Latest news with #Tory
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Kneecap's Mo Chara Granted Unconditional Bail at First Hearing on Terror Charge
Kneecap's Mo Chara was released on unconditional bail at his first court appearance in London on terror charges tied to an incident where he allegedly displayed a Hezbollah flag at a concert. The preliminary hearing at the Westminster Magistrates' Court Wednesday June 18 was largely procedural. The Belfast rapper, real name Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh, spoke only to confirm his name, and the judge scheduled his next court date for Aug. 20. If convicted, Ó hAnnaidh could face up to six months in prison, and a fine. More from Rolling Stone Wife of Weezer Bassist Appears in Court, Wins Delay in LAPD Shooting Case Tyler Perry Sued for Alleged Sexual Assault, Battery by 'The Oval' Actor Matthew Perry's Ketamine Death: Second Doctor Agrees to Plead Guilty The terror charge is based on footage from a November 2024 concert in London, where Ó hAnnaidh allegedly displayed the Hezbollah flag and yelled, 'Up, Hamas, up Hezbollah,' as well as, 'The only good Tory is a dead Tory.' Both Hamas and Hezbollah are banned in the U.K., and it is a crime to publicly support them. Ó hAnnaidh and Kneecap have repeatedly denied the allegations, stating previously that they 'do not, and have never, supported Hamas or Hezbollah.' They've claimed footage of the November 2024 concert was 'deliberately taken out of all context,' and suggested the terror charge is a reprisal for their outspoken support for Palestine, their calls for an end to the war in Gaza, and their criticism of the U.K. and U.S. governments for continuing to fund and supply arms to Israel. At Wednesday's hearing, prosecutor Michael Bisgrove insisted the case was not about Ó hAnnaidh's support for Palestine or criticism of Israel, adding that he is 'well within his rights to voice his opinions and solidarity, as is anybody else' (via The Associated Press). Rather, Bisgrove said the case is centered around the video of Ó hAnnaidh at the November 2024 concert. Ó hAnnaidh's lawyer, Brenda Campbell, countered that authorities charged the rapper outside the six-month statute of limitations for a terror offense. While the concert took place on Nov. 21, 2024, London Metropolitan police only became aware of the alleged incident in late April 2025, not long after Kneecap's controversial set at Coachella, where they displayed messages about the war in Gaza. The charge was brought May 21, exactly six months after the London concert. 'If we are right in relation to that, then this court has no jurisdiction and there ends the case,' Campbell said of the timeline. Ó hAnnaidh and his bandmates Móglaí Bap (Naoise Ó Cairealláin) and DJ Próvai (JJ O'Dochartaigh) all arrived at the London courthouse wearing Palestinian keffiyeh scarves. They were greeted by a crowd of supporters outside, many of whom were waving Palestinian and Irish flags. On social media last night, Kneecap wrote, 'British courts have long charged people from the North of Ireland with 'terrorism' for crimes never committed. We will fight them. We will win.' Best of Rolling Stone Sly and the Family Stone: 20 Essential Songs The 50 Greatest Eminem Songs All 274 of Taylor Swift's Songs, Ranked
Spectator
5 hours ago
- Politics
- Spectator
Diane Abbott's masterful Assisted Dying speech will come back to haunt us
If yours is a sentimental bent, you'll have been terrifically moved by the spectacle of Jess Phillips MP giving Kim Leadbeater a big hug after the Assisted Dying Bill was passed. Ms Leadbeater has a tendency to look agonised at the best of times. When MPs paid tribute to her in the course of the debate for her compassion, she looked as if she was on the verge of bursting into tears. Now, it'll be tears of joy – at least for her. I should right now retract all the unkind things I have ever said about Diane Abbott Quite how this reaction, and the hugs, can be elicited by a measure which will mean people can be given lethal drugs courtesy of the state is beyond me – because that's actually what it entails – but you can dignify almost anything in our politics if you designate it as being motivated by compassion. There was one contribution to the debate which will stay with me. It was made by Dr Neil Hudson, one of those Tory MPs who looks as if he'll never rouse a rabble; he was in his previous incarnation, a vet. Almost apologetically, he declared that he had been involved in participating in euthanising various animals, large and small, in that job, and while he absolutely wasn't comparing human beings with animals, he wanted to make the point that the substances and procedures were very similar to those used for humans. 'The final act,' he said, 'doesn't always go smoothly'. What a vista that conjures up. All very different from the talk in the chamber, which was all about dignity. Hudson isn't the first person to make this point. Several months ago, I talked at some length to parliament's premier palliative care practitioner, Professor Ilora Finlay. Her verdict? Assisted suicide 'was not a Hollywood death'. Not clean, not quick. Or as she observed, the length it takes actually for the drugs to work – from the experience of those countries which have euthanasia – varies enormously, from under half an hour to over a day. The debate has glossed over this kind of gritty stuff. In the Lords at least, where the bill goes to next, Finlay will have the chance of pointing out how the thing works in practice. She can also say that the agonising deaths that pro-euthanasia MPs described graphically, as a sort of clincher, during the debate are not necessary with proper palliative care. It took the daughter of a male hospice nurse, Labour's Lola McEvoy, to point out that this choice, between dying with hospice provision or without it is not universally available. Making assisted suicide a ready option will, she said, 'deprioritise good palliative care'. Masterly understatement there. It was, moreover, the odd philosophical basis of Leadbeater's speech as the bill's sponsor which was most striking. Passing over her insistence that this bill wouldn't mean more deaths (yes, Kim, we all know that everyone must die eventually, one way or another), she waxed lyrical about the way some patients could already, all by themselves, without any supervision, opt to have their life support or ventilation turned of. Yet, she suggested, MPs were making a fuss about euthanising people who did have the benefit of a supervisory panel. Look, if we can't tell the difference between not doing something (like not opting for artificial life support), and actually – and actively – giving someone drugs that would kill them, it's hard to know how to argue about these things at all. But the MPs who really undermined the cant about choice were those who talked about coercion. I should right now retract all the unkind things I have ever said about Diane Abbott, Mother of the House. She was brilliant, even though she was panicking a bit when she couldn't read her speech on her phone (go for paper!). She was utterly convincing when she dismissed witheringly the notion that, in approved cases of assisted suicide, there would have to be no police evidence of coercion. 'There wouldn't be!' she said. 'In the family the most powerful coercion is silent.' Abbott went on to observe that 'if the police can't spot coercion dealing with domestic violence, why should they spot it in assisted dying?' Her most powerful point was to look at the assembled parliamentarians and observe that every single one of them was 'confident in dealing with authority and institutions. But what about choice for all those who all their lives have lacked agency, particularly in a family situation?' That needed saying. It's one thing for Esther Rantzen to say that she'll die in a fashion of her choosing; quite another for some poor put upon individual being made to feel that they're selfishly taking up other people's time and money (if we're sinking to the level of emotional anecdote, my mother, with Parkinson's, said just that about herself). But it's the wretched Rantzens who dominate this debate, people who've never been pressurised by anyone. There was another unexpectedly brilliant contribution on coercion, Labour's Jess Asato, who works with victims of domestic abuse. She declared that coercion was 'a certainty' – it would be 'the most vulnerable people who will experience wrongful death…as a self-perceived burden'. As she pointed out, other family members will only find out about these deaths when it's too late. She warned that 'there can be no room for doubt, and no room for error'. Except there will be errors, but who'll be complaining, and how? On a Ouija board? It's been quite the week in parliament for life and death. The vote earlier this week – for Tonia Antoniazzi's amendment to allow mothers to abort unborn babies up to birth without criminal sanction – was to do with one end of the life spectrum; the victims being the foetuses who will die. Today's vote was about the end, rather than the beginning of life. But allowing doctors to give drugs to ill people to bring about their death is a similarly warped notion of choice. It's been a good week though for the hooded man with the scythe.
Daily Mirror
10 hours ago
- Politics
- Daily Mirror
Tory council chief sparks outrage with 'poor people' steak dinner joke
Norfolk County Council leader Kay Mason Billig has defended the Facebook post - in which she took a picture of a tomahawk steak - claiming it was a "private joke" A Tory council chief is facing calls to quit after posting a pic of a tomahawk steak with the caption: "Wonder what all the poor people are doing?" Norfolk County Council leader Kay Mason Billig posted the photograph of her meal with a £21 bottle of Italian red wine, potatoes in peppercorn sauce and salad to her Facebook friends. But the caption sparked a furious reaction, with tens of thousands of people in Norfolk forced to rely on food banks and her own council runs an £11.8m fund to help people struggling to afford to eat. Mrs Mason Billig, who is entitled to more than £51,000 in allowances from County Hall each year, told the EDP website the sharing of the post beyond her friends was a "personal attack" and a private joke had been misunderstood. Mrs Mason Billig, who lives in Chedgrave, near Loddon, with her husband Michael, the former director of Procastle Properties, said: "My husband and I have sometimes called ourselves 'the poor people'. "It's a private joke as we live fairly modestly, so when we have a treat, we will sometimes post about it. This is asking if friends wonder what we (the poor people) are doing. It's not intended to be about anyone else and is no reflection on people who are less well off than ourselves. "It's a bad state of affairs when I can't even joke about myself without it being twisted into something it isn't. I am deeply disappointed that someone has decided to be this horrible when they must certainly know it's actually self deprecation. What a sad world we live in." But Steve Morphew, leader of the Labour group at County Hall, said: "People like to have council leaders who show they are in touch, care about the plight of others and show humility and pride in the public positions they hold. This is a nauseating example of the exact opposite. I find nothing amusing here." And the EDP reported one senior Norfolk Conservative said they thought Mrs Mason Billig, who is also a South Norfolk district councillor, should quit. They said: "I think she should resign. We are entitled to a private life and to let our hair down, but I don't think anybody should degrade those less well off than others. "Under Conservative party guidance, there's a case that she has brought the party into disrepute and the party should be carrying out an investigation. This falls well below the Nolan Principles for Public Life.' Another Tory said: "Most politicians are wise to avoid social media. It's hard to win votes, but easy to lose them." Mrs Mason Billig, who has been County Hall leader since May 2023, was criticised earlier this week for comments made during a debate over Norfolk County Council's vision for a single council for when all eight of the county's councils are abolished and new ones created. She said children could die should plans to abolish all eight Norfolk councils and create new ones result in two or three different councils delivering social services.
STV News
10 hours ago
- Business
- STV News
‘Impossible to say' how long Arran ferry will remain out of action, says Calmac
It is 'impossible to say' how long a ferry serving one of Scotland's busiest island routes will continue to be out of action, the operator has said. The MV Caledonian Isles usually operates on the route between Ardrossan in North Ayrshire and Brodick on the Isle of Arran, but it has been out of service since January last year. It had been due to return to the route in recent weeks, but issues with its gearbox have forced consistent delays. On Thursday, CalMac announced the ship would return to dry dock for work on a pressure issue with its propulsion system. Chief executive Duncan Mackison said the inspection will take a few days, and the length of time the ship will continue to be out of action will not be known until that is completed. 'Everyone at CalMac is disappointed that MV Caledonian Isles isn't ready to carry passengers yet, and I know that disappointment will be shared by communities across our network and by those who travel to and from Arran regularly,' he said. 'Once the vessel is in drydock, the inspection will take a few days. Until then, it is impossible to say how long any repair might take. 'But there is a range of possible scenarios going from the issue being resolved in a few days to it taking significantly longer. 'To give communities and customers certainty, we're removing MV Caledonian Isles from deployment plans for now and will provide a detailed update on any service impact early next week.' When it returns to service, the Caledonian Isles will run from Ardrossan, the only ferry in the vicinity able to do so given the long-awaited MV Glen Sannox and its yet-to-be-delivered sister ship are too big to dock at the port, meaning passengers have to board at Troon, South Ayrshire. The Scottish Government is investigating potentially buying the port at Ardrossan to make the necessary changes to allow both newer vessels to berth there, but talks are reported to have stalled. Scottish Tory transport spokeswoman Sue Webber said the latest news will have 'Arran residents tearing their hair out in despair'. 'It beggars belief that there is still no return date for a ferry which has been out of service since January last year,' she said. 'The makeshift CalMac fleet is hanging together by a thread – and the blame for this lies squarely with the SNP and their abject failure to build the new ferries that betrayed islanders were promised years ago. 'CalMac and island communities have been left crossing their fingers that no other aging and decrepit vessels break down in the meantime.' A Transport Scotland spokesperson said: 'CalMac has informed us that while carrying out sea trials for MV Caledonian Isles, further work has been identified relating to pressure levels in the propulsion system. Further information is expected in the coming days. 'In the interim, a two-vessel service will continue to operate between Arran and the mainland, via Troon. This two-vessel service will be delivered by MV Glen Sannox and MV Alfred. 'MV Alfred, which is currently chartered from Pentland Ferries, will be retained by CalMac until the end of October. 'This will continue to provide improved resilience across the Clyde and Hebrides ferry network.' Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
The Herald Scotland
15 hours ago
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
The Tories are becoming two parties in one. Which one will prevail?
But for the two parties of the right, there are more existential issues to keep in mind. The Tory party in Scotland finds itself in the hottest water it has encountered since devolution began. The party bumbled along for the first few terms of Parliament in the mid teens in vote share, translating to the high teens in seat numbers. As the anti-devolution party, they spent a fair bit of the first decade just trying to convince people they actually wanted to be there, with their first leader David McLetchie also making a good fist of putting into place some sort of liberal, free-market policy platform as an alternative to the social democratic consensus which was emerging. Read more by Andy Maciver The theoretical high-point of the party was when, under Annabel Goldie, it struck up an informal agreement to prop up the minority SNP administration of Alex Salmond. In reality, though, the SNP got what it wanted out of that arrangement for pocket change, and the Conservatives were unable to use those four years to derive any kind of sustained shift in sentiment. At its lowest ebb after the 2011 election, the party was saved, not by something to argue for but by something to argue against; independence. In the wake of the independence referendum, with the Labour Party in the grip of Jeremy Corbyn – who had indicated his agnosticism towards Scotland's future in the UK – and with the SNP having won a landslide victory in the 2015 General Election on a ticket of promising another independence referendum, the Tories scored the open goal with which they had been presented. In elections in 2016, 2017, 2019 and 2021, with constitutional temperatures running hot, the core Tory vote in the teens was joined by a large number of unionists who held their noses and voted for the party they thought would stop another referendum. The trouble is, though, that the party's vote was built on sand. The Tories should, by now, have realised that they have been victims of their own success. The UK Government's belligerent "no, never" approach to granting a referendum led to the Scottish Government pursuing the case in the Supreme Court that led to the now-famous judicial decision that the Scottish Parliament cannot legislate for an independence referendum. With independence off the table, and the Tories heading out of office, those "transactional Tories" who backed the party for four elections over five years chewed them up and spat them out. Add to the mix the rise of the Reform party, and you have the story of why, at the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election, Scotland's primary party of the centre-right polled six per cent of the vote. We should understand what that means. Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse sits within the Central Scotland electoral region. In 2021, with over 18 per cent of the vote, the Tories returned three MSPs. In the neighbouring Glasgow region, its 12 per cent gave them two MSPs, and next door in West Scotland (where the party's leader Russell Findlay has his seat) a 22 per cent vote share gave them another three seats. Through east, in the other urban region of Lothian, a 20 per cent vote share gave them another three. That's 11 MSPs across those four urban regions – around one-third of the party's total. An outcome more like the six per cent the party polled in the by-election puts every one of those seats at risk. In all probability, there are enough rural areas in West Scotland and in Lothian to keep them in the game, but only just. There is angst within the Tory MSP group that the party's strategy amounts to no more than hoping Reform will implode. In reality, though, it's about the best strategy available to them in the short term. Cross your fingers, folks. This is not true, though, in rural parts of the country. It is interesting to look back at that 2024 General Election, at where the party kept its seats. The Tories have retained a good amount of land mass, up north and down south, still popular in rural areas. The Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election changed the political ground in Scotland (Image: PA) There is an underlying story here, of two parties under one banner. There is the Tory party of the blue-collar, hacked off, law and order urbanite, driven by concerns over community issues from anti-social behaviour to potholes, with unsubtle views about the impact of immigrants and even more unsubtle views about the distribution of welfare to them, and a sensitive radar to woke issues. That is the party of Mr Findlay, for sure, but the trouble is it is also a mirror-image of Reform. If there is a distinction between Mr Findlay and defectors to Reform such as Glasgow councillor Thomas Kerr, then it is a distinction I am yet to spot upon hearing the two men speak. They are fishing from the same pool and, in the by-election and in national polling, it is Mr Kerr's party which is catching the bulk of the fish. Then there is the Tory party of rural Scotland; the entrepreneurs and small business owners, the free-market liberals concerned about the pernicious economic environment; the hard workers impinged by dismal infrastructure. Ironically, this is very much the party of Mr Findlay's Deputy, Rachael Hamilton. This party does fairly well, and in truth is more in tune with the needs of rural people and rural businesses than any other, including the SNP. We may find, in May next year, that the party's Holyrood map looks more like its Westminster one; strong to the north and to the south, but gutted in the middle. Maybe, as we inevitably move into a fractious parliament and perhaps to a future with more new entrants into Holyrood, and as Scotland's productive economy becomes more focussed on rural Scotland, it is this version of the Tory party which will prove its longevity. Andy Maciver is Founding Director of Message Matters, and co-host of the Holyrood Sources podcast
