thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-20--Just 162 Billionaires Have The Same Wealth As Half Of Humanity

LOADING ERROR LOADING
In a stark reminder of gaping global inequality, a report published Sunday reveals that 162 billionaires, including Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg and Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, have the same wealth as the poorest half of the world.
There are 2,153 billionaires globally, and, in 2019, they held more wealth combined than 4.6 billion people, according to the report, which uses data from the Credit Suisse Global Wealth Report and Forbes’ billionaire rankings.
Advertisement
The report uses a striking analogy to put these amounts of wealth in context. If everyone sat on their wealth piled up in $100 bills, most people would be sitting on the floor, a middle-class person from a rich country would be the height of a chair, and the world’s two richest men would be sitting in space.
Oxfam’s report is published annually to coincide with the start of the World Economic Forum gathering in Davos, where high-profile policymakers, business leaders and the wealthy take their private jets to a Swiss ski town to discuss how to “improve the state of the world.”
Once someone is very wealthy, the report points out, it’s easy to just watch the money accumulate because the rich can afford the best investment advice. Billionaire wealth has increased by an average of 7.4% a year since 2009, according to the report published by Oxfam, an international development nongovernmental organization. And 2019 was a good year for the ultrarich. Despite their wealth levels dipping at the start of the year, they quickly rebounded, and the world’s 500 richest people managed to add $1.2 trillion to their wealth over the course of the year, according to a Bloomberg analysis.
For some, the ability of individuals to accumulate vast levels of wealth, more than some countries’ entire gross domestic product, is a sign of the American Dream in action. The US has the highest concentration of billionaires (705 individuals) and last year was the only country to see an increase in its billionaire population.
Advertisement
But for others it’s a sign that something’s gone wrong. Economist Stephanie Kelton last year tweeted, “No one makes a billion dollars. You TAKE a billion dollars.” And Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said in July that “a system that allows billionaires to exist when there are parts of Alabama where people are still getting ringworm because they don’t have access to public health is wrong.”
“Extreme wealth is a sign of a failing economic system,” according to the report, which calculates that about a third of billionaire wealth exists because of inheritance. President Donald Trump’s fortune, for example, was built off the hundreds of millions of dollars he was given or inherited from his father.
No one makes a billion dollars. You TAKE a billion dollars. You take it from your workers (Hi, Jeff, Jim, and Alice!). You plunder it from the environment (What up, Charles & David?). You strip it using patents/protections (Lookin' at you, Bill.) https://t.co/cRSdtXoNUD — Stephanie Kelton (@StephanieKelton) January 22, 2019
The gap between the world’s richest and poorest remains stark. Research by French economist Thomas Piketty found that the benefits of global growth have not been shared equally. From 1980 to 2016, the poorest 50% of people received 12 cents of every dollar of global income growth, while the richest 1% got more than double that, with 27 cents of every dollar.
Even though estimates of the wealth of the world’s poorest have been revised upward this year, the rate at which we are reducing global poverty has fallen by half since 2013, according to the World Bank.
Advertisement
And while huge numbers of people have been pulled from extreme poverty over the last few decades, 735 million people still live in extreme poverty ― meaning they survive on $1.90 or less a day ― and nearly half of the world (3.4 billion people) live on less than $5.50 a day.
The last year saw huge protests against inequality in countries around the world, from Chile, to Lebanon to Ecuador.
“Global inequality is at crisis levels,” Rebecca Gowland, head of inequality at Oxfam, told HuffPost.
The ski resort of Davos, Switzerland, where the world's political and business elite gather for the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum. FABRICE COFFRINI/AFP via Getty Images
Women put in billions of hours of unpaid, undervalued care work
This report, called “Time to Care,” puts a spotlight on those who care for the young, the sick and the elderly, the vast majority of whom are women and girls working long hours for little or no pay.
Advertisement
Globally, women provide 12.5 billion hours a day of care work without pay, which the Oxfam report calculates adds at least $10.8 trillion of value to the economy every year.
This work is undervalued socially and economically, but, the report says, “It also lays the foundations in society that make possible enormous economic wealth accrued by others and helps to generate enormous economic wealth.”
Gowland gave the example of a woman in rural Zimbabwe who has to walk four hours a day to fetch water for her family. “The consequences of that are really obvious,” she said. “Girls are pulled out of school to do this unpaid care work, women can’t access fair, decent jobs and wages, and the biggest thing is the fact that they just don’t have time to contribute to societies, to any kind of political discourse or engagement with how their societies are run.”
This care crisis is not just affecting developing countries. The U.S. child care system, for example, is costing the country hundreds of billions of dollars a year in lost wages and lost opportunities, according to a report published Wednesday by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI). Child care providers in America are overwhelmed and underpaid, with a median wage of $12 an hour, according to the report’s findings. Meanwhile, parents, most often women, are being forced to give up work or turn down better-paying jobs because of the expense of child care.
The burden of caregiving looks set to increase. The International Labor Organization estimates, for example, there will be 100 million more older people needing care by 2050. Then there are the effects of the climate crisis, which are causing myriad health problems, forcing people to leave their homes and depriving them of water and food.
Advertisement
“These factors threaten to further exacerbate gender and economic inequalities and fuel a spiraling crisis for care and carers,” says the report.
At the same time, most countries have no plan to deal with this, says the report, and are instead reducing public spending, increasingly privatizing health and education, and raising taxes on the poor.
“If world leaders meeting this week [at Davos] are serious about reducing poverty and inequality,” said Danny Sriskandarajah, the chief executive of Oxfam Great Britain, “they urgently need to invest in care and other public services that make life easier for those with care responsibilities, and tackle discrimination holding back women and girls.”
We know the solutions. There’s just not the will to implement them.
The report calls for a swath of policy changes, such as free and universal public services ― like education, child care and health care ― and policies to limit the influence of companies and the superrich.
Oxfam suggests a progressive taxation system, which closes the loopholes that allow companies and wealthy individuals to avoid tax. Amazon, for example, paid $0 in corporate income tax in 2018 despite making $11 billion in profits.
Advertisement
“The entire economy, and many corporations within it, exist solely to the benefit of its of their wealthiest stakeholders,” Marshall Steinbaum, an assistant economics professor at the University of Utah, told HuffPost. Where before we had companies whose workers were collectively represented and a society in which businesses and the wealthiest were taxed proportionately more than the less wealthy, he said, now companies’ only purpose is to benefit shareholders and we have low marginal income tax rates that allow huge fortunes to be amassed.
Increasing taxes on the wealth of the 1% by 0.5% could raise enough over the next decade to create 117 million jobs in education, health and elder care, and close the care deficits, the report says.
Though these kind of policy changes may feel remote in countries like the U.S., Gowland said, “we are slowly seeing some governments decide to take on more progressive policies.”
Uruguay, for example, implemented legislation in 2017 that enshrines in law a right to care for all children, older people and people with disabilities, meaning the state is obliged to provide good-quality care services.
And New Zealand is trying to tackle inequality with its new well-being budget. The country has pledged to prioritize citizen well-being over economic growth in its spending and in the way it measures its success.
Advertisement
New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern visits a community health center in Auckland on May 31, 2019. Budget 2019, known as the Well-Being Budget, has a heavy focus on public welfare alongside economic growth. Phil Walter via Getty Images
“It is sobering that this is the first time we have had a national budget that explicitly focuses on well-being,” Anna Matheson, senior lecturer in health policy at Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand, told HuffPost last year. “Governments worldwide are missing the crucial and pivotal role they play in stewardship, and in creating and maintaining collective well-being.”
Chances of bold policies aimed at inequality passing under the Trump administration appear incredibly slight, but the Democratic presidential candidates are raising the issue. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) sent billionaires into a panic with a proposed 2% wealth tax on those earning over $50 million.
And even the International Monetary Fund, which traditionally supported lower taxes, has called for taxes to be raised on the rich to tackle inequality.
“It’s not changing yet,” Growland admitted of inequality, “and that is a question of political will. But now, more than ever, we need to keep telling this story. We can’t afford to let this divide continue.”
Advertisement
For more content and to be part of the “This New World” community, follow our Facebook page.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-20--The Truth Behind Honey's 'Health Halo' – Plus 6 Other Sugar Myths Busted

How Verizon Media and our partners bring you better ad experiences To give you a better overall experience , we @ @ @ @ @ that are more useful to you .
For example , when you search for a @ @ @ @ @ search information and location to show the most relevant cinemas near you .
We also @ @ @ @ @ you ads for similar films you may like in the future .
Like Verizon Media @ @ @ @ @ show you ads that they think match your interests .
Learn more about how Verizon @ @ @ @ @ and how our partners collect and use data .
HuffPost is part of Verizon Media @ @ @ @ @ partners need your consent to access your device and use your data ( including location @ @ @ @ @ , and provide and measure personalised ads .
Verizon Media will also provide you with @ @ @ @ @ .
Learn more .
Select 'OK ' to continue and allow Verizon Media and our @ @ @ @ @ , or select 'Manage options ' to view your choices .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sugar is the devil, we’re told on an almost daily basis. Numerous studies have unearthed alarming findings on the sheer amounts of the stuff lurking in our favourite foods, while excess consumption has been linked to plenty of nasty health issues, too. Everything from dental decay to obesity and type 2 diabetes.
But among all this knowledge and awareness of sugar – obviously a good thing – potentially harmful misconceptions can grow. Here are some myths that well and truly need busting – and what better time to do so than Sugar Awareness Week?
Advertisement
Myth #1. Fruit is bad for you because it contains sugar.
“I try to avoid fruit, because of the sugar” is something US-based registered dietitian Carrie Dennett often hears from clients – an issue, because most people don’t actually eat enough fruit and veg. In the UK, we should be eating at least five portions of a variety of fruit and vegetables each day. But most of us are lucky if we get that in a week.
There’s an idea that ‘all sugar is created equal,’ says Dennett, who runs Nutrition By Carrie, “but that’s not exactly true”. Context is key.
“To some extent, sugar is sugar, but when you look at the broader context, there’s a big difference between ‘natural’ sugar that comes in a fibre-rich, nutrient-rich ‘package’, and ‘added sugar’ that comes in a ‘package’ that contains few nutrients, and may also contain excess sodium and low-quality fats, as with many highly-processed snack foods,” she explains.
Dennett explains that when eating a piece of whole fruit, our digestive system has to break down all the fibre surrounding the sugar before we absorb it, “so it’s not going to just spike our blood sugar”.
Advertisement
Eat your fruit with a meal, or with some protein and fat from nuts or cheese as part of a snack, and you’ll digest it even slower, she adds. “Even a small glass of 100% fruit juice, consumed as part of a meal once a day or less, is fine.”
Myth #2. Honey is automatically healthy.
Sorry to break this to you as you’re slathering honey across your porridge, but honey’s health benefits are non-proven, says Katharine Jenner, campaign director for Action on Sugar and a registered public health nutritionist.
“Honey has a ‘health halo’ surrounding it, so that although it is incredibly sweet, people erroneously think it doesn’t count as ‘added sugar’ in the same way that, say, table sugar does,” says Jenner. But Public Health England defines honey as an added sugar. As Jenner says: “Just because it’s natural, doesn’t mean it’s good for you.”
Bahee Van de Bor, a specialist paediatric dietitian and British Dietetic Association (BDA) spokesperson, says even though some types of sugars like honey contain antioxidants or other nutrients, you’d need to consume a large quantity to benefit. “This sadly would negate any potential proposed benefits of consuming the organic variety of sugar,” she explains.
If you are caught in the dilemma of whether to have sugar or honey on your porridge, the latter is probably slightly better, but there’s not much in it.
Advertisement
As nutritionist Keith Kantor explains: “Sugar is sugar. And honey is (mostly) sugar. But if you’re choosing between the two from a health perspective, err on the side of the sticky stuff.”
bortonia via Getty Images
Myth #3. You should try and quit sugar completely.
Moderation is everything when it comes to diet, and that includes in the realms of sugar. It’s widely agreed that added sugars – sugars which are added to foods, either by us or manufacturers – aren’t good for us.
“That doesn’t mean that if eating less is good for us, that eating none is better,” stresses Dennett. “I see this disturbing idea online, in books and in the media that we can ‘disease-proof’ ourselves, that if we eat perfectly that we will enjoy perfect health.
“I think sugar avoidance is part of that. The fact is that many factors contribute to health, and nutrition is only one part of that. There’s a big difference between eating or drinking large quantities of sugary foods and beverages – perhaps mindlessly, perhaps as a desperate grab for an energy boost or some stress relief – and mindfully enjoying a portion of a thoughtfully chosen dessert or other sweet treat in the context of a balanced, nutritious diet.”
Advertisement
Myth #4. Fruit juice is good for you.
When buying those massive cartons of juice from the supermarket that go past their best in the space of a week, it can be tempting to chug the lot in the space of a few days. And that’s a really bad idea. Juice provides some vitamins, but it also contains ‘free sugars’.
As Action on Sugar’s Katharine Jenner explains: “Whole fruit is good for you. So are vegetables. You do not need to worry about the sugars in whole fruit or vegetables. However, when fruit is processed (ie. juiced), the cellulose structure containing sugar breaks down and becomes ‘free’ of its fibrous cell – hence we call these ‘free sugars’ – and becomes as harmful as any other added sugar.”
This goes for fruit and vegetable juices, concentrates, smoothies, purées, pastes, powders and extruded fruit and vegetable products such as kid’s fruit snacks, says Jenner.
BDA spokesperson Bahee Van de Bor suggests it’s always better to eat your fruit whole. Once it’s juiced, she says, you can end up consuming far more fruit than you intended or realised. “The fibre in whole pieces of fruit also helps you to recognise when you are full,” she adds.
Myth #5. Cartoons on kids’ food mean it’s healthy.
Nope, sorry. Parents should be really aware that fun cartoon packaging doesn’t give a nutritional green-light for products to be given to kids.
Advertisement
“It is widely assumed by parents and grandparents that if packaging is designed to appeal to children – such as cartoons, mascots, characters – that they are somehow ‘approved for use’ by children,” says Jenner.
Yet half of over 500 food and drink products using cartoon animations on pack are so high in fat, saturated fat, sugar and/or salt, they couldn’t even be advertised on TV during kids programmes, an Action on Sugar report found.
“There are no regulations, restrictions or even watchdogs to control what manufacturers put on their packaging, which is why we are calling for a ban on cartoons on unhealthy foods,” she adds.
Myth #6. ‘No added sugar’ means it’s healthy.
Not necessarily, says Van de Bor. Look closely at the ingredients list at the back of food product packaging. It’s important to be mindful that ‘natural’ free sugars may have been used instead. These can include fruit juice concentrate; honey; syrups like date, agave or maple; fructose or coconut sugar.
Scientific names such as dextrose, fructose, glucose, maltose and sucrose are also types of added sugar or free sugars, “but many people don’t realise that these words actually mean sugar”, she adds. So keep an eye out for them.
Advertisement
Myth #7. All sugars are terrible.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-20--6 Unanswered Questions We Have About The Peppa Pig Universe

HuffPost UK Getty
Peppa Pig just seeps into family life. You can be insistent you’re not going to watch it, but via some kind of cultural osmosis, it happens, and suddenly your toddler wants Peppa, Peppa, Peppa, all the time. Even with the best will in the world, one can suddenly find oneself eight episodes in, tired and confused.
In this era of Prestige TV, adult viewers are used to detailed episode recaps, complex mythology and intricate world-building (think Game Of Thrones). With most of the TV we watch, we analyse the hell out of after – so how can we not do that when we’re watching Peppa Pig?
Advertisement
Here are just some of the questions I’ve been left pondering after watching that famous pig on telly.
1. How exactly do names work?
In the world of Peppa Pig, everyone has their species as their surname, which automatically makes some of the customs we have around names redundant: Mummy Pig’s maiden name was Pig, and her married name is Pig. That’s one in the eye for patrilineality: good stuff.
Children all have names beginning with the same letter as their surname (and therefore, species) – Peppa Pig, Suzy Sheep and so on – apart from Peppa’s brother, George Pig. Why does George buck the trend?
Adults’ names seem to be determined based on their parental status, an unusual societal development. Daddy Pig’s name is Daddy Pig. What was his name before having a child? And if Peppa or George have a child while Grandpa Pig is still alive, will Daddy Pig’s name change to Grandpa Pig, and Grandpa Pig’s to Great-Grandpa Pig?
Advertisement
Childless adults are named after their job – Police Officer Panda and Dr Brown Bear, for instance – but if they have jobs without titles they use standard honorifics, like Mr Bull, Miss Rabbit and so on. But at what point do non-parent animals go from using a real first name to using an honorific? Was Madame Gazelle ever Mademoiselle Gazelle? IT’S ALL SO UNCLEAR.
2. Why are some animals just animals?
The vast majority of Peppa Pig’s word is populated by intelligent, anthropomorphic, equal-sized versions of familiar animals. But zoos and pets also exist – there are pet fish, tortoises and birds. Did something happen in this universe that only affected mammals, gifting them with human-level intelligence while leaving other species untouched?
If so, how does one explain Oliver Ostrich?
3. Is inter-species romance a thing?
In a world where most friendships are cross-species, why are all families limited to one species? Wouldn’t it make sense that there would be romantic cross-species relationships as well? Different animals can’t necessarily breed with one another, but you’d expect a few couples to be wandering around where one’s an antelope and one’s a panda, or whatever. Don’t most people ideally want to date outside their surname?
Former Lib Dem leadership candidate Norman Lamb (who, despite having an animal surname, wouldn’t fit into the Peppa Pig world due to a lack of alliteration) previously asked why there weren’t any gay characters, and he’s absolutely right. They can create a world where gazelles are teachers and doctors do home visits for injuries as mild as “a bumped leg” (something the British Medical Journal have deemed “inappropriate”), but they can’t let two dudes, one of whom is a buffalo and the other of whom is a warthog, snog?
4. Is humour different there?
There are jokes in Peppa Pig, but figuring out the difference between a joke that gets a giggle from one character and a joke that makes every character on screen roll around on the floor rocking hysterically seems nigh-on impossible. Every other episode ends with a pedestrian statement like, “That was fun” that makes everyone collapse in paroxysms of laughter. It’s baffling.
Advertisement
5. How does employment work in Peppa’s universe?
Miss Rabbit has a different job every time we see her. It’s a running gag, but it’s also really irritating, as sometimes she’s doing a job she would clearly have needed years of training for, but seems to have just wandered into it.
Employment works in strange ways in the universe of the show, anyway – in one episode, Mummy Sheep and Suzy Sheep are about to move to another country because Mummy Sheep has got a new job, and then she gets a phone call and they aren’t doing that anymore. You don’t book flights before actually confirming your start date, surely? It’s handled remarkably casually considering they’re about to head to the airport. Employment law reform is overdue over there.
6. Does “everyone” really like all this stuff?
The episodes that don’t end with the characters laughing their heads off, end with some sort of pronouncement about “everyone” by the narrator. For example: “George loves castles. Everyone loves castles!”, or “Peppa loves jumping in muddy puddles. Everyone loves jumping in muddy puddles!”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-19--Prince Harry: There Was 'No Other Option' But To Quit Royal Family

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Prince Harry has said there was “no other option” but to quit the royal family with Meghan Markle as he insisted they were not “walking away”.
In his first public speech since the couple’s decision to step down as senior royals, the Duke of Sussex suggested that the announcement on Saturday that they would be renouncing their royal titles and public funds was not enough to allow them “to continue serving the Queen, the Commonwealth and my military associations”.
Advertisement
The duke said he now wanted his family to have a “more peaceful” life, adding that they were standing down with “great sadness”.
On Sunday, Harry was speaking at a dinner for supporters of Sentebale – his Africa-based charity supporting youngsters with HIV – at the Ivy Chelsea Garden in London.
He said: “The decision that I have made for my wife and I to step back is not one I made lightly. It was so many months of talks after so many years of challenges. And I know I haven’t always got it right, but as far as this goes, there really was no other option.
“What I want to make clear is we’re not walking away, and we certainly aren’t walking away from you. Our hope was to continue serving the Queen, the Commonwealth, and my military associations, but without public funding. Unfortunately, that wasn’t possible.”
Advertisement
Harry’s grandmother, the Queen, issued an emotional statement on Saturday, saying she recognised the “challenges” the couple had faced over the past year.
Unusually, she used the first names of her grandson and his family in a public message.
The Sussexes announced they will stop carrying out royal duties from the spring, no longer use the title HRH and will repay the taxpayers’ millions spent on their Berkshire home.
But Harry said the couple will continue to lead a life of service, and were taking a “leap of faith”.
He added: “It has been our privilege to serve you, and we will continue to lead a life of service.
“I will always have the utmost respect for my grandmother, my commander in chief, and I am incredibly grateful to her and the rest of my family, for the support they have shown Meghan and I over the last few months.
Advertisement
“I will continue to be the same man who holds his country dear and dedicates his life to supporting the causes, charities and military communities that are so important to me.
“We are taking a leap of faith – thank you for giving me the courage to take this next step.”
Here is the text of the Duke of Sussex’s remarks:
“Good evening, and thank you for being here for Sentebale, a charity me and Prince Seeiso created back in 2006 to honour my mother’s legacy in supporting those affected by HIV and Aids.
“Before I begin, I must say that I can only imagine what you may have heard or perhaps read over the last few weeks…
“So, I want you to hear the truth from me, as much as I can share – not as a prince, or a duke, but as Harry, the same person that many of you have watched grow up over the last 35 years – but with a clearer perspective.
“The UK is my home and a place that I love. That will never change.
“I have grown up feeling support from so many of you, and I watched as you welcomed Meghan with open arms as you saw me find the love and happiness that I had hoped for all my life. Finally, the second son of Diana got hitched, hurray!
Advertisement
“I also know you’ve come to know me well enough over all these years to trust that the woman I chose as my wife upholds the same values as I do. And she does, and she’s the same woman I fell in love with.
“We both do everything we can to fly the flag and carry out our roles for this country with pride.
“Once Meghan and I were married, we were excited, we were hopeful, and we were here to serve.
“For those reasons, it brings me great sadness that it has come to this.
“The decision that I have made for my wife and I to step back is not one I made lightly. It was so many months of talks after so many years of challenges. And I know I haven’t always got it right, but as far as this goes, there really was no other option.
“What I want to make clear is we’re not walking away, and we certainly aren’t walking away from you. Our hope was to continue serving the Queen, the Commonwealth, and my military associations, but without public funding. Unfortunately, that wasn’t possible.
“I’ve accepted this, knowing that it doesn’t change who I am or how committed I am.
“But I hope that helps you understand what it had come to, that I would step my family back from all I have ever known, to take a step forward into what I hope can be a more peaceful life.
“I was born into this life, and it is a great honour to serve my country and the Queen.
“When I lost my mum 23 years ago, you took me under your wing.
“You’ve looked out for me for so long, but the media is a powerful force, and my hope is one day our collective support for each other can be more powerful because this is so much bigger than just us.
Advertisement
“It has been our privilege to serve you, and we will continue to lead a life of service.
“It has also been a privilege to meet so many of you, and to feel your excitement for our son Archie, who saw snow for the first time the other day and thought it was bloody brilliant!
“I will always have the utmost respect for my grandmother, my commander in chief, and I am incredibly grateful to her and the rest of my family for the support they have shown Meghan and I over the last few months.
“I will continue to be the same man who holds his country dear and dedicates his life to supporting the causes, charities and military communities that are so important to me.
“Together, you have given me an education about living. And this role has taught me more about what is right and just than I could have ever imagined.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-21--'I Can't Smell Smoke Or Perfume': The Reality Of Life Without Scent

Softulka via Getty Images
“I would love to be able to smell my mum’s perfume or my partner’s cooking,” says Jesselyn Verity. She’d also dearly like to know “what all the fuss is about” when it comes to walking past a branch of Lush.
The 27-year-old, who works at a West End theatre in London, doesn’t have a sense of smell, also known as anosmia – and it has huge repercussions across her life. “I find it so baffling that other people can just smell things in the air without having to make a conscious effort to sniff something,” she says.
Advertisement
Verity isn’t alone in her struggles – a study saw researchers from the University of East Anglia speak to more than 70 people aged 31-80 about living without smell and discovered just how many aspects of life it can disrupt.
Common themes that arose included everyday concerns about personal hygiene, a loss of sexual intimacy and the break-down of personal relationships.
It can also be dangerous, as Professor Carl Philpott, from UEA’s Norwich Medical School, explains: “One really big problem was around hazard perception – not being able to smell food that had gone off, or not being able to smell gas or smoke. This had resulted in serious near misses for some.”
Verity knows this first hand. “I can’t smell smoke, burning or gas,” she says. “At uni, one of my housemates left the gas on and I had no idea.” Nowadays, she cooks on an electric stove.
Advertisement
Jesselyn Verity Jesselyn Verity
Smell disorders are thought to affect around 5% of the population – that’s around one in 20 people. Some people lose their sense of smell altogether, others might experience a change in the way they perceive odours. Some perceive smells that aren’t there at all.
Anosmia can be caused by many things, from infections and injury to neurological diseases such as Alzheimer’s. It can even be a side effect of certain types of medication.
How does it affect people’s lives?
Imagine not being able to properly taste the food you eat. This was a major issue flagged by the new study, which was published in the journal Clinical Otolaryngology.
Some participants no longer enjoyed eating, and lost appetite and weight as a result. Others ate more food with low nutritional value that was high in fat, salt and sugar – and gained weight. Some lost interest in preparing food altogether or were too embarrassed to serve dishes to family and friends, which had a knock-on impact on their social lives.
Advertisement
“Smells link us to people, places and emotional experiences... people who have lost their sense of smell miss out on all those memories.”
Inability to link smells to happy memories was also a problem. Prof Philpott paints a picture of what that actually means: “Bonfire night, Christmas smells, perfumes and people – all gone. Smells link us to people, places and emotional experiences. And people who have lost their sense of smell miss out on all those memories that smell can evoke.”
Another source of anxiety among those interviewed was personal hygiene for participants who couldn’t smell themselves, something Verity worries about.
Researchers also spoke to parents of young children, who couldn’t tell when their child’s nappy needed changing, and experienced feelings of failure as a result. “One mother found it difficult bonding with her new baby because she couldn’t smell him,” says Prof Philpott.
Many participants described a negative impact on relationships, too – ranging from not enjoying eating together to an impact on sexual relationships. All of these problems led to a range of negative emotions including anger, anxiety, frustration, depression, isolation, loss of confidence, regret and sadness. The problems are compounded by a lack of understanding about the disorder among clinicians, the study suggested. “I have depression and BPD [borderline personality disorder] but I have no idea how strongly that’s tied to the anosmia,” says Verity, who studied at UEA. “It’s hard to say how much I miss out on as I have no idea what it’s like to be normal.
“I try not to think about it too much otherwise I just get angry and sad.”
Prof Philpott and his fellow researchers hope their study’s findings will motivate clinicians to take smell problems more seriously, with better help and support offered to patients. Verity is pleased to hear about this focus, especially as she finds a lot of people don’t take her condition seriously or fully understand the impact. “The most common question I get asked is, ‘so does that mean I can fart in front of you?’,” she says.
The 27-year-old has undergone blind smell tests, a CT scan and surgery to have part of her septum removed. She’s tried experimental steroid sprays, acupuncture and craniosacral therapy (light manipulations of the skull and sacrum) – it hasn’t been cheap, or easy.
“My response from hospitals has just been: ‘Oh you’re anosmic, and that’s now your life.’ Although actually, most haven’t even heard of anosmia and it’s usually easier to just say I don’t have a sense of smell,” she says, an experience which can be “quite demoralising” if she has to explain or justify the impact.
“It’s been an absolute nightmare my entire life to try and get other doctors to take it seriously,” she adds. “I don’t think enough is being done about it.
“I am worried about the future. If I ever have kids how am I going to know if they need changing? Will I miss being able to smell them? When my parents pass on, am I going to forget them quicker if I can’t remember their smell?”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-20--Why The Labour Leadership Could Become A Two-Horse Race On Tuesday

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sign up now to get The Waugh Zone, our weekday evening politics briefing, by email.
Keir and present danger
“I can’t believe it.” That was Keir Starmer’s instant reaction to the news that he had become the first name on the formal ballot to become the next Labour leader, following the endorsement of shopworkers’ union Usdaw.
Or rather that was the way he put it in an email to his supporters, saying he would have been amazed if you’d told him “42 years ago when I first joined the Labour party” that he would one day be in the running to lead it.
Advertisement
That line itself was a pointed reminder of his longevity as a party member (he signed up as a Young Socialist at the age of 15) and not some careerist lawyer who tried the political suit on for size in later life.
But Starmer’s missive to members wasn’t some mere humblebrag at getting on the ballot paper, it was a statement of intent. Asking people to sign up straight away as “Team Keir CLP organisers”, he said “if we’re going to win this election [note the ‘we’, not ‘I’], we first need to win as many CLP nominations as we possibly can”.
In theory, to say ‘broaden the debate’ (copyright Margaret Beckett 2015), Starmer could have gone all altruistic and encouraged CLPs to now back other candidates rather than himself. But he rightly knows that frontrunners in politics have a terrible track record and need to ram home every advantage to avoid getting overtaken.
Starmer may also have calculated that after that shattering defeat to Boris Johnson what many Labour members want now is a traditionally very non-Labour characteristic: a touch of ruthlessness. His big pitch (and the reason he says he’s running despite admitting the party ought to have a woman leader) is that he’s a winner. And there’s no better way of proving it than winning big in his own party election.
Advertisement
Of course, Rebecca Long-Bailey is no pushover, as her impressive launch showed last Friday. Tacking working class ‘aspiration’ onto the Corbyn message could prove very popular among members, and her Joe interview proved that she has a sense of humour and warmth if only she can forget the camera is running.
For Jess Phillips, Usdaw’s decision in effect means she can only survive if she clears that big hurdle of 33 nominations from local Labour parties. But don’t forget the most ‘moderate’ contender in 2015, Liz Kendall, won just 18 CLPs. It’s perfectly possible that Starmer (who as of tonight already has 12 to Long-Bailey’s 4) will dominate the CLP nominations as much as he has the MPs and affiliates sections, squeezing out Lisa Nandy and Emily Thornberry too.
In fact, it’s no exaggeration to say that tomorrow’s hustings before the GMB union could be the most important of Nandy’s life. If she wins its endorsement, she all but gets on the ballot. If the GMB follows Usdaw and Unison to back Starmer, Nandy’s brief but exciting candidacy will probably be over. For all the chatter, we could really be down to a two-horse race by 3pm tomorrow. It would be all over, bar the touting for an unlikely CLP surge.
The GMB has a strong tradition of promoting smart, soft left women (new MP Sarah Owen replaced the legendary late Mary Turner on the NEC until her election to parliament) and with Nandy campaign chair Louise Haigh another alumnus, it could be ‘the women-wot-win-it’. A big endorsement could provide the launchpad she desperately needs to show members she’s a heavyweight figure in this race (remember her ‘preferential strategy’ depends entirely on coming ahead of Long-Bailey, a big ask).
But the GMB’s Central Executive Council (CEC) is made up of 55 ‘lay’ members and they’re proud of the democratic, regional structure. Although there are big Nandy fans (dubbed ‘Nandynistas’ by one party insider who shares my age and knowledge of Latin American leftists) in senior GMB posts, it’s possible that the 55 council members have picked up the same pro-Starmer rank-and-file sentiment as other unions.
Advertisement
And if Starmer clinches the GMB, he really can say he’s already uniting the different wings of the Labour movement. You can also bet there would be another email to party members to get CLPs on board. Thanks to the alternative vote system and all-member meetings, the CLPs nominations in fact could give us a pretty decent proxy for the final result.
With CLP and affiliate deadline closing on Valentine’s Day, by February 14 Starmer could get the clinching love letter from Labour members he clearly desires - a week before the ballot formally opens, and six weeks before the final result is announced.
Quote Of The Day
“Does he think that when the people in so many constituencies in the north lent their votes to the Conservative Party they were longing for more politicians to be sent there?”
Tory peer Lord Forsyth ridicules the idea of a York-based second chamber
Cheat Sheet
The Johnson government has lost its first three votes since the election, as the Lords delivered a triple whammy over its Brexit legislation. Stronger rights for EU nationals and blocking ministers’ power over EU Court of Justice rulings were among the amendments backed by peers.
Boris Johnson met Prince Harry at the Africa summit in London. They had a 20 minute chat without any aides but No.10 said there would be no briefing whatsoever on what was discussed. Guess we will have to wait for Peter Morgan’s imagination in a future episode of Netflix’s The Crown.
Advertisement
Brussels announced the EU will not be ready to open trade talks with the UK on a post-Brexit trade deal before the end of February. With a deal needing ratification to start in say October, and Europe taking August off, that gives us, er, seven months to hammer out one of the most potentially complex trade deals in modern times.
The FT revealed that the bill for the HS2 high-speed rail link could soar to £106bn. Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said he wanted more data.
Tower block owners who refuse to strip out combustible cladding will be named and shamed under new post-Grenfell rules, housing secretary Robert Jenrick said.
What I’m Reading
Lego Targets Stressed-Out Adults - Washington Post
Got A Tip?
Send tips, stories, quotes, pics, plugs or gossip to waugh.zone@huffpost.com.
Subscribe To Commons People


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-20--Britain's Youngest MP Says She Feels Unwelcome In Parliament As A ‘Working-Class Woman Of Colour’

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Britain’s youngest MP has said she does not feel as if she belongs in the House of Commons as a “working-class woman of colour” because its procedures are designed to “exclude and alienate”.
In her maiden speech, newly-elected Labour MP Nadia Whittome, 23, blamed “old conventions and antiquated language” and said she has been made to feel she must “throw my community under a bus” to get along.
Advertisement
She also accused politicians of using their drug experiences at university to “build street cred”, while working-class people were being criminalised for drug dealing.
Whittome, who represents Nottingham East, had previously said she would only take a “worker’s wage” of £35,000 and donate the rest of her MP’s salary of £79,468 to charities.
The so-called baby of the house – the name given to the UK’s youngest MP – told MPs: “Historically so much happens in this building that is designed to exclude and alienate working-class people.
“The old conventions, the antiquated language. As a working-class woman of colour, I’m made to feel like I don’t belong here unless I throw my community under a bus.
Advertisement
“But that’s not what I’m here to do. Because when I first saw the results of the exit poll last month these are the first people I thought about.
“My friends who are one delayed universal credit payment away from homelessness.
“My neighbour who goes without hot meals so her children don’t have to.
“My friend’s teenage brother who ended up in prison for dealing weed when he had no other job opportunities, while those here on the front benches can use their drug experiences at university to build street cred.”
Explaining her decision not to take a full MP’s salary, she told MPs: “Of course MPs do an important job. But care workers, like I was proud to be before I became an MP, also do an extremely important job.
Nadia Whittome accused politicians of using their drug experiences at university to “build street cred” - while working-class people were being criminalised for drug dealing. Parliament TV
“And when care workers, retail workers, and NHS staff get their pay rise, I’ll take mine.”
She said teenagers’ climate activism was not a “whim of youth” and warned older colleagues “if you don’t let us dream, we will not let you sleep”.
Advertisement
Whittome said: “I’m also here to represent the burning planet and the generation that will be left to foot the bill and save it from catastrophic climate change.
“We’re a generation that is brave, collaborative and outward-looking. We’re determined to fight for a future in which everyone can breathe clean air and live well.
“These are not the whims of youth, they are the deadly serious response to an existential crisis and the moral bankruptcy of our economic system.”
She added: “My generation wants a future. We want a planet we can live on, wages we can live on and we want opportunities that make life worth living.
“And let me tell you something. If you don’t let us dream, we won’t let you sleep.”
She paid tribute to her predecessor Chris Leslie, a former Labour shadow chancellor who resigned from the party to join Change UK last year, for his work supporting Gordon Brown in the Treasury.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-20--More Than Two Years After Grenfell, The Government Promises A Fire Safety Crackdown

A Treasury bail-out could pay for the removal of Grenfell-style cladding still covering hundreds of tower blocks as the government admitted progress to address a series of fire safety issues had been “unacceptably slow”.
More than two years after the west London blaze that killed 72 people, housing secretary Robert Jenrick outlined a crackdown that would represent the “biggest change to our building safety regime for 40 years”.
Advertisement
Some 315 high-rise buildings are still covered in flammable aluminium composite material (ACM) cladding, the same material blamed for the rapid spread of the Grenfell blaze.
Other issues include thousands of faulty fire doors still being in use and buildings shorter than 18m being excluded from a cladding ban.
In the House of Commons on Monday, Jenrick said he was preparing to name and shame those responsible for private buildings that have yet to start getting rid of “unsafe ACM cladding”.
The cabinet minister also told MPs he would begin immediately to establish a new building safety regulator, and that he is “minded” to lower the height threshold for sprinkler requirements in new buildings from 18m to 11m.
Advertisement
Jenrick added the 18m height threshold on the ban on cladding, introduced in December 2018, could be also be lowered “to at least 11 metres”, as he said regulations had for many years “relied on crude height limits”.
Cruddas Park House in Newcastle as messages about fire safety from survivors and bereaved families of the Grenfell disaster were lit up on towerblocks on the second anniversary of the blaze. Grenfell United
The height threshold was criticised in the aftermath of a fire that gutted student housing in Bolton last November. The Cube building was found to be 14cm short of the restriction, which meant the high-pressure laminate (HPL) cladding covering the building met regulations. The Fire Brigades Union says 11m is important as it is the height modern-day fire brigade cherry-pickers can reach.
ACM cladding has left leaseholders in private apartment blocks in limbo as many landlords refuse to remove the material, leaving residents with sky-high bills to remediate the buildings themselves. Campaigners have spoken of how their homes are unsellable, and said the uncertainty has caused anxiety, illness and financial pain.
Government cash to help leaseholders through the £200m Private Sector Remediation Fund has been approved for just one building, but Jenrick hinted at more financial support from the state. “I am considering with Her Majesty’s Treasury options to support leaseholders,” he said.
Advertisement
Jenrick said the remediation of “unsafe ACM cladding, especially in the private sector, is still far too slow”. He continued: “Inaction must have consequences.” Detailed proposals are to be set out in February.
Shadow housing secretary John Healey said the proposals are “too little, at least two years too late”.
He said: “Why, two-and-a-half years later, are 315 high-rise blocks still cloaked in the same Grenfell-style cladding? Why have 76 of these block owners not even got a plan in place to replace the deadly cladding?


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-20--Keir Starmer Pulls Further Ahead In Labour Leadership Race Thanks To USDAW Backing

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The shop workers’ union USDAW has backed Keir Starmer for Labour leader as the frontrunner opens up a commanding lead.
It means the shadow Brexit secretary is first of the candidates to make the ballot in the second round of the contest to replace Jeremy Corbyn, having secured nomination from three affiliates.
Advertisement
It comes after Unison, thought to be the largest UK union, and SERA, Labour’s only affiliated environment campaign, announced their support for Starmer earlier this month.
On Monday, USDAW also nominated Angela Rayner for the deputy leadership.
In a statement, the union’s general secretary Paddy Lillis said Starmer and Rayner were the right leadership team “to unite and rebuild Labour after a devastating election loss.”
“Our members desperately need Labour in power, they cannot afford another decade of Conservative governments attacking workers’ rights, incomes and public services,” he said.
“The Labour Party must be led by someone who can persuade voters that they have what it takes to be a prime minister and we are a government in waiting.”
Advertisement
Starmer – who is the MP for Holborn and St Pancras – said he was “honoured” by the endorsement, adding that if he was elected leader “Labour will stand shoulder to shoulder with the trade union movement”.
Keir Starmer speaking at a Labour campaign event in November 2019 ASSOCIATED PRESS
Starmer is increasingly seen as the candidate who can beat shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey, the favourite of the left of the party and a close of ally of Jeremy Corbyn’s.
The others in the race are shadow foreign secretary Emily Thornberry, Wigan’s Lisa Nandy – who has centred her focus on reviving Labour’s hopes in towns – and moderate Jess Phillips.
Under Labour’s new leadership rules, candidates must secure 5% (33) of Labour’s CLPs (constituency Labour parties) or three affiliates by February 14 to progress to a ballot of members.
Advertisement
Though many other unions have yet to announce, Unite and the Communication Workers’ Union are expected to back Long-Bailey.
Rebecca Long-Bailey, Jess Phillips, Emily Thornberry, Lisa Nandy and Keir Starmer on stage during the first Labour leadership hustings at the ACC Liverpool ASSOCIATED PRESS
Nandy, meanwhile, has won the backing of the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) and could get support from the GMB union, whose executive meets Tuesday.
Thornberry and Phillips are trying to mobilise support among Labour’s pro-EU grassroots.
It comes amid criticism of membership hustings, with some candidates complaining that rules are too restrictive. Candidates have just 40 seconds to answer and are denied the opportunity of making an opening statement.
New figures show that more than 100,000 new members have joined the party to vote in the leadership since Boris Johnson won an 80-seat majority in December’s general election.
Advertisement
The winner is decided on a ballot of members by a proportional representation system known as AV (alternative vote), which sees candidates ranked in order of preference.
If one of the five wins more than 50% of first preference votes, they are declared the winner outright. However, if no candidate hits 50%, the candidate with the least support is eliminated and their second preferences are allocated to the remaining contenders. That process is repeated until one candidate reaches that crucial 50% mark.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-20--Scrapping A&E Targets Only Helps The Tories, Not Patients

A&E wait times Getty Creative
I started working in the NHS in 2012, and would regularly rush around busy A&Es as the most junior of doctors like an angry wasp, buzzing between what felt like tens of patients, struggling to manage all the plates in the air.
At the time, a recent A&E had closed and there were no plans to open another. We would get regular calls about patients “breaching”, the term we use for a patient waiting longer than four hours to be seen, treated, admitted and discharged. The coalition government had just reduced the four-hour target from 98% to 95% in 2010, and, at the time, it felt like we would get more urgent calls about “breaching” patients than very sick ones. Hospitals still get fined from their budgets if they miss these targets, which always seemed a ridiculous way to address a struggling service, so we would feel the pressure not just from the patients but senior doctors and management as well.
Advertisement
Flash forward to 2020, and I look back on those days with rose-tinted glasses. Since 2015, the A&E target hasn’t been met in England at all, and fell from one in eight patients waiting over four hours, to one in four this winter. A&E sits at the crux point between the community and the hospital, and when you walk in to a heaving hospital you can physically feel the strain: patients queueing in corridors, the emergency alarms, the strained voices of the receptionists. The worst part is the hungry eyes of the patients waiting to be seen and their families; even when I’m not working I find it difficult to walk past.
As a busy heart doctor I have taken lots of calls from A&Es about “breaching” patients, and sometimes that does mean prioritising the sickest patients can become confused by the target. But that reflects the ever increasing volume in our hospitals, up 4% year on year for the past 10 years, and the lack of resources to follow it, average funding increasing by only 1.5%.
Matt Hancock has said that this target being scrapped would be “clinically appropriate”. If that were the case why has it been in place for the last 10 years? Or why wasn’t scrapping it part of the Tory manifesto? I feel it is more than coincidence that this is the second target to be binned by this government in a year: the 18-week target for urgent operations went last year as well. As a doctor under constant scrutiny in an intense and difficult environment, this government’s constant and repeated ability to escape accountability infuriates me. The 18-week target hadn’t been met for years, the two-week target for cancer diagnosis hasn’t been met for years, and now the A&E target is flat-lining, instead of an urgent solution, it’s the target that becomes the problem.
Despite our own personal nit-picking with the four-hour target, on a system-wide level it is a really good barometer of what the NHS is really like on the ground: ever busier clinics, ever harder to get to GPs, ever sicker and ever more patients. To take my daughter to the GP last year was a four-week wait. There isn’t a target for that, and this is probably exactly why.
Advertisement
I don’t believe the four-hour target is being scrapped because of “clinical need”, and neither do the Royal College of Emergency Medicine, who have said there isn’t “a viable alternative”. Without the four-hour target we could very well let low acuity patients wait in A&E for literally days, but there wouldn’t be any data to let the outside world know how bad it’s gotten. It’s another move to reduce the headlines that are damaging to this Tory government, but devastating for the actual patient’s here on the ground. A cynical move to escape scrutiny and mendacious to suggest otherwise.
I’d imagine this will be the start of removing more and more of these targets and metrics. Soon, the only way to evidence the crisis enveloping our healthcare system will be via the photos we are forced to take on our phones. That is, unless the prime minister pockets them too.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-20--Tories Split On HS2 Amid Warning That Costs Could Spiral To £106bn

A HS2 sign near the village of South Heath in Buckinghamshire PA Wire/PA Images
Make sense of politics. Sign up to the Waugh Zone and get the political day in a nutshell.
Tory splits over the HS2 high speed rail link have burst open after a leaked government-commissioned review warned it could cost up to £106bn.
A group of 30 pro-HS2 Tory MPs from the north and Midlands, including senior ministers, have put their name to a private letter to Boris Johnson underlining their support for the project.
Advertisement
It came in response to reports that more than a dozen Tories, including from the new intake who seized so-called “red wall” northern and Midlands seats from Labour, were prepared to meet the prime minister to urge him to cancel HS2.
The split adds to the dilemma Johnson faces as he prioritises infrastructure investment as part of his efforts to close the north-south divide and serve voters who backed the Tories at the election.
The review led by former HS2 Ltd chairman Doug Oakervee, leaked to the Financial Times, found there is “considerable risk” that the high-speed rail project’s cost will rise by up to 20% from between £81bn and £88bn.
It was initially allocated far less – £56bn – in 2015.
The review also recommended that the second stage of the project, to take the line beyond the initial London-Birmingham link onwards to Manchester and Leeds, should be paused to probe whether it would be better to downgrade it to a mix of high-speed and conventional lines.
Advertisement
But Kevin Hollinrake, who is organising the pro-HS2 letter alongside Crewe and Nantwich’s new Tory MP Kieran Mullan, told HuffPost UK: “If we have a change of heart now, you are still going to deliver HS2 to Birmingham.
“What’s the rest of the country going to think of that?
“The north is left out again – it would look very bad.”
Worst of all worlds would be HS2 only reaching as far as Birmingham, which is the most likely outcome if Phase 2 (The North) is suspended. https://t.co/WNhHmMbRCO — Kevin Hollinrake MP (@kevinhollinrake) January 20, 2020
Hollinrake welcomed the “robust challenge” from Tory colleagues but said they were wrong to portray the decision as an “either/or” choice between HS2 and boosting transport within the north.
The MP for Thirsk and Malton, in North Yorkshire, is a supporter of the proposed northern powerhouse rail (NPR) link between Liverpool, Manchester, Bradford, Leeds and Newcastle.
But he said: “It is the wrong thing to superconnect the north into one geographic region and then not connect it to the rest of the country.”
Advertisement
Half the infrastructure for NPR will be also be shared with HS2, which will be built first, Hollinrake said.
He is keeping his letter private as a number of ministers have signed it and need their views to be kept private, including “very senior people”.
The MP said he has also had “very positive” conversations about HS2 in the past with “senior treasury ministers”.
His impression is that the government is currently “on the fence”, adding: “I think if you’re on the fence on something like this, at a time like this, I think you should come down on the side of investment.”
On the other side of the Tory party, Dehenna Davison said the project would not give value for money and called for transport between northern towns and cities to be prioritised.
Advertisement
Davison, who in December won Bishop Auckland in County Durham for the Tories for the first time ever, said: “I’m all in favour of investment in infrastructure.
“However, with the ballooning costs of the HS2 project, I find it difficult to believe it will provide value for money for taxpayers.
“I also believe that our infrastructure agenda should prioritise the north, and focus on connecting our northern communities, rather than entering around the journey times to London.
“To guarantee we spread opportunity across the country we must ensure that we have effective transport links to and from our great cities and towns in the north.”
“Transport investment alone will not ‘rebalance’ the UK economy”
Advertisement
The Oakervee review concluded that the government should “on balance” continue with the 250mph railway but that this was subject to “a number of qualifications”.
It said “further work” is needed to assess HS2′s impact on regional growth, and warned that it is “hard” to say what economic benefits will result from building it.
“Transport investment alone will not ‘rebalance’ the UK economy,” the review adds.
Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham described the leak as “quite worrying” and claimed that using conventional lines in the north would be a “second-class option”.
He told BBC Breakfast: “It’s the same old story. London and the south gets whatever it wants, and it’s all about penny-pinching in the north.”
Judith Blake, leader of Leeds City Council, said: “It is time to bring the damaging speculation around HS2 to an end with the prompt publication of the Oakervee review and an unambiguous government commitment to deliver the project in full.”
Advertisement
Several construction bosses also claimed scrapping the project would cause “irreparable damage” to the industry and suggested it could cost jobs.
The chief executives of Balfour Beatty, Skanska and Morgan Sindall were among the signatories to a letter to Johnson, seen by the Times, which urged him to approve the scheme and noted it would take “many years to get an equivalent pipeline of work in place” if HS2 were cancelled.
A decision on whether to go ahead with the project will be made in “weeks rather than months”, transport secretary Grant Shapps said.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-20--Government Defeated In House Of Lords Over EU Citizens Post-Brexit Amendment

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The government has suffered a defeat in the Lords over the right of EU citizens lawfully residing in the UK after Brexit to have physical proof of their status.
The cross-party amendment, proposed by Liberal Democrat peer Lord Oates, was backed by a majority of 41 peers.
Advertisement
In total, 270 peers voted for the measures and 229 voted against them.
Lord Oates said EU citizens covered by the settled status scheme should have the right to a physical form of proof of status instead of only the digital proof proposed by the government.
He said the right to remain should also be based on eligibility and not forfeited by failing to meet an arbitrary deadline under a cut-off date in June 2021, which could lead to EU citizens being “criminalised” afterwards.
Without physical proof of right of residence, there was bound to be “confusion” and “anxiety” for such people in their dealings with officials post-Brexit.
“In the real world, in respect of permanent residence, proof of immigration status is in physical documentation,” Lord Oates said. “That’s what people are used to.
Advertisement
“EU citizens are going to be severely disadvantaged if they don’t have it.”
Labour Lords frontbencher Iain McNicol, who formally backed the amendment said: “The government has made a rod for its own back on this non-contentious issue, when it should have been listening to the sensible solutions from around the House of Lords.
“I hope Ministers take this defeat on the chin and find a way of accommodating our amendment to give people the reassurance they need.”
The bill will now go back to the Commons where MPs will have the opportunity to scrutinise and possibly reject the amendment.
Later on Monday evening, the government crashed to a second defeat on ministerial powers over the courts to depart from European Court of Justice judgments.
Voting was 241 to 205, majority 36, for a cross-party amendment to delete the power from the Bill, amid warnings of it being an interference in the independence of the judiciary.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-20--Australia Hit By Dust Storms And Golf Ball-Sized Hail

Australia Hit By Dust Storms And Golf Ball-Sized Hail
In the midst of the worst bushfire season in living memory, parts of south east Australia have been hit by flash flooding, golf ball sized hail, and large dust storms.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-20--Forget The Lords – Move Major Government Department Outside London Instead, Experts Say

LOADING ERROR LOADING
There may be “more substantial ways” to boost jobs and investment outside London than moving the House of Lords to York or Birmingham, a government minister has admitted.
The proposal to relocate the chamber is being considered as one of “a range of options” to help people feel more connected to politics, according to Conservative party chairman James Cleverly.
Advertisement
But Lords deputy leader Earl Howe admitted that while a move was under consideration, he agreed with other peers that “there may be other, and possibly more substantial, ways to bring jobs and investment to the north of England than relocating the House of Lords”.
Answering a question tabled on Monday in response to the revelation, Earl Howe said he was sure all logistical issues would be fully examined “should the idea be taken forward” as part of a wider constitutional review.
But Conservative peer Lord Forsyth said: “Does he think when people in so many constituencies in the north lent the Conservatives their votes, they were longing for more politicians to be sent there?”
The government has already identified disused government-owned land near York railway station as a potential site for a new Lords chamber, the Sunday Times reported – despite a tongue-in-cheek offer from the Archbishop of York of the use of a “large garden where a marquee could be erected”.
Advertisement
Members of the House of Lords are seen ahead of the state opening of parliament ceremony at the Palace of Westminster in London on December 19, 2019 POOL New / Reuters
But experts agree the move would do little to combat the centralisation of power in the UK.
Prime minister Boris Johnson should look instead at shifting one of Whitehall’s major departments elsewhere in the country, says Rachel Laurence, director of programmes and practice at the New Economics Foundation.
“York has a lot of things going for it – it’s very well-connected to London, with a big university, high-value industries and thriving local economic sectors in terms of growth,” she told HuffPost UK.
“But that’s true of a lot of cities – if you look at Sheffield and Leeds, for example, the picture is similar.
“If the government is really looking to grapple with the centralisation of power and our economy around the capital, then moving something like the House of Lords to another city isn’t going to be a silver bullet.
Advertisement
“Arguably, moving a large department with large numbers of civil servants out of London would make more of an economic impact than moving MPs or peers. But that’s with the caveat that you would assume there are more jobs attached to such a department than to the running of the House of Lords, for example.”
Campaigners claim a relocation of the Upper House, which needs to move out of its current home for restoration works to begin on the Houses of Parliament in five years’ time, would provide nothing but “tokenistic tinkering”.
Willie Sullivan, senior director of the Electoral Reform Society, which lobbies for an elected and slimmed down House of Lords, said: “This can be an inspiring step forward for our constitution, rebalancing power with a smaller, proportionally-elected senate for all the nations and regions of the UK. If the government is committed to a real union, we must have a parliament that truly reflects that.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-20--Labour MP Zarah Sultana Slams 'Crushing' Student Debt, Brandishing Loan Statement In Commons

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Labour MP Zarah Sultana has slammed the “colossal” debt students are being saddled with as she held aloft her loan statement in the Commons.
The 26-year-old asked universities minister Chris Skidmore to “look me in the eye and say with a straight face” that the government imposing university fees on working class students was fair.
Advertisement
She also pointed out prime minister Boris Johnson, who comes from a privileged background, had gone “from the playing fields of Eton to a free education at Oxford”.
Sultana was 17 when the coalition government tripled tuition fees and was in the first cohort of students to pay £9,000-a-year.
She was brandishing her latest student loan statement which shows that her student debt rose to £46,198, with £2,022 added in interest in the last year alone.
Sultana said: “In 2010, like thousands of other young people, I argued against the tripling of tuition fees.
Advertisement
“But the government ignored us. And now I am in nearly £50,000 of debt.
“This is my latest student loan statement. As it says, in the last year alone the interest added was £2,022.65.
“So I ask the secretary of state, can he look me in the eye and say with a straight face that it is fair that working class kids who want an education are forced to take on this crushing debt when his government is led by a man who went from the playing fields of Eton to a free education at Oxford?”
Replying to Sultana, Skidmore said students would pay nothing until they were earning £25,000 and that the number of people from disadvantaged backgrounds attending university has risen 62% since 2009.
He added that the government was committed to reviewing the rates of interest that students would be asked to pay.
Tory MP Andrew Percy, meanwhile, called on Skidmore to “ignore the class warfare” as he too argued that more working class people were going to university.
Advertisement
Sultana, the new MP for Coventry has been making waves since winning her seat in the December general election.
In her maiden speech, she accused the government of betraying her generation with “rising rents, frozen wages and diminishing opportunities”.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-20--Boris Johnson Could Still Face A Criminal Probe Over Links To Jennifer Arcuri

American businesswoman Jennifer Arcuri Leon Neal via Getty Images
There could still be weeks to wait before the independent police watchdog reveals whether Boris Johnson should face a criminal investigation over his links with American businesswoman Jennifer Arcuri.
In September, the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) was tasked with deciding whether there were grounds to investigate the prime minister for misconduct in public office – a criminal offence.
Advertisement
It followed allegations that Arcuri had received favourable treatment while Johnson was the mayor of London – including £126,000 of public money and privileged access to three foreign trade missions.
Johnson has consistently denied any wrongdoing, with No.10 having previously insisted that “everything was done with propriety and in the normal way” during his time as mayor.
Meanwhile, in a statement in September, Arcuri said any money her company had received and any trade missions she had joined “were purely in respect of my role as a legitimate businesswoman”.
The matter was referred to the IOPC by the Greater London Authority, which is headed by current London mayor Sadiq Khan, in autumn 2019.
Advertisement
But it’s likely to be weeks before any announcement is made by the police watchdog into whether a probe should be launched.
Boris Johnson with Prince Harry at the UK-Africa Investment Summit on Monday WPA Pool via Getty Images
In a statement, an IOPC spokesperson said its assessment was “progressing”.
“We continue to acquire material from various sources and this process has not slowed or paused – it is very much ongoing,” they said. “We are also seeking appropriate legal advice.
“Once our assessment is complete, we will decide whether the matter requires investigation.”
In December, the IOPC denied claims published by the Observer that it had decided to delay announcing its decision about Johnson until after the general election.
The most recent statement from the body comes as SNP Westminster leader Ian Blackford has written to the PM demanding immediate action to allow a report into alleged Russian interference in British politics to be published.
Advertisement
According to the Guardian, the Russian report – which was produced by parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) – cannot be published until MPs are appointed to the ISC following the general election.
During the election campaign, critics accused Downing Street of suppressing the report until after polling day. But government ministers insisted it was the “machinery of government” that had delayed its release.
It and the IOPC decision were among several hot potatoes alleged or proven to have been put on ice by the calling of the election, on topics ranging from Huawei’s involvement in British 5G networks to maternal deaths.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-20--British Mother Who Tried To Smuggle Her Children Into UK On A Rubber Dinghy Walks Free

Lauren Etchells arriving at Jersey Magistrates' Court in St Helier, Jersey, for her sentencing, along with her parents, Brian and Angela, for child neglect PA Wire/PA Images
A British mother who spent years on the run with her two children before washing up in an inflatable dinghy on the island of Jersey has walked free from court.
Teacher Lauren Etchells fled Canada with her young children after the breakdown of her relationship with ex-wife Tasha Brown, and the issuing of a Canadian court order.
Advertisement
She headed for Europe with her new partner Marco van der Merwe, who is believed to have been the sperm donor for one of the children, evading capture for three years despite Interpol issuing a Red Notice.
Her travels took her to France, the Netherlands, the Middle East and possibly to Spain and Portugal, police said.
The mother-of-two was finally caught after arriving in Jersey with her parents in July 2019 in a 13ft inflatable dinghy – despite their subsequent attempts to deceive immigration staff.
Etchells, 34, appeared alongside parents Brian Etchells and Angela Hardy, both 68, for sentencing on Monday at Jersey Magistrates’ Court.
Advertisement
All three had pleaded guilty to making a false representation under immigration law.
Lauren Etchells was convicted after a four-day trial at the same court in December of two charges of exposing a child to risk of harm.
Her parents were convicted of two charges of aiding and abetting exposing a child to risk of harm.
Assistant magistrate Peter Harris said: “These were rather unique circumstances which are unlikely to be repeated.
“Together they were using Jersey in an attempt to avoid compliance with a Canadian court order.”
He acknowledged the efforts made to reduce the risk of harm to the children, and that no harm was actually sustained.
But he added: “The waters around Jersey can be very dangerous.
“Both children were exposed to a risk of harm.”
Harris told the defendants that he viewed their conduct as “to all intents and purposes of an equal nature”.
They were each given six-month prison sentences, suspended for 12 months, and fined £500.
They must also pay costs of £1,600 between them.
Prosecutor Simon Crowder told the court how all three had initially claimed they had come to Jersey from France “with the intention of having lunch”.
Advertisement
Sarah Dale, defending Lauren Etchells, said: “As you heard throughout the trial, Miss Etchells believed that she and also her parents had taken all relevant precautions to ensure the safety of the children during the crossing.
“Miss Etchells’s children are the greatest importance in her life and whatever her motive for making that crossing, she was adamant that she would not do anything at all that she felt put them at risk or endangered them.”
The court heard that all three defendants, listed as being of La Ruette Pinel in St Helier, Jersey, were of previous good character.
Rui Tremoceiro, defending Brian Etchells and Angela Hardy, echoed Ms Dale’s submissions about the steps taken to ensure the children were safe on the crossing.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-20--No.10 Casts Doubt On Jeremy Corbyn's Move To Get John Bercow A Peerage

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Make sense of politics. Sign up to the Waugh Zone and get the political day in a nutshell.
Downing Street has cast doubt on whether Jeremy Corbyn can get John Bercow a seat in the House of Lords.
The Labour leader is said to have earmarked the controversial ex-Commons speaker for a peerage in his outgoing parliamentary dissolution honours list.
Advertisement
But Boris Johnson’s official spokesperson said it was a “longstanding convention” that opposition leaders only nominate peers representing their own party.
His comments suggested No.10 could block the appointment unless Bercow, a former Tory MP, switches his allegiance to Labour.
Johnson is expected to break with tradition by refusing to nominate the ex-speaker, such is the anger over his handling of 2019’s Brexit debates and votes in the Commons.
It is understood that Downing Street has not yet seen any opposition nominations list.
The PM’s spokesperson told reporters: “It is a longstanding convention that leaders of the opposition can nominate individuals representing their party for peerages.”
Advertisement
Bercow's handling of Brexit proved controversial and angered the government PA Wire/PA Images
Corbyn’s honours list, as reported by the Sunday Times, has proven controversial.
The inclusion of his former chief of staff and Labour elections chief Karie Murphy has prompted a backlash from senior Labour figures.
Leadership candidate Jess Phillips and deputy leadership candidate Rosena Allin-Khan said Murphy should not be given a peerage while the party is facing an investigation over alleged anti-Semitism by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC).
That view was echoed by the anti-racism charity Hope Not Hate, while the Jewish Labour Movement (JLM) said Murphy’s nomination was “deeply inappropriate” and must be rescinded.
The JLM said it had written to the Lords appointment commission to raise concerns about Murphy relating to concerns about disciplinary processes and “botched handling of anti-Semitism” in the party. The party did not respond to requests for comment regarding the JLM’s claims.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-20--Now Australia Is Hit By Massive Hailstones, Dust Clouds And Lightning Strikes – All In One Day

Hailstones the size of cricket balls, apocalyptic dust clouds choking whole towns, lightning strikes hospitalising two tourists – all in an Australian summer’s day.
As dozens of bushfires continued to rage across the country, the elements got to work creating chaos largely across the south-eastern and eastern regions of Australia on Monday.
Advertisement
Several of the nation’s largest cities – including Melbourne and Sydney – were hit with the huge hailstones, which wrought destruction on homes, plants, and wildlife.
They were largest in Canberra, the national capital, smashing car windows as residents posted videos on social media of themselves sledding through streets in t-shirts.
Just weeks ago Canberra residents were being warned to stay indoors as bushfire smoke left the air among the most toxic in the world.
Hail destroying the trees at Parliament House.. poor gardeners pic.twitter.com/bHEES1yhHy — Tamsin Rose (@tamsinroses) January 20, 2020
Advertisement
happy birthday val! 30 mins ago it was 30c and sunny. #melbweather pic.twitter.com/Xnpt9OBbOw — Daniel (@firewaters) January 19, 2020
More weather from Australia pic.twitter.com/rZk2ZTLROo — Robert Lanfear (@RobLanfear) January 20, 2020
Almost at the same time, drought-ravaged parts of rural Australia were hit with enormous dust storms, bringing a new element to the extreme weather that has disrupted the country since hundreds of bushfires broke out in September.
Dramatic video footage shared online reveals apocalyptic scenes of dust clouds rushing towards nearby towns, engulfing those holding the camera and blocking out the sun to near-total darkness.
Glad I spent all weekend cleaning. This weather is really testing us! @abcnews pic.twitter.com/q4tRb82xCP — Jen Browning (@jen_browning) January 19, 2020
Advertisement
“I’m just over it,” said Tanya Fulton, manager of the council swimming pool at Tottenham, a town of 300 people about 310 miles west of Sydney, which was closed on Saturday because of dust in the water.
“I couldn’t even see the bottom of the big pool, and the toddlers’ pool was all mud,” she added.
Wild video of an enormous dust storm in Australia. Watch to the endpic.twitter.com/EXVqwFOqib — Andrew Backhouse (@Andytwit123) January 20, 2020
And it didn’t stop there. In the Blue Mountains, a popular visitor spot west of Sydney, two tourists were taken to hospital after being struck by lightning during a violent thunderstorm.
The Sydney Morning Herald reported on Monday that a 16-year-old boy had been on a metal staircase – part of the Giant Stairway Walking Track in Katoomba – when he was directly struck, suffering entry and exit injuries to his arms and feet.
Advertisement
The other victim was a 24-year-old man, who was not struck directly but suffered the aftershock of the strike whilst leaning on the metal railing.
Storm clouds gather over Sydney Harbour. PETER PARKS via Getty Images
2 weeks apart pic.twitter.com/DwHsNKIPTV — eb heins (@EbonyfHeins) January 20, 2020
Parts of the country saw massive rainfall over Friday and Saturday, sparking flash floods and closing major highways, but the downpours couldn’t fully extinguish many of the bushfires that have raged across the nation for months.
At least 29 people have been killed since October by the bushfires, and more than 2,000 homes have been destroyed – with families returning to the rubble where their homes once stood to salvage whatever they can.
Advertisement
Photo taken on January 18 shows the property picture on its owner's phone taken before the bushfire and its ruins left by the bushfire in Mogo town, a two-hour drive from Canberra, Australia. Xinhua News Agency via Getty Images
Fires continue on the devastated Kangaroo Island. REUTERS/Tracey Nearmy
The storms were forecast to hit Sydney late on Monday, prompting Virgin Australia to cut some flights, the company said in an email. Larger airline Qantas Airways Ltd said it had cancelled three flights.
The storms were also expected to hit hundreds of miles of coastline to the city’s south, the site of mass evacuations weeks earlier as fires destroyed homes and wiped out swathes of forest.
The area had received heavy rain but no hail or dust clouds by Monday afternoon, residents said.
“We’re just trying to get over what we’ve experienced on New Year’s Eve and the weeks before and after,” said Guy Chapman, general manager of Club Catalina, a golf club at Batemans Bay, 280 kms to Sydney’s south.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-21--Disney Plus: UK Release, Price, Films And Everything Else You Need To Know

LOADING ERROR LOADING
By now, you might well have heard about Disney’s foray into the world of streaming, with the launch of Disney+ in the US.
After a lot of envy from fans here in Europe (mostly those wanting to get a glimpse at Baby Yoda in action), it’s now been confirmed that Disney+ will be launching here in the UK in March, with specifics, including prices, having also been announced.
Advertisement
For anyone curious about Disney+, or just wondering whether it’s shelling out for, allow us to break it down for you...
What is Disney+?
Put simply, it’s Disney’s way of getting in on the wave of new streaming platforms, following the success of Netflix and Amazon Prime, and subsequent unveiling of reality TV-centric Hayu and last year’s Apple TV+.
A glimpse at the Disney+ homepage Disney/PA
As well as offerings from the House Of Mouse, there’ll also be films and TV shows from other brands that now fall under the Disney umbrella (and there are more of them than you probably realise).
Advertisement
When is Disney+ coming to the UK?
After arriving in the US last year, Disney+ is finally coming to the UK on 24 March, on the same day it’s made available in Ireland, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Austria, and Switzerland.
Excitingly, this is a week earlier than the original launch date of 31 March. To stay updated on launch, click here.
Fans in other Western European markets, including Belgium, the Nordics and Portugal, will apparently have to wait until the summer, though no specific date has been given as of yet.
How much will Disney+ cost?
At £5.99 a month, you’ll notice it’s considerably cheaper than some of its competitors, most notably Netflix, who actually announced they were increasing their prices last year.
There’s also an option to pay for annual use, which will cost you £59.99 (a saving of £11.98), after which you’ll have 12 months’ worth of Disney magic at your fingertips.
Advertisement
What films will be available on Disney+?
For a starters, all your favourite animated Disney classics, from Snow White and Cinderella right through to modern offerings like Frozen and Moana.
This also includes Pixar films, so fans of Toy Story, Finding Nemo and Inside Out can rest easy knowing their faves are all on the same platform.
Pixar's back catalogue will also be streaming on Disney+ Disney
Disney+ will also allow you to jog your memory and revisit some of the more overlooked offerings from the Disney vault, including live-action projects (Flubber, anyone?) and Disney Channel original movies.
But believe it or not, that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
Since Disney’s acquisition of Lucasfilm and Marvel Studios, you can also look forward to every single Star Wars film (apart from the most recent one, which we imagine is coming in due course), but also the likes of Avengers, Black Panther, Iron Man and Doctor Strange.
Advertisement
The cast of Star Wars: A New Hope LMPC via Getty Images
And if you’re feeling especially nostalgic, Disney+ has a number of films from The Muppets, and – for some reason – the first three Home Alone films.
And what about TV series?
This is where things get especially nostalgic, because Disney+ has a number of shows you might remember from the glory days of Disney Channel (Lizzie McGuire! That’s So Raven! Hannah Montana!), but the TV show that has got most people talking is The Simpsons.
Owned by Fox – which was recently bought out by Disney – The Simpsons finally found a streaming home in Disney+ in the US, and we had been already planning which order we’d be streaming our favourites in.
The Simpsons Fox
Advertisement
A word of caution, though... Disney+ made no mention of The Simpsons in their recent European press release, and haven’t actually confirmed whether our favourite family will be making the jump to the UK yet...
Question: “Will Disney+ have the full Simpsons catalogue at UK and Europe launch?”
Disney spokesperson: “Full content to be confirmed in the coming weeks”
👀 — Mark Di Stefano (@MarkDiStef) January 21, 2020
Does Disney+ have any original content?
You bet it does.
First and foremost – The Mandalorian, which means only one thing: Baby Yoda.
Yes, after a long wait, the Star Wars spin-off show will finally be available to stream in the UK, and while fans in the US had to wait for new episodes every week, it seems the show will debut all at once for British subscribers.
The star of The Baby Yoda Show... errr... we mean The Mandalorian Disney
High School Musical fans can also dive into the new show High School Musical: The Musical: The Series (yes that’s actually what it’s called).
Advertisement
Future titles include Encore!, executive produced by The Good Place’s Kristen Bell, and The Imagineering Story, which will give viewers a (Disney-endorsed) look behind the scenes at Disneyland.
The streaming service will also have original films, which includes the first Disney live-action remake to debut online rather than in cinemas, Lady And The Tramp.
Lady And The Tramp Disney
And as if that’s not enough, Tom Hiddleston will later take centre stage in a new Marvel film unique to Disney+, focussing on his character, Loki, while Jeff Goldblum will land his own nature series (for reasons we don’t fully understand, to be honest) but we’re sure it’ll be entertaining all the same.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-21--Serena Williams Has Slick Response To Meghan Markle Question

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Serena Williams knows how to gently hit back, too.
A reporter at the Australian Open asked the tennis champ to address her friend Meghan Markle stepping back from her senior role in the royal family.
“What are your feelings about that?” the reporter asked at a news conference on Monday, as seen in the clip below. “Have you spoken to her?”
Advertisement
Serena replied: “Yeah, I have absolutely no comments on anything with that. But good try. You tried. You did good.”
Serena and the Duchess Of Sussex struck up a friendship at the 2010 Super Bowl and have supported each other over the years.
Serena and Meghan at an event in 2014 Michael Loccisano via Getty Images
The tennis ace and husband Alexis Ohanian attended the royal wedding, and Serena helped put together a baby shower for Meghan last February.
Advertisement
The Duchess has cheered on her pal at Wimbledon and at the US Open.
In the first round at Melbourne, the eighth-seeded Serena defeated Anastasia Potapova of Russia, 6-0, 6-3, to begin her quest for a 24th Grand Slam singles title.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-21--So That Photo Of 'Gogglebox's Mary In Her Modelling Days' Doing The Rounds Isn't Quite What People B

So That Photo Of 'Gogglebox's Mary In Her Modelling Days' Doing The Rounds Isn't Quite What People Believe

LOADING ERROR LOADING
By now, you might have seen a picture doing the rounds supposedly showing Gogglebox’s Mary Killen in her modelling days.
The vintage snap shows a glamorous woman – looking very much like a young Mary – posing in the street as she models a mini skirt and a roll neck jumper.
Advertisement
People mistook this picture of model Susan Shaw for Mary from Gogglebox Hulton Deutsch via Getty Images
Many people shared the photo on Twitter claiming it was Mary in her younger years, with the picture gaining further momentum after Zoe Ball tweeted it out to her 350,000 followers.
Even some news outlets, including Hello!, Daily Star and Metro, published stories on Mary’s early foray into modelling.
Advertisement
However, it turns out the picture isn’t actually of Mary at all but of another model called Susan Shaw, shot in 1975.
A Gogglebox spokesperson told HuffPost UK that Mary had missed the photo doing the rounds as she is “not on Twitter”, but was “hugely flattered” by the mix up.
Mary with husband Giles on Gogglebox Channel 4
Mary, who appears on the Channel 4 show alongside husband Giles, does reportedly have a modelling past though, as it’s believed she worked as a model in her 20s.
She now works as an author and journalist, with her columns featuring in a number of publications.
Her first book, titled How The Queen Can Make You Happy, was published in 2012, and she is also credited as being an etiquette expert.
Advertisement
Mary and Giles joined the cast of Gogglebox in 2015 and regularly have viewers in stitches with their squabbles as they pass comment on the week’s TV highlights.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-21--Nora Quoirin’s Family Sues Malaysian Resort Over Vulnerable Teenager’s Death

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The family of a London teenager found dead after she disappeared in a Malaysian nature reserve last year is suing the resort for alleged negligence.
Nora Quoirin, a sweet, shy and vulnerable teenager, had been on holiday with her parents and siblings in Dusun in southern Negeri Sembilan state in August last year, when she vanished from their apartment.
Advertisement
Last week the 15-year-old’s parents told HuffPost UK of their dismay that there would be no further investigation into a death they believe was extremely suspicious and urged the Malaysian government to open an inquest.
Nora Quoirin pictured on the west coast of Ireland in 2018 Supplied
Nora went missing on August 4, sparking a massive search operation. Ten days later, her naked body was discovered beside a small stream less than two miles away from the resort, and in an area that had already been searched by the authorities.
An initial post-mortem examination found she had died from gastro-intestinal bleeding and an ulcer, likely brought on by starvation, stress, or both. Police in Malaysia said they have so far found no evidence of rape, abduction or kidnapping.
Advertisement
But Sankara Nair, a lawyer for Nora’s parents Meabh and Sebastien Quoirin, said the family strongly believed Nora was abducted as she has mental and physical disabilities and could not have wandered off on her own.
The lawsuit says a cottage window was found ajar, with its latch broken, on the morning she disappeared.
A members of a rescue team plays a recording of Nora's mother's voice during the search for the missing teenager ASSOCIATED PRESS
The resort gate was left open at all times without any security and there was no surveillance camera except for the reception area, the legal papers said.
Nora had poor motor skills and needed help to walk, and her mental age was about five or six years old, her parents said in the claim.
Advertisement
Sankara said outside a court in Negeri Sembilan after a procedural session on the case: “The place was not safe for the child because of the negligence. [...] Anybody could have come in and taken the child.”
Nora’s French-Irish parents are seeking more than 180,000 Malaysian ringgit (£34,000) over losses, bereavement costs and damages for pain and suffering from the resort owner, Helen Marion Todd.
Todd’s lawyers were not immediately available for comment.
Nora's mother Meabh Quoirin strongly believes her daughter was abducted ASSOCIATED PRESS
Sankara said the family has asked Malaysia’s attorney-general to launch an inquest because the post-mortem inquiry would not include what happened to Nora before her death. Police have said a complete post-mortem report will be released soon.
Nora’s parents previously said they were shocked when Malaysian prosecutors classified Nora’s death as requiring “no further action” based on the preliminary coroner’s report, essentially ruling out any inquest. They said the move could prevent justice being done.
Advertisement
In a statement issued by the Lucie Blackman Trust, a charity that helps British families in crisis overseas, the parents said: “It is crucial to understand how Nora came to be found where she was. As a vulnerable child, with significant physical and mental challenges, we strongly refute any conclusion that Nora was alone for the entire duration of her disappearance.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-21--Is Rihanna's New Fenty Full Frontal Mascara Worth The £21 Price Tag?

Fenty Full Frontal Mascara
Since its launch in 2017, Rihanna’s Fenty Beauty has shown no sign of slowing down. From a 50-shade line-up of foundations and concealers to a slew of vibrant, matte lipsticks and bold eyeshadow palettes, there’s a product for every step of your makeup routine. Except your lashes – until now, that is.
In an Instagram post, the brand revealed its Full Frontal Mascara (£21), promising fanned-out lashes that volumises, lifts, lengthens and curls. There’s an exhaustive list of reasons to love it, but does it live up to the hype? I put it to the test to see how just how it measured up.
Advertisement
I already own the Universal Gloss Bomb Lip Gloss (£17) and a Pro Filt’r Concealer (£19) which are staples in my usual makeup regime, so I have high hopes for this new Fenty product. Having long loved the Pixi Lashlift 188 Mascara, (£16), I’ve used nothing else for my eyelashes over the past 18 months, will this knock it off the top spot?
HuffPost UK Louise/HuffPost UK
On first impressions, it’s a thick tube with an inoffensive smell to it and fits neatly into my makeup bag. The brush is described by Fenty Beauty as ‘Flat-Fat’, and with one swipe on my top lashes, the bristles pick up every hair and evenly distribute the product.
It’s easy to navigate onto those tiny lashes in the corner of my eye using the flat side, which is normally a recipe for disaster and involves a frantic rush to find a cotton bud to wipe remnants of mascara off my nose, but with this it’s a clean application.
Advertisement
It’s buildable too, I apply a couple more coats to get the length that I like, and the formula doesn’t dry out as I’m doing it, nor is it so wet it smudges. It adds instant length and definition, separating out each lash, and doesn’t clump at all. There’s no gloopy, excess product on the end of the wand either.
For my bottom lashes, which are short and almost undetectable without mascara, I use the flat side of the brush and am immediately impressed that it coats them but doesn’t overload them with product. So far, so good.
They’re noticeably longer, and the fanned-out finish it promises certainly delivers. It doesn’t thicken lashes however, which I have no qualms about, but it might be something to consider if that’s a priority for you. Throughout the evening, there’s no crumbling under my eyes and my lashes stay looking lifted.
To remove it with the rest of my makeup, I use The Ordinary Squalene Cleanser (£5.50), a balm that melts into an oil, and comes off without a bother using a warm flannel. There’s no tugging on my lashes to make sure I’ve got every last bit. It’s as easy to apply as it is to remove.
Final verdict
Mascara is a product that often doesn’t require spending lots of money on to get a good one, with brands such L’Oreal and Maybelline doing stellar ones for less than a tenner.
Advertisement
That said, I do think this is worth the £21 price tag. It lengthens, curls and lifts, without being messy or weighed down with too much product. It doesn’t smudge, crumble or clump my lashes together either. The only issue is the fact that it’s not overly volumising, which isn’t an issue for me.
It’s a yes from me. Is there anything Rihanna can’t do?