Byline Times Audio Articles

Support Our Mission

Read Our Latest Edition

BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen

Russia is reportedly preparing to strike Ukraine's water and electrical infrastructure this winter, as the war stalls, Russian casualties mount and more of its jet-powered drones and ballistic missiles get through Ukraine's defences. If Russia faces no meaningful consequences, Ukraine could target the water systems around Moscow and Saint Petersburg, and the US could be tempted to try the same tactic on Iran.

The New York Times is reporting that Russia will focus on destroying Ukraine's energy and water infrastructure over the winter using long-range strikes with ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and one-way jet-powered attack drones. Attacking electrical infrastructure over the winter is nothing new: Russia has done it every winter since the conflict started. Targeting water infrastructure, however, is new. Crossing that line represents an escalation that could have broader global implications.

Over the past year Russia and Ukraine have increasingly attacked each other's infrastructure. Ukraine has targeted the Russian petroleum industry and commercial equivalents to Amazon with massive numbers of propeller-driven drones. By spring of 2026, Ukraine was producing enough of these drones that it could send more to Russia per month than Russia was able to send into Ukraine.

Ukraine has also become highly proficient at shooting down similar Russian-made drones, defeating roughly 90% of them. Ukraine is doing it cheaply too, using electronic warfare and a wide variety of small interceptor drones.

Russia responded by moving away from slower propeller-powered drones to slightly more expensive jet-powered drones (e.g. Geran 4, Geran 5, Banderol), along with very expensive ballistic missiles (e.g. Iskander-M), and expensive supersonic cruise missiles such as the Oniks and Zircon.

Despite Russia firing a smaller number of munitions, more of them are getting through. Ukraine has mostly been cut off from the Patriot missiles needed to deal with ballistic and supersonic targets, and has been scrambling to develop cheap, fast interceptor drones to counter Russian jet-powered drones. As a result, up to 45% of the jet-powered drones are hitting their targets, along with most of the ballistic and supersonic munitions.

There are signs that Ukrainian efforts to counter jet-powered drones are bringing the success rate up. Ukraine is developing its own system (called Freyja) to counter ballistic missiles and supersonic cruise missiles, and getting a licence to build Patriot PAC-3s, but mass production of both is likely years away.

As a result, Ukraine is successfully overwhelming Russian air defence systems with cheap drones. It has put 51% of Russia's oil refining capacity out of commission and effectively driven Russia's equivalents of Amazon (Wildberries and Ozon) into deep financial distress.

Similarly, Russia is able to strike high-value static targets in Ukraine with relative ease for the foreseeable future using supersonic and ballistic missiles. It is also increasingly able to hit moving targets, such as trains and trucks, deep inside Ukraine.

Paul Niland reports from Kyiv as the city comes under attack from Putin's new strategy of 'psychological terrorism'

Paul Niland

Ukraine has been trying to prepare its infrastructure for the upcoming winter war, but it will be difficult in an environment where Russia can strike at will. Russia has had this advantage to some extent in years past; its efforts to leave Ukrainians cold and in the dark without electricity during the winter were often successful. It managed to cut Ukrainian electrical capacity in half compared to pre-war output.

However, Russia's calculation that heaping misery on Ukrainian civilians would compel the country to capitulate to Russia's extreme demands was wrong. Russian efforts to force an unfair peace, supported by US President Donald Trump, remain unsuccessfu...

Support Our Mission

Read Our Latest Edition

BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen

The Green Party overhauled its policies on the UK's media at its conference last weekend, in a largely ignored move towards a radically-toughened stance on the press.

The party's previous policy committed the Green Party to "campaign to restrict ownership so that no individual or company owns more than 20% of a media market".

However, the new policy drops this wording, instead "limiting ownership of the press to 20% maximum for any one company and requiring divestment for companies with larger market shares".

Owners of more than 10% of the market would also need "a licence to operate in the UK granted by the regulator", with further obligations "such as the use of profits to fund local media, or introducing a public service media element to operations". That could see the likes of the Daily Mail's owner DMGT and Murdoch's News UK forced to fund smaller, rival publishers.

DMGT held 50.6% of daily national print circulation, according to the Government's January 2026 letter on its bid to buy the Telegraph. Under a 20% cap it would have to shed well over half its share. It is not clear whether 'the market' means revenue or, for print outlets, circulation.

The old cap applied to any "media market", print or broadcast. The new one applies to "the press", with broadcasters facing only a "presumption against aggregation of ownership both within and across media types", likely protecting public service broadcasters such as the BBC and Channel 4.

SIGN UP TO EMAIL UPDATES

The chapter also says co-operative and other democratic ownership models "may be mandatory for larger (financial/employment) platforms and organisations", raising the prospect of enforced co-operative ownership of titles such as The Sun.

Media organisations would only be allowed to platform the work of think tanks that are "transparent about their funding", in a move that could hit the think tanks rated least transparent, which are largely on the right.

The old policy committed the party to extending broadcast regulator Ofcom's powers to "take on statutory responsibility and regulation for matters relating to print media". The new text does not mention Ofcom, but goes further: "The Green Party will seek for independent, statutory regulation of all Cultural, Sporting and Media activity."

The policy defines culture as including everything from poetry to digital gaming, music, theatre and dance, adding that "this is not an exhaustive list".

Currently the press is 'self-regulated', mostly through Ipso and the smaller rival regulator Impress (of which Byline Times is a member). Publishers do not have to belong to any regulator, and the main incentive to join one proposed after the Leveson inquiry – costs penalties for publishers outside a recognised regulator – was repealed in 2024 without ever coming into force.

Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account.

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe.

Regulators would have to "ensure their members and chairs are democratically, inclusively and fairly elected, and independent from industry and Government". The old text named trade unions and NGOs among those who would nominate members. The new text sets out no electorate.

Regulators must now give social and cultural concerns "greater weight than commercial factors", up from "equal weight". Money from penalties would go to "the most local endeavours possible" in each industry, such as hyper-local news outlets.

The party would also introduce "a levy on large international social media corporations operating in the UK" to fund local and independent journalism, including new 'local news forums'. These forums would hold the BB...

Support Our Mission

Read Our Latest Edition

BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen

When US and Israeli forces attacked Iran on February 28th, conventional financial markets were largely closed for the weekend. But on Polymarket, an American cryptocurrency-based prediction market where users bet on future events, trading continued.

And in the hour before the first strikes, something unusual happened.

Between 05:00 and 06:00 UTC, large volumes of money flowed into bets predicting imminent US and Israeli attacks on Iran. The strikes began at 06:15 UTC, just 15 minutes after that trading window ended.

Polymarket is a cryptocurrency-based prediction market in which users buy and sell shares tied to the outcome of future events, ranging from elections and interest rates to sporting results and military action.

All markets are framed as binary questions, with "Yes" and "No" shares trading between $0 and $1.

That price is meant to reflect the market's estimate of the probability of an outcome. So, a "Yes" share trading at $0.20, for example, means the better believes there is roughly a 20% chance of the event occurring. Traders deal with one another rather than betting against a bookmaker, and they can sell their positions before the event is decided. Once a market is resolved, winning shares pay out $1 while losing shares become worthless. Trading is conducted using the dollar-pegged cryptocurrency USDC.

It can make people small fortunes. Some traders who prematurely backed the likelihood of a US or Israeli attack on Iran went on to make tens of thousands of dollars. Across the markets examined by the London-based charity Action on Armed Violence (AOAV), positions taken around this period generated potential returns running into hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The trading itself does not prove that the betters possessed advanced knowledge of the military operation. But the timing, scale and concentration of bets among some newly created or lightly used accounts raise significant questions about what certain traders knew before the attacks began.

The US-Iran war has since claimed at least 268 civilian lives.

The attacks marked a major escalation in the US-Israel confrontation with Iran. American and Israeli forces struck targets across Iran, including Tehran, with Washington saying the operation was aimed at Iran's nuclear, ballistic-missile and military capabilities. Iran retaliated with missile and drone attacks against Israel and US-linked targets across the region. It followed the 12-day Israel-Iran war of June 2025 and has since developed into a prolonged regional confrontation.

In total, the US-Iran bombing war reportedly claimed at least 268 civilian lives, according to the NGO monitoring body Airwars.

The pattern of betting on military action that was as-yet-unkown to the public can be seen across several Polymarket contracts linked to military action against Iran.

In the market 'US Strikes Iran by 28 February, 2026?', the number of 'yes' shares bought between 05:00 and 06:00 UTC, the hour before the bombing started, shot up by some 313% compared to the previous hour.

The movement in the bets on Israel bombing Iran was considerably larger.

In 'Israel Strikes Iran by 28 February', those purchases of 'yes' shares increased by almost 1,600% (from 2,626 shares to 44,411) in the hour slot preceding the attacks.

Fifteen minutes later, the bombs began to fall.

Across the two markets, the average price of 'yes' shares during the surge was between $0.19 and $0.21. Each winning share was subsequently redeemed for $1.

The shares bought during that pre-strike period would ultimately be worth about $799,420.

At prevailing prices, some positions taken during the surge stood to return as much as 500% of the bet if the bet was held until the markets resolved, which was when Polymarket deemed the US and Israel had launched an attack on Iran at UTC 9:30:47 and UTC 9:14:55 UTC respectively.

For individual traders,...

Support Our Mission

Read Our Latest Edition

BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen

After fear-mongering for years about Ukrainian biolabs, Russia is now the culprit behind a possible plague outbreak that has left at least one person dead and hundreds of others being monitored for the deadly disease.

On Friday, a lab worker in a region of Siberia called Irkutsk was confirmed to have died of pneumonia after reportedly telling medical staff at the hospital that she had inadvertently broken a test tube containing plague bacteria while working at an anti-plague institute. She was hospitalised last Tuesday and died on Thursday, according to The Moscow Times.

The hospital where she died was placed under quarantine, and nearly 200 people with whom she had contact were reportedly placed in medical isolation to be monitored for signs of the disease. Moscow has also reportedly been put on "plague alert" and is following protocols for an "emergency sanitary regime."

The plague is caused by a bacterium called Yersinia pestis, which circulates among some wild mammals and their fleas. People can become infected through contact with fleas or infected tissue, or in this case, through direct exposure to the live bacteria.

Once a person contracts the disease, it can spread to others through exposure to respiratory particles. The World Health Organisation (WHO) recorded 3,860 suspected cases of plague and 423 deaths worldwide from 2019 through 2025, most of which came from the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Madagascar.

Both pro-Kremlin and opposition media in Russia have reported that the lab worker, a 28-year-old woman named Darya Shipilova, died from pneumonic plague following exposure to the bacteria in a research institute. Local government officials have also confirmed parts of the story.

As one of her last moves as head of the US intelligence community,Tulsi Gabbard propped up a Russian disinformation campaign that was used by the Kremlin to justify its illegal invasion of Ukraine four years ago

Caroline Orr Bueno

Despite these reports, Russian authorities are denying that there was a lab accident and say the woman died of "pneumonia of unknown aetiology." But given Russia's history of engaging in cover-ups and secrecy, there is reason to doubt the government's story.

Furthermore, some Russian media outlets and Russian officials are deleting earlier reports about a potential plague outbreak, raising even more questions about a possible cover-up by the Kremlin. Meanwhile, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov is demanding that the public "ignore different rumours" and that journalists stick to official statements.

Locals who live near the location of the laboratory are reportedly "outraged" by the lack of information they're receiving from the government and have begun to panic.

Even though the Kremlin is trying to downplay the incident, the situation on the ground suggests something far more serious is going on, with lab employees and contacts of Shipilova placed under mandatory quarantine and some even reportedly escorted by the FSB to isolation centres.

On Tuesday, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio called on Russia to be more "transparent" about the lab worker's death and any potential risks associated with the reported lab accident.

"I think it's incumbent upon Russia to obviously share more information with the world," Rubio added.

Russia has good reason to be sensitive about this topic, though. When Russia invaded Ukraine in early 2022, it justified its military aggression by claiming that Ukrainian biolabs near the border posed an existential threat to Russia and needed to be destroyed.

The Kremlin spent the next several years spreading conspiracy theories about the biological laboratories, saying that Ukraine was weaponising deadly pathogens and preparing for a biological attack on Russia.

Acknowledging that a deadly bacterium like the plague had escaped from one of its own laboratories would expose...

Support Our Mission

Read Our Latest Edition

BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen

A Byline Times review of Dr Nathan Cofnas' social media output has found that he posted comments about "Jewish IQ", racial purity and miscegenation that appear to be racist and antisemitic, and shared an essay arguing that the "emptying" of Gaza should be seen as "a realistic option".

Cofnas, a postdoctoral researcher at Ghent University in Belgium, published a Substack article in July 2026 that accused Professor Jason Arday of plagiarism and "academic fraud" and implied that Arday had invented aspects of his personal biography. The piece set off weeks of media coverage of Arday, Cambridge University's youngest black professor, who resigned on 5 August and was found dead on 14 August.

Cofnas' posts on Facebook and X could undercut his claims to be engaged in academic inquiry into the role of race and IQ in society. They also raise serious questions about why the media took their cues and framing on Arday from Cofnas despite his objectionable views.

In one post about Jewish IQ in August 2024, Cofnas approvingly cited the work of "Nazi psychologists" who "acknowledged Jewish intelligence". In other posts, Cofnas complained about how "sh*tlibs" in Israel were facilitating "nonwhite immigration" into the country. He also dismissed a "huge %… of US Jews" as Mischlings, a derogatory German term meaning 'mixling' or half-breed that was adopted as a legal term by the Nazis to describe individuals with mixed Jewish and Aryan ancestry. Cofnas is Jewish.

Cofnas was suspended by Ghent University on 20 August, six days after Arday's death. In a post to X, Cofnas said the university was investigating him "for discriminating against Arday".

However, Ghent lifted the suspension after the Trump administration intervened publicly on Cofnas' behalf.

The day after the suspension, the US Ambassador to Belgium, Bill White, publicly condemned it in a lengthy post on X. White said it was an exercise in "scapegoating" and "punish[ed]" Cofnas' "accurate journalism unearthing academic dishonesty". "Dishonest, corrupt institutions that engage in, or reward, scapegoating mob behaviour are not desirable partners for us," White said.

White announced that the US Government would be "reviewing any relationships we have with Ghent University". Public records show that the US Department of Defense funded research projects at Ghent valued at $869,000. His post was shared by Elon Musk, who responded with an American flag emoji.

On 27 August, Cofnas posted to X that Ghent's rector, Petra De Sutter, had allowed him to "stay". He said he wished to "personally thank" White, citing White's "great support which helped bring about a just outcome. I am proud of my country." The university also clarified that Cofnas' case remained under disciplinary investigation, and that he would be barred from teaching and required to work remotely for three months.

Byline Times has discovered that Cofnas' claims against Arday were either flatly incorrect or seriously dubious. Cofnas, for instance, questioned Arday's claim to have run 30 marathons in 30 days, but evidence from the time, since unearthed, suggest that Arday did.

Byline Times has also shown how media coverage of allegations of plagiarism were heavily skewed and ignored the possibility raised by several academic observers that they may have resulted from unintentional errors.

Cofnas was dismissed from Emmanuel College at Cambridge in July 2024 after he published a blog post, 'A Guide for the Hereditarian Revolution', that argued for "anti-woke" politics and said "there must be some barriers set up between races in order for each one to express its own unique genius". Cofnas has denied advocating racial segregation.

Cofnas is a prolific poster online, including on X and Facebook. A review of his Facebook, in particular, reveals that Cofnas has posted inflammatory and bizarre commentary about Jewish IQ, racial pur...

Support Our Mission

Read Our Latest Edition

BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen

Andy Burnham should use his National Commission on Electoral Reform to launch a conversation on making voting compulsory, experts have suggested.

The Prime Minister announced the plans – which are set to endorse a new voting system for Westminster elections – in his Labour conference speech in Liverpool last week.

Now backers of compulsory voting say it is an opportunity to end low turnout in Britain. In doing so, they say he could drastically close the gap between the power of the high-turnout wealthiest voters, and the poorest who stay at home in disproportionate numbers.

It would also, a new report argues, help end the imbalance in voter power between generations, as older voters turn out in high numbers and younger voters sit out elections in far larger numbers.

Andrew Blick, Professor of Politics and Contemporary History at King's College London, believes any reform to the system Brits use to vote "must include measures aimed at increasing electoral turnout".

Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account.

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe.

"If we simply change how voters cast their ballot instead of who casts their ballot, we risk failing to maximise the possible gains for a fairer society," Professor Blick said.

Will Snell, chief executive of the Fairness Foundation, agrees, arguing the Prime Minister is right to "acknowledge that there is a fundamental issue of inequality in our electoral system".

"If you are poor, you're less likely to vote and less likely to be the focus of politicians' concerns.

"That's why any major review of our electoral system cannot be limited to discussions around systems and processes, but must be about the importance of who votes."

Charles White, from the Campaign for Compulsory Voting, said the National Commission "cannot just be about how people vote, but who votes".

"We need to address our country's woeful turnout, and the only tried-and-tested solution in a democracy is the Australian model of compulsory voting."

And Dr Nick Garland from the progressive think tank IPPR also joined the calls, saying democratic change is "essential": "The national commission is an opportunity for a debate about our democracy more widely." He believes it could also be an "opportunity to tackle our low and unequal turnout through an Australian-style compulsory voting system".

This week a report added extra weight to their calls – and it may be read with interest in Labour HQ.

Adopting compulsory voting would, according to new Fairness Foundation analysis, sidestep some of the political costs of amending the pensions triple lock. Pensioners are now less likely to be in poverty than the rest of the population, and half as likely as children. Pensioners are also far more likely to vote than younger people.

While pensions rise by the highest of average earnings, inflation or 2.5% every year – there is no annual uplift at all for Local Housing Allowance or the benefit cap. Universal Credit elements like child, carer and work allowances are reviewed annually at ministers' discretion, alongside Jobseeker's Allowance, Employment and Support Allowance, income support and housing benefit personal allowances. In effect, they have a weak 'single lock', in pension terms.

Writing in the report, crossbench peer Baroness Polly Neate, former CEO of Shelter, says compulsory voting "would give Burnham the political cover and popular support to deliver" the changes he announced in his speech.

SIGN UP TO EMAIL UPDATES

"The people most likely to back reform, including younger voters, would be at the ballot box to reward a government that took on intergenerational inequa...

Support Our Mission

Read Our Latest Edition

BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen

When Israel launched its ferocious bombardment of Gaza within 48 hours of Hamas's massacre, few, even of those who were alarmed, took seriously the charge of emerging genocide, which I made in Byline Times on 13 October 2023. This was despite Israeli leaders having proclaimed their genocidal intentions from the rooftops within hours of the attacks.

Israeli language that was soon catalogued by South Africa's lawyers in their case in the International Court of Justice and was quoted by the Court itself in January 2024, when it found a 'plausible risk' of genocide and warned Israel not to commit it. This effectively triggered the duty on all signatory states of the Genocide Convention to 'prevent and punish' the crime.

Yet despite this, denial remained pervasive. It took two years for 'genocide' to become the consensus verdict of informed and public opinion, and even longer for policymakers to catch up.

Israel appears to be seeking collective punishment for Hamas atrocities, and this is not self-defense under international law

Martin Shaw

Today, some of them — especially in the UK's new Government — are acknowledging Israel's crimes, but they still deny genocide. This article examines this journey and argues that the new mix of recognition and denial still protects Israel and blocks radical action to end the genocide.

Few Governments — certainly, not the UK's — responded to the ICJ's 2024 judgement. Nor did many media and cultural institutions take it as a signal to take genocide seriously. Most politicians and media not only denied that Israel was committing it, but actively suppressed any mention of the word, cancelled those who used it and accused them of antisemitism.

In the UK, 'genocide' was largely banned, not only by the BBC — which has interviewed me once in these three years, on Radio Ulster, even as I have fielded queries from the world's press — but also in 2023-24 by the Guardian, where the word was confined to rare opinion pieces by people who could boast impeccable Jewish credentials.

Many who were horrified by Israel's actions were confused in this period. They had not thought much of the definition of genocide, wrongly identifying it with the mass extermination of the Holocaust — which according to the Genocide Convention (as well as experts) is only one of numerous forms that genocide may take. Many also felt that to accuse the state which claims to represent the archetypal victims of itself committing genocide was a step not to be taken lightly.

Yet beneath this suppression and confusion, a genuine debate bubbled up. Israel's obviously deliberate destruction of civilian lives and Palestinian society could not be dismissed as 'collateral damage' from urban warfare — in 2026, the Israeli military's abbreviation for this, 'Naza', has become notorious as the title of a devastating new film.

EXCLUSIVE

Peter Oborne reports from East Jerusalem on last night's deadly attack on an Anglican-run hospital in Gaza

Peter Oborne

As 2024 wore on, most experts came round to the genocide verdict. The Israeli-American Holocaust historian, Omer Bartov, symbolised this movement. 'I resisted the conclusion for as long as possible', he later wrote, but by June he was convinced. A similar shift took place in the human rights world. That November, Amnesty International published what is still one of the best evidenced, legally argued, and most accessible statements of the genocide case.

Meanwhile, the International Criminal Court indicted Benjamin Netanyahu for crimes against humanity and war crimes. Although it did not bring genocide charges, it accused Israel of a 'wholesale attack' on the Palestinian civilian population — language that evoked genocide. It was enough for the US right wing to try to destroy the ICC.

In mid-2025, the floodgates opened for genocide recognition, after an emboldened Netanyahu abandoned a major...

Support Our Mission

Read Our Latest Edition

BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen

The Conservatives' new policy to abolish the Future Homes Standard, which supports the installation of solar panels on new homes in England, will lock millions of people into reliance on fossil fuels for their energy needs, energy experts have warned.

Households are currently set to benefit from lower energy bills and warmer homes under a 'solar for all' package in England. The Future Homes Standard will effectively require solar panels on all new homes from 2028.

The MCS Foundation has calculated that mandatory renewables on newbuilds will save the average household £1,300 a year.

Under the new rules, solar panels will become all but mandatory for newbuild properties, covering at least 40% of floor area (to ensure developers don't just put on one or two token panels to meet the regulations).

Enhanced energy efficiency requirements will also mean cutting home carbon emissions by around three-quarters compared to one built to the 2013 Building Standards, slashing bills.

The Government says that the measures will make solar more accessible, including for renters, and cut energy costs for families. The Conservatives say it will crush housebuilding goals and drive up costs, announcing the plans at the party's conference this week in Birmingham.

Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account.

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe.

Byline Times has previously reported on the Conservatives' extensive financial ties to the fossil fuel industry, including donations made directly to leader Kemi Badenoch. In 2025 we found that Badenoch ditched the Conservative Party's longstanding support for reaching Net Zero by 2050 after taking donations from key funders of a climate science denial group which has campaigned against the target.

Friends of the Earth's senior campaigner, Sienna Somers, said: "The Conservatives' latest attempt to cling onto relevance by taking a sledgehammer to our climate commitments and environmental protection agencies would be laughable if it weren't so dangerous.

"The party is pitching its assault on environmental action as an offer to big business, which would give free rein to polluters. In the midst of a rapidly accelerating climate crisis this is clearly nonsensical."

Dr Ellie Chowns MP, the leader of the Green group in Parliament, said it was shocking that after the summer's wildfires and record temperatures, "the Tories have chosen this moment to make a bonfire of environmental standards, weaken climate protection, and abolish organisations charged with protecting nature".

"Scrapping the rules that secure affordable homes, built to high energy-efficiency and environmental standards is a gift to profiteering developers. It would leave millions of people unable to afford a home and facing higher costs and energy bills," Dr Chowns said.

And Craig Bennett, chief executive of The Wildlife Trusts, said the Conservative announcements would "do nothing to encourage growth or deliver development".

"Instead, they will expose the UK's economy to dangerous weather, the UK's food supplies to biodiversity collapse and UK homes to flooding and extreme heat," Bennett added.

SIGN UP TO EMAIL UPDATES

The Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit's head of energy, Jess Ralston, told Byline Times scrapping the Future Homes Standard would mean less certainty for thousands of small businesses across the country investing in the net zero technology boom, from insulation suppliers to solar panel and heat pump installers.

"It would also mean UK homes remaining dependent on gas for longer, which as the North Sea continues to decline irrespective of any new drilling, means greater reli...

Support Our Mission

Read Our Latest Edition

BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen

Who knows what lay behind Andy Burnham's surprise announcement last week that he would soon be setting out options for a new long-term relationship between Britain and the European Union.

Was it part of some cunning plan to reverse Brexit, or was he winging it? It's hard to know with this prime minister. What is clear is that, whether he realises it or not, the logical endpoint of the debate he has started is a manifesto pledge to "go all the way" and rejoin.

After all, having declared that the current Brexit settlement, negotiated by Boris Johnson, is "not good enough" and has done "more harm than good", he can hardly advocate for the status quo.

In any case, the status quo is not an option because, as Brexiteers used to be fond of telling us, Brexit is a process, not an event – and it is a process that is going to become inexorably worse for Britain as time passes. Indeed, it may be this realisation that led the prime minister to surprise his own cabinet with his decision to reopen the European question.

Not only had the limited reset initiated by Keir Starmer, designed to "make Brexit work" run out of road after securing only modest advances, stymied by Labour's current red lines. But the entire process was in danger of being derailed by a row over the EU's new "Made in Europe" provisions designed to protect the bloc's autonomy and boost its resilience in the face of Chinese mercantilism, Russian aggression and US coercion.

EXCLUSIVE

Ten years and six prime ministers on, Byline Times looks at the fate of Brexit's most prominent media cheerleaders

Byline Times Team

Suddenly, being outside the bloc is becoming an uncomfortable place for Britain to be, particularly if, like Burnham, your goal is to boost the country's own resilience through reindustrialisation.

But the other options Burnham is considering don't work either. A customs union with the EU would ease some of the problems associated with the Made in Europe policy, but beyond this the economic benefits would be slight. They would also come at the expense of requiring Britain to follow EU trade policies without having a say over them: a lot of political pain for not much gain.

Rejoining the single market would bring much bigger benefits, but would turn Britain into even more of a rule-taker – including over the country's large financial services sector. That is not something any responsible British government could agree to.

So that leaves Rejoin. Could Burnham persuade the public to back it?

Much, of course, would depend on the terms. But Brexiteer scare stories claiming that Britain would be forced to join the Schengen travel zone or adopt the euro are surely wide of the mark. New members are committed to both in principle, but in practice, as Sweden's three decades outside the euro and Ireland's Schengen opt-out show, neither need happen without Britain's consent. The real risks lie elsewhere.

A backdrop of an EU in crisis, whether as a result of renewed market turmoil or the rise of the far right, would make rejoining a hard sell. Meanwhile, the biggest challenge could be persuading the EU that Britain was serious about rejoining and would not Brexit again.

Nonetheless, Burnham would start with some clear advantages. A megapoll undertaken by YouGov for Best for Britain found that only two per cent of voters think Brexit has been a great success, and only 29% think Britain was right to leave. Almost half of voters would back rejoining, rising to 65% of likely voters.

The rise of nationalism that followed Brexit has brought with it a concerted campaign to undermine our fundamental human rights, argues Daniel Sohege

Daniel Sohege

The poll also shows that Labour would be more likely to win a majority at the next election on a commitment to rejoin. Indeed, for all their bravado, neither Reform nor the Conservatives are likely to welcome the prospect of havi...

Support Our Mission

Read Our Latest Edition

BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen

The Reform UK Mayor of Basildon – who is also Essex County Council's Cabinet Member for Education, SEND and Skills – has had one of his companies struck off the official register after it failed to file legally required documents, while another has never filed accounts in more than six years.

On 29 September, Genesis Jewellery Ltd, a company Cllr Sam Journet co-owned and directed, was dissolved via compulsory strike-off by Companies House, the official registrar of companies.

Companies House does this when it has reason to believe a company is not carrying on business. It is nearly always triggered by overdue filings. Compulsory strike-off is an administrative step and is common for companies that are no longer used, but failing to file required documents is a criminal offence (albeit one that is rarely prosecuted).

The firm's confirmation statement – an annual filing confirming details including who owns and controls a company – was due by 28 March 2026. It was never filed. The company's only set of accounts, covering the year to 31 May 2025, records 'nil' on every financial line and no employees.

Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account.

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe.

Yet when Cllr Journet submitted a fresh register of interests to Basildon Council on 31 July – a fortnight after Companies House gave public notice that Genesis would be struck off – he listed it as a trade carried on "for profit or gain". That register was published on 21 September. Genesis appears in the same way on his Essex County Council register, where Cllr Journet is Cabinet Member for SEND and Education following a Reform victory in May.

The same Basildon register declares "None" for shareholdings ("securities", in the register's terms). His Essex register, by contrast, declares shareholdings in all three of his companies. Companies House records him as holding 75% or more of two of them, both with Basildon addresses. Basildon's register requires councillors to declare holdings in companies with a place of business or land in the borough, where the holding is worth more than £25,000 or exceeds one hundredth of the company's share capital.

Councillors' registers of interest are legally-required to be up to date within 28 days. Some of Cllr Journet's entries were added late. His August 2025 Basildon register said "None" to sponsorship and to land. Financial support from Reform UK and a land entry appeared only on the September 2026 version, 13 months later.

Reform has set its own standard on registers. In July 2025 it accused Cllr Gavin Callaghan, then Labour leader of the council, of failing to register a company within the 28-day limit, saying: "Failure to register or disclose within the statutory timeframe is a criminal offence… This matter is now with the police." The gap then was 36 days.

EXCLUSIVE

Essex police privately accepts device should have been taken from Reform Cllr Sam Journet rather than handed to a political ally

Josiah Mortimer

Cllr Journet still runs a jewellery shop, trading as Samuel Perry Jewellery, in Basildon's Eastgate shopping centre. His shop is a tenant of DVS GHL Basildon Ltd, the company that owns Eastgate, which Basildon Borough Council bought in July. The council says the shop is not a direct council tenant. His Essex register lists all three of his companies as renting county council-owned land, but his Basildon one does not.

His company Samuel Perry Jewellery Ltd also faced compulsory strike-off this year. Companies House published a strike-off notice on 17 March over accounts that had been due by 30 September 2025. The company filed them the next day...