Byline Times Audio Articles

Support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system

Packed with exclusive investigations, analysis, and features

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

The Government will scrap the use of First Past the Post in mayoral elections in England, in a surprise move as part of Labour's flagship devolution bill.

Under the English Devolution & Empowerment Bill - published today - the Supplementary Vote (SV) will be reinstated for Mayoral elections, replacing First Past the Post (FPTP) after just one electoral cycle. Byline Times was the first to report that the change was on the cards last December.

SV allows voters to list a second preference on the ballot paper. If their first choice doesn't command enough support, their second is used instead. It dramatically lowers the risk of 'spoiler' candidates splitting the vote, while backers say it also gives winners a stronger and more politically diverse mandate - as they must campaign for voters' second preferences as well as first.

The move has been welcomed by MPs and campaigners as recognition that First Past the Post is "not fit for purpose," and buoying hopes in some quarters that the Government may be more open minded about changing Westminster's voting system too.

ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE

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

PAY ANNUALLY - £39.50 A YEAR

PAY MONTHLY - £3.75 A MONTH

MORE OPTIONS

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.

The English Devolution and Empowerment Bill reverses the change made by the previous Conservative Government in 2022. Campaigners say the change to FPTP has resulted in mayors being elected on very small shares of the vote, undermining their democratic mandates and eroding trust in the political system. It was widely viewed as a way of boosting Conservative chances in Labour-dominated mayoralties, and criticised by Sadiq Khan and others as a form of electoral 'gerrymandering'.

In the last set of English mayoral elections held under the preferential (SV) system in 2021, all six positions were elected with the support of a majority of local voters.

But in the 2024 elections, the first such elections held since the introduction of First Past the Post, only five of the ten mayors elected received a majority of the vote.

And in this year's May elections, not one of the six winning candidates received a majority of the vote. In Cambridgeshire & Peterborough, Conservative Paul Bristow was elected with just 28% of the vote, while in the West of England, which saw a strong Green Party vote, Labour's Helen Godwin won with a mere 25%. In Hull & East Yorkshire, Reform won with 36% of the vote.

Electoral reform campaigners are calling the shift back to the two-preference system a "welcome recognition of the damage FPTP does to our democracy" - and a sign that the need for 'fair votes' is cutting through in Parliament.

It is a signal of "growing political recognition" that the winner-takes-all system is "not fit for purpose," pro-reform campaign Make Votes Matter said in a statement.

EXCLUSIVE

'Undemocratic' and Possible 'Gerrymandering': Voters Express Anger After First Past the Post Introduced for Mayoral and PCC Elections

The change to First Past the Post is expected to benefit Conservatives like Susan Hall, who might win fewer second preference votes than Labour

Josiah Mortimer

Alex Sobel MP, Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Fair Elections, said: "Since the Tories imposed First Past the Post on mayoral elections, it has failed to fairly represent voters, undermined the ability of mayors to speak for their whole communities, and therefore eroded trust in politics.

"By committing to changing this, the Government has wisely taken a step in the right direction - but First P...

Support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system

Packed with exclusive investigations, analysis, and features

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

Keir Starmer's Government should introduce "Australian-style" compulsory voting to combat the "disastrously low" voter turnout seen at the last UK general election, according to a new report.

The call from the Constitution Society comes amid an ongoing trend of reducing turnout at General Elections. The last General Election saw overall turnout of registered voters fall to 59.8%, a historic low.

But the "real" turnout, including those who could be on the electoral roll but are missing, was around 53%, according to the IPPR think tank.

The report argues that even these numbers mask "stark disparities" in turnout rates on the basis of class, race, age, and housing tenure.

The Constitution Society paper argues that disparities in electoral turnout are creating "warped incentives" for governments, which are pushed to prioritise the interests of higher-turnout demographics - often wealthier voters - over those of wider public.

"The consequences of these warped incentives are policies that contribute to high inequality and low economic growth," they say.

ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE

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

PAY ANNUALLY - £39.50 A YEAR

PAY MONTHLY - £3.75 A MONTH

MORE OPTIONS

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.

The result is that unequal turnout in elections "risks trapping British politics in a spiral of stagnation and discontent, ultimately threatening the long-term health of our democracy."

Compulsory voting would likely involve, as in Australia, a small fine - of around £10 - for not participating, which is waived if there is a valid excuse. In Australia, that leads to turnouts of 90% or more.

Backers of change quote the political scientist V.O. Key Jr. who said in 1949: "The blunt truth is that politicians and officials are under no compulsion to pay much heed to classes and groups of citizens that do not vote."

Data from Ipsos's UK Knowledge Panel suggests that turnout at the 2024 general election was:

13 percentage points higher amongst white people than amongst ethnic minorities

22 points higher amongst the highest social grades AB than amongst (more working class) social grades DE

34 points higher amongst those aged 65+ than amongst those aged 18-24

36 points higher amongst outright homeowners than amongst private and

social renters

And now YouGov polling, commissioned for the report, shows that a plurality of the public would support the introduction of compulsory voting. And a resounding majority, 72% of Brits, are worried about politicians ignoring the interests of groups that are less likely to vote, such as young people or working-class people.

Don't miss a story

SIGN UP TO EMAIL UPDATES

The report's author, Dr David Klemperer, said: "What this polling shows is that the public understand that our democracy is being undermined. Low and unequal turnout have left the UK with an unrepresentative electorate - one that is considerably richer, older, whiter, and more secure than the UK population as a whole. This has created warped incentives for politicians who are pushed to disproportionately prioritise the interests of an economically insulated minority."

Amidst the rise of populism, the report argues that low and unequal turnout are exacerbating dissatisfaction with democracy, by rewarding politicians for pursuing policies that contribute to high inequality and low economic growth. The report warns that the UK risks becoming trapped in "a vicious cycle of unequal turnout, economic stagnation, political disillusionment, and democratic decay - a cycle that is creating the conditions in whic...

Support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system

Packed with exclusive investigations, analysis, and features

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

Killing People

In the first wave of the Coronavirus pandemic in 2020, I interviewed an NHS nurse who told me that "people are being taken into hospitals and murdered".

Those in her profession were running "death camps" that were "no different" to those of "the Third Reich", Kate Shemirani said. "When I liken this to Auschwitz and the cattle trucks, you tell me the difference? I am science-led and I am law-led… I call it genocide".

At the time, some criticised Byline TV for giving Shemirani 'a platform' for her conspiracy theories. When challenged on her outlandish claims, she called me a "special snowflake". Admittedly, I found it difficult to know how to deal with such an interaction as a journalist. One viewer commented that I looked almost "frozen" while listening to her impenetrable monologues. The interview stayed with me for days afterwards. It was disturbing.

Byline TV decided to speak to Shemirani because, at the height of a public health emergency, her fringe views - and others like them - were spreading on social media. In the uncertainty and upset of lockdowns and socially-distanced deaths, people were in search of stabilisers. And Shemirani was already enjoying a platform that she used to speak directly to those questioning the chaos.

Legitimising her claims was, clearly, not the aim, but I wanted to hear what she had to say. Without bringing such conspiracist mindsets into wider view, and attempting to counter them, often to no avail, it is difficult to identify and understand what exactly is being claimed in the crevices of conspiracist social media communities - and why people are drawn towards them in the first place.

Often, the stock response to conspiracy mindsets like Kate Shermirani's is 'ignore them and they'll go away'. But, if the past few years have taught us anything, these conspiracist social media communities have flourished regardless.

Having declared the pandemic to be a hoax and vaccines part of a plan to kill people, Shemirani was struck off as a nurse in 2021. Now branding herself as "the natural nurse", she sells membership to her alternative health business.

For a time, her social media accounts were suspended over the promotion of misinformation. When Elon Musk took over the then Twitter, she was reinstated on what became X, as well as on Facebook.

"I see her as a public health issue rather than a close family relative" is how her son Sebastian Shemirani described his estranged relationship with his mother a year later when I interviewed him for Byline TV.

Arguing with her, according to Sebastian, simply had the effect of confirming - in her mind - that she was 'right'. It was not only unhelpful to engage with her thinking, he said, but harmful: when presented with challenging facts, she would double-down.

In all the discussions of our 'post-truth' age and social media platforms pumping out disinformation and misinformation, it is easy to overlook the cost of it all amid the personalities of those promoting these ideas. But there is always a cost: often, bit by bit, to our shared sense of any sort of collective reality; and, sometimes, suddenly and fatally to those who pay the ultimate price.

In June, a BBC Panorama investigation revealed that 23-year-old Cambridge University graduate Paloma Shemirani had died after refusing treatment for cancer.

Told by doctors that she had a high chance of survival with chemotherapy, she was dead seven months later. She was the daughter of Kate Shemirani.

Her older brother Sebastian, and her twin brother Gabriel Shemirani, blame their mother's anti-medicine conspiracy theories for their sister's death last year.

Instead of the medical treatment recommended, Paloma tried 'Gerson therapy' - a strict plant-based diet, supplements, juices, and coffee enemas - which some claim, without medical evidence...

Support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system

Packed with exclusive investigations, analysis, and features

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

July 11 is an international day of commemoration for the thirtieth anniversary of the Srebrenica Genocide, the largest mass killing in Europe since 1945. In mid-July 1995, over 8,000 Bosnian Muslim (Bosniak) men and boys were murdered by the VRS, the army of Republika Srpska (RS), the statelet which Bosnian-Serbian nationalists, in conjunction with the Serbian government, had carved out of Bosnia-Herzegovina during the previous three years.

The International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the United Nations and most states have now recognised Srebrenica as a genocide.

The RS leader, Radovan Karadžić, and VRS commander Ratko Mladić, who oversaw the massacre, are both serving life terms for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide, which include Srebrenica.

The Serbian leader Slobodan Milošević, who instigated the genocidal conquest of Bosnia in 1992 after a campaign in Croatia in 1991, was facing similar charges when he died in ICTY custody in 2006.

BREAKING

Reform UK Tells Prospective Candidates Who Failed Vetting to Reapply Under New 'Common Sense' Rules

Individuals previously blocked from standing for Nigel Farage's party have been told to reapply under new rules prioritising "freedom of expression"

Josiah Mortimer

Recognition and Denial

The international recognition of the "Srebrenica Genocide" appears to contrast with the denial of Israel's current genocide in Gaza. Yet Srebrenica was also comprehensively denied at the time and continues to be denied by Serbia.

Basic knowledge of the killings, the intention of Serbian leaders to execute so many people, and the extent of Western complicity, all had to be painstakingly exposed over many years. Karadžić and Mladić were on the run for a decade and a half before being caught in 2008 and 2011.

It was not only the international trials and the excavation of the victims' bodies (which the perpetrators had tried to hide) which has largely overcome the denial. The determined campaigning of women survivors has also played a crucial role; although women from Srebrenica were raped and murdered in 1995, most were bussed out while their menfolk, columns of whom tried to flee the Serbian forces, were hunted down and slaughtered - some in methodical executions after being forced to dig their own graves. The Mothers of Srebrenica have been fighting for justice ever since.

Equally, the Serbian nationalists were not the only ones responsible for the Srebrenica killings. In 1993, when Serbians were already threatening to overrun the town, in which thousands of Bosnian refugees were sheltering, the UN had proclaimed a "safe area" around it.

In 1995, a Dutch battalion, commanded by a multinational UN force based in the Bosnian capital, Sarajevo, was supposed to protect this. Yet when the VRS threatened to conquer the area, the UN failed to deploy sufficient force to prevent it.

It was Dutch peacekeepers who effectively handed over most of the men to the Serbians - causing national shame which later led the Netherlands Supreme Court to hold the state partially responsible for the killings - but Western governments, NATO commanders in Sarajevo and UN officials in New York were also to blame.

Srebrenica and the Denial of the Bosnian Genocide

While it is the 'Srebrenica Genocide' that is internationally recognised, the killings were the culmination of what most experts, including those at an international conference in Sarajevo last week, consider to be a larger Bosnian Genocide.

From April 1992, the Yugoslav National Army and paramilitary gangs, both under the effective control of Milošević's Serbia, conquered much of Bosnia and largely removed the non-Serb (Bosniak and Croat) populations from the areas they annexed, through massacres, terror, systematic rape and cruelty. M...

Support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system

Packed with exclusive investigations, analysis, and features

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

Keir Starmer's spokesman has declined to condemn Elon Musk's X after the site's official AI chatbot posted a series of antisemitic comments, which endorsed Hitler and appeared to call for a second holocaust.

The comments, which reportedly followed a change to the social media platform's 'Grok' service, led to global outcry, including a threat by Poland's Prime Minister to block the service in his country.

However, when asked if the UK Government plans to remain on the social media platform, Starmer's spokesman suggested that it was an "internal" matter for Musk's company.

"I haven't got a comment on that," the spokesman said, before adding that "obviously, X's internal safeguards are a matter for the company".

Lucy Connolly, Bob Vylan and the False Claims of a 'Two Tier Justice System'

Attempts to claim that the treatment of Lucy Connolly and Bob Vylan in any way demonstrate a "two tier" justice system are completely wide of the mark, argues barrister Gareth Roberts

Gareth Roberts

Asked by Byline Times whether the UK would follow Poland in threatening to block X following the comments, Starmer's spokesman replied that "that's a matter for the Polish Press Secretary."

The comments posted by Musk's 'Grok' service included repeated suggestions that people with Jewish surnames spread hate and a call to "round them up, strip rights, and eliminate the threat through camps and worse" in order to stop them from spreading "venom".

At one point the Grok account referred to itself as "MechaHitler" and in another apparent endorsement of the former German dictator, added that "Hitler would have called it out and crushed it."

Some of the comments were later deleted, with the company putting out a statement that, "We are aware of recent posts made by Grok and are actively working to remove the inappropriate posts. Since being made aware of the content, xAI has taken action to ban hate speech before Grok posts on X".

Downing Street has repeatedly refused to criticise the changes made to the X platform since Musk's purchase of the company and the Government has also refused to set up official accounts on other X alternatives, like Bluesky.

Their reluctance comes despite their recent condemnation of the BBC for showing chants calling for the death of the Israeli Defence Force, made by the punk group Bob Vylan at Glastonbury.

The Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy described the comments as "appalling and unacceptable" said that the incident demonstrated a "problem of leadership" at the BBC.

ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE

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

PAY ANNUALLY - £39.50 A YEAR

PAY MONTHLY - £3.75 A MONTH

MORE OPTIONS

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.

Support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system

Packed with exclusive investigations, analysis, and features

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

A detailed investigation into the murder of 1500 Alawites just over three months ago in Syria has concluded that the crimes were sanctioned by the country's new Islamist rulers, raising huge doubts about their declared commitment to a new democratic system and shattering any hope that they will be held accountable for their crimes.

The investigation by Reuters also raises awkward questions about the West's hurried decision to drop sanctions against Syria and to offer both trust and aid to those now accused of involvement in a heinous massacre.

To date, Syria's self-appointed interim president, Ahmed Al Sharaa, has managed to sidestep responsibility for his own past actions as a member of an Al Qaeda affiliate - but his ability to unite Syria's bewildering array of religious sects and cultural identities will have been seriously undermined by the latest revelations.

Western officials claim it is too late to withdraw support from Sharaa. As one European diplomat put it "there are no other candidates. We are stuck with Sharaa whether we like it or not".

"We need to engage gradually and with caution to help Syria move in the right direction. We cannot afford to see the process collapse."

For now, though, the process looks decidedly shaky.

The Decades-Long US-Israeli Plan for Regime Change in Iran Is Taking Shape

The recent attacks on Tehran are part of a long-standing plan by the US and Israel, argues Mel Frykberg

Mel Frykberg

Veteran Turkish ambassador Erdem Ozan, who left the foreign office at the end of 2024, says Al-Sharaa governs under a transitional declaration that grants broad executive authority but offers little in the way of checks and balances.

This, he explains, creates a hybrid regime based on more functional control than on legal authority

"Syria's path, " says Ozan, an expert on Syria, "indicates a mix of authoritarian control and selective pluralism. The ongoing selective violence and limited engagement with minority communities weaken his claims of national dialogue, alienating non-Sunni groups. Formal institutions like the transitional cabinet and justice committees are in place but public trust remains lacking."

"Sectarian violence, including over 1500 Alawite deaths, reveals an inability to restrain allied militias or deliver justice. His unilateral rise to the presidency and postponement of elections erode institutional trust. Failure to reconcile with Kurds, Druze and Alawites threatens national cohesion."

After 24 years of Bashar Assad's brutal regime, there were grand hopes for a period of truth and reconciliation.

But the report on the recent massacre highlights the fragility of the current situation.

Its conclusion that the killers' chain of command led to the capital Damascus could well re-ignite a whole raft of bitter, factional disputes in a country with a bewildering array of sects, religions and nationalities.

Minorities, which once allied with the Assad regime to survive, now fear persecution or exclusion in a country that may well be heading towards an authoritarian theocracy.

Many fear that Syria is on a knife edge, with few good outcomes in sight.

"They are not building a new country - a melting pot for all citizens regardless of their religious or ethnic identity," says Rayyan Maarouf, Chief Editor at Suwaida24.com, and member of the Druze community in southern Syria.

"They are pitting the Sunnis against the minorities who are turning against the new regime".

EXCLUSIVE

Cryptocurrency Loophole Could Allow Foreign Billionaires to Secretly Bankroll UK Political Parties

Anti-corruption campaigners warn of untraceable foreign interference, as Nigel Farage's party seeks big money crypto donations

Josiah Mortimer

Maarouf, who had to flee Syria to the West during the civil war says: "Regardless of the international support given to Sharaa by ...

Support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system

Packed with exclusive investigations, analysis, and features

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

The lead-up to the vote on the Government's welfare cuts - particularly to the Personal Independent Payment (PIP) - was a hellish time for me and, most likely, for many disabled people.

Even with a climb-down in the face of a backbench revolt that saw concessions made, including the dubious announcement that only new PIP claimants will be affected, it all leaves me wondering where we are.

What remains in the bill is changes to Universal Credit (UC), which is means-tested and will affect claimants who are currently seen as unfit for work. What does this say about our society? What do they want us to do? Why do they continue to consider us separate? We are entirely 'othered'.

There is a burdensome irony in the failure of successive governments to invest in actions which could reduce barriers and provide disabled people with the support that would make work environments equal and equitable. No disabled person imposes their own barriers - we merely endure those placed on us by uninterested non-disabled politicians.

Now the Welfare Bill has been passed, it highlights how we are condemned. A problem for someone else to deal with. Tied up with strings of resolute refusal to grasp the reality of what disability is. Yet again.

Non-Disabled People's Delusions That Disability 'Is Nothing To Do With Them' Only Harm Disabled People

As Government cuts to disabled people's benefits lead to more dehumanising rhetoric, Penny Pepper reminds us that disability is an embedded reality of human experience as much as it always has been

Penny Pepper

It is 15 years since I was immersed in the fight to keep open the then Independent Living Fund, which allowed people like myself to live as independent members of the community; to be productive beyond mere pound signs; and which kept us hopeful that we had a role to play in society. It understood that it is helpful to see 'independence' in its broader context - not so much in the literal sense of doing everything in every aspect of your life at ground-level minutiae (which no one does anyway, when fully examined), but around the principles of rights to choice and control.

I was there with activist colleagues when the judges came in at the High Court during the legal challenge to the ILF's closure in 2014: there was a grim paradox to them having personal ushers pull out their chairs, ready for their august posteriors to sit upon - presumably an extension of more ceremonial pomposity as no judge disclosed disability on that day.

Disabled people were there, fighting for their right to freedoms at the most basic level: such as not sleeping in your own piss; and the right to decide when to get out of bed, supported by a personal assistant, which could ultimately enable you to work.

We lost and the ILF was closed in 2015. Local authorities were supposed to receive transitional payments to take us through to a new age of independent living. Countless numbers of disabled people were failed and any hard-won freedoms soon cut back.

So is it any wonder that disabled people are terrified about what is happening to PIP, now and for future generations? Here we are, reeling in disbelief as we unravel the true impact of these changes, as we attempt to find new strength for future battles as the bill moves on.

The confusion about what is being done to the disability components of UC remains raw and terrifying for younger disabled people. MPs across all parties have been culpable throughout the campaign, misunderstanding what each benefit means and what the rules are - crucially, that PIP is not means-tested, whereas UC is an income-based benefit.

I'm a complete veteran and I'm bewildered.

Almost two years ago, forced through the migration from Working Tax Credit (WTC) to Limited Capability for Work-Related Activity Universal Credit (LCWRA UC - ridiculous!), I'm...

Support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system

Packed with exclusive investigations, analysis, and features

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

Keir Starmer's government could recoup billions of pounds by using digital technology and AI to tackle rampant fraud across Whitehall, a new report by the National Audit Office suggests today.

The disclosure comes after the Government was forced to drop plans to abolish the winter fuel allowance and cuts to disabled people, leaving around a £6 billion hole in Rachel Reeves spending plans. The move has led to speculation that she will have to raise taxes in the autumn Budget.

According to the NAO Whitehall is losing between £55 billion and £81 billion a year in fraud and error and the report says by using digital technology could prevent at least £6 billion of the losses every year in the immediate future. This is virtually equivalent to the money the Government has lost by restoring the winter fuel allowance and keeping PIP for disabled people. Given most of the cuts were not due to take place until the end of next year, it gives Whitehall time to plan.

Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, Conservative Chair of the Committee of Public Accounts said: "With fraud and error potentially costing the taxpayer up to £80 billion a year, it is vital that Government prioritises data analytics to make sure the right amount of money goes to the right recipient.

The £350 Billion a Year Lost to Corruption, Tax Dodging and Crime Every Year in the UK

As ministers search for cuts, a new parliamentary report reveals the hundreds of billions of pounds that could be clawed back into the UK's flagging economy

Olly Haynes

"Whilst tools used in Government are often designed to detect transactions where fraud and error has already occurred, it is the preventative use that is much more cost-effective."

The estimate comes from the Government Digital Service and is taken from savings already achieved by HM Revenue and Customs and the Department for Work and Pensions by using data analysis

The report says: "GDS believes Government could save as much as £6 billion a year by using data analytics to help tackle fraud and waste. The use of data analytics to tackle fraud and error has the potential to save billions of pounds of taxpayer money. Counter-fraud experts, within and outside of Government, consistently told us that data analytics needed to be a key part of any plan to reduce fraud and error."

The DWP used data analysis to scrutinise Universal Credit claims and is estimated to have saved £588 million from potential fraud and error.

HMRC is using a number of in-house data analytics platforms to help decide where it should prioritise tax investigations, and to support those investigations. The platforms which were first introduced in 2010, now bring together over 100 datasets to find potential anomalies between an individual's declared income and their assets or lifestyle. Savings amount to £3-4 billion a year.

Other projects include a pilot scheme in the NHS known as Project Athena, a data science and machine learning project, which tackles fraud. The pilot detects anomalous data points that could be prioritised for investigation or fraud prevention intervention, such as staff working elsewhere while claiming to be sick, or fake invoices.

EXCLUSIVE

Reform's Darren Grimes Accused of Lying After Police Deny Telling Him Not to Hold Council Surgeries for 'Security' Reasons

EXCLUSIVE: Local police have rejected the Reform UK deputy council leader's claim that they advised him not to meet his constituents

Josiah Mortimer

The ministry of Justice data science team has developed a machine learning model using AI that flags possible fraud, corruption and bribery using prison staff misconduct records.

However the report states that it is not mandatory for every government department to introduce data analysis and there is no cross government strategy to implement it.

Gareth Davies, head of the NAO, said: "Gover...

Support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system

Packed with exclusive investigations, analysis, and features

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

Conservative plans to ban all non-Brits from claiming disability benefits would be unworkable and could push children into poverty, according to campaigners and academics.

Over the weekend, Shadow Chancellor Mel Stride said Personal Independence Payments (PIP) and disability payments under Universal Credit should be limited to UK citizens because his party believes "British citizenship should mean something."

He struggled to answer questions as to why his party didn't make that change during its 14 years in power, as Politico noted.

But while pushing the policy over the weekend, shadow policing minister Matt Vickers conflated asylum seekers - who cannot claim the benefit - with foreign nationals who arrived via regular routes and have legal status. Many of them will have worked and paid taxes in the UK for years.

Vickers told Sky News: "This is about getting rid of some of those pull factors, about making, you know, why are all those people fleeing from France to come to the UK? Because they think life here is paid for."

ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE

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

PAY ANNUALLY - £39.50 A YEAR

PAY MONTHLY - £3.75 A MONTH

MORE OPTIONS

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.

He suggested that PIP and Universal Credit disability payments only go to those out of work - saying their plans would hit those who "ended up not working, [who] have ended up not contributing." PIP is available to those in work (and out), as a way of supporting people who face extra costs due to their disabilities.

Vickers added: "People who live here who are contributing need to be put first." Again, non-Brits who had lived here and worked here for decades would also be excluded under the Conservative plans.

And he claimed: "We are paying out a billion pounds a month in sickness benefits to households with foreign nationals. That's not acceptable."

However, the figure covers any household with a foreign national in it, which means it may be a British citizen claiming the benefit. In other words, the true figure may be nearer to £0.

Specifically, the policy - added as a Conservative amendment to Labour's stripped-back Universal Credit Bill - would significantly restrict PIP and Universal Credit payments for disabled people who have a Limited Capability for Work (LCW) or the more severe Limited Capability for Work- and Work-Related Activity (LCWRA) status. Those with LCW status are expected to be able to work in future with support, while those on LCWRA status are not. PIP recipients are often in work.

Don't miss a story

SIGN UP TO EMAIL UPDATES

Most migrants are already blocked from accessing public funds until they get permanent residence - they are on a 'No Recourse to Public Funds' condition from the Home Office. This has also applied to almost all EU nationals in the UK from 2021 (and longer for non-EU migrants).

Potential disability benefit claimants are subject to a residency check (known as 'past presence test') - where they must prove they have lived in the UK for the last two out of three years.

Byline Times has spoken to experts and campaigners about the Conservative proposals, which have been little-analysed so far.

Misleading Voters?

Cary Mitchell, a director at the internationalist campaign group Best for Britain, argues much of the rise in welfare spend in recent years was attributable to the last Conservative Government's "shambolic handling" of the pandemic and its aftermath.

"The Conservatives are cynically and deliberately misrepresenting this general trend of their making to increase division," Mitch...

Support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system

Packed with exclusive investigations, analysis, and features

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

On Monday, I gave what might have been my first ever fist pump for a House of Lords debate. Lord Watson of Invergowrie asked a question in the chamber about an investigation I published with Index on Censorship, where 53% of the school librarians I surveyed said they had been asked to remove books from their shelves. Even more worryingly, 56% of those librarians then felt forced to actually remove the books in question.

An overwhelming number of the books ripped off school library shelves had LGBTQ+ themes or authors, and the bans were usually in reaction to a single parent complaint - or even school leaders acting in anticipation of causing offence among particular communities. I spoke to librarians who feared for their jobs, and others have been in touch since, telling me about the pressure they are under.

The debate in the House of Lords showed overwhelming support for the freedom to read, and it was heartening to see the Lords sit up and listen.

BREAKING

Reform UK Tells Prospective Candidates Who Failed Vetting to Reapply Under New 'Common Sense' Rules

Individuals previously blocked from standing for Nigel Farage's party have been told to reapply under new rules prioritising "freedom of expression"

Josiah Mortimer

Fast-forward to Wednesday evening. Just as I was thinking about which picture book to read to my son (which may or may not have had LGBTQ+ themes), a Reform councillor was making plans to raid library collections across Kent.

Councillor Paul Webb told his X audience that one member of the public had contacted him with concerns about books with transgender themes in the children's section of public libraries.

"I've today issued an instruction for them all to be removed from the children's section of any of our libraries," he said.

That's 99 libraries. Based on one complaint. It was unclear from his video whether this related to one particular book or all books with a hint of transgenderness, but if the response from Linden Kemkaran, leader of Kent County Council, is anything to go by, we might assume that it was the latter.

Forty minutes after Webb's X post, Kemkaran gave a message of support, also on X: "Courage & common sense in #Kent from my brilliant colleague who's acted decisively & REMOVED all trans-related books from our libraries children's sections with immediate effect."

So far, so murky. And then, a statement from Kent County Council made the issue even more confused.

Published in several news outlets, the statement said: "Kent County Council have confirmed that children are not and will not be exposed to adult transgender literature in our libraries.

"Staff at the county's 99 libraries have been asked to ensure that books are always stocked in age-appropriate categories and that no adult literature makes its way into areas specifically aimed at children, or where children will be selecting books, such as the public welcome displays.

"It follows feedback from a resident who spotted a transgender book aimed at adults in a public display at the entrance of one library in Kent. The book has since been relocated to a section that is unlikely to be visited by children."

There's certainly a lot to be said here about what happens when you hand out instructions via social media, and the chaos that ensues. Kemkaran's X post suggests that all books with transgender themes have been removed from children's sections. The Kent County Council statement suggests that the book about which the complaint was made wasn't actually a children's book, and wasn't even in the children's section in the first place. So, what exactly is the truth?

EXCLUSIVE

Reform's Darren Grimes Accused of Lying After Police Deny Telling Him Not to Hold Council Surgeries for 'Security' Reasons

EXCLUSIVE: Local police have rejected the Reform UK deputy council leader's claim that they ...