He’s promising to announce “new policies to give the self-employed a break“. Watch along above…
UPDATE: Farage announces Reform will raise the VAT threshold to £150,000.
Jonathan Hall, the independent reviewer of terror legislation, has said increased migration has damaged Britain’s national security. Does Starmer think he’s “whipping up division” as well?
Asked on Sky News: “Do you think increased immigration has negatively affected national security?” Hall said:
“Yes, if I’m candid, I do when I’m talking about the the the large waves that have come over. I mean, bear in mind, I’m looking at it from the national security perspective. I’m not trying to speak about the economic impact. I mean I’m not an economist but I mean there is a risk that if people come into the country who you don’t want to come in who’ve got these sorts of traumas who may be connected to foreign states or terrorist organisations or you simply don’t know anything about there’s of course there is there is a risk because those people may not have any allegiance to the UK or may be coming in bringing in um ideology or experiences that that that um aren’t aren’t good to have. So, I think the answer must be yes.”
Hall added: “I suppose there are lots of potential policy solutions to this. Looking at who you want to welcome in and who you want to take extra efforts to try and deter or keep away from. That policy solution area goes way outside my remit.”
He also refuted the suggestion by the Sky News presenter that there was speculation around the Belfast attack as to whether it was a terror incident: “My impression is that the public weren’t really wondering whether or not it was terrorism to any great degree.” He said the public have now priced in non-ideological violence and random killings…
Jolyon Maugham’s serially incompetent Good Law Project is using the North Belfast attack and subsequent protests to ask for donations to “stop Farage.” Grifters gonna grift…
An email sent after lunch to everyone captured by GLP’s data collection says: “The far right are following the playbook they used in Southampton and Southport: take an isolated tragedy, talk about it in the language of race, divide us against each other and push their hate.”
“According to the ONS, there were more than 20,000 knife assaults in the UK in 2024/2025. It’s no accident that the far right have chosen this one…
Now more than ever, we need to stand together against hate, and division, and take action.”
There follow two dubious “stop Farage” buttons that go to GLP’s donations page. This is one of their “reactive fundraising” campaigns…
Jolyon’s outfit says it’s “already knee-deep in the fight against Reform, we’re taking them to court and are campaigning against them. Whether it’s their failure to respect data rights, or exploiting women’s safety to attack migrants, we’re fighting to stop their hateful agenda.” Reform did condemn the violent protests last night…
The last update to Jolyon’s ‘campaign‘ against Reform refers to court proceedings by the GLP against it way back in February over the party’s alleged failure to respond to Subject Access Requests quickly enough. There is no judgement on that one yet. What’s known as a bottom-of-the-barrel legal attack…
A “petition” by Good Law Project (data collection form) about “fighting back” against Reform has only 3,303 signatures so far. Not much faith in Jolyon’s abilities?
Jolyon is himself facing legal proceedings – gender-critical barrister Sarah Phillimore has filed a £50,000 claim defamation claim against him after he accused her of harassing a trans person. Lawfare has got two edges…
Reform’s Sarah Pochin on X:
“This morning in Parliament, I was accosted by Lib Dem MP Angus MacDonald, who accused me and others of inciting violence. His aggressive approach and tone left me feeling threatened and shaken. This kind of behaviour is unacceptable, especially from fellow MPs. We all have different views and should be able to disagree respectfully. The Lib Dems support open borders, while Reform UK supports controlled immigration and putting the British people first. That’s not inciting violence, that’s doing what’s best for the United Kingdom.”
MacDonald has responded:
“I completely reject this characterisation. I had a brief conversation with a fellow Parliamentarian regarding the impact of her party’s rhetoric on our communities. It is acceptable to challenge colleagues in a fair and respectful way when their actions and words risk causing real-world harm, as we have seen in recent weeks with Reform’s stirring up of hatred and division.”
Sounds like handbags in Portcullis…
Scotland Secretary Douglas Alexander has admitted to having a secret meeting with a Global Counsel employee brokered by Peter Mandelson who was at the time Chairman of Global Counsel. It being his lobbying company…
Alexander wanted a “trade policy expert” to help him in his previous role as trade and security minister. He asked Mandelson for a recommendation…
He wrote two days ago to Starmer:
“I wanted to make you aware of an oversight that has emerged in the transparency reporting of a meeting that took place whilst I was the Minister for Trade Policy and Economic Security.
On the 21st July 2024 I asked Peter Mandelson, given his past experience as EU Trade Commissioner, to suggest the name of a British trade policy expert from his time at the European Commission, with whom I could meet. The name suggested was a former official of the European Commission, working on trade policy, who by that time worked at Global Counsel.
I passed his details on to my officials in DBT, who facilitated, attended and minuted the subsequent meeting on the 31 July 2024. The minute was then shared widely with trade officials within the department at the time. The meeting covered general trade policy across the globe and that there was no discussion of named businesses or of any ongoing role for Global Counsel.
The management of my transparency reporting was delegated by me to officials as permitted in the ‘Ministers’ overseas travel and meetings: Publication Guidance’. In March 2026, in the process of complying with the Humble Address, I became aware that this meeting had been omitted from the DBT transparency website and instructed officials to rectify this error.
I am grateful to have received the Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards’ advice on this matter and of course regret this inadvertent administrative oversight.”
Starmer replied:
“I am grateful for your swift action to rectify the oversight in declaring the meeting you held on 31 July with someone who at the time worked for Global Counsel, after its omission from the relevant transparency publication came to light. While this administrative oversight is regrettable, you acted appropriately when the issue was identified, including engaging with the Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards, and I consider no further action to be needed.”
Fallout from the Mandelson Files – where this meeting was mentioned – continues…
Mail commentator Dan Hodges – who was kind to Burnham during the Makerfield campaign – now concludes: “The truth is Andy Burnham doesn’t have a 10 year plan. He’s barely got a 10 week plan.“