This made me cry. Truly evil

It beggars belief this has come back now!

I love a paper menu!

She was off work for 3 months. Is still on restricted duties over a year later. She had to give up her Sergeant Rank because she couldn't do the role. But it's OK, her spine wasn't actually shattered. Out of sheer luck.

Barnaby Philip John Webber 11/01/2004-13/06/2023 💔 If you can, share these images of the beautiful soul stolen from us by the worst of humanity. Let his face today burn bright. Barney, I promise you there will be accountability 💛💚 For You. For Grace. For Ian.

Good and will the @ukhomeoffice close all the loopholes of businesses exploiting the skilled overseas worker visas?

It really winds me up when someone is asked on the TV how we can cut benefits & the first thing they say is scrap the Triple Lock. For starters it should not be called a benefit as pensioners have worked really hard all their lives for a measly £12k Secondly why do they never talk of cutting it for the people who have never done a days work in their lives & they receive far more. It’s disgusting the way pensioners are the first people they go after. Rant over but it just winds me up the unfairness of this system.

Smashing up property and attacking a police officer with a sledgehammer is not “protest” It’s violence Zack Polanski is a disgrace. Anyone voting Green is supporting this nonsense

Keir Starmer: "We don't have £4.5 billion for defence." Keir Starmer the next day: "I’m announcing £4.5 billion for more cycle lanes and zebra crossings." He’s just reached the point where he’s just laughing at us all now. You really couldn't make it up.

RT @sandieshoes: Rachel Reeves has given Ed Miliband £9bn to be spent on controversial carbon capture and storage – a technology that has…

Bloody hell, I’ve been digging more into the government definition of 'Crisis' a bit more So... an unelected regulator is now operating within government where the meaning of “crisis” has become very stretched. The Cabinet Office Amber Book says an emergency under the Civil Contingencies Act covers serious damage to human welfare, the environment or UK security. (fair enough) But then it has added ... “For the purposes of this guidance, the terms emergency and crisis are used interchangeably.”... INTERCHANGEABLY? It also says an emergency/crisis can include situations that have not yet been harmful but have the potential to be (they do not define 'harmful' This guidance has not been voted for or debated So let me explain why thats so important. it means that almost any situation the government believes could become a problem can now be treated as a 'crisis'. And under that broad language, Ofcom has been able to write to platforms about civil unrest, crisis situations and how they will need to beef up moderation, it isnt just about removing illegal content. Anything could become a “crisis”, no one voted for the widening of the definition and no one had the opportunity to, because thats how government by guidance works.... hoping you won't even notice.

How about a cut to the £333bn - and growing - benefits bill? Can Labour really not shave 1-2% off that to cover the required increase in defence spending? If they can’t, as they have demonstrably failed to do, then they are not fit to run seaside ice cream shack let alone a country’s economy and security.

Kier Starmer has committed to give Ukraine 21.8 BILLION !! but we have no money for our own defences.

I can hardly believe it that the government has started charging VAT on drugs that have been DONATED for compassionate use schemes. Watch this non answer from the minister.

Just a reminder, Starmer is still trying to push through SPENDING £35bn *giving away* Chagos, yet is trying to short change defence budget.

Agenda 2030 Or The Defence Of The Realm. Starmer Has Made His Choice. John Healey Has Resigned Over It. This morning Britain woke up without a Defence Secretary. By lunchtime it knew why. The numbers tell the story precisely. The Ministry of Defence faces a £28 billion funding shortfall over four years. Healey wanted £18 billion. He was offered £13.5 billion of which defence chiefs regarded only £10 billion as real money. The remaining £3.5 billion was, in the words of the Telegraph, invented through magical accounting tricks. The Chief of the Defence Staff, Sir Richard Knighton, took the unusual step of writing directly to Starmer to warn that the money was not enough. The head of the British armed forces writing directly to the Prime Minister is not a routine communication. It is a signal of desperation. Starmer told NATO last week that it is our intelligence assessment that there could be an attack by Russia on NATO as soon as 2030. Those are his words. His government's assessment. Shared with our allies. Four years away. And his Treasury offered the man responsible for defending against that threat an accounting trick and a two page summary instead of a funded plan. Why. Because the money was needed elsewhere. In 2015 every United Nations member state including Britain signed the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Its 17 goals and 169 targets commit signatory nations to facilitating migration, eliminating inequality, achieving net zero and embedding inclusive institutions. No British parliament voted on it. No British public was consulted. It was adopted at a UN summit and has been implemented ever since through regulatory frameworks, public sector guidance and institutional capture rather than democratic mandate. It is not a conspiracy. It is a publicly available document on the UN website. And its priorities, net zero, welfare, migration, DEI, are precisely the budgets this government has protected while offering the defence of the realm an accounting trick. Ed Miliband refused to cut his net zero budget to fund defence. The Labour Party refused to cut welfare spending that would have freed up billions. The £10 billion in asylum accommodation contracts continues. The DEI infrastructure embedded across British policing, the NHS, the civil service and the education system continues to be funded. Every one of these is a commitment that takes precedence over the defence of the realm in this government's spending decisions. The hierarchy of priorities is now visible. A government that has spent two years embedding progressive transformation across British institutions, protecting the net zero agenda from cuts and managing mass migration has discovered that it cannot simultaneously do all of that and defend the country. When the moment of decision arrived the progressive agenda was protected and the armed forces were handed a two page summary and told to make do. Lord Robertson, the former Labour Defence Secretary and NATO Secretary General, warned in April that Britain was underprepared, underinsured and under attack. He said there was a corrosive complacency in Britain's political leadership. The army has been reduced to its smallest size in 200 years. Seven warships have been axed. The Defence Investment Plan was due last autumn, delayed through winter, missed its spring deadline and has now produced the resignation of the Defence Secretary on the day it was finally meant to be published. Healey's letter says without a plan that meets the moment he is being forced to make decisions that would reduce the readiness of our forces, increase the risk to personnel on operations and could make the country less safe. He had no other option but to resign. In the most dangerous security environment since the Cold War a Labour government has chosen the globalist agenda over the defence of the realm. That choice has now cost it its Defence Secretary. The question is what it will cost the country.

This is an outrageous, disgraceful smear on John Healey — and an outright lie. There are a ton of ways to finance more for defence — starting with net zero — without taking a penny from schools or hospitals. Reeves should be ashamed of herself for allowing this nonsense. Suggests she’s really desperate.

Well done, @JohnHealey_MP. We prioritise disability benefits over drones. The MoD can’t get the £28 billion which it needs to keep us safe, yet the welfare budget is set to rise by £42 billion. We spend more than 5️⃣ times as much on social security as on actual security.

Our government seems more bothered about stopping people seeing bad stuff happening, then it does about stopping the bad stuff happening. It is said bad stuff which is inciting disorder. Trying to hide it from people will make things worse, not better. It blows my mind that in moments like this, instead of thinking “right, we really need to stop the issues giving people cause for concern’ this government instead thinks ‘what we need to do, is control people even further’… Absolutely clueless.

The 'subsidy' line is disingenuous - it implies parents owe the Govt money for daring to exercise a choice other than the state system (which they still pay for) and therefore not taxing this previously was an act of largesse. Labour's education tax is spite dressed up as policy.