The UK’s latest dystopian censorship plans could spell the end of UK independent content creators to save the BBC

 Andy Burnham’s government is proposing statutory changes that force digital service providers to prioritise its preferred sources of “news,” such as the BBC.

YouTube, an American company, is warning that the UK government’s control over its algorithms will make it harder for independent UK content creators to be discovered on its platform.

The UK government is proposing regulatory changes that force social media platforms to prioritise content from established public service broadcasters such as the BBC, ITV and Channel 4.Currently, the public is being softened up to the idea through a government consultation on a Green Paper titled ‘Watch this space: A new strategic direction for UK media’ published by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (“DCMS”) on 23 June 2026. The consultation, which takes the form of a survey, closes on 31 August 2026...<<<Read More>>>....

The oligarchs’ primary front organisation are national governments

 A functional oligarchy is where economic elites and organised business groups have significant influence on government policy, while average citizens have little to no independent influence.

As Iain Davis explains, many countries, whether they are capitalist or communist, are now “governed” by a functional oligarchy, the same oligarchy. This is the One World Government.

Oligarchy is a very old system of governance and one we have never really escaped. More than 2,000 years ago, Aristotle stated that oligarchy (oligarchia) becomes the governance system “when men of property have government in their hands.” Today, we define “oligarchy” as “government by the few, especially despotic power exercised by a small and privileged group for corrupt or selfish purposes.” When oligarchs exercise political power by virtue of their wealth, we call it “plutocracy.”

A branch of political science called “Elite Theory” has tried to justify the plutocracy of contemporary oligarchs. Generally, however, both plutocracy and oligarchy are considered pejorative terms.

We are told that we live in “representative democracies” precisely because oligarchy is widely viewed as unacceptable. Despite the fact that “representative democracy” is the antithesis of democracy, the purported virtues of our fake democracies are constantly extolled simply to convince us that we don’t live in oligarchies. Political science, though, clearly reveals that we do....<<<Read More>>>...

As with all “leaders” on the political left, Andy Burnham is fake

 Socialists and communists, the political left, reject authentic, traditional values such as loyalty, masculinity and family, and replace them with inauthentic, ideological concepts like imaginary genders and transnational institutions.

The same pattern of inauthenticity is seen in left-wing leadership, where leaders like Andy Burnham, Barack Obama and Joe Biden are worshipped not for their individual qualities but for serving the Party’s quest for power.

Burnham’s rise to power is marked by fakeness. He has used a “working man” image and regionalism to connect with voters, while actually prioritising his personal ambitions in Westminster. His inauthenticity is further demonstrated by the controlled, choreographed environment in which he gives his public speeches, Jupplandia writes....<<<Read More>>>...

Fear is Overwhelming Us

No-one’s disputing that very hot weather can be challenging, even dangerous, for some people. But I’ve been fascinated by the news coverage of the heatwave over the last week or so, largely because I’m currently touring in the American West, as I often am. Reading the British news one could be forgiven for thinking the country was on the brink of destruction.

However, it also links into an accumulating culture of fear which is having a paralysing effect on wider society. It’s been developing for years, driven not only by a news media craving stories, but also government seeking ever more control over our lives, and a vast industry capitalising on promoting fear to sell solutions, reassurance and ‘peace of mind’.

Out here the weather is seriously dangerous in ways most of we Brits have little or no idea. About two weeks ago I was driving across South Dakota into North Dakota through epic downpours that were like carwashes for the gods, and in 80mph winds. But the place carried on, as we did. I drive around 10,000 miles in the American West annually and I have developed a healthy regard for the weather, without letting us stop what we’re doing. We simply adapt.

You might remember that in 2023 there was a heat dome over Texas. Since we were due to fly into Dallas Fort Worth, we were a little worried, thanks in no small part to the tireless BBC that left us and everyone else with the impression that all Texas was about to be obliterated in a conflagration.

Naturally, when we rolled up, we found Texas was hot but in a 100% operational state. Everything was working as normal. We went about our road trip as planned. In southeastern Texas we visited a forest, lush with leaves and long green grass. We found a couple of nonagenarians, who in Britain would have been locked in a freezer to save their lives, out walking as they always did. We told them about the news in Britain. They laughed and carried on.

The interesting thing is not then the heat, or in my case the torrential downpour across the northern Great Plains on a remote and almost entirely empty road, but the fixation in the media and government to turn everything into something to be terrified of....<<<Read More>>>...

The Government’s Latest Censorship Initiative is its Most Sinister Yet

 Over the last few months, free speech activists have been perturbed by proposals to age-gate social media for under-16s. Meantime, whilst all eyes were looking elsewhere, the Government has just slipped out a new raft of proposals which would profoundly reshape the online media landscape in the UK. In my view, whereas the impact of the proposed social media restrictions for kids on the free speech rights of adults has been overstated, this new initiative poses a far greater and invidious threat to our freedom of speech and access to information.

The proposals are contained in a Green Paper, published this week, called ‘Watch This Space’. Described by Ian Murray, the Minister for Creative Industries, Media and Art, as setting out a “new strategic direction” for the Government’s media policy, the new measures would require social media companies to prioritise content from ‘traditional’ so-called public service broadcasters – the BBC, ITV, Channel 4, Channel 5 and so on – over that of independent media outlets. This would therefore (although this is not spelt out expressly in the paper) de-prioritise, i.e., suppress, content from independent content creators. The effect would be to rewire the algorithms according to which content is delivered to our social media feeds. It would take us from content driven by preference and audience demand towards a system structurally hardwired and legally obliged to direct us to traditional media brands – the very titles that such a large proportion of the public have turned away from.

Given that some 70% of all UK news content is now read digitally, the impact of these measures on the online public square and on the ability of UK audiences to access information sources of their choosing can hardly be overstated....<<<Read More>>>...

Too Young for TikTok, Old Enough to Vote?

 There are few sights more comic than a modern minister pretending to be the stern parent of the nation.

We know the routine. The concerned expression. The voice lowered half an octave. The carefully arranged background of flags, earnest young people and laminated safeguarding jargon. Then comes the announcement. The government is going to protect children online.

At which point every parent in the country is expected to breathe a sigh of relief, put down the gin and thank the Department for Being Sensible on Our Behalf.

This would be comic enough at any time. It is even better when the Government now proposing to supervise teenagers online gives the impression of being unable to supervise itself. Sir Keir Starmer wants to childproof the internet while presiding over a state that cannot produce a defence policy that convinces its own side, let alone our allies or enemies.

Still, never mind the Russian threat. Has anyone thought about Chloe scrolling Instagram?

To be fair, there is a problem. Social media is not exactly a moral health spa. Much of it resembles a Victorian freak show redesigned by behavioural psychologists and funded by advertising executives. It is addictive, vain, cruel, stupid and often deranging. The idea that a 14 year-old girl with a smartphone is simply exercising ‘choice’ while being stalked by an algorithm designed to exploit insecurity is absurd.

So no, this is not a libertarian hymn to TikTok.

The problem is not that politicians worry about the effect of social media on young people. The problem is that they worry about it selectively.

The same political class that increasingly tells us young people must be protected from online manipulation is also very keen to tell us that those same young people are mature enough to vote.

This is where the argument begins to wobble like a drunk on a paddleboard.

Apparently, a teenager may not have the judgement to scroll through Instagram without state supervision, but does have the judgement to help choose the next government.

This is not a principle. It is a convenience....<<<Read More>>>....

They are deliberately destroying the economy

 The UK is heading for an orchestrated economic disaster, with a recession, depression and widespread despair, Dr. Vernon Coleman says. The ensuing chaos, poverty and homelessness benefit the conspirators.

The economy is being destroyed through high inflation, low interest rates and rising taxes, which benefits those with debts, such as the government, while hurting those with savings.

The destruction of the economy is being managed by politicians, including Comrade Reeves and Comrade Starmer, who are serving the interests of the “puppet masters.”

The world is heading for disaster: a recession, then a depression and a sense of despair of a nature never known before. It’s all deliberate, of course. The destruction of the economy is being managed with great precision. In the UK, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Comrade Reeves, has learned from her mistakes and will, therefore, continue to repeat them until the British economy is in tatters. Inflation is too high (and likely to rise in the medium and long term) and interest rates need to go up, so they’re going down instead – to benefit those with debts (e.g. the Government) and hurt those with savings.

In the UK, more than 1.2 million foreign-born claimants are living on universal credit – and the figure is rising. Sickness (much of it self-diagnosed “anxiety” or “autism spectrum disorder,” concerns which have been encouraged by politicians, journalists and members of the very entitled royal family) costs £212 billion a year and is rising. Taxes are soaring and red tape is increasing, so unemployment will inevitably reach record highs in 2026. Millions diagnosed as being “on the autism spectrum” or “suffering” from anxiety are content to live on benefits rather than working for a living. It is now officially possible to suffer from an illness within the autism spectrum called “rejection sensitivity dysphoria” – a self-diagnosed disorder which occurs when a person is rejected or criticised. I think it would be difficult to find anyone in the world who does not suffer from a disorder within the autism spectrum disorder....<<<Read More>>>....

Strait of Hormuz blockade achieves the goals of WEF and Agenda 2030 – coincidence?

 On 13 April 2026, the United States imposed a naval blockade on Iranian ports in the Strait of Hormuz following the collapse of peace talks in Islamabad, Pakistan.

The true intentions behind the US’ blockade in the Strait of Hormuz are unclear, Charlie Howden writes. He speculates whether it may be part of a larger plan to create a new world order, aligned with the World Economic Forum’s goals and the UN’s Agenda 21/2030.

In an article published on Wednesday by Free Speech Backlash, Charlie Howden tries to make sense of what’s really going on with the war on Iran.

The US has blockaded the Strait of Hormuz, aiming to destroy Iran’s economy, but this move risks damaging the global economy, including the US’s own, he reasoned.

The blockade has reduced traffic in the Strait to 10 ships a day, down from the normal 120-140 vessels, causing a huge impact on the world economy, with oil prices skyrocketing and food security teetering on the brink.

“So, let’s probe the ‘logic’ behind the US blockade,” he said. And continued:

Ostensibly, [the blockade is] to kneecap Iran’s economy, starving its war chest by choking exports. Sounds ruthless, right? Except … is it? Here’s where it gets ludicrous. Slamming Hormuz doesn’t just hurt Tehran; it hammers everyone from British pump prices to Chinese factories. The world’s economy is the real casualty, with International Monetary Fund (“IMF”) forecasts slashing 2026. Why torch the village to smoke out one house?”

If the goal was pure economic warfare on Iran, precision sanctions or targeted interdictions would do the trick without igniting a global bonfire. Instead, this blunt blockade reeks, at best, of overreach, begging the question: is it really about Iran, or something grander – and more destructive?

Is Trump’s fireworks display, wittingly or unwittingly, fuelling the World Economic Forum’s (“WEF’s”) dystopian dream and the UN’s Agenda 21/2030 blueprint for “sustainable” control? Recall the WEF’s infamous line: “By 2030, you’ll own nothing and be happy” – code for centralised overlords engineering scarcity to herd the masses into digital cages – universal basic income, asset grabs and supranational rule under the guise of climate and equity fixes. Agenda 21, that 1992 UN blueprint evolving into 2030’s sustainable development goals, pushes similar themes: interconnected crises as levers for global governance, from resource rationing to behavioural nudges.

The Hormuz blockade’s shockwaves are a near-perfect match. Sky-high energy costs? They erode savings, forcing folks from car ownership to communal transport, aligning with “own nothing” mobility mandates. Commodity crunches in food and fertilisers? They spike prices, hammering small farmers and pushing reliance on corporate or state handouts – echoing Agenda 2030’s food security pacts that centralise supply chains. Global growth dips? Cue the calls for “resilient” economies via green transitions, digital IDs and wealth redistribution – WEF wet dreams all. Trump’s “America First” bluster rails against Davos elites, yet his blockade is brewing the very brew they sip: interdependence turned weapon, crises as catalysts for reset. Europe’s energy woes? Priming the pump for supranational grids. US consumers squeezed? Softening resistance to universal controls. It’s ironic poetry – anti-globalist Trump, by fracturing the old order, accelerates the one where sovereignty shrinks and elites orchestrate from afar. Is it a coincidence? Or does chaos always pave the road for the “experts”?...<<<Read More>>>...

Starmer is Finished. But, More Importantly, Britain’s System of Government is Fundamentally Broken

 We are about to witness an implosion in British politics with a real risk that we will reach entirely the wrong conclusion.

Keir Starmer is already a lame duck Prime Minister but – like many who hold that office – he is stubborn and thus likely to stagger on until the untenability of his position is punched into him by his Parliamentary colleagues.

Starmer’s political obituary will read that he misled Parliament (or at best was economical with the truth), that he ran a No. 10 operation that was out of control and alienated many of his own MPs, that his judgement on the big decisions he was actually willing to take (few in number) was deeply flawed and that his unpopularity with the British public led his party to electoral oblivion (Labour has every chance of coming in fifth place in both vote share and council seats won on May 7th).

But despite the fact that Starmer is in no way equipped to be PM, I think the real tale is that Britain has now become essentially ungovernable.

In a period of over half a century from 1964, only eight different people occupied the office of Prime Minister. We are now on the verge of moving on to our sixth PM in a single decade.

The political debate in Westminster is focused on whether ‘full due process’ was followed and whether Starmer has been deceitful about his actions, inaction and baseline knowledge....<<<Read More>>>...

The Real Reason For The Facial Recognition Roll Out

 Facial recognition is set to be ‘rolled out’ across the entire country, after a human rights challenge was thrown out by the courts.

Well, of course it was.

The establishment want facial recognition, and the courts are merely an extension of the establishment.

It’s a stitch up, and you’ll see just how much this is true, once jury trials in the UK are dispensed with.

Then there will be no checks and balances as the state appointed judge will rule on behalf of the state at every opportunity.

Do you remember the Bart Simpson meme, where the kids are goading him?

“Say the line!”, they order, alluding to the fact that the line is wholly predictable, and then Bart says it, and they all cheer?

You know what I’m talking about?

Well, that’s basically how I read news articles these days.

So as soon as I saw that facial recognition had been given the go ahead, I scrolled the article for the predictable Bart Simpson line.

It only took a paragraph for it to appear, and it came courtesy of Policing Minister Sarah Jones.

You ready?

“Law-abiding citizens have nothing to fear.”

Yes! Predictability bingo champion once again. What do I win? A facial recognition camera?

Nothing? OK.

The problem with the claim that “Law-abiding citizens have nothing to fear.”, is quite a significant one given that it simply isn’t true.

This whole legal challenge came about because people are being misidentified by the technology, and arrested for crimes they didn’t commit, so you can be law abiding and still fall foul of Big Brother,

And also, what does “law abiding citizen” really mean?...<<<Read More>>>

UK High Court Supports Facial Recognition Roll-out, New Ruling Confirms

 On 21 April, the UK High Court handed the Metropolitan Police a significant victory in the battle over live facial recognition, dismissing a legal challenge to the force’s policy and clearing the way for its continued use across London. The case was brought by youth worker Shaun Thompson and Big Brother Watch director Silkie Carlo, who argued that the Met’s rules for deploying the technology were too broad, too unclear and too intrusive to satisfy human-rights law. On Tuesday, the court rejected that claim, holding that the policy had enough clarity, foreseeability and safeguards to be lawful....<<<Read More>>>... 

Parents Decide Act requires Apple, Google to verify age of every device user

 New bill mandates age verification for all device users.

Critics warn it creates a digital national ID system.

The law would make Apple and Google age brokers for apps.

Data protection rules are vague and deferred to the FTC.

The measure could end online anonymity for all Americans.

A new congressional bill, packaged as a child safety initiative, would require every American setting up a phone, computer, or tablet to verify their age with Apple or Google, creating what critics warn is a backdoor national identification system for the digital age. The Parents Decide Act (H.R. 8250), introduced by Representative Josh Gottheimer and Elise Stefanik on April 13, mandates that operating system providers collect and confirm the birth date of any user during device setup, with no opt-out for adults. While proponents argue this gives parents control, the legislation’s fine print builds a universal age-verification layer that could reshape online anonymity and consolidate surveillance power with two tech giants.

Gottheimer announced the bill at a Ridgewood, New Jersey, news conference on April 2, standing with local advocates. “With each passing day, the internet is becoming more and more treacherous for our kids,” Gottheimer said. He criticized the current system where “children are able to bypass age requirements by entering a different birthday and accessing apps without any real verification. Kids can bypass age requirements by simply typing in a different birthday. That’s it. That’s the system.” ...<<<Read More>>>...

Britain Doesn’t Want or Need Digital ID

 In September 2025, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer introduced a new digital identity scheme for the UK. The Government says it will prevent illegal working and make public services simpler to access. Officials mention convenience, security and inclusion, but they do not explain who will control the system, how it will be used or what people can do if it is misused.

Right now, the digital ID scheme is a large and unnecessary move toward more government surveillance. It follows a pattern of government overreach and could leave older people and those with less money excluded from society. Advertising the scheme on YouTube before the consultation ends also shows a troubling attitude toward democracy, which should worry everyone, no matter their views on digital identity.

The Government claims that proving your identity is complicated and difficult, but this is open to debate. For generations, people in Britain have used passports, National Insurance numbers, driving licences, bank statements and utility bills to prove who they are. This system is intentionally spread out. No single authority controls it, so there is no single point of failure, and no one institution can take away someone’s ability to prove their identity.

The United Kingdom has a distinctive and hard-won tradition of resisting national identity schemes. When wartime identity cards were retained after 1945, the public mood turned sharply against them. In 1951, a motorist named Clarence Willcock refused a police officer’s demand to produce his card. The subsequent court ruling was so emphatic in its defence of individual liberty that the cards were abolished shortly afterwards.

The belief that the state must answer to its citizens, not the other way around, has continued. This led to the cross-party rejection of Tony Blair’s Identity Cards Act, which was repealed in 2010 after strong public opposition. Now, the current Government is trying a similar idea under a new name. The goal remains the same, even if the method has changed....<<<Read More>>>...

Global crackdown on free speech: Digital dictatorship looms as governments jail citizens for “indecent” content

 Governments (U.A.E., U.K., Germany) are imprisoning citizens for private messages, truthful reporting or criticism of policies, under vague "public security" laws.

Tech giants (Microsoft, Google) and governments are capturing screenshots, scanning devices and monitoring all digital activity under the guise of AI training—creating a backdoor for total control.

Algorithms now pre-censor "extremist" speech (including criticism of Israel or COVID policies), while identity verification mandates hand personal data to intelligence-linked corporations.

The U.K.'s mandatory conscription proposal and disaster prep warnings signal impending militarization, while the U.S. faces UN/WHO treaties that override sovereignty with digital IDs and medical mandates.

New laws (U.K.'s Online Safety Act, Israel's misinformation penalties) jail truth-tellers, while elites and mainstream media enjoy immunity—proving this is about silencing dissent, not public safety.

In a disturbing escalation of government overreach, nations worldwide are tightening their grip on digital communication, criminalizing dissent and punishing ordinary citizens for sharing information deemed "indecent" or "harmful to public security." Recent cases in Dubai and the U.K. highlight a chilling trend toward digital authoritarianism, where individuals face imprisonment for private messages, photos or even truthful reporting—raising alarms about the rise of a social credit-style surveillance state...<<<Read More>>>...

Governments attempting to control “hate” is a hallmark of totalitarian regimes

 The Spanish government has launched a “hatred and polarisation footprint” to monitor social media users. Monitoring “hate” is one of the hallmarks of a totalitarian regime.

“The mix of moralism, technocracy and political power is itself the ‘footprint’ of a totalitarian movement in the making,” David Thunder writes.

A few weeks ago, the Prime Minister of Spain used the occasion of a “forum against hate” in Madrid to launch “HODIO,” a “hatred and polarisation footprint” created by the Spanish Observatory for Racism and Xenophobia and the Ministry for Inclusion, Social Security and Migration.

The goal of the new “hatred and polarisation footprint” is to create a public measure of the amount of hateful and polarising discourse occurring on social media platforms available in Spain and to use this measure, to quote Sánchez, to “demand responsibility” from the platforms for restricting the polarising “amplification” of hate speech.

In spite of the appearance of “science” and “objectivity” that the word “measurement” might suggest, there could be nothing more partisan and politically charged than the “HODIO” initiative, which effectively assigns to the national government of Spain the function of combatting “hatred” and “polarisation” on the internet – two terms that do not lend themselves to any clear and non-partisan interpretation...<<<Read More>>>....

Fears Keir Starmer's digital ID cards could be used as population-wide facial recognition database for police mugshots

 Keir Starmer’s digital ID card scheme could be used as a population-wide facial recognition database for police to check mugshots, privacy campaigners fear.

A clause included in Labour’s digital ID consultation could allow police to access facial recognition and biometric data held by the Government.

The digital ID cards will include a ‘a current, high-resolution biometric facial image that meets specified requirements’, the Government announced this week

Documents published by the Cabinet Office state that ‘there is a legal basis for police use of facial recognition, which may include access to biometric data held by government’.

The documents add that under the Government’s proposals the digital ID cards will be subject to existing and any new legal frameworks ‘for using facial recognition in law enforcement’.

Jasleen Chaggar, from civil liberties group Big Brother Watch, said: ‘Snuck into the consultation is an admission that the police would be allowed to repurpose our digital ID photos as mugshots to create a population-wide facial recognition database.

‘It is for precisely this reason that the public is rightly sceptical of a sprawling ID system that has been sold to us under various guises - whether to “stop the boats” or improve public services - but which invariably hands more power and more of our personal information to the state, at our expense.’

She added: ‘Given the public backlash, high costs, serious data risks and likelihood that this could become a mandatory scheme in practice, the government should drop this digital ID disaster altogether.’...<<<Read More>>>...

European Commission is expanding its dictatorship

 The European Commission has been gaining power at the expense of not only the Member States but also other European Union (“EU”) institutions.

One area where the Commission has been taking assertive steps is foreign policy. It has created its own parallel roles to the EU High Representative’s mandate for defence, space and the Middle East.

The EU High Representative is appointed by the European Council, which comprises the heads of state or government of all EU member states. It follows that the Representative’s mandate is given/approved by EU countries.

Usurping the EU High Representative’s role is nothing short of a power grab by Ursula von der Leyen and her European Commission.

According to Article 15 of the Treaty of the European Union: “The European Council shall provide the Union with the necessary impetus for its development and shall define the general political directions and priorities thereof.” While the Treaties originally intended the European Council – the forum of the Heads of State or Government of the Member States – to be the primary decision-making body of the European Union, in recent years the European Commission has taken the lead.

The European Commission’s growing power – at the expense of the Member States’ competences – is well documented. Thomas Fazi of MCC Brussels claimed more than a year ago that, “We have witnessed a game-changing transfer of sovereignty from the national to the supranational level, at the expense of democratic control and accountability.”....<<<Read More>>>...

Online “child safety” is a ruse to enable data collection and surveillance of the entire population

 Governments are using child safety as an excuse to build a surveillance state, pushing for enhanced surveillance and data collection over digital communication for everyone, both children and adults.

These days, we are seeing a strong push for enhanced government surveillance over digital communication, from Australia and the United Kingdom to Ireland, Germany and Spain, whether by imposing a universal digital identification requirement for accessing social media, or spying on citizens’ private chats.

The leading reason being offered for enhanced surveillance and data collection is the protection of children from online harms, such as pornography and social media addiction. But given recent experiences of shameless government overreach rationalised by “solidarity” and protection from disease, any move by government to claim enhanced powers of surveillance over our personal data and communications should be viewed with suspicion.

Sometimes governments leverage citizens’ deepest fears and most noble aspirations to convince them to expand State prerogatives at the expense of personal liberties. This is not a hypothesis, but a historical reality, evidenced in a vivid way by the UK’s psych-op operation to guilt citizens into taking the shot, and the UK’s Health Secretary boasting in private correspondence that announcing a new, more virulent variant of Covid would “frighten the pants off everyone.”...<<<<Read More>>>...

Number of Asylum Seekers Granted Permission to Stay in Britain Soars by a Third in a Year

 The number of people granted asylum by the Home Office jumped by more than a third last year, with 55,000 people given refugee status or similar permission to stay in Britain. The Mail has the story.

Official figures showed nearly 55,000 migrants were handed refugee status or another type of permission to stay in Britain in the year to December.

It was up 35% on the previous 12 months but 14% below the peak seen in 2023.

Eritreans made up the largest group with just under 8,700 successful asylum claims, followed by Sudan with 7,000 and Iran with 6,900.

The figures only cover those granted asylum by the Home Office at the initial decision stage, and do not include those who successfully appeal against a refusal in the immigration courts which had a backlog of 70,000 cases at the last count.

There were 46,497 illegal arrivals into the country in 2025, up 7% on the previous year.

It included 41,472 by small boat across the Channel – a figure which was already known from daily updates published by the Home Office – with the rest coming by ‘clandestine’ routes such as stowing away in the backs of lorries.

Small boat arrivals were up 13% on 2024 but lower than the peak of 45,772 seen in 2022.

Statistics also showed the total number of asylum claims lodged in the year was 101,000, a 4% fall on the previous year but still at a near-record level.

The total number of claims to receive an initial decision from the Home Office hit an all-time high of more than 135,000, meaning the proportion of those granted was 42%, down from 47% the previous year.

A record number of asylum claims – just over 80,000 – were rejected by the Home Office, a significant 75% jump on the previous year.

The rise indicates a large number of unfounded claims are being lodged by migrants, although after initial rejection many go on to bring lengthy appeals.

The number of migrants receiving taxpayer-funded support dipped at the end of last year, including those given full-board accommodation in hotels.

Data showed there were 107,003 people receiving state support, a 5% fall year-on-year and 14% below the peak of almost 124,000 in September 2023.

Of those, 31,000 were in hotels, 19% lower than a year previously....<<<Read More>>>...

What social credit means to you and how it will change your life

 Social credit is a scheme designed to enable governments to control their citizens, and it is being implemented globally, with China being a prime example.

The system is being implemented Politicians, journalists, social scientists, masochists and communists talk about social credit as if it were a “good thing.”

“I don’t know what all the fuss is about,” said one. “It won’t be so bad. In fact, if you behave yourself, it will be a good thing.”

A programme promoting social credit on NBC News in the US stated that social credit pushes people to become better citizens. “You’re not going to be punished if you haven’t done anything wrong,” they said, ignoring the fact that it is the Government which decides the definition of wrong.

Well, if you are a fan of totalitarianism or communism, then I suppose social credit is a good thing.

However, there is no escaping the fact that social credit is a scheme designed to enable governments to control their citizens. Every new law and rule ties into the social credit system, which is now clearly the way in which the Great Reset will be turned into a practical reality. It is government policy everywhere to exhaust their citizens with a constant barrage of new rules and regulations (which are backed by force and therefore have the power of law).

And although all this may sound like futuristic science fiction, it isn’t. Social credit is here, and it is growing by the minute.

Take a look at precisely how social credit operates in China. various countries, including Holland, Denmark, Ireland, Iran and India. And similar systems are already in place in countries such as the UK, New Zealand, Italy, Ukraine, France, Canada, Austria, Germany, Russia, Zimbabwe and Thailand.

These systems often involve digital IDs, vaccine passports, and tracking of citizens’ behaviour. The goal is to control behaviour and replace democracy with artificial intelligence-driven decision-making. It is all part of The Great Reset....<<<Read More>>>...