Nicky Campbell Describes A ‘Distressing Weekend’ After Social Media Users Wrongly Speculated He Was The Star Of Teen Sex Pics Scandal

Nicky Campbell has spoken about his distressing weekend after he was falsely named as the BBC presenter accused of paying a teenager for sexually graphic images.

The broadcaster, 62, was among the well-known faces forced to clear their name after allegations that a BBC presenter paid £35,000 for explicit photos.

Presenting his BBC Radio 5 Live show on Monday, Nicky Campbell said, that obviously thoughts with the alleged victim and the family. So, a bit of perspective here, worse things happen at sea as they say, but it was a distressing weekend, he couldn’t deny that, for him, and others falsely named.

He said that he was having further conversations with the police in terms of malicious communication and with lawyers in terms of defamation.

It comes after he suggested he’d contacted the police about being falsely mentioned online in connection with the story.

He tweeted a screenshot which featured the Metropolitan Police insignia and the words, ‘Thank you for contacting the Metropolitan Police Service to report your crime’.

He wrote that he thought it was important to take a stand. That there were just too many of these people on social media, and that he thanked support from friends.

On his BBC radio show, a caller rang to say she was so enraged and cross that Mr Campbell and others had to come forward to clear their names.

Nicky Campbell responded that he was all good, Jeremy Vine and also others involved as well, Rylan Clark and also Gary Lineker, and that it was uncomfortable but as he said earlier worse things happen at sea and that they were big boys.

The BBC was to meet the Metropolitan Police on Monday as the corporation dealt with the allegations, after confirming a male staff member had been suspended.

BBC Breakfast host Jon Kay is the latest star to distance himself from the scandal, tweeting last night that he was enjoying some extra sleep and long-planned annual leave with the family, so there was no need to set his alarm clock.

It came after Gary Lineker and Rylan Clark publicly said they were not the presenter in question, with Gary Lineker tweeting that he hated to disappoint the haters but it wasn’t him.

Rylan Clark also wrote that he wasn’t sure why his name was floating about but re that story in the newspapers, that it wasn’t him babe, and that he was currently filming a show in Italy for the BBC, so people should take his name of their mouths.

If these people know they’re not guilty then they have nothing to be distressed about. However, it is outrageous that so many completely blameless BBC presenters are being shockingly slandered with such impunity by fools on social media.

Poor Nicky Campbell. However, more ominous things occur every day to people worldwide though, but at the moment, speculation is rampant about the identity of the latest BBC presenter – just say who the person is and be done with it, rather than dragging other presenters through the mire.

It’s important to take a stand because there are just too many of these people on social media, and it gives people on social media a potentially lunatic platform.

If people name others in the industry and get it wrong then they should be sued for defamation. We have no idea who this person is that allegedly did the crime and until the BBC releases that information we should all keep a lid on things because this is how people’s names get slurred and once out in the open it can never go back in the closet again. It’s out there and they say that what’s today’s new is tomorrow’s history, wrong!

Social Media And Online Gaming Dominate Brits’ Social Lives, With One In Ten Lacking A Single ‘Real’ Friend

New research reveals that almost one in ten British people say they haven’t got any friends in real life.

Instead, eight per cent of Brits between the ages of 18 and 70 emanate all their social interaction from the internet, the poll of 3,000 people reveals.

Extrapolated out to the wider UK population of about 55 million, that works out to 4.4 million people who have no ‘real’ friends they can count on.

Those Brits without real-life friends instead said they have ‘online’ friends, who they keep in touch with through social media, online games or email.

The study by life insurance specialists LifeSearch discovered that the remaining 92 per cent who did have friends had, on average, eight friends each.

The poll revealed men have an average of nine friends, with women having an average of seven.

Those aged 35-54 have the least real friends, with seven, compared to those aged under 35, who have an average of ten friends.

Brits over the age of 55 had an average of eight friends each.

The study also found that 55 per cent of the 3,000 people surveyed said they had a ‘best friend’, with their partner top of the pile.

All in all, more than a third (39 per cent) of those polled said their best friend was their husband, wife or partner.

Asked to reveal how they knew their best friend, those surveyed revealed the following:

How Brits know their best friends’ Relationship Percentage

Partner 39 per cent
School friend 9 per cent
Sibling 8 per cent
Parent 7 per cent
Hobby friend 6 per cent
Another parent at child’s school 3 per cent
Cousin 3 per cent

Barry Taylor, 44, of Watford, Hertfordshire, said his wife Claire was now his ‘best friend’.

The window fitter said he’d lost touch with friends from school and hadn’t seen his ‘hobby’ friends since giving up playing darts.

He said that he used to keep in touch with friends from school and meet up once or twice a year, and used to play darts in the pub league.

He said that he gave up darts after breaking his arm, and friends from school were all online these days as they’ve mostly moved away.

He said that his best and probably only friend was his wife Claire, and that was all that he need.

Sadly for some people, friends move away and as people get older and they’re on their own, they find it difficult to make friends because everything is done online.

Teenagers make friends effortlessly, particularly when they’re at school, and generally, they might keep those friends after they leave school, but people make different lives for themselves, or they move away or just make a different group of friends when they start work.

As we get older though we tend to have friends through marriage, but if that marriage ends or someone’s loved one dies, then that person is left isolated with no way of making new friends apart from online, which is extremely sad indeed.

Friends with children stop asking you over because they’re too occupied doing family things, or they think that they’re now more important than you are, or you might drop in on them and they’ve changed and no longer want to be your friend so people resort to online activities to bide their time away.

There are, of course, ways of meeting people like getting out and walking about, talking to people, going for a coffee, even a coach trip to meet people. However, not everybody is the same and not everyone is as outgoing as the next person, and sometimes it’s easier to hide behind a screen than to make actual contact because that’s the society that we’ve become because of social media.

Currently, The BBC Licence Fee Is £159, But Ministers Plan To Scale It Back To Ease The Cost-Of-Living Crisis

A newspaper outlet understands that the BBC licence fee would be cut in real terms under planning being considered by Ministers to reduce the cost of living crisis for households.

The £159 fee is expected to rise in line with soaring inflation next April, meaning viewers are facing a near double-digit growth in the charge.

Now Ministers have told MPs that they’re looking at removing the link between the fee and the Consumer Prices Index (CPI), which is presently running at 8.7 per cent.

A source said that ministers realise a near ten per cent rise isn’t exactly going to go down well, so they’re looking at moving from the standard annualised inflation figure to a different, lower measure.

Former Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries announced in 2022 that the fee would be frozen for two years, before increasing in 2024.

However, the Government is considering options for replacing the fee with a different funding model after the BBC’s charter runs out in 2027.

The actual rise in April would be calculated by using the annualised CPI rate between October 2022 and September 2023 and the projected rate of 8.2 per cent would increase the licence fee by £13 to £172.

The move comes as the Corporation’s former chairman Richard Sharp suggested that more affluent households should pay more towards the cost of running the BBC and that the licence fee should be replaced by a tax on broadband bills or a household levy based on the value of the viewer’s property.

Richard Sharp argued in an interview with The Daily Telegraph that it was regressive to ask those on lower incomes to pay the same for their TV licences as wealthier households.

He said that he would be in favour of a form of mandatory payment, but there was one issue, which is it’s regressive, and that you could look at models around the world, there’s broadband tax, there’s household tax and there’s the licence fee.

Labour has said that it would consider means testing the fee if it forms the next government.

When she was in post, Ms Dorries warned the BBC that the licence fee needed to be reformed because the days of state-run television were over.

She published a White Paper, which declared that the Government planned to put in place a new funding model when the £3.2 billion a year licence fee deal expires in 2027, as part of plans to make the British broadcasting system fit for the streaming age.

Really, what should happen is that it should be scaled back to nothing, that would be a good start. The BBC earns enough profits without taxing the common people, but the only way to force that change is if everyone stands together and doesn’t pay it.

Every time a new home is built, the BBC gains an extra £159 a year for absolutely nothing. Consider how many homes are being built every year and then add it all up, that’s a lot of money the BBC gain for doing nothing extra.

You’ll be frothing at the mouth when they add it to your council tax, rather than discarding it for a choice-based system.

Cut all public funding for the BBC now. If the BBC are as good as they keep telling us, then they should go out into the real world and stand on their own two feet.

In this day and age, there’s no reason for a licence fee. The BBC is no longer the only provider of programmes or news and hasn’t been for an extremely long time.

It should be a choice. Those that want to pay for it can, and those that don’t want to can opt-out.

This government’s adding a further tax on top of taxes we already pay and this is immoral.

Let the BBC fund themselves – sink or swim and let everyone have a choice.

Meeting Official Healthy Food Guidelines Will Cost The poor Half Their Disposable Income

Research shows that Britain’s most impoverished families would need to spend half their disposable income on food to meet Government healthy eating guidelines.

Soaring food and drink prices have left numerous households struggling to afford the healthier alternatives recommended in the NHS’s Eatwell Guide.

The Food Foundation has cautioned that rampant inflation has hit the lowest 20 per cent of earners particularly hard.

A report by the charity, which campaigns for healthy, sustainable food, found that to comply with the guidelines, the most impoverished households would have to buy produce costing 50 per cent of their disposable income, which is the amount left after housing costs.

Nevertheless, the wealthiest 20 per cent need to spend just 11 per cent of their earnings on healthy food and drink. Last year, the poorest had to fork out 43 per cent of their disposable earnings.

The Eatwell recommendations include at least five portions of fruit and vegetables daily, starchy carbohydrates such as potatoes and pasta, protein such as beans or meat, and in much lower quantities, dairy or dairy alternatives.

It recommends that foods high in fat, salt and sugar should be consumed less frequently and in tiny amounts.

The Food Foundation has worked with other groups including the University of Cambridge, the markets consultancy Nielsen and the charity Action On Sugar to create its annual Broken Plate report.

It discovered that healthy food costs on average £10 per 1,000 calories, double that of less healthy foods at approximately £4.45 per 1,000 calories.

Nutritious produce has also increased in price far more quickly, partly as a result of poor fruit and vegetable harvests, by £1.76 per 1,000 calories compared with just 76p for less healthy foods. The NHS says men should eat about 2,500 calories per day and women 2,000.

Sir Stephen Timms, the Labour chairman of the Commons Work and Pensions Committee, said suggesting that households should spend almost 50 per cent of their income on groceries to meet the Government’s recommended diet was clearly not feasible, adding that they need to make a healthy diet affordable. Sir Ed Davey, leader of the Liberal Democrats said the report should be a wake-up call.

It comes after the Prime Minister scrapped plans last month for a Government embargo on two-for-one junk food deals for food that’s high in fat, sugar and salt.

The real issue is that children aren’t familiarised with cooking anymore. School cookery lessons don’t exist, and children these days aren’t taught how to make nutritious meals, or how to budget, and we really should bring back home economics for all, this includes sewing lessons as well.

We’re paying way too much all over the place and everyone appears to want their cut. We pay the highest energy prices. Everything is extremely inflated in price. Most people can’t afford to eat healthily, while some companies make record profits, billions and we’re overpaying so they and their shareholders can line their pockets.

Personally, I eat what I want to eat and not what I’m told to eat.

And newsflash to whoever thought this one up. Poor people don’t have a disposable income!

School dinners are a joke, and none of it is very healthy, and not much of it, and it costs a pretty penny. Children have to go to school by law, therefore school dinners should be free all year round as well as a free breakfast. Too many school holidays and the long summer one is unnecessary these days since we no longer bring in a harvest.

This Is More Than Insensitive

A grieving mother has criticised police for congratulating themselves on Twitter with a Top Gun GIF for finding her daughter’s dead body.

Nevres Kemal said Kent Police’s Tweet, which boasted about finding a deceased person’s dead body within 90 minutes alongside a GIF showing two Top Gun characters high-fiving each other was horrendous and unacceptable.

Nevres Kemal’s daughter Azra Kemal was 24 when she died after falling from a motorway bridge in Kent, England, as she fled her burning car in July 2020.

It comes after Nevres Kemal said she’d had months of distress waiting for an inquiry into necrophiliac David Fuller’s crimes after it emerged her daughter was one of at least 102 women and girls sexually assaulted by him after their deaths.

A different tweet celebrates the police drone work used in the investigation with the hashtag ‘crackingbitofkit’.

She told Sky News that the tweet was just horrendous and that she couldn’t believe that professional police officers would high-five themselves and pat themselves on the back of her daughter’s demise.

She said that it was more than insensitive, it was unacceptable and what was this mindset of people investigating crimes on our behalf?

A different Tweet said within hours police were satisfied there were no suspicious circumstances, even though Mrs Kemal said she was told they were still investigating at the time.

The initial suspect, the man Azra was travelling with, said that in the darkness, Azra hadn’t seen the drop between the carriageways, as she climbed over the central reservation barrier.

He was released with no further action and the investigation closed before the end of its first day, but Mrs Kemal said she thought the investigation was wrapped up too quickly and a forensic post-mortem should have been carried out.

She said of the police that they should do the job that they’re supposed to do. Look at the information, look at the leads, look at the timelines, look at the interviews, and go back to the witnesses, because no one saw Azra die.

She said there should be a uniform process. If there’s death and there’s no witness to death, everybody should have that right to a forensic autopsy.

A Kent Police spokesman told a newspaper outlet that Kent Police carried out a full and thorough investigation following the death of a woman who fell from a road bridge of the A21, on 16 July 2020.

This is despicable, and did anyone from the police even think for a moment that perhaps they shouldn’t be publicising such things on Twitter?

All police forces should be barred from tweeting when it comes to things that they have been investigating. What they do off duty in their own personal time is up to them, they can put whatever rubbish they want about their own personal life, but not another person, and they have to be seen to police themselves to an acceptable standard. There should be more policing and less tweeting.

This was out of order, cruel and unprofessional and there was simply no justification for this tweet.

No one in the police force should be tweeting. They have a job to do and that isn’t tweeting. They claim they’re overworked and short-staffed, but they have time to tweet!

Perhaps if they spent as much time dealing with crime as they do on social media the UK would be crime free. And it appears that our police in the United Kingdom are no longer fit for purpose and they clearly aren’t policing by consent anymore.

And why wasn’t a post-mortem done? There was only one witness, and this tragedy wasn’t investigated well enough, probably because they were too busy on Twitter, tweeting messages that they shouldn’t have been.

Now Health Professionals Are Urged To Call Vaginas ‘Bonus Holes’

Women have criticised a charity after it suggested the vagina could instead be referred to as ‘the bonus hole’ to avoid upsetting non-binary or trans men.

Female rights campaigners rounded on the alternative glossary, branding it both misogynistic and utterly degrading.

It’s featured on the charitable organisation Jo’s Cervical Cancer Trust on a page for health professionals who are treating patients who have the disease.

V

The trust urged it wasn’t suggesting the term should be used by all women, but added it was important to reach trans men and non-binary people. But the ‘bonus hole’ term, which the cause says was developed with expert organisations who work with the LGBT community, was widely condemned.

The page also features a suggestion that the vagina might also be referred to as a ‘front hole’.

It’s entitled ‘Language to use when supporting trans men and/or non-binary people.

Conservatives for Women founder Caroline Ffiske told a newspaper outlet that the gender movement seemed actively to want to encourage body disassociation and hatred, in other words, to actively create more confused young people alienated from their own physicality and their own sex.

She said what better way than to use this utterly dehumanising language about our own bodies? And she said that to her mind this was grooming. Create the unease, the disassociation, the alienation, and then when they’ve done that, they step in with euphoric rhetoric about trans joy.

She said, fill the void you’ve created, but of course, those doing this won’t be around to pick up the pieces when young bodies are irreversibly damaged and young lives are destroyed and asked if there was a mechanism whereby these charities promoting harm could be struck off.

The glossary says it was created with the help of the LGBT Foundation.

It adds that using the wrong terms if a person doesn’t use them can lead to them feeling hurt or distressed.

Kellie-Jay Keen, the founder of Standing for Women, described parts of the glossary as an erasure of female language.

She added that the whole thing was loathsome but bonus hole and front hole were so misogynistic.

She said that if a woman was so triggered by the word vagina, then she would imagine that she needs serious psychiatric help rather than the world bending to her never-ending list of irrational needs.

She added that you would think that charities focused on cervical cancer would have better things to do than erase female language. Still, it was better than the Canadian cervical charity which devoted a whole section for men with cervical cancer.

This is positively insulting because this is how some women bring life into the world, and this expression ‘bonus hole’ somehow implies that it’s some kind of goal for men, or that it’s some sort of prize, and this is disgusting.

It sounds more like a term men would use when they get laid or score in a nightclub or one-night stand.

This word is degrading and discriminatory and extremely unprofessional, and any healthcare professional that can’t or won’t use the correct medical terms for body parts should be struck off.

I pretty much like the term vagina, but if we have to call the vagina a ‘bonus hole’ then men’s penises should be called ‘bonus skin fold’ instead, but then we shouldn’t give them ideas.

This really does have to stop now! Otherwise, the future will be too horrendous to imagine.

So now, what should we start calling health professionals – oh, don’t tempt me!

A Four-Star Spa Hotel That Laid Off ALL Its Staff To Accommodate 241 Asylum Seekers

A four-star spa hotel which is reportedly sacking all its staff and cancelling all events is facing legal action.

Stradey Park Hotel in Llanelli, Carmarthenshire, is said to be accommodating up to 241 asylum seekers across its 77 rooms, under new plans by the Home Office.

According to a newspaper outlet, 95 full and part-time staff are facing redundancy from July 10 following the disclosure of these plans.

It reported that all events, including weddings at the venue, had been cancelled following that date.

Carmarthenshire County Council confirmed it’s now taking the hotel owners and the Home Office’s housing contractor to the High Court over claims that they have changed the use of the facility without planning permission.

Leader of Carmarthenshire County Council, Darren Price, said that Carmarthenshire County Council has recommended legal proceedings against Gryphon Leisure Limited, Sterling Woodrow Limited, Clearsprings Ready Homes Limited, Robert Horwood and Gareth Street regarding the material change of use without planning permission of the Stradey Park Hotel in Llanelli and that this case has been listed for a hearing on 7 July at the High Court at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London.

Darren Price added that the Council are unable to make any further comments at this time due to the need to respect the legal process that is underway.

Dame Nia Griffith MP said in a previous statement that this was hugely concerning and that she would continue to oppose any such proposal very vigorously, making clear the very strong opposition from local people.

A Home Office spokesman said that the number of people arriving in the United Kingdom who require accommodation has reached record levels and has put our asylum system under incredible strain and that they’ve been clear that the use of hotels to house asylum seekers is unacceptable, and that there are currently more than 51,000 asylum seekers in hotels costing the UK taxpayer £6 million a day.

The spokesperson added that the Home Office was committed to making every effort to reduce hotel use and limit the burden on the taxpayer.

It came as the Home Office faces another legal challenge next week from two other councils over its plans to house migrants in two UK military bases.

West Lindsey District Council and Braintree District Council are opposed to plans to turn the RAF Scampton base in Lincolnshire and RAF Wethersfield in Essex into a haven for migrants.

Hopefully, they will be taken to the cleaners and fined heavily.

Our Government pledged to us that this would stop, but instead, they’re still enabling them to come to our shores, while our British-born homeless people are left on the street in this country – something isn’t right.

And how much is our government paying for these hotels? It must have outstripped what these hotels were going to get from the many bookings they already had.

This has happened to a lot of large seafront hotels which used to be topped with holidaymakers, now it’s ruined, and what used to be a beautiful place to go is now full of migrants.

Our government actually needs to start acting in accordance with the law, not just doing whatever they feel like doing.

There are over 300 hotels that have been taken over by the government to house immigrants crossing the channel. Thousands of people have lost their jobs because of this as well, so instead of helping our unemployment problem, they’re helping to cause it.

Nearly ALL Ticket Offices At Rail Stations Have Been Closed

Plans to close almost all of England’s remaining train station ticket offices were revealed by rail chiefs, amid concerns over the impact on the elderly and disabled.

The Railway Group has unveiled proposals which could see most of the 1,000 offices being closed, with facilities only staying open at the busiest stations.

The move will be seen as a bid by ministers and rail bosses to bounce striking union moguls into getting back around the negotiating table after discussions stalled. But it could backfire by angering already rock-bottom relations and sparking more strikes.

The militant RMT union, which has been striking since last June, has warned it would bring into effect the full industrial force of the union to stop any closures.

Campaign groups have also raised fears that elderly or vulnerable passengers who don’t have a smartphone or use the internet could miss out on more affordable tickets.

A 21-day consultation was launched, during which travellers could give their views. It means the volume of closures being proposed is not guaranteed.

There are 1,007 stations in England run by train companies operating under contracts administered by the Government. Signs are being displayed at the vast majority of these, advising passengers about the possible closure of the ticket office.

After a consultation, the Government will make the final decision on which offices will be axed. It’s not known how quickly the first sites will close, although the schedule is set to last for three years.

But Caroline Abrahams, charity director at Age UK, told a newspaper outlet that millions of older people are not online and therefore rely on traditional methods, including face-to-face ones, for everyday transactions such as buying train tickets.

She said that it was unfair if they’re excluded from accessing the cheapest prices, just because they don’t own a smartphone or other digital device.

She added that companies should be legally obliged to treat all their customers fairly when it comes to prices and access, whether people are internet savvy or not.

Transport Secretary Mark Harper will have the final say on the volume of closures.

But Vivienne Francis, the Royal National Institute of Blind People’s chief social change officer, told a newspaper outlet that a mass closure of rail ticket offices would have a hugely detrimental impact on blind and partially sighted people’s ability to buy tickets, arrange assistance, and critically travel independently.

Unfortunately, all services industries are closing their doors where you once could pay your bills. Now they’ve closed them and are saving millions of pounds but the bills still keep going up. Now even the banks are closing their doors. Service industry, of course, they’re not, they’re profit industries.

This is another nasty step towards a cashless society, but some might say why cling onto cash. Because it’s a protection against dictatorship, but instead, we’re moving towards a 100 per cent surveillance civilisation, and once all our money goes digital, if the bank shuts you down you’re going to be destitute.

I much prefer having a person to talk to when at the train station, particularly when you might need a refund. If there’s a physical person to hand, things are done in moments rather than days or weeks.

Sadiq Khan’s Hated ULEZ Expansion

A High Court challenge by five Conservative-led councils against London Mayor Sadiq Khan’s plan to expand the Ultra Low Emission Zone (Ulez) will be heard today.

The outer London boroughs of Bexley, Bromley, Harrow and Hillingdon along with Surrey County Council started legal action in February over the proposed extension.

A High Court judge gave the councils the go-ahead to bring the challenge in April, saying parts of the local authorities challenge were ‘arguable’. Now, a hearing will start at 10 am today before Mr Justice Swift, who will give his ruling at a later date.

Sadiq Khan’s Ulez has proven hugely controversial amid claims it does little to improve air quality and has an adverse impact on families and tradespeople who need cars.

The scheme was originally launched in April 2019 when it covered the same area as the Congestion Charge zone in Central London before being expanded two years later in October 2021 to cover the area within the North and South Circular roads.

Sadiq Khan now plans to expand the Ulez on August 29 to cover all of Greater London, with new borders reaching Buckinghamshire, Essex, Hertfordshire, Kent and Surrey.

If it goes ahead on that date, Ulez will see all motorists in all parts of London pay a £12.50 daily fee if their vehicle does not meet the required emissions standards.

Councils involved in the legal challenge believe ‘relevant statutory requirements’ were not complied with, anticipated compliance rates in outer London were not considered and the proposed scrappage scheme was not consulted on.

They also declared the overall consultation process was not adequately conducted and that there was a failure to carry out a cost-benefit analysis of the plan.

The High Court has allowed the case to proceed on two grounds, the legal basis for the scheme and scrappage.

The extension has provoked a fierce backlash from many living in and around the newly encompassed areas, who face penalties of up to £160 for each day they fail to pay.

Chris Fordham, 62, told AFP as he pulled up at a supermarket just beyond South East London in his non-compliant 2012 diesel van that it wasn’t right.

The self-employed builder who travels into the capital almost every day said that he was thinking about packing up work, blaming the looming new charge and other soaring costs.

Sadiq Khan insists the bigger Ulez will help improve the city’s harmful air pollution, which causes thousands of annual deaths and life-changing illnesses.

However, the only way to de-pollute is by getting rid of older cars, but not everyone can afford a new car. Therefore older vehicles are still on the road, and it wouldn’t matter how much Ulez charge one pays, the older cars are still on the roads pouring out pollutants, so what good is the Ulez charge, unless they’re using the money to filter out the dangerous toxins in some way.

But ask yourself what profit is gained from all this, and whose pockets are being filled with that profit? Data obtained from the Mayor of London’s Annual Report and Statement of Accounts for the years 2019-2020, 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 revealed that last year’s gross income from the Ulez (Ultra Low Emission Zone) charges increased to £225.7 million, that’s a lot of profit!

Apparently, any money obtained from the scheme is reinvested into running and improving London’s transport grid, such as expanding bus routes in outer London. The maintenance of Ulez also requires significant expenditure on new cameras, toll facilities, traffic management, administration, and support services.

Whenever we hear the word ‘administration’ you just know that the money we pay out doesn’t go towards what we believe it does, or what they tell us it does – I bet Sadiq Khan rubs his hands together at night before he goes to sleep? As he gets driven to work in a £300,000 armoured car – we are being robbed blind, and remember, pollution is perfectly acceptable if you pay your £12.50 a day.

The UK public is facing the largest attacks on their freedom of speech and personal freedoms than they’ve ever encountered before.

It’s taken a while but the public is becoming aware of this and what’s been going on in the background, and now it’s all coming to the forefront – who and what’s behind it but how do we stop it? And remember, government doesn’t support the poor or working class, they only support the rich Metropolitan elite.

If only Sadiq Khan put as much energy into solving knife crime in London, but of course, there’s no money in that, is there? And then he claims paying the Ulez charge will save lives while ignoring the people getting stabbed every day – this man clearly has his head up his posterior – I bet it’s not lavender-scented up there!

The Long-Term Game Is On For Kate

New disclosures that Kate was the one behind the Royal Family’s famous Ophrah fightback statement, showing that she truly is the real steely operator in the Palace.

Details of how the late Queen approved the subtle but strong comeback to Harry and Meghan’s poisonous attack on the monarchy, using the expression ‘recollections may vary’, have emerged in a book by royal correspondent Valentine Low.

A draft palace statement initially didn’t include the famous expression, and was a much milder version, though the Prince and Princess of Wales were said to have demanded it be toughened up a bit. While Kate was right behind her husband, it was said that she was even more firm than him on the matter.

When a courtier first suggested the ‘recollections may vary’ phrase, which was hailed as a classic iron fist in velvet glove royal manoeuvre, at least two palace officials argued against it in case it enraged Harry and Meghan further.

But it was Kate, then the Duchess of Cambridge, who pressed home the argument that it should remain, Mr Low’s books says.

He quotes a source as saying that it was Kate who clearly made the point, ‘History will judge this statement and unless this phrase or a phrase like it is included, everything that they have said will be taken as true’.

The source said it was an example of how Kate is often far steelier than she appears, and that she doesn’t get as much credit as she should, because she is so subtle about it.

He said she’s playing the long game and she’s always got her eye on, ‘This is my life and my historic path and that she’s going to be the Queen one day’.

Author Claudia Joseph recently revealed how lines of strong, indomitable women run through both sides of Kate’s family history.

Hers is a story featuring deprivation and hardship in the Durham coalfields and in the working-class suburbs of London. There was also privilege, too, and connections to high society.

The main theme, nevertheless, is one of strong, matriarchal figures.

Kate’s mother, Carole, made sure her three children had the best possible start in life.

She got her drive and ambition from her own mother, Dorothy Goldsmith, who set her family on the road from poverty to prosperity, earning the affectionate moniker ‘Lady Dorothy’ along the way.

Kate’s invincible great-grandmother Edith Goldsmith was another formidable woman, who smoked 20 Woodbines a day and brought up six children in Southall, then a working-class suburb for railway depot workers in west London.

Widowed in 1938, Edith Goldsmith was left to bring up her two youngest children Joyce, then 13, and Kate’s grandfather Ronald, then six, in a condemned flat, juggling work at a nearby Ticklers jam factory.

And another of the Princess’s great-grandmothers, Olive Lupton, who passed away 45 years before Kate was born, had worked to ensure her family left behind the atrocities of the First World War.

Kate’s second cousin Kim Sullivan said that Prince William was a lucky man because Kate came from a family of strong women and that hopefully, the country will benefit from her strength of character in the years to come.

But Kate’s not playing any game, long or otherwise. She’s fulfilling her responsibility and doing her job, as well as protecting her children’s future, and she seems to be an iron fist in a velvet glove, and hopefully, the fate of the Monarchy will be in safe hands with this couple.

Hopefully, they will inject a new meaning to their role, one which is of its time, and they both appear totally committed.

Kate playing the long game, not sure about that. The one that played the long game was Camilla. Kate didn’t need to play the long game, she won the game by right of marriage to William.

Kate always looks lovely and appears to be a happy and supportive wife and mother, and extremely respectful of the Royal Family and its traditions, and she always does her duties with warmth and commitment.

Katherine might look stunning, but she’s a silent Queen in waiting and has a great deal of backbone, which William will need when it’s time for him to become king.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started