failure**.

This is no longer a theoretical risk.

This is a **real‑world safety breach** involving the very sector Miliband has tied to deeper cooperation with China.

THE QUESTIONS ED MILIBAND MUST NOW ANSWER:

1. Why did you refuse to release the full China MoU for so long?

A year‑long delay followed by a quiet publication is not normal practice for a major international agreement.

2. Does the MoU expand Chinese involvement in UK offshore wind projects?

The public deserves clarity on whether Chinese firms gain access to UK tenders, supply chains, or grid‑related work.

3. Were you aware of asbestos risks in imported turbine components?

If yes, why was the public not informed?
If no, why were safety checks inadequate?

4. What due‑diligence processes exist for foreign‑manufactured renewable‑energy components?

Today’s revelation suggests they are either weak or non‑existent.

5. Will you now publish the full MoU, including annexes, technical notes, and implementation plans?

Partial transparency is not transparency.

6. How will the government ensure that UK infrastructure is not compromised by unsafe or non‑compliant imports?

This is a matter of public health and national security.

7. Why should the public trust your assurances when the supply chain has already failed at the most basic safety level?

The asbestos discovery undermines every claim of “routine cooperation” and “nothing to worry about.”

**WHY THIS MATTERS**

This is not about geopolitics.
This is not about party politics.
This is about:

- Public safety
- Regulatory integrity
- National infrastructure
- Transparency in government

When a minister signs an agreement with a foreign power covering critical infrastructure, the public has the right to know **exactly** what was agreed — especially when components from that same country are now found to contain banned carcinogenic materials.

The refusal to release the MoU is no longer a procedural issue.

It is now a **public‑interest emergency**

Given The Potential Corruption of Two Brothers from the Marxist End of Labour.

Ed handing out Huge Green Energy Contracts.

Brother David sitting on the Board of a company seeking to make money from the same Contracts.

IT IS TIME PARLIAMENT, AND THE POLICE TOOK AN INTEREST IN THE CHINESE DEAL

[Ant Middleton @antmiddleton]

Ooh quick to jump on this one I see! ‘I will not tolerate this’ speaking like a true dictator. So it is you that’s personally swaying/interfering with the justice system for harsher punishment when it comes to white Brits. Corrupt to the core! Your only job now is to stand down before you’re booted by your own party. Absolutely nobody wants you around let alone listens to you… RESIGN!

[Together @Togetherdec]

DIGITAL ID: "People find it deeply disturbing"

"People feel a quite reasonable sense of paranoia about the amount of surveillance they’re under"

@jeremycorbyn from December's petition debate

#ScrapDigitalID @UKLabour

[Toby Young @toadmeister]

Police guided a grieving mother to soften her words after her daughter was stabbed 23 times by a Sudanese asylum seeker – fearing another Southport. https://t.co/7ZWaZdu76X

[Andrew Bridgen @ABridgen]

Covid inquiry ‘buried evidence’ of lockdown critic surveillance
The so called ‘Covid Inquiry’ led by Baroness Hallett, was a whitewash on every front.
That shows you how much there was to hide, it was a total scamdemic.
It was all about control. https://t.co/zaX3AVwhKV

[Paul Weston @PWestoff]

Starmer: "The suspect appears to be motivated by anti-Muslim hatred."

Contempt of Court Act 1981: "Publications that create a substantial risk of serious prejudice to active criminal proceedings can amount to contempt. This includes public comments that risk influencing jurors, witnesses, or the administration of justice."

Do your job @metpoliceuk and arrest Starmer. There cannot be one law for us and a different law for them.

[Toby Young @toadmeister]

So far, the UK government has spent over £200 billion on subsidising renewables, including indirect costs – yet no minister has ever been shown the total. Richard Lyons has built a counter. The meter is running. https://t.co/XzXBnUukKH

[George Galloway @georgegalloway]

Constipated adenoidal sclerotic dull devious doubtful dickhead. You were the worst. You made Liz Truss look competent made Sunak seem spectacular made Johnson look honest. You were the WORST prime minister we had. A whole nation will rejoice that you are GONE! May you plunge into a slough of despond and sink in it for ever. George Galloway, leader of the @WorkersPartyGB in exile.

[Chris Philp MP @CPhilpOfficial]

Irreversible changes should not be imposed on 11 year olds - who obviously can’t give informed consent

This is a form of child abuse, and it should be banned

[Claire Coutinho @ClaireCoutinho]

The Government have quietly announced that they will push ahead with their Puberty Blocker Trial.

Children as young as 11 will be given drugs that can lead to loss of fertility and bone density.

No child can consent to this. The trial must be stopped.

[Liam Tuffs @liamtuffs1]

Imagine living in a country where you go straight to jail for a tweet, but get bail after being arrested for ‘allegedly’ throwing a 3 year old baby into a crocodile enclosure! The world is watching is disbelief!

[James Esses @JamesEsses]

If you want to summarise just how messed up the United Kingdom is in a single sentence:

The UK government believes that 11 year olds are too young to watch YouTube but old enough to block their puberty and render themselves infertile.

[Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10]

The establishment meltdown is reaching new heights.

[Global Dissident @GlobalDiss]

🚨🇪🇺 EU wants INTERNET BY PASSPORT - and plans to block VPNs to enforce it.

“The new age verification system cannot be bypassed via VPN.”

Their plan is totalitarian surveillance! 1984 is coming!

[Stuey Beef 🇬🇧🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 @stuey_beef]

If Vladimir Putin changed the voting system days before an election to stop his opponents winning, every British journalist would call it what it is: rigging the rules.

Tonight, Labour rammed through a last‑minute switch in the Lords so that if Andy Burnham wins Makerfield and quits as Greater Manchester Mayor, his replacement won’t be chosen on a simple first‑past‑the‑post ballot, but on the supplementary vote system instead.

Why now?

Because Labour knows the race to replace Burnham would be a straight two‑horse fight with Reform UK – and under FPTP, the candidate with the most votes wins, no second chances, no back‑room redistributions, no “stop Reform” stitch‑ups.

Under SV, Labour gets a second bite of the cherry: if their candidate can limp into the top two, they can hoover up second preferences from every other party and magic a “majority” on the second count, even if Reform tops the poll on first preferences.

This isn’t “modernising democracy”. It’s the governing party using its Commons majority and the unelected Lords to hurriedly doctor the rules of one specific contest because it’s terrified the voters might choose someone else.

When the establishment preached to the world about “rules‑based order”, they forgot to mention one thing: in Britain, the rules are “based” on whether Labour thinks it might lose.

[Donna-Louise @NoLongerTheFuzz]

1/ Adolescence. A Netflix drama with a fictional white boy.
Parliament debated it. Into every school within weeks. To teach boys about misogyny.

That was fiction. 🧵

[Andrew Bridgen @ABridgen]

Hillary Clinton says she is worried about losing control of social media - I think she means the ‘predator class’ are worried they are losing control over what the people think !
Why should they have control over what you think ? Because they always have ?

[Benonwine @benonwine]

So let me get this ABSOLUTELY straight…

The public are being told facial recognition cameras, Digital ID and eventually digital currency are all about “security” and “safety”.

Meaning every payment, every document and every movement could one day be linked directly back to YOU.

But here’s the part hardly anyone talks about…

MPs and members of the Royal Family are reportedly exempt from parts of Digital ID systems for “security reasons”.

So the very people creating and supporting these systems won’t necessarily have to live under them in the same way as everyone else.

Ordinary people could end up being monitored through one vast digital network, while those at the top remain outside parts of it.

Whether you support Digital ID or oppose it, surely the same rules should apply to everyone.

Because the moment people believe there is one set of rules for MPs, the Royal Family and the political class, and another for everybody else, trust in government starts to disappear.

And looking around Britain today, it’s not hard to see why so many people are losing faith.

The real issue isn’t technology. It’s whether the people creating the system are willing to live under it themselves and if they aren’t then WHY and WHY should anyone else be expected to then.