Subscribe now

The price of a pint in London has made headlines this week, and rightly so, but it’s not just London, the cost of living crisis is happening everywhere.

The price of a food shop is set to be 50% higher in the coming weeks than 5 years ago. This is an utterly insane statistic, particularly when you know that supermarkets make £230,000,000,000 in the UK annually. However, despite this staggering inflation, the media still call workers greedy when they ask for a pay rise that’s above inflation.

So what causes this inflation? Well, the right-wing economists (from their lovely fully owned mortgage-free town houses) will tell you its because of the greed of public sector workers - blaming pay rises for inflation. However, public sector workers have had a real terms pay cut, so that cannot be the case. Lets take a closer look…

The scale of the problem:

According to the Joseph Roundtree Foundation, 21% of the UK population live in poverty. Read that again. 21% of the UK population live poverty. This is a national disgrace and should be our number one priority to reduce.

What’s more, 69% of adults in the UK report regularly going with out essentials, with 3,000,000 UK households regularly skipping meals due to rising costs. Tragically, 4,500,000 children in the UK currently live in poverty (28%).

Housing crisis:

Housing prices have risen by 50-60% in the last decade, far outpacing income growth, with private rentals going up 40-45%.

This is something that has a real generation impact too, as younger people face housing prices that their parents and grand parents simply didn’t experience. Housing has become a luxury, rather than a human right.

Subscribe now

And what about wages?

While CPI is around 3-4%, wage growth remains at about 1%. This rate of disparity over 5 years leaves a 12% gap, and a 21% gap over ten years. This is why in work poverty is currently sitting at 18%. Work simply doesn’t pay anymore.

The Gini Coefficient measures the income inequality of a country. 0% is perfectly equal, and 100% is completely unequal. The UK currently sits at 37% when all costs including housing are considered - a rating of moderate-high income inequality for a developed nation. What’s worse, this has not been updated since 2021 meaning that it will be much worse now.

However, this does not include wealth, its only income, so underestimates the situation. When we use the Gini coefficient to compare wealth, and not just income, it shoots up to 59% - which is incredibly high.

This right here highlights that the UK taxation system does go someway to reducing income inequality, however, it does not touch overall inequality. This is, in my opinion, the number one reason why Britain needs a wealth tax.

Inequality is widening:

The top 10% in the UK earn more than the bottom 40% combined (income only, not wealth) and they hold half of the UK’s wealth, including 50% of the UK property market. Meanwhile the lowest 10% own barely anything at all.

If you received today 50 years worth of the average income in one go, you still would not be in the UK’s richest 10%.

Moreover, the top 1% in the UK own 10% of all UK household wealth, the same as the lowest 50%, meaning that the top 1% have as much between them as the lowest 50%.

So how are the rich getting on?

In Britain, whilst we are all tightening our belts, the richest 10% have added up to £3,000,000,000,000 to their household wealth in the last decade.

3 trillion pounds is enough to:

• End all poverty, two to three times over, and end it for up to 30 years

• Fund healthcare for every citizen of the earth in every country for 10 years

• Fund global education for 70+ years

• Slow and make a real dent in the progress of climate change

• Build over 10 million homes

• fund the entire UK government for almost 3 years

So, two very different pictures depending on if you are in the top 10%, or the bottom 50%.

If we shared out the 3 trillion equally across the UK, every person would get £44,800 meaning poverty would be essentially eradicated over night. Wouldn’t that make things better for people?

Why is this important?

Lots of politicians will tell you we cannot raise wages, we cannot raise the minimum wage and we cannot lower prices. However, the people really in charge who own the press and the politicians are sitting pretty in that 10%.

However we are not blind, and we can see the system is working exactly as it has been designed. The rich are getting richer, and the poorer are getting poorer.

It’s time for a change. This cannot go on. Lets end inequality once and for all.

Please note, this article is not behind a paywall as I want to make sure we spread the word far and wide, but if you can support by upgrading your subscription, please do.

Click here for 20% off for your first year!

Subscribe now

Share

Who were the winners in England?

Well, without a shadow of a doubt, Reform UK were the stand out winners in terms of seats gained. They gained 1,451 Councillors across England and gained control of 14 councils.

Then, the second winners of the night were the Green Party who won 441 new councillors and gained control of 5 councils.

The final winners of the night were the Libdems who gained 155 councillors and gained control of one new council.

The losers of the night, as predicted were the Tories, losing 563 councillors and losing 17 councils, and in bottom place, Labour losing 1496 councillors and 38 councils.

Does this Make Reform the biggest party locally in the England?

No, it does not. Only one third of Council seats were up for Grabs, and Labour remain in control of the most Councils in England.

And does this mean Reform’s support is continuing to rise?

Well, it certainly remains high, however, their projected vote share is actually 4% lower than last year:

That being said, Reform UK still took the biggest portion of the Vote Share, with the Greens in second place. These results show that the 2 party system really is dead.

And did reform perform this well in Scotland and Wales?

In Short - no. Plaid Cymru won the night in Wales, however failed to make a majority. Reform did perform well, but not as well as predicted. Also, in exciting news - the Greens won their first every two Senedd members.

In Scotland, Reform really did not perform as well, showing (unsurprisingly) that Scotland does not have the same taste for English nationalism as England does. The SNP’s seats did drop, but they remain the largest party, and with the Scottish Green’s gains, they can hold a left-wing pro-independence majority in Scottish Parliament.

And What about on the Isle of Wight?

Well, again Reform won the night, but failed to win the council. Reform took 19/39 seats meaning they were one short of an overall Majority.

The Greens held their two seats, and Labour held their one. The Libdems made some gains, and the Tories were all but wiped out.

Some glimmers of hope for me (as a Green candidate for Lake South). The Greens Vote share went up across the board, we have 4 strong second places and 11 strong thirds. We held both of our seats with a good majority, and our total votes were more than Labour and the Libdems combined.

We certainly have more work to do. But we are laying strong foundations. This time we stood in 26 seats, next time it will be all 39!

And for Lake South (my ward) we have moved the Greens into third place, and increased the total votes by 65 votes!

It was a great experience and I have learnt a lot!

Got any thoughts/comments or ideas? drop them in the chat below!

Click here for the YouTube video on this topic!

Please note, this article is written with free access, but if you are able to subscribe to support my work - here is a special 75% off discount code!

You can also subscribe to my YouTube, or make a one-off donation through my buy me a coffee page

This week, Josh Simmons, a right wing Labour Together (Now LabourThinks) loyalist MP announced he was standing down to enable Andy Burnham to return to Parliament and save the Labour party, saving Britain in the process.

Most of us, if we are honest, probably thought “Great!” when he heard this, but the more I have let it percolate, the more it annoys me, and I’ve been trying to put my finger one why ever since.

This article will start by looking at the hurdles Burnham would have to jump to pull this off, and what is at stake if it goes wrong. Then it will tackle the broader question of if any of it is worth it anyway and hopefully in writing this article I will figure out why it is all winding me up so much!

Subscribe now

What are the odds on Burnham becoming MP?

Well, the first thing to say is that Makerfield is not an easy seat for Labour to win. Current Polling has it as a Reform UK safe seat. True, the ‘Burnham effect’ will improve Labour’s odds, but it might also harm them as I will explain.

Is Andy Burnham really that popular in the North?

The short answer? yes he is. And moreover, he grew up around Makersfield which certainly helps his claim. To be honest, he has been a really good Mayor for Greater Manchester and in 2024 he won his Mayoralty with 63.4% of the vote (and i would put money on him winning again if it wasn’t for this current political move).

So, what’s changed in Greater Manchester of the last two years?

This for me is where seeds of doubt start to come in…

Local Election Results 2026:

As you can see, a once Labour Stronghold had a really poor local elections this year, with Greens and Reform both making big gains.

Now lets look at the vote share by party following the recent local elections (source - Britain Votes Now):

Reform UK

Labour

Green

Now clearly there is still a relatively strong base of support for Labour, but Reform have clearly gained a lot of ground in Greater Manchester, as have the greens.

Now lets look again at the results for Greater Manchester in the recent Local Elections:

Now, in addition to that let’s look at the most recent byelection result (also from Greater Manchester) in Gorton and Denton:

Again, we are seeing consistently the same pattern: Greens and Reform on the rise, with Labour results crashing.

What’s more, many Starmer fans may not want to vote for Burnham in this race denting his chances, and likewise many socialists may have made solemn pledges never to vote for Labour again. Particularly not for another centrist politician. In a race where every vote will count, this all needs factoring in.

What’s more, this whole political stunt will cost the tax payer over £5,000,000 with many seeing at as personal ambition. That itself could harm Burnhams chances. If this was a byelection triggered by a Reform loss, I think it would all be quite different, but it isn’t and this cannot be ignored.

So, I will ask it again - Can Andy Burnham win a byelection in Wakersfield? The answer? Possibly, but it would require a very strong change of direction and it is by no means a done deal.

So - should the left unite and back this deal?

For me, this boils down to one thing: What will it actually achieve? And for me there are two parts to this. 1) Is Burnham actually left wing, or even centre left? 2) Do labour’s tactics have any chance of winning?

Is Burnham any better than Starmer?

In 2020, we were told that there was a sensible, smart and passionate Labour Politician that sat as a centrist but made claims to centre-left policy, and was goin to save the UK. We were told that years of Tory Austerity were coming to an end, and that this calm and likeable politician would be Britain’s Saviour. He would unite the centre and the left and deliver change across Britain at a scale not seen in recent decades. He delivered a stonking (but thinly spread) commons majority, and everyone breathed a sigh of relief. His name was Kier Starmer.

Fast forward, and Britain is on the precipice of Fascism, and Starmerism has failed catastrophically. In fact, when I warned about this happening before the GE, I was told I was over reacting, naive and too young to really understand. Turns out I was spot on.

When elected, Keir Starmer was enthusiastic, popular and had the people’s support. In less than two years that has all disappeared and Starmer is left a hollow shell of a PM presiding over the demise of the Labour Party. That is not because of who he is, or his style of politics (though I don’t think that particularly helps), it’s because of his politics. It’s not Starmer who has failed, it’s Starmerism that has failed. In fact, it runs deeper still: McSweeny, Starmer, Mandelson, Burnham, they are all part of new, new Labour which has proved itself vastly effective at making profit for the rich, but ineffective at creating social change.

Starmer believes in Centre/Centre-right neoliberalist politics. His government has overseen the increased privatisation of the NHS, a continuation of austerity, and the enabling of a genocide in Gaza, all with a massive majority in the commons. These are not traditional ‘Labour’ values, but they are certainly the Labour values of the 21st Century. This is why the working class have abandoned Labour, quickly followed by the middle classes. It just doesn’t stand for anything any more. They might be a friendlier and more electable face than the Tories, but that is meaningless if people don’t feel any tangible change. The rich keep getting richer, and the poor keep getting poorer. Now it is true there are still some trustworthy Labour politicians on the left (although now few and far between), but Burnham is not one of them.

So - What exactly is my point? My point is that Burnham’s politics are not really any different from Starmer’s. Let’s take a look…

He’s not the Messiah, he’s a very naughty boy!

When you look at Burnham you see that he has supported NHS privatisation, austerity and appears to be a supporter of Israel. So not a good start.

He has made some good moves as Mayor, particularly with capping bus fairs and nationalising buses - which has been hugely successful and hugely popular.

However, it is also important to remember that Burnham opposed Corbynism at it’s peak, and as far as I can see, he still opposes it now. I fail to see how swapping out one centrist dad for another can do anything to save the Labour party, let alone the country. So is Burnham any better than Starmer? Well yes, but that’s not hard. Is he the UK’s saviour? I very much doubt it.

Has Burnham offered the left PR?

No, he has not. He has supported it in the past, but remember so did Keir Starmer. So far Burnham has made no solid promise to the left. There is lots of wishful thinking out there stating that he might, but not an ounce of evidence from Burnhams own lips. Firstly, lets see if he does make any solid promises, then if he does, lets remember Starmer made the same promises.

This brings me down to Burnham’s team and their tactics.

Will the Risk Backfire?

If I were living in Makerfield, I would be feeling pretty nervous right now. The risk of a Reform MP is now very real, and it feels rather unnecessary. Labour have 403 MPs in parliament. If not a single one of them is better than Keir Starmer, then surely the Labour Party is beyond saving. Moreover, it is not just Makerfield that is being offered up in this political game, the Greater Manchester Mayoralty could well be at stake.

If Reform UK take this seat, then this will have a huge impact on Labour’s polling locally, and could event jeopardise the next mayoral race.

Will the Greens Stand?

This is where I’m starting to get annoyed. There seems to be an expectation that the Greens will step aside to enable Burnham to win, and people have already started to criticise the Greens for not rolling over straight away, but they seem to be forgetting that this is a completely unnecessary byelection completely of Labour’s own making. Labour have a 403 Majority and could introduce PR, wealth taxes etc right now if they wanted to. They could replace Starmer with Rayner or any number of Labour MPs, but they have chosen not to. Instead they have called an unnecessary byelection, risking a Reform win, and at a huge cost to the tax payer. If Labour lose, it is 100% their own fault for calling it in the first place.

Moreover, it Burnham wants to prove he can win in 2029, he cannot do that by expecting others to step down. Labour has let people down, and they cannot expect people to vote for them - they have to inspire the electorate once more if they stand any chance.

The only people who will decide if the Greens stand locally will be the local Green party, and they have my full support whatever they decide.

So What if Burnham does win?

So, if Andy Burnham does win, he will then be MP for Wakerfield, then there will be a Mayoralty byelection for Greater Manchester.

Now, I could foresee Labour, the Greens and Reform UK all winning the mayoralty, particularly now it has been confirmed it will run under FPTP. This could really backfire for Labour, if Burnham pays the price of the GM mayoralty to pursue his own ambition, I can’t see that going down well at the next General Election.

Then you have the question of a Labour Leadership Challenge?

Could he win that? I think probably. It seems he has the support of Blue Labour, and the Centre left - however I have learnt not to underestimate Starmer who has survived this far (somehow!).

This is a high risk high reward strategy, and to me it seems clear this is Labours last chance to prove it has any electoral fire left in it at all.

If he saves Labour, does that mean he will beat Reform?

Again, I refer back to Starmer and his journey. More of the same will end in the exact same result. Disillusioned voters, feeling poorer, are prime pickings for Reform UK. If Labour want to change course, they have to fundamentally change who they are, and I don’t see that happening any time soon, or under Andy Burnham.

In Summary.

To conclude here are my thoughts:

1. It is not a given that Burnham can win, and this could all massively backfire for Labour

2. Even if Burnham gets in, and Labour keep the mayoralty, do not expect any real change

3. This is not a fight for socialists to be part of. We have enough work to do building the Greens and creating a real alternative vision of the UK. The Centrists are fighting for their political survival, and that’s on them.

Please note, this article is written with free access, but if you are able to subscribe to support my work - here is a special 75% off discount code!

You can also subscribe to my YouTube, or make a one-off donation through my buy me a coffee page

Subscribe now

Share

I wanted to start by saying a huge thank you to everyone who has been supporting me in my writing since launching my Substack. I am trying to write about things that really matter, and I hope I can contribute to the public discourse surrounding politics, health and UK -based news in a positive way.

Going forward, I will be publishing a weekly review of the week for my paid subscribers only, giving my take on what is going on (first one tomorrow). I will also provide a monthly update on other things happening in my work/life. If you are not yet on a paid Subscription, as one of my dear supporters, please accept this offer for a 75% discount for your first year (only £1 per month!), and come along on this journey with me. Claim your discount by clicking here.

For those who don’t subscribe I will still publish regular content and articles that are free access. But those who can subscribe will be supporting directly in my work, have access to exclusive content and be able to chat with me about the articles produced.

New - YouTube Launch!

For those of you who like video content, please check out and subscribe to my YouTube channel where I will be discussing new topics each week!

Click here to go to my new YouTube Channel!

Other Sites:

I am also publishing regular content on Insta, TikTok, Facebook, X and Bluesky so do make sure you are following along!

If you are a subscriber and want to suggest a future topic or any ideas for future topics, please drop me a message!

Take care, and thank you so much for your support!

For those who don’t want to Subscribe to my Substack but would like to support my work, please check out my BuyMeACoffee Page

Peace and Love Friends

Subscribe now

Share

Subscribe now

This article is going to highlight how the establishment have made themselves look utterly weak and pathetic, and making sure we learn the lessons from what happened to Jeremy Corbyn.

Firstly, its important to understand the context. In the week leading up to the Local Elections in England, and the Senedd and Scottish Parliament elections - tonnes of dodgy revelations came to light about Farage and his Reform UK Candidates. However, these were ignored until after the Elections - instead the media united against Zack.

Here are some of the ridiculous claims they made:

1. They have criticised Zack for saying he had been a spokesperson for the Red Cross, despite him having spoken for the Red Cross on multiple occasions at multiple functions

   

2. They have criticised Zack for saying he has worked at the MoJ, despite the fact that he has in fact worked at the MoJ.

3. Subsequently they have Criticised him for failing to pay his council tax for the house boat where he part-time lives, despite in 35 years, only one person ever actually paying council tax, and the Tax Expert who broke the story admitting even he was previously unaware of it.

   

   

4. Following this absolute shocker, the media then tried to claim Zack was in the top 1% for living in a ‘5 bedroom 2 million pound house in London’. They failed to mention he rents a room in a 5 bed house share. This level of desperation simply reeks (especially when you remember Farage owns 5 houses, not including the Clacton one which he apparently didn’t buy himself).

Whilst all this was happening, Farage was revealed to have accepted an undeclared £5,000,000 donation which could lead to a Clacton by-election. What’s more, Ben Habib has made allegations about this money that if true would really shake things up.

Likewise, tonnes of Reform Candidates (and now councillors) have been revealed to be saying racist, homophobic and misogynistic things that the press have decided to only pick up now. They were too busy digging through Polanski’s dirty laundry (literally).

This ridiculous witch hunt didn’t go unmissed on X.

And for many people it felt vaguely familiar…

The Media hysteria is the same as when Jeremy Corbyn started to pose a real risk by becoming a credible PM candidate:

Subscribe now

So what does this mean?

Well, firstly it means that the establishment see Zack Polanski as electable and a real credible threat to the establishment.

It also shows that they see Nigel Farage as one of their own (he is funded by the billionaires after all).

A real cynic might also suggest that the tax dodging billionaire oligarchs who own the press might be scared by proper taxation and press scrutiny.

The Times who broke Polanski’s boat tax story is owned by Rupert Murdoch who is estimated by some to have avoided over £2,000,000,000 in UK tax (some estimates say up to £5 billion). How’s that for irony.

So What do we do?

Well a few things we can learn from Jeremy Corbyn is:

1. Don’t apologise if you’ve done nothing wrong

2. Get good Defamation lawyers.

Moreover, you have to keep moving. Zack has top social bants which will do him well because the people see through the smears.

The establishment is never more visible as when it is on the attack, so in that alone Zack is doing a great job.

Keep going Zack!

Share

There are a few reasons why this policy should worry us all.

Attacking political opponents

The attack on the greens has a couple of worrying elements. Firstly it feeds in to a highly divisive ‘us and them’ narrative - one which seeks to stoke tensions and division.

The reality is, Green voters and Reform voters live alongside each other, and by and large coexist peacefully, and are even friends and family.

Last week my boiler packed in (IKR!) and the boiler man who came to fix it noticed my Green literature and announced himself as a reform voter. And do you know what we did? We had a cup of tea and talked about policies and politics and shared experiences. He reflected that he had learnt something from me (particularly about the Green’s drug policy) and I was reminded not to pre-judge people and assume bad motivations for wanting Reform in power. I heard his reasoning and understood his journey. He was a nice bloke and we made friends.

Attacking political opponents in this obvious way is straight out of the fascists playbook. Just look at Trump; he brands political opponents enemies of the state and cuts of their funding and threatens to throw them in jail. It’s fascism.

Fascists mix party politics and ideological warfare with Governance. A democratic government should represent all the population equally, that is their job. It is not okay for them to weaponise the state against their political opponents. If Reform have already started doing that now, and they are not even in power yet, what would they be like if elected?

Attacks on minority groups

The most disgusting thing about this plan, is that they are essentially creating prison camps for those they deem undesirable, starting with illegal immigrants. However, once these camps are set up (and likely run by private companies for vast state contracts with billions), who will they be used for next?

In 1933, the Nazi’s opened Dachau detention camp, and started rounding up their political opponents. They took those they saw as undesirable and locked them away in prison camps, which later became concentration camps and extermination camps. What started as a political move quickly accelerated into an ideological one. Soon anyone the regime disapproved of (Roma, Gays and especially Jews) were rounded up, imprisoned, and exterminated).

This is also seen in every fascist state that has ever existed, from Stalin to Mussolini.

Now, i know that it is often deemed hyperbole to use comparisons to Nazi Germany, and normally I agree. However, Trumps MAGA is only one step away from Nazi Germany, and Reform UK are only one step behind Trumps MAGA.

Share

The takeaway message?

This is a warning from history. This is a red flag. We must be vigilant and resist these fascists with all our collective might.

I will leave you with this poem which i have slightly adapted from the original by Martin Niemoller which he wrote in 1946 following the horrors of WW2.

Subscribe now

Subscribe now

Share

It appears that Farage has been given a “get out of jail free” card by the main stream media. In fact more than that, it’s almost like they are invested in his success.

A grand total of 38 times he has been on BBC question time, way more than any other political figure, and the vast majority of those appearances were before he was ever elected MP (However, it appears the new season ticked holder is the unelected Zia Yussef who is now vying for Nigel’s title).

Nigel has a vast collection of scandals ranging from tax avoidance to racism, but the MSM don’t seem to like talking about them, so we’re are going to look at some of them more closely here...

Firstly, Farage only bothers to vote in about a third of Parliamentary debates. That means two thirds he avoids altogether. Funnily enough he doesn’t just take a third of his MP salary however. This was similar in his time as a member of European Parliament where he took his full paycheck (and now his pension) but barely ever participated. Why aren’t the media highlighting this dereliction of duty?

Moreover, Farage is making his whole gambit about being better than the Tories. In fact, Farage recently said: “Never Trust a Tory” and on that I have to agree with him... But let’s have a closer look at his current party shall we... Well, for starters Nigel Farage was himself a Tory.

His newest MP Jenrick, was of course also a Tory. Nadhim Zahawi was a Tory. Lee Anderson was a Tory. Nadine Dorris was a Tory. Danny Kruger was a Tory. Zia Yussef was a Tory. Andrea Jenkins was a Tory. In fact, all Reform UK politicians where former Tory party members, with most of them being former Tory politicians!

I mean, you get the picture. In fact, 66% of Reform UK councilors defected from the Tories. Why aren’t the media talking about this?

So what motivates Farage? Why is he doing what he does? Who does he work for? Well, let’s take a look at his recent income...

Top of the list, spouting bile and fury on GB news (via a tax avoiding firm) pockets Nigel approximately £450,000 - £500,000. This is both blatantly a conflict of interest, and also a moral failing seeing that GB news fuels division and hate like no other UK channel.

Share

Next, for being a “brand ambassador for Direct Bullion Nigel has made £236,000. Now that alone is over twice his MP salary.

Then next we have his third job, being an MP for Clacton which brings in £91,000. However strangely enough, most people in Clacton have never seen him there...

Then there is Public Speaking which has brough Nigel approximately £65,000. And you guessed it, he’s hardly speaking about peace and justice...

Then, we can’t forget his cameos, including the one he did for convicted pedophile Ian Watkins which have earned him about £50,000

Then there is his writing for the Daily Telegraph which gives about £24,000

And in the interest of time, I will simply list the others (that we know about)

• Blockworks inc approx £34,000

• Sky News Australia aprox £28,000

• Zebu group approx £20,000

• YouTube - £11,000

• Hillsdale college - £11,000

And if your wandering why it’s approximate, we’ll it’s hard to fully know as Farage has breached parliamentary standards 17 times by not declaring income on time. That’s right, 17 times (and those are only the breeches he’s been caught out on so far).

Okay, so he loves money. But at least he pays his tax...

That is he does pay tax, sometimes...

For example, remember when he got caught with an offshore account to avoid tax in 2013? Now that was pretty embarrassing. There is also the company that he currently uses to minimise tax on earnings, and also the fact that he possibly pretended that his girlfriend (with no plausible explanation) bought his £885,000 house in Clacton so he didn’t have to pay stamp duty (we still don’t know the truth, but we do know he lied about it a few times, and that he has not yet provided a satisfactory answer). So in reality, he does everything he can to avoid actually paying tax... Very patriotic.

It’s also important to remember that there are countless numbers of claims of racism, antisemitism and bullying against Farage, far too many to dismiss. So why does he get away with it? Why won’t the media hold him to account?

Guardian story: Nigel Farage dismisses racist and antisemitic school bullying claims as ‘made-up fantasies’ | Nigel Farage | The Guardian

And it’s not just him. Richard Tice has been caught avoiding tax, and he also recently moved to Dubai despite being MP for Skegness.

Nadhim Zahawi got caught fiddling tax when he was the Chancellor of the exchequer and was made to repay £5,000,000. That’s not forgetting the scandal of his expenses to heat his stables. In fact, Farage seems to collect other cheats and scandals like dung attracts flies.

Now, there is also the question of who funds Reform. I’ll give you a clue, it’s not the working class.

The vast majority of Reform UKs donations come from companies and individuals linked to big oil. He is bank rolled by the billionaires, and they will expect he does their bidding in return.

Subscribe now

Farage recently attended Davos at the behest of an Iranian billionaire and he also has links to Russian Oligarchs. Let’s not forget his best mate and former head of Reform UK Wales, Nathan Gill, who has been convicted of being a Russian asset for money. Farage is also a Trump sycophant and it’s hard to figure out which evil billionaire he is currently most loyal too, but it certainly isn’t anyone in Clacton, or even the UK.

Now we gave the latest Farage scandal. Farage was given £5,000,000 by a Thai-based crypto-billionaire in 2024 (just before he decided to run for parliament). If this was Keir Starmer, or Angela Rayner, the press would have hounded them out office by now. But because it’s Farage, no one seems to complain.

What’s more - Reform UK have also been reported to the watchdog for taking a £200,000 donation from JCB - and then promoting their new product in their campaign literature!! Even their campaign is a ploy to scam and raise money, it would appear.

One final point about Farage, his record on the NHS is also atrocious. Countless times he has told journalists he wants to move to a privatised system, something incredibly unpopular with voters, but journalists seem to shy away from talking about this. Why is that??

If elected, Farage will sell off everything Britain has, and he will flog it to the highest bidder. He will divide our communities and ramp up attacks on minority groups. He is not to be trusted, and nor is any media outlet that fails to hold him to account.

Thousands of Reform Candidates around the UK are standing for Thursdays local elections, with Reform set to make massive gains. However their campaign of ‘Get Starmer out’ and ‘stop the small boats’ has absolutely nothing to do with local elections or councils. It’s like they have no idea what the election is even about. What’s more, scores of Reform Candidates have been caught saying atrocious things, such as calling white people ‘the master race’ and saying they will ‘shoot the Pakis on the spot’.

Additionally, Arron Banks, the Reform UK donor and previous mayoral candidate, was caught saying that a Welsh Reform candidate could not be Welsh, because they were black. This disgraceful racism has been overlooked by the press. I wonder why?

So the long and short of it is this. Farage is a fraud, and it’s time he is held to account. If the media won’t do it, then we will have to. The media need to stop giving Farage a free pass, and we need to stop giving the media a free pass.

It’s time to stop Farage.

Please note, this article is not behind a paywall as I want to make sure we spread the word far and wide, but if you can support by upgrading your subscription, please do.

Click here for 20% off for your first year!

Thanks, Harry

Subscribe now

Share

Subscribe now

I am a Clinical Nurse Specialist in Drugs and Alcohol and I sit on the UK All-Party Parliamentary Group for Drugs, Alcohol and Justice. I am also writing my masters dissertation on the effects of drug policy and societal outcomes (legalisation, decriminalisation and prohibition). I care about this for a few reasons. Firstly, I have witnessed first hand the effects of prohibition. I have seen too many people die, and I cannot understand why we take an approach that is so contrary to the evidence base. Secondly, I have a strong sense of justice, and I cannot abide seeing people with addiction issues criminalised by a society that is actually responsible for the levels of drug crime we see. Finally, as a society we are wasting staggering amounts of resources fighting a ‘war on drugs’ that can never, and will never be won (you don’t reduce sex addiction with a ‘war on sex’). These resources could be better spent improving our societies and improving the factors that lead to addiction in the first place.

What are we going to talk about?

Firstly, we will explore what we mean by the term ‘drugs’ and how our understanding of ‘good drugs’ and ‘bad drugs’ has changed over time. We will consider what percentage of ‘drug use’ is harmful, looking here in the UK, and considering examples from around the world.

Then we will explore what addiction actually is, what causes it, and how we treat it.

Finally we will look at an overview of the evidence and ask, which drug policies make things better? and which are actually causing more problems than they solve.

Drugs - are they all bad?

Brief answer? No.

When you ask people what percentage of drug use leads to addiction, they will always pick a huge number. The reality is that it is about 10–20%. That means about 80% of substance use does not lead to addiction. And when we stop and think about it, this makes sense. We know many people who drink alcohol who don’t develop problematic drinking habits or addiction, who are able to simply use alcohol to relax, socialise or party. However, we also know that for some people this isn’t the case and they end up in spirals and cycles of harmful use, and we will explore that a little bit later on. The important point to remember is that the majority of substance use in the UK is not what we would consider ‘problematic’.

Who draws the line?

Coffee, chocolate and alcohol are all substances that have been ‘banned’ and criminalised in history. If you want a challenging but interesting read, I advise Madness and Civilisation by Michel Foucault. Foucault was a French sociologist and philosopher who brilliantly tells the story of ‘madness’ and how certain trends, acts or substances have been accepted, shunned or criminalised depending on how they affected society (and in particular the ruling classes) at the time. This reminds us that what society deems ‘bad’ at any one time is not necessarily permanent. Think about smoking: it used to be encouraged in adults and even children, and now is heavily regulated. Likewise, opiates and cocaine used to be legal and obtainable in the pharmacy, but are now illegal. Conversely, chocolate was considered heresy in the 16th century by the church, whilst the Ottomans banned coffee; likewise the Swedes in the 18th century, and now both are available in every shop. What’s more, alcohol was illegal in 1920s America, and is now not only legal but actively advertised across the world.

It is also worth remembering that an in-depth study by Professor Nutt and his team in 2010 found that the most harmful drug, out of all used in the UK, is indeed alcohol; however this is the most accepted in current British culture.

Spiritual and societal practices around the world

Now this could make an interesting essay in itself, but I wanted to briefly mention here how substances have been used in spiritual and cultural practices around the world, and continue to be to this day. Rastafarians and Vedic Hindus believe Marijuana aids meditation and worship. People from ‘Magic Towns’ in Mexico utilise psilocybin throughout their lives to commune with mother earth. Opium has been used across the Middle East for centuries (and remains used by Thai hill tribes) for medical and social purposes, whilst coca leaves (from which cocaine is derived) had a central role in the life of Incas and subsequently Quechua societies in South America. Iboga has been used in central and west Africa to commune with ancestors, and the betel nut is regularly chewed to this day in South East Asia as a post-prandial pick-me-up. Even in the UK, Christians regular consume small doses of wine as communion, and often vast quantities of alcohol as social lubricants at important events such as weddings and funerals. Using substances is a practice that spans the globe and spans history. It can even be found in the animal kingdom! So my point is that it is not new, and it is not always seen as a bad thing. That is where the role of societal stigma and law come in to try and separate what is deemed ‘good’ from what is deemed ‘bad’.

Medicine and Healing

Herbal medicine has been around as long as humanity itself. Healers have treated their communities with medicines created from what is found around us, and this remains the same the world over today. However, that which is readily available around us has grown exponentially due to trade, the internet, and advances in pharmacology; therefore so has the drug market. The West has categorised that which is made by pharmaceutical companies as ‘medicines’ and that which is derived from the natural world around us as ‘herbal remedies’. But in essence, that divide is arbitrary and both practices are using substances to heal (when done correctly by people who know what they are doing).

Many substances which are illegal to buy on the street in the UK are also widely used as medicine.

Ketamine is an anaesthetic, and can also be used to treat depression.

Cocaine is an analgesic, but is less commonly used these days.

Amphetamine (or similar compounds) are used to treat ADHD (myself included).

Heroin (diamorphine in medical terms) is used to treat acute pain in hospitals and community settings across the UK.

Cannabis is used to treat glaucoma, pain and anxiety.

Many substances are also used in treatments around the globe that are not yet legal here.

Psychedelics are used with incredible success rates to treat addiction, and mental health conditions. They have also shown incredible results in helping palliative patients accept their diagnosis.

Interestingly, ecstasy has been trialled in couples therapy and shown some promising early results.

Now it is important to note that as a Mental Health Nurse and Drug and Alcohol Nurse I do not recommend people who are unwell simply experimenting with psychedelics or ketamine or indeed any substance; in fact it is best avoided. These substances are powerful and have healing potential, but also the potential to cause great harm. These substances have been proved to be helpful in certain circumstances when delivered by skilled and trained professionals (be they medical, therapeutic or shamanic). I am simply trying to broaden our collective mindset when we consider the word ‘drug’.

Prevalence of use in the UK

Is drug use common in the UK? Put simply: Yes.

33% of people in the UK have disclosed using an illicit drug in the past. That is 1 in 3 people. That goes up to 90% when you include alcohol.

This shows that in spite of prohibition, 1 in 3 people will admit to have taken a drug; (this is likely higher as some people will not disclose illegal activity).

So who should decide what is good or bad?

This is a genuine question, not one I claim to have the answer to or to try and answer here and now. The truth is, people will probably come up with different answers throughout their lives depending on their current circumstances and experiences.

Personally, I want to see a world with less addiction, less unregulated access to powerful and harmful substances, and greater access to a range of evidence-based medicinal treatments that can improve people’s lives.

In modern Britain, we claim to follow an evidence-based approach; however as we will see later in this essay, we seem to be doing the opposite with prohibition.

Understanding Addiction

Again, this is a big topic, so what I am going to provide here is an overview of the key points. If you are interested in understanding more about addiction I would recommend In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts by Doctor Gabor Maté.

Addiction vs Dependence

Before we begin, it’s important to clarify what we are discussing and to clarify between a substance dependence, and addiction.

Dependence is biochemical process that happens when we regularly take a substance which interacts in such a way with our own biology and neurochemistry that we become physically dependent on that substance, which then requires detoxification or gradual reduction.

An example of this is alcohol. Consistent and regular heavy consumption of alcohol can lead to a down-regulation of our own internal GABA receptors (which in essence help keep the mind calm) whilst upregulating our glutamate receptors (which balance out GABA by creating glutamate, an excitatory chemical). This causes an imbalance in our brain chemistry which is maintained by the steady and heavy use of alcohol. This is called a physical dependence. A sudden cessation of alcohol use can cause ‘Alcohol Withdrawal Syndrome’ as the brain is no longer balanced by the alcohol, and the glutamate is now overpowering the GABA, which can be fatal if not treated. This is a physical process, caused by substances interacting with our brain biochemistry. Addiction to alcohol will have got someone into alcohol dependency, and also hold them in it, but the physical disorder is a distinct disorder which compounds the issue.

Likewise, if you have ever taken an anti-depressant, or perhaps some other forms of medication, you may have had to gradually reduce it in order to stop. People don’t get addicted to venlafaxine or amitriptyline, but their body has developed physical dependencies, so a gradual reduction is needed.

Addiction is therefore a separate and more complex issue. Addiction is where a behaviour which often creates more pain or trauma in the long run, is used to anaesthetise feelings of pain, unease or fear, which itself then leads to even more pain, unease or fear. It is a feedback loop that continues and perpetuates, often with worsening consequences as it progresses. People can be addicted to substances, to shopping, to gambling, to sex, to social media or many other things. In fact, anything that can be used to give us an immediate dopamine hit and distract from our underlying melancholy can be the object of our addiction, and as we build a tolerance, our addiction becomes more extreme as higher doses are necessary to deliver the same level of comfort/distraction.

Subscribe now

Do drugs cause addiction?

The short answer? No. Well not on there own, and that doesn’t necessarily make them safe. (They can cause dependence remember!)

If one of your elderly relatives has ever fallen and broken a hip or femur, it is likely they were given medical-grade heroin in hospital, and very possibly for several weeks/months whilst they recovered. It is also highly likely that as they recovered they simply stopped taking the diamorphine and didn’t become addicts. That’s because drugs do not ‘cause’ addiction per se.

It’s also important to remember that addiction transcends substances, and many addictions are behavioural. Does sex cause addiction? Does gambling cause addiction? No, not really. Most people have sex in their lives, but very few become sex addicts. They are the objects of the addiction. The situation is much more complex.

Addiction is caused by a variety of factors including genetic disposition, experience during formative years (in particular trauma), societal influence and life stressors (particularly feelings of being disconnected from society); and of course by something that can be the object of the addiction, such as drugs or sex.

For example, I have ADHD. This is most likely due to a combination of a genetic predisposition (a lot of neurodiversity in my family) and also my neurological and psychological development in my early years. However, ADHD is also a predisposing factor to addiction itself, with people with ADHD being four times as likely to develop addiction (due to increased sensitivity, increased dopamine sensitivity, increased impulsivity and feelings of ‘otherness’). However, many people who have ADHD do not become addicts, and this is important to understand. It is a combination of genetic predisposition and the presence of sufficient triggers such as trauma (particularly in infancy) that lead to addiction.

This is why most people drink alcohol and it never becomes problematic, but for some they become reliant on that escape, and it develops into harmful drinking and addiction.

The other key factor is societal influence and circumstances. The most compelling evidence for this was in the Vietnam War, where thousands of American soldiers became addicted to heroin whilst in Vietnam, but 90% of them stopped without further issue when they returned. It was the war zone that triggered the drug use, and when they returned home and the trigger was removed they were able to stop. Sadly some were not able to, and the trauma was too much and they continued their addiction back in the States.

What is the biggest killer in drug addiction?

The vast majority of harm in drug addiction comes from overdose, drug-related infections, and repeated exposure to unclean substances or injecting equipment.

As discussed earlier, a physical dependence requires a steady flow of a substance to maintain normal neurochemistry. However, as the drug market is unregulated this is very hard to achieve as potency varies massively. If one day your heroin has a potency of X, but the next day it has a potency of two times X, then you can accidentally overdose by taking the same amount because the potency varied. Think of it with alcohol. Imagine if a beer had a range of 2% up to 15% and you had two pints of beer every night. One night you might only have 1.2 units of alcohol, and the next 17 units of alcohol. These will have wildly differing consequences and there is no way of telling the strength by looking; we only know because it is regulated and there is a legal obligation on the supplier to tell us an accurate percentage. This is not the case with the illicit drugs market.

What’s more, where drug use is illegal, it is often hidden ‘underground’. This means that people have less contact with health providers, and drug paraphernalia can be hard to come by. If you share and reuse needles, for example, your risk of getting a blood-borne virus (such as HIV or Hepatitis C), your risk of infections such as endocarditis, and your risk of injection-related harm such as embolism, all go up exponentially.

So why do so many people become addicted to drugs?

The drugs which we see in addiction tend to be potent and powerful ones such as heroin, alcohol or cocaine. Powerful drugs have a profound effect on humans, which lead to altered states of consciousness. If your day-to-day state of consciousness is full of pain, anxiety and suffering, then it is understandable that you might want to change that. The more you hurt, the more susceptible you become to drastic measures. The problem is, the relief is only temporary. What’s more, due to the development of tolerance, you end up needing bigger hits to achieve the analgesic effects (physical and mental). Whilst this does lead to changes in your neurology in the long term, this is an effect, not a cause, of substance addiction.

So how do we treat addition?

We have already discussed how addiction results from people feeling pain, being unable to move past trauma or feeling disconnected from society. However, we also know that there is a physical component to addiction, called dependency, which also needs considering.

We also know that it is often overdose, or the act of injecting, that causes the most drug-related harm or drug deaths. It is also important to consider the impact of poor mental health for patients with ‘dual diagnosis’ who can become mentally unwell and take there own lives. For those with dual diagnosis, the treatment principles remain the same, and removing the stigma-barrier associated with drug use is essential to ensuring appropriate mental health treatment is accessed.

Addiction is treatable, and people can and do get better. Often it is a case of reducing the harm involved in their addiction whilst we support them to rebuild their lives and address the issues in their life which led them to their aversion to sobriety in the first place. I will quickly address a few of the key areas of addiction treatment:

Harm Reduction

This is a really important aspect of all drug and alcohol treatment. It accepts the reality that people are struggling with addiction, and will continue to do so; therefore we should try and reduce the associated harm in the meantime. I have worked with many people who have accessed harm reduction for many years before recovering from their addiction. I have also sadly worked with too many who were unable to stay alive long enough to have the opportunity to recover.

Harm reduction is a non-judgemental evidence-based approach to saving lives. Sadly many aspects of it remain illegal under UK law, with many aspects requiring legal permissions and exemptions to deliver.

Examples of harm reduction are:

Needle exchange – providing clean needles (massively reduces risk of infection and blood-borne viruses).

Drug-testing facilities – these identify toxic batches to reduce overdose risk (often used at festivals).

Heroin Assisted Treatment (HAT) – prescribing clean, regulated and controlled heroin to opiate users has been shown to massively reduce heroin deaths, and improve long-term recovery rates. It was used in England for many years before pressure from the USA shut it down in the 60s and 70s. It has been used successfully across Europe and has reduced heroin-associated crime and improved treatment outcomes considerably. The UK has recently reintroduced one trial site for HAT.

Safe injection facilities – These provide a place where drug users can access clean equipment and safe injection advice, and inject their drug of choice with medical staff present. This both reduces overdose risk and also supports relationship-building between the user and the health professional which can lead to people entering treatment. (Again, there is only one trial happening in the UK for this, despite a strong evidence base from around the world.)

Naloxone provision – a partial opiate antagonist that can temporarily displace heroin from opiate receptors, temporarily reversing heroin overdoses – this is being widely distributed to drug users and those who live with drug users, and has saved many lives; (it only lasts 20 minutes so an ambulance must always still be called).

Recovery Programmes:

There are many recovery programmes in the world, and many different approaches – here is a brief overview:

12-Step recovery: 12-Step Recovery has helped more people struggling with addiction than any single other programme. It is a spiritual programme with a strong evidence base, which is based on abstinence and the principles of mutual aid. It is true that it does not always work for everyone, and for some people it is all about timing; however, it remains the world’s most successful recovery programme.

Trauma-based approaches: Supporting people to process and manage their trauma, and supporting them holistically to heal and rebuild their lives.

Bio-psycho-social approaches: These incorporate physical treatments, such as relapse prevention medications, detoxes and opiate substitution therapy, alongside holistic care (such as support with housing, finances and social connections) alongside psychological treatments such as CBT or DBT.

Inpatient rehabs: These can utilise a range of recovery approaches, and are offered in inpatient settings away from wider societal influences. These require a lot of preparation, without which people tend to leave early, as they are not prepared and it is too much for them to process without their drug of choice.

Detox: This is the medical process of supporting people from dependency, and is best used in conjunction with recovery programmes; it is sometimes done on its own in medical emergencies.

Okay, so now we’ve covered what drugs are, and what addiction is; let’s talk drug policy.

Have drugs always been illegal?

No. They haven’t. In fact, blanket prohibition is relatively new and started in America in the early 20th century. If you want to learn more about the development of prohibition I recommend Chasing the Scream by Johann Hari.

In 1908, the United States introduced the Opium Exclusion Act followed by the Harrison Narcotics Act in 1914 which banned the sale and distribution of narcotics. This was followed by the Alcohol Prohibition Act in 1919.

Prior to this, cocaine and opium were readily available in most pharmacies, and there was very little drug-related harm. Strengths were lower than under prohibition, and three quarters of opium users were functioning members of society with social lives and jobs.

A lot of the narrative at the time was grounded in racism and was around stopping ‘black’ and ‘Mexican’ drugs, with hyperbolic narrative, which has sadly continued to this day. The vast majority of incarceration in the USA for drug use offences are for non-white people, despite the fact that white people use drugs at the same rate.

It’s important to recognise that the medical profession resisted this as they felt it would lead to drug harms and deaths, and in the 1910s and 1920s hundreds and possibly thousands of doctors were arrested for continuing to prescribe heroin to patients who needed it.

The USA then continued to use the UN to pressure countries around the world to adopt prohibition, in what is now known, due to Nixon’s famous speech in 1971, as ‘the war on drugs’.

Share

Does prohibition reduce use?

The answer to this is yes and no.

Under strict prohibition, if a substance is impossible to get hold of then it clearly will be used less. However, it doesn’t change the individuals experiencing addiction, who will likely find other outlets for their addiction.

Moreover, it never really works. America and the UK for example have tried this for years, increasing prohibition and introducing harsher sentences, but drug rates continue to steadily rise and drugs seem more available than ever.

Why does prohibition not stop drug supply?

Many drugs are not expensive to grow or produce. However, because they are made illegal, there is a huge potential for profit. This is what attracts criminal gangs.

The global drugs trade is worth hundreds of billions of dollars per year (up to $600,000,000,000). This means that drug gangs have enough money to outmanoeuvre law enforcement and increase the supply of drugs, and they have a huge incentive to keep creating new drug addicts.

If drugs were legalised, this would mean this billion-dollar industry loses both its income and its market.

Does prohibition lead to higher-quality or lower-quality substance?

As the drug market is not regulated, dealers get away with mixing drugs with all sorts of toxic substances.

It is important to remember that under alcohol prohibition, methanol poisoning rose drastically, something which is not seen with regulated alcohol.

Then there is also the ‘Iron Rule of Prohibition’.

If you are smuggling alcohol into a party or event, you will likely pick the strongest alcohol possible to get the most units in your hipflask. The same is true for any drug under prohibition.

In America prior to prohibition, the nation’s favourite and most drunk alcohol was beer. This switched to whiskey under prohibition as smuggling beer was less cost effective. After prohibition, it switched back to beer. This applies to drugs too. Before prohibition, the opium you could buy in the pharmacy was much less potent than the heroin seen on our streets today.

Does prohibition make it harder for children to buy drugs?

Sadly it does not. Think about it, it is much easier for a 16-year-old to buy cannabis than alcohol in this country. That is because alcohol suppliers are heavily regulated and if they break those regulations they lose their licence. However, for a cannabis dealer who doesn’t require a licence, everyone is a potential customer.

Decriminalisation vs Legalisation

Decriminalisation tends to refer to the act of decriminalising certain aspects of drug law, most usually possession. This is an approach backed by the UN and most drug organisations; it stops punishing the users, and starts to treat addiction as a medical issue and not a crime.

Legalisation tends to refer to the act of repealing all prohibition, and then using regulation as a means to control and regulate supply.

In essence, they are a similar approach but working at it from different sides: one starts with criminalisation and works backwards, one with legalisation then works forward.

Does legalisation mean drugs will be more readily available?

Again, the answer is no.

Legalisation does not mean liberalisation and it covers a range of possibilities.

Commercial legalisation is exactly what we have for alcohol. This approach means adults can buy it, but children can’t. It means its strength is controlled and regulated. You can regulate who can sell it, who can buy it, and what is in it. It also enables the sale and distribution of it to create tax revenue.

The strongest argument for this is that someone will be selling the substances no matter what we do. Who would you rather was in control of the process and benefiting from the profit? The government, or criminal gangs?

Controlled legalisation is another form of legalisation, but in a more tightly regulated way. As a registered non-medical prescriber, I regularly prescribe methadone to my patients to help reduce their overdose risk, and reduce the need for them to go out and find heroin. This is regulated and controlled. Only specialist services can prescribe this to those who need it, and no one else can access it. The sale of it or distribution of it in any other way remains illegal.

This is what would happen to drugs like heroin. It would be available through heavily regulated and monitored specialist services, ensuring it only went to those who needed it.

(Methadone does save many lives. However, heroin-assisted treatment is associated with better outcomes and would be my preference for many of my patients, but I cannot currently legally prescribe it to my patients despite the evidence base.)

Will legalisation reduce drug crime?

Short answer? YES

Under alcohol prohibition, street gangs grew rapidly to corner this profitable market. As soon as it was legalised and regulated, they lost their income and the profits from alcohol sales were redirected to the government, not the alcohol gangs.

Criminal enterprise and county lines online exist because of prohibition. The pain caused in the countries where drugs originate (such as Colombia), or where they are trafficked (such as Mexico) through to the gang shootings, stabbings and grooming we see here, all stem from drug prohibition.

If we supply those who are addicted with medical-grade heroin or stimulants, the market collapses and there is no market for drug gangs. Moreover, the person addicted does not need to steal to fund their expensive habit, which further decreases drug crime.

Is legalisation expensive?

No, it is not. Tax revenue from commercialised legalisation (for example if we legalised cannabis) would be huge. But also think about the time and resources spent arresting drug addicts, and keeping them in prison. This is money we cannot currently spend on other things such as addiction services, or on improving quality of life for communities to reduce incidences of addiction in the first place.

Moreover, the amount of money spent fighting criminal gangs is insane (especially when we remember these gangs only exist BECAUSE of our laws). If we legalise drugs we can stop wasting money on an endless war which will never be won, and start investing it instead in our communities.

Subscribe now

Is this supported by the evidence?

Yes, it is, but it requires a complex understanding of the evidence for the following reasons.

1. What is deemed a good outcome varies drastically. (Is switching from injecting heroin to smoking heroin a good outcome? Is reducing use a good outcome? Is abstinence the only good outcome?)

2. There are an infinite amount of variables to consider. Countries which decriminalise, for example, are more likely to have less stigma and invest more in treatment services as well, so it is very hard to isolate the specific causes of improvement

3. Barriers to research. Both the criminal cartels and the American federal government are staunchly against ending this multi-billion dollar industry. The pressure they can exert on other countries is not to be underestimated. This remains a barrier to research and trialling evidence-based approaches.

That being said, there is still a lot of evidence we can use. We can study Portugal, Holland and other European countries that have tried varying levels of decriminalisation and legalisation, as well as Canada and several of the US states. The evidence consistently highlights the failures of prohibition to effect change (the countries with the worst drug outcomes all use prohibition) whilst the harm reduction approaches enabled by decriminalisation and legalisation have a very solid evidence base behind them.

I am currently conducting a scoping review of the literature and am aiming to publish the results later this year so I will share that when I do.

For those interested in current evidence summaries, I recommend looking at the Transform Drug Policy Foundation

For now though, the evidence all points in the same direction. Prohibition is a failure. It is expensive and ineffective. To blindly continue with it is sheer insanity.

It’s time we moved to an evidence-based approach to drug policy. Not an approach grounded in racism and stigma and which has been proven to cause untold levels of harm, pain and suffering, which we know are the key ingredients to creating more addiction.

Please note, I have not put this article behind the paywall as it is an important topic that I want shared as widely as possible. However, it has taken considerable time to research and write. If you are able to support me to continue doing work like this, please consider subscribing to my Substack. It is only £3 per month, but it will enable me to put aside more time for writing.

Subscribe now

Thank you.

Share

Firstly, who am I?

My name is Harry Eccles and I am 31 years old. I have lived on the Isle of Wight for about 5 year and I started working here two years before that. I was born in Manchester, but grew up in Cornwall with my mum and siblings. In 2014 I moved to Southampton to study nursing and I qualified in 2018 as a Registered Mental Health Nurse and a Registered General Nurse. During my training I worked across Hampshire, Southampton, Portsmouth and the IOW in a variety of settings. Upon graduation I took a job for a year in Eastleigh in the Drug and Alcohol service, before being asked to come to the Island to help set up the new local service here. I was only supposed to come for a few months, but I loved it so much I never left. I worked in the community specialising in addiction for several years, and ended up moving to the island full time during the Covid-19 Pandemic. My choice was either to stay in my flat in Southampton and try and do some work remotely, or stay on the island in a local hotel and continue caring for my patients, and I chose the later. Following the Pandemic I started working as a Nurse Specialist at St Mary’s (where I’m known as ‘Harry from Inclusion’) supporting patients with addition or detox needs across the whole hospital. During this time I also commenced my Advanced Nurse Practitioner Masters, of which I am know finalising my dissertation (on the topic of the effects on public health of drug legalisation). For the last few years I have been working in a full time nursing leadership role at a national level, where I have established a small team of eight people who carry out complex UK-wide multi-year projects, whilst still doing some part time community clinics on the side. In the last year I have moved from my house in Pan over to the Shanklin area so I can be closer to the beach. I love sea swimming all year round (when there has been no sewage dumps that is!), and I love walking the promenade between Shanklin and Lake (and stopping for a chicken Benny at Tradewinds).

Subscribe now

Why I am standing as a local county councilor candidate

I am a very big believer of ‘If not me, then who? if not now, then when?’.

It is all to easy to list the problems we are facing as a community, but my interest really lies in how we do something to change it. This is the drive that has led me into activism and campaigning. I have been a long standing campaigner for keeping our NHS public, and for NHS workers getting fair pay, terms and conditions. I have also been a campaigner for peace and social justice, and cleaner rivers and seas.

I am a big believer in democracy, and the power of organising and collective action. I believe that when ordinary people like you are me get together as a collective, we can achieve incredible change. This drive led to being a rank and file trade union organiser before becoming a trade union Rep, and has led me to get involved in local campaigns and now local politics.

In addition, I feel that my work as a local nurse has led me to unique insight into the impact that local service provision has on people’s health and wellbeing. I have seen the detriment to wellbeing and recovery when local services have been cut, and I have seen the improvement to peoples lives when services have had investment. Therefore rather than continuing to simply treat those suffering the effects of service cuts, I also want to try and tackle the root cause. Prevention is always a better option than cure (where possible).

The Island faces is fair share of issues. It has experienced chronic under funding and under investment for far too long as is far too often over-looked. This affects all of us, and it is time for us together to do something about it.

Share

Why am I standing as a Green?

My political journey is not an uncommon one. I grew up in Cornwall where we had a good local LibDem MP. However, as a teenager I felt the Cleggmania descend into betrayal as the LibDems joined the Conservative coalition and increased university tuition fees by three fold (this led me to organise my first ever protest in Truro against the tuition fee hike).

Then, at university I voted Greens in my first ever election, and in 2017 I joined the Labour party where I campaigned several times for Jeremy Corbyn as leader. His commitment to working class people and global justice has always been an inspiration to me, and he remains a hero of mine to this day. Under Corbyn I saw a Labour party really willing to fight for working people, for our public services and to restore equality. Sadly, I felt that quickly dissolve following 2019, and soon saw the Labour party as completely unrecognisable.

That was when i Joined the Green Party full time and I have not looked back since.

Locally the Green party are a diverse group of warm, friendly, local folk who care deeply about this island and the people here. Nationally we are setting standards and values consistent with my own of equality, social justice and unity. This is the party for me.

This year, the Greens are fielding 26 candidates across the Island which is a huge increase, and we stand to make some big gains in May. You can find out more about our full candidate list here.

What are my passions, values and priorities?

As I am asking for you to lend me your vote, I will also tell me about my priorities and values.

1. Good, high quality, affordable local transport - As someone who does not drive, I rely solely on local transport and have a good understanding of the issues we face. I spent my first few years on the island commuting between Newport and Southampton, and now I commute between Shanklin and Portsmouth on a regular basis. Local Transport should be based on the needs of the island, and should be cheap to encourage use and to enable local residents to travel around the island and to commute to and from the mainland. I believe that Transport is a public service and should be locally owned and run based on need, not profit.

2. Clean Rivers and Seas, free of sewage - As a Sea Swimmer, I struggle to express how angry I get at Southern Water dumping sewage into our rivers and seas. Across the UK - £88,000,000,000 has been paid to private water company share holders in dividends since they were privatised. Private companies line there own pockets whilst under investing in infrastructure. Although in recent years Southern water have technically forgone shareholder payouts, that hasn’t stopped the CEO Steven Lawrence awarding himself over £600,000 as bonuses through a long-term incentive plan on top of his £600,000 salary. That’s a lot of reward for an increasingly crappy service (excuse the pun).

3. Investment in local services - Councils should be investing in their towns, villages and communities. Local amenities and services benefit us all. From libraries to school clubs, from local toilets to day centres. Local services are a public asset and should be protected, not cut in a short-sighted bid to cut corners and save a few bob. As residents, it is OUR council tax, and it should fund OUR services. That shouldn’t be controversial.

4. Local Representation - Finally, and for me the most important, I believe that being a local councillor is about helping you as constituents to achieve your goals and priorities. I am a big believer in democracy and recognise that if I were elected councilor, that would not be a mandate for me to pursue my own personal agenda, but would be a big a huge responsibility to pursue the collective agenda of the people of Lake South. I would be fully accountable to you, and I strongly believe that there is not greater honour and responsibility than being elected to represent your community.

   

So, finally, why vote for me?

My experience:

1. My local nursing has led me to a deep understanding of the experience and needs of residents across the island.

2. Me experience of campaign and activism shows my commitment to achieving real change, and I have a good track record of real-life wins for real-life people.

3. My experience in national Nursing leadership has shown my skills of overseeing complex projects, large budgets, and working with multiple stakeholders and committees.

   

My Values:

1. I remain committed to fairness and equality for everyone. We live in a time of increasing toxicity and division, and it is the biggest threat to social cohesion we have seen. I will not tolerate it.

2. I believe in democracy which means I believe it is the people of the Isle of Wight who should decide what happens with the island’s money.

3. I love this beautiful island, and it deserves investment and conservation.

   

My Promises:

1. Contactability - If elected, I will ensure all constituents have my contact information.

2. Responsibility - If elected, I will ensure I respond to all requests for support in my role as a councilor, and give my all to every issue that arises.

3. Accountability - If elected, I will remain accountable to the people of Lake south.

   

If you would like to support us in our local campaign, you can make a donation here:

For regular updates, please Subscribe to my Substack

Subscribe now

You can also follow me on X: @heccles94 and Bluesky on @harryeccles.bsky.social

Be sure to Vote Green on May 7th!

Please share this article, particularly with anyone you know in Lake!

Share

The deadline to register to vote is 20 April - Click here to register!

Okay. So. I have mulled this over for a while, but I keep coming back to need to ask you - what on earth is going on?!

Subscribe now

This letter is intended in a spirit of enquiry to try and understand what we are seeing across the pond, and to reflect back how it looks to us Brits over here. I hope we can figure out some common way forward to repair our relationship, and to stop the world being plunged into further chaos and darkness.

The USA and the UK have a longstanding relationship. Despite sibling rivalry and banter, we have long been seen to share common values. However, it feels today like we have never been further apart,

Trumps approval ratings are now at an all time low with the British Public, and we have gone from seeing most Brits see the USA as allies, to now seeing you as a rogue state. So what is really going on?

Link: YouGov

Trump

Okay, so most of this focuses on Trump, and what he is doing both at home and abroad. But it is also about you, the people who elected him, and the people who are letting him remain in office. Trump was first elected in 2016 with 60 million votes, and then again in 2024 with 77 million votes, so this is no way fringe politics, this is American mainstream politics. So, instead of shouting ‘AMERICA, WHAT ARE YOU THINKING’ - I will try and calmly explain how things look through British eyes.

Trump and Epstein.

Now, we Brits are no stranger to political scandal, but we are also used to scandals having consequences. This is a land where David Miliband lost out on being labour leader because he was filmed eating a banana, and John Perfumo had to resign for being a soviet spy. However, what we cannot fathom is how a man, already convicted of fraud, can be so deeply implicated in the most disgusting and heinous scandal of our time without consequences.

For us, it seems like you simply don’t mind that your commander in chief is implicated in the world’s largest pedophile ring, and that is a troubling thought. The Epstein Files took down a prince and a political titan over here, so why are you, the people of the USA, letting the president getting away scot-free? This should be something that is apolitical. Whether you see yourself as on the left or on the right, surely you should unite in standing against paedophilia?

Trump and ICE - Land of the free?

If you were to ask any Brit 10 years ago to name something associated with America, they would likely have said Freedom. ‘The land of the free’ was something you Americans always seemed to hold dear - but over the last decade we have watched you seemingly hand over your freedom to a cult-style dictatorship.

ICE have been patrolling the streets of various US states, attacking and even murdering US citizens. What’s more, they are being given real time information and data by Palantir who are conducting mass surveillance that north Korea would be proud of. So America, why are you not fighting back?

Moreover, whilst we can all see that ICE murdering citizens is horrific, what’s even more terrifying is that Trump and his team went on TV and told you to ignore the evidence you could see with your on eyes, and the media left him do it. Now this is seriously scary stuff. When truth ceases to exist, and power is being stripped from you, how can you not see red warning flags??

“When you think of it, we shouldn’t even have an election” - Donald Trump, 2026

Trump’s personal enrichment

The other thing that seems clear to us over here is that Trump and his pals are doing pretty well out of this. Trump and Musk for example have seen their wealth double since Trump returned to office in 2025. Peter Theil has seen his wealth quadruple since 2016. Meanwhile, poverty is rife across America. What is going on?

Decent into fascism

Alongside the attempts from Trump’s administration to attack the very fabric of American democracy, we are also seeing a terrifying raise in racist and homophobic language. This rhetoric is dangerous and throws fuel onto the fire of the culture wars. Whilst Britain is seeing a rise in this too, we are not seeing the blatant neo-Nazi phraseology and sentiment shared quite so openly and publicly by leading politicians and the Whitehouse itself. America is fast becoming everything it claims to hate (an authoritarian Nazi dictatorship) and you, the people, are seemingly allowing it to happen.

Subscribe now

Illegal War and Genocide

Now, while for many Brits the domestic concerns around America are troubling, the biggest call to officially remove the USA as a British ally is the war crimes your government are committing abroad.

Invading Venezuela, threatening Canada and Greenland, arming Israel’s genocide, bombing Iran… These are all deeply troubling acts which are seeing a death toll in the tens of thousands and are threatening global law and order.

Whilst Britain is not innocent of complicity, many Brits feel like it is because of America that we are getting involved. Now, I do not absolve the British state for it’s actions. But, at the same time, this lack of regard for international law from this current US administration is like nothing many of us have ever seen before.

Make no mistake, history will remember those who supported and enabled genocide. The question is, are you willing to let the history books show that the people of the United States of America sat back and let it happen?

So, why am i writing this letter?

My hope is that this letter finds you, the average US citizen, and encourages you to think about what you can do to stop the destruction being committed in your name. We understand that for many Americans, watching what your country is doing is painful, however, it is not enough to simply feel upset by it, we need you to do something about it.

For now, we will continue to support the good people of the USA who want to stand for peace and justice, but is getting harder and harder to keep that faith alive. We do not want to abandon the decent people of the USA as our allies, but we are fast being left with no choice.

We need you to show us and the world that you are not going to tolerate and accept this decline into dictatorship and terror.

If you stand up and fight, we will stand with you.

Yours sincerely, the people of Britain.

Share

Share Harry Eccles

Subscribe now

Subscribe now

Who founded Palantir?

Peter Theil:

Peter Thiel founded PayPal and Palantir, and is one of the worlds richest men. He has pushed for big tech to work closer with the state, and has been a strong supporter of Donald Trump and MAGA before it was common amongst big-tech companies. In fact, it is reported that Thiel gave over $35,000,000 to hardline republican candidates and reportedly set up JD Vance on his political career. As a backer of big state, Thiel goes against the American Libertarianism and towards authoritarian control, and has long drawn criticism for his anti-democracy views.

Alex Karp:

Alex Karp is the founder and CEO of Palantir. He believes that big tech should be a tool of the state and the military so has drawn lots of criticism for pro-fascism and authoritarian views.

Withe regard to Palantir being used to slaughter thousands of Palestinians, Alex said he was ‘proud’.

Stephen Cohen:

Often seen as the tech, Cohen is less mired in publicity and scandal than Thiel, however is still linked to Palantir’s mass surveillance and support of genocide and racist authoritarianism in America as we shall explore in this article

Joe Lonsdale:

Joe Lonsdale was involved more so in the early days and is a longstanding colleague of Thiel. His speciality is polarising politics, fueling culture wars and division.

Nathan Gettings:

Lesser known and quieter, an engineer.

Who runs Palantir in the UK?

Louis Mosely (grandson of the fascists Oswald Mosely) is the head of Palantir in the UK and Europe. He leads on British Palantir Contracts which included defense and the NHS.

Who Funds Palantir?

1. Vanguard Group - one of the largest investment management firms, with over $12,000,000,000,000 - known for scandals including misleading advisor compensation and target date fund tax disclosure scandals. (Vanguard, Blackrock and State Street global all involved in the ESG anti-trust lawsuit to influence coal output).

2. BlackRock - another of the worlds largest asset management firms known for various scandals including its love of fossil fuels and burning the planet- worth over $14,000,000,000,000

3. State Street global Advisors - Asset management firm, worth over $4,700,000,000,000

4. Peter Thiel himself

5. Alex Karp himself

6. Geode Capital management - worth $1,900,000,000,000

7. Norges Bank Investment Management - worth $2,200,000,000,000

8. JP Morgan Asset Management - worth $4,200,000,000,000

9. UBS Asset management - $7,000,000,000,000

10. Northern Trust Global investment worth $1,400,000,000,000

Palantir and Palestine

Palantir has provided AI and data-analysis technology to the IDF and as a company have expressed ‘solidarity’ with the IDF during its genocidal campaign. This means Palantir’s tech has been used by the IDF in their consistent and multiple war crimes. Whilst Palantir deny any wrongdoing, it is hard to fathom how arming a genocidal army whose president has an outstanding ICC warrant for potential war crimes can possible not involve any wrongdoing. Karp in one video minimised the genocide by saying it was Hamas killing Palestinians, despite the IDF itself admitting at least 72,000 Palestinians have been killed by the IDF. This has led to mass demonstrations against Palantir for the accusation of supporting genocide.

Subscribe now

Palantir and ICE

The Department of Homeland Security signed a $96,000,000 contract with Palantir in 2022, which Trump added a $30,000,000 contract to specifically to support ICE leading to Palantir building ICE’s core systems and software.

Across the United States, ICE have been compared to a private police form for Donald Trump, and have openly murdered several peaceful protestors included Alex Pretti (a 27 year old ICU nurse) and Renee Good (a mother of three). Palantir has provided the technology for ICE to conduct mass state surveillance, raids and mass deportations of people across the USA.

Their have been claims that DODGE, Health and other data is being combined to create a mass-surveillance state, which is the stuff of Orwellian nightmares.

Palantir also provide the software and systems for the LAPD, Chicago PD, NYPD, New Orleans PD and regional ‘fusion centres’ which allow local police agencies to both add to and draw from the data pool. They can cross reference criminal, financial, welfare and social media data sets, and map relationships between people, and even conduct ‘predicative’ patrol policing based on the data.

Moreover, Palantir has $10,000,000,000 of US Military contracts, $1,300,000,000 of Pentagon contracts and a Marine Corps Enterprise licence.

Long story short, Palantir has turned the US government into a highly effective mass surveillance state that would shock George Orwell himself.

So what about the UK?

Palantir already has £240,600,000 worth of Ministry of defence contracts in the UK. This was offered as a direct-award contract meaning there was no competition. In fact in February of this year, the UK government confirmed that Palantir was a strategic supplier of the UK government with up to £1,500,000,000 of investment to come.

Moreover, MPs have stated that Palantir is currently being trialed in several police forces across the UK showing that Palantir is not content with mass surveillance across the States. It wants it here as well.

What about the NHS?

As a nurse, i know how important it is to protect our health data. In order to maintain the sanctity of confidentiality (which allows patients to be honest) and in order to safeguard to process from private interests (such as health insurance companies).

Palantir already holds up to £500,000,000 of NHS contracts to build a new data platform. This has proved incredibly unpopular with NHS workers and patients alike. Our health data contains information about our mental health, our sexual health, our long term conditions. Would you trust Palantir with this information?

Who is involved?

The current Health Secretary Wes Streeting and his friend and confident Peter Mandelson (sacked from the lords and recently arrested for his role in the Epstein Files) appear to have been collaborating to promote Palantir in the NHS. What’s more, whilst in the USA in 2025, Mandelson arranged for Starmer to visit Palantir HQ and to hold a private undocumented meeting with Palantir CEO Alex Karp in Washington. Is this what has led to hundreds of millions of pounds worth of NHS contracts and access to our health data being handed over to such a dodgy firm? It certainly seems dodgy to me.

So What can we do?

There are many organisations and charities campaigning against Palantir in the NHS. Zack Polanski, the leader of the Green Party has been lobbying Palantir and the government directly to drop the NHS contracts. The Good Law Project have created a tool to contact your local NHS trust and a public petition now has nearly 120,000 signatures.

This is something we must fight against. For the sake of all of us. Say NO to Palantir.

Share

Subscribe now

However, I do worry that things have developed so rapidly in recent months that we have not taken to the time to stop and explore why climate justice and social justice are one and the same thing. This article will break down how the Green party’s mission to save the plant, and its mission to to restore power to the people, are one and the same thing.

Subscribe now

Destination Climate Catastrophe

There is no denying the effects of climate change. We are seeing a global rise in sea temperatures, record greenhouse gas levels, rising sea levels and more severe and changeable weather across the globe.

We are burning through the planet’s precious resources in perpetual search for growth without much thought for the wider impact.

Our rivers and seas are as full of sewage as they are plastic, and intensive land cultivation has left the landscape as unrecognisable to us as it has to our fury friends.

This planet is our home, and we are its guardians. It is our duty to protect it. However, it no longer feels like we have any say in what is happening around us, and that is a big problem. Roughly half of all the land in England is owned by 1% of the population with 30% of the land being owned by the aristocracy, and 18% (and growing rapidly) owned by corporate and private holdings. We are seeing the mass globalisation of trade, and more and more autonomy being taken away from local communities as cooperate powers compete to take over the globe. Hyper-consumerism is leading to conformity as local cafes are being replaced by Costa-coffee and McDonalds, and power is being centralised far, far away from local communities. Is it any wonder the social contract is breaking down?

The Role of Capitalism and Consumerism

If you ask someone a question which starts ‘as a consumer’ and then ask the same question but starting ‘as a citizen’, you will get two very different answers.

When we are asked to think as consumers we prioritise our immediate wants (I want to get my food delivered as cheaply and as quickly as possible, for example). However, when we answer as a citizen, we consider the impact of our choices much more carefully (I would like some locally grown and produced food, which is brought to me in a sustainable way and in a way which supports the member of my community delivering the food). That is why, in a neoliberal capitalist culture, we have consumerism reinforced at every opportunity: in an ad after our morning meditation on YouTube, through the bus stop advertising whilst we wait for the bus to work, in the advert breaks of coronation street in the evening. This keeps us in a perpetual mindsight of the consumer, desperately fighting for our slice of the pie at the best possible price, and not thinking about our communities, our environment or the impact of the choices being made all around us. But the limited pie is a myth, as is the competition for it. The reality is that there is more than enough to go round, it’s just competitions is being used as a distraction to sell national assets out from under our feet, and we are letting it happen.

That is why the worlds biggest industries (War and fossil fuels) are able to continue to grow, despite most people being against war and climate destruction. It is also the reason we allow worsening austerity and privatisation, despite the disastrous effects this has on our communities.

The sad reality is that those who are trying to stop us winning better working conditions and reclaiming our utilities are the very same people on the pay role of big oil and the arms industry, just check out Reform UK’s major donors.

If this sounds like a global conspiracy, well that’s because it is. The same Epstein class who see this world as their playground, will burn through both people and the planet to buy themselves more power and control. The question is, will we let ourselves be bought by iPhones and big macs? or will we fight for our birthright as human beings, which is to live in peace and harmony with nature and our neighbours.

Subscribe now

Scapegoating Minority Groups

The biggest threats to vulnerable communities around the globe are war and climate change. We are seeing victims of war and genocide fleeing their homelands, as we are also seeing refugees of climate breakdown.

These poor humans are victims of global trends forwarded by western capitalism and consumerism. What’s worse, the global arms and fossil fuel industries causing this pain are funding far-right political parties around the world to scapegoat those same refugees desperately seeking new lives.

That is why the fight to save the planet and the fight against the far-right are linked, because those seeking to destroy the planet are bankrolling the far-right to protect their own self-serving interests.

The Solution? Cohesion and Unity

So what is the answer? How do we reverse this trend?

By sticking together.

A community divided is a community conquered, and that is how up until now they are getting away with their attacks on social cohesion and on the local environment. It is no coincidence that the Labour party, the former party of local communities and the working class, has slowly and gradually been infiltrated by corporate lobbyists and those wishing to sow hate and division. Sadly the Labour party is no longer recognisable by those who started the movement. However, the movement is not dead, and it is getting ready to rise up once more in the name of the Green Party.

It is my firmly held believe that we cannot restore ecosystems without also rebuilding local communities. A community united is a force to be reckoned with, but it requires hard work to build and defend. Solidarity means just that. We have to stand with the persecuted and the marginalised. When we allow fear, hate and division to infiltrate in any guise (be it racism, sexism or transphobia) it enables competitive consumerism to once again take over.

A united community can take back control of our energy, water and transport. United we can say no to Palantir in our NHS, say no to sewage in our seas, and say no to the closures of local schools and libraries.

Together we can stand against genocide and war, we can end deforestation, and we can reverse habitat loss.

Together we can bring back hope to communities around the world. Together, we can save the people and planet. Only together, can we win.

Join the Green Party today!

Share

It’s not an understatement to say that we face the very real, and very scary prospect of a far-right government in the near future. The complete collapse of centrist and centre-right politics has led to a populist uprising from the far-right and they are rapidly gaining ground.

Although they only have 8 MPs, you would think that Nigel Farage was already prime minister given the amount of airtime the BBC give him and is party. Reform are top of the polls, and that doesn’t seem to be changing. Whilst it is true that they did not win the last Welsh Senedd and Parliamentary byelections, this was not by a huge margin. They are learning as they go, and they are getting organised. Reform are in it to win it. If we want to beat them, we need to get organised too.

What is at stake?

Reform UK are the British equivalent of MAGA. This means we don’t need to use our imagination to look at what would happen if they win, we simply need to look across the pond. Minority groups being rounded up by secret police, protestors being shot and killed and government resources and data being sold off to big tech. Is this the future we want? Moreover, look at what is happening abroad, illegal invasions, illegal wars and support for genocide. MAGA is destabilising the entire world, and creating countless refuges across the globe, as well as claiming thousands of innocent lives.

If Reform UK win, we would see an unprecedented attack on workers rights, on LGBTQ+ rights, and on women’s rights and on disability rights. These rights are hard won, and we still have some way to go. We cannot go backwards. We would also see the lives of black and minority ethnic people put at risk, as Reform will use parliament to continue their racist rhetoric and policies. Reform UK want to restore patriarchy and white supremacy, alongside a return to feudal systems where we remain the surfs, and they the wealthy land owners.

Then we have our NHS. Farage has already spoken about how the NHS does not work and we need an insurance-based model. Can we risk the NHS being privatised? No we can not.

We cannot hand over our hard won democratic rights over to the big tech and big oil companies that Reform UK work for.

What needs to change?

In short? Everything.

Firstly, we need to break our love affair with neoliberalist politics. We cannot continue with rampant privatisation and austerity which only enriches a small handful of the elite, at the expense of the rest of the people.

Moreover, we cannot allow more and more control to lie in fewer and fewer hands centrally; we need voter reform and devolution of power. We need a stronger democracy.

We need investment in our communities and local businesses, not in mega-chains and monopolies. We need renationalisation of public utilise and infrastructure. If we need it to live, and it is what it is (such as electricity, internet or a train) – then nationalise it. Yes we love variation in clothes and coffee shops, but we do not need it for water or gas.

We also need to see a drastic reduction in inequality. This partly comes from shifting power back to the people, but it also includes taxing wealth and not work.

Finally we need policies that protect the future by protecting the planet. We also need to end global injustice. War is bad for us all.

In short, we need eco-socialism.

Why the Greens?

The Green Party of England and Wales are the only party right now (particularly in England) that are showing the will and the potential to challenge the system.

The Tories got us into this mess. Labour have kept us in it, and the LibDems seem to sit tinkering on the edges.

It is worth recognising the Plaid Cymru in Wales, the SNP and Scottish Greens in Scotland, and Sin Fein in Northern Ireland are also doing their bit to fight the current system. However, we need a central vehicle for parliamentary change to win at a UK-wide level, and that is the Greens.

What about ‘Your Party’?

I don’t think it is possible for me to love Jeremy Corbyn than I already do. I also respect the idea and premise of Your Party and many of those involved, but for me, they have taken too many missteps and the energy has gone. They do not have the breadth of support needed to bring about parliamentary change; however I am sure they will field a handful of fantastic MPs and continue to be a force for good in this world.

So, what do we need to do?

Right now, we need to grow our local Green Branches and we need to recruit more members. Each new member brings in new skills and expertise, and that is our secret weapon.

If you are not yet a member, join today!

If you are a new member, find out when your next branch meeting is and go along and find out what you can do to help bring about change.

Labour have sold their membership for money from Blackrock. This means that Reform, the Tories and the Labour party have much more money donated to them than the Green party. But our strength lies not in big money (which can come, and go, and makes us vulnerable to pressure), but in people. And when you rely on people power rather than big business, you restore the social contract with the people that the Tories and Labour have recently ripped to shreds.

This means we need to fundraise. Can you support us on the IOW to fight the May elections? If so, please donate by clicking here. Every donation helps us get closer to our goal of restoring power to the people.

It is vital that we organise in our communities and find the future leaders of tomorrow. The next big fight is the local elections in May. If we can win the May elections, we lay the ground for parliamentary wins in 2029, and we regain control of our local communities.

We need people like you to come forward as Green councillors, and we need to beat reform to ensure that the councils come back into the hands of the people, and don’t fall to the fascists.

Together I do believe we can win, but we cannot be complacent and we cannot sit back and watch. If we do that, then Reform will win. However, if we all get active and do our bit, then and only then will we beat the fascists.

Share

Everywhere we look, we are seeing the most egregious acts of harm being committed, and seeing very little accountability or justice. What kind of world are we living in? And more importantly, why are we letting this happen?

Gaza in rubble, and Tehran ablaze.

A conservative estimate, confirmed by the IDF, puts the death toll in Gaza at 72,000 human beings. Almost a third of which (30%) are, or rather were, children (for comparison, Ukraine has 4% of their death toll as children). Now it goes without saying that any death is a tragedy, particularly that of a child, but a paediatric murder rate of 30% is simply evil. I cannot think of another word.

What’s worse, the western world is not simply watching, it is supporting these acts of genocide. the USA has supplied over $20,000,000,000 to Israel since the escalation of the genocide. My own country the UK has supplied 150,000 bullets, 8,630 munitions and parts for tanks and fighter jets, alongside military intelligence and training for the IDF.

Moreover, the British media consistently belittle the death of Palestinians, whilst excusing the leaders of this barbarity. I sincerely hope that those complicit are one day held to account.

Imagine trying to explain to our children and grandchildren as they learn of the Gazan Genocide, how we watched on as our country played its part.

There is no philosophical exploration of morality I can conceive that justifies our active role in this genocide. Our governments have blood on their hands.

What’s more, Trump and Netanyahu, not content with their on-going genocide have now escalated this to all out war in the middle east. However barbaric the Iranian regime was, it does not feel like there are any winners to this escalation. Moreover, the Whitehouse has been live streaming war crimes on X, seemingly unaware of the implications, or more cynically complete aware of the implications but believing that they can get away with it. With every moral or legal law broken, the criminal is further emboldened to act with impunity.

The first major blow on Iran, launched by the USA military, was a strike on an Iranian girls school killing over 160 Iranian school girls. An act of sheer inhumanity that i cannot fathom. The loss of innocent life, let alone the pain it will cause the communities and families, is incomprehensible. This is a blatant war crime, but again, there seems to be no consequences for the perpetrators. Middle eastern eye have recorded the name of the school children murdered by the UAS military, and it can be found here: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/names-and-ages-children-iranian-school-strike.

Moreover, the World Health Organisation have announced that 13 hospitals and healthcare facilities in Iran have been attacked by the USA and Israel - each act a blatant war crime. As a nurse, I cannot comprehend how any country could deem a hospital, or indeed a school, as a legitimate target. But as they got away with it in Gaza, they believe they will also get away with it in Iran.

The USA also launched an attack on an Iranian frigate which was on exercise in international waters, 2000 miles form Iran. Not only was it clearly an illegitimate target, but the USA navy left the sailors to drown, which is a serious breach of the Geneva Convention. Fortunately Sri Lanka rescued the sailors.

So what do we do we the world’s super powers are committing war crimes with impunity?

Subscribe now

Domestic Criminality

On Jan 24th, 2006, ICE agents in Minneapolis shot and murdered an ICU Nurse, Alex Pretti, in cold blood live on camera. The world saw it. This was 2 weeks after a mother of a beautiful 6 year old, Renee Good, was also murdered by ICE live on camera.

Not only did these murders go unpunished, in the most Orwellian twist they were flat out denied by Trump and his cronies, despite the world being able to watch the killings for themselves.

How can we expect to instill any sense of justice in our communities, when the law is only applied to those the state wishes to control, and not to others?

Closer to home

Then we look at the UK, where the government illegally proscribed direct action group, Palestine Action, in a cynical and brutal attempt to supress democracy. This led to the arrest of hundred of innocent peaceful protestors, in a act of fascist brutality that will stain the British state for a long time.

In addition we are seeing a worrying rise in racism, bigotry and hate speech enter the political mainstream, spearheaded by a morally repugnant but seemingly bullet proof Nigel Farage. Despite dodgy tax claims, despite acts of electoral fraud, and despite allegations of racist bullying, this man seems to have a ‘get out of jail free’ card permanently in his back pocket, and instead of holding him to account, the press seem to worship the very ground he walks on.

And lets not forget, this is following the years of conservative PPE fraud. These treacherous acts of theft from the tax payer were committed at a time when most of the community were working together to save lives. But what consequences have those responsible had to face? Absolutely none.

Baroness Michelle Moan, Lord Michael Gove, and Matt Hancock remain beneficiaries of the state, and it feels like no further action will be taken against them.

When we will we hold these corrupt elite figures to account?

Share

The Epstein Files

The biggest cloud hanging over the establishment at present is the Epstein Files. Despite countless allegations of sexual violence against children, Donald Trump remains the president of the Untied States of America. Granted the UK has seen a few arrests (The Andrew formally known as prince, and the lord of darkness Peter Mandelson) - we are yet to see any charges. Moreover, the trump administration are holding back on the evidence, to protect those guilty of paedophilia and child sex trafficking.

The we have Elon Musk, who spends half his time peddling far-right conspiracies online, and the other half trying to weasel his way out of his involvement with Epstein. However, he remains the worlds richest man. It really does feel like this world rewards moral depravity.

So what does this mean?

For me, its hard to find any semblance of morality or purpose when the world seems to reward depravity, and punish those who seek justice. However, we cannot accept this as the status quo.

All over the world, people are rising up saying enough is enough and demanding peace and justice, and we must do the same.

Join the political movement, get active, and lets demand peace and justice.

Share

Read more

“People voting has clearly been the cause of this shocking upset” said the Shadow Frist Officer, “we have never seen people voting like this on such an epic scale in a byelection before”.

Reform UK’s Political Fuhrer Farage said “the problem is, our equalities data collection is not yet adequate enough to stop all minority groups from voting. We know for a fact that some Muslims were able to vote, and i have heard rumours some gays slipped through the net”.

Now shadow MP for Gorton and Denton confirmed this worrying trend: “I for one saw lots of brown people voting, and this sort of thing that cannot continue”.

However minorities voting was not the only problem that Reform UK faced on the day.

“I think the problem was our lack of any actual policies, it seems to have been a turnoff to some voters” said Reform UK campaign lead Goebbels. “We told everyone what to do, but for some reason people appeared to be thinking for themselves, a very worrying trend” he continued.

Somehow, the Eco-Zealot Cabbage shagging Green party managed to woo voters with pie in the sky radical policies like: “invest public money in the NHS” and “Stop burning the planet” - but lets be honest, this nonsense will never catch on.

Thankfully, in some chink of hope, the Labour party seemed to have finally realised that the only way to reverse their string of catastrophic defeats is to double down on their failing strategies, and try and race-bait a bit harder.

“I think the lesson we have learnt here, is that we are not trying to chase the Reform vote hard enough” said local Labour candidate (what was she called again?). “oh well, back to corporate lobbying for me…”

The Labour Leader cheerfully followed this up by saying “some day, if we can finally pull of a properly convincing Reform UK impression, we too can come second in a byelection!”

As for the Libdem’s and the Tories, well, we cant actually remember what happened to them so never mind.

“We will learn our lesson” Farage concluded “we will make sure we ban voting before attempted the next General Election in 2029, that way we can finally implement a proper British democracy!”

Share

When the nurses first went out on strike in England, my twitter game picked up. As a frontline NHS nurse I had a message I wanted to share, and there were millions of people who wanted to hear it. Twitter helped me to use my voice in a way that resonated with millions of people around the UK, and it also put my message directly in front of journalists and government officials. Little old me was being listened too, and that felt good.

So to clarify, I’m not against the concept of twitter, in fact, I’m still very much clinging on, but I am growing more and more concerned.

Subscribe now

The Shift to X

If Twitter was witty, warm and welcoming, then X is Cold, Callous and Calculated.

Since Musk bought Twitter and named it X, the feeling has changed. The space has become much more toxic, more divided and it feels like it has become the playground of the far-right. At each step, Musk has made changes that feel designed to push out the leftwing anti-fascist voices, and to radicalise the user (and as i will come on to explain later, the generator too).

When i first joined, twitter didn’t had a massive bot problem. These days, being a relatively high profile left-wing account, i tend not to read my replies any more. There is consistently a combination of bot replies (easily identifiable by their syntactical structure, account names and profile pics) and just plain old rude accounts which pile on the obvious insults and defamations. Now, there must have been rude people on twitter before the bots, however, the presence of 20 or 30 bots replies on a post that seem to say ‘it’s okay to be a complete dick to this person’ emboldens the real-life but embittered poster to join in. This leads to a cacophony of hate on each of my posts, regardless of what i post about. This has several consequences:

1. Disengaging with the twitter community

If your reply list is full of hate, you tend to avoid reading them, this means that the people who genuinely care and you would like to engage with get missed. This means that Musk’s Twitter is making left wing accounts more isolated from their communities.

2. Emboldening the haters, and creating new dystopian societal norms.

The presence of the bot hate account seems to create a new and seemingly acceptable societal norm - one which would not be tolerated in any other setting. People think ‘oh its okay on twitter to be a complete and utter arsehole’ and proceed to type a string of abuse, and then continue about their day. I doubt many of these people would ever consider doing this in real life, but they are emboldened by the bots. This means that Musk’s Twitter is making people meaner in real life.

3. Distorting the picture

Now this is one of the most important points I want to make. Musk’s presence of online hate bots are trying to shift the societal and political discourse in his extremist right wing direction. I’ll give an example. Say I post about refugees, and 30% of the real replies are negative responses, and 70% are positive, people who see this think ‘cor there are a few racists out there, but thank goodness that most people are sane and kind’. Now add in the bots which distort this image to look like 50% of posts are negative, and it gives the impression that people are more hate-filled and right wing than they are. This normalises hate, emboldens the closeted racist to come out their shell, and distorts the overall picture. This is important as it enables politicians to keep justifying moving the Overton window further and further right. A phenomenon that results in racist low-life’s like Lee Anderson and Rupert Lowe being considered ‘mainstream’ voices, when in actual fact they are fringe weirdos. This is also the phenomena i believe too be behind Keir Starmer’s utterly failed political project to make Labour a meaner party in an attempt to win over voters by pandering to the right - he seems to be forgetting that bots don’t vote. This is a phenomena that i also recognised from my lived experience of being a twitter junkie. I have had several occasions where after spending a weekend emersed in twitter I head into town for a walk, and when someone approaches me to speak i flinch, only to realise that they are trying to be friendly. This is because the picture created on X does NOT reflect the real world.

4. Wearing down the content creator

The final point I want to make is of the personal experience of the content creator.

Now, I consider myself fairly thick skinned. I have nursed in A&E and have older siblings. However, it can become a bit depressing seeing all the hate directed in your direction, especially when the hate is prioritised over the supporters by the algorithm. Personally, I rationalise it (as i am doing now) and remind myself this is not the real world. But this does seek to push left wing creators of X (which is the main reason i have remained thus far). When i have posted about leaving, this seems to be something the trolls and the bots latch onto, which reminds me they want me gone, which makes me want to stick around.

Share

The Algorithm and the user.

Now, bots aside, the other thing that is designed to radicalise is the algorithm.

A recent study published in Nature compared different social media sites with the algorithm turned off and on. The disparity they found with X is quite scary.

The study found that those who used Musk’s algorithm came to change their fundamental beliefs. For example, they were 5.5% more likely to deem the way Trump has been investigated as unacceptable, and 4.7% more likely to support right-wing issues and talking points such as immigration. Even more scarily, they were 5.2% more likely to stay on X -showing that this racialisation can entrap the user. Moreover, it was found that the algorithm moves people away from more trusted traditional news sources, with their posts reducing by over 15% under the algorithm.

This raises similar concerns to a Sky News (an outlet owned by a right wing oligarch) investigation which found that right-wing accounts were promoted to new users. 60% of posts seen came from right-wing accounts, compared to only 32% from left wing accounts (only 6% non-partisan). Neutral non-partisan users were shown twice as much right wing content as left wing content and virtually no non-partisan content. This suggests that not only is Musk’s algorithm stoking division, it is also purposefully driving people further right.

Nature study: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-026-10098-2

Sky new study: https://news.sky.com/story/the-x-effect-how-elon-musk-is-boosting-the-british-right-13464445

This has also led to many left-wing accounts leaving X (the Xodus) and at the same time, Must has returned previously banned dangerous extremists such as Tommy Robinson back onto the platform. Even Lucy Connolly who pled guilty to inciting racial hatred on X after encourage people to burn asylum seekers alive (which people later did actually try and do), remains active and hateful as ever on X.

So what does this mean? It means that alongside the algorithm radicalising the user, it also is seeing a real term shift in loosing left wing accounts, and reinstating radicalised right-wing accounts, shifting the Overton window, yet further right.

What’s even worse is that this is not really being talked about. People do not realise what is happening. It’s worth remembering that the worlds richest man, who is also a white supremacists, doesn’t spend $44 billion dollars on a social media platform without very sinister intentions.

The Algorithm and the content creator.

Now we get into content creation.

Musk has now monetised X, meaning that eligible users can claim 98% of their ad revenue back from the platform. On the face of it, this seems like a good thing, and is exactly why i thought i would give it a go. For those who follow me on X you will know that my account’s proceeds go to Charities supporting groups that are particularly attacked on Musk’s platform such as refugees and the trans community, as well as supporting mental health and SEND charities. This enables me to square some of the ethical issues, but it has also allowed me to gain insight as a content creator myself.

When first monetised, payments where figured out by overall engagements (they never tell you how they figure it out, you just get an amount every 2 weeks). This meant that the more viral content, the bigger your paycheck. What this leads to is trial and error testing, to see what content preforms better, and already know from the above section on the algorithm, that right-wing content is rewarded. What’s more, if you post misinformation, it seems to get double interactions. Firstly it is shared by those who share the same bias, but secondly it is also corrected by those who know it is misinformation, which leads to it getting more interactions. Moreover, divisive content which enrages people, also leads to users being more inclined to interact with it. This is known as ‘rage-bait’ and the right-wing accounts do it brilliantly, and they make a fortune from it. This means that people seeking to maximise their profits from X, might be every so slightly pushed further right in that pursuit.

Finally, monetisation has now been changed what’s more to favour larger content and timeline reviews only. This means it relies more heavily on the algorithm, and less on standard interaction. Since this change i have seen my interactions increase, but my revenue decrease. When i asked Grok about it, this is what Grok said:

Direct Political Interreference

Finally, it is worth adding that alongside his warped Algorithm, Musk is directly promoting far right parties. He boasts of winning Trumps second presidency, and has boosted European far-right political parties like Germanies ADF and the UK’s Restore Britain. He uses X has his own personally platform for white supremacist views and far-right political promotion. Personally, I advise blocking Musk too.

So, what does this all mean?

Subscribe now

For me, this means it is getting harder to be a positive voice on X, and to use the platform for good.

But there are still ways that you can support accounts like mine to have a reach, and here is what they are:

1. Engage with our posts on X. Like, add a comment and a RT.

2. Make sure you are following along on X (and you can even turn alerts on).

3. Engage with article posts, leave a comment and share the article (Musk is weighting the algorithm in favour of articles in a bid to make them more successful).

4. Don’t engage with far-right accounts or rage bait. Simply block and move on. Don’t put money in their pockets. If you need to share one of their posts, share a screen shot, but the best is simply to ignore them.

5. Please share my Substack articles with friends, and on social media, and please consider subscribing!

   Share

For me, on a personal note, I want to keep on providing my opinions and analysis, which seems to be wanted by many of you, but i cannot see a sustainable way of doing this on X for too much longer. I want to safeguard my own wellbeing and sanity, which is getting harder to do on X.

The best thing you can do for me is to subscribe to my Substack. If i can get a community of paid subscribers, this can support me to publish 50% of my content to the wider public, and 50% just for the paying community. This will allow me to be less reliant on X as a platform, and enable me to continue sharing my regular political insight and analysis.

Subscriptions are £3 a month, which is the price of a cup of coffee, and yearly subscriptions are discounted further still. If you are able to do this, it would be much appreciated, and will help me to justify keeping time set aside for writing these articles.

Subscribe now

And as a special offer, available for 7 days only, you can get your first 12 months at 50% off - a special offer just for my first cohort to thank you for your support- by clicking the below link!

https://harryeccles94.substack.com/97e301c9

Share

I was born in Manchester. I grew up watching Man United play. I had united wallpaper, bedsheets and curtains. I grew up watching the greats: Vanestroy, York, Ronaldo, Park, Solskjær, Giggs, Vidic, Nani, Schmeichel. I watched players from all over the world come to United to play the world's best football.

To hear that United is currently owned by a bigot is more than upsetting. However, it did make me want to look a little closer into who this man is…

Subscribe now

Rank Hypocrisy.

This week Ratcliffe said that ‘The UK has been colonised by immigrants’ whilst using wildly inaccurate figures. His claimed in 2020 the population was 58,000,000 and that now it is 70 million people which is fact a full out lie. In 2020, the UK population was in fact 67,000,000 people. Quite a different story.

Jim Radcliffe is worth £17,000,000,000 pounds - but in the UK he pays £0 in tax (this is compared to the £17,000,000,000 paid annually in tax by immigrants btw). This is because in 2020 following a failed-Brexit (that he personally campaigned for) he moved to Monaco, a country that has a 65-75% immigrant population.

Moreover, he is part owner of Manchester United, a Football team with a squad made up of 70% international players from which he profits.

Brexit

At the time, many people said that Brexit was a ploy by the billionaires and elite to manipulate the people of Britain into voting against their own interest to leave the EU. Since then, the Epstein Files has shown this to be true (see messages from Steve Bannon to Jeffrey Epstein). Brexit has caused catastrophic financial and diplomatic harm to Britain, and most of us have to live with it.

However, if you were a billionaire who campaigned for Brexit (like Ratcliffe) you have other options… You can simply move away to a tax haven, and that’s what he did in 2020 saying that Brexit ‘didn’t turn out as anticipated’.

Subscribe now

Taxation

As aforementioned, being a resident of Monaco means that Ratcliffe no longer pays UK income or capital gains tax. How come the part owner of one of England’s biggest football clubs can get away with paying no UK tax? Does not seem fair to me…

Other Scandals

In addition, instead of using his own billions which he saves in tax avoidance to fund improvements to Manchester United’s stadium (from which he profits) - he is requesting to use hundreds of millions of pounds of public money! The cheek!

Moreover, since his involvement in Man Untied, he has cut countless jobs (as he has at his INEOS company) to maximise profit at the expense of the working people who keep his business going.

Also, in 2023, his personal charity (the Jim Ratcliffe Foundation, was investigated by the UK charity Commission over governance concerns over a £16,000,000 ski clubhouse project in the French Alps. This concluded with no confirmation of wrongdoing.

Subscribe now

So what?

Essentially, what this paints is a picture of a petty and greedy man willing to throw the working people under the bus to make a few extra quid. What’s more, he is quite happy to use racist views and rhetoric to achieve his aims, despite being shielded by the consequences of racist policies due to his vast wealth.

As far as i’m concerned, we can let him leave, but he should no longer keep his stakes in British businesses and institutions. He does not represent the views of most united fans, therefore he should be nowhere near the club.

I would much rather have hard working and kind immigrants in my community than hostile greedy billionaires any day of the week.

Share

Subscribe now

Share

Now to many of us this won’t be a shock. People have warned about the establishment for years. In fact, the world has been run buy a small handful of evil rich white men for a long time. However, society has moved forward, and the media have done a terrible job at holding the establishment to account (because they have been bought out by the establishment), meaning the establishment can pretend it is now fully democratic, legally minded and moral. The Epstein Files show the opposite.

This a rare opportunity and glimpse into an otherwise sealed of world. Granted it has been heavily redacted by the DoJ, so not all the truth is on offer, and granted this is only a fraction of the full files, however the opportunity to expose the bastards is here, and we must take it.

Subscribe now

Legal Disclaimer: This is blog post is making no assertion of legal wrongdoing or criminal activity, but is simply exploring the latest Epstein release and asking questions and expressing a personal interpretation of the evidence as made publicly available in the Epstein Library. Readers are encouraged to look at the evidence for themselves and use their own judgement.

Reform UK and their Epstein Links

It is true that Nigel Farage is mentioned 38 times in the Epstein Files, however, it is important to note that their is nothing directly linking him to Epstein thus far. The most shocking revelations about Farage come from texts between Steve Bannon (the far-right agitator and former Trump advisor) and Jeffrey Epstein. They reveal a dark world where Bannon claims to be controlling and advising Farage alongside other Far-right figures across Europe, and they reveal the far-right elitist conspiracy behind Brexit.

And:

However, a close Farage friend and ally, Nick Candy does have some questions to answer…

Nick Candy was appointed Reform UK treasurer in 2024 by Nigel Farage. He is also one of Reform UK’s largest donors (giving aprox £1,000,000 thus far). Him and his brother share a £1,500,000,000 company which made its money in property. The Epstein Files shed a little bit of light on some of the specifics…. In terms of contention, it is fair to say the Candy Brothers have their fair share. There have been several tax and legal disputes that you can review for yourselves, with accusations of tax evasion on a large scale which the Candy brothers deny, however Nick Candy does admit moving to Monaco for Tax purposes, and his brother Christian called him self a ‘tax exile’ saying ‘i don’t pay tax’ in an interview with the financial times in 2010.

Epstein Dealings

Share

An email Sent to Jeffrey Epstein on 17 Jun 2010 (two years after Epstein’s conviction) references a Candy and Candy LTD property up for sale, 21 Chesham place, for the modest sum of £39,250,000.

This is something that Nigel Farage said he was fully aware of when asked, and he even went so far as to praise Nick Candy for his networking skills in reference to Epstein. However Farage failed to mention the rest…

Another property from Candy’s One Hyde Park development appears to have been offered to and sold to Epstein in 2010 for £80,000,000. The development was a joint venture between the Candy Brothers, and the ex Qatari PM HBJ (Hamad Bin Jassim). Further emails in 2012 show Epstein personally trying to find legal council for HBJ to navigate international law and sanctions.

Then in 2014, we see Ghislaine Maxwell (convicted of child sex trafficking in 2021) arranging for Nick Candy to see Epstein’s New York City Mansion - Herbert Straus House, worth $77,000,000.

Ghislaine seems to speak very highly of the Candy Brothers in her conversations with Epstein.

We then see a known business associate of Candy, Jed Garfield, handing over contact directly to Epstein, who appears to swap numbers with Candy and then later says ‘I spoke to him’ in reference to Candy’s visit which could indicate Candy delt with Epstein directly.

A 2012 Email also references One Hyde Park (the Candy and Candy venture with HBJ) in the discussion of selling the NYC property to a ‘Russian finance minister’ which reference HBJ making an offer:

Another Email also shows Candy boasting of a Knightsbridge property sale to Sarah Kellen. This email has been picked up by Richard Brooks and Private Eye who think it may have some wider implications…

So why would Nick Candy be dealing with Maxwell and Epstein?

Questionable friendships

In 2004, we see a series of emails between Nick Candy and someone called Sarah. A later email which is poorly redacted reveals the email address as: KellenS@earthlink.net.

Sarah Kellen is a known associate of Epstein and is indicated in the most severe and instrumental way in Epstein’s Child sex trafficking. She has never faced charges as part of a non-prosecution deal. However, searching her name in the Epstein Library reveals numerous harrowing accusations of her arranging the sexual abuse of countless minors.

The email exchange shows Candy asking for Ghislaine’s email, and also suggests that Nick Candy and Sarah had dinner together on Halloween in 2003.

It also shows them discussing the possibility of meeting up again:

Candy and Mandelson

In 2024, the spectator published an article on Nick Candy called ‘The hypocrisy of Nick Candy’ where they describe Nick Candy and Mandelson as ‘close’.

In the Epstein Files we can see that Mandelson is directly discussing Candy’s business with Epstein.

Candy is also seen photos with other key names which collectively occur thousands of times in the Epstein Files, including Elon Musk, Donald Trump and Sarah Ferguson.

What this does seem to suggest is that far from being ‘anti-establishment’ - Reform UK seem very much at the centre of the establishment and their conspiracies.

So what does all this mean?

As aforestated, i am no tax or legal expert and this is me simply exploring the evidence and not making any specific assertions or accusations. But i am a human being with a sense of right and wrong. It appears to me that Nick Candy is very much at the centre of this establishment mess, and Farage has already claimed awareness of this when asked by ITV. It seems to me if Farage is calling for Starmer’s resignation over his lack of judgement with Mandelson, perhaps Farage should also be reflecting on his own judgement.

So far the Main Stream Media are giving this a wide birth. Interestingly i have also had a temporary restriction placed on my X account since reporting this.

Is this something the Establishment want to keep covered up? it appears so.

Subscribe now

Lets keep talking about it…

Share

Subscribe now

When one of us (the plebs) commits a crime, we get held to account. In fact, the ruling elite like Trump and Musk (both named in the files) spend their days saying they want to stop crime, and protect women and children. They constantly highlight the crime of others whilst concealing their own.

The truth?

The truth is that Trump is accused of the most severe atrocities and they need investigating. Not only has he publicly displayed gross misogyny and sexual deviancy - but he now stands accused of paedophilia. And it looks pretty damning.

So what will happen? He is still the most powerful man in the world.

Musk is also found to be begging Epstein for a wild visit. The richest man in the world. Who will hold him to account?

And closer to home, the Andrew formally known as Prince, and Lord Mandelson (a Labour lord) are also implicated. Andrew looks to have been committing some of the most severe offences. He has been stripped of his title. So what? He should be in prison.

Subscribe now

So why can the elite lie, steal, cheat and get away with it? Why can they rape, abuse children and murder and get away with it?

We say we are all equal in the eyes of the law. But it’s clear we are not.

And this is just the beginning, only a fraction of the truth has come out. The powerful forces are still fighting the full release.

We must unite and demand the full release of the Epstein Files. We must demand full investigations into all allegations. We must demand the victims are supported.

We must also demand better from our leaders. Those who have let us down must be held to account, and power needs to be rebalanced and restructured.

Let’s hold power to account. Let’s take the power back.

It is our moral duty to demand better.

Share

Leave a comment