Category: Politics

I know that sometimes, it can feel like there are so many issues to sort out that getting a grip on one is like trying to shoot fish in a barrel. That is why it’s really important that we stick to simple principles, like the polluter pays. If you break it, you buy it and it’s your responsibility to fix it.  That is exactly the case with PFAS, a group of over 10,000 synthetic chemicals that barely degrade in the natural environment, also known as ‘Forever chemicals’, which have polluted UK’s drinking water sources, supermarket food, our bodies, and even the iconic marine species such as harbour porpoises, which are also found in my constituency, South East Cornwall.

Their resistance to heat and ability to repel grease and water has led to their use in many areas of daily life, from sandwich wrappers to mobile phones. However, due to their persistence in the environment, PFAS pollution is everywhere, and the UK is no exception. Not a single river in England is in good chemical health due to cocktails of chemicals, including highly persistent chemicals such as PFAS. Tens of thousands of PFAS ‘hotspots’ have been detected across the UK and Europe. And more information about the UK’s most PFAS polluted sites has been coming to light recently, with communities being told to be ‘cautious’ about eating home grown produce and others recommended bloodletting carried out by medical professionals to help remove high levels of PFAS from their bodies.

This is a problem that affects both humans and animals. In my constituency of South East Cornwall, we are lucky to have harbour porpoises visiting our coastline. The harbour porpoise is widely loved and thought of as one of the most shy, charming whale species in the UK, they used to be known as ‘puffing pigs’ due to the noise they make when they come up for air. Between 2012 and 2014, 51 harbour porpoises around the UK were tested for a PFAS chemical, PFOS, which is linked to impacts on reproduction and the immune system in marine mammals. It was found in every single harbour porpoise tested.

It appears we are learning little from our recent past. Legacy pollutants banned in the UK in the 1980s called PCBs are still causing havoc for killer whales, harbour porpoises and grey seals today. There is clear evidence they are behind the decline in the UK’s killer whale population and evidence suggests higher concentrations of PCBs are connected to increased risk of infectious disease mortality for harbour porpoises.

Data is mounting from other places in the world on the presence of PFAS in seals, whales, dolphins, fish and other wildlife. Whilst we do not know what harm all 10,000 of these chemicals are doing, we cannot wait for all the evidence before acting. The European Environment Agency highlight PCBs as a substance whose early warning signs of harm were ignored. Had evidence of harm been acted upon earlier, many years of PCB use would have been avoided, and we would have ‘a more manageable, less costly problem than we are faced with today’.

Marine life in Cornwall is an important part of our history, identity and economy. The only option we have to overcome this new toxic legacy is following the approach being taken by other countries of phasing out all PFAS over a number of years, in line with EU laws enabling smooth interaction and clarity for UK businesses. Many sectors that use PFAS already have viable PFAS-free alternatives, and rapid innovation is underway in others. To raise awareness, I will be hosting a parliamentary event in April on this growing issue. We need to ensure action is taken to prevent further pollution and accumulation of PFAS in our environment, and to finally learn from the toxic mistakes of our past.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

Source: Politics

The Court of Appeal has upheld the sentence handed down to Stephen Yaxley Lennon, better known as Tommy Robinson. In a courtroom far removed from the social media echo chambers where Robinson built his brand, his legal counsel made an impassioned plea: that he had experienced an “evident decline in his mental health,” that he suffers from ADHD and PTSD, and that he struggles to “regulate his emotions.”

Without wishing to be unkind, these are precisely the arguments that figures on the far right routinely ridicule as “woke” when applied to others, particularly asylum seekers, refugees, and other minority groups. When an unaccompanied child from a conflict zone is found to be traumatised, when an LGBTQ+ prisoner is found to be experiencing poor mental health, or when a protestor cites neurodivergence in their defence, the right-wing commentariat dismisses these claims with derision. “Excuses,” they cry. “Snowflake culture.” “Wokeness gone mad.”

Suella Braverman described the UK’s asylum system as broken because it is too soft, even calling the arrival of asylum seekers fleeing war and persecution an “invasion,” completely disregarding their mental health trauma. Or take the 2024 summer riots. A recent report found that asylum seekers were so terrified they didn’t dare leave their homes. Yet instead of concern for their welfare, far-right influencers and even mainstream figures like Matthew Goodwin complained that calling such groups “far-right” was an elite attempt to silence ordinary people.

Indeed, on his own X account, Yaxley-Lennon frequently derides leftism, feminism and Islam, as ‘mental health issues’.

Yet when it is one of their own in the dock, the language changes. Suddenly trauma matters. Suddenly ADHD is real and relevant. Suddenly empathy is not just acceptable but necessary.

So, do they not see the irony? Or do they not care?

The answer, in many cases, is both. Some genuinely fail to connect the dots. But many do see the hypocrisy and press on regardless, because the point was never principle, it was power. These arguments are not wielded to protect the vulnerable, but to preserve a hierarchy: who deserves compassion and who does not; who is seen as a human being and who is seen as a threat.

This is the real danger of selective empathy. It turns human rights into conditional privileges. It turns vulnerability into a partisan talking point. And it corrodes the public’s understanding of justice, encouraging the idea that mental health or trauma are only real when experienced by the politically palatable.

Let me be clear: Yaxley-Lennon should absolutely be afforded his legal rights. He should have access to mental health care, and the justice system should recognise his neurodivergence as a factor. But that must be true not just for him, but for everyone, especially those who are never given a platform, never given the benefit of the doubt, and never make the headlines.

Because if we only believe in trauma when it suits our politics, then we don’t really believe in it at all.

The challenge for us all is to keep making the case for universal dignity. That means defending rights even for those we disagree with. But it also means holding a mirror up to those who only discover their compassion when the defendant wears the right flag or shares the right Facebook post.

Human rights are not a weakness. They’re a strength. And they’re meaningless if not for everyone.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

Source: Politics

Well, I don’t imagine I made a lot of friends at Thames Water when I spent twenty minutes on my feet lambasting them in Westminster Hall at the start of April.

But I promised my constituents that I would fight for them every day in parliament on the issues that matter to them most. For many, that means holding failing companies to account who are making our lives, and our environment, much poorer. By that measure, Thames Water is certainly among the worst of a bad bunch.

Years of historic underinvestment in favour of profit has run the business into the ground. It now finds itself on the brink of collapse despite a financial lifeline that it ought not to have been awarded, when a court last month allowed the company to take on another three billion pounds of debt.

So you can imagine my frustration when recently, US private equity group KKR was selected as the preferred bidder to bail out Thames Water — a company whose involvement with Northumbrian Water has covered their reputation more in sludge than in glory.

Enough is enough. A company of this importance should not be allowed to carry on such a self-destructive and brazenly careless path. The government, in not stepping in, is allowing a failing company to lurch from crisis to crisis whilst slowly drowning in ever greater debt. The only flow being successfully managed is the flow of cash into the pockets of bankers, advisors, lawyers and private equity. Meanwhile bills are up and sewage continues to breach into our waterways at dangerous levels.

If I seemed harsh in my assessment of the company in Westminster Hall, it’s because I genuinely cannot fathom why we are allowing the situation to go on as it is. The government must step up, take the lead, and put the company into special administration.

It’s clear that without doing that — we’re sleepwalking into a major failure of the company. The government has been quick to reassure us that essential services would not be disrupted in the event of a collapse – but that’s cold comfort when we should all be expecting a lot more from utility companies than just keeping the tap water running. That is quite literally the bare minimum the British people expect.

What we all want to see is the adults in the room stepping in to stop infrastructure creaking, sewage spilling and bills rising.

Ofwat certainly isn’t able to compel these changes. The regulator is increasingly toothless and unable to enforce any meaningful changes or penalties. It is standing idly by whilst shareholders and executives profit from a declining system. It should be scrapped and replaced with a regulator that is unafraid, and well equipped, to do enforcement seriously.

But there isn’t enough time to simply wait for a new regulator to take its place. So the only solution is the one the government seems most reluctant to admit — that it should take temporary control of Thames Water to reset its activities, restructure its management and refocus its mission.

Because let’s be clear — that is what has fundamentally gone wrong at the heart of Thames Water. It is not just that they are a failing commercial enterprise, they are quite evidently an organisation that has lost the public service part of their mission — becoming instead a paragon of failure, debt and daylight robbery, all in the name of profit — and we are all suffering as a result.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

Source: Politics

Exhausting, gruelling and stressful – just some of the words parents have used to describe their experiences of the children’s social care system. It’s a system that exists to support disabled children across the UK, of which there are 1.8 million, but unfortunately the evidence points to a fragmented, underfunded and frankly broken system, that’s letting children down and taking a huge toll on families.

Disabled children are supposed to get support from the children’s social care system following an assessment from a social worker. If a social worker determines a child needs support, for example, in the home or with access to day services, this can be covered by local authority budgets.

But new research by Sense reveals what parents have known for a long time – the huge delays they face to receive support.  According to our latest findings, parents are waiting more than 200 days for their child to be seen by a social worker before they can even have an assessment, with a significant number (17 per cent) waiting over a year. Without a referral and assessment, families are unable to get any support from their local authority.

The situation means families that are able will often pay out of their own pocket to meet their disabled child’s health and social care costs, ranging from private assessments to therapy, home adaptations to accessible transport.

According to our research parents of disabled children spent more than £1,500 of their own money in the past six months to meet their disabled child’s needs. That’s over £250 a month.

This cash is from parents’ own pockets and does not include any welfare benefits, with more than half (56 per cent) of parents telling Sense they have had to use their savings to afford support for their child, because not enough support has been provided by their local authority.

The financial toll this takes on families is huge, forcing some to turn to loans, credit cards and even crowdfunding to plug the gaps. The double whammy here is that many parents have to reduce their work hours or quit their jobs entirely to provide support for their disabled children – be that education support, social care support, attending healthcare appointments and more – meaning that families are also sacrificing their incomes. More than half (53 per cent) of parents have cut their working hours, with 40 per cent having to give up work entirely.

As one mum told us: “We were used to living on two salaries, and then mine was basically replaced by £327 per month carer’s allowance. If my son was getting everything that we know he needs, and he was properly supported, I would be in work. But because we’ve been let down, we’re in this situation instead.”

Parents are picking up the pieces of a broken system and fighting for scraps of support. It shouldn’t be this way – with families forced through multiple assessments, facing delay after delay. Many end up in court just to get what they’re entitled to, with 40 per cent of families who have been successful in securing social care support saying they had to fight their case at tribunal to get there.

Imagine the mental toll this constant battle has on families. Many are exhausted, broken and losing sleep, with one parent, forced to quit her job to fight for her disabled son, saying: “I have been keeping myself from having a breakdown. It’s taken a lot out of me and my family. I’m struggling.”

Disabled children and their futures are clearly bearing the brunt of this fragmented, underfunded system. So what can be done to fix it?

The problems in the system are deep-rooted: research from the Disabled Children’s Partnership found a funding gap of £573 million in 2019/20 – a figure that’s most likely risen since this research was carried out. To fix this will require political will.

The government needs to simplify and streamline this confusing system by establishing a clear and consistent pathway to accessing support through new laws, and laws that ensure all disabled children are assessed for their social care needs when they need it. These changes must be backed by adequate funding and investment in local services.

Good social care can be a lifeline for disabled children, but it’s a lifeline out of reach for too many families. The government must make disabled children a priority by reforming this confusing children’s social care system, to give more children the best start in life.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

Source: Politics

When you see the term ‘NDAs’ in the title of this article, many readers will likely conjure up Hollywood scandals or corporate boardroom dramas.

But the reality is far more disturbing, and much closer to home. It is vital that we dispel the many misconceptions about this legal tool and lay bare how it has been exploited to cover up abuse and wrongdoing on an epic scale.

The reality is that in today’s world NDAs have become a shorthand for secrecy and silencing. Originally designed with a practical objective of protecting intellectual property, they are now routinely used to shut down allegations of harassment, abuse and discrimination — often against those with no means of challenging them.

These victims are left to suffer in silence, failed by the very legal system that should protect them. The extent of the usage is truly shocking, with some lawyers estimating that they are included in over 90% of such settlements, covering cases involving sexual assault, harassment, racial discrimination, disability and pregnancy discrimination, LGBTQ+ discrimination, bullying, and other workplace misconduct.

We cannot continue to pretend that NDAs are harmless legal instruments — they have become central to the suppression of abuse and mistreatment.

Since I spoke in parliament last month, I have been utterly inundated with stories from people trapped by NDAs. These are not powerful executives or celebrities, but people often with little job security and even less access to justice. I have been honoured that so many have trusted me to hear their stories in full, despite the real risks they face from exposure.

In one truly harrowing case, I spoke with an incredibly brave woman who explained that after being raped by a colleague, she couldn’t even speak to medical professionals, because of a confidentiality clause she signed. Leaving her unable to properly recover from her trauma or even speak out to stop others suffering the same fate.

These aren’t isolated cases, it is systemic. A recent survey by the campaign group Can’t Buy My Silence found that in the hospitality sector, 100% of confidentiality clauses are being routinely drafted too broadly. That’s not about protecting trade secrets — that’s about silencing people.

Some of these clauses may not stand up legally or be enforceable by the courts — but that’s not the point. The chilling effect, the fear, the isolation, the sense that speaking out might ruin your life — that’s the real impact.

By their very nature they gag those who often need to speak up the most, disguising their prevalence and ubiquity. This issue is perfectly demonstrated by the woman who told me about the mental health charity she works for, which has discriminated on disability grounds against at least 4 people in the last year that she is personally aware of.  Three of them have signed an NDA, she is bravely pursuing them through the courts because she believes it is the only way to get justice.

And if we can’t call out our own, we have no business in speaking truth to power so we must acknowledge that within our own labour movement, trade unions have been accused of using confidentiality clauses in settlements, which have the same chilling effect as NDAs. If our most progressive and socially conscious organisations are regularly exploiting this practice, then we must accept that it is a serious problem in every type of workplace in this country and we have to conclude that employers simply cannot be trusted with this tool at their disposal.

And here’s the reality: as so often is the case, it’s low-paid, insecure workers — those with the least power — who are most affected. People who can’t afford the costly, time-consuming battle of taking an employer to court. Workers simply trying to do their jobs, only to be met with enforced secrecy when something goes wrong.

But what should we do to tackle them? Well, we certainly don’t need any more consultations. The women and equalities select committee, the Treasury select committee, and BEIS (now DBT) have all investigated this issue and concluded that reform is needed. Multiple jurisdictions, including Ireland, Canada, and over half of US states, have already legislated.

We need urgent action to end this cycle of abuse. That’s why I tabled an amendment to the Employment Rights Bill to ban NDAs in cases of abuse, harassment, and discrimination. And I was proud to receive cross-party support from 66 MPs. This is not a partisan issue, but one I hope the whole House will agree needs to be addressed.

We simply cannot wait any longer, the time for consultations has long passed. The longer we fail to address this, the more people we are condemning to suffer in silence. The government says it’s open to options. My question is: what more evidence do we need?

We have a chance now to lead, to bring an end to legalised abuse in the workplace, and to put the rights of victims above the reputation management of institutions. It is my hope that soon I won’t have to read yet another case of abuse gone unspoken due to the ubiquity of NDAs.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

Source: Politics

Michael Gove is among several former cabinet ministers to be given a seat in the House of Lords in Rishi Sunak’s resignation honours list.

The former levelling up secretary served in the cabinets of four prime ministers before standing down as an MP ahead of last July’s general election.

A rare constant across the fourteen years of Conservative governance that came to an end in 2024, Gove also served as education secretary, chief whip, justice secretary, environment secretary and chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.

Gove, who was MP for Surrey Heath for nearly 20 years, is now editor of the Spectator magazine.

Meanwhile, former chancellor Jeremy Hunt and former foreign secretary James Cleverly have been awarded knighthoods.

Mark Harper, former transport secretary; Simon Hart, former chief whip; Alister Jack, former Scottish secretary; and Victoria Prentis, former attorney general, are the four other onetime cabinet ministers to have been awarded a peerage in Sunak’s resignation honours list.

This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly.

Please refresh the page for the fullest version.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest election news and analysis.

Source: Politics