Care home workers were good enough unvaxxed to look after people’s loved ones for the last 16 months but now HUGE RISK..these were people you were clapping for a year ago and ANYONE celebrating this decision you disgrace yourself by demanding they give up their bodily consent 🤬
I am married with a young daughter, both myself and my husband work.
-We are not entitled to housing benefit, or any other benefit for that matter.
-We do not get free eye tests, free dental care or free prescriptions.
-Our daughter is not entitled to free school meals, or free breakfast clubs, or free wrap around care, no help with her uniform.
-We don’t get council tax discount, or any other discount.
-We don’t get help with our energy bills, or low cost broadband.
-We don’t get help with the cost of going to the cinema, or days out at theme parks.
-My daughter is unable to play outside unsupervised, because you have failed to secure our borders and the streets aren’t safe.
-If I work more hours, I fall into the higher tax band.
Why should someone like me, vote for someone like you? @UKLabour@andyburnham
What are you offering my family?
When kids are slain at a dance class in Southport it’s not terrorism.
When Brits are murdered by illegal migrants it's not terrorism.
When high profile conservative politicians are beaten to death it's not terrorism.
When Muslims are the targets it’s terrorism straight away.
The two-tier system is clear to see.
Dear Adam,
I have taken time to think about your apology. Mostly because, having made a mistake publicly before, I was keen to accept yours. It hurts when people don’t understand that you are sorry for messing up. I get that, probably more than most.
But here’s the thing… I’m not sure you understand what you did wrong. And so you don’t really understand what you are apologising for or why. With that in mind, I want to help you.
I didn’t know Ann, except as a powerhouse in politics and that so many people have spoken of her friendship and great loyalty. How lovely, I wish I had known her.
I am utterly disinterested in her sexual prowess or the state of her virginity. But I would have enjoyed hearing you speak of her great accomplishments. Not as a woman, but simply as a human being.
Here’s a list.
She served in the House of Commons for 23 years and won five general elections.
She served as a government minister in Social Security, Employment and the Home Office, where she was Minister of State for Prisons.
She rose to become Shadow Health Secretary and then Shadow Home Secretary.
She was appointed to the Privy Council.
After leaving Westminster, she built an entirely new career as an author, broadcaster, documentary-maker, stage performer and television personality.
Then, at the age of 71, she returned to elected politics and became a Member of the European Parliament.
She was a longstanding advocate for Britain leaving the European Union and, when the political establishment failed to deliver the referendum result, she left the Conservative Party after more than 50 years and stood for the Brexit Party.
She was elected as an MEP and took the argument for British independence directly into the European Parliament.
She was also an unapologetic defender of free speech. She continued to speak openly on difficult and unfashionable subjects when others chose silence, it was easier to do that, she accepted the criticism and hostility that came with it rather than surrendering her convictions.
Her Catholic faith was central to her life. She converted to Catholicism, met Pope John Paul II in Rome and was later made a Dame of the Order of St Gregory the Great by Pope Benedict XVI for her service to politics and public life.
She remained a powerful public voice well into her late seventies, defending her beliefs despite decades of ridicule and hostility.
That is an extraordinary life of public service, courage and reinvention.
Yet, when asked to speak about her after her sudden and violent death, you chose to tell the country that she was a “spinster”, an “old maid” and a virgin. You discussed a failed relationship and suggested that afterwards she simply dedicated herself to other activities.
Do you understand the reduction involved in that?
You took the life of a highly accomplished woman and assessed it according to whether she had married, whether she had sex and whether a man had wanted her.
That is what was wrong. That is what you should have known.
It wasn’t simply that your words were poorly chosen or badly timed. It was the instinct to view a woman’s entire life through her relationship with men, even when her achievements should have rendered that completely irrelevant.
Nobody discussing the death of an accomplished male politician would think it necessary to tell viewers whether he was a virgin, speculate about his sex life or describe him as an ageing bachelor whose romance had failed.
I don’t want you cancelled. I don’t believe that people should be denied forgiveness when they make mistakes.
But a meaningful apology has to identify the actual wrong.
Ann was murdered after a lifetime of public service. At the moment her achievements should have been remembered, you diminished her to an unmarried woman who apparently hadn’t had sex.
She deserved better than that. And I’m still not sure you get it. But every woman who watched you speak of her and then read your apology does.
Bernie.
God the UK is a fucking circus. Reform voters persuading themselves Farage has pulled off a masterstroke rather than diverted attention from his reckless donations. Labour clutching their pearls like they havent just launched a coup on the country. Ed Davey popping up to remind everyone what an irrelevant oddball he is. Kemi holding court like her backbenches arent filled with traitors.
Meanwhile the country is a fucking slop shop Somali wet market with electricity more expensive per gram than cocaine.
Introducing our latest policy paper - Impartial Service to the Law: Restoring British Policing.
Authored by our national security spokesman, @_HenryBolton, who himself has extensive experience in the police as an officer on the frontline.
The paper argues that the problems facing British policing are not a matter of funding or numbers but of structure, culture, and principle.
It sets out a programme of legislative and institutional reform designed to restore public trust, remove political interference, and return impartial policing to every community in Britain.
Central to the plan is a Police Restoration Act, which would restore the Office of Constable, reinstating the independent legal status of police officers and removing the political and ideological influences introduced by the Police Reform Act 2002.
The paper argues that this Act was the turning point that allowed external bodies, political pressure, and ideological doctrine to infiltrate policing and erode public confidence.
A properly detailed and comprehensive plan to restore British policing.
This is what we need. Not empty rhetoric, but a plan.
Restore Britain has delivered that plan.
https://t.co/t4mHDC5OZL
It genuinely amused me that people think replacing Starmer will make things better.
From Boris Johnson's election onwards, we've been shuffling the bollards on the Titanic.
You have to actually change direction if you want to avoid crashing into the iceberg:
- End Net Zero
- Make business viable again
- Get welfare under control
- Fund defence
- Ensure equality under the law
- Arrest criminals and keep them in jail
- Deport illegal immigrants and close the border
- Bring the civil service to heel
Burnham will become as unpopular as Starmer within months since he isn't going to do any of that.
On Father’s Day today, my thoughts are with the thousands and thousands of dads who are kept away from their children purely because of malicious lies and a family court system that discriminates against men based on outdated and false assumptions.
Years and years. Tens of thousands of pounds. Bankruptcy. Horrific mental health struggles.
British men are put through hell.
Of course there are bad fathers, as there as bad mothers, nobody is saying otherwise - but there is no doubt in my mind that the system actively works against dads.
For decades, the role of fathers has been downplayed and underestimated - that’s reflected in the rotten family courts.
Fathers wait months to get a hearing, false allegations mean the child is taken away from them entirely. All based on one person’s word, when clearly emotions are running high.
It costs a fortune. Many men have been bankrupted trying to seeing their children.
Some of the stories I have heard from affected men are nightmarish. It does affect mums too, although clearly not in the same numbers.
It is torture. No other word for it.
None of this is about downplaying the importance of mothers (obviously) and of course there are many men (as there are women) who should not be in their children’s lives. But it has clearly swung too far, and that needs to be reversed.
That is what a Restore Britain Government will do.
Give decent and honest fathers a fair chance to be in their children’s lives.