Sir Keir Starmer has announced he will stand down as an MP. He could have chosen to announce this at any time, but he chose today. And the media are having a field day.
Today is the first day Andy Burnham faces Parliament as Prime Minister.
Why has Starmer stolen the limelight?

Almost half of voters want migrants who already live and work in the UK to be exempt from tough reforms on UK settlements, exclusive polling for The i Paper shows.

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood wants to double the waiting period for immigrants to qualify for permanent residency – indefinite leave to remain (ILR) – from five years to 10 years. This would rise to 15 years for lower-paid foreign workers, and shorten for the most skilled.

However, Mahmood is facing a major Labour revolt over the plans, with rebels particularly anxious that she plans to apply the changes to those already in the UK, including lower-skilled social care and health workers.

New polling, conducted by BMG Research for The i Paper, shows the rebels are backed by more voters than not, with 45 per cent saying people already in the UK should be exempt from the new rules.

This compares to a third (33 per cent) who believe the changes should apply to those who already work in the UK.

A similar proportion (45 per cent) believe lower-skilled health and care workers should be exempt, with the number of voters supporting Mahmood’s plan to apply her “earned settlement” changes to these people falling to 26 per cent.

UK facing a care crisis

It comes in the wake of a care crisis in the UK, where approximately 96,000 vacancies are available in the sector on any given day, according to Skills for Care. The care sector is forecast to need an additional 410,000 posts by 2040.

Most would exempt lower-skilled health and care workers from longer waits

Lower-skilled health and care workers already in the UK should be exempt, so their wait for settlement does not increase: 45%

Lower-skilled health and care workers already in the UK should face the increased wait of fifteen years: 26%

Don't know: 28%

The figures from BMG’s latest poll are likely to be seized upon by Labour MPs who are threatening a rebellion over the proposed changes and the Unison union, which is calling for health and care workers to be exempt.

Mahmood is understood to be weighing up whether to make a concession to the rebels before finalising the policy this autumn, with suggestions that she could either exempt care workers or all of those already in the UK from the ILR changes.

The Home Secretary is also reportedly weighing up a plan to make immigrants wait longer to access benefits even after they are granted ILR in the UK.

Backing for benefits clampdown

The move would be backed by more voters than not, with 44 per cent saying foreigners should wait for three to four years after settlement before accessing welfare, and 37 per cent saying they should get benefits once they get settlement.

It comes after the number of people granted ILR rose to a 16-year high of 199,628 in the year to June, with experts suggesting the 24 per cent surge on the following year was a result of record numbers of workers arriving in the country under Boris Johnson’s post-Brexit immigration reforms.

Mahmood’s reforms are designed to address concerns that hundreds of thousands of immigrants could soon be given the right to stay in the UK permanently and access benefits as migrant numbers went up from 2021 and peaked at 944,000 in the year ending March 2023.

The number of migrants entering the country has since been falling to record lows due to various visa restrictions imposed by the Conservatives and Labour in recent years.

The Home Secretary is expected to announce a final decision on whether her changes will apply to an estimated 1.6 million immigrants who are set to qualify for ILR between 2026 and 2030 later this autumn.

BMG surveyed a representative sample of 1,579 GB adults between 25 and 26 August. BMG are members of the British Polling Council and abide by its rules.

Reminds me of the lib/centrist weirdos on the other Reddit and twitter who refused to accept it when ha clearly said he preferred davos over Westminster.

The Employment Rights Act 2025 is a set of changes that will strengthen workplace rights and make them fairer. All employees should be aware of the changes that are coming, especially those on zero-hours contracts and working parents. This blog explains when the new rules are expected to start and what to look out for.

Key changes include:

• clearer rules around your working hours, and your right to be paid if a shift is cancelled

• stronger protections when you raise concerns to reduce the risk of losing pay or work unfairly

• sick pay to start from day one of your illness

• better protections for parents and carers to support your right to time off and flexible working.

Key changes expected from early 2026

From April 2026, Paternity Leave or parental leave for the non-carrying partner will become a day-one right for employees. You can give notice of your plans to take this leave from 18 February 2026. Talk to your manager or HR department if you plan to take Paternity Leave from 6 April 2026.

Changes from April 2026

Most of the changes coming in from 6 April 2026 cover parental leave.

These include:

• Paternity Leave will become a ‘day-one right’. This means you will be entitled to Paternity Leave from your first day of employment instead of needing to have been employed at your place of work for 26 weeks or more

• ordinary parental leave will also be a day-one right - this is your right to take unpaid time off to care for your children

• you will now be able to take Paternity Leave after Shared Parental Leave, previously you had to take Paternity Leave first

• fathers and partners will now be able to take up to 52 weeks of unpaid leave if the mother or primary adopter dies when your child is under a year old or in the first year of adoption.

Changes to your rights to claim sick pay also start from 6 April 2026:

• you will now be able to claim Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) from the first day of your illness. It used to start from the fourth day

• the lower earnings limit has been lifted, meaning there is no minimum income needed to be able to claim SSP.

Unfair dismissal changes.

From 1 January 2027 you will be able to make a claim for unfair dismissal after you’ve been employed for 6 months. Currently you need to be employed for 2 years before you are eligible to make a claim. Fire and rehire will automatically become an unfair dismissal in most cases from 1 January 2027. This is when your contract is terminated, and you are rehired on worse terms and conditions.  

Potential enhanced protections for pregnancy and new parents.

More changes that strengthen dismissal protections for pregnant workers and new mothers are due to come in during 2027. These are still being consulted on, so there are no confirmed details yet.

One proposal is to extend the period that protections apply. This could mean that protection from dismissal covers pregnancy, maternity leave and a defined period after returning to work. Who will be covered and how long the protected period will last will depend on the final version of the law.

How the changes could affect different types of workers.

There are more proposed changes planned to be brought in during 2027 that could affect your rights to guaranteed hours and when you should be notified of shift changes.

The proposed changes include:

• employees on zero-hours or low-hours contracts will have right to guaranteed working hours if they want them

• you should get reasonable notice of shifts and shift changes from your employer

• if your shift gets shortened, cancelled or moved without enough notice you will be able to claim compensation.

If you are on a zero-hours or low-hours contract, start keeping track of the hours that you do. When the new protections come in, your guaranteed hours should reflect the hours you usually work, so it could be helpful to have a record.

Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon is calling on administration officials to issue a national emergency declaration regarding election integrity, including a policy to allow the presence of federal immigration agents at polling booths during the upcoming midterms.

Bannon, 72, forcefully floated the idea Tuesday during an episode of Real America's Voice, suggesting that an "up-armored ICE presence" at voting booths in November is critical toward ensuring election integrity. The former White House chief strategist said President Donald Trump should take the bold approach rather than focusing on the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, which contains plans for voter ID and limits mail-in ballots.

"It's not going to happen," Bannon told conservative commentator Jack Posobiec. "You know why it's not going to happen? Because John Thune and the donors don't want it to happen. They think it's racist, they think it's nativist."

Bannon said many senators, including Thune, treat Trump like a "lame duck" while publicly urging the administration to act.

"This is why we need a national emergency proclamation, a national emergency memo, about the upcoming elections," Bannon continued. "You're going to have to have a forcing function to get to ID. You're going to have to have a forcing function not to have the phony mail-in ballots."

Bannon also called for an "up-armored ICE presence" at polling booths, which critics will say amounts to intimidation, he acknowledged.

"Well, it ain't intimidation if you're a United States citizen," Bannon said. "It's an intimidation if you're a foreigner and here illegally and not eligible to vote. It should be intimidating; we don't want you there. We don't want you near a voting booth. We certainly don't want your votes."

A message seeking comment from the White House was not immediately returned Tuesday afternoon.

Trump, meanwhile, has remained tight-lipped regarding any plans to declare a national emergency ahead of the midterm elections. He spoke to Wayne Allyn Root last week on Real America's Voice, with the host asking him directly about his intentions.

"Stranger things have happened," Trump said. "I'll leave it at that."

Trump has repeatedly said voter ID and other measures included in the bill, which the Senate has yet to pass, are essential to both election integrity and Republican chances to win in November.

Critics of the proposal say it would block thousands of Americans from voting booths due to lack of identification, including passports. A national emergency declaration linked to elections could also lead to results being challenged or overturned, other detractors insist.

Free entry, but registration required - and the venue has a bar 🍻🦊

While Keir Starmer’s premiership has officially come to an end, one of his most significant policies is about to come into force: the expansion of Free School Meals in England to more than 500,000 children from September.

Announced in June 2025 as a precursor to the 2025 Child Poverty Strategy, the government has estimated that these additional meals will lift over 100,000 children out of poverty.

More recently, following their victory in the 2026 Senedd election, Plaid Cymru have announced a similar expansion in Wales. From September, eligibility will be extended to students in Years 7 and 8, with plans to roll it out to all secondary school students in households receiving Universal Credit over the coming years.

But how will it all work? And how will it affect school funding?

All children in households receiving Universal Credit, in England, will become eligible for Free School Meals from September

In England, the 500,000 newly eligible students will join the 3.6 million already receiving a free meal. There will be a smaller expansion for those in Years 7 and 8 in Wales.

There will be three cohorts that will receive a free meal: the Universal, Expanded, and Targeted cohorts. The three groups can overlap, so the fact a child is receiving a meal at school does not mean they are necessarily registered. 

Families who claim free school meals receive support equivalent to around £500 per year in school meals. This support can go beyond school meals by making families eligible for holiday free meals outside term time.

(More details in article)

Thanks Labour. Thank you for defending minorities. You're an inspiration for the SENS movement in Romania. r/sens_romania stands for you and your cause.

The Canton–Hong Kong Strike, which lasted from June 1925 to October 1926, took place 100 years ago. At the time, the Kuomintang (Chinese Nationalist Party) and the Chinese Communist Party jointly organized and participated in this strike movement against British imperialism and its agents in China—capitalists, compradors, corrupt officials, reactionary military and police forces, and others—who oppressed Chinese workers in both mainland China and Hong Kong. It was also one of the largest and longest-lasting labor movements in China and the world.

The Canton–Hong Kong Strike played a major positive role in defending the dignity of Chinese workers, improving their treatment, and bettering their circumstances. The Republic of China’s subsequent “Golden Decade” was achieved precisely under conditions in which the interests of elites and workers were relatively well reconciled. Unfortunately, Japan’s later invasion interrupted China’s development and the workers’ efforts to build the country. Afterward, the CCP nominally championed the supremacy of the working class, but in reality established a totalitarian system that enslaved people of every status and social class.

Decades ago, the CCP devoted extensive attention and propaganda to depicting and promoting the Canton–Hong Kong Strike. But today’s CCP is unwilling to mention it and refuses to commemorate it. The reason is that the CCP today exploits and oppresses workers, and suppresses labor movements, to an extent surpassing even that of the British colonial government in Hong Kong and the imperialist powers of that era. The CCP rose to power through the labor movement, yet today it has degenerated into a regime of the privileged bourgeoisie and has become an agent of the interests of developed countries such as the United States, Japan, and European countries, while regarding the working class and labor movements with hostility and fear. This is deeply ironic.

During the period of British colonial rule, people in Hong Kong still had the possibility of going on strike. Today, however, both mainland China and Hong Kong prohibit all forms of strikes and political resistance. Although there are still scattered strikes in mainland China and Hong Kong based on economic demands, movements for rights and dignity and for the broader interests of workers have now disappeared.

The Jasic labor movement in Shenzhen in 2018 and the solidarity shown by Hong Kong people eight years ago were rare bright spots in the Chinese labor movement, but they were ultimately suppressed. Hong Kong political organizations that fought for workers, such as the Hong Kong Confederation of Trade Unions and the League of Social Democrats, have also been forcibly dissolved. This is precisely what makes the CCP—a totalitarian regime that is left-wing in appearance but right-wing in substance—so frightening and abhorrent. Both the people of Hong Kong and the people of mainland China should clearly recognize the true nature of the CCP.

Today, Chinese people have generally fallen into political apathy and distanced themselves from political movements. Even some Chinese liberals and political opposition groups dislike and reject labor movements with strong left-wing and grassroots characteristics. This is saddening, yet there seems to be little that can be done about it.

I have participated in left-wing marches in Germany commemorating Rosa Luxemburg and others, as well as German May Day marches. I have also done some advocacy concerning Chinese workers, displaying posters and distributing leaflets, including materials mentioning the Canton–Hong Kong Strike. But the strength of one person is far too limited, and my voice carries little weight. People in Hong Kong, people in mainland China, and people around the world have largely forgotten that magnificent and turbulent chapter of history.

https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/andy-burnham-starts-his-premiership-public-expectations-his-leadership-finely-poised

It's been a while. Not since I voted labour. I've always done so, since joining half a lifetime ago, in the face of Plaid and the SNP, always have. But it's been a while since I cared.

It's been a while since i thought it represented the lesser of two evils - Gordon was the last person who i thought had a plan and a vision.

And i believed in Starmer and his unassuming way of doing politics - hell, i loved his way of being the technical leader someone professional always wanted to be in charge.

And you showed deep promise in being relational to the general public, but seem to have lost your way. From becoming flaccid on the water companies ruining our country for shareholders, to failing to have enough balls to really tackle youth unemployment - i'm sad to say you are not as good as you could be.

Dear Andy, as a young professional i know what it's like getting into a job, let alone one as competitive with such high turnover rates as PM. But grow some balls and ask yourself: are you the next FDR with bold, new, innovative policies for the working man? Or a new fleshlight for Deliotte? Because if you want to prevent reform, you better make sure you aren't the latter

‘I’ve mostly treated Restore Britain as another source of comedy material for my Threads audience. Rupert Lowe says something ridiculous, one of the little gang around him says something even more ridiculous, I take the piss, everyone has a nice time and we move on with our day.

Then I saw a number. 10,000,000.

Charlie Downes, Restore Britain’s campaigns director and official spokesman, has said a Restore government would deport “upwards of ten million people.”

And that stopped me. Because ten million isn’t “stop the boats”. It isn’t deporting foreign criminals. It isn’t even Restore Britain’s own estimate of the number of people living illegally in the country. Ten million people is around one person in every seven living in Britain. And when you look at like that, that is f***ing scary.
So I had what seemed like a fairly straightforward question.

Who the f*** are they?

This isn’t a policy about somebody who has entered the country illegally or overstayed a visa. Restore is explicitly talking about people whom the British state has given a legal right to live here.

And look at the tests that follow… There’s an enormous difference between some of those things. If somebody has committed a serious criminal offence, there is at least a legal process capable of establishing what happened. There are already circumstances in which foreign nationals can be deported following conviction.

But what does “fails to integrate” mean? Who decides? How integrated is integrated enough? Is there a test? Does someone come round with a clipboard and ask if you know the words to Jerusalem?

What does “hates our way of life” mean? Which way of life? Mine? Rupert Lowe’s? Yours?
Britain contains monarchists, republicans, Muslims, Christians, atheists, communists, Tories, anarchists, vegans, fox hunters and people who put the milk in tea first. We’ve been arguing about what “our way of life” means for centuries. That is part of our way of life in this country.

We’re a mongrel breed melting-pot, a vibrant ever adapted nation rich in a history of multicultural mixing from way back even before Commonwealth and even before Empire days.
Anyway, back to unpicking that website statement, social housing? That one is particularly revealing because living in social housing isn’t behaviour. It isn’t a crime.

It isn’t even a political opinion. It’s where you live. Yet Restore lists it among possible reasons a legally resident foreign national should be expelled from the country.’

(Full details in article)

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn4kzd7k2nvo