Army barred from showing kit at Armed Forces Day, sparks anger
But the decision outraged part-time soldiers from the Queen's Own Yeomanry, who reportedly withdrew entirely from the event in protest. It comes amid claims the decision was taken to avoid inflaming pro-Palestine demonstrators, with a whistle-blower telling military blog Fill Your Boots the council was worried about 'triggering a protest'. Colonel Hamish de Bretton-Gordon was appalled at the claims and accused the council of 'capitulating' to activists like Palestine Action - which over the weekend was banned and branded a proscribed terror group. The former commander of the military's Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) Regiment told MailOnline: 'It's absolutely bonkers if a Labour council is seemingly supporting a proscribed terrorist group over the army.'
'The military is there to protect the civilian community, but it seems at the moment whether you're an activist against climate change or anything else they get the rub of the green rather than the people doing the hard yards. 'It's a hugely disappointing and the people who serve us - the council and MPs - need to man up a bit and stand for those on the right side of the law rather than capitulating to the likes of Palestine Action, that's a proscribed terror group.'
Speaking ahead of the event, Councillor Claire Douglas (pictured) - leader of York City Council - said the day was 'a show of unity, pride and community spirit'. And Martin Rowley, the city's lord mayor and an army veteran, said it was about thanking and celebrating 'all who serve or have served'. But in a post on Facebook, seen by MailOnline, Mr Rowley conceded: 'We could and should have handled this situation differently.'
Local Tories hit out at the fiasco, with Councillor Chris Steward, leader of the York Conservative group, telling York Press : 'Military equipment is not a big part of Armed Forces Day by volume, but it is a crucial part. What use is any military without equipment? We totally condemn this decision of the Labour councillors. It shows how far the Labour Party has fallen from a proud, patriotic party which recognised the courageous and vital job our military do, to one more concerned how their actions may offend their increasingly extreme supporters who seem to want to protest against our long held values.'
The council declined to comment on whether the decision to block the Jackal vehicle from attending was taken due to fear it could lead to protests.
However, in a statement, Cllr Douglas said: 'With our military partners, we carefully considered residents' concerns and decided that the day will go ahead as planned, with the only change being no military equipment on show. This decision in no way diminishes how seriously we take Armed Forces Day and our deep respect and commitment to those who serve and have served.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
13 minutes ago
- The Independent
Starmer fights to save ‘one-in-one-out' migrant deal during Macron state visit
Sir Keir Starmer is facing a fight to salvage his much-vaunted deal with France to return illegal migrants and halt increasing crossings of small boats across the English Channel. With Emmanuel Macron arriving on Tuesday a three-day state visit, there are concerns the prime minister's 'one in, one out' agreement is close to collapse. It is understood Sir Keir hoped the agreement would be the centrepiece of the French president's state visit, but it has stalled amid opposition from other EU countries. Italy, Spain, Greece, Malta and Cyprus wrote to the European Commission over the proposals, fearing it could see asylum seekers returned to their shores instead. It is understood that migration will be front and centre of talks between Sir Keir and president Macron in Downing Street on Wednesday, with discussions over 'returns hubs' and new tactics by French border police expected to feature heavily on the agenda. Officers were seen last week slashing inflatable boats with knives to prevent them leaving French shores. Downing Street insists the deal is not dead, but admitted the picture is 'complex' as Britain is on course for a new record in illegal crossings. The Channel migrant crisis, which helped destroy the last Tory government, appears to be dogging Sir Keir after a difficult first year as prime minister; his mantra of 'smash the gangs' and tackling the backlog of asylum cases has not reduced the numbers attempting dangerous crossings. A Downing Street spokesperson said Sir Keir and president Macron have 'an excellent working relationship', adding that Britain's 'joint work with the French which is stronger than it's ever been'. Asked about the 'one-in-one-out' agreement, the spokesperson said: 'I wouldn't comment on specific things ahead of a summit. We can expect progress on a wide range of priorities including migration, but I'm not going to speculate on specifics ahead of a summit that is yet to take place.' The leaders will also discuss defence and their joint efforts to create a 'coalition of the willing' to maintain any peace deal to end the war in Ukraine. Ahead of the visit, the pair spoke on the phone on Saturday, where they said they wanted to make "good progress" on a series of joint issues, including migration. Macron is to have the rare honour of addressing a joint sitting of the Houses of Parliament on Tuesday before being the guest of honour at an evening banquet hosted by King Charles. The prime minister is under growing pressure to get a grip on the numbers of small boats crossing the Channel after figures published last week showed that a record number of people made the journey in the first six months of this year. Home Office data shows a total of 19,982 people have arrived in the UK since the start of 2025 – the highest total for the halfway point of the year since data was first collected on migrant crossings in 2018. The prime minister has been struggling to bring down both the number of boat crossings and the amount of money spent on housing asylum seekers in hotels across the UK. But he has also faced criticism from left-wing Labour MPs and refugee charities, who have accused Sir Keir of attempting to copy Reform UK's inflammatory rhetoric. Ahead of the visit, Sir Keir and Mr Macron spoke over the phone on Saturday, where they said they wanted to make 'good progress' on a series of joint issues, including migration.
Sky News
29 minutes ago
- Sky News
UK farmers have 'nothing more to give' as they fear govt will compromise welfare in US-UK trade deal
UK farmers have "nothing more to give" as they fear the government will use agriculture to further reduce US tariffs in a trade deal with the White House. The UK is trying to reduce steel tariffs to zero, from a current reduced rate of 25%, but Downing Street refused to confirm if it was confident ahead of Donald Trump's deadline of 9 July. Tom Bradshaw, president of the National Farmers' Union (NFU), said UK agriculture had already been used to reduce Trump-imposed tariffs on cars but any other concessions would have serious repercussions for farmers, food security and the UK's high animal welfare standards. He told Sky News: "It just feels like we, as the agricultural sector, had to shoulder the responsibility to reduce the tariffs on cars from 25%. "We can't do it anymore, we have nothing more to give. "It's clear the steel quotas and tariffs aren't sorted yet, so we just want to be very clear with the government: if they're sitting around the negotiating table - which we understand they are - they can't expect agriculture to give any more." 'Massively undermine our standards' Since 30 June, the US has been able to import 13,000 tonnes of hormone-free British beef without tariffs under a deal made earlier this year, which farmers feel was to reduce the car import levy Mr Trump imposed. The UK was also given tariff-free access to 1.4bn litres of US ethanol, which farmers say will put the UK's bioethanol and associated sectors under pressure. Allowing lower US food standards would "massively undermine our standards" and would mean fewer sales to the European Union where food standards are also high, Mr Bradshaw said. It would leave British farmers competing on a playing field that is "anything but fair", he said, because US food can be produced - and sold - much cheaper due to low welfare which could see a big reduction in investment in UK farms, food security and the environment. 5:08 'The US will push hard for more access' He said the US narrative has always suggested they want access to British agriculture products "as a start and they'll negotiate for more". "The narrative from the White House on 8 May, when a US-UK trade deal was announced, was all about further access to our agriculture products - it was very different to what our government was saying," he added. "So far, the UK has stood firm and upheld our higher welfare standards, but the US will push very hard to have further access. "No country in the world has proved they can reduce the 10% tariffs further." US 'will target poultry and pork' The Essex farmer said he expects the US to push "very hard" to get the UK to lower its standards on poultry and pork, specifically. US poultry is often washed with antimicrobials, including chlorine, in an attempt to wash off high levels of bacteria caused by poor hygiene, antibiotic use and low animal welfare conditions not allowed in UK farming. US pig rearing methods are also quite different, with intensive farming and the use of feed additive ractopamine legal, with both banned in the UK. A government spokesperson told Sky News: "We regularly speak to businesses across the UK to understand the impact of tariffs and will only ever act in the national interest. "Our Plan for Change has delivered a deal which will open up exclusive access for UK beef farmers to the US market for the first time ever and all agricultural imports coming to the UK will have to meet our high SPS (sanitary and phytosanitary) standards."
Telegraph
29 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Whisper it, but ‘special educational needs' is becoming an unaffordable racket
The British taxpayer is being taken for an ever-more-expensive ride. It is seemingly not enough that we must support six million public sector workers, spaff £400 million on legions of DEI staff or pay £200 billion a year for a health service on life support: Whitehall's big spenders are endlessly looking for new ways to empty our bank accounts. Arguably their most troubling new spending frontier is 'neurodiversity'. It's one of those new age, suitably fuzzy terms which we don't quite understand but have to pretend has always been a part of our lexicon – similar to 'equity', 'intersectionality' or 'microaggression'. Officially, though, it's a spectrum of illnesses, from ADHD to dyspraxia, which must always be validated, never gainsaid, however generic the 'symptoms' may appear. As with all elements of the progressive orthodoxy, the Blob regards any hint of scepticism as akin to supporting the Slaughter of the First Born. And it is now turning out to be as vexing for Bridget Phillipson as it is for anyone who has secretly wondered whether young Tommy is more dim than dyslexic. In October, the Government is set to overhaul the special needs and disabilities (Send) provision in schools, through which councils provide support to pupils. Given that, of the total spend on 'education, health and care plans' (EHCPs), which legally mandate expensive support and have risen exponentially in recent years, just 4 per cent are going to those with severe learning disabilities associated with physical incapacity, I'd say for once the Education Secretary is right. But antsy backbenchers, fresh from their Pyrrhic PIP triumph last week, panic that there will be an attempt to save money by scaling back support. As one Labour MP warned, foretelling future rebellions: 'If they thought taking money away from disabled adults was bad, watch what happens when they try the same with disabled kids.' Just as with the welfare row, the backdrop is an explosion in claimants. Close to two million people under 25 now require Send support. The Department for Education is, according to the National Audit Office (NAO), now spending £10.7 billion providing support to these youngsters. Funding for ADHD claims has risen from £700,000 a year in 2013 to £292 million today: a mind-boggling increase of more than 41,000 per cent in just over a decade. It goes on: autism diagnoses in England have risen by 787 per cent between 1998 and 2018, while ADHD and autism referrals have increased five‑fold since the pandemic. We have been so sucked into this (who hasn't had a recently diagnosed friend query whether perhaps they might, too, be a 'sufferer'? It's starting to feel like a Ponzi scheme) that at no point have we stopped to ask: who are we helping? Or: where does this end? As Prof Ginny Russell, a researcher in developmental disorders, has courageously suggested: 'I do think it's going to continue until maybe everyone is categorised as neurodiverse'. Do we dare ask whether providing transportation, including taxis, for these children, is necessary or sustainable? The County Councils Network (CCN) projects that the cost of 'free' transport will reach £3.6 billion a year by 2030. What's truly staggering is that children don't even require a diagnosis to receive this benefit: one eight year old with 'behavioural difficulties' in Gainsborough was given daily private cars to and from school despite never having been assessed. Then there was the mother in Derby, who bemoaned her child feeling 'distressed' going to school on public transport, adding: 'I could take her in the car but I also have other children who I need to get to school and nursery'. So, like every other parent? It's easy to complain when someone else is paying. Is this a good use of taxpayer funds, when CCN is also warning 26 of England's largest councils could have to declare bankruptcy by 2027 if the SEND deficits they are grappling with are placed onto their budget books? What's more, the evidence that SEND support works is limited. In 2019 the NAO found there was 'no consistent improvement' in outcomes for children and young people receiving this support. We have created a system which is patently too easy to game. Almost every student who was screened for ADHD at Oxford University recently was assessed as having it after a 90-minute test. Students were asked such probing questions as, 'Would you describe yourself as a well-organised person?' and, 'Do you tend to be on time to appointments?'As though any 18 year old student could respond 'yes' to either without a smirk. Records show a frankly ludicrous 42 per cent of pupils in private schools were granted extra time in their exams last year, against an already implausible 27 per cent in non-selective state schools. The incentives for teachers, and parents, to push children towards these diagnoses is self-evident. But here's the rub. Not only has the DWP forecast that the number of children entitled to disability benefits will rise by a third by 2030 – one of the fastest growing benefits categories. But those children will be trapped in a cycle of dependency: cast as unable to function independently at school, then deemed too mentally unwell to hold down a job. They'll come to see 'neurodiversity' as a part of their identity, something which must be catered for in adult life as it was in childhood, however unfeasible that might be in the Real World. Not all that long ago, when most readers were young, children were allowed to be eccentric, dreamy or difficult. They could be high energy, imaginative, introverted. Perhaps even – sorry, I'll wash my mouth out – occasionally naughty. But now childhood foibles and growing pains are being pathologised and monetised. Private assessment clinics are booming, with charges reportedly reaching £1,500. Along the way, any sense of resilience is being lost. And such is the diagnostic inflation, that parents of the 4 per cent who really need it get lost in the crowd and may not get appropriate support. It's almost enough to make you long for the country to get the shocking dose of reality that Ukrainians or Israelis are experiencing. Our state has become a soft touch paying out for every sad story, pandering to every claim of exceptionalism. It's fuelling a culture of entitlement and welfare dependency, and even formerly profligate Labour front benchers are slowly coming to realise it's not sustainable.
