If Farage is found to have broken parliamentary rules Clacton could face another byelection. Photograph: AFP/Getty Images
Reform UK leader’s return to Clacton restarts inquiry into £5m gift from cyrpto-billionaire and support from fraudster
The suspended parliamentary standards investigation into Nigel Farage over accusations he failed to declare gifts and donations has resumed after the Reform UK leader’s re-election as the MP for Clacton.
The twofold investigation by Daniel Greenberg, the parliamentary commissioner for standards, was paused after Farage resigned from his seat and called a byelection in protest at what he said was unfair scrutiny of his finances.
Now the investigation had restarted, according to the commissioner’s website, which said previously that the process had been suspended from 8 July, when the MP resigned.
…
If Farage is found to have broken parliamentary rules and is suspended from the Commons for at least 10 sitting days he could face a recall petition, where a byelection is called if at least 10% of local voters demand it.
According to one report, Farage called his own byelection after his team advised that leaving parliament would end the investigation. In fact it only pauses such processes, which resume if the person is re-elected.
Nigel Farage is scathing at the £250,000 cost to the taxpayer of his unnecessary and ridiculous Clacton-on-Sea election campaign that he caused to avoid scrutiny and acccountability for the £5MILLION ‘gift’ that he didn’t declare.Nigel Farage explains that he’s called another byelection in Clacton-on-Sea because he should be able to secretly enrich himself without scrutiny and accountabilty and that the rules shouldn’t apply to him.Nigel Farage admits to being a whore willing to do anything for someone with a big fat wallet and asks whether drinking pints and smoking fags is not enough for the stupid plebs.
I came first in the Clacton by-election! Of the candidates who bothered to turn up for the results. Here is my victory speech!
“A new dawn has broken … ” Nice one
Nigel Farage is scathing at the £250,000 cost to the taxpayer of his unnecessary and ridiculous Clacton-on-Sea election campaign that he caused to avoid scrutiny and acccountability for the £5MILLION ‘gift’ that he didn’t declare.Nigel Farage explains that he’s called another byelection in Clacton-on-Sea because he should be able to secretly enrich himself without scrutiny and accountabilty and that the rules shouldn’t apply to him.
A burned field of wheat in Eton Wick, Windsor, in July. Experts say the UK should regenerative agriculture approaches to increase food resilience. Photograph: Maureen McLean/REX/Shutterstock
Rejecting North Sea drilling licences and protecting nature are just some measures Andy Burnham must implement to ready country
From record-smashing temperatures, wildfires, hosepipe bans and thousands of premature deaths, the climate crisis has left its mark across the summer of 2026.
Tackling the root cause – the burning of fossil fuels – and ending the crisis will take years. So will fixing the UK government’s calamitousfailure to protect lives and livelihoods against the long-predicted affects of global heating.
But the climate emergency is right here, right now, and here are 10 policies that Andy Burnham’s government should consider announcing urgently.
1. Reject drilling licences for the Jackdaw and Rosebank oil and gasfields
This would be a vital and confidence-boosting sign that the UK is committed to putting a rocket-booster under the clean, green and very fast-growing economy of the 21st century, not the fossil-fuelled one of the last. It would also give diplomatic weight to the UK as it works internationally to cut emissions and end the climate crisis.
The supposed benefits of approving the North Sea oil and gasfields are mostly fantasy. They will have no impact on UK energy prices – oil and gas are commodities whose price is set by international markets. As the UK Energy Research Council says: “Assertions that drilling the North Sea will provide energy resilience and affordability in the face of current fuel price shocks are a delusion.”
As for jobs, the licences would support very few – again, unlike the growing green economy. Some also argue North Sea production is less carbon intensive than imports, but that ignores the far cleaner record of our main gas importer, Norway, as well as the methane emissions from LNG, and in any case the differences are small compared with CO2 savings of using renewable energy and storage instead of gas.
2. Increase windfall tax on fossil fuel giants to pay for adaptation measures
…
3. Make grey water reuse mandatory in new buildings and incentivise rainwater harvesting
…
4. Bring the water industry under national control
…
5. Invest in proper equipment for firefighters
…
6. Implement a maximum workplace temperature
…
7. Fund cool spaces in every community
…
8. Launch a national retrofit programme
Homes in the UK are among the draughtiest and least energy-efficient in Europe. This means they are often too hot in summer and too cold in winter, leading to high bills and spiralling carbon emissions.
Efforts to persuade the private sector to take on the challenge of making homes fit for the changing climate have failed. But a report earlier this year suggested councils could take the lead on a retrofitting programme backed by national government. Under the plan, councils would train and employ their own retrofitting workforce and, starting with key public services such as hospitals and care homes, then work through council and social housing before moving on to privately owned homes. The report said it would not only make the country’s homes and public services more climate resilient, but it would also tackle the cost of living, create secure jobs and stimulate growth. They added it would also be a more efficient way of spending the public funds already allocated for insulation.
9. Plant more trees and protect existing nature
…
10. Encourage regenerative agriculture approaches to increase food resilience
Andy Burnham addresses the climate crisis by considering banning disposable barbecues.Nigel Farage urges you to ignore facts and reality and be a climate science denier like him and his Deputy Richard Tice. He says that Reform UK has received £Millions and £Millions from the fossil fuel industry to promote climate denial and destroy the planet.Orcas comment on killer apes destroying the planet by continuing to burn fossil fuels.
dizzy:
11. Make private jets and superyachts history
…
12. Tax the rich so much that they’re not able to destroy the planet
The rich hugely drive climate breakdown. Tax them out of existence.
13. Recognise Carbon Capture and Storage as a false solution and abandon it
Zack Polanski speaking at a separate festival, the Edinburgh Fringe, this month. Photo: Rich Dyson/Alamy Live News
Green leader throws weight behind Media Sovereignty Act campaign to stop press barons “literally buying democracy”
Green leader Zack Polanski has backed a campaign for a fundamental overhaul of Britain’s media ownership, in order to prevent billionaires buying newspapers in order to “literally buy democracy”.
Polanski threw his weight behind the ‘Media Sovereignty Act’ campaign in a speech at Green Gathering festival in Chepstow (Wales) earlier this month.
The petition promoted by the Green Party of England & Wales leader calls on the Government to “pass [a] law to ban foreign and offshore ownership of UK media” and enact a social-media levy to “distribute media ownership across society & fund independent, local and cooperative-owned media”.
…
Such an act would mark the biggest shake-up of media law in generations – and would conceivably force sell-offs of most national newspapers.
That includes the (now German-owned) Telegraph, the Mail group (owned by non-dom Lord Rothermere and structured through offshore trusts), as well as the Independent which is part-owned by Saudis, local news giant Newsquest (owned by the US holding company USA Today Co) and the Financial Times (owned by Japan’s Nikkei).
It is not clear if it would apply to listed firms which have some foreign shareholders such as Mirror and Express publisher Reach PLC, part-owned by Swiss firm Lombard Odier Asset Management and Boston-based Fidelity.
Polanski told a panel at the festival: “Billionaires should not be able to have a monopoly on our free press.”
He criticised the “billionaire media” repeatedly, adding that Britain needed “a free press for a free country”.
Orcas discuss Donald Trump and the killer apes’ concept of democracy. Front Orca warns that Trump is crashing his country’s economy and that everything he does he does for the fantastically wealthy.
As I have already noted today, The Times has chosen to question whether Chris Packham is really autistic, despite the fact that he has a diagnosis saying that he is. I have already discussed some aspects of this issue. I also think it is worth asking why they have done this.
I stress that question because I cannot know the motivation of those involved. I have no access to the editorial discussions at The Times, and I am not suggesting that I do. But newspapers make choices. They decide whom to feature, what questions to ask, which doubts to amplify and what associations they want their readers to make. So asking why Chris Packham has become a target is entirely reasonable.
There are, I think, several possible explanations, and they obviously overlap, creating a credible explanation as a consequence.
The first is that Chris Packham is becoming an important figure in British public life. He is no longer simply a television presenter who talks about wildlife. Increasingly, he appears to be assuming the mantle that Sir David Attenborough wore for decades.
That matters. Attenborough acquired authority because millions of people trusted him. He could talk about the destruction of the natural world in a way that politicians could not because people did not think of him as a politician. They thought of him as someone who knew what he was talking about.
Packham has some of that authority, but there is an important difference. He is more explicitly political. He does not simply say that a species is disappearing or that an ecosystem is under threat. He asks why that is happening, who is responsible and what we should do about it. That makes him potentially threatening to some powerful interests.
Packham is a prominent advocate of action on climate change. He challenges the fossil fuel economy. He questions environmentally destructive forms of agriculture. He supports environmental protest. More broadly, he challenges the idea that the pursuit of profit should take priority over the survival of the ecosystems on which human beings depend.
…
Chris Packham’s diagnosis tells us nothing about whether he is right about climate change. The evidence on climate change stands or falls on its own merits. If The Times, or anyone else, disagrees with what Packham says about the climate, biodiversity, fossil fuels or the environment, there is an obvious response available to them. They should challenge his arguments. But what they should not do is challenge who he is, or seek to undermine him, and others, by doing so. That is not just unethical, it provokes prejudice to support profit at cost to many.
We should not be surprised that profit is promoted at cost to many. That is what extractive capitalism does. That is not a flaw in its design. It is what it is designed to do. The well-being of millions and maybe billions of people have been sacrificed to that false god over decades and maybe centuries. But should Chris Packham be added to that list, to be discarded by being discredited because he asks awkward questions? I think not. And that is why this case matters.
