UK British News Megathread - aka CWCissey's news thread

  • 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:
Am I imagining this or did someone post up thread about illegals running food businesses from the hotels they're at?
You're not imagining it. Its real.


You can find out through your local council if they've applied for a license on the premises. In the case of the Cedar Court Hotel and Big Boi Burgers, the council had zero issues granting them a license but then revoked it when it came to light.
 
You're not imagining it. Its real.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=bdgAdu6hkDM
You can find out through your local council if they've applied for a license on the premises. In the case of the Cedar Court Hotel and Big Boi Burgers, the council had zero issues granting them a license but then revoked it when it came to light.
I mean this begs the question,why are they being allowed to work? They've entered the country illegally, we don't know who they are and they're completely unvetted.
 
I mean this begs the question,why are they being allowed to work? They've entered the country illegally, we don't know who they are and they're completely unvetted.
Because once they're off the boat/plane, processed and put into a hotel etc, the government and police give absolutely zero fucks about what they do next. It doesn't matter whether they're flipping a burger or feeling up your kids, they're basically untouchable.

If you have a spate of bike thefts in your area and there is a migrant hotel nearby, check the grounds of the hotel because they're probably there with Deliveroo bags on the back ready to help keep some mystery meat in PS5 games and designer trainers.
 
Because once they're off the boat/plane, processed and put into a hotel etc, the government and police give absolutely zero fucks about what they do next. It doesn't matter whether they're flipping a burger or feeling up your kids, they're basically untouchable.

If you have a spate of bike thefts in your area and there is a migrant hotel nearby, check the grounds of the hotel because they're probably there with Deliveroo bags on the back ready to help keep some mystery meat in PS5 games and designer trainers.
It's almost like the government is trying to bait people into forming lynch mobs as an excuse to give themselves ultimate executive control over everything, just like the good ol days after right after 2019.
Only this time the restrictions will never go away.
 
I've considered it but I think what I need is to talk to actual teachers and see what their level of despair is.
Not a teacher but know a few. High.

Campaigners lodge legal action over gender rules for schools and prisons​

Campaigners who won a legal victory on the definition of a woman are taking action against the Scottish government over policies it says are "inconsistent" with the ruling.
For Women Scotland have lodged an action at the Court of Session, claiming rules on transgender pupils in schools and transgender people in custody are "in clear breach" of a Supreme Court judgement in April.
Judges ruled the words "woman" and "sex" in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex after For Women Scotland brought forward a legal challenge against Scottish ministers.
A Scottish government spokesperson said it was unable to comment on live proceedings.
Guidance for single-sex toilets in schools states young people "where possible" should be able to "use the facilities they feel most comfortable with".
In prisons, current guidelines allow for a transgender woman to be admitted into the women's estate if the person does not meet the violence against women and girls criteria and there is no basis to "suppose" they pose an "unacceptable risk of harm" to those housed in the women's estate.

https://archive.ph/o/PUSHj/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c74nx8lk82vo
However, For Women Scotland allege those policies are "inconsistent" with the Supreme Court judgement and remain "stubbornly in place".
It has raised an ordinary action for reduction - quashing - of the policies relating to schools and prisons, first reported by The Sunday Times.
In a statement, the group claimed the rules remaining in place were to the "detriment of vulnerable women and girls".
It said the Scottish government had 21 days to respond to the action.
"We are asking the court to issue a declarator that the school guidance and the prison guidance are unlawful and that they be reduced in whole," it said.
"We are also asking that both policies are suspended in the meantime."
A Scottish government spokesperson said: "It would be inappropriate to comment on live court proceedings."
I'd have have shared the BBC article but they neglected to mention this speaker also directly profits from illegal immigration. So fuck them
The BBC has been forced to pull a Thought for the Day segment on the Today programme in which a guest accused Robert Jenrick of xenophobia over his stance on illegal immigration.
Dr Krish Kandiah, the founder of a refugee charity, said the shadow justice secretary had fuelled “fear of the stranger” by saying illegal migrants made him fearful for his daughters’ safety.
“The technical name for this is xenophobia,” he added.
Mr Jenrick hit back at Dr Kandiah, writing on X: “On BBC Radio 4 this morning, listeners were told that if you’re concerned about the threat of illegal migrants to your kids, you’re racist. Wrong. You’re a good parent.”

The BBC later withdrew the entire Today programme during which the comments were made from its on-demand BBC Sounds service. The station’s head of editorial standards apologised to Mr Jenrick, saying the references to xenophobia would be edited out before it was reinstated.

Speaking on Wednesday morning, Dr Kandiah made reference to a newspaper article in which Mr Jenrick said he did not want his children “to share a neighbourhood with men from backward countries who broke into Britain illegally”.
It followed protests outside migrant hotels including in Epping, Essex, where an Ethiopian asylum seeker was charged with sexually assaulting a schoolgirl days after arriving in Britain, which he denies.
Dr Kandiah said: “A front-page story in the Mail on Sunday quoted shadow justice minister Robert Jenrick talking about his fears for his young daughters.
“He said: ‘I certainly don’t want my children to share a neighbourhood with men from backward countries who broke into Britain illegally and about whom we know next to nothing.’

“These words echo a fear many have absorbed. Fear of the stranger. The technical name for this is xenophobia.”
Dr Kandiah, who has previously appeared on programmes including BBC Breakfast and BBC News 24, went on to say that all phobias were “by definition irrational” but nevertheless have a “huge impact”.
He added: “It is understandable that many people are scared by the unknown, especially if they’ve been told illegality and unfairness are part of the story. However, over the past year, xenophobia has fuelled angry protests outside hotels housing asylum seekers, deepening divisions in our communities.”
Dr Krish Kandiah's full Thought for the Day on BBC Radio 4:
“We are not born. Psychologists and neuroscientists explain that babies arrive in this world with only two natural start responses. One to falling and the other to loud noises. Most other fears, whether of heights, failures, spiders or strangers are learned. Picked up through experience and the influence of others. When my children were born I felt afraid leaving them alone in their cots, I hesitated to let others hold them, I felt my stomach twist when they walked through the school gates for the first time. Even now as I count down the days to my daughter’s wedding, I feel butterflies in my stomach. Across the country many parents, carers and grandparents will be feeling a similar nervousness ahead of tomorrow’s A-level results. They seem so important, shaping our children’s next steps towards university, a job, a career, but in truth our fears are misplaced. A grade on a piece of paper does not define who our children are, nor does it dictate their future success or happiness.
“A front page story in the Mail on Sunday quoted shadow justice minister Robert Jenrick talking about his fears for his young daughters. He said: “I certainly don’t want my children to share a neighborhood with men from backward countries who broke into Britain illegally and about whom we know next to nothing.” These words echo a fear many have absorbed. Fear of the stranger. The technical name for this is xenophobia. All phobias are by definition irrational. Nevertheless, they have a huge impact. It is understandable that many people are scared by the unknown, especially if they’ve been told illegality and unfairness are part of the story. However, over the past year, xenophobia has fueled angry protests outside hotels housing asylum seekers, deepening divisions in our communities.

“After rigorous Home Office assessment, the majority of people arriving in small boats are found to be genuinely fleeing war, persecution, and famine – circumstances we would never wish on our own families. The idea that they pose a greater risk to our children than those already within our communities isn’t supported by evidence. Most crimes against children are committed not by strangers, but by people they know, often from within their own families or neighborhoods.

Fear, when it makes us cautious, can keep us safe but when it makes us unnecessarily suspicious it can be dangerous, making society more fractured and fragile and eroding the very values we want our children to experience - kindness, fairness and open heartedness. Martin Luther King Jnr, standing on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, spoke not of fear but of hope. He wanted his children to share a neighbourhood with those others considered a risk. Children from all races walking hand in hand in peace. His words rooted in his Christian faith echo what Jesus taught - to love thy neighbour and to welcome the stranger. Just as fear may be learned, I believe it is possible for us to learn to hope. By choosing empathy over suspicion, by listening before judging and by building bridges instead of walls.”


Dr Kandiah, the founder of refugee charity The Sanctuary Foundation, was speaking a day after the number of Channel migrant crossings passed 50,000 since Sir Keir Starmer took office.
He claimed that “the majority of people arriving in small boats are found to be genuinely fleeing war, persecution, and famine – circumstances we would never wish on our own families”.
He added: “The idea that they pose a greater risk to our children than those already within our communities isn’t supported by evidence. Most crimes against children are committed not by strangers but by people they know, often from within their own families or neighbourhoods.”

On Wednesday afternoon, Roger Mahony, the head of editorial standards for BBC Radio 4, wrote to Mr Jenrick to apologise.
He said that “following discussion of the programme with the production team, I have concluded that, while its reflection on fear in society from a faith perspective is broadly in line with expectations of Thought for the Day, some of the language it used went beyond that”.
Mr Mahony added: “I have asked for the two references to xenophobia to be edited from the programme on BBC Sounds. Please accept my apology for their original inclusion.”

The Telegraph understands ideas for Thought for the Day scripts are first discussed between the guests and a producer, with the latter the first to sign off drafts.
Tim Pemberton, the Head of BBC Religion and Ethics, is understood to provide the final approval on scripts before broadcast. The Telegraph has asked the BBC if Mr Pemberton himself signed off Dr Kandiah’s script and is awaiting a response.
Guests are briefed to frame scripts to avoid bias, acknowledge the other side of an argument and to avoid straying into territory that is overtly political.

On Wednesday afternoon, a BBC spokesman said: “Today’s episode of Thought for the Day contained reflections from a faith perspective on fear in society but has been edited to remove some of the language used and we apologise for its inclusion.”
Dr Kandiah declined to provide a further comment.

Richard Tice, the deputy leader of Reform UK, said: “It wasn’t Thought for the Day, it was delusion of the day. The British people are sick of paying to import a combination of economic opportunists, drug dealers, criminals, misogynists and men from inferior cultures to our own where their views of women are borderline medieval.”
A Tory source said: “Thought for the Day has long descended into a bunch of nobodies wittering on about their mad hat socialist ideas. If the BBC are not prepared to broadcast serious religious voices, they should at least ensure the second rate ones they do find are balanced.”
According to the BBC, the Thought for the Day segment is intended to share “reflections from a faith perspective on issues and people in the news”. It was first broadcast in 1939 and is usually delivered by those involved in religious affairs, with Christians tending to make up the majority of speakers.

It comes after The Telegraph revealed that at least 200 people living in asylum seeker hotels have been charged with criminal offences, without police revealing their immigration status.
Forces have now been told to share suspects’ ethnicity and nationality after authorities were accused of covering up offences carried out by asylum seekers.
3 spectator articles shitting on Sturgeon afterher new book because Nicola deserves it
Nicola Sturgeon gets an easy ride with the English media. This weekend, with a book to flog and an image to launder, we’ve had to endure another round of softball interviews with the former first minister. And what have we learnt? Her sexuality is ‘non-binary’; she has ‘famed emotional intelligence’; she handled Covid better than Boris; she is the most successful woman in politics since Margaret Thatcher.
Some of that may be true, some of it demonstrably false. But what matters is the Scotland she left behind.
To judge the success of Scotland – and those who lead it – three categories matter most. Two were once sources of national pride; one has always been our Achilles’ heel. Education was once the envy of the world and our economy once punched above its weight, but health outcomes have long been grim. In Glasgow, a man born in the east end can expect to live a decade less than one born in the west. Fixing that should be central to any progressive’s mission.
1. Education
Sturgeon said in 2016 that closing the attainment gap between rich and poor would be her ‘defining mission’. The gap is as wide as ever.
By age 11, there is still a 20-point literacy gap and a 19-point numeracy gap between the richest and poorest pupils. Higher pass rates remain stubbornly unequal. Rather than confront this, Sturgeon withdrew Scotland from the ‘Timss’ and ‘Pirls’ studies, making international comparison impossible. By the time Humza Yousaf reversed the decision, the latest ‘Pisa’ rankings showed Scottish pupils a year behind their English counterparts – despite a testing bias in Scotland’s favour. Ministers now trumpet tiny, statistically irrelevant ‘narrowings’ of the gap. In 2015, Sturgeon had said: ‘Let me be clear, I want to be judged on this.’



2. Economy
Scotland enjoys one of the largest budget deficits in the developed world.
As a result of the Barnett Formula, at the point when Sturgeon resigned, spending on public services in Scotland is some 30 per cent higher than it is in England – a financial bonus that pays for many of the SNP’s flagship policies. The deficit last year was some 10 per cent of GDP; EU membership requires it to be no higher than 3 per cent. Scotland also has the highest income tax rates in the UK, and little to show for it.



The picture is no brighter in industry. Look at the ferry fiasco: in 2015, a £97 million contract was handed to a shipyard owner friendly with Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon. The cost has since exploded to over £450 million – and only one of the two promised vessels is in service.
3. Health
Life expectancy for Scots men and women has seen the sharpest fall in 40 years – accelerating in the time Sturgeon’s been in power.
Scottish men born in the last year before Sturgeon resigned could expect to live for 77 years, the lowest of any UK country (it was 79 in England) and a fall of some 18 weeks on the previous year. The same was true for women, who could expect to live to 81 – a six week fall. Glasgow had the lowest life expectancy of anywhere in the UK.
There’s was a ten-year gap in life expectancy between baby girls born in the poorest and richest areas of Scotland. For boys it’s almost 14 years. At the point Sturgeon left office, this poverty gap had grown some 1.3 years for males and 1.6 years for females since 2013.



Much of this ill health was because drug deaths soared during her administration. Deaths from ‘drug-related’ causes in Scotland reached record highs for seven years in a row (five of which on Sturgeon’s watch). More people die from drug misuse in Scotland than anywhere else in Europe. During Sturgeon’s premiership, the heads of Scotland’s ‘drug taskforce’ resigned because of government desires to meet targets rather than make lasting change.



Sturgeon is well regarded by lockdown zealots in England because they think she did things better than Boris. In reality, she just had a good PR machine. When I was a civil service statistician in Scotland during the early days of Covid, someone in my department was taken away from their regular duties to produce a daily report for the then first minister on how she was outperforming England. But when everything was said and done, the numbers of those who died from coronavirus did not vary wildly across the border.
Apart from education, health and the economy, let’s not forget politics. In pure electoral terms, Sturgeon was formidable, winning eight straight elections. Yet the SNP’s dominance owes much to the electoral maths: as long as a significant minority back independence, the party remains on top in Holyrood.
On that core mission, however, she delivered nothing. Multiple announcements of a second referendum came to nothing; polls barely shifted; independence is now barely discussed, even among the faithful. If Sturgeon wanted a legacy beyond public-sector failure, she had advance independence.
I spent the weekend in Sturgeon’s native Ayrshire. A few years ago, politics and the constitution dominated every conversation. Now? Hardly a mention of the woman or her cause.
Nicola Sturgeon isn’t someone for whom oversharing comes naturally. Throughout her career, she has regularly been labelled ‘dour’ or ‘frosty’ by both her opponents and those on her own side. As her profile grew through the 2010s, so did her popularity among the SNP’s expanding membership – and in her first week of being party leader she mustered a 12,000-strong crowd with which to celebrate in Glasgow’s Hydro. But she remained an introvert with a tight-knit circle of few friends. ‘I can come alive on a stage in front of thousands of people, but put me at a dinner table with four people and I will struggle much, much more,’ she told the Sunday Times. While so much has been written about Scotland’s former first minister, there don’t seem to be many people who really know her. It’s unclear, also, whether she knows herself.


Sturgeon’s new memoir Frankly (which is out today) and the interviews that have accompanied it seem like an attempt to shrug off that reservedness. The events of the last two years – Sturgeon’s gender bill; her impromptu resignation; the Operation Branchform police probe into SNP finances – have been dissected, judged and criticised relentlessly. Now Scotland’s former leader is giving people the opportunity to see things from her point of view. Her critics say she is less offering insight, more rewriting history.
Sturgeon’s interview with ITV’s Julie Etchingham sees elements of both. One of the controversies that, some suggest, prompted her resignation in February 2023 was the Gender Recognition Reform Bill – and the case of Isla Bryson. Sturgeon still struggles to call the sexual offender a man and pointedly sticks to ‘they/them’ pronouns. While she admits that she ‘lost the dressing room’ on the gender debate, calling it ‘her failure’, the former FM appears to regret her communication, rather than the substance of her argument. The closest Sturgeon gets to admitting she might have been wrong on the best way to protect trans people is when she says: ‘We lost all sense of rationality in this debate. I am partly responsible for that… I should have said, okay, let’s pause. Let’s take a step back.’
It is clear Sturgeon doesn’t know how to square this particular circle – but that there is a vocal group of people she is conscious of upsetting. She hints at this briefly: ‘Anything I say about Isla Bryson, in the wider world, will be immediately taken and transferred to every trans person. And if I sometimes still seem as if I’m struggling with how to define Isla Bryson, it’s not out of any concern for Bryson, it’s out of concern for how that then affects the wider trans community.’
There are three moments when glimpses of real, unfiltered emotion are seen in the ITV interview. When the police arrived at her door with a search warrant over an embezzlement investigation, the former first minister left for her parents’ house. She sounds unnerved as she tries to describe the day, saying she can’t remember much except shock at photos that made her home look ‘like a murder scene’. She describes her own arrest some months later as the worst day of her life. ‘Do you stand by that you knew nothing?’ Etchingham asks. ‘If there had been any evidence that I had done anything that constituted a criminal offence, I wouldn’t be sitting here right now having been cleared by the police,’ Sturgeon replies, in a way that doesn’t quite answer the question.
Covid is an emotive issue for the woman who led Scotland through the pandemic. Sturgeon’s daily press conferences and decision making saw her popularity – and that of independence – soar at the time, though she was later accused of having pursued her own public health strategy for political gain. With Etchingham, she discusses how she started going to therapy a few weeks after the Covid inquiry. Yet talking about how she felt when she sought help proves difficult for a woman who has over the last decade demonstrated an otherwise uncanny ability to hold herself together. Sturgeon admits she didn’t tell her mum that she had gone to counselling – and makes a mental note on screen to explain this to her ‘before she gets to this bit in the book’.
Sturgeon has been a politician for so long that she doesn’t know who she is outside of that
And it was talk about Salmond’s death that prompted something of another visceral reaction from his onetime protégée. The Salmond-Sturgeon fallout tore apart the ‘Yes’ movement, leaving a pair that had hoped to secure independence together at each other’s throats. To ITV, Sturgeon says: ‘Do I believe he behaved inappropriately – that’s different to criminally inappropriately – on some occasions towards women? I believe that, and… instead of acknowledging that and showing contrition and apologising for that, he doubled down.’
His death conjures up strange feelings. ‘He died, and I hadn’t spoken to him for years,’ Sturgeon admits. ‘I went through this period of I would still talk to him in my head. I would have vivid dreams that we were still on good terms. And then I’d have this feeling of such sadness when I remembered the reality, so I went through that process. I still missed him in some bizarre way. Even today, I still miss him in some way. The person that I used to know in the relationship I used to have.’
Elsewhere, Sturgeon keeps her answers superficial. On preparing for the 2014 indyref, she said that while the SNP had been ‘caught a bit off guard’ and lacked positions that would ‘withstand the full glare of scrutiny’, the party turned things around with their white paper (which, she claims, Salmond never read). On issues of governance, she switches back into politician mode, shrugging: ‘Do I wish I had done more? Of course I do.’ An expression of distaste flickers across her face at the mention of the Reform surge in Scotland and on Nigel Farage she is scathing about his ‘fragile ego’ and ‘bravado’.

The interview swings between political events and personal travesties, with talk of her miscarriage a tender point. She’s candid: ‘I carry a sense of guilt that I miscarried a baby, because I had been conflicted about the pregnancy.’ She jokes later, on a more light-hearted note, that getting a tattoo at 55 is a ‘mid-life crisis alert’. Its infinity-arrow design, she divulges, symbolises strength, resilience and her continuing to move forward.
Nicola Sturgeon has been a politician for so much of her life that you get the sense she doesn’t know who she is outside of that. Her detractors will dismiss her memoir and these interviews as a blatant attempt to reshape a narrative that slipped out of her control in recent years. But it feels much less contrived than that. The former first minister has chosen to expose herself while still in a period of transition. ‘I do feel a sense of liberation,’ she smiles a little uncertainly at Etchingham as the interview wraps up. But she still seems lost, too.
Throughout her memoir, Nicola Sturgeon emphasises her achievement in becoming the first female first minister of Scotland. While that achievement should not be underestimated, I’m sure I’m not the only woman who wishes she made a better job of it.
In her political afterlife, as in her political life, she evades real scrutiny
It’s not just her determined blind spot on the implications of self-identification for women’s rights which emerges from this memoir, but also the fact that her much trumpeted support for women, including those under attack in the public forum, seems not to extend to those who dare to disagree with her.
There is widespread recognition that Nicola’s legacy is marred not just by the self-identification fiasco but by other notable policy failings in the fields of education, the NHS, drug deaths and public transport (ferries and roads). Not to mention her failure to advance the raison d’etre for her political career, Scottish independence, beyond the point to which her predecessor took it.

Yet she has remarkably little to say about these issues in her memoir.
For example, on her failure to close the educational attainment gap she claims that it took her a while to realise the role played by child poverty. This is hardly rocket science. Besides, the child poverty payment which she finally introduced in February 2021 was a policy which she initially dismissed out of hand when it was first presented to her by Alex Neil five years earlier in February 2016. But she doesn’t mention that.
Clearly, she considers her handling of the Covid pandemic to be her greatest triumph. She cites the exhaustion it induced as one of the reasons for her resignation and says she came close to a breakdown in the wake of her evidence to the Covid inquiry. Yet, the chapter on Covid is curiously silent on some of the biggest concerns which have come to light since her daily broadcasts to the nation ended. Care home deaths merit a brief mention but there is no analysis or justification of strategy that led to them. Nor does she even attempt to justify the deletion of her WhatsApp messages despite her promise to a journalist to keep them.


Nicola is very keen to remind us, repeatedly, of her love for books. But for all her reading, this book, like her speeches, is curiously short on big ideas or indeed literary references. Except for a very superficial treatment in the opening chapters there is little insight into why she is a Scottish nationalist and which political theories she espouses.
Even where she does attempt to address difficult issues such as her sexuality, she dances around the issue and the reader is left not quite sure what she is trying to say. The confusion has not been cleared up by her media interviews during the publicity storm surrounding the book.
Reflections on life as a woman in politics is one of two themes which dominates this memoir. The other is a thorough traducing of her predecessor and one-time mentor. Alex Salmond is clearly living rent free in her head except he isn’t because he’s dead and some think that’s in no small part due to the treatment he endured at her hands. Not content with the fact that he’s now gone and can never again be a threat to her, large parts of this book are devoted to further besmirching his character.
Before the book was even published, Salmond’s political friends and independent observers like the highly respected former Green MSP Andy Wightman and the journalist David Clegg, were able to debunk some of the allegations against him. These include the ludicrous notion that Salmond himself might have been the author of the leak which led to the media storm around allegations that he was a sex pest and that he was opposed to gay marriage despite him having introduced it as first minister. The minister he entrusted with doing so, Alex Neil, claims that Salmond handed him the equal marriage brief because, ‘Nicola didn’t want to do it any longer as she was fed up with it.’
Despite her efforts to heap further opprobrium on Salmond, Sturgeon scorns the idea that there was any conspiracy to do Salmond down and that she was involved. She states that there was neither evidence nor motive and leaves it at that. Thus, she avoids addressing the evidence of conspiracy that has been adduced by others – some of which has been revealed under parliamentary privilege by David Davis MP and Kenny MacAskill (former MP and leader of the Alba party) – including the existence of WhatsApp messages by her husband, Peter Murrell and other close aides in which the suborning of evidence against Salmond was discussed alongside how best to pressurise the police to act.
Ironically the motive for removing Salmond from the political scene emerges in the glaring resentment of him displayed in her book. In addition, anyone who’s been paying attention to Scottish politics knows that he was manoeuvring to make a leadership comeback after she suffered one of her biggest setbacks with the loss of 21 SNP MPs in the 2017 general election.
In contrast to her constant attacks on Salmond, her memoir is remarkably light on any explanation as to why she was unable to capitalise on the extraordinary legacy which he bequeathed her. Independence support was at its highest level ever and an explosion in SNP membership and support led to the party capturing almost 50 per cent of the vote at the 2015 general election.
There is very little discussion of her strategy to capitalise on the opportunities afforded to advance the cause of independence during the Brexit saga and Boris Johnson’s premiership. She sums the situation up by saying independence could not be advanced because the British government would not grant her the permission to hold another referendum. However, she does not explain what if anything she tried to do about this apart from repeatedly banging her head against the brick wall of their refusal.
She also omits any reference to the viciousness with which she and her supporters shut down any attempt to discuss or debate a Plan B.
Likewise, there is no discussion of what advantage she might have tried to parlay in the 2017-2019 when her 35 SNP MPs were close to holding the balance of power at Westminster. Presumably because there was no discussion at the time. I know because I was there and was pilloried for trying to initiate such a discussion.
Indeed, the reader will search in vain for anecdotes about the sort of tortured policy debates in cabinet or at the party’s national executive committee one normally reads about in political memoirs, because, under Nicola’s leadership, such discussions were neither encouraged nor tolerated.
She writes that as soon as Boris Johnson became PM she knew there would be another general election. There is no mention of the opportunity that was afforded to take Johnson down after the UK Supreme Court had ruled his prorogation of parliament unlawful. Indeed, the unlawful prorogation, the most extraordinary upheaval in modern British constitutional history, does not even merit a mention. I can only assume that this is because she failed to appreciate its significance, rather than because I was partly the author of the court victory.
On the scandal surrounding the SNP finances we hear little except about the impact the police investigation has had on her and her joy at her ‘exoneration’. Further discussion, she tells us, cannot happen because of the charges against her husband. How convenient. I guess we shall have to wait for another day to hear why she so determinedly shut down legitimate questions from party members and NEC representatives about the whereabouts of a £600,000 independence referendum fund that was supposed to be ringfenced.
At the Edinburgh Book Festival last week she performed for a gathering of her dwindling fan base, while her legacy played out elsewhere in the festival city. There were rows raging over censorship by the Book Festival and the National Library of Scotland of the book, The Women Who Wouldn’t Wheesht (written by feminists, sex abuse survivors and lesbians). Kate Forbes, the woman who in a more mature Scotland might have been Nicola’s successor, was banned from a fringe venue.
After over an hour with her adoring fans, Nicola spent a very tetchy 14 minutes with Scotland’s broadcast media and print journalists having cancelled all other planned interviews with them.
In her political afterlife, as in her political life, she evades real scrutiny. For those hoping to understand better what was really going on behind the scenes during her leadership, this memoir will disappoint. It will be left to other memoirs to shed more light on what was really going on.
Notting Hill carnival shaping up to be a blinder this year
The Met Police commissioner has defended Live Facial Recognition (LFR) technology as a tool that helps officers locate people on watch lists, ahead of its use at Notting Hill Carnival.

Sir Mark Rowley responded to calls from civil liberty and anti-racism groups to drop its use of LFR, which treats people "as potential suspects", at the bank holiday event.

"Our aim is to ensure that Carnival remains a safe and inclusive celebration for all. It is our operational judgement that LFR has an important role in delivering on this aim," Sir Mark said in a letter.

He added that almost 350 arrests were made at Carnival last year for a range of offences including homicide, rape and possession of weapons.
On Sunday, 11 organisations penned a letter to Sir Mark, where they described LFR as "a mass surveillance tool that treats all Carnival-goers as potential suspects and has no place at one of London's biggest cultural celebrations".

They said the decision to reintroduce the technology at Carnival was "deeply disappointing" and argued it could be "less accurate for women and people of colour".

Sir Mark said the force had designed an extensive and complex policing operation to keep carnival-goers, expected to be more than one million in number, safe.

He wrote: "We acknowledge that when LFR was previously deployed at Notting Hill Carnival in 2016 and 2017, it did not build public confidence.

"At that time, the technology was in its early stages and the algorithm's performance was limited. The legal and oversight position was also very different."

He said that since, the technology had made "considerable progress", and had an improved algorithm that performed at a higher standard.

"We have also refined our operational approach - including not using LFR within the Carnival footprint," he added.

"These developments reflect our commitment to learning from experience and improving how we support public safety while maintaining trust."


The groups concerned about the technology included Liberty, Big Brother Watch and the Runnymede Trust. They highlighted an ongoing judicial review brought by Shaun Thompson, a black Londoner who says he was wrongly identified by the system and detained.

Their letter stated: "Notting Hill Carnival is an event that specifically celebrates the British African Caribbean community, yet the [Metropolitan Police] is choosing to use a technology with a well-documented history of inaccurate outcomes and racial bias."
Sir Mark said the force had selected an LFR algorithm with care, which "does not perform in a way which exhibits bias".

He added that safeguards were in place to ensure the force used the technology in a non-discriminatory way.
Referencing the number of arrests last year, Sir Mark said that a small minority of Carnival attendees "have used the event to commit serious crimes".

"Our use of LFR is part of a much broader strategy to locate, disrupt and deter the minority who pose such risks," he said.
He concluded: "Where we know that LFR can help locate individuals the police need to speak to, and those people pose a public safety risk to the many seeking to enjoy Carnival, it is entirely reasonable to ask - why wouldn't we use it in this context?"
A series of concrete barriers that prompted legal action when they were installed at a popular west London destination will be temporarily removed for the Notting Hill Carnival.

Portobello Road in Notting Hill, famous for its outdoor antiques stalls, was fitted in July with what the local council called "hostile vehicle mitigation measures" - 31 concrete barriers to deter vehicle attacks on the area.

Kensington and Chelsea Council confirmed the blocks would be removed for two weeks from Monday, while road closures will remain on market days between 10:00 BST and 16:00 with temporary barriers being used.

Residents and market traders claimed the concrete barriers left them feeling "imprisoned".


The council said the concrete blocks will be temporarily removed for Notting Hill Carnival "to ensure people can move freely and safely during the event".

The event, held over the August Bank Holiday weekend, is one of the world's biggest outdoor events and is thought to attract up to two million people to the Notting Hill area.

A council spokesperson said the barriers "will be removed between Monday 18 August and Friday 22 August following advice from the Metropolitan Police and Carnival's Safety Group to improve crowd safety.

"Road closures will remain in place on market days between 10am and 4pm with temporary barriers.

"The blocks will be reinstated by Monday 1 September, and road surfaces will be repaired as works take place."

Kensington and Chelsea installed the concrete blocks at each junction between Golborne Road and Chepstow Villas.

Between the blocks are temporary barriers called H-Stops, that are wheeled into place every morning, locked in their spots and then removed in the afternoon.

The council said the temporary order allowing the barriers was introduced following counter-terrorism guidance issued by the Metropolitan Police to protect people - and said it would consult with residents over a permanent solution.


Lawyers representing a group of residents sent a letter to the council, expressing their intention to challenge the Anti-Terrorism Traffic Regulation Order.

As well as the barriers, vehicles have also been banned from using the road between 10:00 and 16:00 for either three or seven days a week, depending on the section of the street.

Locals say the measures, which were introduced over fears of vehicles being driven into pedestrians, means emergency services, delivery trucks and taxi cabs are unable to reach them.

A council spokesperson said the emergency services were consulted on the temporary scheme and their vehicles are able to access the road.

The Carnival parade takes place along a three-mile (5km) route around Notting Hill on Bank Holiday Sunday and Monday.

It features masquerade dancing, soca, calypso, steel bands and sound systems, and attracts huge crowds of spectators.

Roads near the route are closed throughout the weekend due to the high number of people attending.
 
Diversity is having the same effect in London as in DC, where the neoliberal media assures us there is no crime problem and Trump is restoring law & order just to be a fascist. The same gaslighting takes place across the pond.

According to the 2021 Census, only 36.8% of London’s population regards itself as “White British.” Yet for now there are still pockets of Englishness that allow well-to-do shitlibs to remain smug in their denial:
 
if these are the best pizzas then why are they putting hard-boiled eggs on them hm?

:story:
Tod is a really fascinating commentary on the state of modern London as a whole. Going to all these likely expensive AF "exotic" slop areas as a food influencer (bleugh) while his fellow countrymen get robbed, stabbed and beaten.
 
Tod is a really fascinating commentary on the state of modern London as a whole. Going to all these likely expensive AF "exotic" slop areas as a food influencer (bleugh) while his fellow countrymen get robbed, stabbed and beaten.
Brave New World by Aldous Huxley

Keep the populace submissive on pleasure and happiness rather than enslaving them via direct force.
 
Should be named Big Baz Burgers, they may not have been scruptinised.

Can you smell that, boys? It's change and fear.

Fuck you, sincerely Yvette, you mop-haired bitch. The true British people will not have your shitty future forced upon us.
 
The interesting thing about the ruling is that it basically makes every single asylum hotel instantly illegal until they get the correct paperwork to change them to "asylum processing centre"

So on paper every single hotel should have to put everyone out on the streets overnight as otherwise they're breaking 100+ counts of illegal detention every single day.
 
The interesting thing about the ruling is that it basically makes every single asylum hotel instantly illegal until they get the correct paperwork to change them to "asylum processing centre"

So on paper every single hotel should have to put everyone out on the streets overnight as otherwise they're breaking 100+ counts of illegal detention every single day.
Unfortunately either the government will absolutely refuse to prosecute them, or just do a blanket change that assigns all these hotels as such, considering how badly the government is seething over this ruling..
 
Tod is a really fascinating commentary on the state of modern London as a whole. Going to all these likely expensive AF "exotic" slop areas as a food influencer (bleugh) while his fellow countrymen get robbed, stabbed and beaten.
Brave New World by Aldous Huxley

Keep the populace submissive on pleasure and happiness rather than enslaving them via direct force.

The interesting thing about the ruling is that it basically makes every single asylum hotel instantly illegal
This might be the time I start to share my UK Migrant Crime map site. I think it'll make the biggest splash right now as this news has come out. Anyone got any recommendations or suggestions in terms of marketing this and getting it out there? Preferably quickly.
 
Good teaching is a dying art. Most people have that one teacher that changed them for the better, although I don't know how true that is nowadays. Further education seems to be a popular choice because boomers tell their kids that's how to get employed (lol). Imagine how unemployment will build up every year with recent grads who also can't find a job.
I had more nonce teachers than good ones.
 
Back
Top Bottom