The Squad will fight another day

The 2024 primary season is slowly coming to a close — and last night’s marquee election saw a rare big win for the left-wing Squad in the House of Representatives: Congresswoman Ilhan Omar vanquished an underfunded opponent in the Democratic primary to avoid the fates of Congressmen Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman.

Following the Hamas terrorist attacks of October 7, the pro-Israel community was galvanized to challenge some of the most openly anti-Israel members of Congress. It successfully trained its fire on Bush and Bowman, who both carried major liabilities unrelated to foreign policy. Bush opposed signature bills of the Biden administration and used campaign funds to hire private security while publicly supporting defunding the police, and Bowman’s predilection for illegally pulling fire alarms did him no favor. 

Following her defeat, Bush went on a bizarre screed, telling AIPAC that she will tear its “kingdom” down, warning her opponents that they “radicaliz[ed]” her and would get “this whole other Cori” and celebrated that she would not longer have “strings attached” to her. 

Omar, however, won her primary by nearly fourteen points despite her surprisingly narrow primary win last cycle. Her victory ensures that she, along with Congresswomen Rashida Tlaib and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, will be among the Squad’s members in office next year.

Elsewhere, Donald Trump’s endorsement in an open-seat GOP primary likely powered gas station owner Tony Wied to a plurality victory in Wisconsin’s 8th district to succeed Congressman Mike Gallagher. He also backed Congresswoman Michelle Fischbach in Minnesota, where she fended off a challenge from her right. 

While all eyes were on the Midwest, elsewhere in the country a state delegate so antisemitic that she lost support from her fellow Democrats in Connecticut, went down in flames to her Jewish opponent. State Representative Anabel Figueroa, who warned that her district “cannot permit a person who is of Jewish origin, to represent our community,” lost to a Jewish Democrat.

Finally, voters in Minnesota dealt a huge blow to members of #ElectionTwitter, the far-left, highly-online crowd that obsesses over making maps of election results, with civil rights attorney Will Stancil falling short in an open-seat primary for the state legislature. 

-Matthew Foldi

On our radar

‘IMMEDIATE RELEASE’ President Joe Biden demanded Syria return American journalist Austin Tice in a statement released on the twelve-year anniversary of his disappearance. Syrian officials claim to not know where Tice is, but Biden said in 2022  that knows “with certainty” that he is being held by the government. 

NO TAX ON TIPS RIPPED Democrats were reportedly “blindsided” by Vice President Kamala Harris cribbing Trump’s plan to eliminate taxes on tips. According to the Hill, strategists are concerned about the decrease in government revenue and that the tax relief would not help working class people who do not rely on tips for income. 

MERCHAN AND ON Former president Donald Trump lost a third attempt to get Judge Juan Merchan to recuse himself from the so-called “hush-money” case in which Trump was convicted on thirty-four felony counts and awaits sentencing. Trump has argued that Merchan’s daughter’s work with a Democrat-aligned consulting firm presents a conflict of interest for the judge. 

Walz goofs on union claim 

Minnesota governor Tim Walz spoke to members of the AFSCME union in Los Angeles on Tuesday, his first solo appearance as the Democratic vice presidential nominee.

Kicking off a five-state fundraising campaign, Walz warned that Trump would declare war on working people and threaten Social Security and Medicare. Trump has said that he will never cut either program and wants to eliminate taxes on Social Security. 

Walz also falsely told the 1.4 million-member union, which has endorsed Harris, that he is the “first union member on a presidential ticket since Ronald Reagan.”

Former president Trump was a member of SAG-AFTRA, the successor organization to the Screen Actors Guild, when he ran for president in 2016 and 2020.

He is no longer a member, resigning in 2021 after the union’s national board found probable cause that Trump violated the group’s constitution for his actions on January 6, 2021. Trump reported earning a pension from the union in his financial disclosures, which represents 160,000 performers across a variety of media platforms.

“The only thing those two guys know about working people is how to work to take advantage of them,” Walz said about Trump and his VP pick J.D. Vance. “Every single chance they’ve gotten they’ve waged war on workers.”

Walz mentioned his and Harris’s working backgrounds, noting that Harris worked at McDonald’s as a student. “Vice President Harris took that work ethic, goes to work every single day to make sure families don’t just get by, but they get ahead,” he said.

While speaking California, Walz neglected to mention anything about the state’s homelessness crisis, steep taxes and housing prices, which has pushed many residents out.

The Trump campaign has also courted union support, with Trump claiming he is going to save the auto industry from “complete obliteration.”

–Elisenne Stoller

Inflation nation 

The Labor Department released annual inflation numbers for July and presented a mixed bag for the Biden-Harris administration. While the inflation rate slowed to 2.9 percent in July 2024, the lowest rate since March 2021, it still sits more than a full percentage point above where it was in January 2021 when he first took office. Bureau of Labor Statistics data put the inflation rate at 1.4 percent in January 2021 and it stayed below 3 percent until April of that year.

Even worse, the new report shows that prices remain 20.2 percent higher than when Biden and Harris took office. This includes a 31.7 percent increase in electricity prices, a 21.6 percent increase in grocery prices and a 22 percent increase in average rents.

Nonetheless, the Harris campaign celebrated the report and claimed Trump would be the one to drop an “inflation bomb” on America. “Inflation is at its lowest in over three years and our economy is strong. Donald Trump’s agenda would take us backwards, giving tax handouts to the same big corporations that are price gouging Americans, while raising prices on the middle class by $2,500 and driving our economy into a recession,” campaign spokesman Joseph Costello said. 

–Amber Duke

The SNP needs to get to grips with its £22 billion black hole

The Scottish government has published its latest Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland (Gers) report, the official statistics outlining how much tax is raised in Scotland versus public spending for and on behalf of the country.

The numbers have been followed with interest over the past decade because they give as accurate a view as possible of the starting fiscal position of any newly independent Scotland. They therefore provide an insight into the budget challenges the newly seceded state would face if the current Scottish government’s constitutional preference were to come to fruition. So what do this year’s numbers show?

For a Scottish government still intent on promoting secession, the latest analysis does not look good. Scotland is running a deficit of almost £23 billion, representing 10.4 per cent of its GDP – up 2 per cent from the previous year. Excluding oil and gas revenues, which in recent years the SNP has taken to defining as an economic ‘bonus’ not be included in day-to-day spending calculations for an independent state, the deficit stands at 13.2 per cent of GDP. 

By comparison, the UK deficit for the same period improved by 0.5 per cent, taking it to 4.5 per cent of UK GDP, while the latest figures for the EU’s deficit (to the end 2023) puts it at 3.5 per cent of the bloc’s GDP.

The Gers figures show Scotland’s revenues in 2023-24 grew by £1.7 billion to reach £88.5 billion, while expenditure increased to £111.2 billion, from £104.9 billion in 2022-23. At 51 per cent of GDP, public spending is at historically high levels in Scotland, and is around five percentage points higher than prior to the pandemic. The numbers also show that Scots benefit from £2,417 more per head of additional spending compared to the UK average.

Most popular

Paul Wood

The strange death of Islamism

Leonora Barclay

UBI will make us miserable

Owen Matthews

What was the CIA doing in Moscow?

The main driver of the widened deficit is a fall in oil and gas revenues from the North Sea on the back of lower energy prices. Those revenues have halved, to sit at £4 billion.

The numbers are a return to what can be thought of as a normal position for Scotland following the historic anomaly of the pandemic emergency and immediate post-pandemic inflation crisis. That is not to say the deficit is a reflection of a weak Scottish economy, which is relatively good at generating taxes. Rather, the persistent large deficit is a function of Scotland’s ingrained high spending.

The obvious conclusion to draw from the statistics is that, whether through independence or full fiscal autonomy within the UK, crystalising what is currently a large notional deficit as a real, Scotland-only liability is clearly not in the interests of the Scottish people. Indeed, combine that deficit with the country’s other large persistent deficit – trade – and it seems clear the government of a newly seceded state would immediately find itself grappling with a severe economic crisis.

Yet incredibly, the SNP administration is still wedded to using the Gers numbers to promote independence. Scotland’s finance minister, Shona Robison, responded to the publication of the latest figures by stating the plus-10 per cent deficit is a reflection of ‘UK government choices’.

‘As an independent nation, we would have the powers to make different choices,’ she said, no doubt trying to give the impression that an independent Scotland would somehow both improve peoples’ lives while bringing its deficit at least in line with international norms. The fiscal reality would more likely be austerity on steroids.

Robison’s statement was a continuation of the messaging of the Sturgeon era. Post the general election, this seems weirdly inappropriate. The populist bubble has been burst in the UK. Government is becoming a bit boring again: less emotional, more technocratic, despite this month’s troubled streets and far-right goading of the mob.

The SNP suffered a major defeat at the general election. ‘The cause’ is clearly on the wane. In this context, deflecting from reality simply reminds us of the foolish populist tactics of the failed politicians of yesterday.

Scotland is moving on from this type of politics, and SNP politicians are clearly struggling to deal with that. But at some point they will have to accept that ten years of populism has run its course. Accepting the reality of the Gers statistics would signal the SNP administration is ready to grapple with the new political era we have moved into. But they’re not there yet.  

Liz Truss hits back at ‘far-left’ lettuce stunt

Another day, another drama. This time it’s in Suffolk, where former prime minister Liz Truss appeared on Tuesday night at a promotional event to flog her new book ‘Ten Years to Save the West’. But while the ex-PM was deep in conversation about US politics and Donald Trump, she was oblivious to a banner descending slowly above her head. Bearing the image of a goggly-eyed lettuce – in reference to the Daily Star‘s unofficial countdown about whether the legume would outlast the then-PM – the poster was emblazoned with the words: ‘I crashed the economy’. Safe to say the former prime minister was less than impressed. After it was drawn to her attention, Truss announced ‘that’s not funny’, before picking up her notes and storming off stage. She certainly knows how to make an exit…

The former MP for South West Norfolk has now taken to Twitter to hit back further at the interruption, which has been claimed by activist group Led By Donkeys. ‘What happened last night was not funny,’ she reiterated, going on to fume:

Far-left activists disrupted the event, which then had to be stopped for security reasons. This is done to intimidate people and suppress free speech. I won’t stand for it. Would we see the same reaction if the activists were far-right?

Strong stuff – although Mr S isn’t entirely convinced that a picture of a lettuce is, er, all that intimidating. Indeed Truss has not garnered much sympathy from her followers on social media so far. Her latest post comes a day after the ex-PM took to the platform to slam ‘the attacks on free speech in Britain and Europe’ and hail Elon Musk ‘for standing up to these bullies’ – and just four days after the tech billionaire dubbed her ‘Liz “Lettuce” Truss’ himself. Ouch. It doesn’t seem like she’ll be shaking off that comparison any time soon…

What the New York Times gets wrong about the Cass review

Hilary Cass’s review of gender identity services for children and young people put a stop to doctors playing fast and loose with the development of youngsters in Great Britain. Her report was welcomed on both sides of the Commons, and it was reassuring to hear Wes Streeting confirm that he intends to uphold the ban on puberty blockers to under-18s.

Across the Atlantic, however, the issue is more divisive. So-called ‘red states’ are moving along British lines. Last year, Tennessee prohibited health care professionals from ‘prescribing, administering or dispensing any puberty blocker or hormone’ to children who claimed to experience gender dysphoria. Meanwhile, in blue California, Governor Gavin Newsom signed off a bill to ‘offer refuge’ to children and their families ‘if they are being criminalised in their home states’.

It’s a sorry state of affairs when troubled children become the focus of politics in this way, but that didn’t stop the New York Times piling in with an opinion piece yesterday lambasting the Cass report. The criticisms have been heard before and refuted before.

Yes, the Keira Bell judgement – which preceded the Cass review – was later overturned.  But crucially because the Court of Appeal ruled that, ‘it is for doctors, not judges, to decide on the capacity of under-16s to consent to medical treatment’. Dr Cass – a former president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health – was eminently qualified, therefore, and the British government agrees.

Cass was clear when it came to puberty blockers. She cited a systematic review by the University of York that ‘found no evidence that puberty blockers improve body image or dysphoria, and very limited evidence for positive mental health outcomes’. The same could perhaps be said about chocolate bars, but doctors weren’t in the habit of prescribing confectionary to children on demand.

Most popular

Paul Wood

The strange death of Islamism

Leonora Barclay

UBI will make us miserable

Owen Matthews

What was the CIA doing in Moscow?

Humour aside, the NYT described the Cass as ‘a strange document’ and questioned not only the methodology but also the curiosity. Cass considered the reasons for ‘the increase in predominantly birth-registered females presenting to gender services in early adolescence often with complex presentations, and/or additional mental health problems and/or neurodiversity’. She did so methodically. She discussed peer and socio-cultural influences and – yes – the availability of treatment. In my personal experience (I transitioned as an adult), gender dysphoria is iatrogenic, i.e., the treatment provokes the condition.

The NYT’s challenge, though, is hardly scientific. The author summarily dismissed the Royal College of Psychiatrists’ welcome of the Cass Review, preferring to listen to the British Medical Association’s concerns. Perhaps someone might explain to her that the BMA is a trade union which has recently spent much time and effort running strikes in hospitals.

That was one snippet among many in the piece that ran to 5,000 words. There was an ongoing attempt to repudiate Cass’s work, but little on offer to refute it. Instead, the author appealed to activist organisations that supported her claims. But that is what happens when two worldviews clash, especially when – as here – they are grounded in different principles.

Either you believe that everyone has a gender identity that trumps biological sex, or you don’t. Where children are concerned, the dilemma is even more serious because the concept of gender identity led to puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones being prescribed to children too young to understand what it means to be an adult. Just because an idea is fashionable, and maybe well-supported, does not make it right. 

Sadly, too many politicians and policymakers abandoned critical thinking and lapped up this new and un-evidenced ideology. It might have ‘seemed like a good idea at the time’ – the excuse sometimes offered by miscreant children – but this is medicine, and children’s development is at stake.

‘First do no harm’ is a principle that should always underpin medicine. That’s what Cass recommended, and the NYT would be wiser to recommend that approach to their readers.

Why did a Washington Post reporter urge the White House to censor Trump?

Former president Donald Trump and Tesla founder and X CEO Elon Musk had a wide-ranging conversation in a record-breaking X Space on Monday night. The pair spoke for about two hours with millions of listeners tuning in; the Space received hundreds of thousands of comments. The opportunity to hear from an unscripted presidential candidate for one of the two major political parties on pretty much every major issue facing our country is a gift to journalists. The amount of access Trump gives to the press in general — even adversarial reporters — is also a gift. Ideas directly from the horse’s mouth; no anonymous sources or investigate legwork required. 

But the establishment and corporate media don’t view Trump’s words this way. Many of them believe that Trump is so uniquely dangerous that allowing him to speak — particularly without their live “fact-checks” (which often contain their own falsehoods) — is a threat to the country.

We have a long cultural tradition of free speech in this country that is an unwritten but near-universally understood extension from the First Amendment protection of speech from the government. Our Founders and other enlightened thinkers from the time reasoned that “bad speech” is best countered with more speech. Censoring “bad” ideas would drive them underground and allow them to fester, which promotes unhealthy conflict resolution and national disunity. In addition, the majority “right” or “good” idea can be wrong, so being open to new ideas and minority opinions is vital for societal progress and determining truth.

This philosophy requires a belief in democratic principles. That is, you have to trust the populace to be able to ascertain for themselves what is true versus false or good versus bad and make good decisions based on the speech they hear. It would seem obvious that America believes in that idea; after all, we allow nearly everyone to vote for their elected officials. We trust them enough to choose the government, so we must trust them enough to consume information without censorship.

Unfortunately, the news media in this country has increasingly isolated itself from most of this country which has allowed an elitist attitude to emerge within the industry. It became more prevalent during the Trump era. We know Trump is crazy and dangerous, but the people are too stupid to figure it out on their own, so we need to do everything possible to help defeat him, even if it means shielding the public from what he has to say. Journalists repeatedly lobbied social media companies to remove Trump from their platforms — with many of them finally acquiescing post-January 6 — and encouraged corporate advertisers to pull paid ads from conservative or Trump-related content on social media and television. Many stopped carrying his speeches and events live so that viewers could not see for themselves what he had to say. All of his words were filtered through a biased media that wanted to present him in the most unfavorable light possible. Private persons who chose to support Trump anonymously online were harassed and “canceled” by news organizations, a warning that ideological dissent to the regime would not be tolerated. 

Few of these journalists have ever stopped during this process to consider that their opinion of Trump might be wrong — or wonder why their strategy to silence him hasn’t meaningfully diminished his support. Instead, they have doubled down.

Earlier this week, a Washington Post reporter took it to the next level by openly suggesting the government get in on the game. During a White House press briefing, the Washington Post’s Cleve Wootson asked if the government has a “role” in tackling “misinformation” and if President Joe Biden planned to “intervene” in Trump’s X Space. 

“I think that misinformation on Twitter is not just a campaign issue. It’s a — you know, it’s an America issue. What role does the White House or the president have any sort of stopping that or stopping the spread of that or sort of inter — intervening in that. Some of that was about campaign misinformation, but you know it’s a wider thing, right?” Wootson asked. 

The Biden administration has already been accused of illegally colluding with social media companies to censor content it deemed “misinformation” (unfortunately, the Supreme Court ruled that the plaintiffs in this case lacked standing). Directly preventing a political opponent from speaking on a social media platform would be even further beyond the pale and it is frankly horrifying that a journalist, whose job is protected by the same constitutional amendment that shields the speech of everyday Americans from government censorship, would even suggest such a thing.

That the question was asked with little pushback from Wootson’s mainstream colleagues suggests to me that the American media has been emboldened in its illiberal ways. The problem is likely to get worse before it gets better. The media don’t seem to care that their trust with the American people is at an all-time low or that many of them have had to lay off staff. They have apparently decided it is more important to use their platforms and power to gatekeep “acceptable” ideas in society.

The journalistic profession has humiliated itself by dying on this mantle. Late-night host Stephen Colbert interviewed CNN anchor Kaitlan Collins on his program this week. When Colbert said in all seriousness, “I know you guys are objective over [at CNN], you just report the news as it is,” his audience laughed hysterically. “Is that supposed to be a laugh line?” Collins asked wryly. “No,” Colbert replied.

I suspect CNN and The Late Show have a pretty sizable overlap in audiences, so it seems like a pretty big deal that in-studio Colbert guests don’t believe that CNN is objective.

I offer some ideas of how the media can restore basic journalistic principles in my book, but I don’t purport to know how bad things have to get before the media reforms itself or collapses entirely. I do know that the way our media operates now poses far greater danger to our country than a presidential candidate being allowed to speak freely on X. 

The riots have proved swift justice is possible

John O’Malley and William Nelson-Morgan; Adnan Ghaffour and Leanne Hodgson; Sameer Ali and Stacey Vint – some of the dozens of people who were arrested, charged, convicted and sentenced within days of taking part in the riots that swept across parts of the UK. 

No delays in the police investigation for them, no waiting for the crown prosecution service (CPS) to make a charging decision and no adjournments in court. All cogs in the criminal justice machine working together, sending out a strong message of punishment and deterrence. Punch a police officer on Monday, hear the clang of the cell door on Friday. 

It’s an impressive operation that has undoubtedly helped bring calm back to our streets. But it has taken leadership from the top of government, the CPS, police and the courts to make it happen, serving only to highlight that this is not ‘business as usual’. It is, in fact, as far from usual as you can imagine. 

The criminal justice system in England and Wales is crippled by delays and backlogs, with the vast majority of crimes going unsolved. Over the past decade, the proportion of offences recorded by police that result in a suspect being charged has plummeted from 15 per cent to 6 per cent. When someone is prosecuted for a serious crime, it takes almost two years, on average, for the matter to be dealt with in a crown court, where there are some 68,000 outstanding cases, 30,000 more than five years ago.

Among the factors underlying this sorry record of under-performance include years of cuts to policing, the CPS and the courts which stripped the system of personnel and know-how. Added to this, there has been a growth in criminal cases, which can be more difficult to investigate and take longer to progress – such as sexual offences and those involving digital evidence. The Covid pandemic led to thousands of trials being postponed; the barristers’ strike, the erosion of rates of criminal legal aid and linked to that a chronic shortage of lawyers to defend and prosecute have also affected prosecution delays. 

Most popular

Paul Wood

The strange death of Islamism

Leonora Barclay

UBI will make us miserable

Owen Matthews

What was the CIA doing in Moscow?

None of these issues is easy to address without the kind of significant investment in criminal justice that the government simply cannot afford. But what the last fortnight of arrests and court hearings has demonstrated is that when different agencies have one clear objective they can get things done – and that objective should remain speedy justice. 

The staggeringly long gap between crime and sentence weakens the impact of punishment and deterrence, while any rehabilitative benefits from sentencing are blunted as the weeks and months go by and an offender’s circumstances change. It’s particularly true for young people where change can be so rapid: within a few weeks, a teenager on the fringes of a gang may become caught up in more serious forms of criminal behaviour or quickly find themselves in the grip of an exploitative relationship that is hard to shake off. 

Just for Kids Law, a group which campaigns for children’s rights, highlighted the risks of delay in a report in 2020 saying it was ‘extremely damaging’ for young people to be left ‘in limbo’ for long periods. It said the dangers were acute for those approaching their 18th birthday because it ‘pushes them by default into the adult criminal justice system where the consequences are profound’.

The report went on:

The damaging consequences of turning 18 between the date of the offence and prosecution include loss of anonymity, reduced likelihood of diversion, only being eligible for adult sentences, longer supervision periods (heightening the risk of breach) and much longer rehabilitation periods which reduce employment prospects and prevent people moving on with their lives. 

Tony Blair’s administration understood the need to fast-track under 18s through the criminal justice system, so it set a target to halve the time from arrest to sentence for ‘persistent’ young offenders. In fact, it was a manifesto pledge. In 1997, it took just under five months (142 days) to deal with such cases; by 2001 it was down to about two months (63 days). Although some areas struggled to achieve the target, the overall figure hovered around the 70-day mark for several years. 

The persistent young offender timeliness target no longer exists. It became the victim of a general clear-out of criminal justice performance indicators in the latter stages of the last Labour government and the early years of the coalition which followed, amid concerns they were being manipulated and creating perverse incentives. That is certainly a risk with targets, but if they are carefully constructed and monitored, it can be avoided. 

The greater danger, without targets, is that there is a general slackening off, a loss of focus and decline in performance. Youth Justice Board figures for 2023 show that from the time of an offence it took, on average, nearly seven months for under-18 year olds to be dealt with at court – the third highest figure on record.

This week, two 12-year-old boys became the youngest to be convicted over the riots: one had chucked an object at police during unrest in Southport, the other had thrown a missile at a police van in Manchester. They’ll be sentenced next month, showing a clear connection to them, and society more broadly, of how criminal behaviour has serious consequences. The riots have reminded us of the importance of this basic principle – swift justice: it’s time to build on it.  

Imane Khelif’s laughable lawsuit against J.K. Rowling

Popcorn not being the traditional French treat to celebrate an entertaining spectacle, break out the caramel au beurre salé.  

J.K. Rowling and Elon Musk have been accused in a complaint to French prosecutors of misgendering and ‘acts of aggravated cyber harassment’ against the Algerian boxer and newly crowned Olympic gold medallist Imane Khelif, whom I must avoid misgendering myself, lest I find myself a target of prosecution. I shall therefore refer to this individual by the pronoun K, so as to avoid confusion with Elon’s X.

After K’s Olympic triumph, Rowling, the world’s most notorious Terf, or as she is known here, féministe radicale excluant les personnes trans, accused Khelif of ‘enjoying the distress of a woman he’s just punched in the head.’ Musk weighed in, replying ‘Absolutely’ to a post from swimmer Riley Gaines that said ‘men don’t belong in women’s sports’. A single word that could theoretically lead to him doing time in France.  

Nabil Boudi, the Paris-based attorney of Khelif, said K’s complaint was posted to the anti-online hatred centre of the Paris public prosecutor’s office on Friday. He said there had been an ‘aggressive, misogynistic and racist’ campaign against the boxer.

The case is a criminal one and conviction could lead to two years imprisonment and a €30,000 fine for Rowling and Musk, but neither should be packing their toothbrushes yet for a stay in the Bastille. 

K’s sex, or gender, is, to be fair, disputed. K identifies as female and was raised as such, but the world boxing governing body doesn’t agree, since by chromosomal markers K might be considered male. The International Olympic Committee nevertheless considers K female, since this is what it says on K’s passport. K was therefore permitted to batter their way to the podium against competitors who were indisputably women.  

Most popular

Paul Wood

The strange death of Islamism

Leonora Barclay

UBI will make us miserable

Owen Matthews

What was the CIA doing in Moscow?

K’s gender status is capable of being interpreted much as advocates of either side might wish, as she/he appears to have a disorder of sex development, similar to that of the South African athlete Caster Semenya, a middle-distance runner and winner of two Olympic gold medals and three world championships. Semenya has the intersex condition 5a-Reductase 2 deficiency (please don’t ask me to elucidate) and natural testosterone levels in the typical male range. But K nevertheless packs a formidable punch.

Does this criminal allegation have any chance of succeeding?  I’m not a qualified French lawyer nor indeed any kind of lawyer but I shall climb out on a limb and suggest, même pas en rêve (in your dreams). French lawyers have developed a taste for associating high-profile names with even the most spurious complaints, as with the attempted prosecution of Apple for alleged human rights abuses in Africa. A case which eventually fizzled out, like the battery in an exhausted iPhone. As will this one, I am sure.

James Tidmarsh, a Paris lawyer who is qualified in both England and France, tells me: 

‘In order to amount to cyber bullying under French law there would need to be intent to harm as well as a pattern of harassment against the same targeted individual. If there is no pattern of harassment shown against Khelif, and no specific intent to harm Khelif, the criminal case will not proceed.

And even if it were to proceed I seriously doubt that Musk could be extradited to France over this — the offense would also need to be a crime in the States for him to be at all concerned —which presumably under US First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech it is not.’

Although perhaps the Scottish government might put Rowling on a plane to Paris to face the music.

Woke left-wing French prosecutors relish engagement in cinematic spectacle. Take the entertaining affair of Les Murs des Cons (the wall of idiots). In 2013 it was discovered by a journalist that the magistrates’ union in Paris had a photo montage on the wall of various figures on the French right, with insults written beside their visages. These figures included the former President Nicolas Sarkozy, right-wing intellectuals and police trade unionists. 

There were also photos of various parents of victims of crime, including two fathers of young girls raped and killed by repeat offenders, who had campaigned in favour of the genetic recording of sex offenders and against the laxity of justice. 

The insolent journalist who revealed the existence of the photo wall was then himself pursued judicially for criminal defamation – although ultimately the case ended with the conviction of the union president for public insults.

The prosecutors here can be said therefore to have form pursuing their political foes. 

That gender identity has become a cause of lawfare is hardly startling as France is captured by wokeisme, but if nothing else, the pursuit of Musk and Rowling in the French criminal courts provides an amusing epitaph to the Olympics, and might offer many more months of sporting entertainment.

The unfortunate timing of Harry and Meghan’s Colombia trip

As Harry and Meghan prepare to head off on yet another quasi-regal tour, this time to Colombia, it is surely nothing more than a coincidence that their experienced chief of staff Josh Kettler – a so-called ‘executive accelerator and strategist’ – has left ‘by mutual agreement’ after a three-month trial period in the job. The only detail released was that he was not felt to be the right fit.

The timing would be dismal by any standards, given that he was responsible for organising and executing the couple’s trip; the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will now be travelling without Kettler. However, his departure now means that he is the eighteenth member of the Sussexes’ staff to have quit, or been fired, since they moved to Montecito a few years ago. It has been suggested that there is an informal group, ‘the Sussex survivors’ club’, that those who have been through the traumatic and dispiriting experience of working for Harry and Meghan have formed. To lose one key member of staff is understandable, to lose two or three a pity, but to lose eighteen surely suggests that to enter Casa Sussex is to step foot into the least hospitable working environment imaginable. 

Still, onwards and upwards. Perhaps one of Kettler’s tasks while planning the Colombia jaunt for the pair may have been to gently suggest to the Duke of Sussex that he should make some sort of public statement about his use of the country’s most famous export that he admitted to in his memoir Spare. Ideally, this would be contrite and heartfelt, rather than defiant, but who knows with an untethered Harry. One item on the itinerary that has been planned for the pair is a meeting with Colombia’s president Gustavo Petro, who has been vocal about his country’s war on drugs. It is therefore unfortunate that he will be photographed meeting someone whose high-profile use of cocaine as a younger man has rendered him notorious in many people’s eyes, especially at a time when the president’s administration is said to be ‘drowning in scandal’. 

In any case, the purpose of the tour is obscure. After a pointless and self-aggrandising but strangely well-received trip to Nigeria earlier this year – in which, you’ll no doubt remember, Meghan announced that she was ’43 per cent Nigerian’ – the stated object is for the couple to address Colombia’s issues of child poverty and social discrimination through their star power and influence. No doubt Harry will get in a plug or two for the Invictus Games. There will be photo opportunities of the pair with children, smiling. But given that the impromptu visit is fraught with security and safety issues, the risks of something happening to either of them (heaven forbid) are likely to outweigh the limited PR opportunities that Brand Sussex will receive from the visit. 

Kettler’s departure may have reminded many of that old saying about rats and sinking ships. This latest piece of hubris may or may not be a success on its own, limited terms, but it is difficult to wonder why the Sussexes are still bothering to inflict their faux-messiah complexes on the world when few seem to welcome their presence in foreign climes any longer. Obscurity is a hard fate to contemplate, but sometimes it is better than the ritual humiliation that both seem masochistically intent on putting themselves through, apparently forever.

Why is Germany still cosying up to China?

Growth is slowing down. The property market is wobbling. And the government is tightening its grip on every form of economic activity. Global investors have made a decision about China over the last few months. It may have one of the biggest markets in the world, but the risks are simply too high. Over the second quarter of this year, foreign investors pulled a record amount of money out of China. A total of $15 billion was taken out of the country, and if that continues for the rest of the year it will be the first time the total has turned negative since 1999.

There is, however, one exception: Germany. In total, German companies invested €4.8 billion in China in the second quarter, almost double of what they invested in the first quarter, according to the Bundesbank. In the first half of the year, the total volume of direct investments by German industry came to €7.3 billion, after €6.5 billion last year, with the bulk of the money coming from the German car manufacturers. And that is despite official warnings from the government in Berlin to reduce its reliance on Asia. 

Most popular

Paul Wood

The strange death of Islamism

Leonora Barclay

UBI will make us miserable

Owen Matthews

What was the CIA doing in Moscow?

Sure, it is easy to understand what they are doing. China has been a huge source of profits, and as the country becomes more protectionist they need local factories, especially as Chinese auto manufacturers are turning into real competitors.

But there are two big problems. First, the money is mostly guaranteed by the German government, creating a huge exposure for the whole of the eurozone. If China were to invade Taiwan, and there was a complete economic blockade between China and the West, most of that capital would disappear overnight, just as the far smaller investments in Russia were worth nothing after it invaded Ukraine. The German state would be on the hook for those losses, and ultimately so would the European Central Bank. Next, it makes it impossible for Germany, and by extension the rest of the EU, to operate a meaningful foreign policy, or to stand with its allies in Europe and the United States. It has too much money at stake. 

The consultancy Eurointelligence describes it as ‘subprime’ exposure, a reference to the huge bet on the American mortgage market that triggered the financial crisis 2008 and 2009. That seems right. It was one thing to bet big on China in the last decade, when it was growing quickly, and joining the global trading system. When it is allied to Russia, and threatening Taiwan, it is crazy to invest so much. In reality, German industry is far too exposed to China – and that will end up being very expensive. 

How scandal brought down yet another Japanese leader

Japanese prime minister Fumio Kishida has announced he will be stepping down as leader of the Liberal Democratic party next month. This means yet another new leader, the 13^th in my quarter century in the country (unless one of the previous incumbents fancies another go) but almost certainly not a radical new direction. 

Whoever wins the LDP leadership election will become prime minister, as the party controls both houses of parliament, though no general election need be held until 2025.

The announcement has been declared a ‘surprise’, but in truth, the resignation of a Japanese premier is never really that much of a surprise. It happens so regularly that there are jokes about enlivening the notoriously dull Japanese political scene by playing Queen’s anthem ‘Another One Bites the Dust’ at the resignation press conferences, or just installing a revolving door at the premier’s official residence at the Kotei (Japan’s No. 10).

To be fair, Kishida lasted longer than many, his three-year stint will make him, remarkably, the eighth longest serving post-war prime minister. And he will likely be remembered as essentially a decent man who tried his best in difficult circumstances. He will point to the post-Covid stimulus package, beginnings of a thaw in the hitherto glacial relationship with South Korea, replacing the head of the Bank of Japan, and a firm promise to beef up the military in the face of potential threats as solid achievements.

But it’s thin gruel, or perhaps watery miso. Kishida’s tenure began with ambitious promises of a new kinder capitalism with better wealth distribution and virtuous growth cycles but ends with Japanese stocks and the Yen see-sawing seemingly beyond government control. His party’s and his personal polling are dire, and though never personally a figure of especial opprobrium, Kishida never managed to establish himself in the public imagination or get a firm grip on his fractious party. 

Most popular

Paul Wood

The strange death of Islamism

Leonora Barclay

UBI will make us miserable

Owen Matthews

What was the CIA doing in Moscow?

The biggest problem, as so often with Japanese leaders, was scandal… scandal after scandal after scandal. His predecessor Shinzo Abe never managed to play down allegations of politicking at supposedly neutral, publicly funded cherry blossom parties, but with Kishida it was a whole series of wounding embarrassments, some of which were his fault and others his colleagues’, that he could never really break free from.

A serious misstep, which expended much of his early political capital and brought his honeymoon period to an abrupt end, was the decision to hold a state funeral for Abe, who was assassinated in July 2022. This hugely expensive and constitutionally highly dubious move (imagine a state funeral for Tony Blair) provoked an intensity of anger rarely seen in Japanese society and marked Kishida out as either alarmingly naïve or easily manipulated. 

More recently have been the lingering accusations of a slush fund, which has seen no fewer than ten ministers and their aides step down. Kishida was never personally implicated and he tried to clean up the house by dissolving (at least in theory) the notoriously murky party factions, but the miasma of corruption and sleaze was inescapable. He didn’t help matters by appointing, and then firing for inappropriate behaviour (partying in the official residence), his own son to a key advisory role despite him having little relevant experience.

Hanging over all of this, like an enormous ominous dark cloud, is the still far from resolved scandal of the party’s decades old connections with the Unification Church (more commonly known as the ‘Moonies’). Some 179 (of 379) lawmakers have now admitted to having relationships with the group. The issue is believed to have motivated Tetsuya Yamagami to construct his own gun and use it to murder Shinzo Abe, a crime for which he awaits trial. 

Fumio Kishida had an enormous task to drag his party out of the cess pit and convince the public that it had seriously reformed. He failed, and as he himself acknowledged in his resignation speech: ‘We need to show an LDP reborn. The easiest way to clearly show that the LDP has changed is for me to step aside’.

But will stepping aside demonstrate this rebirth? The runners and riders are all old guard, with an emphasis on old. There is Party Secretary Toshimitsu Motegi (68), Digital Minster Taro Kono (61), Defence Minister Shigeru Ishiba (67), Economic Secretary Sanae Takaichi (a former heavy metal drummer and Margaret Thatcher fan, 63), and Foreign Minister Yoko Kamikawa (71). There is even speculation of former prime minister Yoshihide Suga (75) making an unlikely return, or Taro Aso (84), who lasted less than a year as PM in 2008-2009, throwing his stylish fedora into the ring. Absolutely none of these could plausibly be presented as new brooms. 

As for the Japanese public, today’s news has barely provoked a shrug in a country more worried about the reportedly elevated risk of a massive earthquake hitting the Nankai trough area sometime soon. And as for the future, perhaps after Queen next up on the playlist could be The Who’s ‘Won’t get fooled again’.

Sadiq Khan doubles number of City Hall fat cats

While the new Labour government continues to wax lyrical about the dire state of the country’s finances, it seems not everyone is feeling the pinch. For staff working in the Greater London Authority under Labour Mayor Sadiq Khan, business is positively booming. In fact, according to a Freedom of Information response sent to Mr S, the number of GLA staffers on the top rates of pay in 2024 has more than doubled since 2016. Alright for some…

When London last had a Tory mayor in Boris Johnson, there were 45 staff on the top three rates of pay, with just 12 in the highest salary bracket. Yet under Khan’s eight year tyranny, almost 100 staff are on the top salary bands, with a staggering 28 earning more than £119,793 a year. Just under 20 City Hall staff are in the second highest pay bracket, raking in upwards of £92,307 annually, while more than 50 lucky staffers are sitting on pay packets of over £85,206 a year. And while Johnson had just one staff member in the Mayor’s Office on a top salary back in 2016, Khan has, er, eight. Four fat cats are receiving over £92,000 a year with another four on six-figure salaries. Talk about a splurge…

City Hall has defended the staff boom, insisting that the rise in top-paid employees reflects ‘the rise in powers and responsibilities since Sadiq Khan became Mayor, particularly regarding skills, housing and health and care’. If only Londoners had experienced any great improvement in any of these areas under Khan’s reign, eh? Certainly the TaxPayers’ Alliance remain unconvinced, with head of the group Elliot Keck blasting the Mayor over the revelations:

Taxpayers will be shocked that the Mayor of London is boosting the number of City Hall fat cats. All this while London struggles with the burden of rising crime rates, declining nightlife and unprecedented pressures on housing an infrastructure.

Quite. Mr S would remind readers that Khan has a history of paying his underlings overinflated salaries. London’s first ‘night czar’ Amy Lamé presided over the closure of 25 per cent of the capital’s nightclubs during the pandemic, according to one count – yet was rewarded with a 40 per cent pay hike which landed her on a six-figure salary. Khan’s ever the man of quantity over quality, eh?

About as edgy as Banksy: Joe Rogan’s Netflix special reviewed

My resolution this summer was to see how far into the Olympics I could get without watching an event. It’s harder than you think. Especially when you’ve got kids calling constantly from the sitting room: ‘Dad, Dad, it’s Romania vs Burkina Faso in the finals of the women’s beach volleyball and there’s been a tremendous upset…’

I jest. I actually do know what happened in the finals of the women’s beach volleyball. It was the first thing I watched because that was what was on when I walked into the room and broke my duck. Italy beat the long-standing champions the United States, which delighted me enormously. One of the things that had most annoyed me about the Olympics when I wasn’t watching was hearing the American national anthem on autorepeat, from the TV room, as they won yet another gold.

Later I got briefly very excited that a nice English woman I had never heard of before, and whose name I have since forgotten, won the 800 metres in spectacular fashion. I also got mildly diverted by the Team GB girl Andrea Spendolini-Sirieix – who, after a few shaky attempts, got beaten to the medals by the near perfect-scoring Chinese in the diving – mainly because her dad is the French bloke who presents First Dates on Channel 4. And that’s it. That’s all I saw. Did quite well, didn’t I?

The Olympics are presumably a good time for all the networks to bury bad TV. Maybe that’s why Netflix chose to release Joe Rogan’s alleged comedy special right in the middle. Rogan is a former US sports commentator (mixed martial arts) who has somehow managed to parlay his minor celebrity and blandly amiable jockishness into a multi-gazillion dollar career as the world’s biggest podcaster. But labelling him a ‘stand-up comedian’, I would suggest, is an implausibility too far.

Most popular

Paul Wood

The strange death of Islamism

Leonora Barclay

UBI will make us miserable

Owen Matthews

What was the CIA doing in Moscow?

Rogan is marketed as a kind of edgy alternative to the mainstream media. In reality, he is about as edgy as Banksy. (Explanation for American readers: not very). But he does his best. For example, when he had Elon Musk on one of his interminable podcasts (his longest lasted five hours and 19 minutes), they famously shared a joint.

‘I mean it’s legal, right,’ said Musk as he took the proffered reefer. And there’s your problem, right there. Yes, maybe back in the Ronald Reagan 1980s when – if it was your third offence – it could have landed you an automatic 25-year prison sentence that would indeed have been pretty risqué. But in 2024? You must be kidding. Marijuana smoking is so ubiquitous in most US states – and indeed right across the world – that it’s almost compulsory. The really out-there thing for Rogan to be doing nowadays would be to push out the old ‘just say no’ mantra.

Still, he knows how to please a crowd. The first part of his comedy set from the Majestic Theater in San Antonio was dedicated to how amazingly blessed he felt to live in Texas, how Texans were truly the most wonderful people in the world, and none more wonderful than the ones who’d paid (or perhaps been paid: who knows?) to see Joe Rogan, live, at the Majestic Theater, San Antonio. This went down well.

After that, he could have read extracts from the Big Bumper Compendium of Old Jokes and still have been treated like the world’s funniest man. Indeed, that was pretty much what he did. One minute he was riffing on the subject of aliens and their apparent fascination with intimate personal investigations on humans (which South Park dealt with in 1997 in its very first episode, titled ‘Cartman Gets An Anal Probe’); the next he was recycling an old Joan Rivers gag about Michelle Obama and then swiftly retracting it in case, heaven forfend, anyone thought he was being serious. Stick to the podcast, Joe.

For times like these – telly is always thin in August – what you really need is MUBI. This is a subscription channel which gives you access to films you’re unlikely to find anywhere else: all those brilliant, usually foreign, elliptical, dreamy, thought-provoking arthouse films which you would have gone to see at the cinema if only you’d realised – before it was too late – that they were being shown.

We’ve watched some crackers in the last few months: Claire Denis’s Beau Travail (Billy Budd transported to the French Foreign Legion in 1990s Djibouti); Agnès Varda’s 1962 classic Cléo from 5 to 7 (in which you get to see Paris as you would like it still to be); Wim Wender’s Perfect Days (more involving than a movie about a Tokyo public toilet cleaner has any right to be) and, most recently, Alice Rohrwacher’s mesmerising La Chimera (about a moody Englishman expatriate in 1980s Tuscany, who scrapes his artfully dishevelled living plundering Etruscan tombs).

You can be sure Joe Rogan won’t have watched any of them.

Immersive and spectacular: Piet Oudolf’s new borders at RHS Wisley reviewed

Piet Oudolf’s long borders at Wisley were worn out. The famous designer had in fact become a bit embarrassed by them: they’d done well for 20 years but in that time his own style had evolved – and so had people’s tastes.

Oudolf is now such a household name that his pointillist landscaping is considered fine art on paper, let alone when actually planted up. (There are weighty coffee-table books exploring his art.) But the long borders had become, well, just borders, on either side of a long grassy walk up the hill from the Wisley glasshouses. Many of the people who visit Wisley for a walk – rather than to peer at plants – were perfectly capable of ignoring the whole lot.

So this year, the Royal Horticultural Society ripped it all up and got Oudolf to design them a new two-acre space. Instead of hoping people would notice his dreamy, prairie-style planting as they sauntered past, with its airy, ephemeral perennials, he forced everyone to really look at them. His new design was much more characteristic of the style for which the 80-year-old Dutch artist has become so well-loved.

It is an immersive landscape. A sinuous main path runs through looping beds set out with plants in Oudolf’s two formations: block and matrix. The first creates a generous drift that leads the eye through the planting by repeating the same herb or colour. It also contains a ‘scatter’ of another plant, often contrasting in colour and form. Some of the colour-combinations are well balanced: rich, red Heleniums with sudden spikes of Salvia ‘Blue Spire’ (formerly known as Perovskia). Others are less predictable, such as the light-pink Sidalcea, ‘Little Princess’, and the orange Asclepias tuberosa, or the tall, yellow helicopter-landing-pad flowerheads of the Achillea mixed with mid-pink wand loosestrife, the Lythrum virgatum ‘Happyness’.

Most popular

Paul Wood

The strange death of Islamism

Leonora Barclay

UBI will make us miserable

Owen Matthews

What was the CIA doing in Moscow?

The Lythrum recurs through the landscape in blocks, along with a number of other species from the same genus. At the base of some of the blocks is a scattering of low-growing Geranium sanguineum var. striatum, which you’d barely notice unless you stopped for a moment. Lysimachia ephemerum – one of Oudolf’s favourite forms – mingle with ball-like Echinops.

One of the downsides of the block form of planting is that if a species fails for some reason, it leaves gaps – like missing teeth – in a bed. This isn’t limited to Oudolf or the new perennial movement of which he was one of the founders: traditional herbaceous borders, with their groups of three or five plants, can have the same problem. There’s often a discrepancy in more established Oudolf gardens between the beautiful plan on paper and what’s now on site. But that’s gardening for you: plants fail, sometimes even in their ideal conditions.

Even Oudolf, who was a nurseryman before he became a designer, can’t have a 100 per cent success rate. But unlike some designers, he does have a deep appreciation of individual plants, understanding the conditions they need, and avoids forcing together species that have nothing in common – such as the very popular but also very weird trend of combining the moisture-loving woodland-edge plant Hydrangea ‘Annabelle’ and Mediterranean drought-tolerant lavender. There’s none of that nonsense here – but there are still some bald gaps. Other naturalistic designers bring together more diverse mixtures of plants so that if one fails, the rest of the community soon compensates and fills the space.

The new landscape makes you stop and stare. There are benches placed throughout, and nearly all of them were full of people appreciating the planting when I visit on a very hot August afternoon. It is just four months since ten RHS gardeners and hundreds of volunteers set out thousands of small pots – mostly reasonably immature plants in 9cm or 2l pots – across the site. And yet it looks remarkably mature and established from a distance, with many of the plants reaching 5ft and filling their space.

Some of the drifts are more obviously new: the matrices of a number of different Molinia caerulea – a real signature plant of Oudolf’s – that appear throughout the landscape look very neat indeed. And Baptisia australis is a gorgeous prairie plant, but it spends at least the first season of growth appearing to loaf about and doing very little at all in the way of flowering. It is, in fact, like one of those colleagues who just cracks on with the job without talking constantly about their greatness: beneath the surface it is building a huge root network. But you’ll have to wait until next year to see much from it. It has an astonishing afterlife long after the flowers have faded; when the first frosts come, it turns a shocking steel grey, as though it has been blasted in a furnace.

Oudolf is the designer who persuaded the RHS that brown is a colour and as such he doesn’t rely on shrubs for structure across the season; he chooses plants that have as good a senescence as they do a prime. The ephemeral plantings that breeze and billow in the summer are frosty skeletons come the winter: Eryngium and Echinops seedheadspicked out in filigree detail and golden rustling grasses.

In fact, there are barely any new shrubs in this landscape. Nothing here is evergreen, save a few semi-evergreen grasses such as Deschampsia cespitosa ‘Goldtau’. A few young magnolias stud some of the beds. Mostly, though, the design relies on the mature Cotinus coggygria that were planted when the long borders were first done. They are a very Oudolf plant, too: deciduous and still ephemeral in appearance despite their size. Their plume flowers earn them the common name ‘Smoke Bush’. But that’s it. When the winter comes, the garden is brown, and that’s how it’s supposed to be.

The only problem I have with this is that shrubs are great and have become rather forgotten in gardening – especially among the amateur gardeners who try to mimic Oudolf (four of the blocks of planting at Wisley are designed specifically to inspire amateur gardeners). Of all the naturalistic designers in the UK, Nigel Dunnett is the solitary one to use shrubs on a large scale. That said, it was only this year that Shrouded in Light: Naturalistic Planting Inspired by Wild Shrublands came out. It was, honestly, a bit of a disappointment, as its authors were allowed to get away with some dreadfully pretentious writing when they could have been arguing the case for shrublands and their place in modern planting design.

What they could have pointed out with more force – and what the New Perennial Movement ignores – is that much of our wild landscape isn’t prairie. And we certainly don’t have any prairie in the UK. Scrubland – shrubs – on the other hand, is one of the most common, diverse and interesting wild-plant communities.

Perhaps the next Oudolf will be someone who really wows the public with some modern shrubbery. Anyway, criticising this designer for not using many shrubs is a bit like whingeing that Van Gogh wasn’t that into watercolour: they just aren’t part of his palette. It’s called the New Perennial Movement for a reason. And Oudolf has done more than probably any other modern garden designer to elevate planting to an art form that is taken seriously. He has made people fall in love with ornamental grasses, taught them to realise that there is beauty at every stage of a plant’s life cycle rather than just during its flowering prime, and helped us to appreciate a wilder, looser feel to gardening, stopping us from needing to turn everything into a Lego town.

He has made garden design better and more plant-focused, and has now made his old long borders at Wisley much better: spectacular, in fact.

Israel needs to get out of the Gaza war

As the war in Gaza drags on into its eleventh month, and the conflict risks expanding into a regional war involving both Iran and its Lebanese proxies, it is surely time to question what would be a successful outcome for Israel.

Militarily, the IDF has inflicted enormous damage on Hamas. Yet around 115 hostages continue to languish in Gaza and, in public relations terms, Israel is clearly losing the propaganda war. 

The Jewish state is increasingly accused of war crimes and its allies are more likely to call for a ceasefire than issue a stalwart defence of its actions. Moreover, court cases in the international arena continue to ratchet pressure on Israel. The International Criminal Court is still considering whether to issue arrest warrants against Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes; while a case continues at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) alleging genocide. 

In a further blow, in July the ICJ issued an advisory opinion on ‘the legal consequences arising from the policies and practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory’, which stated that Israel’s occupation is illegal. This opinion is not legally binding and many of these international cases seem unduly political, are unlikely to be enforceable, and may well prove counter-productive. Nonetheless, they all add to a sense of reputational damage since Israel wishes to be identified as a moral state which observes the rule of law. 

One of Israel’s problems is that it has simply lost control of the narrative. The events following the strike on the Al-Tabaeen school site on 10 August highlight the problem. It remains far from clear what happened. Yet the account from the Hamas run Gaza Health Ministry that Israel had massacred more than 80 people immediately took hold, with Israel facing condemnation from many European states. The same day Israel published a list of 19 terrorists killed in the strike, alongside ariel photographs of the strike itself. This received little media coverage and when it was mentioned was presented as Israeli ‘claims’ (whereas the casualty figures, which are likely to have been inflated by Hamas, were typically presented by the media as fact). 

Most popular

Paul Wood

The strange death of Islamism

Leonora Barclay

UBI will make us miserable

Owen Matthews

What was the CIA doing in Moscow?

This week, a spokesperson for Israel argued that BBC journalist Mishal Husain warranted ‘a pro-Palestinian reporter of the year award’ after the Today programme gave a Palestinian time to repeat the Al-Tabeen massacre accusations on air, whilst posing him tough questions about whether Palestinian prisoners had been tortured in prison.

While Mencer may have felt exasperated, his approach was fairly ineffectual. If you want to win a journalist (and the public) over, it is better to take them through evidenced facts, rather than being abusive on air. 

The Israeli government often does itself no favours. Its talk of eliminating or destroying Hamas is increasingly counterproductive. No one really knows that this means and, after 11 months of fighting, it does not seem like an achievable objective – rather an excuse for a permanent state of war. If Israel does not reframe the narrative, it will eventually face claims that it lost its conflict with Hamas.

Earlier in July, Netanyahu might have calculated that Trump’s anticipated victory over Joe Biden would leave him in a far stronger position to continue the war with American support. The recent Democratic resurgence under Kamala Harris makes that bet a much riskier proposition. Support from Britain is also not guaranteed under Sir Keir Starmer. There are already reports that David Lammy may cease the export of offensive arms to Israel.

The irony is that with the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh in July, Israel has now killed four of the five top Hamas leaders it holds responsible for the October 7 massacre and subsequent Gaza war. Saleh al-Arouri, the deputy chairman of the Hamas Political Bureau was killed in January;  Marwan Issa, the deputy commander of the Ezzedeen Al-Qassam Brigades was killed in March; and Mohammed Deif, the head of the Ezzedeen al-Qassam Brigades was said to have been killed in July (although this is denied by Hamas). That may leave only Yahya Sinwar, recently promoted to Chairman of the Hamas Political Bureau, skulking in the tunnels below Gaza.

The audacious killing of Haniyeh should have been used as a means for Israel to declare victory in the war (much as President Obama sought to reorientate the ‘war on terror’ following the assassination of Osama Bin Laden). Israel has demonstrated its ability to reach its enemies, wherever they may hide. Now, its primary objectives should be seeking a way to successfully conclude the conflict and recover the hostages. 

In spite of its resolute propaganda, Hamas appears increasingly desperate, reportedly killing one hostage and wounding two others in separate incidents on Monday. The situation for the hostages seems ever more grave. 

The Israeli government’s alternative, an escalation involving a war with Hezbollah and Iran, may help Netanyahu’s short term political prospects, but would do little good for the citizens of Israel who would suffer significantly in such a conflict. De-escalation is in everyone’s interests.

In terms of the Gaza war, arguably, Israel should set out some much clearer objectives to enable it to end the conflict. These would obviously be subject to negotiation, but a starting point might be a negotiated surrender by Hamas (rather than continued calls to destroy the organisation by Israel); the return of the hostages and a new Palestinian administration (excluding Hamas) in Gaza. 

Israel should repeat these conditions ad nauseum until everyone is clear that it is willing to end the war and is not asking too much in return. Of course, Hamas is unlikely to agree to these terms. But such reasonable demands would put much greater pressure on the Palestinians and would make it rather harder for world leaders to criticise Israel. 

The alternative is that Netanyahu doubles down on the conflict and continues to seek the total destruction of Hamas, whatever the cost. It is hard to see how such a course of action would end well for Israel, or for the remaining hostages.

No EU migrant deal will stop the small boats

The sea lanes of Europe were busy last weekend. On Sunday, more than 700 migrants crossed the Channel from France to England, taking the total number this year to 18,342 – a 13 per cent increase on 2023. On the same day, 421 migrants in twelve boats disembarked on the Italian island of Lampedusa, and more have arrived since, swelling the numbers to over 500.

The diversity of the nationalities of arrivals in Lampedusa is a fascinating and alarming snapshot of the crisis confronting Europe. The people stepping ashore hailed from Egypt, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Ghana, Gambia, Malaysia, Nigeria, Liberia and Syria. 

Some set out in their boats from Libya and others from Tunisia. The latter is the cheaper route, with the migrants paying the smugglers between £500 to £1,500 pounds (the cheapest route is from Sfax, which is 116 miles west of Lampedusa). Migrants who set sail from the more distant Libya paid between £3,000 to £7,000 for their place in the boat. 

The cost of crossing the Mediterranean to Europe underlines what the American academic, Stephen Smith, explained in his 2018 book, The Scramble for Europe: namely, it is the young African middle-class who are migrating, and not the poorest and most downtrodden. The internet and social media allows this demographic to glimpse what they perceive to be greater potential for personal growth in Europe; according to Smith these young middle class resent the ‘rule of elders’ in Africa that restricts this growth. In his book, Smith predicted that migration from Africa has only just started and will increase enormously in the decades ahead.

Most popular

Paul Wood

The strange death of Islamism

Leonora Barclay

UBI will make us miserable

Owen Matthews

What was the CIA doing in Moscow?

It is not just Africans who see Europe as the promised land. Increasingly, it is the target for south Asians, particularly Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis. 

Nearly 40,000 migrants have arrived in Italy this year and 7,615 are from Bangladesh, the highest number of any country. The Italian authorities fear that this figure will surge in the months ahead given the recent political upheaval in Bangladesh. Student protests that began in July evolved into a widespread uprising against prime minister Sheikh Hasina. Hundreds were killed and the premier fled, leaving behind a volatile country presided over by an interim government that has promised to soon hold parliamentary elections.

The unrest in Bangladesh is similar to that seen in a myriad countries across the developing world in recent years; there have been seven coup d’etats in Africa since 2020, while conflict has ravaged Sudan, Syria and the Yemen. In each case, one consequence is an increase in migration to Europe.

The European Union is striving to contain this huge exodus. In the last 18 months its commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, has signed deals with Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Mauritania and Lebanon in the hope their governments will help limit the flow. 

The numbers of migrants crossing into Europe are down on 2023 – 94,009 arrived in Italy in the first seven months of last year – so the EU’s strategy is having an effect. Nonetheless, tens of thousands continue to arrive, paying considerable sums of money to the well-organised criminal gangs who control the routes. These gangs will be encouraged to step up their illicit business by the political vacuum in France and the election in Britain of a Labour government. 

It is reported this week that Keir Starmer has held talks with his Italian counterpart, Giorgia Meloni, about the challenge of illegal immigration. The British PM believes tackling the criminal gangs is the most effective way of stopping the boats. 

This is unlikely to work. There are now too many gangs operating in Asia, the Middle East and Africa. Break up one and another will take its place, attracted by the relatively easy riches on offer.

According to a report earlier this year by the Global Initiative against Transnational Organised Crime, one people-smuggling gang can earn as much as one million dollars (£780,000) a month. Not as lucrative as trafficking drugs, maybe, but unlike that trade, the risk is borne not by the smugglers but by the people being smuggled. They are the ones in jeopardy when they climb into a flimsy boat and push off into the open water.

But it is a risk huge numbers are willing to take. Europe is their dream and they will not be deterred, not by danger or by deals done by the EU.

RSPB told off over ‘party political’ anti-Tory post

To the matter of ‘inappropriate’ party political tweets – from a rather unlikely culprit. The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) has come under fire after it took to Twitter last year with a rather odd campaign post. The charity took a fierce stance against proposals from the then-Tory government to scrap water pollution restrictions for housing sites in England – and decided to channel its fury online at Conservative ministers. In a tweet written in August 2023, the RSPB accused former prime minister Rishi Sunak, ex-housing secretary Michael Gove and former-environment secretary Therese Coffey for U-turning on environmental protections, slamming the trio as ‘liars’. Crikey.

The furious post contained a photo of all three politicians, with ‘LIARS!’ emblazoned across the image in red. Tagging the former government ministers, the charity account fumed: ‘You said you wouldn’t weaken environmental protections. And yet that’s just what you are doing. You lie, and you lie, and you lie again. And we’ve had enough.’ Good heavens. Talk about pulling no punches…

The organisation quickly faced backlash, with ex-Tory MP Mark Jenkinson claiming the RSPB was turning into a ‘political campaigning organisation’ – and even calling for the charities watchdog to strip it of its charity status. At the time, the company’s chief exec Becky Speight apologised for the post, adding that it was wrong to name individual politicians and insisted the charity was ‘not entering politics’.

And now the Charity Commission has blasted the organisation’s post, noting in a report published today that: ‘We found that the tone and nature of RSPB’s post was inappropriate and had not been signed off at the appropriate level within the charity.’ But the watchdog hasn’t gone so far as to sanction the charity, claiming the RSPB has taken ‘sufficient remedial action’ by deleting the post, apologising and taking action to ensure it wouldn’t engage in ‘party political tweets’. Orlando Fraser, chairman of the Commission, pledged this year that the watchdog will not be ‘misused or weaponised’ in the culture wars from within politics, or the sector itself. It’s a warning to the charity – and any others considering such antics – that next time the outcome may not be quite so lenient…

Catalonia can’t escape the curse of independence 

In a low-key ceremony in the Catalan parliament on Saturday, Spain’s former health minister Salvador Illa was sworn in as the new president of Catalonia. Despite coming first in the regional elections on 12 May, Illa’s Socialists failed to secure a majority and have spent the last three months in cross-party negotiations. They finally struck a deal with the pro-independence ERC, which came third in the May election after losing 13 of its 33 seats. 

Illa is the first unionist politician to become president of Catalonia since 2010, so there has been a lot of talk in Spanish media of a ‘nueva etapa’, or new era – a chance for Catalans to move on from the independence-related upheavals of recent years. Illa, himself a Catalan, has promised that his coalition will be ‘an institution for all Catalans… in [the] service of everyone’. Spain’s Socialist prime minister Pedro Sanchez, under whom Illa served as health minister during the pandemic, has said that Illa is ‘exactly what Catalonia needs’.  

High hopes for a new start in this wealthy northeastern region aren’t completely unjustified. Ahead of the May vote, Illa campaigned on a pragmatic platform that concentrated on issues such as education and housing rather than independence. He is a quiet, somewhat dour figure – completely unlike pugilistic former presidents such as Carles Puigdemont and Quim Torra, both of whom governed Catalonia with one goal in mind: to secede from Spain, whatever the cost.  

Although pro-independence, the party with which Illa’s Socialists have teamed up is not as hardline as its ally-turned-rival, Puigdemont’s Junts per Catalunya. In fact the dissolution of the ERC-Junts coalition in late 2022 was one of the factors that led to the early election in May. Illa wants to engage with those Catalans who oppose secession from Spain – 53 per cent according to a recent poll, the highest figure in almost a decade – not just the minority (40 per cent) who are in favour. 

Most popular

Paul Wood

The strange death of Islamism

Leonora Barclay

UBI will make us miserable

Owen Matthews

What was the CIA doing in Moscow?

Still, this is not as emphatic a victory for the unionists as Illa and Sanchez seem to think it is. Separatists have already stated that their support for Catalonia’s new Socialist-led administration is far from unconditional. At the investiture vote last Thursday, Josep Maria Jove, the ERC’s president in the Catalan parliament, warned that there will be ‘consequences’ if the Socialists fail to comply with its conditions – both ‘here and wherever it is needed’. This was an ominous reference to the national congress, where Sanchez’s minority government is also dependent on Catalan separatists. 

The fact that Illa’s situation now mirrors that of Sanchez should be cause for concern in the unionist camp, not celebration. After losing last July’s general election to the Conservative Popular party, Sanchez was only able to return to power by striking a confidence-and-supply deal with the ERC and Junts. In return, they requested – and received – an amnesty for all the politicians and activists involved in the illegal secession bid of 2017, several of whom were handed lengthy prison sentences by Spain’s Supreme Court (they were pardoned by Sanchez in 2021). Puigdemont avoided the same fate by fleeing to Belgium, where he remained in self-imposed exile until a brief, dramatic return to Catalonia last week. 

Sanchez hoped to appease separatists with the amnesty, which is hugely unpopular amongst Spaniards – but so far it has only emboldened them, as was shown by Puigdemont’s Houdini-like antics in Barcelona last Thursday. As well as being deeply embarrassing for the Spanish government, the former Catalan president’s fist-pumping speech and subsequent evasion of arrest – despite the presence of hundreds of police officers – sent a clear message to both Sanchez and Illa: success in their respective offices will depend on how they handle the separatists. Junts and the ERC will relish playing the two men off against each other, punishing the prime minister for non-compliance by the Catalan president and vice versa. 

The ERC has wasted no time in extracting concessions from the Socialists in return for its precious votes.^. Even in his reduced acting capacity after May’s election, Pere Aragones, the party’s boss and Illa’s pro-independence predecessor, made awkward demands of Sanchez. He managed to wrest control of the region’s minimum basic income scheme from the central government, and repeated his request for a ‘single financing’ setup, in which Catalonia manages its own taxes. 

One wonders how many times throughout his presidency Illa will have to make similar demands of Sanchez to keep the ERC on board – and how many times the prime minister will have to accede to retain the support of Junts. The sight of two powerful unionists negotiating on behalf of separatists would no doubt feel, for the latter group, like the ultimate victory. Yet this is precisely what might happen in the not-so-new era that has just begun in Catalonia.  

Treasury under scrutiny after Labour donor bags top civil service job

Back to the Labour government, which is under scrutiny as more questions about party donor Ian Corfield’s new job arise. The banker has a history of donating hefty sums to Sir Keir’s lefty lot, with Electoral Commission records showing Corfield gave more than £20,000 to Labour politicians (including now-Chancellor Rachel Reeves) over the last nine years. Just last month, the Labour donor landed a job as a director of investment at the Treasury – and now it has emerged that the civil service watchdog was not informed of his donation history when it approved Corfield’s appointment. How curious…

While most civil service jobs are filled through ‘fair and open competition’, departments are able to apply for exemptions for senior roles as long as the Civil Service Commission approves them. As revealed by Politico, two insiders confirmed that the regulator was not informed of Corfield’s rather generous donation history in advance of its own decision. Meanwhile, Civil Service Commission chief Kate Owen claimed that government departments are responsible for vetting candidates, with the regulator’s spokesperson agreeing that ‘due diligence on candidates is a matter for the employing department’ – which, in this case, would be the Treasury. Yet, rather interestingly, the Treasury refused to say whether Corfield’s donations were indeed declared.

‘Any appointments are made in line with the civil service rules on recruitment,’ a government spokesperson said – but this hasn’t stopped the criticism from rolling in. An Institute for Government researcher, Jack Worlidge, claims the case ‘exposes clear gaps in the rules’, adding that ‘it will be interesting to see if the new Ethics and Integrity Commission closes some of those’. Meanwhile former Tory SpAd Henry Newman took to Twitter to fume: ‘Can you imagine the outrage if a Conservative PM had appointed a donor to the civil service?’ Rules for thee, but not for me…

Why has the inflation rate gone up again?

The inflation rate rose to 2.2 per cent in July, slightly up from the Bank of England’s target of 2 per cent, where the rate sat in May and June. It’s the first rate uptick this year – and though widely expected, it will be used to explain why the Bank’s continued hawkish stance, despite starting its rate-cutting process earlier this month.

The slight speed up in the inflation rate is largely attributed to the overall cost of household services, where the ‘prices of gas and electricity fell by less than they did last year’. This was somewhat offset by the ‘largest downward contribution’ which was attributed to falling costs for restaurants and hotels. But that wasn’t enough to stop the rate from increasing slightly, raising further questions about when the next interest rate cut might come.

The uptick is not a surprise. Inflation has been widely forecast to rise in the second half of this year – though these increases are in no way comparable to the earlier inflation crisis experienced worldwide. At the beginning of the month, when Threadneedle Street opted for a small rate cut of 0.25 percentage points, the Bank’s own forecast showed inflation rising ‘slightly towards the end of the year, to 2.75 per cent’ – then falling back down ‘to 1.7 per cent in two years’ time and to 1.5 per cent in three years.’

This small uplift, largely attributed to flux in energy prices, was already factored in by the Bank when it decided to start cutting rates, and should not – in theory – stop the BoE from continuing to cut rates in the autumn, even if it decides to hold rates at its next meeting in September. But the headline inflation rate is only one (albeit important) part of the equation. As Ross Clark pointed out yesterday, the latest wage growth data has also stabilised, which should allow for more rate cuts, but Chancellor Rachel Reeves’s first big spending decision – to grant inflation-busting pay rises across the public sector – is bound to give members of the Monetary Policy Committee some pause, and it will feel bound to assess any potential inflationary impact of those pay boosts.

Most popular

Paul Wood

The strange death of Islamism

Leonora Barclay

UBI will make us miserable

Owen Matthews

What was the CIA doing in Moscow?

All that said, the details in the data today will have the Bank feeling confident it made the right decision earlier this month.

While the inflation rate did increase slightly, the rise was smaller than markets had been predicting (the consensus was closer to 2.3 per cent). Capital Economics reports this morning that the data ‘opens the door to more interest rate cuts later this year’ thanks to a long-awaited slowdown in the services rate, which slowed from 5.7 per cent in the year to June to 5.2 per cent to July. This number has been especially sticky – and has been part of the broader story about why the Bank held off on a rate cut in the first half of the year. Its movement further suggests that the Bank will see a return to its 2 per cent target soon enough, even if there is a slight uptick over the next few months.

The government won’t be too concerned about this morning’s update, not least because it’s benefitting from the start of the rate-cutting process, which is happening regardless of a small rate rise. The Chief Secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones notes this morning that the Treasury is ‘under no illusion as to the scale of the challenge we have inherited’. But compare the inflation rate to what the last Prime Minister inherited – Rishi Sunak took over with inflation in the double digits – and it serves as another reminder that, slowly but surely, economic conditions are improving.

Hear Kate's analysis on today's Coffee House Shots podcast:

The city finally cracking down on the e-scooter menace

E-scooters are the bane of modern civilisation. They are the stealth bombers of our pavements. They are a silent danger to those who ride them, and a threat to life and limb for pedestrians and cyclists forced to share paths and roadways with them. They give accident and emergency departments unwanted business, thus imposing a significant social and financial cost on the wider community.

There is nothing worse than being out for a walk with your young children in a park or on a shared pathway, only to be nearly mowed down by a speeding e-scooter rider you never heard coming, who sounded no warning, and who obviously doesn’t care about anyone else.

Across the West, however, e-scooters are being promoted as a clean, green mode of personal transport. In some places, like London, they are being trialled as vehicles for hire, while they are still illegal to be owned privately for use on public roads and paths. In other places, including my home Australian state of Victoria, they are legal both for hire and private use, with a burgeoning retail market for e-scooters – which are, as a consumer item, not cheap and run into the Australian dollar equivalent of hundreds of pounds to buy.

As in a number of UK cities, including London, Victoria’s capital Melbourne has been running an extensive trial of for-hire e-scooters. The city corporation has contracts with two operators, including the American company Lime which is also involved in UK trials. 

Running, that is, until Tuesday night, when Melbourne City Council voted narrowly to tear up the contracts and end the scheme immediately. The two operators now have 30 days to remove their scooters and charging facilities from the city’s bounds.

Most popular

Paul Wood

The strange death of Islamism

Leonora Barclay

UBI will make us miserable

Owen Matthews

What was the CIA doing in Moscow?

Melbourne’s Lord Mayor, Nicholas Reece, described the decision as ‘taking the Paris option’ after 2024’s Olympic city did away with the machines last year. ‘After two years of patience, I have run out of patience at what I’m seeing on the streets and footpaths of our city,’ Reece told council meeting before the vote.

‘There are literally more people disobeying the law on e-scooters than are actually following the rules, people riding around without helmets, people double-dinking (carrying more than one passenger), people in groups, riding on the footpath, creating havoc on the footpaths of our city,’ he said.

Reece also could have mentioned the eyesore factor. Just like for-hire bicycles, vended by Lime and other operators, discarded e-scooters and helmets litter the city and suburbs, including finding their way into Melbourne’s Yarra river and Port Phillip Bay.

While four Greens councillors voted to keep e-scooters, claiming their benefits as clean, green urban transport outweigh their problems, most councillors wanted them gone, at the very least when the trial contracts were due to expire. The council’s decision has been greeted warmly by Melbourne’s media and by callers to Melbourne’s talk radio programmes. People hate e-scooters, and their riders who seem to think, as Reece observed, that they can give the proverbial two fingers to road laws and civic regulations, as well as pedestrians.

The issue is a classic example of what the late US politician, Tip O’Neill, said about all politics being local. The decision certainly won’t hurt the Lord Mayor, Nicholas Reece, a well-known figure in Australian Labor party politics. In October he is up for election again, and Reece’s main rival has been campaigning hard on Melbourne’s e-scooter plague – and now is shamelessly taking credit for Reece’s conversion and the city council’s vote. 

Besides Green activists, the only people openly upset by the decision are the e-scooter operators themselves, who did their best to make the trials work safely and efficiently, and  who are no doubt eyeing how Melbourne’s ban will be seen by London and other cities.

A Lime spokeswoman said, ‘We’re thoroughly disappointed and after all the cooperation with council, this isn’t just a setback for the current operators, but for Melbourne’s transport future’ 

Oh, please. Getting these micro-juggernauts off Melbourne’s streets and paths is great for Melbourne’s transport future. It will make getting around the city safer, reduce accident and injury risks to both riders and pedestrians, and simply make it more enjoyable for others to walk those streets. 

And if those dismounted riders walk instead, they’ll actually get physical exercise and avoid injury. 

A recent study by a trauma injury research institute found that there were 1,273 e-scooter related injuries reported by Victoria’s hospital emergency departments in 2023, up from 1,018 in 2022 and 691 in 2021. While people using their own e-scooters still means that broken limbs, and smashed faces and teeth, from e-scooter misadventures and stupidity will continue in Victoria, hire e-scooters, as a source of injury, will disappear. Is that a bad thing, Lime?

Well done, City of Melbourne, for reclaiming our pavements from the e-scooter menace. Hopefully London and other cities around the world will soon ‘take the Melbourne option’ and banish e-scooters altogether. They, and their put-upon residents, won’t regret it.