Today a group of Muslims prayed next to the Ministry of Defence, facing the Iraq and Afghanistan memorial. As I have said before, choosing to pray in this way in public is a political act. It is a social statement and, yes, it is an act of domination. Anybody who understands Islamism understands that the domination of public spaces is part of the modus operandi. It is done so Islamists can show who is in charge - and to show other Muslims and the wider public that the authorities will bend to their will. There is quite obviously no need to pray here. The decision to do so is symbolic and pointed. It is not welcome. We have freedom of religion in this country, which is why there are mosques. But we are not a Muslim country and this is not welcome. It should be stopped.

🚨 BREAKING: The Assisted Dying Bill will be reintroduced to Parliament next week by Labour MP Lauren Edwards

Updated Letter with References to Oppose the Return of the PMB on Assisted Dying  [Your Full Name] [Your Address] [Postcode] [Email] [Date] [MP’s Full Name] MP House of Commons London SW1A 0AA Dear [MP’s Name], I am writing as one of your constituents [Your Postcode] to urge you to oppose the reintroduction of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill. On 14 June 2026, Labour MP Lauren Edwards announced her intention to bring this legislation back after coming second in the Private Members’ Bills ballot. This Bill should never pass, for the following reasons: 1. Palliative and end-of-life care must come first Our system is failing many dying people. Marie Curie research shows that around 100,000 people die every year in the UK without the palliative care they need. Hospice services face major financial pressures, with repeated reports of significant collective deficits and hundreds of beds lying empty. Parliament’s priority should be to fully fund and expand high-quality palliative care so no one suffers unnecessarily; not to introduce assisted dying while these services remain inadequate. 2. The Bill has serious and unresolved safeguard failures The previous version was subjected to intense scrutiny in the House of Lords, where more than 1,200 amendments were tabled. These exposed major weaknesses in detecting coercion, assessing mental capacity (especially for vulnerable people), communication support, independent advocacy, and protection for specific groups such as those with eating disorders or who are pregnant. The Bill contains significant regulatory gaps, particularly around how any assisted dying service would operate alongside or within the NHS. 3. It puts vulnerable people at unacceptable risk Disabled people, older people, those with learning disabilities (including Down’s syndrome), and people in poverty face heightened risks of coercion or feeling like a burden. An open letter signed by 61 organisations representing disabled people and those with learning disabilities set out clear concerns about these gaps. 4. Clear evidence of the “slippery slope” from other countries Canada’s MAID programme began with narrow criteria but has expanded significantly and now accounts for a large and growing proportion of deaths. There are documented cases of vulnerable individuals being offered or steered toward assisted death due to inadequate support services rather than receiving proper care. Similar patterns of expansion have occurred elsewhere. 5. Strong concerns from medical professionals The British Geriatrics Society opposes legalisation because effective safeguards cannot be guaranteed to protect older people. The Association for Palliative Medicine has highlighted significant risks. Lord Stevens, former Chief Executive of NHS England, has warned that assisted dying does not fall within the proper scope of the NHS and risks undermining public trust in clinicians. 6. It will cause deep division and distract from real priorities This issue is already splitting parties and diverting attention from urgent needs such as NHS funding, social care reform, and better end-of-life support. Public polling consistently shows that assisted dying ranks low as a priority compared with improving palliative care and other core services. 7. Broader ethical and practical problems It risks changing societal attitudes toward the value of life, especially for older and disabled people. Decisions are irreversible. Practical implementation would create inequalities (depending on doctors’ willingness to participate) and add further pressure to an overstretched health service. For all these reasons, I strongly urge you to oppose this Bill at every stage and instead champion fully funded, high-quality palliative and end-of-life care for everyone who needs it. Thank you for considering these concerns. I would welcome your response. Yours sincerely, [Your Full Name] References Here are direct links to the main sources referenced above: Marie Curie – Measuring unmet need for palliative care (2026): mariecurie.org.uk/document/u… Hospice UK on sector funding pressures: hospiceuk.org/latest-from-ho… (and related reports) Open letter from 61 organisations (National Down Syndrome Policy Group and others): ndspg.org/wp-content/uploads… British Geriatrics Society Position Statement on Assisted Dying: bgs.org.uk/bgs-position-stat… Lord Stevens (former NHS England CEO) comments in Hansard: hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/… House of Lords scrutiny and amendments (previous Bill): Search on bills.parliament.uk/bills/37… (see Committee stage records)

10 years ago my wife, the mum of our kids & the MP for Batley&Spen was killed by a far right extremist. At anniversaries I try to be optimistic about the future. But not this time. In the ten years since she was killed we have gone backwards & I fear our democracy is now at risk

Fascists want our kids brains filled with racist 💩