UK Politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares56 Views

      in UK Politics

      Judge us by impact of new online safety measures for children, says regulator

      by

      Parents and children can expect to “experience a different internet for the first time”, according to the Technology Secretary as new safety measures came into effect.Peter Kyle said he had “high expectations” for the changes, as the head of the regulator in charge of enforcement against social media platforms which do not comply urged the public to “judge us by the impact we secure”.While some campaigners have welcomed the new protections – which include age checks to prevent children accessing pornography and other harmful content – others have branded them a “sticking plaster”.Charities and other organisations working in the sector of children’s safety have agreed the key will be ensuring the measures are enforced, urging Ofcom to “show its teeth”.The changes also require platforms to ensure algorithms do not work to harm children by, for example, pushing such content on the likes of self harm and eating disorders towards them.Actions which could be taken against firms which fail to adhere to the new codes include fines of up to £18 million or 10% of qualifying worldwide revenue, whichever is greater, and court orders potentially blocking access in the UK.Mr Kyle has said a generation of children will not be allowed to grow up “at the mercy of toxic algorithms” as he pledged the Government is laying the foundations for a safer, healthier, more humane online world and warned tech firms “will be held to account” if they fail to act in line with the changes.He told Sky News: “I have very high expectations of the change that children will experience.“And let me just say this to parents and children, you will experience a different internet really, for the first time in from today, moving forward than you’ve had in the past. And that is a big step forward.”The measures, as part of the Online Safety Act and set to be enforced by regulator Ofcom, require online platforms to have age checks – using facial age estimation or credit card checks – if they host pornography or other harmful content such as self-harm, suicide or eating disorders.Ofcom chief executive Dame Melanie Dawes said the regulator’s research had shown half a million eight to 14-year-olds have come across pornography online in the last month alone.When it was put to her by the BBC that one of their staff members testing out the new measures had been able to sign up to a well-known porn site on Friday using just an email address, she said sites will be “checking patterns of email use” behind the scenes to verify users are adults.She told Radio 4’s Today programme: “We’ve shown that we’ve got teeth and that we’re prepared to use them at Ofcom. And we have secured commitments across the porn industry and from the likes of X that no other country has secured. These things can work.“Judge us by the impact we secure. And absolutely, please do tell us if you think there’s something we need to know about that isn’t working because the law is very clear now.”She also said the Government is right to be considering limits on the amount of time children can spend on social media apps.Earlier this week, Mr Kyle said he wanted to tackle “compulsive behaviour” and ministers are reportedly considering a two-hour limit, with curfews also under discussion.Dame Melanie told LBC: “I think the Government is right to be opening up this question. I think we’re all a bit addicted to our phones, adults and children, obviously particularly a concern for young people. So, I think it’s a good thing to be moving on to.”Children’s charities the NSPCC and Barnardo’s are among those who have welcomed the new checks in place from Friday, as well as the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF).The IWF warned the “safeguards put in place need to be robust and meaningful” and said there is “still more to be done”, as they urged tech platforms to to build in safeguards rather than having them as “an afterthought”.The Molly Rose Foundation – set up by bereaved father Ian Russell after his 14-year-old daughter Molly took her own life having viewed harmful content on social media – said there is a “lack of ambition and accountability” in the measures, and accused the regulator of choosing to “prioritise the business needs of big tech over children’s safety”.Andy Burrows, chief executive of the foundation, told Sky News: “We’ve always had a very simple test for the Online Safety Act, will it stop further young people like Molly from dying because of the harmful design of social media platforms?“And regrettably, we just don’t think it passes that test. This is a sticking plaster, not the comprehensive solution that we really need.”Ofcom said it has also launched a monitoring and impact programme focused on some of the platforms where children spend most time including social media sites Facebook, Instagram and TikTok, gaming site Roblox and video clip website YouTube.The sites are among those which have been asked to submit, by August 7, a review of their efforts to assess risks to children and, by September 30, scrutiny of the practical actions they are taking to keep children safe. More

    • 138 Shares62 Views

      in UK Politics

      Record number of farms close in wake of ’tractor tax’ raid

      by

      A record number of farms have closed in the wake of Rachel Reeves’s inheritance tax raid, new figures suggest. In total 6,365 agriculture, forestry and fishing businesses have closed over the past year, the highest since quarterly data was first published in 2017, according to the Office for National Statistics.The chancellor has faced a furious backlash over her decision to extend inheritance tax, which critics warn could sound the death knell for family farms in England.All the major supermarkets have backed the farmers and called on Ms Reeves to halt her controversial ‘tractor tax’ plan. But ministers have ploughed ahead even though the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) has warned the policy may raise less than the Treasury hopes, with the £500m-a year-revenue forecast given a “high” uncertainty rating and likely to fall after seven years. Victoria Atkins, the shadow environment secretary, said the latest figures showed farm closures were a result of “Labour’s disastrous tax policies”. Farmers protest in Westminster over changes to inheritance tax rules (Jonathan Brady/PA) More

    • 225 Shares52 Views

      in UK Politics

      Voices: ‘They work long, unsocial hours – for what?’ Frustration over doctor pay boils over as strikes begin

      by

      Public opinion on whether resident doctors are fairly paid is sharply divided – but nearly half of Independent readers agree with the government’s stance that their current salaries are reasonable.In our poll, 49 per cent said the doctors’ pay is fair given NHS budget pressures. Just over a quarter said they could be paid more but felt a 29 per cent increase is too high, while a further 25 per cent backed the BMA’s demand for significantly higher pay, especially in light of rising inflation and real-terms wage cuts since 2008.“The answer to this is quite simple,” wrote one reader. “Pay them more or they will leave in droves… Does anyone believe healthcare can function without doctors?”But some readers felt the scale of the strike is unreasonable, with one arguing that “old-school union militancy has no place in our NHS.”The walkout comes despite last-minute appeals from Sir Keir Starmer and health secretary Wes Streeting, who warned that the five-day strike could derail NHS recovery efforts and harm patient care. With hospitals bracing for widespread disruption and ministers urging the BMA to return to talks, the question remains: are doctors fighting for fairness – or pushing too far?Here’s what you had to say:This is just another aspect of a failing countryOf course these doctors deserve a higher rate of pay, I cannot see solicitors working for what they get.However, this is just another aspect of a failing country.A country run by politicians who could play internal political games with an EU referendum, which has destroyed businesses and lives, to say nothing of GDP… and for what, may I ask?All public services are now in freefall, and on top of this, we have to increase spending on defence.Thank goodness that the public can still go holidaying in Spain and vote for a snake oil salesman!Until we wake up to who and what we are in the world, this will continue… downwards.PateleyladDo you support the strike, or do you think resident doctors have already had a fair deal? Share your views in the comments.Pay them more, or they will leave in drovesThe answer to this is quite simple. Pay them more, or they will leave in droves (already are leaving in droves) to countries that pay them properly.Does anyone believe healthcare can function without doctors?AndrewBAccountants versus doctorsAverage pay for a newly qualified accountant: approx. £40k – very similar to a newly qualified junior doctor, who does more hours, has more stress, and does a much more important job in a much more challenging environment.I was an accountant. Throughout my career, I held various roles, many of which involved managing or saving money for individuals who already had more than they could spend in several lifetimes. By and large, I worked in warm, well-lit offices, and the only blood I ever saw was when I audited a veterinary practice and they (quite deliberately, I’m sure) walked me through a theatre while a dog was being operated on.WokeUpLong, unsociable hoursThese are not medical students – they are qualified doctors!They pay for their own training, amassing around £100,000+ in debt – more if they specialise.It takes maybe 12 years to get to consultant level and requires even more studying.They work long, unsociable hours and have to keep studying.For £15 an hour?That’s not to say I trust the medical profession anymore – I don’t – but that is more down to the culture of the NHS Trusts (what a misnomer that is!), who now seem to spend more on legal claims than they do on care…lottageladyAnything less for doctors cannot be considered fairOf course they aren’t paid fairly.Fairness in pay is relative. When footballers, rock stars, movie stars, and C-suiters are paid millions, anything less for doctors cannot ever be considered fair by anyone able to think.TrevSmith82Public servants are underpaidJunior Drs (so-called until they start behaving like adults) need to appreciate that the vast majority of public servants are underpaid in comparison to their predecessors before austerity.Many were in primary school at the pay reference point they use for comparative purposes, so would have had plenty of time to choose another profession if income was of primary importance.Finally, pay differentials with other health professions should be accepted as an honest appraisal of whether they are being treated fairly.Frankly, large educational debt is borne by many others who don’t see it as a legitimate cause to take industrial action.RedpawnJust now, they have 25 per cent public support in the poll above.Nearly everybody has suffered a decline in living standards since 2008, due to the financial crash and indeed, due to Brexit.We don’t all have the option of pointing a gun at the government’s head and saying “Bwaaa! Don’t like this! Gimme!”That gun is pointed at our heads: their gain is the taxpayers’ loss.For kids just leaving university in their very first jobs, they are very well paid. If they turn out to be any good, they will end up very rich, and they know it.Enough. Go away. Old-school union militancy has no place in our NHS.SteveHillTheir pay is abysmalHow anyone can say their pay is fair is beyond me.By the time you’ve taken tax, NI, and pension contributions off that figure, they are working all hours for not much more than the basic wage!Do you really think doctors are worth only that? These people save your lives, for goodness’ sake – and their pay is abysmal!deadduckThe UK spend per capitaHealth spend per capita [US $], private and state system:United Kingdom: $5,493 Ireland: $6,047 – 10% more than UK Switzerland: $8,049 – 46% more Germany: $8,011 – 45% more France: $6,630 – 21% more US: $10,644 – 93% more Australia: $6,372 – 16% more Source is OECD. The average spend of all members is $4,986. India has the lowest spending at just $212.The UK Government’s spending is just $4,479.wolfieSome of the comments have been edited for this article for brevity and clarity.Want to share your views? Simply register your details below. Once registered, you can comment on the day’s top stories for a chance to be featured. Alternatively, click ‘log in’ or ‘register’ in the top right corner to sign in or sign up.Make sure you adhere to our community guidelines, which can be found here. For a full guide on how to comment click here. More

    • 275 Shares41 Views

      in UK Politics

      Voices: ‘A system set up to fail?’ Readers say Ofwat should go – but can’t agree on whether water should be nationalised

      by

      The call to scrap Ofwat has struck a chord with Independent readers, who overwhelmingly agree the water regulator has failed to hold companies accountable after decades of pollution, crumbling infrastructure, and rising bills.A landmark review led by former Bank of England deputy governor Sir Jon Cunliffe concluded that Ofwat should be dismantled and replaced with a powerful single regulator covering the entire water system. The current setup, the Independent Water Commission said, is “fragmented and overlapping” and has allowed private companies to extract billions in shareholder payouts while sewage spills surged and investment lagged behind.When we asked for your views, 86 per cent of readers said Ofwat should be scrapped entirely, with only 14 per cent favouring reform over replacement.Many also backed wider changes, including new regional authorities, stronger environmental oversight and tougher rules on company ownership and debt. But the strongest opinions focused on ownership itself: whether water, a vital natural resource, should ever have been privatised in the first place.Some readers argued that the damage is now too deep to reverse, with nationalisation legally fraught and prohibitively expensive. Others insisted that public control is the only way to fix a system that has lost public trust.Here’s what you had to say:Only reward acceptable performanceI don’t care how it is structured, as long as they are only rewarded for delivering acceptable levels of purity, availability, leakage, and pollution. Jim KitThe horse has boltedMany individuals here mistakenly think nationalisation is the answer. It isn’t. Nationalising privatised water companies would force the government (and so taxpayers) to buy them back at market value or face legal battles with domestic and foreign investors under international trade agreements.These companies carry massive debts, which would transfer to the public, burdening taxpayers with billions in liabilities. Further, compensation claims and lawsuits from investors would escalate costs, making nationalisation an expensive and legally risky process with no guarantee of improved service.Privatisation was craftily set up so as to be more or less irreversible. The horse has bolted, I’m afraid. MusilForeign ownership makes it worse”National strategic assets should never ever be in the hands of private companies” – I agree, and it’s worse if those companies are based outside the UK. They will be even more disinterested in any sort of service. Vital infrastructure should be publicly owned: rail, buses, trams, electricity, gas, water. I don’t think we’re quite there yet with broadband.But nationalising needs to be done very carefully. I don’t think anyone can claim that old BR and BT were paragons of efficiency. And local councils have their part to play by carefully scheduling road dig-ups across utilities – there’s a lot of pipework that’s been left to rot whilst dividends are paid. PremiumMismanagement should mean re-nationalisationPass a law to legislate that if privatised public utilities or services are mismanaged, they pass back into public ownership. Simple. BigDogSmallBrainNobody should own waterNobody should be the owner of water. Water should just be managed in the name of the people, and any profit should be entirely coincidental. There is zero need to have financially motivated ownership of water, along the same lines as why nobody owns air, oxygen, or sunshine. ItReallyIsNotCrumbling infrastructure is the real crisisThe elephant in the room is the increasing population/increasing housing requirements, along with combined sewers carrying sewage and rainwater. More people/homes means more sewage/rainwater run-off, and when it rains hard, any treatment works are unable to cope with the volume of water piped to them.For example, the Trafford Centre’s rainwater is kept separate from sewage and can go straight into the nearby canal, being clean water. That water is as much as 10 cubic metres per second! Now consider the tens of thousands of homes, businesses, roads, car parks, etc. that add up to a lot more area, all funnelling their rainwater into the local sewage works, and you can see what the problem is.To properly solve it would require every household and business to have expensive work done to install separate rainwater drains, and for every single road in the area to be dug up to install a parallel piping system to keep rainwater separated from sewage.Much of the main piping has been in place since before WW2, when there were far fewer people, homes, and large businesses. SteveWDriven by profitNational strategic assets should never, ever be in the hands of private companiesThey are driven by profit above all else… and when they fail… we end up footing the bill anyway. All privatisation does is make a few people very rich. captaintrippsProductivityI agree in principle, but the trouble with nationalised industries is that down the line, they will all cause problems. The issue is productivity: “Why should I work hard when I’ve got a guaranteed job for life?” Maybe not so much on the water supply side, but all other nationalised industries suffered from this communist idea. It sounds good on paper, but in practice, it doesn’t work. Now, nationalising industries without union interference or job protection, and you’ll have something. StevetheBarbarianNationalise now!There is absolutely no benefit in privatising a public utility that is also a monopoly. Privatised water companies are in competition with no one, so there is no pressure to decrease prices or improve services. They serve two masters: increased pay at the top and profit for shareholders. Nationalise it now! bloodwortBreak up regional monopoliesLike most basic utilities, privatisation provides none of the potential benefits and all of the worst drawbacks. It is difficult to innovate with a product as simple as water, while the most important features – safety, the environment, and keeping down the price – are anathema to profit-driven organisations.At the very least, the regional monopolies need to be broken up. AimeryanThey are just laughing at us allIt will never get fixed until those responsible for running the industry are properly held accountable. Until then, they are just laughing at us all – literally laughing all the way to the bank. captaintrippsIt can’t be fixedIt can’t be fixed. And there’s no way to nationalise it without spending about a trillion pounds to buy the companies and pay off the bondholders. There is no solution; it’s only going to get worse. BlueWhale Some of the comments have been edited for this article for brevity and clarity.Want to share your views? Simply register your details below. Once registered, you can comment on the day’s top stories for a chance to be featured. Alternatively, click ‘log in’ or ‘register’ in the top right corner to sign in or sign up.Make sure you adhere to our community guidelines, which can be found here. For a full guide on how to comment click here. More

    • 213 Shares71 Views

      in UK Politics

      UK should recognise state of Palestine while there is still a state to recognise, MPs tell Starmer

      by

      The UK should recognise the state of Palestine while there is still a Palestine left, a powerful Commons committee has told Keir Starmer. The foreign affairs select committee said the UK’s actions over the ongoing conflict and “in the years preceding, have often been too little, too late,” as they called for further sanctions “against settlers”.It comes as Keir Starmer has issued his strongest condemnation yet of Israel’s starvation of Gaza and hinted he is edging closer to recognising a Palestinian state,More than 100 rights groups and charities have demanded unfettered aid to the besieged enclave as warnings of starvation grow. In a new report the committee said Israel must open all crossing points to food, medical, materials for shelter and other aid to Gaza. Smoke billows from an explosion in the northern Gaza Strip on Wednesday More

    • 150 Shares71 Views

      in UK Politics

      Starmer condemns ‘indefensible’ starvation of Palestinians in Gaza and calls emergency talks

      by

      Keir Starmer is set to have an emergency call with his closest allies as he condemned that “unspeakable and indefensible” unfolding crisis in Gaza.The prime minister appeared to have lost his remaining patience with Benjamin Netanyahu’s Israeli government as he used his strongest language yet to condemn the deliberate starvation of thousands of Palestinians trapped in Gaza.And as he prepared to hold an emergency call with French president Emmanuel Macron and German chancellor Friedrich Merz on Friday, Sir Keir appeared to be on the cusp of being prepared to recognise a Palestinian state.It comes as starvation in Gaza is reported to have dramatically increased in recent days; most of the 113 hunger-related deaths recorded there have come in recent weeks, and 82 were children, according to Palestinian health officials.Starmer has condemned the starvation of Gaza More

    • 163 Shares63 Views

      in UK Politics

      Children must not grow up at mercy of toxic algorithms, says tech secretary

      by

      A generation of children will not be allowed to grow up “at the mercy of toxic algorithms”, the Technology Secretary said as new online safety protections came into force.Peter Kyle said the Government was laying the foundations for a safer, healthier, more humane online world, as he warned tech firms they “will be held to account” if they fail to adhere to the measures.The changes, as part of the Online Safety Act and set to be enforced by regulator Ofcom, require online platforms to have age checks in place – using facial age estimation or credit card checks – if they host pornography or other harmful content such as self-harm, suicide or eating disorders.They also require platforms to ensure algorithms do not work to harm children by, for example, pushing such content towards them when online.Actions which could be taken against firms which fail to comply with the new codes include fines of up to £18 million or 10% of qualifying worldwide revenue, whichever is greater, and court orders potentially blocking access in the UK.Campaigners have warned the measures must be enforced strictly, with the NSPCC urging Ofcom to “show its teeth” if companies fail to make changes in line with the regulator’s protection of children codes.But the Molly Rose Foundation – set up by bereaved father Ian Russell after his 14-year-old daughter Molly took her own life having viewed harmful content on social media – said there is a “lack of ambition and accountability” in the measures, and accused the regulator of choosing to “prioritise the business needs of big tech over children’s safety”.Mr Kyle insisted the Government has “drawn a line in the sand” and that the codes will bring real change.He said: “This Government has taken one of the boldest steps anywhere in the world to reclaim the digital space for young people – to lay the foundations for a safer, healthier, more humane place online.“We cannot – and will not – allow a generation of children to grow up at the mercy of toxic algorithms, pushed to see harmful content they would never be exposed to offline. This is not the internet we want for our children, nor the future we are willing to accept.”He said the time for tech platforms “to look the other way is over”, calling on them to “act now to protect our children, follow the law, and play their part in creating a better digital world”.He warned: “And let me be clear: if they fail to do so, they will be held to account. I will not hesitate to go further and legislate to ensure that no child is left unprotected.”Ofcom chief executive Dame Melanie Dawes has previously defended criticism of the reforms, insisting that tech firms are not being given much power over the new measures, which will apply across the UK.Dame Melanie said: “Prioritising clicks and engagement over children’s online safety will no longer be tolerated in the UK.“Our message to tech firms is clear – comply with age checks and other protection measures set out in our codes, or face the consequences of enforcement action from Ofcom.”The regulator said X, formerly Twitter, and others including Bluesky, Reddit and dating app Grindr are among those to have committed to age assurances, and described its safety codes as demanding that algorithms “must be tamed and configured for children so that the most harmful material is blocked”.It said it has launched a monitoring and impact programme focused on some of the platforms where children spend most time including social media sites Facebook, Instagram and TikTok, gaming site Roblox and video clip website YouTube.The sites are among those which have been asked to submit, by August 7, a review of their efforts to assess risks to children and, by September 30, scrutiny of the practical actions they are taking to keep children safe.Chris Sherwood, chief executive at the NSPCC, said: “Children, and their parents, must not solely bear the responsibility of keeping themselves safe online. It’s high time for tech companies to step up.”He said if enforcement is “strong”, the codes should offer a “vital layer of protection” for children and young people when they go online, adding: “If tech companies fail to comply, Ofcom must show its teeth and fully enforce the new codes”.Echoing this, Barnardo’s children’s charity said the changes are “an important stepping stone” but “must be robustly enforced”.England’s Children’s Commissioner, Dame Rachel de Souza, said Friday “marks a new era of change in how children can be protected online, with tech companies now needing to identify and tackle the risks to children on their platforms or face consequences”, and said the measures must keep pace with emerging technology to make them effective in the future.But Andy Burrows, chief executive of the Molly Rose Foundation, said: “This should be a watershed moment for young people but instead we’ve been let down by a regulator that has chosen to prioritise the business needs of big tech over children’s safety.”He said the “lack of ambition and accountability will have been heard loud and clear in Silicon Valley”.He added: “We now need a clear reset and leadership from the Prime Minister. That means nothing less than a new Online Safety Act that fixes this broken regime and firmly puts the balance back in favour of children.”Earlier this week, Mr Kyle said children could face a limit on using social media apps to help them “take control of their online lives”.He said he wanted to tackle “compulsive behaviour” and ministers are reportedly considering a two-hour limit, with curfews also under discussion.The Cabinet minister said he would be making an announcement about his plans for under-16s “in the near future”. More

    • 175 Shares75 Views

      in UK Politics

      Jeremy Corbyn ‘getting 500 people a minute’ wanting to join his new political party

      by

      Jeremy Corbyn said he is “getting 500 people a minute” wanting to join his new political party.The former Labour leader launched a new outfit with Zarah Sultana that does not yet have a name, on Thursday (24 July), calling for a “mass redistribution of wealth and power”.Asked what the new name of his party would be, Mr Corbyn said: “We’re going to decide when we’ve had all the responses, and so far the response rate has been massive.“They’ve been coming in at 500 a minute wanting to support and join the new party.”He also said that he and Coventry South MP Ms Sultana are “working very well together”. More