Healey’s resignation is the military industrial complex announcing its programme for the next Labour leader. It finishes Starmer. Arms spending is the key issue of the age. Come to the international anti war conference: tickettailor.com/events/stop…

I hadn't watched Yusuf's interview until now … I have some thoughts! Firstly, that's two weeks in a row that a Reform UK representative is brought on to the show and kept separate from the other guests. They are allowed to have uninterrupted, unchallenged segments of the show to themselves. Secondly, what happened to journalism in this country? Laura Kuenssberg allowed him to talk, largely unchallenged, for ten minutes. She had one question prepared that was repeated several times — the Kemi Badenoch strategy. That Yusuf was allowed to repeatedly claim that two-tier policing was the biggest challenge to this country is shocking. We know that there's no such thing and this is the LITERAL weaponisation of Henry Nowak's death, while saying that Reform respected the family's wishes. There are very few in politics that repulse me as much as Zia Yusuf, and yet we are still fed his petulant lies, week in, week out. When Reform UK collapses after Farage is found guilty on one of his impending corruption investigations, the fact that this guy will be consigned to the dustbin of history, is well worth celebrating. Happy rainy Monday. Thanks for posting the full clip, Narinder. 😊

The death of Henry Nowak is a tragedy in every sense, and the public reaction to the body‑worn video is completely understandable. It is painful to watch. It is painful for officers to watch. And it is painful for Henry’s family to know that his final moments were chaotic, confused and shaped by a lie told by the man who killed him. But if we are going to talk about this case, and especially where/if politicians make highly charged statements, I believe it’s important to stay anchored to what was actually established in court. The judge was clear that the responsibility for Henry’s death lies solely with the man who stabbed him. The fatal wound to his chest was described as “catastrophic” and “unsurvivable”, and the pathologist confirmed that no medical intervention, immediate or otherwise, could have saved Henry. That does not erase the distressing nature of the footage, it does not mitigate the seemingly dispassionate response of the officers in attendance, but it does matter when we are trying to understand what happened and what could or could not have changed the outcome. It is also a matter of record that the officers were responding to a 999 call in which the offender falsely claimed he had been the victim of a racist attack and insisted no weapon had been used. That deception shaped the first few minutes on scene. The IOPC has been involved from the outset, and the officers have remained as witnesses throughout. This is an important distinction, as those familiar with post incident procedures can tell you. If there was a shred of doubt or suspicion that the officers actions at the time, when balanced against the information known at the time and their reasonable held beliefs, amounted to potential misconduct, the IOPC must at the earliest opportunity review their status. The IOPC have confirmed that the officers status remains unchanged. That indicates that the officers initial decisions/actions have already been assessed against the information known at the time and is unlikely to now change and amount to misconduct. None of this means the initial assessment was correct. It wasn’t. The officers misread the situation, and the body‑worn video shows that plainly. But policing is full of moments where decisions are made in seconds, under pressure, with incomplete or misleading information. Sometimes those decisions are right. Sometimes they are not. And sometimes…as in this case…the consequences are unbearably tragic even when the mistake does not change the final outcome. What we cannot/should not do is turn this into a proxy battle in a wider culture war. Henry’s family have asked that his death is not used to fuel division, hate or to propagate political agendas. It is possible to hold two truths at once: that the initial response was flawed, sloppy even…and the investigation needs to establish how policy, procedure and relied information impacted those decisions and events; and that despite the officers clear mistakes and compassion fatigue, they did not cause Henry’s death, nor could they have prevented it. Policing is at its worst when it becomes defensive, but it is also at its worst when it becomes a canvas onto which people project their own political battles and/or bitterness. This case, if it is to be a turning point, deserves better than that. We can demand accountability without abandoning fairness. We can acknowledge mistakes without inventing motives. And we can talk honestly about the pressures and imperfections of frontline policing without turning every tragedy into a referendum on the entire profession. That balance is difficult. But, to my mind, it is the only way we avoid repeating the same cycles of outrage, distortion, division and defensiveness that have done so much damage to public trust… and to the people who still turn up, every day, to do a job that is getting harder by the day.

On the day the whole political establishment claims we do not live in a two tier country, they announce this. Note, the NHS makes NO drugs available exclusively to white people.