Albie Amankona 'sacked by GB News for calling Suella Braverman a racist'
Albie Amankona was dropped by the broadcaster last year and is now taking it to an employment tribunal, alleging that he was subject to racial discrimination and unfair dismissal.
He formerly presented GB News's The Saturday Five programme and left after calling the former home secretary 'a racist and a thoroughly bigoted woman'.
READ MORE: Former Unionist party leader backs Scottish independence referendum
GB News apologised for his comments at the time, saying they had 'crossed a line between robust debate and causing unnecessary offence'.
Amankona is now crowdfunding a legal campaign against the broadcaster, The Telegraph reports, and is getting support from Jolyon Maugham's (below) Good Law Project.
He said: 'I regret that it has come to this, I have tried very hard to resolve matters privately and in good faith. Like so many fair-minded Britons I believe in free speech, fairness, the rule of law and I know right from wrong. GB News claims to stand for these values.
'My experience tells a different story. They must be held accountable, not only for cancelling me, but for seemingly treating non-white employees differently from white employees, and for abandoning the very values we Britons hold dear.'
READ MORE: Scottish Labour MPs set to rebel on UK welfare reform – see the full list
The Good Law Project said: 'GB News likes to brand itself as a champion of free speech and journalistic independence. But when one of its own presenters dared to call out racism and intolerance, the response was swift and severe: he was dropped instantly.
'It's a familiar pattern – when free speech aligns with their agenda, they celebrate it. But the moment it challenges their narrative, the mask slips.'
A GB News spokesperson said: 'Mr Amankona's claim is misconceived, without merit and being robustly defended. As the claim is ongoing we do not propose to comment further.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
29 minutes ago
- The National
Here's what we learned from John Curtice's new polling report
It comes in response to figures in a new report penned by Professor John Curtice and published by the National Centre for Social Research as part of the latest British Social Attitudes survey, released on Wednesday. Curtice's report, titled Repairing Britain, found that almost two-thirds of the public (63%) were likely to vote to rejoin the European Union in a second referendum. When the public are given more than a binary option, Curtice reported that 'only 21% say that the UK should be outside the EU, the lowest proportion to do so since 2008'. READ MORE: Pressure piles on Anas Sarwar as 10th Scottish Labour MP joins rebellion The polling expert further reported that the 'latest survey shows that as many as 69% believe that the economy is worse off as a result of Brexit, well up on the 40% who anticipated such an outcome in 2015'. He noted that Labour were aiming to win over pro-Brexit voters who had backed Boris Johnson in the 2019 General Election, but added: 'However, Labour's support came overwhelmingly from those who say they would vote to rejoin the EU.' Elsewhere, a majority of the UK public (61%) said they believed that the tax burden on people with low incomes was 'too high', up nine points on 2016. Conversely, a plurality (44%) said that the tax burden on the UK's highest earners was too low, up ten points on 2016. Only one in 10 UK adults support spending less on disability benefits (Image: PA) The report also said that, by 45% to 11%, people think the UK Government should spend more – not less – on disability benefits. However, the support for spending more is at a 'record low', down 22 points on 2017. The Labour Government is currently facing down the biggest rebellion of Prime Minister Keir Starmer's leadership, with more than 100 MPs opposing plans to cut disability benefit spending by £5 billion per year. Elsewhere, the report found: A record 26% of people say they are struggling to live on their current income, up from 16% before the pandemic. Satisfaction with the health service has plummeted in the wake of the pandemic. A record 59% are now dissatisfied with the NHS, compared with just 25% in 2019. In total, 40% of people now support increasing taxes and spending more on health, education, and social benefits, down from 55% in early 2023. However, this is still above the 31% support reported in 2010, when taxes were a lower proportion of GDP than currently. 58% of those who voted Labour in 2024 are in favour of increasing taxes to spend more on health, education and social benefits. 'NIMBYism' is on the rise: the proportion of people who support building more homes in their local area has fallen from 57% in 2018 to 41%. Conversely, 32% are opposed, up from 23% over the same period. SNP MSP Clare Adamson said: "This report shows what we all already know – that Britain is broken beyond repair. "Whether it's on EU membership, taxation, or cuts to welfare, the UK Government and the rest of the political bubble is totally out of step with voters. "What Scotland really needs isn't a change of Government in Edinburgh or London – it's a full change of the system with independence." Scottish Green co-leader Patrick Harvie also took aim at Labour over Brexit, saying there was 'no question' that leaving the EU had contributed to 'higher bills, poorer services, and a struggling economy'. READ MORE: Jonathon Shafi: West's imperial arrogance takes propaganda to farcical levels 'It's no surprise that an overwhelming majority across the UK now support rejoining the EU,' he went on. 'Yet despite this, Labour refuses to acknowledge the harm it's done and begin taking the urgent action we need to reverse it. 'Like on so many issues, whether it be immigration, tax or Brexit, they ignore the public and the good of the country in order to pander to a small number of right-wing newspapers and Reform voters.' The campaign group Yes for EU said the high support for rejoining the EU was 'no surprise', with a spokesperson adding: 'What is surprising, indeed scandalous, is that the UK Labour Government continues to reject calls to rejoin.' Scottish Green MSP Ross Greer further hit out at Labour over taxation, calling for a more progressive UK system. 'Labour claim there isn't enough money to end cruel policies like the two-child benefit cap and rape clause, yet in the recently published Rich List we saw that the top 1% increase their net worth yet again,' he said. 'Working and middle class people are struggling with the cost of living, but super-rich elites are doing better than ever. Scottish Green MSP Ross Greer (Image: NQ) 'Keir Starmer was elected on a commitment to end at least one tax avoidance loophole enjoyed by some of these billionaires, but he dropped that as soon as he got the keys to Downing Street and instead he is slashing the support provided to disabled people to 'balance the books'.' Curtice, a senior research fellow at the National Centre for Social Research, said: 'The public are well aware of Britain's problems – not least those of a failing health service and an economy in which many are struggling to make ends meet. Yet rather than turning their back on the state, for the most part, the public are still inclined to look to government to provide solutions. And while they feel that most people on low and middle incomes are already paying enough tax, they suspect that some of the better off could pay more. 'As a result, while voters have perhaps now begun to react against the marked increase in the size of the state during the last Parliament, that reaction is still, it seems, relatively muted – and especially so among those who voted Labour. READ MORE: Tommy Sheppard: SNP must woo voters to turn our indy hopes into reality 'Yet this does not mean that voters are necessarily ready to back the various remedies that Labour have been offering to overcome the country's difficulties. They are not necessarily prepared to embrace a dash for more infrastructure building, including perhaps not least anything that appears in their own backyard. 'Tightening up on disability benefits is potentially controversial too, as the government has already discovered. 'The political difficulty with these policies is there are potentially identifiable winners and losers, and it is often the losers who shout the loudest. Pursuing economic growth rather than tax rises as the route out of fiscal constraint will not necessarily be the easier path for Labour to tread.'
The National
29 minutes ago
- The National
Using an election as plebiscite referendum is just not going to fly
Most of us, I bet. But fun as it is to see those who only a few short years ago were proclaiming themselves to be 'All4Unity' – and now failing to find much unity among themselves – Galloway endorsing the right of voters in Scotland to choose to be independent is no longer the political showstopper that it could have been a couple of decades ago. Far more predictable was Labour minister Douglas Alexander popping up on BBC Scotland at the weekend and refusing – despite being asked three times – to say how Scotland can voluntarily leave the Union should they wish. READ MORE: Palestine Action activist rejects Home Secretary's Glasgow protest claim It's the question which is guaranteed to leave any Unionist spokesperson spinning towards the ground belching puffs of acrid smoke in their wake, because there's really no good answer they can give. Which of course is all the more reason to keep asking it. The fact is that most Scots, pro-independence or not, accept without question our right to self-determination. Implying or even stating that no such right exists, or dodging the question as Alexander tried to do, only serves to get right up people's noses. While it's not a strategy for independence, it's nevertheless a useful way to put some people on the spot and get the people of Scotland in general talking about the rights and wrongs of the matter. And let's face it, the more people who accept our right to choose independence and who start to consider that the question deserves to be put again, the more likely it is to happen. Short of a 'black swan' event which turns people so decisively against the Union that any vote becomes redundant, independence will probably only happen through a standalone referendum to begin a legal process of becoming independent. And even in the unlikely event of that black swan flying overhead, you'd still likely want a referendum to ratify and legitimise the outcome. So, having said that, let's recognise that using an election as a plebiscite referendum is just not going to fly. Not now. Probably not ever. I'm always puzzled how so many who argue that we absolutely must take this route can argue with 100% certainty that any UK government will say no to another referendum on independence, yet can still believe the same UK government would just roll over and say yes to actual independence in the face of a positive election result. The truth is this – in the unlikely event of being able to win 50% of the vote in a multi-party election, the best anyone in the UK Government will ever do is congratulate us on our result. It will only have effect in their eyes if we fall short, when in a twist on that classic Edinburgh expression, it will be a case of 'you'll have had your referendum'. And independence then really will be off the agenda for another generation. (Image: Supplied) What should matter more to independence supporters than what Westminster thinks is what the Scottish people think. And by that, I mean what people in Scotland really think, rather than what we might wish they thought instead. If anyone spends any time talking to voters in Scotland just now about what is important to them, they would find that even independence supporters are still overwhelmingly going to be voting first and foremost for a government, no matter what anyone else might want them to do. In the present circumstances, if the SNP were to try to use the next Scottish Parliament election as a proxy referendum, then you can probably say hello to a thumping Unionist majority at Holyrood. That's not because there's a thumping majority or anything like it out there for the Union, because there isn't. Rather, it'll be because most people – even independence supporters – will rightly conclude that there are lots of other pressing issues also needing decided. By standing on a platform not of 'independence, nothing less' but instead 'independence and nothing else', Scotland's main pro-independence party would be showing that it was no longer capable of being both pro-independence and being a government at the same time. And good luck getting Scotland to independence without having a pro-independence Scottish Government taking decisions in Scotland. There are a couple of reasons why Alex Salmond embraced the idea of a pre-legislative referendum as part of his moves to professionalise the SNP that he led. (Image: JASON REDMOND) Firstly, it was to help decouple independence supporters from their (then) loyalty to the Labour Party. But also, it was to allow people who wanted SNP representation to vote for the party, knowing that if it came to it, independence could be only decided later on in a separate vote for that purpose. While it was that first group who helped take Scotland so close in 2014, it was the second group of 'soft' SNP supporters who were instrumental in the 2011 SNP landslide which made that referendum possible at all. It was a shrewd move from a man who knew exactly what he was doing when he did it. And it was informed by the hard data that had come in from SNP canvassers all over the country, which had started to show that support for independence was not always the same as support for the SNP and vice versa. So by all means let a thousand flowers bloom in our strategic thinking. But let us always be realistic, grounded in reality and looking outwards to those we still need to persuade, rather than trying to set a political course based solely on what might make us feel good personally.
The National
30 minutes ago
- The National
Scottish Government accused of shutting door on rewilding projects
A meeting with the Scottish Rewilding Alliance, a coalition of more than 20 organisations, and former Minister for Climate Action Dr Alasdair Allan MSP, was scheduled for Wednesday but was cancelled without being rescheduled. THE Scottish Government has been criticised for cancelling a meeting about beaver restoration and failing to schedule a replacement, with activists warning that the 'door is shutting' on biodiversity. It was expected to discuss concerns over 'stalled progress' on the recovery of beaver populations and the need for 'courageous' leadership by ministers and government agency, NatureScot, however Dr Allan left government earlier this month. The coalition warned that biodiversity risked being 'marginalised' ahead of the Holyrood elections in 2026, despite high profile support for a bid for Scotland to become a 'rewilding nation' including from actors Leonardo DiCaprio and Brian Cox. READ MORE: Palestine Action activist rejects Home Secretary's Glasgow protest claim In December 2024, Forestry and Land Scotland (FLS), in partnership with rewilding charity Trees for Life, submitted a licence application to NatureScot to release a family of beavers on its land in Glen Affric in the Highlands, after two years of extensive consultations. Beavers create wetlands, soak up carbon dioxide, purify water and reduce flooding, and can bring in tourism, and polls showed 80% of people think the Scottish Government should support rewilding, according to the charities. In April, NatureScot delayed a decision on granting a licence for a community-backed proposal to reintroduce beavers, citing concern, despite previously describing engagement as exemplary and the proposal as in line with policy. Surveys showed that two-thirds of people surveyed support the beaver reintroduction, during two years of research, according to the coalition. But a Freedom of Information request revealed it was perceived by a NatureScot official as 'novel and contentious' and was referred to ministers, with a decision was delayed after lobbying, the charities claimed. It was said to have prompted an intervention by local MSP and deputy first minister Kate Forbes, who is said to have raised the case with Mairi Gougeon MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands, according to a Freedom of Information request from investigative journalism publication the Ferret. The coalition said it was concerned that NatureScot 'is being hobbled by political game-playing ahead of an election year', and appeasing others, including from National Farmers Union Scotland. Steve Micklewright, chief executive of Trees for Life, said: 'Beavers have been present in the catchment for 15 years with no issues. 'The Glen Affric community is overwhelmingly in favour of an official reintroduction, and NatureScot officials described the public engagement as exemplary and 'above and beyond'. 'NatureScot also tells us that it fully endorses the environmental case for beaver restoration in Glen Affric. So what is going on? 'This is bigger than a single family of beavers finding a new home on a national nature reserve. 'Why does the government keep marginalising efforts to restore biodiversity to satisfy vested interests? Can NatureScot show leadership and vision on large-scale nature recovery in the face of anti-nature lobbying?' Karen Blackport, the Scottish Rewilding Alliance's co-convenor and chief executive of Bright Green Nature, said: 'The Scottish Government's approach on beavers is a symptom of a bigger problem. It's failing to take its biodiversity commitments seriously, and there are worrying questions around consistency, fairness and transparency in decision-making. 'Scotland has no need to languish as one of the world's most nature-depleted countries – but we are lagging on nature recovery where we should be leading.' Kevin Cumming, Rewilding Britain's rewilding director and deputy convenor of the Scottish Rewilding Alliance, said: 'Rewilding offers hope for tackling the nature and climate emergencies, and a wealth of social and economic benefits for communities from jobs to health. 'Large-scale nature recovery should be prioritised not marginalised. 'If the Government is truly committed to protecting 30% of Scotland for nature by 2030 then it needs to stop shutting the door in the face of rewilding organisations.' NatureScot director of green economy Robbie Kernahan said: 'NatureScot is committed to expanding the beaver population across Scotland for the benefit of biodiversity, in line with Scotland's Beaver Strategy. 'A huge amount of work has been taking place to ensure this, and a lot of progress has been made, with the population of beavers in Scotland expanding and their range increasing accordingly.'
