Byline Times Audio Articles

'Keir Starmer Must Stop Chasing Reform's Cruelty and Embrace the Compassionate Politics His Own Voters Demand'

Read our Digital & Print Editions And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system SUBSCRIBE TODAY Prime Minister Keir Starmer is reportedly planning to launch a major Government reset, next year, starting with a King's speech in May. Few would dispute the need. Under current polling the party is on course for a historic routing at next year's local elections. So far, Labour's response to the threat posed by Reform has been to harden its language and policy on migration, to frame human rights as impediments to tackling the issue, and to signal "toughness" at almost any cost. The overwhelming logic behind this strategy has been the idea that Labour needs to chase Reform voters in order to survive. However, new polling suggests the opposite could be true. Research carried out by Survation for Compassion in Politics, and shared exclusively with Byline Times, shows that if Keir Starmer leaned into his stated values of compassion, tolerance and care, Labour could achieve a net gain of as many as 3.2 million votes at the next election. That is roughly one sixth of the turnout at the last general election and, on similar turnout next time, could be enough to overturn Reform's projected majority. An electoral drubbing, in other words, is not inevitable. The votes are there. Labour is simply looking for them in the wrong direction. EXCLUSIVE 'They've Ruined Christmas': Nigerian Student Blocked By Home Office From Visiting UK Family for Holidays British academic and his Nigerian wife repeatedly stopped from hosting family members, including at their own wedding, due to visa restrictions brought in by Keir Starmer's Government Nicola Kelly The biggest gains from this approach would not be from Reform, but from the progressive voters Labour is currently haemorrhaging. According to the polling, an estimated net 1.5 million voters say they would be more likely to switch from the Greens and 1.1 million from the Liberal Democrats were Starmer to be more clearly guided by compassion. Labour is sitting on a vast pool of voters who broadly share its historic values but who no longer trust its leadership to stand up for them. That erosion of trust matters. Of respondents who currently expect to vote Labour, 50% say they would be more likely to do so if Starmer showed greater compassion. A further 1.5 million voters say they would consider switching to Labour if Keir Starmer came across as more sincere. This is not just about rhetoric. It is about congruence. What the polling exposes is something many Westminster commentators have missed. Despite the noise around Reform, Britain remains a predominantly progressive country. Using Survation's segmentation, developed with 38 Degrees, 54% of the electorate falls into what is described as the progressive majority. These voters are diverse, but they are not incoherent. They include what are known as "open hearted collectivists", "guarded localists", "pragmatic youth", "rooted traditionalists" and "cosmopolitan optimists". They differ on tone and emphasis, but they share core commitments to fairness, dignity, decency and social responsibility. Crucially, across the whole of this progressive majority, 44% say they would be more likely to vote Labour if Starmer backed more compassionate policies. Just 11% say they would be less likely. This directly challenges the fatalism that has taken hold in Westminster, the idea that voters are inexorably moving rightwards, and that the only way to defeat the far right is to mimic its language or legitimise its framing. The evidence tells a different story. As CEO of Compassion in Politics, I have spent years arguing that compassion is not an add on to politics, but a governing principle grounded in evidence, effectiveness and trust. This polling makes that case in electoral terms. Failing to heed it does not just damage Labour's electoral prospects but also feeds the forces that would undermine democracy. Adopting the rhetoric...

Why Is the Government Really Refusing to Investigate Russian Interference in Brexit?

Read our Digital & Print Editions And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system SUBSCRIBE TODAY When the Nathan Gill bribery story fist hit the headlines, Keir Starmer and his ministers dodged calls from MPs to launch a full enquiry into Russian interference in British politics. So, when the Government this week ordered an urgent review into foreign financial political interference, it came as a surprise to many. However, there was one big snag: while aiming to consider "recent cases", it will not "consider previous allegations over interference in the Brexit referendum". Perhaps to ensure that the review does not go anywhere near Brexit, it is being led by Philp Rycroft, one of the handful of senior civil servants who spearheaded "getting Brexit done", with little regard to questions around its legitimacy. Needless to say, he does not happen to have any relevant experience in either covert finance operations, nor national security. Having defended his Doctorate of Philosophy (DPhil) on the ever-pressing topic of church and community in XVIII-XIX century Yorkshire, he served as Permanent Secretary at the Department for Exiting the European Union (DExEU) between October 2017 and March 2019. Keir Starmer Is Setting a Trap for Nigel Farage With Foreign Interference Inquiry As Reform opens the door to crypto donations, the Government is finally starting to take action against the threat of foreign financial interference in our politics, reports Adam Bienkov Adam Bienkov The excuse which a Labour Government minister used to justify staying away from the Russian covert operation around Brexit, echoed Boris Johnson's: Russian interference had no material impact on elections. However, that assumption is unproven. According to US intelligence, the Kremlin spent over USD 300 million since 2014 to influence European politics via front companies and think tanks. For comparison, the total Brexit campaign spending was about £30 million. Carnegie adds that non-state actors may play a predominant role in such campaigns even when a government is ultimately behind them. Foreign interference has a material impact on elections when the society is divided and voters are split on an issue around 50:50. In cases where the margins of voting counts are wide, it may not alter outcomes but it can still damage democratic integrity. US intelligence and congressional inquiries showed that Russian interference in 2016 plausibly shifted sentiment in swing states because they were decided by tens of thousands of votes. The Hillary Clinton campaign is adamant that, according to their poll data, it was the Russian operation to disclose emails on 22 July 2016 which was the single factor that moved the election in Trump's favour. In Romania and Moldova, courts and authorities explicitly concluded that Russian financial and cyber interference compromised electoral integrity to the point that outcomes were annulled or required extraordinary counter-measures. Similarly in the UK, the Brexit referendum's two-point margin combined with unresolved questions of opaque funding, data-driven targeting and disinformation makes material impact plausible but untested because the Government refused to investigate. For the past 15 years or more, the British electoral system has witnessed what some in the intelligence community called "the most successful Russian active measures operation against the UK". It comprised sustained and systematic Russian political interference through donations to political parties, via shell companies and foreign-born British passport holders, and other Putin proxies. I myself became an unwitting witness of this when, in 2010, a senior Russian diplomat in London looked for ways to channel funds into the Conservative Party. In addition, Russian oligarchs based in the UK funded political thinktanks propagating specific narratives, employed relatives of politicians, and influenced influential politicians tho...

Families of Palestine Hunger Strikers Beg for Meeting With David Lammy as Their Conditions Deteriorate

Read our Digital & Print Editions And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system SUBSCRIBE TODAY Family members of the Palestine Action-affiliated hunger strikers have called on Justice Secretary David Lammy to meet with the strikers before any of them die. Speaking at a press conference in Vauxhall on Thursday, the sisters of hunger strikers Kamran Ahmed and Teuta Hoxha and the next of kin of Qesser Zuhrah alleged ill treatment of their relatives by prison staff, and pleaded with the Government to agree to a meeting to negotiate over the hunger strikers' terms so that they can put an end to the strike. 29 Palestine Action-affiliated individuals are currently being held on remand for their alleged involvement in break-ins at a facility outside Bristol owned by the Israeli arms firm Elbit Systems and at RAF Brize Norton where military planes were sprayed with red paint. Of these 29, seven are on hunger strike in five different prisons. Demands from the strikers include immediate bail,a lifting of the ban on Palestine Action, the closure of Elbit Systems on UK soil and the ability to communicate freely with family and supporters outside the prisons. Ministers have so far refused to meet with the strikers or their representatives to discuss their demands. EXCLUSIVE Palestine Action Arrests Condemned as 'Deeply Alarming' While British Press Remains Silent The Liberal Democrats described the arrests of campaigners against the ban on the group as a "dangerous precedent" for free speech, yet the British press remains largely silent about it Josiah Mortimer Shahmina Alam, sister of Kamran Ahmed, a 28-year-old prisoner currently on day 39 of his hunger strike, stated that her brother: "saw the outpouring of videos from Gaza and the Palestinians being slaughtered; he couldn't look away […] it drove him to stand for humanity". She said that her brother is committed to "the liberation of Palestine" and to "our rights in this country as a British citizen" as well as the rights to a fair trial and to not be censored. She claimed that because these had been denied he had taken the "most difficult decision to starve his body of nutrients". Alam told the press conference that while her brother's ketone levels had previously stabilised, they are now rising rapidly to dangerous levels. She also said that his heart is giving in and that he is losing 0.5 kilograms in body weight each day. She called on David Lammy to "please have this meeting" saying: "we haven't asked for much. Stop declining the meetings from MPs. If you don't want to speak to us, then at least speak to your colleagues. This is not about your politics, it is about the lives of eight individuals". Medical professionals believe that all of the strikers are in imminent danger of death, or permanent, life-altering injuries including irreversible brain damage, as a result of the advanced stage of their strike. Six of the strikers - Qesser Zuhrah, Amu Gib, Heba Muraisi, Jon Cink, Teuta Hoxha and Kamran Ahmed - have refused food for at least 39 days. Three of the strikers, Heba Muraisi, Amu Gib and Qesser Zuhrah are on days 46 or 47 of their strike. Martin Hurson, one of the IRA hunger strikers in the H-Block of Long Kesh prison, to whom the Palestine Action-affiliated strikers are increasingly being compared, died after 46 days of his hunger strike in 1981. Ella Moulsdale, 21, the next of kin of Qesser Zuhrah - who has been held on remand in HMP Bronzefield since November 2024, and who is on day 47 of her hunger strike - told journalists of the "excruciating pain" Zuhrah is in. Zuhrah was taken to hospital last night. Her supporters who protested outside HMP Bronzefield, including Coventry South MP Zarah Sultana, claim that she was denied access to emergency medical care for several hours. Moulsdale told journalists: "[Qesser Zuhrah] was 19 when she was taken from us. She was just starting at university and she had her whole life ahead of her...

'They've Ruined Christmas': Nigerian Student Blocked By Home Office From Visiting UK Family for Holidays

Read our Digital & Print Editions And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system SUBSCRIBE TODAY A British academic and his Nigerian wife say the Home Office has "ruined Christmas" after refusing a visa for their cousin, a student of prosthetics and orthotics at a top-ranking university. Dr James Pickering and his wife Chioma had booked a return flight for their eighteen-year-old cousin and had stated that they could financially sponsor her visit. However, the Home Office denied the visa, saying that their cousin Chizaram had not provided evidence of an "ongoing and genuine relationship" with Pickering and his wife, which "damages the credibility of [your] application". They added: "I am not satisfied that you will leave the UK at the end of the visit." "Chizaram has never left Nigeria and never been on a plane, so we were really hoping she could have her first 'white Christmas' in the UK," said Pickering. "We sent all the evidence we could - WhatsApp messages, call logs, bank statements, photos - really belts and braces - but they still refused the visa. My wife has spent days in tears. They've really ruined Christmas for us." Shabana Mahmood's Asylum Seeker Military 'Warehousing' Plans Delayed Amid Opposition by Labour MPs Home Office sources tell Byline Times that local Labour MPs are opposing plans by the Home Secretary to use barracks and army bases to house asylum seekers amid rising community tensions Nicola Kelly In May the Home Office launched a crackdown on student visas from countries it deems "high-risk". Whitehall officials claimed that students from Nigeria, Pakistan and Sri Lanka were more likely to overstay their visas and claim asylum. Official data at that time showed that people from those countries were the most likely to enter the UK on a work or study visa and then switch to the asylum system. The cuts to international student visas were announced as part of a package of measures in the gGovernment's immigration white paper, which followed a series of losses to Reform in the local elections in May. Labour vowed to reduce overall immigration figures and tackle what former Home Secretary Yvette Cooper described as "abuses in the system". Pickering and his wife have applied for five visas in the last year for members of their family in Nigeria to visit them in Britain for short stays. All of the visas have been denied. Each time their family members have reapplied, having addressed the original concerns set out in their decision letters, the department has raised new concerns which had not been addressed originally. Last year a large number of family members were unable to attend the couple's wedding following repeated rejections. The family have only once managed to have a "particularly egregious refusal" overturned following intervention from their local MP Neil O'Brien. "My wife Chioma is completely cut off from her family here," said Pickering. "It's difficult for her to maintain a relationship with those she loves, especially when the power and connection goes down. We just want to be able to spend time with her family." Pickering believes that the recent increase in the use of AI to assess visa applications could be the cause of the repeated visa rejections. 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. "I believe they approach applications looking to refuse them rather than trying to assess them fairly," said Pickering. "We sent through a hundred pages of evidence. At no point did they ask for more information and we have no right to appeal. It feels like they just bank on ...

I Met Migrant Women in Calais Hoping to Reach the UK and This Is What I Learnt

Read our Digital & Print Editions And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system SUBSCRIBE TODAY I was in a car with charity workers somewhere between Calais and Dunkirk. We were on our way to a women's centre: a small sports pavilion that offers women in the camps a chance to shower, do their hair, put on make-up, have a gossip, a brief moment of normality in a hostile place. My companions were chatting in French, which I struggled to follow. So, when they exclaimed, "Huit." I had to ask, "Eight what?". Pregnant women, they said. My heart sank. I asked whether they would cross in the small boats. They told me the women hope so. It is safer to cross before the babies are born. Some, though, are forced to take babes in arms. At the centre we met women from all over the world. I spoke with another Rachel (Raheli), a physics teacher from Afghanistan, fleeing the Taliban with her daughter, a midwife. She squeezed my hand tightly as she described the fear of the journey. Another woman spoke of her longing to return to Eritrea, to work and support her family back home. There were two mothers with babies already born. EXCLUSIVE Nigel Farage-Backed 'Raise the Colours' Campaign Pivots to Racially Abusing Migrants and Harassing Aid Workers on French Beaches Far-right activists were seen stabbing dinghies and releasing dogs to intimidate migrants and aid workers Nicola Kelly and Olly Haynes Women on the move. Pregnancies shaped by danger and displacement. A search for safety in a world that insists there is "no room". Standing there, listening, it struck me that this is, at its heart, a Christmas story. Migration and asylum are not modern anomalies. They are as old as humanity itself. Yet we have allowed our politics to strip them of their humanity, turning people into numbers, threats, slogans. These women in Calais are in crisis, but they are not a crisis. Each is a person. And how we treat them tells us everything about the kind of country we are choosing to be. Our Government has poured £476m into making the border as hostile as possible: aggressive policing, tents ripped away, water stations destroyed, and the horrific use of military-grade tear gas on children as young as two months old. Still, people cross, only now they do so more dangerously, with greater suffering. Humanitarian organisations, including those working with Calais Appeal, do everything they can to counter this violence with scant resources. Their work is lifesaving. As 2025 draws to a close, it is impossible not to reflect on how sharply our political language has hardened. Cruelty has been rebranded as "toughness". Indifference as "pragmatism". Moral abdication as "realism". That showing basic humanity to pregnant women living in appalling conditions is now considered "radical" should alarm us all. Too often, policies are justified not by whether they work, but by whether they sound punitive enough to satisfy an increasingly volatile media ecosystem. People seeking safety are framed as a problem to be managed, rather than lives to be protected. That is also why earlier this year, I opposed the policy of housing people seeking asylum in army camps. The 'Pink Ladies' Laundering Anti-Migrant Views Into the Mainstream An anti-migrant movement backed by Reform and Conservative politicians and regularly invited onto news channels is funded by a far-right group and has platformed a Neo-Nazi activist Nicola Kelly I believe in dignity. Placing traumatised people, including pregnant women, children and survivors of torture, in isolated, militarised settings without proper support is neither humane nor effective. It entrenches fear, worsens mental health, and makes integration harder, not easier. Worse still, this cruelty is profitable. Clearsprings and just two other providers have made a combined £383m from Home Office asylum contracts, while delivering what has been described as "miserable" conditions. How did we end up paying c...