Latest / UK Column Radio / UK Column News — 11th November 2026

Transcript

UK Column News — 11th November 2026 · UK Column Radio

0:04
Speaker 1: Thank you.
0:15
Speaker 2: Good afternoon. It's Wednesday, the 11th of November, 2026, just
0:19
Speaker 2: after one o'clock. Welcome to UK Column News. I'm your host,
0:21
Speaker 2: Brian Robinson. Joining me in the studio, once again, Brian Garish.
0:23
Speaker 2: Welcome to the program, Brian. Great to be here. And
0:26
Speaker 2: Vanessa Beattie joins us from Lebanon. Later in the program,
0:29
Speaker 2: we'll be reporting on UK devolution plans. We'll be asking
0:33
Speaker 2: how the US and UK governments are using the WebLock
0:36
Speaker 2: location tracking software from Israel and also Israel's takeover of
0:41
Speaker 2: the EU. But we'll begin today with Well, yet another
0:46
Speaker 2: sex scandal, Brian.
0:47
Speaker 3: Yes, and what's it all about? Is it a straightforward
0:51
Speaker 3: sex scandal or is there a lot more to it?
0:53
Speaker 2: That's the question.
0:55
Speaker 3: Well, let's wade in and bring David Wallis.
0:59
Speaker 4: Walliams.
1:00
Speaker 2: Walliams. on screen. I'm proud you don't know his name, Brian.
1:05
Speaker 3: Well, I did laugh as I went through some of
1:08
Speaker 3: the material on this man, because they said he's unbelievably well-known,
1:13
Speaker 3: but I'm pleased to say I haven't paid much attention
1:15
Speaker 3: to him.
1:16
Speaker 2: Is this his real name? No, his real name is Williams,
1:20
Speaker 2: but there already was a David Williams on equity, so
1:24
Speaker 2: he changes to Williams.
1:26
Speaker 3: Yeah, so it gets interesting, but let's have a look
1:29
Speaker 3: at the UK. uh press uh today it's just wall
1:34
Speaker 3: to wall the russians have gone away the chinese have
1:37
Speaker 3: gone away threats on the country the removal of american
1:41
Speaker 3: aircraft has all gone away and if you think it's
1:44
Speaker 3: finished well it hasn't let's bring another one on screen
1:46
Speaker 3: because of course it's the good old bbc and jonathan
1:49
Speaker 3: ross is horrified by the story and says he does
1:53
Speaker 3: doesn't know him but of course he had no idea
1:55
Speaker 3: what was really going on behind the scenes but so
1:58
Speaker 3: for the audience let's just um go through things in
2:03
Speaker 3: a little bit of detail because of course um walliams
2:07
Speaker 3: attempted a forever injunction uh to stop the press and
2:12
Speaker 3: media talking about the story uh and and in the
2:17
Speaker 3: background he uh was claiming that there was a direct
2:20
Speaker 3: threat to his life as a result of material being
2:23
Speaker 3: published and um This has led to some interesting reporting,
2:28
Speaker 3: not least by the BBC, because they start to wade
2:32
Speaker 3: in what responsibilities the state has to protect people. They
2:39
Speaker 3: give the example that, of course, if the police believe
2:42
Speaker 3: somebody's life is at risk, even if they're a hardened criminal,
2:46
Speaker 3: they've got an obligation to protect that person. But ultimately,
2:51
Speaker 3: the BBC admits that... the courts in this case did
2:57
Speaker 3: not have any duty to protect him. They were simply
3:01
Speaker 3: dealing with the issue of what was true and what
3:03
Speaker 3: could be reported or not. But it is pretty interesting
3:09
Speaker 3: that the BBC followed a line which, as we'll see,
3:12
Speaker 3: got onto the subject of social media. And the irony
3:18
Speaker 3: is that, of course, most people say that at some
3:21
Speaker 3: stage people knew what was going on around this man.
3:24
Speaker 3: That's what's claimed. And certainly BBC people that UK Column
3:32
Speaker 3: has been able to speak to over the last month,
3:35
Speaker 3: people who previously worked for the BBC, were happy to
3:39
Speaker 3: say everybody knew. Well, of course, nothing's been proven yet
3:44
Speaker 3: because it hasn't been taken to Court, no charges have
3:47
Speaker 3: come out, but these are lots of questions which we
3:50
Speaker 3: need to discuss. So let's have a little look about
3:53
Speaker 3: this article, Why William's Unprecedented Legal Battle to Stay Anonymous Failed. Now,
3:59
Speaker 3: I've already given you some of the bullet points out
4:01
Speaker 3: of it, but I was just interested in how this journalist,
4:05
Speaker 3: Dominic Cascani, approached things. And I've taken a couple of
4:11
Speaker 3: paragraphs out. He says, while all this, the attempt to
4:15
Speaker 3: actually block the thing coming to court, while all this
4:18
Speaker 3: had been going on, there was a social media-sized elephant
4:22
Speaker 3: in the room. No end of people were posting it's
4:25
Speaker 3: David Walliams and wondering why we bona fide journalists were
4:30
Speaker 3: not staying the same. So you see that knife put
4:33
Speaker 3: in very quickly. We, the BBC, are the proper journalists.
4:37
Speaker 3: Nobody on social media. When the courts in the UK order... Sorry,
4:41
Speaker 3: when the courts in the UK order that someone should
4:44
Speaker 3: remain anonymous, that order applies to all forms of publishing
4:48
Speaker 3: and broadcasting. It matters not whether the publication is a
4:50
Speaker 3: newspaper or online, it's still publication. That is why bona
4:55
Speaker 3: fide journalists who undermine the law did not wade in.
4:59
Speaker 2: I think that's probably one of the most ridiculous things
5:01
Speaker 2: I've ever read, because, of course, people online, it was
5:06
Speaker 2: never officially acknowledged that it was David Walliams brought the injunction.
5:09
Speaker 2: There was never a court order published. saying that David
5:11
Speaker 2: Walliams can be named. And of course, if a court
5:15
Speaker 2: order is published that says that, then his name is
5:17
Speaker 2: out anyway. So how is it possible for somebody on
5:21
Speaker 2: social media to adhere to a court order that they
5:24
Speaker 2: know nothing about? Well, it's great you picked up on this, Mike,
5:27
Speaker 2: because this article particularly caught my eye because I'm wondering
5:31
Speaker 2: what this journalist is playing with. Let's give a little bit,
5:35
Speaker 2: bring in a little bit more here. And he went
5:39
Speaker 2: on to say, but there's a massive practical issue. How
5:42
Speaker 2: far does the writ of English law run in cyberspace?
5:45
Speaker 2: One judge recently addressed over a reporting restriction issue described
5:51
Speaker 2: social media as a wild west. That comment underlines the
5:55
Speaker 2: concern amongst legal professionals. But the question is how to
5:59
Speaker 2: enforce injunctions in an age of rapid fire digital gossip. Well, no,
6:04
Speaker 2: the important question is to establish how much so much
6:08
Speaker 2: how so much was known about this man for so long,
6:12
Speaker 2: particularly within the BBC. And what was the role of
6:15
Speaker 2: mainstream journalists in covering that up?
6:17
Speaker 3: Right. Thank you very much, Mike. Because this is the
6:20
Speaker 3: real nub of it. We've got another case where clearly
6:24
Speaker 3: a lot of people knew a lot of things. They
6:26
Speaker 3: were talking about it widely in the background. But of course,
6:31
Speaker 3: journalists couldn't get on until, of course, ITN and the
6:36
Speaker 3: Guardian got stuck in and this has now come to
6:39
Speaker 3: the surface. So what is this BBC journalist doing? Well,
6:43
Speaker 3: he's trying to muddy the water. He's trying to use
6:45
Speaker 3: this case to attack social media when the real journalistic
6:50
Speaker 3: work could have been done many years ago by BBC journalists. Now,
6:54
Speaker 3: let's compare those headlines right the way across virtually every
7:00
Speaker 3: newspaper in UK. to deal with one man and abuse
7:05
Speaker 3: of young women, alleged abuse of young women. Let's come
7:10
Speaker 3: on to the subject of child abuse. And I want
7:13
Speaker 3: to bring this lady up on screen, Juliette. A little
7:17
Speaker 3: while ago, we interviewed this grandmother who was desperately speaking
7:23
Speaker 3: out to try and protect her young grandchild from abuse
7:26
Speaker 3: in the system. This lady is now facing committal.
7:31
Speaker 2: That's right.
7:31
Speaker 3: She's now facing being put in court, sorry, being put
7:35
Speaker 3: in jail for speaking out in order to try and
7:39
Speaker 3: protect her grandchild that is supposedly under the care of
7:43
Speaker 3: social services from being abused. Now, this story is just
7:48
Speaker 3: one of many that the UK column has reported over
7:51
Speaker 3: the years.
7:52
Speaker 2: Over the years.
7:52
Speaker 3: But if we take a little bit of this and
7:55
Speaker 3: bring it up on screen from Juliet's own story, she's
7:59
Speaker 3: talking about her grandchild. She says that when the child
8:02
Speaker 3: was snatched by the state, the girl was well and unharmed.
8:06
Speaker 3: The police recorded that the child had no injuries. But
8:10
Speaker 3: we then go on just five days later, still in
8:13
Speaker 3: the care of social services, child protection teams, injuries to
8:17
Speaker 3: the child were observed and photographed by Juliet and her daughter.
8:22
Speaker 3: And what are we talking about? We're talking about bruises,
8:25
Speaker 3: burn marks, physical withdrawal, refusal to speak, unsteadiness on her feet,
8:31
Speaker 3: and all of that believed to have been caused by
8:34
Speaker 3: drugging with possible needle puncture marks. Now, this grandmother has
8:39
Speaker 3: gone to the police. She's gone to social services. She's
8:42
Speaker 3: attempted to take this case through the courts, but everywhere
8:47
Speaker 3: she's blocked. And now for speaking out, she is being threatened.
8:52
Speaker 3: with a hearing in the new year with the possibility
8:54
Speaker 3: of being put in prison for trying to protect her
8:58
Speaker 3: child from abusers. Remember, she's spoken to the police in
9:02
Speaker 3: detail and this case gets nowhere. Let's just listen to
9:06
Speaker 3: a little bit of Juliet speaking to the UK column.
9:11
Speaker 3: Why would you need to go to the King's Bench
9:13
Speaker 3: if you've got access to the family court system in
9:17
Speaker 3: order to try and protect your granddaughter?
9:22
Speaker 4: OK, because in the lower court, I wasn't being listened to.
9:30
Speaker 4: I requested multiple times for my granddaughter to be seen
9:33
Speaker 4: by an expert and for us to get forensic expert reports,
9:40
Speaker 4: which I was refused every time. And every bit of
9:44
Speaker 4: evidence I had was just shoved under the carpet. So
9:47
Speaker 4: even when perjury was committed in court, It was just
9:51
Speaker 4: all shoved under the carpet, even though I was showing
9:54
Speaker 4: with factual evidence. It was just shoved under the carpet
9:59
Speaker 4: and ignored.
10:02
Speaker 3: So one set of headlines for celebrities and absolutely no
10:06
Speaker 3: headlines for grandmothers trying to protect their children we'll talk
10:09
Speaker 3: about this more in extra mike it's appalling.
10:12
Speaker 2: Absolutely well look uh let's move on then to surveillance
10:16
Speaker 2: and uh let's bring this on screen because uh a
10:19
Speaker 2: surveillance system that follows people's movements using data leaked from
10:23
Speaker 2: weather apps, from games, and in fact, prayer apps as well,
10:28
Speaker 2: is being sold to police and intelligence agencies around the world,
10:31
Speaker 2: including in the UK. And that's according to this, if
10:34
Speaker 2: we just bring it back on screen, this investigation published
10:36
Speaker 2: by Bloomberg. The tool is called WebLock. It's sold by
10:41
Speaker 2: a company called Penlink, which is based in Nebraska, but
10:44
Speaker 2: this was first built by Cobweb Technologies, an Israeli firm
10:49
Speaker 2: that merged with Penlink in 2023. Bloomberg reports that WebLock
10:53
Speaker 2: is sold to police in the United States, the UK,
10:56
Speaker 2: and elsewhere. And the Bloomberg report is based upon company presentations,
11:03
Speaker 2: internal presentations, PowerPoint presentations, training materials, and interviews with seven
11:08
Speaker 2: current and former staff. According to researchers who've studied the system,
11:14
Speaker 2: Bloomberg's findings add the UK, the Netherlands, Germany, Mexico, Singapore,
11:20
Speaker 2: Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Israel, despite the fact
11:24
Speaker 2: that it was originally created in Israel. The Israeli government
11:26
Speaker 2: is using this as well. So those countries have all
11:29
Speaker 2: bought it. Publicly available summaries of the report don't say
11:33
Speaker 2: which British agencies are involved, and we'll come on to
11:36
Speaker 2: that a little bit more in a second. Many free
11:39
Speaker 2: apps are carrying hidden advertising code, and when an app
11:43
Speaker 2: is allowed to see a phone's location, That code can
11:46
Speaker 2: pass the location onto advertising firms together with an advertising ID,
11:50
Speaker 2: which is the code that identifies the handset. And then
11:53
Speaker 2: data brokers are collecting these records and selling them on.
11:56
Speaker 2: WebLock is gathering this data into one searchable system, and
12:00
Speaker 2: then the police can draw a box on a map,
12:03
Speaker 2: see every phone that was there at a given time,
12:06
Speaker 2: and then follow where those phones went before that and afterwards. Now,
12:11
Speaker 2: because phones spend... Basically, the data can be quickly pointed
12:20
Speaker 2: in person if they absolutely choose. So the Bloomberg article
12:25
Speaker 2: is based on research by Citizen Lab, part of the
12:29
Speaker 2: University of Toronto. They published a detailed study of WebLock
12:32
Speaker 2: in April this year, and they found that it covers
12:35
Speaker 2: up to 500 million devices worldwide and holds up to
12:39
Speaker 2: three years of location history. Bloomberg said that the licenses
12:43
Speaker 2: for access to the software began at about $ 100, 000 per year.
12:47
Speaker 2: Trading material showed that the tool being used against pro-Palestinian protesters,
12:52
Speaker 2: as well as suspected spies and biker gangs. You'll have
12:55
Speaker 2: to explain that to me, but that's what it said.
12:58
Speaker 2: The company also planned a version called Safe Lock for
13:02
Speaker 2: banks and retailers, apparently. And the app makers that are
13:06
Speaker 2: named in the report include AccuWeather and the Muslim Pro
13:10
Speaker 2: Prayer app. They, the authors of those apps both said
13:16
Speaker 2: that they had no relationship with PendLink, but of course
13:19
Speaker 2: they wouldn't have a clue about what's going on here
13:21
Speaker 2: because they are making use of ad networks, which are
13:25
Speaker 2: then how the ad networks themselves have the relationship with PendLink.
13:30
Speaker 2: So PendLink wouldn't comment on who their customers were. But
13:34
Speaker 2: if we just bring this back on screen, it's quite
13:36
Speaker 2: interesting because this research asked 96 Freedom of Information questions,
13:44
Speaker 2: and the British in particular refused to say where they
13:47
Speaker 2: used this tool. So 44 of those freedom of information
13:50
Speaker 2: requests were to UK police forces. Five said they held
13:54
Speaker 2: no information about WebLock. The other 39 would neither confirm
13:58
Speaker 2: or deny. And then the Home Office's Immigration Enforcement Unit
14:02
Speaker 2: gave the same answer. It did confirm that it did
14:06
Speaker 2: not use several rival products, but they didn't confirm whether
14:09
Speaker 2: or not they used this one. CitizenLab said that this
14:13
Speaker 2: suggests the Home Office had used WebLock and it complained
14:17
Speaker 2: to the Information Commissioner in 2025, but naturally nothing has
14:21
Speaker 2: happened since on that. Now, Hungary was the first EU
14:24
Speaker 2: country that confirmed to use WebLock. Then vSquare, working with CitizenLab,
14:31
Speaker 2: reported that the Hungarian intelligence had used it since at
14:34
Speaker 2: least 2022 and reviews its licenses weeks before the general
14:39
Speaker 2: election in Hungary in April. Hungary's data protection authority has
14:43
Speaker 2: since opened an investigation. I'm quite sure that'll go nowhere
14:46
Speaker 2: as well. Austria's interior ministry has reviewed its own license
14:51
Speaker 2: for about 1.85 million euros. And that's according to Netzpolitik
14:56
Speaker 2: in Germany. And then 404 Media has reported that in
15:01
Speaker 2: the US, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency, ICE, notorious,
15:07
Speaker 2: bought WebLock in 2025. an internal ICE legal analysis that
15:12
Speaker 2: officers could search the data without a warrant. So, Vanessa,
15:16
Speaker 2: this again highlights the Israeli connections. And if we're talking
15:21
Speaker 2: about hybrid warfare, and of course, we're all being told
15:24
Speaker 2: that Russia is running hybrid warfare actions on the West,
15:30
Speaker 2: but actually it's our own governments that are running hybrid
15:33
Speaker 2: warfare with Israeli technology, usually being at the center of it.
15:39
Speaker 5: Well, I would say it's actually, although I mean, I
15:42
Speaker 5: totally agree with you, I would say it's actually more
15:44
Speaker 5: sinister than that in the sense that the British regime,
15:46
Speaker 5: for example, is basically channeling Zionist Israeli spyware into the
15:54
Speaker 5: public arena in the UK. And as we've been saying
15:57
Speaker 5: for a very long time, the Gaza model or the
16:00
Speaker 5: Palestine model is coming our way. And it appears to
16:04
Speaker 5: be coming a lot faster than even we anticipated.
16:09
Speaker 2: Absolutely.
16:10
Speaker 3: I think this is a really good point that these
16:13
Speaker 3: systems are now being directly unleashed on the UK public
16:17
Speaker 3: or the American public without really identifying who has developed
16:24
Speaker 3: the operational use for them.
16:27
Speaker 2: And without admitting that it's going on, of course, that
16:30
Speaker 2: nobody has any clue of this. And it's never mainstream journalism. Well, OK,
16:35
Speaker 2: the Bureau of Investigative Journalists might be considered relatively mainstream,
16:41
Speaker 2: but where's the coverage, broad coverage in mainstream media? It's
16:46
Speaker 2: not there. But Vanessa, there's also a broader effort by
16:51
Speaker 2: Israel to worm its way in, particularly to the EU
16:55
Speaker 2: at the moment.
16:57
Speaker 4: Yes.
16:58
Speaker 5: I mean, we've been talking about Greece and Cyprus, the Balkans, Serbia, Slovenia, Hungary,
17:04
Speaker 5: et cetera, for some time. But actually, I found this
17:08
Speaker 5: quite interesting in its sheer hypocrisy. And I think it's
17:11
Speaker 5: a very good demonstration of how we shouldn't pay any
17:14
Speaker 5: attention to the virtue signaling made by many European and,
17:18
Speaker 5: of course, our own UK government over their alleged blockade
17:23
Speaker 5: or embargo or sanctions on Israel. So this was, for example,
17:28
Speaker 5: from the Netherlands. The Dutch Defense Expo bars Israeli firms.
17:34
Speaker 5: from a 2025 event. So this was in 2025. Then in,
17:41
Speaker 5: I think this was July 2026, they went on to
17:44
Speaker 5: say that in agreement with the UK, Netherlands to ban
17:49
Speaker 5: the import of goods from Israeli settlements in West Bank
17:52
Speaker 5: starting September. So starting the same month that basically Ed
17:56
Speaker 5: Miliband gave his moving in inverted commas speech in parliament.
18:02
Speaker 5: And then basically also in February 2026, they went on record,
18:07
Speaker 5: the Dutch parliament moves to reduce reliance on Israeli weapons
18:10
Speaker 5: over war crime concerns. So they will report to parliament
18:13
Speaker 5: on steps to limit Israeli arms imports, reflecting a push
18:17
Speaker 5: for greater European defence autonomy, which is kind of interesting
18:21
Speaker 5: because does that suggest that Israel was a primary supplier
18:25
Speaker 5: to Europe of weapons? And it says, basically, it's undesirable
18:30
Speaker 5: for the Netherlands to be dependent on military industries involved
18:35
Speaker 5: in war crimes. However, this all sounds very good, but
18:39
Speaker 5: let's have a look at what is actually happening. So
18:42
Speaker 5: this was in 2026. This is translated from Dutch media.
18:47
Speaker 5: The Netherlands bought 163 million euros worth of weaponry from
18:52
Speaker 5: Israel in the first half of 2026. And in the
18:56
Speaker 5: last two days, this announcement has been made. Basically, the
19:00
Speaker 5: total value of Dutch arms imports from Israel reached 2
19:03
Speaker 5: billion since 2020, with 1.13 billion spent in 2025 alone.
19:10
Speaker 5: But this is about an Israeli weapons firm to set
19:12
Speaker 5: up a plant in the Netherlands eyeing the European market.
19:19
Speaker 5: Israel Weapons Industries, IWI, will set up a factory in
19:23
Speaker 5: the Netherlands in the coming months with the Dutch company
19:26
Speaker 5: Artillery Armaments a year after Israeli firms were excluded from
19:33
Speaker 5: an arms exhibition in Rotterdam. The factory in Tilburg near
19:36
Speaker 5: the Belgian border will produce Negev machine guns, Arad-5 rifles
19:41
Speaker 5: and sights developed by the Israeli company. And then here
19:45
Speaker 5: is a quote from Ronan Hamadot, Israel Weapon Industries, Israel.
19:50
Speaker 5: of the SK group, which is controlled by Sami Katzav,
19:53
Speaker 5: an Israeli businessman active in the defense sector who was
19:57
Speaker 5: head up over bribery claims related to arms supply to Nigeria.
20:03
Speaker 5: He got off. But basically, Hamadot says the plant is
20:08
Speaker 5: being established out of an understanding that to sell to
20:11
Speaker 5: leading EU countries in large quantities, we need to manufacture
20:16
Speaker 5: in Western Europe. So, I mean, this basically blows out
20:19
Speaker 5: of the water all of the prior virtue signaling from
20:22
Speaker 5: the Netherlands. And I found this quite interesting. This is
20:26
Speaker 5: Dutch Prime Minister Rob Jetton. Here he is basically buying
20:29
Speaker 5: into the anti-Semitism claims In the Netherlands, he's saying basically
20:34
Speaker 5: Jews should not leave the Netherlands. He will counter anti-Semitism. However,
20:39
Speaker 5: Jatin is an interesting character. He formally marched in the
20:42
Speaker 5: pro-Palestine red line protests. He was vehemently anti-Israel. But recently
20:50
Speaker 5: his government has banned Israeli settlement goods and pressures Israel diplomatically.
20:55
Speaker 5: But he has actually ruled out an arms embargo or
20:58
Speaker 5: severing military ties. And he refuses now to use the
21:04
Speaker 5: term genocide. His coalition includes the pro-Israel People's Party for
21:08
Speaker 5: Freedom and Democracy. So whether he is compromised because of
21:12
Speaker 5: that or whether simply being in power, he now has
21:15
Speaker 5: to accept the Zionist movement pressure remains to be seen.
21:20
Speaker 5: But I also just want to remind people, and I
21:22
Speaker 5: apologize to be bringing Ed Miliband back on screen, Ed
21:27
Speaker 5: Miliband's virtue signalling speech in Parliament where he talks about
21:31
Speaker 5: the settlements.
21:34
Speaker 6: Truth is, the least the people who face such suffering deserve,
21:42
Speaker 6: and it should be the prelude to justice. Now, for
21:45
Speaker 6: a long time, the British government has rightly said settlements
21:48
Speaker 6: are illegal, but we have remained silent on the question
21:51
Speaker 6: of the legality of the occupation as a whole. which
21:55
Speaker 6: in 2024 the International Court of Justice concluded was unlawful.
21:59
Speaker 6: Today I announce that the official view of the British
22:01
Speaker 6: government is that the occupation is unlawful. Because of Israel's
22:08
Speaker 6: entrenchment of its control, its intention to extend permanent sovereignty,
22:12
Speaker 6: and its expansionist agenda via illegal settlements.
22:19
Speaker 5: And I'm sure people noticed Andy Burnham's blank expression behind
22:23
Speaker 5: Miliband there, but let's bring him back on screen. What
22:28
Speaker 5: are they actually talking about? Now, interesting, in the last
22:31
Speaker 5: two days, this report has been published in multiple media outlets.
22:35
Speaker 5: UK awards deals worth millions to firms linked to illegal
22:40
Speaker 5: Israeli settlements. What does this actually mean? There is effectively
22:44
Speaker 5: a running UN OCHCR report list which names all of
22:50
Speaker 5: the more than 400 international organizations that are involved in
22:55
Speaker 5: supporting the Zionist settlement programs particularly of course in the
23:02
Speaker 5: West Bank. So let's have a look at where the
23:06
Speaker 5: British regime is putting 10.7 million pounds in public contracts
23:11
Speaker 5: contracts sorry First of all, Motorola solutions, 87,900 to be
23:18
Speaker 5: put into so-called police communications, which of course means the
23:24
Speaker 5: security forces that are used against Palestinians. Motorola is listed
23:29
Speaker 5: by the UN as engaging in settlement-related activities, and Israel
23:33
Speaker 5: has reportedly used Motorola technology in security and surveillance infrastructure
23:39
Speaker 5: in the occupied West Bank. Then three Heidelberg materials subsidiaries,
23:45
Speaker 5: 14 contracts worth 10.4 million to carry out roadworks and resurfacing.
23:50
Speaker 5: I'm sure people can imagine what that is going to
23:52
Speaker 5: be used for. Heidelberg's Israeli subsidiary, Hanson Israel, owns the
23:58
Speaker 5: Nahal Raba quarry in the West Bank, which sits on
24:01
Speaker 5: land belonging to Palestinian villages. And then Thomas Adamson International Limited,
24:09
Speaker 5: which is a subsidiary of French group Aegis, £ 84, 000 contract.
24:15
Speaker 5: Aegis is listed in connection with the provision of services
24:19
Speaker 5: and utilities supporting the maintenance and existence of settlements. Aegis
24:23
Speaker 5: itself has formally expressed its disagreement with this inclusion in
24:28
Speaker 5: the UN database. And then finally, Breeze Medical, which is
24:32
Speaker 5: actually owned by Chinese Fosun International. And of course, China
24:36
Speaker 5: does play a very important role in the sustaining of
24:40
Speaker 5: the settlement programmes in the West Bank. And that is
24:44
Speaker 5: another £ 98, 000 contract. So I think what I find very interesting,
24:51
Speaker 5: we saw Ed Miliband virtue signalling in Parliament about putting
24:56
Speaker 5: sanctions on products coming from the illegal occupation settlements in
25:02
Speaker 5: the West Bank. Of course, that is relatively meaningless because
25:07
Speaker 5: While you're doing that and you're not actually preventing the
25:11
Speaker 5: expansion of Zionist settlement and occupation of the West Bank,
25:14
Speaker 5: which is ongoing on an almost daily basis, the takeover
25:18
Speaker 5: of agricultural lands, the demolishing of homes, like, for example,
25:23
Speaker 5: now in Hebron, the displacement of tens of thousands of Palestinians.
25:29
Speaker 5: While you're not addressing that, then anything else, anything else
25:33
Speaker 5: is just an empty statement which goes nowhere to actually
25:36
Speaker 5: prevent the Zionist crimes against the Palestinians in the West
25:40
Speaker 5: Bank and their ongoing expansion.
25:44
Speaker 3: So what we've got is pure propaganda, isn't it, coming
25:48
Speaker 3: out of Ed Miliband in Parliament there. This is talking
25:52
Speaker 3: about a relatively tragic, but relatively minor issue to keep
25:57
Speaker 3: public attention off the real elephant in the room. That's
26:01
Speaker 3: how I see it. And also when he's talking about
26:05
Speaker 3: effectively the crimes on the West Bank, you could apply
26:09
Speaker 3: the same descriptors that he used to what took place
26:13
Speaker 3: in Gaza. But of course, they don't do that. So
26:16
Speaker 3: there's another deflection here. And meanwhile, you're quite right that
26:21
Speaker 3: under the surface, we're still in the memorandum of understanding
26:25
Speaker 3: between the UK and Israel. And that's just forgotten. But
26:30
Speaker 3: of course, that was a very powerful agreement, which said
26:33
Speaker 3: that there was going to be massive integrations between UK
26:38
Speaker 3: and Israel in matters to do with science and defence
26:42
Speaker 3: in particular. Vanessa, will the link to the UN database
26:47
Speaker 3: be in the show notes?
26:50
Speaker 5: It is, yes.
26:51
Speaker 2: Excellent, because, you know, Motorola is named there and I
26:55
Speaker 2: think people then should be asking questions if they are,
26:58
Speaker 2: you know, if they own a Motorola phone or they
27:01
Speaker 2: have any Motorola equipment in the house. Maybe we should
27:03
Speaker 2: be asking ourselves questions about whether we should be giving
27:06
Speaker 2: money to companies like that.
27:09
Speaker 5: Absolutely.
27:10
Speaker 4: Yeah.
27:11
Speaker 1: Okay.
27:11
Speaker 2: Thank you. Well, let's move on. If you like what
27:14
Speaker 2: we do here at the UK Column, we do need
27:16
Speaker 2: your ongoing support. Have a look at the website and
27:20
Speaker 2: details are there. You can make a donation, which is
27:23
Speaker 2: VAT free for us, which is fantastic. But if you
27:25
Speaker 2: join as a member, you can get access to members
27:28
Speaker 2: only content such as UK Column News Extra. But of course,
27:32
Speaker 2: we can only do this with that support. So please,
27:36
Speaker 2: if you can consider doing that, that would be massively appreciated.
27:40
Speaker 2: You can pick up a copy of issue three of
27:42
Speaker 2: the column that is available in the UK column shop,
27:45
Speaker 2: along with annual subscriptions. So please do that if you
27:48
Speaker 2: can as well. If you can't support us financially, share
27:52
Speaker 2: this program, share anything else that you like that we do. That,
27:56
Speaker 2: of course, helps immensely as well. Yes. Now, tonight at seven,
28:01
Speaker 2: Jerm is discussing Rothschild's and the Third Temple myth. That's
28:04
Speaker 2: 7 p.m. Carl is asking whether America is losing Asia.
28:09
Speaker 2: I think that's probably fair enough. But tomorrow, Brian, you
28:15
Speaker 2: and Charles, Military Matters, episode 12.
28:19
Speaker 3: Absolute 12. I'm not going to say a lot about it.
28:22
Speaker 3: Could that be because you don't remember? Time is moving
28:26
Speaker 3: very fast at the moment. But one of the things
28:29
Speaker 3: that Charles and I have found is that there is
28:31
Speaker 3: so much to talk about. And I just encourage people
28:35
Speaker 3: to step into that and hear us discussing a variety
28:39
Speaker 3: of different subjects to do with military matters.
28:43
Speaker 2: Okay, thank you for that. Now, let's move on then
28:46
Speaker 2: to the issue of RAF Mildenhall, because the mainstream press
28:50
Speaker 2: has been heavily covering the fact that the US has
28:55
Speaker 2: moved aircraft from RAF Mildenhall in Suffolk on Monday. And
28:59
Speaker 2: the reason, well, apparently the UK is unable to protect
29:03
Speaker 2: them from Iranian attack. We'll come back to that in
29:06
Speaker 2: a moment. But this news came at the same time
29:09
Speaker 2: that the U.S. Department of Justice announced charges against three
29:13
Speaker 2: Iranian-backed operatives, as they described them, that it alleges were
29:18
Speaker 2: involved in a string of plots in the United States
29:20
Speaker 2: and Europe. One of them was directly involved, allegedly, in
29:24
Speaker 2: the RAF Fairford fake incident, according to the DOJ. It's
29:28
Speaker 2: quite a staggering story because apparently Iranian-backed Iraqi national Mohammed
29:32
Speaker 2: Bakr Saad Dawood Al Saadi managed to run the Fairford
29:37
Speaker 2: incident from his prison cell in New York by sending
29:40
Speaker 2: messages via family members to two other Iranian-backed operatives. It
29:44
Speaker 2: all sounds, Fidesa, it sounds a bit too much like
29:48
Speaker 2: hijacking aircraft from a cave in Afghanistan.
29:51
Speaker 3: Yes, precisely.
29:52
Speaker 2: LAUGHTER I mean, yeah, it's just a mockery.
29:57
Speaker 5: I mean, it really is.
29:59
Speaker 2: Anyway, it's a good plot.
30:01
Speaker 5: Yes.
30:03
Speaker 4: Yes.
30:03
Speaker 2: But anyway, back to Mildenhall then, because the claim is
30:07
Speaker 2: that the aircraft were moved because the UK can't protect
30:11
Speaker 2: them from an Iranian attack. And in order to reinforce
30:15
Speaker 2: this nonsense, three emergency airspace orders covering RAF Mildenhall, RAF
30:19
Speaker 2: Lake and Heath and RAF Feltwell were were all made
30:23
Speaker 2: by the Secretary of State for Transport at 5.40 p.m.
30:25
Speaker 2: on Monday. Each statutory instrument bans unmanned aircraft within five
30:31
Speaker 2: nautical miles from the base named below 1,200 feet above
30:35
Speaker 2: mean sea level, and each took effect immediately under Article
30:40
Speaker 2: 239 of the Air Navigation Order 2016, and each cites
30:45
Speaker 2: an emergency having arisen in the area without saying what
30:48
Speaker 2: that emergency was. No expiry dates on the instruments. The
30:53
Speaker 2: explanatory notes say that only that the restrictions will be
30:56
Speaker 2: revoked once the emergency has passed. The only exemption is
31:00
Speaker 2: for drones flying under the direction of RAF Lake and
31:02
Speaker 2: Heath's air traffic control unit. But if we just put
31:05
Speaker 2: that back on screen for a second, the question is,
31:08
Speaker 2: are the instruments worth the paper they're written on? Both
31:10
Speaker 2: Mildenhall and Lake and Heath are described in their titles
31:13
Speaker 2: as being in Norfolk, even though they're both in Suffolk. So,
31:17
Speaker 2: I mean, clearly, Brian, these were created in a hurry.
31:21
Speaker 3: That's what I think, yeah. These were rushed through with
31:25
Speaker 3: this dreadful mistake. But then you say, what other mistakes
31:28
Speaker 3: are in it? And therefore, can you trust these things
31:31
Speaker 3: in the first place? Well, I mean, indeed, these are
31:34
Speaker 3: all good questions. But the thing is that since the
31:37
Speaker 3: 19th of February, the Ministry of Defence prohibited places regulations
31:40
Speaker 3: of restricted drones over all three sites already.
31:43
Speaker 2: So what was this about? So then if we look
31:46
Speaker 2: at the map here, and flight tracking analysis shows at
31:50
Speaker 2: least 10 Stratotankers of the 100th Air Refueling Wing leaving
31:54
Speaker 2: Mildenhall on Monday, with more following on Tuesday. Some went
31:58
Speaker 2: to Germany. At least four tankers went to Spangdalen Air Base,
32:04
Speaker 2: one to Ramstein Air Base. Four went to Spain to
32:08
Speaker 2: Moran Air Base there, southeast of Seville. Italy, one flew
32:14
Speaker 2: to an airbase in Italy, flew around a little bit
32:17
Speaker 2: and then went back to land at Spangdellum and one
32:21
Speaker 2: flew to Glasgow Prestwick airport. And then three Ospreys, these
32:26
Speaker 2: are the aircraft that have the tiltable wing with the
32:30
Speaker 2: sort of look almost like helicopters. They moved four miles
32:35
Speaker 2: from Mildenhall to Lake and Heath. So clearly the emergency situation.
32:38
Speaker 2: was for Milton Hall, but apparently there was no emergency
32:41
Speaker 2: at Lake and Heath because none of the F-35s left
32:44
Speaker 2: Lake and Heath, just the extra four aircraft going to
32:48
Speaker 2: Lake and Heath. So the question is, what was this emergency?
32:51
Speaker 2: It all just seems completely ridiculous. Then here we have
32:55
Speaker 2: the aviationist citing local reports that, sorry, citing reports that
33:03
Speaker 2: the security department Rating at the site was raised to
33:08
Speaker 2: FP Con Charlie. This is the Pentagon's second highest force
33:12
Speaker 2: protection level, apparently. And that was early in Monday afternoon.
33:15
Speaker 2: And then the flights took place after that. And the
33:19
Speaker 2: Ministry of Defense says it does not routinely comment on
33:22
Speaker 2: the activities of other nations.
33:24
Speaker 1: U.S.
33:24
Speaker 2: European Command said only that aircraft rotate between locations for
33:30
Speaker 2: various reasons. And so what was the specific threat identified
33:34
Speaker 2: on Monday afternoon that suddenly required these statutory instruments to
33:38
Speaker 2: be created? I'm going to suggest that there was no threat, Brian.
33:42
Speaker 2: This is a repositioning of aircraft by the United States,
33:46
Speaker 2: for which they needed a cover story. And they get to,
33:50
Speaker 2: at the same time, ramp up the Iran propaganda, and
33:53
Speaker 2: they're able to justify the moves. That's how it looks
33:56
Speaker 2: to me.
33:58
Speaker 3: It is very opaque, Mike, but I think you could
34:00
Speaker 3: be right on that. But are we really saying that
34:04
Speaker 3: American military aircraft are safer in other European countries than
34:10
Speaker 3: in UK? I very much doubt that, even having been
34:13
Speaker 3: highly critical of the military's capability in this country. But
34:19
Speaker 3: they are closer to Iran and to Russia. But they
34:21
Speaker 3: are closer. So you could save a little bit of
34:23
Speaker 3: fuel and replace it with weapons payload. That's a possibility.
34:28
Speaker 3: And then you've got a smokescreen of confusing the public
34:32
Speaker 3: as to what's going on. But we can't trust the
34:37
Speaker 3: Americans to tell the truth about their operations. We can't
34:39
Speaker 3: trust the British government to tell the truth. So we're
34:42
Speaker 3: now living in this very swampy pond.
34:45
Speaker 2: Have you any thoughts on that, Vanessa? Smiling.
34:49
Speaker 5: Well, maybe they're giving the Americans a geography lesson.
34:55
Speaker 2: It's always possible.
34:56
Speaker 3: It's a bit sad that one of those planes circling
35:01
Speaker 3: around in Norfolk trying to find out where to land.
35:05
Speaker 2: Well, one clearly didn't know how to get to Germany,
35:08
Speaker 2: flew to Italy instead and had to go back. But anyway, yes,
35:11
Speaker 2: that's the way it is. Okay, Vanessa, let's move on
35:14
Speaker 2: then to give us an update on Gaza.
35:19
Speaker 5: Well, yeah, I apologise in advance that I'm including Ed
35:22
Speaker 5: Miliband yet again. And Brian, you mentioned that he hasn't
35:26
Speaker 5: spoken about Gaza. Well, I'm going to prove to you
35:30
Speaker 5: that he can also virtue signal over Gaza. So let's
35:34
Speaker 5: just run this video that was published on his ex-account.
35:40
Speaker 1: The intolerable humanitarian situation in Gaza is getting worse. Heavy
35:45
Speaker 1: rain and strong winds have resulted in 70,000 tents being
35:50
Speaker 1: affected by flooding, damaged buildings collapsing and more people losing
35:54
Speaker 1: their lives. One year on from the so-called ceasefire, the
35:58
Speaker 1: humanitarian situation in Gaza remains bleak and the reality on
36:03
Speaker 1: the ground is heartbreaking. My message is that the UK
36:07
Speaker 1: government will not stand by. We are demanding the government
36:12
Speaker 1: of Israel ends arbitrary restrictions on humanitarian access, protects humanitarian workers,
36:19
Speaker 1: and provides humane treatment and basic welfare for the civilian
36:22
Speaker 1: population of Gaza. There are strict legal obligations that the
36:28
Speaker 1: occupying power, Israel, must obey. And here at the G7,
36:34
Speaker 1: I'm pressing our partners to get more humanitarian aid in,
36:38
Speaker 1: re-inject momentum into the peace process and send a clear
36:42
Speaker 1: message to the government of Israel that their behaviour and
36:46
Speaker 1: actions in Gaza is totally unacceptable.
36:53
Speaker 3: Vanessa, you're absolutely right. What a masterpiece. You don't talk
36:57
Speaker 3: about why the Gaza population is such a state because
37:01
Speaker 3: of the genocide and the sheer brutality. You just say, well,
37:06
Speaker 3: it's down to the flood. A bit of global warming
37:08
Speaker 3: has caused some flooding there. And the Israeli government's been
37:11
Speaker 3: very slow at getting the food and aid in. It's
37:14
Speaker 3: really disgusting listening to these people deflect from what the
37:18
Speaker 3: key issue is.
37:19
Speaker 2: So, yeah, I agree.
37:22
Speaker 5: Yeah, I mean, it is. It is utterly obscene. And
37:26
Speaker 5: the fact that Britain is so clearly complicit in the
37:29
Speaker 5: genocide that's been ongoing for 100 years, but of course
37:33
Speaker 5: escalated since October the 7th. And there is absolutely no
37:37
Speaker 5: accountability for that in anything that any of these sock
37:42
Speaker 5: puppets are actually saying. But anyway, let's have a look
37:45
Speaker 5: at the actual.
37:47
Speaker 5: Horrible ground situation in Gaza so this was yesterday a
37:53
Speaker 5: landslide from the bad weather and also it's not as
37:56
Speaker 5: if they didn't know that the bad weather was coming
37:58
Speaker 5: it comes every year and the conditions for Gazans now
38:01
Speaker 5: are the worst that they ever have been in the
38:03
Speaker 5: history of the Gaza Strip but a landslide basically killed
38:07
Speaker 5: five Palestinian sheltering in tents in central Gaza And the
38:11
Speaker 5: flooding left 350,000 displaced people sleeping in the open. Gaza's
38:17
Speaker 5: civil defense said a woman and four children were killed
38:21
Speaker 5: when a landslide buried tents in Deir el-Bala. So that
38:25
Speaker 5: is just one aspect of the ongoing flooding in Gaza
38:30
Speaker 5: right now. But also on top of that, of course,
38:33
Speaker 5: what are we seeing? We're seeing the ongoing bombing of
38:36
Speaker 5: the tent cities. Reuters claiming that the Israeli airstrike hits
38:41
Speaker 5: Gaza foundry igniting nearby tent camp, but of course gives
38:46
Speaker 5: no responsibility or condemnation to Israel for striking a foundry,
38:50
Speaker 5: which apparently appears to be in the middle. of the
38:54
Speaker 5: refugee tents. And then on top of that, UNICEF says
38:58
Speaker 5: that Israel is blocking Gaza basin repairs, warns rather late
39:04
Speaker 5: of flood risk. But of course, the worst part of
39:06
Speaker 5: this is that without the repair to the sewage systems
39:10
Speaker 5: and the desalination, et cetera, then these people are walking
39:16
Speaker 5: around in raw sewage, which is being pushed up by
39:19
Speaker 5: the floodwaters. And they have absolutely no equipment. The civil
39:24
Speaker 5: defense is saying that they are literally digging with their
39:27
Speaker 5: hands to try and clear the water from. around the tents.
39:32
Speaker 5: And basically, of course, Israel is not allowing prefabricated homes
39:36
Speaker 5: to shelter the displaced. And many so-called dual-use items remain restricted,
39:43
Speaker 5: such as metal tent poles. Humanitarian workers said they instead
39:46
Speaker 5: had to use wooden poles made or fashioned from broken pallets. Now,
39:53
Speaker 5: we come back again to the sheer hypocrisy of, for example,
39:57
Speaker 5: Ed Miliband's plea there on his social media post. Because
40:02
Speaker 5: if we look at Burnham's plan to end neoliberalism, which
40:06
Speaker 5: we can talk about in extra, it includes the involvement
40:10
Speaker 5: of US firm linked to effectively continuing the genocide in Gaza,
40:15
Speaker 5: the Gaza aid site massacres. So he's basically turned to
40:21
Speaker 5: American consulting group that worked with the U.S. and Israeli-backed
40:25
Speaker 5: Gaza Humanitarian Foundation to help draft a plan that was
40:29
Speaker 5: supposed to end neoliberalism in the U.K. Now, the Gaza
40:34
Speaker 5: Health Foundation, people will remember, formed the food distribution centers
40:40
Speaker 5: in Gaza. And when hundreds, if not thousands, of young
40:43
Speaker 5: men gathered to try and gather food for their family,
40:46
Speaker 5: they were being fired upon. by the Zionist soldiers, tanks, helicopters, drones,
40:52
Speaker 5: et cetera, and massacred, I think, more than an estimated 2,500
40:57
Speaker 5: were killed through this method. And that's whom Burnham is
41:02
Speaker 5: turning to, to end neoliberalism. There is a large degree
41:07
Speaker 5: of irony in that in itself. However, some glimmers of hope.
41:12
Speaker 5: This was a recent survey, and I'll tell you who
41:17
Speaker 5: it was, done by the National Centre for Social Research.
41:21
Speaker 5: Nearly 80% of Britons see Israel as a threat to
41:26
Speaker 5: world peace. Nearly four in five Britons see Israel as
41:29
Speaker 5: a serious threat to world peace. The figure rose from
41:31
Speaker 5: 48% in 2005 to 78% this spring. two and a
41:36
Speaker 5: half years into the genocide and just after Israel and
41:40
Speaker 5: the US had attacked Iran. Now, we can talk about
41:43
Speaker 5: this a bit more in extra, but in the article,
41:46
Speaker 5: they're saying the war on Iran has hit the UK economy.
41:49
Speaker 5: And so therefore, potentially, the austerity measures are pushing people
41:53
Speaker 5: to come to this conclusion. But also interesting and positive,
42:00
Speaker 5: I think, for petitions. In October, the government basically refused
42:04
Speaker 5: to launch an inquiry into the UK being complicit in genocide.
42:10
Speaker 5: And so, therefore, the petition was raised, Time to Face
42:12
Speaker 5: the Music petition, seeking probe into the UK's role in Gaza.
42:18
Speaker 5: reaches 100,000 signatures. So I want to kind of, I
42:24
Speaker 5: do try to find positive in what is going on.
42:28
Speaker 5: And I do find it positive that people in Britain
42:30
Speaker 5: do seem to be really understanding that perhaps Israel is
42:34
Speaker 5: not the kind of benevolent partner or collaborator with the
42:38
Speaker 5: UK that it is being described as by successive British
42:43
Speaker 5: regimes and in the UK. 2030 roadmap for the UK
42:49
Speaker 5: and Israel, and the fact that I think a petition
42:52
Speaker 5: has reached a point where it is pushing for an inquiry.
42:56
Speaker 5: Whether that inquiry is going to achieve very much, we
42:59
Speaker 5: don't know, but I think it's positive that people are
43:02
Speaker 5: actually taking these steps to hold the government to account.
43:07
Speaker 2: Yes, thank you for that, Vanessa. Absolutely agree with that. Now,
43:13
Speaker 2: An old friend. An old friend, yes, of a sense.
43:16
Speaker 2: So this is Common Purpose advocate Dame Cressida Dick, the
43:21
Speaker 2: former commissioner of the Metropolitan Police. And the Bureau of
43:25
Speaker 2: Investigative Journalism here has been calling this an exclusive, describes
43:31
Speaker 2: her as working as a paid advisor to U.S. data
43:33
Speaker 2: analytics firm Palantir for more than a year. Now, as
43:37
Speaker 2: a reminder, Cressida Dick led the Metropolitan Police from 2017
43:40
Speaker 2: to 2022. She was the force's first female commissioner and
43:45
Speaker 2: before that headed UK counterterrorism policing, including being in charge
43:49
Speaker 2: of the assassination of Jean-Charles de Menezes. I do apologize
43:53
Speaker 2: for messing up his name. And then after the Met,
43:58
Speaker 2: she served as director general at the Foreign Office. The
44:02
Speaker 2: Bureau of Investigative Journalism in this report published yesterday said
44:07
Speaker 2: that she took the role in September 2025, just in
44:08
Speaker 2: time for Palantir's continuing to expand its work with British
44:14
Speaker 2: police forces. Just a coincidence, I'm sure. Palantir said Christina
44:19
Speaker 2: Dick advises it on how its software could improve the
44:22
Speaker 2: delivery of public sector services, drawing on her four decades
44:28
Speaker 2: of public service. She said her role was confined to
44:31
Speaker 2: giving advice, and she absolutely denied either ever lobbying for
44:35
Speaker 2: or advocating for the company. And she said she had, quote,
44:39
Speaker 2: never introduced Palantir to any contact of mine.
44:43
Speaker 3: That's probably true. It doesn't deflect the criticism.
44:46
Speaker 2: No, indeed. Now, this news is coming then as the
44:51
Speaker 2: Citizens' Substack broke the story that Palantir has won a
44:54
Speaker 2: £ 10 million contract with a group of police forces in
44:57
Speaker 2: the east of England. And that contract follows a pilot
45:00
Speaker 2: project called Nectar, in which Palantir built a real-time data-sharing
45:04
Speaker 2: network to support crime investigations and decision-making in the region.
45:09
Speaker 2: And so I'm just going to ask, is this AI
45:11
Speaker 2: targeting in the same kind of way that we see
45:14
Speaker 2: in other countries with a more lethal effect in other countries?
45:17
Speaker 2: I'm talking about Gaza here, of course, but the same
45:20
Speaker 2: type of targeting of people perhaps in the UK here.
45:24
Speaker 2: And earlier reported by the Eye and Liberty Investigates found
45:28
Speaker 2: that Nectar handled sensitive personal information on victims, witnesses, and suspects,
45:33
Speaker 2: including children, It processed data for more than a dozen
45:36
Speaker 2: forces and was described as a possible model for national rollout.
45:41
Speaker 2: And then the Bureau of Investigative Journalism suggested that Cressida
45:44
Speaker 2: Dick's appointment had probably helped Palantir's efforts in policing, but
45:49
Speaker 2: its report does not present evidence that she was personally
45:52
Speaker 2: involved in any specific contract. Now, we have to say
45:57
Speaker 2: that Cressida Dick is the second prominent British public figure
46:01
Speaker 2: linked to the company in recent weeks. Former Labour deputy
46:05
Speaker 2: leader Tom Watson recently joined Palantir as a senior vice
46:08
Speaker 2: president covering its UK defence, policing and NHS work. The
46:13
Speaker 2: current Labour MP Clive Lewis said that Christina Dick's appointment
46:17
Speaker 2: raised the same concerns that he had raised about Watson.
46:20
Speaker 2: And then during a recent health and social care committee
46:24
Speaker 2: meeting earlier in the week, Labour MP Ben Coleman said
46:27
Speaker 2: that NHS England had cautioned against attributing improvements to to
46:31
Speaker 2: the NHS directly to Palantir's federated data platform. But he
46:36
Speaker 2: said that the newly appointed Palantir UK senior vice president,
46:40
Speaker 2: Tom Watson, that we saw on screen there a second ago,
46:43
Speaker 2: is making claims that the platform is making a difference.
46:47
Speaker 2: So apparently the NHS is going to require that Palantir
46:50
Speaker 2: stops doing that, but we'll see. But it is just
46:55
Speaker 2: incredible that they hire these people and then the contracts
47:00
Speaker 2: come Just a question, I'm sure, Brian.
47:03
Speaker 3: Yeah, and we've got the blurring between state public posts
47:08
Speaker 3: and very powerful commercial organisations. Where are the boundaries between these?
47:13
Speaker 3: I know she's out of the job at the moment,
47:15
Speaker 3: but we're constantly seeing that it's getting more and more
47:19
Speaker 3: difficult to tell what is actually sort of government. the
47:23
Speaker 3: constitutional side and what is the military industrial complex or
47:27
Speaker 3: you know these sorts of companies the fusion doctor at
47:30
Speaker 3: work absolutely and of course we should remember that chrysida
47:34
Speaker 3: date was in post uh when uh former met policeman
47:37
Speaker 3: john wedger was trying to uh bring out to this
47:41
Speaker 3: or bring to the surface the cover-up of the abuse
47:43
Speaker 3: of children including by cover-ups and uh lies uh by
47:49
Speaker 3: the metropolitan police themselves but he didn't get very far
47:53
Speaker 3: through chrysida dick's office no she kicked him out didn't
47:56
Speaker 3: she absolutely yes uh let's uh move on then brian
48:00
Speaker 3: to devolution and and a little bit about plymouth in
48:03
Speaker 3: fact well we're back on the subject of plymouth and
48:05
Speaker 3: this is um well this report we think is very
48:08
Speaker 3: significant but uh also this is the uk column um
48:12
Speaker 3: bringing home the importance of watching what's going on locally
48:15
Speaker 3: now back on the third of August in UK column news.
48:20
Speaker 3: I was together with Ben Rubin. We were talking amongst
48:24
Speaker 3: other things about Burnham's devolution plans, but we also got
48:29
Speaker 3: onto the subject of what was happening in Plymouth. I
48:31
Speaker 3: just want to strap a label across that one before
48:34
Speaker 3: it goes. What we were actually looking at was the
48:37
Speaker 3: rise of the city state, which is being fermented under
48:41
Speaker 3: Burnham's devolution plans. program, but also under his local government reforms. Now,
48:48
Speaker 3: at the time, our local newspaper, the Plymouth Herald, had
48:51
Speaker 3: come out with this headline, Tudor fights back. And this
48:55
Speaker 3: is because he was allowed part of a double page spread,
48:59
Speaker 3: supposedly fighting back about criticisms around Plymouth's involvement in local
49:05
Speaker 3: government reforms. Uh, We reported on this, and we'll show
49:11
Speaker 3: you a bit more about what we actually said at
49:13
Speaker 3: this time, but essentially this was a clear grab for
49:16
Speaker 3: both land and power, and ultimately extra money from the government.
49:21
Speaker 3: This was the drive to make Plymouth bigger and take
49:25
Speaker 3: control of local parish councils around it. Now, I was
49:30
Speaker 3: very interested to actually see this recent headline from the
49:34
Speaker 3: Herald Council, Plymouth City Council, must slash services or face
49:40
Speaker 3: threat of bankruptcy. So here in November 2026, the same
49:45
Speaker 3: Plymouth City Council that said it was going to take
49:48
Speaker 3: over some 13 parish councils, expand its power, deliver better services,
49:54
Speaker 3: more for less, is suddenly teetering on the brink of
49:58
Speaker 3: bankruptcy with a mere £ 700 million in debt. So I'd
50:04
Speaker 3: just like to ask the question, what is this? Is
50:06
Speaker 3: this incompetence? Is it maladministration or is it deceit?
50:11
Speaker 2: Can I just say that the documentation that I've seen
50:14
Speaker 2: suggests it's closer to a billion pounds in debt, not
50:18
Speaker 2: 700 million. Seems a little light to me.
50:20
Speaker 3: I could agree with that, but that was the figure
50:22
Speaker 3: printed in the article. So we're accurate reporting on that.
50:26
Speaker 3: But yeah, the situation is probably worse. But before we
50:30
Speaker 3: go further into what this really represents, let's jump back
50:35
Speaker 3: and hear what I was discussing on that 3rd of
50:39
Speaker 3: August UK column news. I just wanted to focus on
50:44
Speaker 3: this local Plymouth article for a couple of days ago.
50:47
Speaker 3: If you can make out the headline amongst the adverts
50:50
Speaker 3: on the front page of the Plymouth Herald, it says
50:54
Speaker 3: that Tudor is fighting back. and that the council leader
50:59
Speaker 3: defends the local government shake-up, that's the local government reorganisation,
51:05
Speaker 3: and says nobody's land is being seized. Well, there was
51:08
Speaker 3: a double page spread inside the paper. Nobody wanted to
51:13
Speaker 3: put their name to the article, so I don't know
51:15
Speaker 3: who actually wrote it. But essentially, this is just a
51:19
Speaker 3: propaganda piece for Tudor Evans. And, um, The sub-headline here
51:26
Speaker 3: said that the planned reorganisation of local governments provoked huge controversy. Here,
51:32
Speaker 3: Plymouth City Council leader Tudor Evans responds to critics of
51:37
Speaker 3: the imminent restructure. So if we try and put a
51:40
Speaker 3: bit of meat on the bones here so that people
51:42
Speaker 3: can understand, here's Plymouth ringed. And then what has happened
51:47
Speaker 3: is that with a very carefully planned operation by Plymouth
51:51
Speaker 3: City Council, They've got a whole load of local parish
51:56
Speaker 3: councils to agree that they need to be managed and
52:00
Speaker 3: controlled by Plymouth City Council. And what we've got here
52:05
Speaker 3: and in front of our eyes is the creation of
52:07
Speaker 3: the Plymouth Super City State.
52:10
Speaker 2: Greater Plymouth.
52:11
Speaker 3: Greater Plymouth. And this is going to happen across UK.
52:15
Speaker 3: And this is what Burnham wants, more power to mayors
52:19
Speaker 3: who are going to take control, not just of cities,
52:22
Speaker 3: but whole economic regions around. So this is major and
52:25
Speaker 3: very dangerous constitutional change, and we can see it unfolding
52:30
Speaker 3: on our doorstep. Plymouth has just subsumed local councils in
52:34
Speaker 3: accordance with a desired government plan, and it did this
52:38
Speaker 3: by heavily manipulated meetings within the local parishes, where when
52:45
Speaker 3: maybe a couple of hundred people from the parish met
52:48
Speaker 3: in a church hall or whatever the location was, Plymouth
52:51
Speaker 3: City Council had a facilitator on each table in order
52:56
Speaker 3: to ease people into the right decision, the decision that
53:00
Speaker 3: they wanted.
53:00
Speaker 2: Which you know, because you were there.
53:03
Speaker 3: I know.
53:03
Speaker 2: You attended.
53:04
Speaker 3: I attended. And when I challenged the city council representatives
53:09
Speaker 3: about what was really going on, I became very unpopular
53:13
Speaker 3: very quickly. So just think about that. Plymouth City Council
53:19
Speaker 3: with its agents into parish councils with a facilitator on
53:23
Speaker 3: each table to convince those parish councils that Plymouth should
53:28
Speaker 3: take over their responsibilities because Plymouth City Council was in
53:32
Speaker 3: a better position to deliver better services more cheaply. But
53:36
Speaker 3: those very Plymouth City Council officers that undertook those meetings
53:42
Speaker 3: with local councils said, knew presumably that their own council
53:48
Speaker 3: was teetering on the point of bankruptcy. It is an
53:53
Speaker 3: utter disgrace. Let's come back to the article. So this
53:57
Speaker 3: was another big section of it talking about what was happening.
54:02
Speaker 3: But if we just get into the important stuff, it
54:05
Speaker 3: was reform councillor Paul Kelly from Devonport who asked about
54:09
Speaker 3: contingency plans if transformation, that's really council savings, were not effective.
54:16
Speaker 3: And Kate Taylor, Labour for the Ham district, referred to
54:20
Speaker 3: other councils' tax rises and troublesome warnings around the 114
54:26
Speaker 3: bankruptcy notice. So this was a pretty serious discussion. How's
54:30
Speaker 3: Plymouth going to get out of this mess? Well, it's
54:32
Speaker 3: going to spend money. It's giving 2.1 million to consultants
54:37
Speaker 3: in power to deliver changes and savings. Good consultancy work there, Mike.
54:43
Speaker 3: And this is significant for me. Social care accounts for
54:48
Speaker 3: 80% of the council's budget every year. So you think
54:52
Speaker 3: of the criticism about around the protection of children in particular,
54:56
Speaker 3: and where is this money going? It's going into an
54:59
Speaker 3: area which is opaque to even city councillors themselves. A
55:05
Speaker 3: lot more we could say on that, but we'll save
55:07
Speaker 3: it for extra. Now, if we get into the paper,
55:11
Speaker 3: there's another headline here, which is worth looking at. Now,
55:15
Speaker 3: this isn't Plymouth City Council. This is actually about Teenbridge Council,
55:20
Speaker 3: which has moved to hand over a number of parks
55:22
Speaker 3: and public toilets to local community councils, sorry for the duplication,
55:28
Speaker 3: saying it is the best way to protect them for
55:30
Speaker 3: the future. And this is the real issue. They, this
55:34
Speaker 3: local devil council, say that they fear that under the
55:38
Speaker 3: forthcoming local government reorganisation, whatever form it takes, the larger
55:43
Speaker 3: unitary councils that take over in Devon, i.e. Plymouth City Council,
55:47
Speaker 3: for example, will not be able to maintain the most
55:50
Speaker 3: local assets and services. And then alongside this, which is
55:57
Speaker 3: basically the dismantling of constitution in this country under Andy Burnham,
56:02
Speaker 3: this paper pushed the fear factor with this headline, No
56:07
Speaker 3: Cavalry Coming If War Comes to the UK. And it's
56:10
Speaker 3: quoting a man called Rob Duran, who worked for government
56:13
Speaker 3: planning for national emergencies. And apparently he said there's trouble
56:17
Speaker 3: on the horizon and no cavalry coming over the hill.
56:21
Speaker 3: The article talks about the Cabinet Office's National Security Strategy 2025,
56:27
Speaker 3: security for the British people in dangerous world. And for
56:31
Speaker 3: the first time, it says, for the first time in
56:33
Speaker 3: many years, we have to actively prepare for the possibility
56:36
Speaker 3: of the UK homeland coming under direct threat, particularly in
56:39
Speaker 3: a wartime scenario. And it also quotes General Sir Rowley Walker,
56:45
Speaker 3: Chief of the Defence Staff.
56:46
Speaker 2: General Staff.
56:47
Speaker 3: Sorry, General Sir Rowley Walker, Chief of the General Staff,
56:51
Speaker 3: warning that Britain had to be ready for war by 2027.
56:54
Speaker 3: So we've got the dismantling of constitutional issues, the creation
56:59
Speaker 3: of unaccountable city-states, get in the fear factor, But this
57:04
Speaker 3: I thought was very interesting. This is in the letters
57:07
Speaker 3: section of the paper. And basically somebody is quoting Kristallnacht
57:12
Speaker 3: and how bad that was for Jews living in Germany.
57:17
Speaker 3: It went on to say, talk about condemning action by
57:21
Speaker 3: China in relation to the Muslim population. But then it says,
57:25
Speaker 3: The same principle must apply to Israel. So I'm particularly
57:28
Speaker 3: thinking of Vanessa here, because in a local paper, finally,
57:33
Speaker 3: we've got a letter where people are saying, yes, we
57:35
Speaker 3: can criticize actions by the Israeli government. But of course,
57:41
Speaker 3: that doesn't have to be on the shoulders of every
57:44
Speaker 3: single Jewish person in the country. It's a very interesting letter.
57:48
Speaker 3: And we'll add a little bit more in the mix.
57:51
Speaker 3: because the Herald doesn't miss an opportunity to drive home
57:55
Speaker 3: the normal government's political mind reframing tricks, because we've got
58:00
Speaker 3: a thing on UN climate talks here, presumably causing the
58:05
Speaker 3: flooding in Gaza, sorry for the cynicism. And then we've
58:08
Speaker 3: got new slavery safeguards for goods sold in Britain. So
58:13
Speaker 3: this is happening locally in Plymouth. This is where you
58:17
Speaker 3: can see the risk of a A city council out
58:21
Speaker 3: of control, but ultimately under Burnham's plan, in control of
58:26
Speaker 3: the police at the same time. Just imagine where that goes, Mike.
58:30
Speaker 2: It's incredible.
58:31
Speaker 4: Yes.
58:32
Speaker 2: And then to finish off today, we have news of
58:34
Speaker 2: Keir Starmer's first after-dinner speech since he signed on with
58:38
Speaker 2: the Creative Arts Agency. It was clearly highly successful, as
58:41
Speaker 2: you can see on screen. Of course... That could very
58:45
Speaker 2: well be fake news because I have no evidence that
58:48
Speaker 2: he has actually been invited to speak anywhere as yet.
58:51
Speaker 2: But the news that he is embarking on this new
58:54
Speaker 2: career came to light last week when Gov.uk published an
58:58
Speaker 2: advice letter under the business appointment rules for former ministers.
59:03
Speaker 2: The advice included, for example, that for two years following
59:05
Speaker 2: his last day in office, he should not do any
59:08
Speaker 2: work with the CIA or its related parties that involves
59:11
Speaker 2: advising on the terms or subject of a bid or
59:14
Speaker 2: contract relating directly to the work of the UK government
59:17
Speaker 2: or its arm's length bodies. Apparently that's okay for former
59:21
Speaker 2: MPs and former Met Police Commissioners, but not for prime ministers.
59:26
Speaker 5: Yeah.
59:27
Speaker 2: Who would you rather listen to, Keir Starmer or Ed Miliband?
59:30
Speaker 2: I think either of them would have me slitting my
59:33
Speaker 2: wrists in very short order. So, yes. Okay. Well, look,
59:37
Speaker 2: we've got to leave it there for today. Thank you
59:40
Speaker 2: very much to Vanessa, Brian, and everybody that's been watching.
59:44
Speaker 2: We will be back in a few minutes on the
59:45
Speaker 2: live stream if you're a UK column member for UK
59:47
Speaker 2: column News Extra. So stay online. And otherwise, don't forget
59:53
Speaker 2: Jerm and Carl tonight and Military Matters tomorrow at 1 p.m.
59:57
Speaker 2: We'll be back at 1 p.m. as usual on Friday
59:59
Speaker 2: for another news program. We'll see you then.
1:00:01
Speaker 1: Bye-bye.
1:00:01
Speaker 3: Bye-bye.