UK British News Megathread - aka CWCissey's news thread

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
https://news.sky.com/story/row-over-new-greggs-vegan-sausage-rolls-heats-up-11597679 (https://archive.ph/5Ba6o)

A heated row has broken out over a move by Britain's largest bakery chain to launch a vegan sausage roll.

The pastry, which is filled with a meat substitute and encased in 96 pastry layers, is available in 950 Greggs stores across the country.

It was promised after 20,000 people signed a petition calling for the snack to be launched to accommodate plant-based diet eaters.


But the vegan sausage roll's launch has been greeted by a mixed reaction: Some consumers welcomed it, while others voiced their objections.

View image on Twitter


spread happiness@p4leandp1nk
https://twitter.com/p4leandp1nk/status/1080767496569974785

#VEGANsausageroll thanks Greggs
2764.png


7
10:07 AM - Jan 3, 2019
See spread happiness's other Tweets
Twitter Ads info and privacy


Cook and food poverty campaigner Jack Monroe declared she was "frantically googling to see what time my nearest opens tomorrow morning because I will be outside".

While TV writer Brydie Lee-Kennedy called herself "very pro the Greggs vegan sausage roll because anything that wrenches veganism back from the 'clean eating' wellness folk is a good thing".

One Twitter user wrote that finding vegan sausage rolls missing from a store in Corby had "ruined my morning".

Another said: "My son is allergic to dairy products which means I can't really go to Greggs when he's with me. Now I can. Thank you vegans."

View image on Twitter


pg often@pgofton
https://twitter.com/pgofton/status/1080772793774624768

The hype got me like #Greggs #Veganuary

42
10:28 AM - Jan 3, 2019
See pg often's other Tweets
Twitter Ads info and privacy


TV presenter Piers Morgan led the charge of those outraged by the new roll.

"Nobody was waiting for a vegan bloody sausage, you PC-ravaged clowns," he wrote on Twitter.

Mr Morgan later complained at receiving "howling abuse from vegans", adding: "I get it, you're all hangry. I would be too if I only ate plants and gruel."

Another Twitter user said: "I really struggle to believe that 20,000 vegans are that desperate to eat in a Greggs."

"You don't paint a mustach (sic) on the Mona Lisa and you don't mess with the perfect sausage roll," one quipped.

Journalist Nooruddean Choudry suggested Greggs introduce a halal steak bake to "crank the fume levels right up to 11".

The bakery chain told concerned customers that "change is good" and that there would "always be a classic sausage roll".

It comes on the same day McDonald's launched its first vegetarian "Happy Meal", designed for children.

The new dish comes with a "veggie wrap", instead of the usual chicken or beef option.

It should be noted that Piers Morgan and Greggs share the same PR firm, so I'm thinking this is some serious faux outrage and South Park KKK gambiting here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fucking Guardian writers should be homeless.
ASBO's worked because the police were just the enforcement agency. They were often used by the local councils to deal with problem families on estates. However the police didn't like having to take direction from Councils or Social workers. They also hated having to go around to police on sink estates. So they and CPS deliberately sabotaged the system. Until the police were put back in control.

At that point it just became a case of a bunch of idle plods on the prowl for easy targets that they could stick with a fixed penalty notice. The scroats wised up early on that they could just refuse to take one and usually the police wouldn't arrest them. However some poor sod that has work the next morning is the ideal victim ... sorry offender.

The Guardian is cancer but the writer is correct when she writes that the police abuse their existing powers which do nothing to counter anti social behavior.
 
When was the last article published by the guardian that wasn't an opinion piece?
They do them but those tend not to make it to Kiwi Farms as easily since they;re usually not as insane.
The Guardian is cancer but the writer is correct when she writes that the police abuse their existing powers which do nothing to counter anti social behavior.
That's true. On the other hand the correct fix there is by cracking down on the police too.
 
The Zombie SNP: Humza Yousaf’s party is now almost entirely sustained by donations from the dead. (Archive)
Spare a thought for the poor souls who have to fundraise for the SNP. Long gone are the glory days when celebrity tax exiles, lottery winners and some of Scotland’s wealthiest individuals threw money at the Scottish National Party. Big-money donors have fled in droves. In fact, over the past five years, the SNP has received just one donation worth more than £50,000 from someone who is alive.

Yes, you read that last part right. Today’s SNP is largely kept going by bequests from the deceased. If you have an elderly parent and someone from the SNP calls them, get power of attorney and pronto.

In fact, donations from the dead represent 91 per cent of the £2million donated to the SNP over the past five years. The only substantial recent donations from people who might actually get to live in an independent Scotland were from Colin and Christine Weir, who scooped £160million in the Euromillions lottery in 2011. The Weirs started giving to the SNP that very year, but they soon became disillusioned. In 2018, they demanded £1million of their donations back.

So what might be behind this drying up of donations? The obvious answer would be the party-financing scandal that has rocked the SNP in recent months. The party’s accountants have resigned, the police have raided the party’s headquarters in Edinburgh and three of its leading figures have been interviewed under caution – former SNP chief executive Peter Murrell, treasurer Colin Beattie and former leader Nicola Sturgeon. That fetchingly bright blue forensics tent, which went up in Sturgeon’s garden in June, was never going to instil potential donors with confidence. But what’s more worrying for the SNP is that its donations had actually dried up long before all this.

Beyond the party-financing scandal, another factor may explain the SNP’s inability to locate donors with a pulse. In every political party, benefactors are rewarded by access to decision-makers. They get invited to receptions, dinners and other events where they get a frontrow seat to see a party’s leaders shine. Unfortunately for the SNP, it seems the more its donors have been exposed to its top brass, the less enamoured they’ve become.

Some of that may be cultural. Stagecoach founder Brian Souter gave hundreds of thousands of pounds almost every year to the SNP until 2014, which just happens to be the same year Nicola Sturgeon became leader. Souter is a strict evangelical Christian. He’s unlikely to have enjoyed polite conversations with Sturgeon about her own religious beliefs, such as in the existence of women with penises.

It may not even be a question of politics or values, but more a reflection of the calibre of the SNP’s top team. In the past, the SNP could field larger-than-life personalities like Margo MacDonald, Jim Sillars and Winnie Ewing, each of whom could light up a sizeable town if you wired them to the National Grid. By contrast, the Scottish cabinet is now filled with characters so dull there’s hardly a flicker of charisma between them.

Then there’s their incompetence. The SNP in recent years has shown itself to be incapable of managing Scotland’s economy. Just about every major intervention has courted disaster. Take the SNP’s long-running failure to build the ferries needed to serve Scotland’s island communities. The two boats it needs, which have still not been made, are now expected to cost a colossal £400million – an overspend of more than £300million. In 2019, the SNP poured £37million into the engineering firm Bifab to build wind turbines, only for the firm to be sold a year later for just £1 to a Canadian buyer. And while the Scottish government gave two steel plants to Sanjeev Gupta’s Liberty Steel for just £1 in 2016, the contract also commits the taxpayer to up to £500million in clean-up costs. No one in the world of business, even if they agreed with the party’s aims, would trust such people with their money.

The upshot of all this is that the party that has spent decades talking about injecting new life into Scotland will have to continue to rely on money from those who have already given up the ghost. Very few living people want to invest in the future the SNP is selling. This truly is a dying party.
Don't follow British politics, but the thought of a political party whose major donors are corpses is hilarious.
 
Its no surprise that SNP donations dropped off after they lost the indy referendum, obviously those who donated to back the referendum would've stopped but anyone seeking to influence policy through donations would be pissing their money away. There simply isn't enough Scottish seats for the SNP to be able to have a real voice in any government.
 

The UK’s Airbnb hotspots and what it’s like to live in them

Archive
Airbnb used to be a way to make a bit of money from a spare room. Now there’s one listing for every four properties in some tourist towns — and residents are struggling to find anywhere to call home. Plus, use our interactive to find out how many Airbnbs are in your town

A direct if not terribly English way to see if there are any locals left in a Devon village is to wander around it asking everyone and anyone, “Hello, are you a local?” On a beautiful summer Thursday in Lynton, I ask ten times and ten times I’m met with a variety of shrugs and head shakes. There are no locals left in this village. Or there are but they’re vastly outnumbered by people “from up country”.

“No, we’re from Clapham,” says a dad loading children and Co-op shopping into the back of his Audi. “Yes, we’ve Airbnb’d. Yes, it’s lovely here.”
Lynton is a village at the top of a gorge overlooking the Bristol Channel, and many tourists come here to take the cliff railway down to Lynmouth, the village at the bottom of the gorge. Lynton’s church is full of remembrances of sons and brothers — Smith, Smith, Smith, Jones, Jones, Jones — lost in the Great War or off lifeboats in 19th-century storms. It’s the sort of place that used to have local shops for local people but now has £3-an-oat-milk-latte bistros and estate agents with windows full of great investment opportunities. The butcher closed a few years ago and then so did the baker. Appropriately enough, the first born-and-bred Lyntonian I meet is the candlestick-maker.

“Not many people actually live down in Lynmouth any more,” says John, proud proprietor of Lyn Candles of Exmoor. “If you walk up Tors Road, all the houses on the left, most of them are Airbnb. I can remember when that was all families up there. I had a woman in the other day, she told me she was paying — I don’t know if this is right — £500 for three nights for an Airbnb. To stay down in Lynmouth. I couldn’t believe it.”

He segues into a story worthy of a spy novel about Lyn Candles’s signature scent. It involves a famous department store, some light corporate espionage and “probably bergamot” but it’s off the record, he tells me, so we return to the demise of the villages at the top and the bottom of the gorge. “Years ago you used to know everyone. Nowadays I bet I don’t know three quarters of the people. In winter it’s very quiet. It’s such a low wage here. You’ve got the holiday trade but in the winter months you’re not working. You’re on the dole.”

Devon locals complaining about how Devon locals are being priced out of Devon — so far, so unsurprising. But in the past few years the focus of complaint has changed. The main threat used to be second home owners. In 2011 local councillors formed a steering committee to promote affordable housing and local jobs; their charter firmly stated that stemming the tide of second homes was a priority. But now that threat has been overshadowed by a new and more virulent one. The area has seen a huge, Silicon Valley-charged influx of Airbnbs. Of the 1,022 residential properties in Lynton’s EX35 postcode, 163 of them are available for short-term rental on Airbnb. That’s almost one in six properties, making it one of the most Airbnb’d places in the UK. But not the most.

Airbnb was originally presented as a pocket-money booster for people with a spare room — the company’s pitch to investors in 2008 was “book rooms with locals, rather than hotels”. But data compiled exclusively for The Sunday Times Magazine illustrates just how pervasive Airbnb has become in many of Britain’s most popular tourist areas. That the demand for holiday homes should be higher in these areas is to be expected, but the scale of the shift to short-term lets — and the knock-on effect this is having on villages, towns and cities and the people who try to live in them — is dramatic.

Murray Cox is the US-based founder of Inside Airbnb, a project that uses data to show the impact of the online rental service. We asked him to analyse the distribution of Airbnb listings across Great Britain. According to the resulting data, there is close to one Airbnb listing for every five residential properties in the picture-postcard resorts of Salcombe in Devon, and Padstow and St Ives in Cornwall. It’s the same for parts of the Lake District: in Coniston, home of Ruskin and last resting place of Donald Campbell, it’s one in four.

On our heat map of Britain’s most Airbnb’d postcodes, Edinburgh is scorching. Five years ago a photograph of a block of flats just off the city’s Royal Mile made headlines because of the 11 key safes lined up beside its front door. Three years before that, there were none. Today that same door is lockbox-less once again because, in 2019, local landlords were warned they could face legal action if they attached them to doorways without permission from the owner of the building’s freehold.

“As part of the Airbnb explosion they are a very visual reminder of just how much housing we are losing into holiday rentals at a time when the city has an acute housing shortage,” said the city centre’s Green councillor Claire Miller at the time. Hosts have had to get clever with where they hide their keys. Residents have been playing a game of Where’s Wally — key safes have been spotted in playgrounds, cemeteries and on public railings. In Edinburgh’s EH2 postcode, there is more than one Airbnb listing for every four residential properties. For this analysis we have included entire properties, not spare rooms to rent in someone’s home.

For the people living next to an Airbnb it can be a frustrating experience. Last autumn Gary Dickson, 55, told Edinburgh Evening News of his three years of “chaos and worry” living below a city-centre Airbnb. “Me and my son suffer from disturbances day and night. But the landlord ignores all concerns. The constant change of guests over the years has been unbearable, people hauling bags up the stairs at 2am, 3am.” He’s lucky — at least they don’t have a karaoke room and a ten-person hot tub, more of which later.

In many of these locations the number of long-term rental properties has plummeted. Of course there are other factors fuelling the housing crisis, not least the many years in which house building in places where homes are in demand has fallen behind government targets. Years of low mortgage rates have not helped. But campaigners are clear that the rise of Airbnb and other online letting services has exacerbated the problem. In 2016 there were about 83,000 Airbnb listings in Britain, of which about half were for entire properties. By 2019 the number had reached 257,000. According to InsideAirbnb, there are now almost 340,000 listings, of which more than 250,000 are for the entire property.

When we asked Airbnb to give us its own data, it declined but stated that data from external monitors does not give an accurate reflection of activity on the site. Amanda Cupples, general manager for northern Europe, said: “Across the UK the typical host shares one home, often their primary residence, for just three nights a month, and four in ten say the additional income helps them stay in their homes and afford rising living costs — as well as boosting local businesses and communities that don’t typically benefit from tourism.”

In the candle shop in Lynton, Scruff — “that’s what everyone calls me” — has joined the conversation. “There used to be youth clubs, Scouts, Guides, everything now they’re all gone,” says the 66-year-old. He has worked for the council for four decades but for the past few years he has been Lynton’s chief and only road sweeper because “we couldn’t find anyone else to do the job. Like John, I was born and bred here. I like to keep the place tidy.” He says he’ll never retire but if and when he does, who will keep the streets clean?

“There are no young families,” he says. “It’s only us old folk. The only reason my daughter managed to get on the property ladder is because her grandmother passed away in London and left her some money.”
John nods and says that his daughter, a social worker, was only able to buy a place up the road in Barnstaple because he helped with the deposit. “She would never have worked her way into a home.”

A few very winding miles west is the much larger village of Braunton. In its EX33 postcode, which includes the surfing beaches of Croyde and Saunton Sands, census data shows there are 5,305 residential properties and our data finds 622 Airbnb listings — about one in nine homes are listed on the website. Each year in Croyde old bungalows are pulled down and luxury apartments and beach houses spring up in their place. On the road down to Croyde’s beach, a typical new-build called Serenity would not look out of place on Miami’s South Beach. “The office block?” asks an employee at the Thatch pub when I ask about it. I nod and she rolls her eyes. Serenity (in name but not in mortgage balance) is a white cube consisting of five “executive” apartments, which have all sold in the past couple of years for between £765,000 and £1 million. Its three-bed, three-bath duplex — “a luxury twist on a Cornish shack with a surf-inspired boho chic” — is already available to rent on Airbnb. Yours in peak season for £3,000 a week. Meanwhile the locals say that finding a place to rent long-term has become nigh on impossible.

Emma Hookway, 43, a single mother of three, grew up on a farm near Braunton and has lived in the village all her adult life. She has always rented because “for a long time, buying a property around here just hasn’t tallied with wages”. Rental prices have never been cheap but she always managed to scrape by. Then, in June 2021, her landlady issued a section 21 eviction notice, in which a tenant is given notice to leave — no reason required. “She needed the home for her daughter, which was completely fine,” Emma tells me over £4 hemp and coconut water smoothies at the Wild Thyme Café (my round). “Because of Covid, I still had six months to find somewhere.”

Tenants were protected from “no fault” section 21 notices at the start of the pandemic but from June 2021 evictions were permitted again, with the notice period extended from two to six months until October 2021. When Emma started looking for a new home, there was nothing on the market. “If a place did come up, there were all sorts of criteria, like I needed an income of £30,000,” she says. “I found one place but by the time I got there the landlord had already had 80 inquiries. He hadn’t even listed it yet, he’d just posted it on Facebook.”
When she got home Emma burst into tears and then tried to explain their predicament to her son, who is autistic. Then she posted on Braunton’s community chat room, asking if anyone else had noticed they were in a housing crisis? By the end of the day she had formed the North Devon and Torridge Housing Crisis group. In its first week 300 members signed up.

“We’re not against people coming here on holiday and we know that house prices have always been high,” she says, “but there has to be a balance.” Emma cleans upmarket holiday homes and, because it’s so hard to find local workers, she is well paid to do so. She is happy to admit that her income comes from tourism but the unmonitored and unregulated rise of Airbnbs, she says, is tipping the balance.
“Holiday homes used to be just that — places you’d book for a holiday, perhaps a bit of an upgrade, maybe with a sea view, maybe in the village itself. But with Airbnb you’ll find standard two-bedroom flats or terraced houses in residential areas, in suburbs. They’re coming from what used to be the long-term rental stock and there’s nothing left for those of us looking for somewhere to live.”

Emma was four days from couch-surfing homelessness when a flat above a social club — “unmodified since the 1980s” — became available. Which raises the question I imagine readers in parts of the UK far less stunning than the North Devon coast will be asking at this point: why risk homelessness when you could just move somewhere cheaper?

“Why should I?” Emma says adamantly. “I was born here. I’ve got three generations in the graveyard. Why should I be forced out of where I call home because everyone wants to do Airbnb? I know I’m not more important just because I’ve been here all my life — but there’s a community here. It’s my life, it’s my roots. It’s who I am. To move somewhere I don’t know, where I’d be isolated I don’t know how I would cope with that.”

Even if your response to that is “tough”, there’s a wider consideration. If Emma had left, that would be one less person to use and provide local services. Braunton doesn’t have as large a proportion of Airbnbs as Port Isaac, the Cornish fishing village made famous by the ITV series Doc Martin, but it’s heading in that direction. Such is the state of the housing market in Isaac, it took 18 months to recruit a new GP. When ITV announced that Martin Clunes’s fictional doctor would be hanging up his stethoscope at the end of series ten, Cornwall Live reported relief among the few remaining locals.

Sandra has joined us at the Wild Thyme Café. In 2020 she was also served a section 21 eviction notice. “I’ve always paid my rent on time and I’m an avid member of the community,” she says. “I never thought, at 55, I’d be made homeless. I just assumed someone would come along and say, oh yes, I know someone with a flat coming up.”

Like Emma, she was given notice on the small but perfect place she’d been renting in Croyde and began a frantic six-month search. “After a few weeks I realised there was nothing,” she says. “Every place that came up, there were 40 or 50 applicants. People were offering to pay six months in advance. And they were, I think, open to offers. As a landlord, if someone offers to pay over, you’re going to snap that up.”
In the end Sandra bought a boat. She moored the scruffy old Norfolk Broads cruiser up the estuary in Velator, did it up and made it her home. Winters are beanie-in-bed freezing but summers make it worth it, she says. She has now bought two more boats — the start of her own marine property empire. They’d be perfect for Airbnb, I suggest. Would she ever stick them on the site? “No,” she says forcefully. “I’ve been asked so many times but if I don’t say it’s not about the money, who’s going to say it? I’m not a wealthy person. There are people who could afford to let one of their houses go to social housing but if I don’t say, no, I’m not going to do Airbnb, who will?”
In one boat she’s housing a young man she met at the food bank where she volunteers. In the other “there’s a carpenter who can’t afford to rent a house I only rent the boats out for £300 a month.”

As well as some recent persuasive Airbnb adverts aimed at potential hosts, there is another good reason why so many long-term lets have now become short-term ones: tax. Because, says Sean McCann, a chartered financial planner at the insurer NFU Mutual, “furnished holiday lets are treated much more favourably from a tax point of view than longer term property rentals”. As well as avoiding council tax, there are reliefs for capital gains tax, mortgage interest and pension contributions. “All of this can make running a holiday let more appealing.”
As a result, Graham Bell, North Devon council’s lead member for housing, says there are increasing numbers of people living in tents and caravans as well as boats. In his day job he is an intensive care nurse and, before becoming a councillor, he started campaigning for more affordable homes after seeing how difficult it was for his hospital in Barnstaple to recruit.

“People point out, quite rightly, that GP services, pharmacies, all essential services are stretched to the limit and they feel that more houses equals more people,” he tells me. “But they miss the fact that the GP can’t recruit staff because there’s nowhere to live. It’s not the physical resources, it’s the human resources that we need.

“We do need people coming in. But they can’t move into the area if there are no houses and if all the new-builds are being snapped up for other uses. The initial idea of Airbnb was supposed to be that you could rent out a room and make a bit of extra cash, and that was a fantastic idea but if entire communities are being lost, then it has gone too far.”

When the pandemic ban on section 21 evictions was lifted in June 2021, Tim Farron, the MP for Westmorland and Lonsdale in Cumbria, “felt it on the ground”. In the following months the number of short-term rentals in the Lake District rocketed by 32 per cent. “It all happened in a really tight, terrible window and it felt like the Clearances,” the former leader of the Liberal Democrats tells me, referring to the large-scale removal of tenants in the Scottish Highlands that began in the 1750s. “In the small town of Sedbergh I had 25 families with eviction notices come to see me in one day. That same day a Sedbergh community group did an assessment of the number of job vacancies in the town there were 104 and not a single place available to rent on Rightmove.”

In his maiden speech to parliament in 2005 Farron highlighted the threat of second home ownership, but the rise of Airbnb lettings is, if anything, more pernicious. “It kills communities and it’s heartbreaking,” he says. “It’s not like people have to move to a different street. There is literally nowhere for them to go.” He says he has hundreds of examples of people being forced out. “It’s important to see this not only as a personal tragedy for the family — kids uprooted, employers losing their staff, parents separated from their support network and all the rest of it — but also you’ve got the impact on the economy. The majority of businesses in the Lakes are operating below capacity because they have no staff. It also has an impact on social care, on ambulance waiting times, everything. The impact is colossal and it’s hard to put a price on it.”
Farron tells me he was in a pub in his constituency last summer when an American couple came in for lunch. The landlord apologised and said they were no longer doing food and off they trooped to the next village. When they left, the landlord told Farron, “That couple are staying in the cottage my chef lived in last year.” On my Devon visit I counted eight “staff wanted” signs on one short stroll through Braunton. Airbnb claims it will take action if and when a tenant is “unfairly evicted” from a property that is subsequently listed on its site.

The residents of Britain’s most Airbnb’d places tell me it’s like living in a ghost town off-season — with dark streets and, in December, a total absence of Christmas trees and lights. And then there are the problem Airbnb neighbours. “You know another one’s gone to Airbnb when the hot tub appears in the garden,” one Braunton resident tells me. “Then you brace for the all-day prosecco in the pool.”

When Rishi Sunak visited Chelmsford in Essex in March to announce a clampdown on anti-social behaviour, he was confronted by Jeff Jones, a 73-year-old pensioner who had the misfortune to live adjacent to a former pub that had been converted into a £2,000-a-night 14-person Airbnb, with a ten-person hot tub and a karaoke room. The property offered private dining, a two-hour cocktail soirée, an outdoor dining pod and a sound system that forced another neighbour to move her son’s bedroom to the other side of their house.
“These places are let by the owners to groups of people with no control whatsoever,” Jones told the prime minister. Jones had complained to the local council on many occasions but nothing had been done. Airbnb responded by pointing out that parties are banned and that, “our 24/7 hotline for neighbours means anyone can contact us directly about a concern with a listing and we investigate and take action on reports received”.

As it stands the offending property in Great Baddow is no longer available to book on Airbnb but its removal only came after a prime ministerial dressing down. (It’s still on Booking.com, if you fancy it.)
So what is the answer for those living in the UK’s most Airbnb’d postcodes? The government’s levelling up bill — in consultation now — promises a national register of short-term lets, with more powers to help local authorities control numbers. In holiday hotspots planning permission may be required to change a property from a long-term to a short-term let. Tim Farron says this is long overdue. “We need three separate categories of planning use — a permanent residence, a second home and a short-term let,” he says. “It shouldn’t be possible to just evict tenants and switch to a short-term let in the same way I couldn’t turn my house into a fish and chip shop without planning permission. I’d need to apply and maybe they’d give it to me. But they might not because it was in the wrong place or because there were already enough fish and chip shops in the area.”

In the meantime some councils are trying to take matters into their own hands. In Edinburgh plans to clamp down on Airbnbs by introducing a registration scheme have been delayed after a court ruling. London has introduced a 90-day annual limit on short-term lets, although questions have been raised about how effectively that limit is policed. In York the Labour MP Rachael Maskell says that the scale of short-term lets has had a catastrophic effect on student and residential communities. Some city suburbs have been turned into “the Wild West”, she says, with constituents complaining about constant parties.

“The expansion of short-term holiday lets, and their impact on community life, is an issue of great concern to me and many other residents across the city,” she told The York Press. Last year she presented her “Fairbnb Bill” in the House of Commons. “Much of my bill has now been adopted by the government in this new legislation, although there are areas that I am still keen to see strengthened if we are to meet the scale of the challenges faced in some of our neighbourhoods.”

This is by no means a uniquely British issue. There have been protests against Airbnb in Mexico City, Barcelona and in tourist hotspots across the Mediterranean. In June Marseilles, which is hosting next year’s Olympic Games, joined a coalition of 20 communities objecting to Airbnb’s sponsorship of the Games and what organisers said were the 800,000 offers of accommodation in France on the site. New York City’s attempts to curb short-term rentals has led, inevitably, to lawsuits. Venice and Florence are also planning to impose strict regulations on new lettings.

In the UK Airbnb claims to be a supporter of greater regulation. “We recognise historic housing challenges in parts of the UK and we want to help,” says Cupples, the general manager. “That’s why we have led calls for new rules that give local authorities the tools they need to know what is going on in their communities, support local hosts who rely on the additional income, and clamp down on speculators.”

Back in North Devon I check out of my £80-a-night five-star Airbnb, a spotless converted studio flat above a garage at the bottom of the owner’s garden. Naughty, I know, given the weeks I’ve spent talking to displaced and disgruntled campaigners desperate for change. But it was cheaper than a hotel room and a hotel room doesn’t have a kitchen, a living room and a view of a lovely river. It was a great place to stay and I’m glad I chose it from about a hundred Airbnbs available in that area. Whether the other 99 got booked or not that night, I don’t know. But if they didn’t, that’s an awful lot of properties sitting empty in the middle of a housing crisis.

1760fc3dc7eb1ffd6902e13f104327c6db496745.jpg
 
TMI but i'm staying in an airbnb-esque property for work. I've never, in all my years of living and working around the UK, seen a lockbox on a residence. On this street alone there are at least a dozen, and there are 10 streets in either direction.
Work are paying for my stay, but it has cost them north of £500 for a week, not bad by most standards, but when you think of that income over a year...it makes no wonder people are shifting to Airbnb vs rental.

Why rent for £600/700 a month when you can earn that in a fortnight or less? Even if the property sits idle for 6 months during the down period, the summer price hike - especially over the six weeks holidays, more than makes up for it.
 
Sky News - Ian Watkins: Disgraced Lostprophets frontman and convicted paedophile stabbed in prison 'while held hostage for six hours'
The disgraced singer is 10 years into serving a 29-year sentence for a string of sex offences.


Disgraced Lostprophets frontman Ian Watkins has been stabbed in prison.

The 46-year-old is serving a 29-year jail term for multiple sexual offences, including serious crimes against young children and babies.

The paedophile sustained injuries which are not life-threatening following an incident at HMP Wakefield in West Yorkshire.

He was reportedly taken hostage by three other inmates on Saturday morning and was freed by prison officers six hours later.

A Prison Service spokesperson said: "Police are investigating an incident which took place on Saturday at HMP Wakefield.

"We are unable to comment further while the police investigate."

Watkins was sentenced in December 2013, after admitting 13 sex offences, including the attempted rape of a fan's baby.


He also encouraged a second fan to abuse her child during a webcam chat and secretly stashed child pornography videos, some of which he had made himself.

At the time, police described him as a "committed, organised paedophile".

Having found fame in Lostprophets, Watkins was arrested after his Pontypridd home was searched on orders of a drug warrant in September 2012.

A large number of computers, mobile phones and storage devices were seized during the search.

When sentenced at Cardiff Crown Court, the singer was told he was being given an extended sentence - and a judge said his crimes "plumbed new depths of depravity".

Watkins will serve two-thirds of the term behind bars before being released. He will serve an additional six years on licence.

After being caught with a mobile phone behind bars in 2019, he told a court that he was locked up with "murderers, mass murderers, rapists, paedophiles, serial killers - the worst of the worst".
Archive - https://archive.is/FfnPr

and later from Daily Mail:
Men who 'tortured' paedophile rocker Ian Watkins 'during six-hour hostage ordeal over guitar lessons' were 'killers who recently arrived at the prison': Ex who blew the whistle on Lostprophets star 'cannot believe it took so long' for him to be attacked
Joanne Mjadzelics was the first to tell police about Watkins' depraved urges


The men who 'tortured' Ian Watkins did so in a six-hour hostage ordeal amid a row over the paedophile rocker giving other inmates guitar lessons, it has been claimed.

The former Lostprophets singer is believed to be in a critical condition in hospital after three prisoners at HMP Wakefield, where he is serving a 35-year prison sentence, attacked him on Saturday morning.

The 46-year-old - who visitors say still 'prances around like a star' behind bars - was only freed after a 'Tornado' team of specially-trained riot officers hurled stun grenades into the cell to break up the incident.

Sources have claimed the group of three responsible - two of which are believed to be 'killers' - were 'recent arrivals' to the Category A prison and had planned the attack, which is thought to be in anger over him giving guitar lessons to other inmates, to take place on a day where there were fewer staff working.

Following the incident Watkins' ex-girlfriend who blew the whistle on his depraved urges revealed her surprise that it had taken so long for him to be attacked behind bars.


Watkins was jailed for 35 years in 2013 for 13 offences against children, including the attempted rape of an 11-month-old baby.

That came years after Joanne Mjadzelics repeatedly warned police about the singer's vile urges, only to be charged with possessing indecent images of a child, sending vile pictures to the singer and demanding that he send her illegal pornography.

She was later cleared of all the charges after telling jurors she had been trying to entrap her former lover and trick him into revealing his crimes.

Speaking to the Mirror in the wake of his prison attack, the 47-year-old revealed she was not concerned about his well being or health.


She told the publication: 'My only reaction is simply that I cannot believe it took them so long, particularly in Wakefield Prison.'

A source at the West Yorkshire prison told the Sun anger over his guitar lessons and visits from his girlfriend could have fuelled the attack.

They told the publication: 'He was known to have hangers-on who asked him about music and being a rock star.

'He even gave some of them guitar lessons — which made other inmates in there angry so they wanted revenge.

'He is also high-profile and a lot of the lads in there think they will get a move to another jail if they attack someone well-known.

'They want to be shifted out of, although it does not usually work like that.'

Visitors to the Category A prison today voiced surprise that he had remained unharmed for so long.

One woman said: 'Watkins is still prancing around in there like he is a star.

'He is always done up to the nines and his hair is immaculate.

'He has a girlfriend who visits him regularly - not the one he had when he was singing.

'She is only a young think in her 20s.'

The attack, which began at around 9am on Saturday, saw three 'heavy-duty' prisoners drag him into a cell which was then barricaded by the gang.

One woman visiting the prison on Sunday said: 'There was one from Liverpool and one from Bradford who attacked him. I don't know where the other one was from.

'My son said no one knows why they did it. Two of the men were killers. I don't know what the third one was in for.

'The three of him were torturing him. The got him in a cell and had him for six hours. They tortured him with the knife. They were sticking him with the knife.

'They are all talking about it in the prison. They said they were surprised it happened. He has been in jail quite a bit so they must have been biding their time.

'The three that did it are all in lockdown now. Then they will be moved out somewhere else.'


One man visiting the prison added: 'I just had a brief conversation with my son about it. It just kicked off. Three guys ran in his cell and that was it.

'I just heard he did get f****d up.'

Another mum added 'He got cut' here while gesturing around her eyes. 'I heard that those who did had only recently arrived in the prison,' she continued.

A source told the Sun that Watkins was heard 'screaming' and in fear for his life, with the entire West Yorkshire prison wing swiftly put on lockdown.

The source added: 'Watkins is obviously unpopular because of who he is – and has been walking around with a huge target on his back.

'They got him on a Saturday, which is generally quieter with less staff on and it seems to have been planned.

'People heard that he was in a bad way when he came out but will probably survive.

'He was taken to Leeds and was still in hospital.'

A Prison Service spokesperson said: 'Police are investigating an incident which took place on Saturday at HMP Wakefield. We are unable to comment further while the police investigate.'

Watkins was sentenced to 35 years behind bars after he admitted to a horrific string of evil offences which included the attempted rape of an 11-month-old baby, plus ten others after preying on fans.

He also admitted conspiring to rape a child, three counts of sexual assault involving children, seven involving taking, making or possessing indecent images of children and one of possessing an extreme pornographic image involving a sex act on an animal.


He changed his plea at the start of his trial but claimed he could not remember the 'depraved' abuse because he was high on crystal meth.

Since the 35-year term was handed down, he has had an extra 10 months added to the sentence due to possession of a mobile phone.

At a hearing for that offence, he told how he was locked up with 'the worst of the worst' and said someone could 'sneak up behind me and cut my throat'.

The singer - a former boyfriend of BBC radio and television presenter Fearne Cotton - pleaded guilty to sex offences involving the children of two female fans, who were sentenced to 14 and 17 years in prison for allowing the offences to take place.

Prosecutor QC Chris Clee told Cardiff Crown Court in 2013: 'Ian Watkins was the lead singer of a successful band called the Lostprophets.

'He was also a determined and committed paedophile engaged in serious sex offences involving of two babies.'

Mr Clee also gave details of a sickening 17-minute video involving Watkins and one of the baby's mother.

He said camcorder footage was shot in a London hotel room which showed Watkins performing a sex act on the child.

Sentencing Watkins, Mr Justice Royce said the case broke 'new ground' and his actions 'plunged into new depths of depravity'.

The category A Victorian prison is home to some of Britain's most dangerous offenders, some of whom will never be released.

Inmates of HMP Wakefield include triple child killer Damien Bendall, White House Farm spree killer Jeremy Bamber and Reynhard Sinaga who drugged and raped more than 100 young men.
Archive - https://archive.is/2kpSk
 
TMI but i'm staying in an airbnb-esque property for work. I've never, in all my years of living and working around the UK, seen a lockbox on a residence. On this street alone there are at least a dozen, and there are 10 streets in either direction.
Work are paying for my stay, but it has cost them north of £500 for a week, not bad by most standards, but when you think of that income over a year...it makes no wonder people are shifting to Airbnb vs rental.

Why rent for £600/700 a month when you can earn that in a fortnight or less? Even if the property sits idle for 6 months during the down period, the summer price hike - especially over the six weeks holidays, more than makes up for it.
There's a lot of areas in the Lake District like that, piddly out of the way places where every other house on a street of a dozen has a lockbox on.
 
There's a lot of areas in the Lake District like that, piddly out of the way places where every other house on a street of a dozen has a lockbox on.
I'm from a Lakeland family. I can't even afford a holiday there unless I bring a tent.

It's fucking depressing.
 
Edinburgh is crazy for this. A lot of students flats get together (and have done for years) and they will get say five or six flats worth of students, rent out all but one for the festival, pile everyone into one flat for that time and share the profits.
I know someone who sold a royal mile flat, and a really nice one too, because all his neighbours had rented out through Airbnb and he just never felt safe or quiet any more.
 
Why rent for £600/700 a month when you can earn that in a fortnight or less?
Because all it takes is one IP2 style retard assault to reduce the property value by at least half, get your neighbors hating you, and possibly end up criminally prosecuted because you rented to Baked Alaska.
 

Secrets and lies

Archive

The secrecy clause in the Gender Recognition Act is a big problem

Susie Green, the ex-CEO of child transition charity Mermaids, is proud that on her son’s 16th birthday she took him to Thailand to have his male genitals surgically refashioned to resemble a vulva and vagina. She has shared the story many times; in a TED talk, on the This Morning sofa with Phillip Schofield, in numerous media interviews and as a TV drama.

But when The Sunday Times published the same facts in an article critical of childhood transition, she complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) that it was a breach of privacy, and argued that by referring to her son as “he” and “male” The Sunday Times was guilty of discrimination and inaccuracy.

IPSO last week robustly dismissed the complaint, saying that details of Susie’s son’s life are in the public domain because Susie and Jackie Green put them there. It was not irrelevant, insulting or inaccurate for the article to refer to her son as male. IPSO also released new guidance which makes clear that although journalists should not make pejorative reference to an individual’s sex or their “gender identity”, there is no requirement not to mention these characteristics at all (and doing so will often be necessary for accuracy).

This minor skirmish in the gender wars highlights something important: what we think of as a battle between “women’s rights” and “trans rights” is really a series of showdowns involving the human rights of freedom of expression (Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights) and the right to privacy (Article 8).

The logic of human rights is not that people and organisations must line up waving flags behind Article 8 or Article 10, but that every individual holds both protections, and when rights are in tension, the conflict needs to be talked about and resolved.

The Editor’s Code is itself an instrument that aims to balance the two rights. Its clause on privacy basically starts with a recitation of Article 8: “Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.”

The Gender Recognition Act 2004, which enables people to change the sex on their birth certificate, was enacted by the UK Government because it lost a pair of cases which hinged on Article 8. The argument was that when a person who wishes to be treated socially as the opposite sex is forced to reveal information showing their actual sex in the course of dealing with officialdom, this breaches their right to privacy.

Building on this, a one-sided weaponisation of Article 8 has been used to batter down the boundaries to women’s changing rooms and women’s refuges, and to force people to refer to men as women and to mind their pronouns.

But as the IPSO ruling reflects, Article 8 is a limited right — there are many ordinary situations where people’s privacy can be impinged upon. We are all subject to routine and lawful collection and use of our information in the interests of national security, public safety, economic activity, the prevention of crime, the protection of health or morals, and the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. It happens on the day we are born, and every time we go to the bank or the doctor, register our children at school, get a job or pay income tax, and on the day we die.

There is also a basic practical limitation to Article 8: you cannot protect the privacy of information that is already widely in the public domain.

This statement of the obvious has been hashed out in terms of human rights. In 1991 The Sunday Times won against the UK government when the European Court of Human Rights found that the injunction to prevent it publishing extracts from Peter Wright’s MI5 memoir Spycatcher was a disproportionate infringement on freedom of expression, since the book had already been published in other countries and the information contained in it discussed in other public forums.

Section 22 of the Gender Recognition Act is something like the Spycatcher injunction, or the ruling that Susie Green sought from IPSO.

Section 22 makes it a criminal act to share information that someone has a gender-recognition certificate (GRC) and about their actual sex, if you acquired that information in an official capacity. It seeks to make a secret out of information that is already in the public domain, and that it is almost impossible to keep secret in life. And in doing so it leads to disproportionate infringements on others’ human rights.

Information about a person’s sex is written across their face, their body, the way they talk and the way they walk. The information is possible to keep secret only if the person is not physically present, or at least not beyond fleeting social interactions. It is also written into their personal history. To keep the information secret a person must be willing and able to cut their current identity off from their previous life, and not go on to become a mother or a father.

But these conditionalities are not attached to getting a GRC. Applicants are not required to cut themself off from their life history, or to cut off parts of their body. To require them to do so would in itself be a breach of their human rights (in a case involving the French government in 2017, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that compulsory sterilisation or other medical treatment as a condition of gender recognition violated Article 8).

The criminal sanction created by Section 22 applies to people working across the public, private and voluntary sectors in any capacity. They cannot share information about a person’s actual sex with their colleagues if they acquired it in the course of doing their jobs, alongside the information that the person has a GRC, unless the person agrees to that specific disclosure. This applies even if in practice everyone knows the person’s sex: they can’t talk about it, write it down or use it to make any official decisions based on it. The drafters of the GRA provided only very limited exceptions, such as for a court order, prevention or investigation of a crime or for the purposes of a social-security system.

The year after the Act was passed, it dawned on officials that the conditions were too stringent and the government hastily added a few more exceptions, covering disclosure for the purpose of obtaining legal advice, for religious or medical purposes, and for credit referencing, insolvency and bankruptcy.

But many everyday situations remain in which it is a criminal act to share information about a person’s sex if you know that they have a GRC (unless they have expressly given consent for that particular instance of information-sharing). And while no one has ever been prosecuted or fined for disclosing this information, organisations nevertheless take the risk seriously.

It means that, for example, an employer cannot have a rule that allows only transgender employees with a GRC to use the opposite-sex toilets, as this would mean they would have to explain why one male employee who identifies as a woman can use the ladies’ while another cannot. Every time they tell someone why a particular individual is allowed in, they would be liable to an unlimited fine. And every employee they tell would be liable to an unlimited fine if they pass the information on.

Similarly, a woman who identifies as a man and who has a GRC saying she is a man will still be known to be the mother at her child’s school (mother is a legal relationship between the person who gives birth and the child). But if anyone in the school explains that the child’s mother is legally recognised as a man because of a GRC they are liable to an unlimited fine.

Large organisations create elaborate systems to avoid revealing the obvious and creating liabilities for their employees. The Department of Work and Pensions treats the records of any individual with a GRC as highly sensitive and the person has to make special appointments at the job centre. NHS organisations avoid revealing that a person’s legal sex and biological sex don’t match by not recording either in their medical records, instead asking people a pair of confusing questions about the gender they identify with and whether this is the same as their sex at birth. The Information Commissioner’s Office has a detailed 35-page policy about what to do if they receive correspondence from someone with a GRC (the instructions include putting any paper correspondence inside a sealed envelope and marking it “Official Sensitive — Protected Information”, putting that inside another sealed envelope marked “Official — Sensitive”, putting that package into a particular locked filing cabinet and then telling the official who is designated to receive this information).

These contortions are ridiculous and pointless. But even more concerning, no one appears to have considered what to do in the situation where the information about a person’s sex is needed, and cannot simply be quarantined in a locked filing cabinet or the digital equivalent.

To give just one example: if a man who identifies as a woman and has a GRC is employed in a job that involves close person-to-person contact, such as undertaking intimate examinations or searches, the employer has no legal means to talk about the distinction between someone who is an actual woman and a woman-by-virtue-of-a-certificate, even if the distinction is crystal clear to ordinary perception.

Discussing the fact that a nurse, doctor, police officer, prison warden or teacher has a GRC in this situation would risk the employer and potentially employees being subject to an unlimited fine.

The Ministry of Justice is currently stuck in this Kafkaesque maze trying to finalise its policy on prison searching. The Department of Health has backed away from the NHS Confederation’s guidance that hospitals should not necessarily tell patients the sex of healthcare professionals, and is considering what to do about single-sex hospital accommodation. The government is considering how to sort out the relationship between the Equality Act and the Gender Recognition Act.

The thing they must recognize is that the cloak of extreme privacy on information about anyone with a GRC puts organisations in positions where they will infringe the human rights of other people instead — article 8 at the point where they tell a woman that the male security officer running his hands around her waistband is a woman, and article 3 (the prohibition against torture and inhuman or degrading treatment) at the point where the male nurse puts his fingers inside her vagina while she is lied to, bullied or threatened into pretending he is female.

While only around 5,000 people have a GRC, the institutional jeopardy created by Section 22 is what leads organisations to get lost in obfuscating language and to harass and bully “gender critical” staff who want to talk clearly. Unable to address the dilemma of what they should do when the right to privacy of a man who wants to have access to women’s naked bodies without their consent comes into conflict with the right to autonomy and privacy of those women, organisations call those who might raise the question transphobes, and pressure them into silence.

But the government must deal with the problem of Section 22. It cannot solve the problems with hospital wards or prison searches without tackling this. All roads lead back to Article 8, and the GRA’s overreaction to it.

The GRA was enacted in response to a pair of 2002 judgments by the European Court of Human Rights that ruled that the UK had violated Article 8 in respect of two post-operative transsexuals who wished to change their birth certificates to read “female”. The violation of Article 8 related to information privacy; in any situation where a birth certificate was required to be shown their sex would be revealed.

The better-known of the two claimants was Christine Goodwin, born Anthony Allington, a father and bus driver who transitioned at the age of 50. Goodwin claimed that he faced discrimination when asked to show a birth certificate in order to apply for a mortgage or insurance at the bank.

The polite fiction was maintained that bank staff meeting Goodwin face-to-face would not immediately clock him as a transsexual. This impression can only be maintained because after the case Goodwin disappeared from public life, and his image never features in celebrations of trans history. He died in obscurity in 2014. His daughter remains upset that he was not celebrated and received no public honours.

Perhaps Goodwin’s plunge out of the limelight happened precisely because of his legal success: if he followed up the ECHR win by applying for a GRC when the law was enacted, then that would have made it a criminal act for anyone who learnt about it an official capacity to talk about it. It would be impossible for the honours committee to consider the story of a legal trailblazer who got a GRC, because sharing the information in an official capacity would risk an unlimited fine.

More broadly, perhaps publicising and celebrating one of the first people to get a GRC did not fit well with the Article 8 rationale that the reason for the Act was an imperative to respect personal privacy.

But Goodwin had, in fact, not made heroic efforts to be private. Like Susie Green, Goodwin had been on the “This Morning” sofa with Phillip Schofield. And in 1989, before he had surgery in 1990, Goodwin featured in a Channel 4 documentary about transsexuals, which shows him in lady-mode driving a bus and doing an interview to camera. “I’m bionic,” says Christine, with a hairstyle and makeup that is feminine and a face and voice that are clearly male.

The other claimant in the European Court of Human Rights, “I”, did keep his identity hidden, but his case raises even more questions about whether it is proportionate to legislate to try to keep information about someone’s sex secret in a broad set of circumstances.

“I” was a dental nurse in the Army and wanted to apply to train as a general nurse. “She alleged that she was unable to obtain a further professional qualification… without producing her birth certificate and that she would be required to reveal her pre-operative sex to any female patient whom she examined.”

The government defence was, in essence, dress however you please and call yourself whatever you like but we are not changing your birth certificate. In relation to the question of the job it deferred to the Nursing Council’s existing policy, which “was to amend the gender on record” with a letter from a consultant psychiatrist. No one asked how this worked in practice or whether it was reasonable for patients to expect healthcare professionals examining them to be honest about their sex.

While the Government argued in the Goodwin and “I” cases that there was already a fair balance between the rights of the individual and the general interest of the community, after it lost, it enacted a law that radically tipped that balance. The GRA tried to do the impossible magic of turning a man into a woman, rather than secure the much more limited right that Article 8 is designed to protect (to say “none of your business” to a personal question in situations where the answer isn’t anyone else’s business).

The approach it adopted of changing birth certificates and imposing criminal penalties on information disclosure is, in a digital age, unnecessary.

A better solution for information privacy is the one we now all use every day. Pieces of information are stored as digital attributes and can be disclosed individually as and when needed. You don’t have to disclose your date of birth (or any other personal information) to show that you are over 18.

Should Christine Goodwin be able to validate his identity at the bank without revealing information confirming his male sex? Sure. But does this mean nurse “I” must be able to lie about his sex to patients? No.

When a patient asks what sex the healthcare professional examining her will be, the only answer that is not irrelevant, insulting or inaccurate is the truth.

Solving the problem of how to reconcile transgender people’s rights and everyone else’s rights requires a sharp focus on what those rights are — for trans people it is the very limited right to keep information about their sex private in some circumstances, not the blanket ability to dictate other people’s thoughts and speech, or to force organisations to keep impossible secrets. It is definitely not the right for a man to force his male body (whatever cosmetic surgery he may or may not have had) into intimate proximity with non-consenting women in situations they have been told are female-only. Other people have rights too.
 
I didn't know that pic of Weinstein Epstein and Maxwell, was taken at Princess Beatrices 18th birthday party.

an1.jpg an.jpg


There's also a rumor she had an affair with Trudeau
21d52f69fd7546a3bf22778ae988991b.jpg
 
Great find. This is going to piss off a lot of people, I don't think it's going to have the same legs as the Farage case but there's a possibility here.

Many internet users are being blocked from looking at gender-critical websites on public wi-fi, it can be revealed.

A Mail on Sunday investigation found that one in three networks are denying access to sites that raise legitimate questions related to trans issues.

A senior MP said this was 'sinister and disturbing'.

It follows reports about Great Western Railway's onboard wi-fi blocking the website of human rights organisation Sex Matters, which campaigns for clarity about sex in law and policy. It had been flagged as being 'associated with terrorism and hate'.

Our reporters visited 25 venues with accessible public wi-fi and found that eight blocked one or more gender- critical websites.


At three branches of Pret A Manger across London, the Women's Rights Network and Transgender Trend's websites were blocked. Access to the latter was also blocked at the Science Museum in London, at retailer Uniqlo and on a London North Eastern Railway (LNER) train.

The Sex Matters site could not be accessed at Victoria, King's Cross and Paddington train stations in London – and it was still impossible to visit it on Great Western Railway (GWR) trains.

Bosses at GWR said the site was blocked because AI scanners had deemed it to contain 'adult' content, most likely due to the repetition of the word 'sex'.

But at least two other websites featuring the word 'sex' in their titles – Sex Positivity UK and Sexual Health Alliance – loaded quickly on the network.

Major internet service providers are required to adopt network-level filtering systems to prevent children from seeing unsavoury content.

But these can block harmless websites, too. Cybersecurity expert Daniel Card said criminals may have attacked gender-critical websites to 'reclassify them' as harmful.

Labour MP Rosie Duffield said: 'This is sinister and disturbing censorship. These firms must be doing well financially if they're prepared to lose the custom of women.'

Women's Rights Network's Claire Loneragan said: 'Pret let us access porn sites. We could access another to buy guns. So we question why there must be safeguarding around sex-based rights.'

A Science Museum spokesman said: 'We use a security system to protect visitors from potentially unsuitable content. We will follow up with the service provider.'

A Uniqlo spokesman said: 'We do not knowingly filter gender-critical websites. We are speaking to our vendor to review the filters.'

LNER said: 'Website categories are not determined by us, but by a filtering service. Such filters do not reflect our view of any site.'

Pret A Manger did not respond to a request for comment.

After being approached by the MoS, GWR bosses said they had asked for the blocked material to be reviewed by their filtering system. Just 24 hours later, the Sex Matters site was accessible on its trains.
Much like Null's issues this is potentially internet providers getting to decide what people can and cannot see.
 
Back
Top Bottom