Twenty‑Six Years Of Building A Life — And Now They Want To Tear A Family Apart

A Jamaican man who has lived more than half his life in the UK is facing deportation to his home country in one of the first cases since new anti-immigration measures were announced in last week’s immigration bill.

Mark Nelson, 46, came to the UK in 2000 and set up his own car-mechanic business. He has five British children and a British partner. In 2017, he received a four-year prison sentence for growing cannabis plants, something he said he did after his business experienced financial problems. He has not committed any additional offences.

In 2022, he wrote an opinion piece for the Guardian about being under threat of deportation. He said Jamaica was a place where he no longer knew anyone after his great-grandparents, who brought him up there, died when he was 16.

His removal was later withdrawn, and instead he was tagged and had to report weekly at a Home Office reporting centre. But last Thursday, when Nelson went to report, he was arrested, detained and told that the government intended to deport him to Jamaica.

Speaking from a detention centre near Heathrow airport, Nelson said he was devastated about once again facing deportation and separation from his five children and his partner. “I’m in a hot and filthy cell on the induction wing. My mental health is so bad because of what the Home Office has done to me. For the first time in my life, I have taken antidepressant medication.

“My family is so upset. My brother, who is 46, was crying on the phone when he heard I had been detained. I haven’t been able to sleep a wink since they brought me here. I was in such a state of shock when they arrested me,” he said.

“What the Home Office don’t think about when they try to deport someone like me is the impact it has not only on the person but on so many other people around them. I love my kids so much, and I can’t bear to think of them being without their dad. I try to be a good role model for them. I talk to them about my crime to try to ensure they don’t make the same mistake I made.”

His partner, Rachel Derbyshire, said that all of Nelson’s family were distraught about his detention and threatened deportation. “It seems that the Home Office is not going to let this go. Mark’s mental health is really bad because of this. He’s a really lovely guy, but the Home Office is treating him as if he was a rapist or a murderer.”

The new immigration bill lays out a harsher test for the family and private life test known as Article 8 in deportation cases.

Although exceptional circumstances are taken into consideration – such as the degree to which a person is socially and culturally integrated in the UK, whether there would be significant barriers to integration into their country of birth and whether the effect of the person’s deportation on family members would be excessively harsh – it appears that the government wants to proceed with Nelson’s deportation despite the span of time he has lived in the UK and his strong family ties.

A Home Office spokesperson said: “All foreign national offenders who receive a prison sentence in the UK are referred for deportation at the earliest opportunity.”

“More than 70,000 illegal migrants and foreign national offenders have been returned since this government took office, a 41 per cent increase.”

People have been extremely vocal about Mark Nelson’s situation, and many are saying that 26 years in the UK, British children, and a stable life make his removal cruel and unnecessary. He’s already served his sentence and rebuilt his life.

His situation is cruel, vengeful and a disgrace, and it would harm his five British children, who would lose their father overnight. They are penalising the children, not just him, and it seems that the system is designed to break people.

This case resembles the Windrush scandal, where long-term Caribbean residents were wrongly detained or deported.

The UK is breaking families apart, and sending him back after 26 years would be dangerous and destabilising. Jamaica has a limited support system for people who have been away for decades, and he would be isolated, with no family, no home, and no realistic way to rebuild.

Community organisations accuse the UK of using deportation as a political tool to appear tough on immigration, and the Home Office is “targeting easy cases” — people who have lived here long enough to be compliant and easy to detain.

Harry Rocked Up — Palace Said, ‘You’re Late, Mate

Prince Harry has touched down in the UK after being barred from staying in Buckingham Palace over a missed invite deadline.

The 41-year-old Duke arrived without Meghan, Archie and Lilibet, a spokesman confirmed – after taking too long to accept an offer of royal accommodation from King Charles.

The arrival of the prince comes just two days after he was told he could not take up a stay at the Palace and at least 36 hours before his own team announced to the world that he would be, the Daily Mail understands. 

Amid the row over his son’s security arrangements, King Charles brushed aside the controversy as he climbed aboard a Challenger 3 battle tank during a royal engagement with the British Army in Bovington, Dorset.

The monarch is understood to have asked for an answer from Harry about staying at the Palace by last Friday, but he was still flip-flopping over the weekend.

The prince had initially declined his father’s olive branch, then changed his mind and attempted to accept it just hours later.

The Duke has now returned to the UK for five days of engagements in London and Birmingham, including marking the one-year countdown to the 2027 Invictus Games. 

On Saturday night, royal officials had told him that the stay was logistically unfeasible due to the lack of the required manpower and hospitality preparations.

However, there was confusion at the Palace on Monday when Harry’s team briefed preferred media outlets, including the BBC, that he would be staying at Buckingham Palace this week, citing direct discussions with the King.

These assertions were publicly contested in a matter of minutes, and only hours before Harry was scheduled to arrive in Britain.

According to palace officials, the Duke had many weeks to think about the offer, but he had just not responded in a timely manner.

Harry’s spokesman later issued an extraordinary statement expressing ‘disappointment’ and accusing Buckingham Palace of withdrawing the offer ‘at the last moment’ – a development that has plunged the Duke’s forthcoming visit into fresh turmoil.

‘I am aware of multiple briefings from Buckingham Palace last week suggesting that the Duke had not accepted the offer of accommodation at a Royal Residence,’ the spokesman said.

‘Following RAVEC’s decision not to provide security for his family, the Duke spent last week making alternative security arrangements. Once those arrangements were in place, he was able to formally accept the offer of accommodation for himself over the weekend.

‘It is therefore disappointing that the offer has now been withdrawn, with Tuesday’s judgment in the Associated Newspapers Limited case cited as the reason.

‘Buckingham Palace has, however, been aware of that judgment since last Thursday. It is therefore unclear why, having formally accepted the accommodation offer, it has now been withdrawn at the last moment.’

The latest dispute marks another twist in more than a week of tense negotiations over Harry’s security arrangements in Britain, a saga that sources say has left the Duke ‘in tears’.

The Daily Mail understands that, despite repeated requests for clarity, no formal acceptance of the offer of accommodation at a royal residence for the Duke and his family had been received by the Palace before the deadline at the end of last week.

While every effort had, it is understood, been made to facilitate Harry’s stay, the Royal Household needs a minimum period of notice to ensure a royal residence can be staffed and prepared properly.

Since the offer was first made, every indication from the Duke and his senior team was that the accommodation had been deemed unsuitable, including correspondence received on Saturday morning formally declining the King’s offer.

Although a request was later received to accept the accommodation for a limited period, the required hospitality and staffing requirements were no longer available.

Following consultation with His Majesty, the resulting outcome was communicated to the Duke through the ‘appropriate channels’.

It remains the case that accommodation at a Royal residence will be made available to the Duke and his family for a forthcoming stay.

Father and son are widely expected to meet, although any plans are likely to remain private.

The key question now is whether Meghan, Archie and Lilibet will also travel to Britain to see the King and spend time with him for the first time in four years.

Harry’s wish to stay in a royal palace is likely to raise eyebrows given his long-running criticism of the Royal Family and the so-called ‘men in grey suits’ who work for his father.

It came amid toing and froing over whether Meghan and the children would be coming over with him.

The Duchess of Sussex and her young children will not travel to London on Monday with Prince Harry after a demand for additional security was turned down.

The family are thought to have been holidaying in Europe.

Sources close to the couple have not ruled out Meghan and the children coming to the UK later in the week. Archie and Lilibet have not seen King Charles since 2022.

Meghan is due to join her husband at an event in Birmingham on Friday to promote next year’s Invictus Games, the charity for wounded servicemen that Harry set up in 2014.

It is understood Meghan and Harry could bring Prince Archie, seven, and Princess Lilibet, five, with them when they travel to other parts of the UK.

Sources previously claimed there have been ‘real and credible threats’, including threats of terrorism, against Harry and his family in the capital.

The five-day Sussex trip to the UK has been fraught with upset and drama.

Harry is still furious that he doesn’t have round-the-clock police security when he travels to the UK.

Instead, he has to give three weeks’ notice of his visits, which are assessed on a ‘case-by-case’ basis.

Harry’s team initially briefed the Press that he was coming with his wife and children – Meghan has not visited the UK since the Queen’s funeral in September 2022 – but, less than 24 hours later, said he feared for their safety if they came without full-time taxpayer-funded armed police protection, and his spokesman said the family would no longer accompany him.

But now Harry’s team are saying that while the family will not travel to London with him, there is a chance they may join him during other parts of his UK visit.

It is believed he wants to take his children to his mother Princess Diana’s family home, Althorp, where she is buried on a private island in the middle of a lake.

A source said: ‘Harry longs to bring his children to the UK, to show them where he comes from and to introduce them to their heritage. And he wants to take them to Althorp, which is where Diana was raised and where she rests. 

‘It’s important to him that the English side of their heritage is part of their life. But their security is everything. There are real and credible threats, and he will not put his family in danger.’

Harry and Meghan had intended to visit the Royal Hospital Chelsea in London as well as other charitable activities in the UK.

It is believed Harry will now attend the London events unaccompanied.

The Sussex drama has been going on all week.

The family is presently in Europe, perhaps at their holiday villa in Portugal, and had been scheduled to travel together on Monday.

The Mail understands there are tentative plans to see members of the Royal Family, including the King, but in a private capacity, with courtiers telling the Sussexes they cannot release any photographs of any reunion.

It is doubtful that Prince William and Princess Kate will see the Sussexes while they are there.

Should Prince Harry pay for his own security while he’s in the UK?

Legally, Prince Harry does not have an automatic right to publicly funded police protection in the UK, and whether he should pay for it is a matter of principle, precedent, and public interest — not a simple yes/no.

Harry decided to leave the UK and his royal duties, so protection when he travels is his responsibility.

Protecting him, however, also protects the others in his immediate vicinity if there are real risks. The same reasoning applies to visiting heads of state; therefore, Harry should not automatically receive taxpayer-funded security, but he also shouldn’t be denied protection if credible threats exist.

Do the royals have a lot of skeletons in their closet? They absolutely do — the British Royal Family has accumulated a century’s worth of scandals, cover‑ups, and controversies, ranging from constitutional crises to deeply serious allegations. That doesn’t mean every rumour is true, but the historical record shows plenty of “skeletons” that have shaped public perception of the monarchy.

So, now we get to the book!

Spare is essentially Harry trying to drag every skeleton he’s lived with out into the light, shake the dust off, and say: this is what shaped me. It’s not a gossip book; it’s a trauma book. And the “skeletons” he’s confronting fall into a few very clear categories.

He was trying to process a lifetime of institutional pressure, family dysfunction, media intrusion, and grief that was never allowed to heal.

Harry describes being told to walk behind her coffin at 12, being discouraged from expressing grief, and growing up in a system that treated his mother’s death as a PR event rather than a family tragedy.

He’s attempting to get across that he wasn’t allowed to mourn properly, the media’s role in her death, and the monarchy’s stern response.

The tabloid machine that stalked him from childhood. Harry writes about the paparazzi chasing him at school, newspapers inventing stories about him, being portrayed as the “problem prince,” and the palace often refusing to defend him.

This is a huge part of the “skeletons”: the monarchy’s long, messy relationship with the press.

But people don’t want the truth; they want the fairytale, because the fairytale is usually more satisfying than the truth, particularly when it comes to the royals. And Harry’s whole point in Spare is that he grew up inside a storybook that everyone else adored, while he was living the messy, lonely, sometimes brutal reality behind it.

We should also remember that even though they are from royalty, they are still human, and humans are not infallible.

Royalty doesn’t cancel humanity. The crown doesn’t make someone perfect, wise, or morally untouchable — it just makes their mistakes more visible, more politicised, and more mythologised, and people often forget that, but sadly the fairytale demands perfection.

Where The Crown Forgets, The Blood Remembers

Nerissa and Katherine Bowes-Lyon were first cousins of Queen Elizabeth II, part of the royal family through the Queen Mother’s side.

Both girls were born with extreme developmental disabilities at a time when society heavily stigmatised conditions like theirs.

In 1941, at just 15 and 22 years old, they were quietly moved to the Royal Earlswood Hospital — an institution for people with mental disabilities.

But what ensued would only be exposed decades later.

The family declared both sisters dead in official records.

Even official genealogical records recorded them as dead in the 1940s… while they were still alive inside the institution.

For years, no visitors came—no public mention. No acknowledgement.

It wasn’t until 1987 that the truth emerged through a tabloid investigation — revealing that both sisters had been alive the whole time, living in near-total obscurity.

Nerissa died in 1986 and was buried in a pauper’s grave marked only with a number.

Katherine survived until 2014, spending over 70 years inside institutional care.

The royal family described it as a “private matter. But for many, it became a haunting reminder of how even those born into privilege could be erased just for being different.

This is how things were done then when they were young. Numerous families put away children considered “not normal”; numerous children with Down syndrome were locked away; it was the way of society. So pleased we are living in a more enlightened age.

You would have expected, though, that the royals would have made sure these ladies had a better place to live than an institution.

What is the true source of genetic problems in royal lines?

Generations of cousin marriages reduce genetic diversity, increasing the chance of recessive disorders. Small gene pools — when families only marry within a tiny circle, harmful mutations accumulate. Selective breeding for appearance — prioritising “royal features” over health. Hidden illnesses — conditions quietly passed down because they were never publicly acknowledged, and Social pressure to hide disability — meaning no one addressed or treated underlying genetic issues.

None of this is about impurity. It’s about too much purity — or rather, the dangerous myth of it.

It wasn’t outsiders who troubled the royal bloodline — it was the walls built to keep them out.

The crown feared contamination, never realising it was suffocating itself.

The Queen Mother lived in a world where secrets were currency.

She absolutely knew about children hidden away in aristocratic families, about heirs quietly removed from succession, about cousins institutionalised and erased from public memory, and about scandals buried so deeply they only resurfaced decades later.

She lived through the era of Nerissa and Katherine Bowes‑Lyon — her nieces, placed in an institution and declared “dead” in Burke’s Peerage, aristocratic families hiding disabled children, royal doctors quietly managing “unacceptable” conditions, and the monarchy’s obsession with presenting a perfect lineage.

She knew how the system worked. She knew what happened to children who didn’t fit the narrative. She knew how easily a life could be erased.

“Behind every royal procession walks a shadow they hope no one sees.”

Tap The Earring, Trap The Danger

A 16-year-old from Limpopo built an “Alerting Earpiece”, which is now award-winning and has been widely reported.

In situations where reaching for a phone is unsafe or impossible, this covert earring protects women and girls by concealing a camera, GPS tracker, and emergency alarm system.

With one hidden press, it can silently photograph or record video of an attacker, send live GPS location to trusted contacts and emergency services. It also transmits distress alerts without any visible movement and captures evidence, including images, timestamps and location, that strengthens prosecution.

This isn’t conceptual — she built a working prototype and presented it at the Eskom Expo for Young Scientists, earning national recognition.

South Africa’s gender‑based violence crisis is severe, and 1 in 3 women have experienced physical violence and 120,000-plus cases of violent crimes against women and children are reported annually.

It was commended by experts for integrating discreet activation, real-time notifications, and evidence collection—functions that are seldom combined into a single wearable.

Her invention has been featured on BBC Africa, SABC Morning Live, and Metro FM, and she won a bronze medal at the Eskom Expo and received praise from Limpopo’s Education MEC, who called her a “role model and change‑maker.”

She later founded Mphahlele Alerts (Pty) Ltd to commercialise the device and integrate it into national emergency systems.

This isn’t just a clever gadget — it’s a young woman refusing to accept a violent status quo, and her work is now sparking conversations across Africa about youth-led safety tech, GBV prevention, and the importance of discreet tools for victims.

She has created an incredible invention, but it’s also sad that girls need this to survive; nevertheless, she has essentially built a wearable panic button that collects evidence.

This clever device needs to be rolled out internationally, and schools should give these out to girls for free. Now people want the device for their daughters because it gives them hope that their children will be safer, and it just shows how deeply personal the issue is. People aren’t just impressed; they’re emotionally invested, and this is the mother of invention.

Whilst it is amazing, the fact that it was even needed in the first place is alarming, but still I believe it’s needed in every town, every state, every country because there are some extremely sick people in this world. It’s kind of like insurance; we don’t need it until we need it.

Fishing For Hate — Catching Suspended Sentences

Two men who went ‘fishing for Jews’ in north London as they filmed anti-Semitic TikTok videos have been given suspended prison sentences. 

Adam Bedoui and Abdelkader Amir Bousloub, both 21, previously pleaded guilty to religiously aggravated intentional harassment after they shouted anti-Semitic abuse at a Jewish person.

Bousloub approached the victim and started yelling insults while filming it on a mobile phone, while Bedoui stood behind him, laughing and also tormenting the victim.

The two can be seen grinning while strolling along a street in Stamford Hill with a fishing rod in videos released by Shomrim, a Jewish volunteer neighbourhood watch organisation.

They have attached a note to the end, in reference to vile anti-Semitic tropes about Jews.

In CCTV footage, Bedoui is seen holding the rod in front of him while Bousloub records with his phone as they pass through an entry hall.

Subsequent video shows Shomrim volunteers standing close by as the two are searched and taken into custody by police.

The Metropolitan Police said Bedoui and Bousloub had travelled to Clapton Common with ‘deliberate’ intentions to capture anti-Semitic content. 

Shomrim reported that the pair had specifically targeted Orthodox Jews in the filmed encounters.

Officers were called about 9 pm on Thursday, May 7, and detained the pair after they attempted to flee.

According to the CPS, the defendants intended to publish the footage on social media.

When questioned by the police, Bousloub said he had gone to Stamford Hill to film a video with a fishing rod with the aim of getting a reaction and to copy what he had seen on an Instagram reel.

He said he had intended to share what he filmed with others on TikTok and that he was expecting numbers in the hundreds or thousands of people to watch it. 

He tried to claim that he thought the Jewish community would find what he was doing funny. Bedoui made a no-comment police interview.

The victim said the incident left him feeling vulnerable and targeted.

The pair have now been sentenced to six weeks’ imprisonment, suspended for twelve months. 

Prosecutor Varinder Hayre said: ‘These men deliberately targeted a member of the Jewish community, and subjected him to antisemitic abuse in a public place.

‘They filmed the incident with the intention to upload it to social media and amplify the harm caused to the victim.

‘The CPS worked closely with the Metropolitan Police to build a strong case, securing a conviction less than 48 hours after the incident.

‘Hate crime has a serious impact on victims and communities. We will continue to prosecute these offences robustly.’

Detective Chief Superintendent Brittany Clarke, who leads policing in the area, said: ‘These men thought nothing of travelling to Stamford Hill so they could generate social media likes from hateful so-called content.

‘There is no place for antisemitic hate in this city, and this case carries a clear warning for anyone tempted to commit hate crimes in pursuit of online notoriety.

‘These men were arrested within minutes of the incidents being reported to us. They were then charged, remanded to court and convicted 48 hours after the original report.’

A spokesperson for Campaign Against Antisemitism said: ‘This sentence has absolutely no deterrent effect.

‘If anything, it reminds antisemites how little they have to fear from the criminal justice system even now amidst the worst wave of anti-Jewish attacks in modern British history. 

‘It is surely because of outrageously lenient sentences like this one that only 10 per cent of British Jews think that the courts do enough to protect them. 

‘When antisemites are given a slap on the wrist, it sends the message that Jews are fair game.

‘This decision is appalling and will only further erode what little confidence the Jewish community has left in the criminal justice system. 

‘Antisemitic offenders must face punishments that actually reflect the seriousness of their crimes.’ 

This sentence was absurdly light. ‘Suspended’ – why bother taking them to court at all? If you violate the law, then it should be jail time. They should have been given a custodial sentence, but then what do you expect? The whole judicial system is a disgrace, which then enables all kinds of crimes to take place without fear of incarceration.

Well, that was a great deterrent, and it does nothing at all to make Jewish people feel safe. The judge may as well have given them compensation and a flat for their inconvenience because our courts have wilted.

Prosecute robustly. I guess the judicial system is unfamiliar with the true meaning of those words. Now this pair will be laughing and bragging about how they got away with it.

This type of behaviour is similar to the Blackshirts, fascist supporters of Oswald Mosley who used physical altercations in the East End to intimidate Jews. These are the new Blackshirts, and believe me, things will only get worse.

EpiPens In Every School — Finally, A Rule That Saves Lives Instead Of Excuses

The parents of children with allergies say ‘lives will be saved’ by new Government guidance, which will require every school in England to stock EpiPens and provide allergy training to all staff.

The statutory guidance, known as Benedict’s Law, will be published by the Department for Education on Monday and follows years of campaigning by the family of Benedict Blythe, who died aged five from anaphylaxis just months after he started primary school in 2021.

In what marks a significant milestone for schools, parents and children, the guidance will set out the practical steps that all 25,000 schools will have to take before the start of the new term in September amid a tremendous increase in the number of children suffering life-threatening allergies to food.

The Mail understands that the guidance will include a requirement to stock emergency auto-injector pens, also known as EpiPens, in case of an anaphylactic reaction and to train all staff – including temporary teachers, visiting tutors, and dinner ladies – to recognise and respond to allergic reactions.

All schools will also be expected to keep clear allergy policies and healthcare plans, ‘so no parent feels worried that their child may not be safe’, the DfE will say.

Benedict’s mother Helen Blythe, who set up the Benedict Blythe Foundation in memory of her son, said: ‘There will be children who we will never know, who will never know us, whose lives will be saved by Benedict’s Law. We are immensely proud of that, and it’s a legacy for our little boy that will last for generations.

‘The guidance will make England among the best education systems in the world for children with allergies, and is the result of a campaign hard-fought, but achieved only by the wonderful generosity of others who supported us along the way.’

The move comes amid a surprising spike in the number of children with potentially life-threatening allergies to food such as nuts, cow’s milk, eggs and fruit over the last two decades.

Figures from the Department for Education show pupils lost more than 500,000 learning days last year due to allergy-related illness or medical appointments.

Sarah Knight, founder of The Allergy Team, which has already provided support and allergy training to thousands of teachers and which worked closely with the DfE and the Benedict Blythe Foundation on the development of the guidance, said it would ‘make a huge difference’ to parents, children and teachers.

‘As a parent of two children with allergies, this is honestly amazing,’ she said. ‘I know how daunting it can be to navigate these allergies, and for that responsibility to sit on other people is a lot.

‘This guidance will give people the tools to support children or fellow staff members with allergies. And the fact that it requires all staff to have allergy training – from the music teacher to an extra member of the catering team – will reduce those vulnerabilities in the system. 

‘People don’t just have allergic reactions at convenient times or in front of people with the right training.

‘My eldest son was turned down for a preschool place because they were worried they couldn’t keep him safe. Now, we’re about to apply for a secondary school place, and that worry will be much further down my list. It should be reassuring for all parents.’

Benedict suffered from asthma and had a number of allergies including eggs, kiwi fruit, nuts and milk. But despite his parents, Helen and Peter, helping his primary school in Stamford, Lincolnshire, to put together an allergy plan to cope with his needs, he was accidentally exposed to cow’s milk in December 2021 when the plan wasn’t followed. 

An inquest heard there were delays in administering an adrenaline pen, which was a factor in his death.

The new guidance will also be written into legislation in the form of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act. Its allergy provisions will come into force in 2027.

Schools used to have on-site nurses, and they should still have them. However, this practice was discontinued for unknown reasons, most likely because it was too expensive, as money is always prioritised above children’s safety.

It’s extremely hard to cause harm with an EpiPen. If you give it and it’s not required, there is no lasting harm. If in doubt, it should always be given, as waiting minutes for an ambulance to arrive can mean it is too late for the reaction to be brought under control, and using an EpiPen is very simple; it would take about ten minutes to show someone how it is used; it is literally a push and click.

Allergies have become more prevalent, or at least they appear to have, and if having training in schools and EpiPens on site saves a child’s life, then it would be an extremely positive move.

“The AI Doctor Will See You Now — Please Hold While It Decides If You’re Actually Ill”

Artificial intelligence will be used on the NHS app to tell patients if they should book a GP appointment or would be better off going to A&E.

People will be asked a series of questions by the new triage tool, which will utilise their responses to guide them to the optimum service for their medical condition.

The update is anticipated to reach more than 200,000 patients in the next 12 months and will be available to all NHS app users by April 2028.

It forms part of a ‘major overhaul of tech’ in the coming years in a bid to transform NHS services.

Although the tool’s launch has been widely applauded, several health organisations have asked the NHS to give patient safety, confidentiality, and inclusiveness first priority as it becomes more dependent on AI.

A trial at a GP practice in Sussex led to a 29 per cent fall in the number of people queuing on the phone for an appointment.

Dr Ragu Rajan, from Wealden Ridge Medical Partnership in Sussex – which ran the initial trial, said: ‘Integrating AI triage directly into the NHS app means our patients can tell us what they need, when they need it, and be directed to the right care first time.

‘It hasn’t replaced our judgment – it’s given us back the time to use it.’

It comes as the health service sets out how £10 billion in funding allotted by the Government last year will be used to overhaul its technology and data systems.

Part of this includes AI that records conversations between patients and staff to generate real-time transcripts and save time on note-taking, and it will be rolled out nationally.

A trial led by Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children and carried out across nine NHS sites in London found NHS staff spent nearly 25 per cent more of their time interacting with patients when using the tool.

St George’s, Epsom and St Helier, Croydon, Kingston, and Richmond are the four NHS trusts in London where the rollout will begin with hospital appointments that don’t require an overnight stay.

Additionally, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust and Alder Hey Children’s NHS Foundation Trust in Liverpool are growing their AI note-taking initiatives.

Sir Jim Mackey, chief executive of NHS England, said: ‘The major overhaul of tech we’re making over the next few years will transform services.

‘The new AI tool in the NHS app will help get patients to the best service for their needs first time – whether that’s a GP appointment, trip to a pharmacy or advice on caring for themselves at home – so that clinicians can make sure those most in need of a GP appointment can get one sooner.

‘We’re also seeing huge benefits from the introduction of AI note-taking tools, with clinicians finding they’re able to spend up to a quarter more of their time with patients, so we’re rolling out the tools as quickly as possible across the NHS.

‘We’re prioritising the improvements that will make the biggest difference and supporting local leaders to adopt them to drive change in their services – helping to cut waiting lists and improve care for millions of patients so that the NHS is fit for the future.’

Health Secretary James Murray said: ‘As the NHS marks 78 years of serving patients, this investment shows how we can build on that proud legacy by embracing the technologies that will shape its future.

‘As someone who believes deeply in the power of tech to transform public services, I’ve made sure we’re backing the right innovations, which will have the biggest positive impact on patients and clinicians and give us the biggest bang for our buck.

‘I’m certain the technological innovations I’ve chosen to prioritise will get patients to the right care faster, free our brilliant clinicians from mountains of paperwork, and help drive down waiting times.

‘By harnessing the power of AI – using it to direct people to the right service first time and giving clinicians back more time to spend with patients – we’re making the NHS work better for patients and staff alike and helping make it fit for the future for its next 78 years.’

Responding to the announcement, the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) said the rollout could mark ‘an important step in upgrading technology in the NHS’.

‘We should be under no illusion though about just how far the NHS needs to go,’ RCN chief nursing officer, Professor Lynn Woolsey, said.

‘With some community nursing staff in 2026 still without mobile phones, while others in the system are forced to share painfully slow computers with poor connectivity, improvements to basic IT infrastructure must come first.

‘New digital technology like AI notetaking could ease the administrative burden on nursing staff, freeing up their precious time for frontline care.

‘But there are also warnings to heed, with growing concerns about overstated, overly-optimistic assessments of the productivity benefits from AI,’ Prof Woolsey added.

‘We cannot have situations where it increases bureaucracy through the need to correct flawed or inaccurate work.

‘Patient safety must be at the heart of any AI triage system, with a guarantee that a health professional will be the one making decisions at key points in that process.’

Prof Woolsey further highlighted the importance of privacy and patient confidentiality, adding: ‘Patients must be reassured that any new systems handling their information, such as ambient voice technology, are accurate and properly protect confidentiality.

‘Privacy and safety cannot be afterthoughts, with everyone deserving to know how and by whom their sensitive data is being used.

‘AI and new digital technology must be deployed with proper guardrails, staff training and anti-bias safeguards.’

Tory shadow health secretary Stuart Andrew said: ‘Any innovation that improves patient care and helps the NHS work more effectively should be welcomed. But new technology must be introduced with a fully-funded plan that delivers value for taxpayers.

‘Labour came into government without a credible plan for the NHS, and their first year saw one million fewer appointments delivered. Modernisation cannot be a sole substitute for reform.’

Most patients haven’t seen a GP for months; it’s usually always a nurse, and they always have to go back if symptoms continue, and this is a ridiculous situation.

Naturally, these arguments are only used to support reducing the number of doctors. These ludicrous assertions that doctors now have 25 per cent extra time are only a diversion, and how will the elderly cope if they don’t have a smartphone or computer? What will they be left to die?

GPs shamefully grabbed the opportunity to disappear during COVID and then never truly returned, other than to collect their pay cheques, and it seems that since COVID everyone has lost the art of being human.

AI is neither the answer nor the best course of action. Talking to a computer is not what people want; they want to speak with actual, caring individuals.

I’m fine with technology, but this is going too far, particularly for the elderly and non-techies, and when dealing with patients, some of them can’t articulate what their problem is, which is usually no fault of their own, and some people drastically play down their symptoms because they don’t want to cause a fuss.

When seen by a doctor, they can usually get to the bottom of it with examinations and targeted questions based on all sorts of factors, so how can an AI determine what help the patient needs based purely on what the patient has told it?

Red Arrows: Sponsored By Keir Starmer’s Pause Button

The Red Arrows face being grounded for years because of Keir Starmer’s dithering over defence spending, it is claimed.

Defence sources have told The Mail on Sunday the year-long delay to the defence investment plan (DIP), finally published last week, means it is now ‘almost impossible’ for the RAF to have a replacement aircraft ready for the Red Arrows by the time the display team’s ageing Hawk jets retire in 2030.

In a hugely embarrassing move, this would result in the famous display team being ‘stood down’ for several years until the replacement jets became operational, it is claimed.

The claims come as the Red Arrows today joined a spectacular flypast over New York City to mark America’s 250th anniversary of independence. 

It is part of a month-long tour of the US, with the display team’s pilots, dressed in their famous red flying suits, posing for photos in Times Square on Friday.

In May, the RAF announced it is cutting the number of jets in many of the Red Arrows aerobatic displays this summer to seven from the usual nine.

The reduction, which did not include today’s display, was imposed so the engines of the display team’s Hawk T1 aircraft, which are more than 40 years old, can be rotated, amid growing maintenance pressures.

After a marathon delay, the DIP committed to investing £360 million in developing a new ‘British Jet Trainer System’, which will include ‘new jets for the Red Arrows to replace the ageing Hawk aircraft’.

But the MoD now has just three-and-a-half years to launch a procurement competition, choose a replacement aircraft and for those jets to be built and authorised for aerobatic displays and for aircrews to be trained.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) would this weekend only say it was an ‘aspiration’ for the Red Arrows to have its replacement aircraft in place by 2030.

Tim Ripley, editor of the Defence Eye website, said: ‘You are looking at a four-year-plus time scale from signing on the dotted line with the manufacturer to a working jet being delivered to the RAF.

‘The Red Arrows requirement throws in added complications. After the basic conversion to the aircraft, to do aerobatic flying, pilots would need a period of rehearsals and training to get ready for displays. On top of that, the jets would need to go through the stringent RAF safety trials.

‘Most experts would say this is almost impossible to do in the time the Red Arrows have left on the Hawk.’

We should know by now that Labour don’t like anything that makes us proud to be British, but this is typical – one of the few things the public treasures and is proud of – shame on Labour.

Starmer is an embarrassment to the UK, and he will never be remembered as a statesman.

Starmer said he was a good Prime Minister because he was trying to frame his time in office as stable, competent, and responsible, but the public narrative around defence, welfare, housing, and the NHS has been chaotic, so when people hear that claim, they think, “What planet is he on?” and living in Britain is a badge of failure.

How on earth can Starmer say that he’s done well whilst being Prime Minister? He has been useless, dithering, and unsuitable for the job, and he was way out of his depth.

The Red Arrows are known worldwide, but this shambolic mess this government has made of this country is also known worldwide, and everything this man has touched, he’s destroyed – he definitely didn’t have the Midas touch.

Crude Cuts? Not On My Watch

Andy Burnham rules out “crude cuts” to benefits in any attempts to improve welfare.

Burnham told LBC: “I’m not going to go with the crude cuts to benefit levels that just put people who are struggling in even worse poverty, and that often creates the backlash, and understandably so.

“There’s a different approach, which is looking at two things that can be done differently to get the overall benefits bill down. One of those is how we support young people.”

“I will not defend an education system that is overly focused on the university route, and does not lay out paths to technical qualifications for our young people.” 

One year on from Keir Starmer’s ill-fated plans to cut £5 billion from sickness and disability benefits, Burnham says one of the focuses will be on helping young people into work.

People may critique him, but Andy Burnham will be prime minister, and like all prime ministers, he will be evaluated based on the outcomes he attains, and that’s how it should be. However, will the results be catastrophic? Only time will tell.

Apprenticeships are essential because they encourage individuals to pursue further education to increase their income.

If our youth lack the necessary abilities, they will not be able to earn enough money to support themselves.

But what about low-paid workers? Will they benefit from all of this?

Someone said that if minimum wage is considered good enough to live on, it should be capped for benefits as well, but people on benefits don’t get the same as low-wage workers, and in most cases, they get significantly less, and the system is designed that way.

A full‑time minimum‑wage worker earns roughly £1,600–£1,800 a month after tax (depending on hours). Universal Credit for a single adult over 25 is around £393 a month, plus housing support, which often doesn’t cover full rent. Even with disability benefits added, most disabled claimants still end up hundreds of pounds below low‑wage workers.

So, why do people think they’re the same? Because politicians constantly talk about “fairness” and “incentives to work,” which creates the impression that benefits are comparable to wages. They aren’t. Not even remotely.

Social security was initially conceived as a temporary buffer, not a wage, a safety net to keep people afloat until they worked again. This is historically correct: when the welfare state was created, benefits were meant to prevent poverty, not replace earnings. But the reality today is more complex, and that’s where people get misled.

Low‑wage workers can adjust spending because their income is flexible: overtime, extra shifts, job changes. People on benefits cannot adjust anything. Their income is fixed, sanctioned easily, and often far below basic living costs, and disabled people face inescapable extra costs: heating, transport, equipment, food delivery, medical needs.

Living within your means” hits differently when your “means” are structurally capped.

The welfare system was built on assumptions that no longer match modern life: It assumed jobs were stable. It assumed illness was short‑term. It assumed housing was affordable. It assumed disability costs were minimal, and it assumed people could return to work quickly. None of that is true anymore. So while the principle of a buffer still exists, the conditions people live in have altered dramatically.

Iceland Foods — Home Of Frozen Meals And, apparently, Frozen Morals

Disabled mum Danielle Riley lost her entire £220 Iceland order because a delivery driver allegedly refused to bring her shopping to her flat and just drove away with it.

The 44-year-old from Tuebrook was left in tears and feeling “sick” after the incident, which she claims unfolded after an Iceland home delivery arrived at her home.

Danielle, who has fibromyalgia and nerve damage to her spine, claims she needs home delivery for necessary shopping and is unable to leave her flat without help.

She uses two crutches to get around and said she has been unable to work since being diagnosed with fibromyalgia five years ago.

She says she spent £220.17 on a grocery order from Iceland’s Norris Green store, claiming she had already written on her order that she was disabled and was unable to come downstairs to collect it.

Having received a text to say her order was on its way, the driver then contacted her, saying: “Hi, it’s Iceland”, before the call cut off.

“Then he was ringing the bell, so I got to the door, and he started shouting: ‘Are you coming down here to get this?’ I apologised and said I couldn’t because I’m disabled.

“He brought one tray up, got to the top of the stairs, stared at me and shouted, ‘I’m not here to bring this up, I bring it to the communal door.’ But that’s not my front door.

“I tried to explain to him that none of the other drivers has an issue with it, and he yelled at me: ‘Well, I’m not them, am I!’

“I said I apologise for being disabled. Then he picked the tray up and took it back down to his van and said, ‘Well, you’re not getting your shopping then’. He took it all back with him.”

An Iceland Foods spokesperson explains: “Our customer care team is looking into this alleged incident, and is in regular contact with the customer.”

Being an Iceland Delivery Driver can be rather challenging work, but it can also be extremely fulfilling, even if you have to carry weighty bags upstairs. Some kind delivery drivers will even take them into the kitchen if they see you’re elderly or disabled. Should they take them into people’s homes? Probably not, but some people need the little extra help, and sometimes the delivery driver is the only person they see, so a cheerful smile and a quick chat make all the difference, and if you don’t have that in you, you’re in the wrong job.

And it’s not just Iceland; it’s other superstores as well because they don’t bag their deliveries anymore; they simply unpack on the doorstep. Now, while I appreciate drivers need not put their back out, just bring the containers in so people can put them on the side in their kitchen, especially the disabled and vulnerable.

Also, if stores are providing a delivery service, they need to consider who they’re delivering to, and have staff that will willingly go above and beyond when necessary in order to help the customer. After all, it is a service. Nowadays, everything is do it yourself and don’t complain, but a little help goes a long way, particularly from those who really do have a need for assistance.

Home deliveries are, in the main, paid for, so any supermarket delivery managers who may find themselves here, please read and feedback. At least take on staff who care and have interpersonal skills, and for those who do and have, thank you; you are valued.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started