As we reported, Reform have chosen long-time establishment insider Matt Goodwin to stand in Gorton & Denton. There was already a backlash to Goodwin when we published that piece; since then, Green Party leader Zack Polanski has made his feelings clear:
'Rent-an-extremist'It tells you everything you need to know that Reform are parachuting in a rent-an-extremist - this isn't about representing the people of Gorton and Denton, it's about using this place as a platform for their careers.
Manchester will show him the door.
— Zack Polanski (@ZackPolanski) January 27, 2026
As we reported, Goodwin is an elite establishment insider. This is from his own website:
He is regularly in demand as a keynote speaker including after dinner and client-facing events. He has given evidence to various parliamentary committees including the Home Affairs, Education and Public Bill committees and has privately briefed some of the world's most well known political leaders including Prime Ministers and Presidents of major advanced Western democracies. He appears regularly in international and national media including BBC News, Financial Times, New York Times and Politico, among many others.
In other words, he's another dinner circuit dandy.
As Polanski noted, Goodwin is known for his extreme opinions; case in point:
If anyone is "insane," it's Matt Goodwin.
Yarwood posted "Head for the hotels housing them [asylum seekers] and burn them to the ground" and "violence and murder is the only way, start with migrant hotels, the MPs homes and take parliament by force".
It was a crystal clear case… https://t.co/eTsoTrkCos pic.twitter.com/WlCEdalPSI
— GET A GRIP (@docrussjackson) December 18, 2025
While you do have to take social media posts with a grain of salt, we should probably draw the line at calling out specific targets for assassination.
As much as we agree with the 'rent-an-extremist' point, we should clarify something else from Polanski's tweet. While Goodwin isn't a Gorton & Denton man, he does have ties to Greater Manchester, having studied at the University of Salford and completed a "Postdoctoral Fellowship" at the University of Manchester. If that sounds a bit elite to you, it is. We personally don't mind a bit of the old academia, but then again we're not running around screaming about 'elites' while literally being on the same gravy train as them all.
While some are claiming Goodwin was born and raised in Manchester, we've not actually seen that confirmed. He certainly isn't from Gorton & Denton anyway, and the experience of being a city centre academic is obviously very different to living in one of Manchester's outer boroughs.
Fighting all sidesPolanski isn't just taking it to Reform. Labour MP Mike Tapp suggested Polanski is telling porkies about the Green's chances in Gorton & Denton:
Our rally tonight is already sold out, Mike.
But thanks for the extra publicity.
Labour are done. https://t.co/pDXgLOeuO9
— Zack Polanski (@ZackPolanski) January 27, 2026
While some polls have predicted a Labour win, it is the case that others favour the Greens:
Just admit you're cooked and move on brother https://t.co/LDympAXkxp pic.twitter.com/R55fQPKEjE
— Hugo Papé
Lee Anderson. Love him or hate him, you know that the guy is thick as mince, and this latest fiasco has only added to the impression:
Lee, oh 30p Lee, Lee Anderson by-election campaigning in the wrong constituency
Once again, Kanye West has issued an apology. This time, West uses measured language. Reflective. For some, that will feel like progress and a sign of remorse after years of anti-semitic rhetoric, public meltdowns, and deliberate provocation. He wrote:
I lost touch with reality. Things got worse the longer I ignored the problem. I said and did things I deeply regret … I regret and am deeply mortified by my actions in that state, and am committed to accountability, treatment, and meaningful change. It does not excuse what I did though. I am not a Nazi or an antisemite. I love Jewish people.
However, apologies do not exist in a vacuum. Instead, power, money, timing, and audience shape them. When examined closely, this apology looks less like accountability and more like a carefully staged act of reputational repair.
The question is not whether Kanye feels regret. The question is what this apology is meant to achieve.
Kanye apology is aimed upward, not outwardWest published his apology as a paid full-page placement in The Wall Street Journal. That choice matters because the paper does not serve community seeking repair. Investors, executives, advertisers and institutional decision-makers make up its core readership. Ultimately, these are the people who determine whether a public figure remains commercially viable.
Importantly, editors did not invite this piece, nor did they subject it to editorial challenge. Instead, West purchased the space. As a result, paid apologies bypass scrutiny, control the framing, and sidestep accountability. They are designed to speak, not listen.
In that context, West does not address Jewish communities harmed by his words. Instead, he directs it toward capital. As such, this apology does not pursue repair. It clears a path back in.
Consequences that matterTo understand why this apology appears strategic, it is important to trace the real consequences Kanye has already faced. Crucially, these consequences carried material weight.
In 2022, West lost his most lucrative partnership with Adidas, a deal that had helped making him a billionaire. Adidas publicly cited his anti-semitic remarks when terminating the partnership. Other major collaborators followed. Balenciaga cut ties. Gap ended its relationship. His talent agency, CAA, has dropped him.
West also faced restrictions on major social media platforms, temporarily limiting his access to the attention economy. In 2025, he reportedly had his Australian visa cancelled following further anti-semitic content, restricting even private travel. Taken together, these consequences amounted to a rare collapse of economic, professional, and institutional support.
For someone who repeatedly claimed to be untouchable, the fallout was unusually concrete.
Timing is not incidentalThis apology does not arrive during a period of withdrawal or reflection. It arrives alongside reports of an imminent album release. That timing is significant.
The music industry often monetises controversy. Distribution, playlisting press coverage, brand partnerships and collaborators all depend on baseline perception of manageability. At this stage, apology becomes a prerequisite for participation.
Apologies that appear just before a release cycle function less as moral reckoning and more as reputational hygiene. They stabilise a brand ahead of renewed exposure. This does not require speculation about intent. It is a structural reality of how power operates.
Performance, not confessionThis is not an argument against apology itself. Apologies can matter. They can be meaningful. However, accountability requires proximity to harm, openness to consequence, and a willingness to prioritise repair over reputation.
What we are witnessing instead is a performance of accountability. The language is contrite. West has controlled his presentation. The audience is elite. The risks are minimal.
Performance implies an audience. It implies rehearsal. In this case, the performance is not aimed at those he harmed but at those with the power to rehabilitate.
Affected voices remain scepticalThat scepticism is shared by Jewish Advocacy groups. The Anti-Defamation league described West's apology as:
Long overdue
noting that:
it doesn't automatically undo his long history of antisemitism.
The organisation emphasised that an authentic apology would be demonstrated through future behaviour, not statements. These responses are instructive. They show that words alone are not being received as sufficient by those directly affected.
The misuse of mental health narrativesPredictably, public discussion has again turned to West's health. This framing has become a familiar detour, one that shifts attention away from choice, power and repeated refusals of care. Of course, in his apology Kanye cited his bipolar disorder as a reason for his behaviour. And, he specified that he was diagnosed with bipolar type-1 triggered by his 2002 car accident.
Mental illness can contextualise behaviour. It does not account for anti-semitism. Nor does it absolve deliberate harm, particularly when the individual involved has immense resources and access to treatment. Kanye has publicly and repeatedly rejected help. His refusal matters.
West cannot claim incapacity while demonstrating strategic agency. Several Jewish commentators have warned that framing bigotry as an illness undermines both accountability and mental health advocacy. Compassion and consequence are not mutually exclusive.
West's apology also draws heavily on Christian language. Repentance, humility, and rebirth are familiar motifs. Repentance without restitution performs accountability rather than delivering it. In many cultural contexts, public repentance is treated as closure. Confession becomes resolution. When these frameworks are stripped of material responsibility, they offer instant absolution without repair.
Of course, Kanye's own public performance of Christianity is a classic part of the rehabilitation tour ahead of an album release.
Accountability without a comebackTrue accountability does not guarantee rehabilitation. Nor does it promise restored platforms or renewed profit. It centres those harmed, and not those watching. It accepts that forgiveness may not come.
What we are being asked to accept instead is a familiar bargain. A display of remorse in exchange for re-admission. A performance of stability in exchange for commercial tolerance. None of the consequences faced have been undone by this apology. Yet it arrives precisely when access and legitimacy once again matter. That sequence is different to ignore.
The issue is not whether Kanye deserves forgiveness. The issue is that power has learned how to perform remorse convincingly. Too often, we mistake that performance for accountability.
In the end, his mental illness deserves compassion. At the same time, anti-semitism demands consequence. Taken together, apologies aimed at markets rather than communities should make us deeply uncomfortable.
Featured image via the Canary
According to reports in the Mirror, Reform UK's mayoral candidate Laila Cunningham is co-owner of a parasite-riddled and mould-plagued 'squat hotel'. Cunningham is running on a race-war platform.
Her 'New Dawn' hotel — which sounds more like a fascist European party than a hotel — has:
been swamped by negative reviews including complaints it has been the target of theft.
Cunningham defected from the Tories and owns an almost £4m flat, but guests have warned people not to stay there, saying it is unsafe and infested with bed bugs and mould. The property is owned by Plaza Continental Hotels Ltd. Companies House shows Cunningham owns 5% of the company's shares under her previous married name Laila Dupuy.
The hotel's website boasts that it prides itself "on going the extra mile to make your stay in London truly comfortable" — but has an average 2.7 star rating on Google with reviews like:
Rooms stink you cant open the door and not feel a really strong smell, not safe place for [women]… especially.
One female guest reported having to tie the room door shut with a hairdryer cable to try to feel safe:
I [was] staying there with my friend. And from the first time we walked in, we never felt safe. We literally had to tied up our door of the room [with a hairdryer cable] to be able to fall asleep but it was nearly impossible.
Another guest, who had to climb out of a window and move to another hotel after being locked in his room, said:
I think what had me even more concerned was the fact I could just be locked into the room so easily. If that was like another floor, or if there was a fire or something there'd literally be no way out.
Staff had to unscrew the door to let me back in. They refused to give me a new room, instead suggesting I wait for a cleaner and a locksmith (at 9 PM!)… No refund was offered after this disaster.
Others reported dirty toilets and even being disturbed by a prostitute knocking on the room door twice before hotel staff "ushered" the woman upstairs.
In an X post, Cunningham said her immigrant mother had bought the hotel and accused the paper of being a "far-left outlet". Trump fan Cunningham, who has had several companies struck off for alleged law-breaking, has begun her mayoral campaign with an attack on Muslims.
Featured image via the Canary
By Skwawkbox
Uber Eats and Starship Technologies have partnered to launch automated food deliveries in the UK. Rolling out in Leeds as of December 2025, robots will deliver takeaways and groceries. The automation company, Starship Technologies, touts that the deliveries "work profitably at city scale". There's no doubt about that. When labour is removed from the equation, the only costs are maintenance and energy. All of a sudden, capital has become labour — there are no potential unions or people in the way of a profit and jobs are being lost.
Is automated delivery progress?Now, that actually could be progress. No longer are people having to take up their time cycling or driving around cities to convenience those with more disposable income. But it's only a move forward if progressives step up and say: you've removed labour costs from your operation, so we want profit removed too. As such, a progressive administration should bring automated convenience services into public ownership through mandating government bonds to the companies at the market rate.
This is what Clement Attlee's post-war 1945 government did in order to nationalise 20% of the economy. They didn't want to seize private property and crash the markets. Rather, they used the democratic mandate from their manifesto in order to mandate prices for 'assets' they wanted to nationalise. Then, after a one-off payment to private companies, the government and the public received gains every year.
Younger generations take such convenience as a given and it's a no-brainer for the government to invest here, especially as the service becomes automated. Removing the middleman between businesses and people would stop delivery services milking profits from both the restaurant and the customer.
Anything that centralises businesses in one place, providing convenience to people, should be considered digital infrastructure and owned publicly.
Fourth industrial revolutionIn the years to come, all production and services will be automated. This will leave so many people without a job that a new system must emerge based on collective ownership of robots or some form of citizens' dividend.
The thing is, China is miles ahead in the move towards the fourth industrial revolution through an active state that publicly invests, taking stakes in strategic high tech companies.
While the technology is increasingly there, it's actually ideology that's lagging behind. People may struggle to conceive of an automated system of luxury and are stuck in their ways.
Featured image via TechXplore
By James Wright
Water companies are encouraging the government to scrap Ofwat, the water regulator, sooner than planned.
Ofwat currently prevents water companies from increasing bills. It also has the power to fine companies if it decides they have breached their licence.
Ofwat replacement 'Real accountability'A recent government white paper proposed a new regulator with the power to act more quickly against companies that fail to comply with regulations. This includes the ability to impose financial penalties.
However, the 52-page white paper mentions fines only once and provides no specifics.
Additionally, Ofwat already has the power to fine companies up to 10% of their annual turnover for license breaches.
So whilst the white paper claimed to be about "real accountability", it failed to provide any details.
As the Canary previously reported:
The document also fails to mention how the current privatised system is screwing over regular people. From massively increased bills to going weeks without water to not being able to swim at Britain's beaches, it appears there is not a single part of Britain's waterways that private firms have not fucked up.
And is there any real surprise that water companies want the current system, which may have its faults, but ultimately fines water companies and imposes bill caps, for one, with zero details ironed out?
It almost seems as if forcing a new system sooner than planned will allow water bosses to do whatever the fuck they want, at least for a while. That is, until the government can catch up.
Water UK, which represents the water companies, told the Financial Times that the government is moving too slowly to abolish a system that is "complex, too expensive and too slow."
Water UK also called on ministers to set up the new regulator in 'shadow' mode. This would allow it to start making decisions. I bet holding those same water companies to account and fining them would be at the top of its agenda? I think not.
A shit ton of debtThere are 16 private water companies in the UK. Between them, they have £82.7bn of debt. At the same time, many of them are taking hundreds of millions in profits each year. In total, nine of them are being monitored by Ofwat.
Additionally, Ofwat recently stopped more than £4m of potential bonuses for water bosses under new rules on performance-related executive pay. This included Thames Water's chief executive, Chris Weston, and Steve Buck, its chief financial officer.
Despite this, Chris Weston still received a base salary of £850,000 - which is absolutely disgusting given the state of the country's waterways. Overall, without a bonus, his remuneration package was £1.035m. And let's face it - a salary like that is hardly an incentive to make any significant changes.
So why would they not want Ofwat abolished?
Water companies know precisely what they are doing, and the government is complicit. As it stands, the system allows water companies to extort consumers while failing to provide decent service. All while making a shit load of cash every single year.
But nothing is going to change until the government takes water companies back into public ownership. Because as long as shareholders have more power than the average consumer and water companies are not held to account, the country will never have high-quality, clean water at a fair price.
Feature image via Imani/Unsplash
By HG
The Palestinian Ministry of Health has warned of a serious health crisis in the Gaza Strip. Thousands of patients are being prevented from travelling abroad for treatment, despite completing all official medical procedures. This directly threatens their lives and places unprecedented strain on the health system.
According to a press release seen by the Canary, around 20,000 patients with approved medical referrals remain on waiting lists. They are awaiting permission to travel for treatment that is unavailable inside the Strip.
Among them are 440 urgent, life-saving cases, where delays in referral pose an immediate threat to patients' lives.
The waiting lists also include more than 4,000 cancer patients who require specialised treatment unavailable in Gaza. This is due to severe shortages of medicines and medical supplies, as well as the declining operational capacity of health facilities under constant pressure.
Official data shows that around 4,500 patients awaiting referral are children. This highlights the profound humanitarian dimension of the crisis and raises serious concerns about long-term health consequences for the most vulnerable.
The Ministry warned that continued restrictions on patient travel could lead to unpredictable outcomes. These include rising mortality rates, worsening medical conditions, and longer waiting lists for external referrals, at a time when the health system can no longer absorb additional pressure.
The Ministry stressed that denying patients access to treatment is a direct violation of the right to health and life. It called on the international community and humanitarian organisations to meet their legal and moral obligations and take urgent action to ensure patients' freedom of movement and immediate access to life-saving care.
Featured image via UN News
By Alaa Shamali
Animal welfare advocates have hailed a 'historic moment' as the Norwegian chicken industry announces a total transition away from fast-growing chicken breeds by the end of 2027.
Norway raises 70 million chickens for meat every year. And it will become the first country in the world to transition to 100% higher welfare breeds. This could increase pressure on UK companies to address the widespread use of controversial breeds.
Fast-growing 'frankenchickens'For decades, NGOs have raised concerns about the use of so-called 'frankenchickens' - known in Norway as 'turbochickens.' Chicken companies typically use fast-growing breeds which have been selectively bred to gain weight as quickly as possible.
The birds suffer from significant and commonplace welfare problems as a result. Countless exposés show the birds struggling to walk under their own weight. Research suggests that fast-growing chickens suffer hundreds of hours of pain during their short lives.
60% of the chickens in Norway are fast-growing breeds, specifically the Ross 308. And 90% of the UK chicken industry uses the Ross 308 breed. Over the past five years the Norwegian industry has gradually adopted higher welfare breeds known as the Rustic Gold and the Hubbard JA787.
Connor Jackson is CEO of the UK branch of global animal advocacy organisation Anima International. He said:
What's happening now in Norway is a historic moment. It's one of the greatest improvements to animal welfare in history, and it shows that the transition away from fast-growing breeds is possible.
But it also shows just how far behind we are on this issue in the UK, where companies have barely started to address this problem.
Anima International has been campaigning in Norway for five years to see a transition away from fast-growing breeds. In the UK, where it also operates, a number of NGOs have been calling for the same transition since 2017 with the Better Chicken Commitment (BCC).
Last year, Waitrose became the first major UK company to make a full transition to higher welfare breeds in all its products as part of the BCC. M&S, a fellow signatory to the BCC, has transitioned for all fresh chicken, with a plan to transition completely by the end of this year.
However, fast-growing breeds remain the norm in Britain. Other UK retailers have chosen to focus on giving their chickens more space in efforts to address welfare concerns. While advocates recognise this as a positive step, it does not address the fast-growing genetics of the birds.
Jackson added:
UK consumers care deeply about animal welfare, and they would be shocked to see the reality of an intensive chicken farm even with more space. Better management is positive, but it only scratches the surface of the problem.
To really improve these animals' lives, we need to follow in Norway's footsteps with a transition to higher welfare, slower growing breeds.
Retailers, along with high street brands like KFC, Greggs and Pret, need to step up and solve the biggest welfare problem for chickens: fast-growing genetics. Nothing is stopping companies from getting together with industry and finding a solution, just like Norway has.
Featured image via Anima International
By The Canary
Over the course of 2025, a record-breaking number of mainstream newspaper editorials spoke out to oppose climate action. The total, nearing 100 articles, demonstrates the complicity of the right-wing press in the destruction of our planet.
That's according to new analysis from climate-focused independent news site Carbon Brief. The researchers analysed editorials - articles setting out the newspaper's 'official' stance on an issue — stretching back as far as 2011.
Last year, 2025, was the only period in which opposition to climate action actually outweighed support. In fact, the opposition outnumbered the support by more than two to one.
Climate hostility driven by the rightUnsurprisingly, every one of the 98 editorials opposing climate action came from right-wing papers. These included the Times, Daily Express, Sun, Daily Mail, and Daily Telegraph.
Meanwhile, lower-circulation left-or-center outlets like the Guardian and Financial Times penned all 46 editorials supporting climate action.
In total, 81% of the climate-focused editorials in right-wing papers voiced their opposition to action. This in itself is a contrast to just a few years ago, when even the right-wing rags saw a swell in support for climate action.
Notably, the 2025 editorials didn't position themselves as skeptical of the existence of climate change itself. Rather, they took a 'response-sceptic' approach, criticising the policies and efforts to stop about climate change.
Economic argumentsOften, this took the form of attacking 'net-zero' as a nebulous scapegoat for any climate policy they disliked. Meanwhile, these critical editorials rarely presented any alternative plans or proposals. As Carbon Brief explained:
Most editorials that rejected climate action did not even mention the word "climate", often using "net-zero" instead.
This supports recent analysis by Dr James Painter, a research associate at the University of Oxford, which concluded that UK newspaper coverage has been "decoupling net-zero from climate change".
This is significant, given strong and broad UK public support for many of the individual climate policies that underpin net-zero. Notably, there is also majority support for the "net-zero by 2050" target itself.
Often, the editors levelled arguments against net-zero as being too costly for the UK to implement. In fact, economic factors were the most commonly cited reason for opposition to net-zero policies, appearing in 87% of the hostile articles.
Likewise, Carbon Brief also analysed the papers' attitudes to renewable energy sources. Following the general timbre of climate-hostility, 2025 was the first year since 2014 when opposition to renewables outweighed support among the editorials.
Over 2025, 42 editorials criticised renewable energy sources and their use in the UK. And, as ever, right-wing papers featured the whole lot — with 86% of the articles again citing the costs of renewable power as the main reason for their rejection.
Shift in the rightCarbon Brief argued that the shift in the editorials' stance on climate action mirrored a shift in right-wing politics more broadly:
Taken together, the newspaper editorials mirror a significant shift on the UK political right in 2025, as the opposition Conservative party mimicked the hard-right populist Reform UK party by definitively rejecting the net-zero target that it had legislated for and the policies that it had previously championed.
The earlier trend of right-wing outlets embracing climate action mirrored Tory policies under May and Johnson, who first introduced the net-zero target in the UK. However, we're now seeing a sharp turn away from those 'green right' policies under Badenoch and Farage:
Over the past year, the Conservative party has rejected both the "net-zero by 2050" target that it legislated for in 2019 and the underpinning Climate Change Act that it had a major role in creating. Meanwhile, the Reform UK party has been rising in the polls, while pledging to "ditch net-zero"
Right-wing newspapers and politicians both influence and are influenced by one another. Both are now working to shift public opinion towards a denial that climate action can be cost-effective and have an impact on climate change - all of which works towards the agenda of their climate-wrecking donors.
The harsh truth is that there is no economic cost of climate action that would outweigh the massive cost of inaction. The oil-hungry right of both the media and politics desperately want a public that believes electric cars and wind farms are too expensive to be worthwhile.
Meanwhile, the inaction they favour will, inevitably, cost no less than the earth itself.
Featured image via CarbonBrief
After murdering hundreds of Palestinian journalists and their families in Gaza, Israel has exported its targeting of reporters to Lebanon. The occupation murdered Ali Nour Al-Din, a television journalist with Lebanese broadcaster Al-Manar, in a strike on the southern city of Tyre. Nour Al-Din was severely wounded in the strike yesterday, 26 January 2025, and died of his wounds today.
Israel is set on seizing territory in southern Lebanon that it has already begun to sell to illegal settlers. It has bombed Lebanon multiple times daily, despite a supposed 'ceasefire' that it has never honoured. The 'you cease, we'll fire' has been in place since Israel's double-wave of terrorist attacks using exploding pagers and radios. The attacks killed and maimed thousands across Lebanon, including children.
We note that Israel's war on journalists in Lebanon began on 13 October 2023, with a tank strike on a clearly marked gathering of reporters from multiple news agencies. The attack killed Reuters journalist — and friend of the Canary — Issam Abdallah, and wounded six others.
The targeting of journalists represents a dangerous escalation and a potential precursor to a renewed invasion by the terror state.
Featured image via the Canary
By Skwawkbox
Outsourced cleaners will strike alongside a protest at Transport for London's (TfL) Board meeting on 4 February. This will increase pressure on mayor Sadiq Khan over outsourcing and democratic control of the capital's transport system.
Outsourcing cleanersThe protest, starting at 9.30am at City Hall, Kamal Chunchie Way, London E16 1ZE, comes amid ongoing strike action by outsourced cleaners on the Docklands Light Railway (DLR) employed by contractor Bidvest Noonan, who are in dispute over company sick pay.
The RMT says cleaners have been told that sick pay would only be considered in extremely limited circumstances, such as terminal illness, which the union branded an insult.
The union says the dispute is a direct consequence of TfL's outsourcing model. This allows private contractors to drive down terms and conditions while TfL and the Mayor distance themselves from responsibility.
At the same time, TfL has awarded a new five-year cleaning contract covering more than 2,000 workers to outsourcing giant Mitie, despite Khan previously stating his support for bringing cleaners back in-house.
The RMT says the decision demonstrates that the mayor of London is allowing TfL pursue private corporate interests, overriding both democratic accountability and the interests of workers and passengers.
RMT General Secretary Eddie Dempsey said:
The upcoming strike action by DLR cleaners' lays bare the cruel reality of outsourcing where frontline workers are treated with contempt by ruthless contractors.
The Mayor cannot wash his hands of responsibility in this matter. He must follow through on the commitments he made to our union that he would end outsourcing.
The protest on 4 February is about linking these disputes directly to the political decisions that are at the heart of this super exploitation of outsourced workers.
Democratic control must be wrestled back from TfL bosses and the Mayor needs to act on his mandate given to him by the electorate to run the transport system in the public interest.
The union is calling on the Mayor to terminate the Mitie contract and publish an urgent timetable for the early insourcing of all TfL cleaners.
Featured image via the Canary
By The Canary
Tory-aligned toilet paper The Spectator has published a column from long-time anti-Irish bigot Julie Burchill, in which she characterises the country as a backwater populated by the "simple-minded", Nazi sympathisers and antisemites.
The column's main thrust is a vacuous interest in celebrity attachment to Ireland. Burchill expresses amazement at the likes of Steve Coogan and Daniel Day-Lewis embracing their Irish heritage. Coogan points out that:
…if I get captured by ISIS, I'm less likely to get my head chopped off with an Irish passport than a British one.
An Irish passport does indeed make you safer in many parts of the world compared to a British one. This is because — unlike the British — the Irish didn't have an empire that went round conducting horrifying acts of mass murder and robbery across the world. Burchill doesn't seem inclined to reflect that, in a Britain veering towards colonial nostalgia, this might make Ireland a more attractive place to identify with.
Confusing anti-Zionism and antisemitismAs for Day-Lewis, Burchill is especially shocked, pondering why a man "of Jewish origin" would have any attachment to the still British-occupied island. While Burchill seems to be aware of the actor having a Jewish mother, she apparently doesn't know about his Irish father, which makes his time spent in Ireland less of a mystery.
In further 'help' Jewish people likely don't need or want, Burchill goes on to incorrectly characterise the word 'diaspora' as "traditionally Jewish" despite it being of Greek origin. She bemoans "every Tom, Dick and Paddy" now supposedly using the term. 'Paddy' is typically considered a slur when used to reference Irish people in general.
She compounds this by conflating antisemitism and anti-Zionism, quoting "great investigative reporter David Collier" who says:
The spread of anti-Semitism throughout the Irish mainstream is clearly worse than in almost any other Western nation.
Collier reveals his real concern, bemoaning an obsession with "attacking Israel and Zionism". No actual evidence of antisemitism is provided by Burchill.
She goes on to claim — again without supporting material — that:
The Irish establishment - including the artistic establishment like Kneecap - have always had a thing about the Jews.
Placing Hezbollah-flag-waving Kneecap among the genocide-backing Irish establishment is an interesting analysis, but not a very accurate one. The only recent case of antisemitism in the Irish ruling class is the endorsement of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, though this is something the likes of Burchill have typically backed. Its problematic character lies in suggesting criticism of 'Israel' is antisemitic, thereby tying Jewish people in general to a genocidal land theft project.
Full-throated embrace of classic anti-Irish bigotryBurchill really enters full-on racist mode shortly afterwards, characterising her targets as "simple-minded". Racist notions of Irish stupidity are the archetypal form of anti-Irish bigotry, perhaps alongside smears about fighting and drinking. The column doubles down on this by classing musician Ed Sheeran as "half half-wit and quarter cretin" for identifying "culturally as Irish".
Burchill has previous for this sort of shite, when in 2002 a social worker at the London Irish Centre reported her to police for incitement to racial hatred following a Guardian column. In that instance, the bile-filled writer again didn't seem capable of differentiating between Irish people in general and the nation's religious and political ruling class, as she railed against:
…compulsory child molestation by the national church, total discrimination against women who wish to be priests, aiding and abetting Herr Hitler in his hour of need, and outlawing abortion and divorce.
She went on to rant about the:
…Hitler-licking, altarboy-molesting, abortion-banning Irish tricolour
Going even further back, there's evidence that this is all motivated by sectarianism. In 1984, the vile witch declared:
The Spectator has done this beforeI hate the Irish, I think they're appalling, I like the Northern Irish Protestants because they're so brave. I know they're ugly, but that's not their fault. I hate the IRA, they're morons their methods have much more in common with the death squads than with genuine liberation armies like the Basques.
If there's one thing the world doesn't need it's another Catholic country. Catholic countries are so stupid and ignorant.
The Spectator has a history of publishing grotesque columns, famously including one entitled "In praise of the Wehrmacht" on D-Day in 2018. The hateful hack haven has a long history of Islamophobia, especially from Rod Liddle. He has described Islam as "liberal, vindictive and frankly fascistic". As the Conservatives were being accused of harbouring anti-Islam attitudes, he said:
My own view is that there is not nearly enough Islamophobia within the Tory party.
That Burchill's column can be published in the Spectator in 2026 shows that, alongside Islamophobia, anti-Irish bigotry remains an acceptable form of prejudice in Britain. While a younger generation looks critically at the country's past and embraces the radical messaging coming from the likes of Kneecap, the slow demise of those who live forever in 1943 and long for old racial hierarchies prevents genuine national renewal.
Britain no longer has a fraction of its former power. Rather than a return to former 'glories', the continued embrace of old racist notions simply increases the chances of old colonial injustices being revisited upon the metropole.
Featured image via Twitter
Reform UK has announced a new policy to 'defend our troops'. In reality, they want to play on the fears of elderly veterans, while attacking the rule of law. Using a tried-and-tested Tory trope, the far-right party said it will prevent past and future prosecutions of armed forces personnel if elected.
Reform's head of policy Zia Yusuf posted the plans on X on 26 January. He said a Reform government would grant immunity to all current and former personnel, create a bar on prosecutions and pardon veterans. Yusuf also promised to leave the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and the International Criminal Court (ICC):
Today, launching Veterans for Reform, @Nigel_Farage announces that a Reform government will:
1) grant immunity from prosecution for all our armed forces for actions during combat operations, they may only be prosecuted if the Defence Secretary expressly authorises it.
2) use a…
— Zia Yusuf (@ZiaYusufUK) January 26, 2026
An hour later he posted again to expand on the policy. In a short video he specified that veterans were under attack by "foreign courts" and a "treacherous political class". He said elderly veterans were being hounded while Irish Republican Army (IRA) terrorists "walk free":
Important policy announcement:
Reform will end the persecution of our brave warriors.
British soldiers past, present and future: Reform UK has your back.
Activists staged a sit-in at the London offices of Metals Exploration PLC on 26 January. This was in protest of human rights violations and environmental destruction linked to its subsidiary, Woggle Corporation, a British-owned mining company operating in the Philippines.
Interestingly, in September 2025, Metals Exploration PLC listed its largest single shareholder as Reform UK treasurer Nick Candy.
The protest condemns the escalating repression faced by farming and Indigenous communities in Dupax del Norte, Nueva Vizcaya, where residents are resisting Woggle Corporation's mining exploration.
Violence inflicted by mining company goons at Dupax Del NorteWoggle Corporation has been linked to the violent arrest and repression of local farmers and indigenous peoples opposing its mining exploration. In June 2025, Woggle Corporation obtained an exploration permit covering 3,100 hectares, the equivalent to approximately 4,000 football fields.
ICHRP Britain is leading the British Mining Out of the Philippines campaign along with London-Philippine Solidarity and others in a growing campaign coalition.
Helen Brewer from ICHRP Britain says:
The situation in Dupax del Norte is emblematic of the Filipino people's long history of resisting foreign mining giants in the country. ICHRP Britain condemns these vicious attacks and stands in solidarity with the Filipino people's rightful defence of land, livelihood and community.
Sam Martin from LPS says:
We have staged this sit in to bring the struggle of the people of Dupax Del Norte against Woggle Corporation to its parent company Metals Exploration PLC, based right here in London. I met with Florentino and other land defenders in Dupax Del Norte in September when we visited the community.
When I was there, one thing was clear, the people of Dupax Del Norte - indigenous people, land defenders, farmers, women and young people alike - are steadfast in opposing mining on their lands. In the face of such overwhelming resistance, the only thing left to do for a British company like Woggle is to down tools and go home.
We want to show the people of Dupax Del Norte that we stand with them - while you fight Woggle there, we'll fight them here.
The Philippines is the fifth most mineral-rich country in the world and remains the deadliest country in Asia for land and environmental defenders. Foreign mining companies aggressively target the country, while local communities bear the brunt of environmental harm and destruction caused by extraction.
Mining operations in the Philippines have a long association with deforestation, watershed destruction, loss of livelihoods, and disasters worsened by climate change.
People's barricade and resistanceIn September 2025, residents of Dupax del Norte established a physical barricade to prevent the entry of mining equipment into their communities and deforestation. On 23 January, representatives from Woggle Corporation and more than 300 members of the Philippines National Police (PNP) and SWAT units violently dispersed and arrested several land and environmental defenders.
Florentino Daynos, a resident and local anti-mining community leader arrested in the raid, said:
Why are we fighting against mining? Because it is a battle for the next generation to come. This battle is not only about our livelihoods, but about life. This battle is about our children, and our children's children.
Local government bodies and community organisations are calling for the revocation of Woggle Corporation's exploration permit and an immediate halt to mining operations in the area.
Featured image supplied
By The Canary
