Byline Times Audio Articles

Some good news for once, and a word of thanks for all of you who have supported Byline Times over the six years since our launch on 31 March 2019. By coincidence, the day after our sixth birth, the Government announced that it was putting Russia as the second country (after Iran) on its new Foreign Influence Registration Scheme (FIRS). As Foreign Secretary David Lammy explained, this will expose Putin's "shady attempts at interference to sunlight - helping us to detect & disrupt threats to the UK". "Now more than ever," Lammy said"we must hold them to account for their increasingly hostile policies against the UK." According to the Home Office minister, Dan Jarvis, the scheme, which will go live on 1 July, will register and publicise "arrangements to carry out political influence activities in the UK at the direction of any foreign power". An enhanced tier, which will include Russia, has been "specifically designed to shed light on activities directed by those foreign powers or entities whose activities pose a threat to the safety and interests of the UK". Better Late than Never This is an issue Byline Times has been passionate about since its inception. Russian influence in both the EU Referendum and the first Trump presidential election in 2016 was a key theme of our original crowdfunding site Byline.com. We joined Carole Cadwalladr and various other media organisations like openDemocracy and Channel 4 News in exposing Russia's influence operations in our elections. Explosive Report Exposes the Molten Core of the Brexit, Trump, Russia Scandal The Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee's final report on disinformation and fake news reveals new evidence and calls for new investigations into dark data, dark money and Russian influence in British elections. Peter Jukes Then Deputy Leader Tom Watson spoke up at the Byline Festival in 2018, calling for a criminal investigation into Russian interference in Brexit. In 2019, in one of my first articles for Byline Times, David Lammy, then an opposition Labour MP, told me that "the scale and depth of malicious disinformation and foreign interference this report uncovers demands an urgent response from the Prime Minister on behalf of the British Government. "It is now blindingly obvious that we need a criminal investigation", he added, "equivalent to the US' Mueller inquiry - to investigate any possible links between the 2016 Leave campaign, Donald Trump's campaign team and Russia." The DCMS report concluded by calling for an "independent investigation into past elections" - including the 2014 Scottish Independence Referendum, the Brexit vote and the 2017 General Election - "to explore what actually happened with regard to foreign influence, disinformation, funding, voter manipulation, and the sharing of data, so that appropriate changes to the law can be made and lessons can be learnt for future elections and referenda". Byline Times has been pushing for a UK equivalent of the US FARA (Foreign Agents Registration Act) ever since. We published a whole book, Digital Gangers, on the subject, written by a former DCMS committee member, Ian Lucas. Nigel Farage and an 'Extraordinary Lack of Curiosity' from UK Government and Intelligence Services Over Possible Russian Interference in Brexit "It did strike me as ridiculous that, given the overt nationalism of the Leave.EU campaign, it was involved in discussions with representatives of the Russian Government" Ian Lucas Six years on, some limited criminal inquiries have taken place. However, further investigations by me and Carole Cadwalladr with the whistleblower Sergei Cristo in our podcast series Sergei and the Westminster Spy Ring reveal an even more stunning lack of action or accountability by the security services over Russian Interference. So we remain in the dark in too many ways, and a public inquiry is still needed to learn from the past and find ways to fight back against information warfare and foreign influence. However, Dav...

Byline Times is an independent, reader-funded investigative newspaper, outside of the system of the established press, reporting on 'what the papers don't say' - without fear or favour. To support its work, subscribe to the monthly Byline Times print edition, packed with exclusive investigations, news, and analysis. Help us build the better media Britain deserves How should Britain respond if President Trump imposes high tariffs on UK products this week? Pressure is growing on the Prime Minister to hit back with retaliatory tariffs of our own. But the PM isn't the only one who controls the fightback. What can be done, if our PM is reluctant to copy Canada and hit back as hard as we get? We may see the British public responding to Trump's far-right administration with more force. There is an emerging movement to boycott American products in the UK, inspired by Canada's 'Elbows Up' campaign - a hockey term for the action taken by players getting ready for the puck drop - which has led to a collapse of 70% in Canadians travelling to the US, while many Canadian stores have removed American alcohol from shelves. Brits are now sharing lists of major US consumer brands that might be avoided to hit the US where it hurts: in the wallet. Major US consumer brands in the UK include Coca-Cola, Pepsi, McDonald's, Burger King, clothing companies like Nike, Converse and Levi's; and tech giants like Apple, Google, Microsoft and Netflix - some of which are harder to avoid than others. Some well-known US brands operating here actively funded Trump's campaign or his Presidential Inaugural Committee, including PayPal, Uber, ExxonMobil, Amazon and Meta. For this reason and others, some Byline Times readers already seem to be boycotting American goods and seeking alternatives from the UK, EU, Canada, and other non-US sources. ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account. PAY ANNUALLY - £39.50 A YEAR PAY MONTHLY - £3.75 A MONTH MORE OPTIONS We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe. Canadian artist Margaret J Rolfe urged Brits to get involved, writing on Threads that the anti-Trump movement in Canada was "grassroots": "You don't need to wait for the Government to start a boycott. Elbows up, my UK friends!" Another Canadian, Sandra Norman, added in a post that after Trump's first round of tariffs on Canada, "we developed apps to help us figure out where a product came from." One such app is called 'Is This Canadian' and it gives alternative non-US products consumers can buy. "[It was] very effective. Good luck from Canada." Pam Mercier from Norfolk replied: "Lots of British people already are boycotting US made goods, but as is usual they are doing it quietly." Another, Jayne Dyson, added: "We really need to stand up for Britain. It's time we hit America hard." And Wales-based clothes designer Virginia Stockley said: "Absolutely. Instead of 'don't buy from x' we should be saying 'buy British' - something positive to get behind." Some pointed out challenges in boycotting certain US products, especially tech (Apple/Microsoft). But alternative European tech services do exist, including search engines Mojeek and Ecosia to help users ditch Google. Don't miss a story SIGN UP TO EMAIL UPDATES Another Canadian added examples of renegade pro-Canadian consumer action: "Be sneaky like us Canadians. When you look at a product and it's American, put it back upside down. Then flip more upside down so other shoppers know it's American & been put back on the shelves. We say sorry a lot but if you screw with us you'll be sorry!" The conversation is also drawing attention to brands previously thought of as British. For example, high street pharmacy Boots is owned by US-firm Walgreens, while ...

Byline Times is an independent, reader-funded investigative newspaper, outside of the system of the established press, reporting on 'what the papers don't say' - without fear or favour. To support its work, subscribe to the monthly Byline Times print edition, packed with exclusive investigations, news, and analysis. Help us build the better media Britain deserves Five days after Elon Musk's infamous Nazi salute at Trump's inauguration ceremony, Dr Jeremy Stone, a software engineering consultant, launched a petition to "remove loopholes that allow wealthy foreign individuals to make donations into UK political parties (e.g. by funnelling through UK registered companies), cap all donations to a reasonable amount and review limits on the fines that can be levied for breaking the rules". Stone posted the petition on X (formerly Twitter) below an AI generated image of Elon Musk performing the salute over a ballot box with dollars stuffed inside. "Is this what we want?" Stone wrote in his posts about the petition. The answer, at least for the 142, 076 people who signed, was no. The petition quickly cleared the 100,000 signature threshold needed to force a parliamentary debate as Elon Musk threatened to intervene in UK politics with the promise (as yet unrealised) of a $100,000,000 donation to Reform UK. The debate took place in parliament on Tuesday between MPs for Labour, the Conservatives, the Liberal Democrats and the DUP. Here's what we learnt from the debate. Keir Starmer's Government plans to tighten rules on foreign donors Democracy Minister Rushanara Ali told MPs "although it is clear that foreign donations to political parties and other campaigners are illegal, the Government recognise the continued risk posed by actors who seek to interfere in our democratic process. The current rules no longer match the sophistication and perseverance of those who wish to undermine our laws, and that threat must be addressed through stronger safeguards". She added that, "We are considering a series of new measures that would achieve that, such as enhanced checks by recipients of donations and tighter controls on donors, including more restrictions around company donations". ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account. PAY ANNUALLY - £39.50 A YEAR PAY MONTHLY - £3.75 A MONTH MORE OPTIONS We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe. But they will leave British big money donors alone Some MPs raised concerns in the debate about the influence of big money donors generally, whether they are foreign or not. Bell Ribeiro-Addy, the Labour MP for Clapham and Brixton Hill said: "We all know the saying, "Money is power," and I would hope that none of us are naive enough to think that this does not apply to the UK. "If we want to create a democratic system where everyone's vote has equal value, we need strong protections in place to prevent the very richest individuals in our society from warping our democracy". Ribeiro-Addy also described a proposal from the IPPR thinktank to cap individual and corporate donations to political parties at £100,000 a year as a "modest starting point". Ali told MPs that there would be no action taken to cap donations from British citizens or corporations. She said, "The Government do not plan to introduce such restrictions, as we are rightly focused on safeguards that protect against the threat of foreign interference" She added, "I mentioned at the start that we must protect what is hard won. It is vital that those who play a crucial role in our democracy can fundraise effectively and communicate their ideas with the electorate. Those who choose to participate in electoral campaigns must follow the strict accounting and transparency rules th...

Byline Times is an independent, reader-funded investigative newspaper, outside of the system of the established press, reporting on 'what the papers don't say' - without fear or favour. To support its work, subscribe to the monthly Byline Times print edition, packed with exclusive investigations, news, and analysis. Help us build the better media Britain deserves MPs today condemn Whitehall for failing to recover over £400 million in loans given mainly to sports clubs to survive the shutdown during the Covid pandemic five years ago. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport lent £474 million to 120 sporting and cultural bodies between 2020 and 2024, but so far only £41 million has been paid back. On top of this, nine organisations went bust, leaving £46 million irrecoverable, and some 60 organisations have still to pay any money back. MPs on the Public Accounts Committee say there have been severe weaknesses from the start in the Department's arrangements for managing its loan book. The Department did not draw enough on expertise across government when setting up its loan schemes. It has subsequently improved its governance, procedures and capabilities for managing these loans, but there are still too many parties involved in managing them- the Department itself, Sport England and Arts Council England as its loan agents, and accountancy firm PwC as its managed service provider. As a result, the cost of managing the loans has already run to £17m. EXCLUSIVE Conservative Fixer Lord Feldman Lobbied Boris Johnson to Push Through Dyson's Ventilator Contract Private messages between Boris Johnson and his team reveal they were "on a mission" to secure the contract with leading Brexiteer James Dyson Russell Scott Conflict of Interest The report highlights the huge sum - £124 million or 57 per cent of all sports loans - given to help professional rugby clubs. It has been unable to question Susannah Storey, the permanent secretary of the department since 2023, about this because of her declared conflict of interest over her husband playing a major role in financing professional rugby union clubs. She had recused herself from all discussions on the loans to rugby clubs after she was appointed. She declares he is a managing partner and shareholder of CVC Capital Partners - a private equity firm registered in Luxembourg - which has invested £200 million in the Premiership Rugby League in 2019 to keep them going and holds directorships with Premier Rugby, Six Nations Rugby and the United Rugby Championship. During this period, three Premiership league rugby clubs, London Irish loaned £11.8 million, Wasps loaned £14.1 million, and Worcester Warriors loaned £15.7 million, had become insolvent, accounting for over £41 million of the irrecoverable money. Another seven clubs are being financed by their owners but are technically in the red, according to evidence given to MPs. Damning Report Suggests Government is Soft on COVID Fraud A committee of MPs has found that HMRC is failing to deal with an 'avalanche' of fraud by businesses during the pandemic, reports David Hencke David Hencke Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP, Tory Chair of the Committee, said: "Cultural and sporting events came to an abrupt and shocking halt during lockdown, by law. In such circumstances, it is of course right that Government came forward with necessary support to ensure the long-term future of foundational elements of our national life. "But such support was contingent on the unprecedented nature of a global crisis, not to provide a lifetime guarantee to institutions like rugby union, which may be experiencing financial difficulties five years later. "DCMS is inherently conflicted in the management of its COVID loan-book. As a lender, its priority will be to secure best value for the taxpayer from these loans. As a Department, its priority is to do everything in its power to support a sector which has become its debtor. "This is before one even considers the direct c...

Byline Times is an independent, reader-funded investigative newspaper, outside of the system of the established press, reporting on 'what the papers don't say' - without fear or favour. To support its work, subscribe to the monthly Byline Times print edition, packed with exclusive investigations, news, and analysis. Help us build the better media Britain deserves The UK Government is being taken to court by climate campaigners over its controversial Jet Zero Strategy (JZS), arguing that the policy encourages aviation expansion at the expense of legally binding climate commitments. Climate charity Possible and the Group for Action on Leeds Bradford Airport and their legal teams at law firm Leigh Day have filed judicial reviews against the Department for Transport (DfT), challenging the JZS for "failing to present a viable plan to reduce aviation emissions in line with the UK's Net Zero targets." They are concerned that the far-off promise of 'Jet Zero' - the long-distant hope of emissions-neutral air travel - is being used as an excuse to expand airports today, complete with a major increase in carbon emissions here and now. The strategy was launched by the last Conservative Government, which claimed it would allow travellers to fly "guilt free". The strategy has continued post-election, with the Chancellor Rachel Reeves announcing in January that the Government will support the construction of a third runway at Heathrow. Ministers have delayed a final decision on Gatwick airport expansion to October this year to assess the climate impact - but suggest they are "minded to approve" expanding the London hub. In its announcement on Heathrow, the Government said they would "engage [with] the Climate Change Committee on how aviation expansion can be made consistent with our net zero framework." And defending Gatwick expansion, a transport minister, Mike Kane, used Jet Zero efforts to bolster his claims: "We continue to work together with industry to consider the best ways to support the aviation industry to de-carbonise, including through the jet zero taskforce." ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account. PAY ANNUALLY - £39.50 A YEAR PAY MONTHLY - £3.75 A MONTH MORE OPTIONS We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe. He added: "Airspace modernisation can help us to reach our target by reducing delays and allowing aircraft to fly in more direct routes. That should result in far less fuel burn, and therefore reduce our carbon omissions and potentially the noise impact of flights." But the International Energy Association says decarbonisation efforts for aviation are "not on track," adding: "In 2023, aviation accounted for 2.5% of global energy-related CO2 emissions, having grown faster between 2000 and 2019 than rail, road or shipping." The legal challenge on Jet Zero begins today (April 1) at the Royal Courts of Justice, with both challenges being heard alongside each other, and is expected to last for four days. Both legal cases argue that the JZS relies on speculative technological solutions while ignoring the need for demand management measures, despite clear recommendations from the Government's own statutory advisors, the Climate Change Committee (CCC). Challenging airport expansion earlier in Parliament earlier this year, Green Party MP Sian Berry said: "The Government's arguments that I have seen appear to rest on the idea that there are new technologies ready to go that will cut carbon emissions and allow large airport expansions. In reality, does the Minister accept that such innovations, many of which are still not ready for commercial use, cannot be relied upon?" Virgin Atlantic's '100% Sustainable' Flight is just a Greenwashing Gimmick say Ex...