We should hang our heads in shame over how Australia treated our diggers today. The few WWII survivors who remain deserved far better
It should be a day that commands the nation's full attention. Instead, the Labor government is phoning it in.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
3 minutes ago
- The Independent
Some workers would be excluded from student loan forgiveness program for 'illegal' activity
Teachers, social workers, nurses and other public workers would be cut off from a popular student loan cancellation program if the Trump administration finds their employer engaged in activities with a 'substantial illegal purpose,' under a new federal proposal released on Friday. The Education Department took aim at nonprofits or government bodies that work with immigrants and transgender youth, releasing plans to overhaul the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program. Opponents fear the new policy would turn the loan forgiveness benefit into a tool of political retribution. The proposal would give the education secretary the final say in deciding whether a group or government entity should be excluded from the program, which was created by Congress in 2007 to encourage more college graduates to enter lower-paying public service fields. The proposal says illegal activity includes the trafficking or 'chemical castration' of children, illegal immigration and supporting foreign terrorist organizations. 'Chemical castration' is defined as using hormone therapy or drugs that delay puberty — gender-affirming care common for transgender children or teens. President Donald Trump ordered the changes in March, saying the loan forgiveness program was steering taxpayer money to 'activist organizations' that pose a threat to national security and do not serve the public. The public will be given 30 days to weigh in on the proposal before it can be finalized. Any changes would take effect in July 2026. Under current rules, government employees and many nonprofit workers can get their federal student loans canceled after they've made 10 years of payments. The program is open to government workers, including teachers, firefighters and employees of public hospitals, along with nonprofits that focus on certain areas. The new proposal would exclude employees of any organization tied to an activity deemed illegal. The Education Department predicts that fewer than 10 organizations would be deemed ineligible per year. It doesn't expect a 'significant reduction' in the percentage of borrowers who would be granted forgiveness under the program, according to the proposal. Yet the agency acknowledges that not all industries would be affected evenly. Schools, universities, health care providers, social workers and legal services organizations are among those most likely to have their eligibility jeopardized, the department wrote. It did not give more specifics about what 'illegal' actions those groups were taking that could bar them from the program. But the proposal suggests that performing gender-affirming care in the 27 states that outlaw it would be enough. If a state or federal court rules against an employer, that could lead to its expulsion from the program, or if the employer is involved in a legal settlement that includes an admission of wrongdoing. Even without a legal finding, however, the education secretary could determine independently that an organization should be ejected. The secretary could judge whether an organization participated in illegal activity by using a legal standard known as the 'preponderance of the evidence' — meaning it's more likely than not that an accusation is true. Once an organization is barred from the program, its workers' future loan payments would no longer count toward cancellation. They would have to find work at another eligible employer to keep making progress toward forgiveness. A ban from the Education Department would last 10 years or until the employer completed a 'corrective action plan' approved by the secretary. Critics blasted the proposal as an illegal attempt to weaponize student loan cancellation. Kristin McGuire, CEO of the nonprofit Young Invincibles, which advocates for loan forgiveness, called it a political stunt designed to confuse borrowers. 'By using a distorted and overly broad definition of 'illegal activities,' the Trump administration is exploiting the student loan system to attack political opponents,' McGuire said in a statement. The Education Department sketched out its plans for the overhaul during a federal rulemaking process that began in June. The agency gathered a panel of experts to help hash out the details — a process known as negotiated rulemaking. But the panel failed to reach a consensus, which freed the department to move forward with a proposal of its own design. The proposal released on Friday included some changes meant to ease concerns raised by the expert panel. Some had worried the department would ban organizations merely for supporting transgender rights, even if they have no direct involvement in gender-affirming care. The new proposal clarifies that the secretary would not expel organizations for exercising their First Amendment rights. ___ The Associated Press' education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
Rachel Reeves tax grab for woke training & mobiles for migrants makes my teeth itch… here's what Govt SHOULD be doing
AS I'm sure you know, you are taxed on the money you earn. And you must pay more taxes every time you buy anything or go anywhere or fill your car up with fuel or buy a pint or get your hair cut or go on an aeroplane. 5 And if by some miracle you manage to die with a few savings in the bank, they even tax your kids on those. It's your money. You earned it. You paid tax on it. And then they tax it again. It makes my teeth itch. However, for many years, you have been able to pass money on to your children, tax free, providing you live for seven years after the gift is made. But now we are hearing they're even going to tax you on that. Yup. You want to help your kids get on the property ladder. Well you can't because that infernal woman, Rachel Reeves, has decided that it'd be better if you gave your money to her instead. I seriously doubt that. Let me give you an example of the problem. Near to where I live, the local council — which gets a quarter of its cash from the Government — decided to spend £51million on a new park and ride facility next to the busy A40. It was completed last year and it's very snazzy with 850 spaces, charging points for electrical cars, and attractive spaces where commuters can shelter from the rain. Lovely. Apart from one small thing: It's not connected to the road network. Seriously, there's no way anyone can access it, so it's sitting there now, a gigantic blot on the landscape and it cannot be used for parking or riding because neither a bus, nor a car can get into it. Raising taxes will kill off growth, Reeves warned as she pledges to rip up business red tape So they have taken 51million of your pounds. And wasted them. And they are doing that sort of thing, every day, across the whole country. And now Rachel Reeves is saying she needs your money more than your children do so that she can waste it on other stupid stuff like diversity training, and pronoun days and treats for illegal immigrants, all of the net zero nonsense. I don't think Reeves is an unpleasant person. But I do think that she and Starmer and Rayner and Lammy are a bit thick. Lammy especially. 5 5 He can't even go fishing without getting into trouble. That's why they can't get it into their heads that taking our hard-earned money and wasting it is seriously annoying. And it's even more annoying when they want yet more money so they can waste that too. It's really not that difficult to get your head round what needs to be done. Don't raise taxes. Just spend less. A TURN OFF TO DRIVING ONE of my oldest friends lost his driving licence recently, having been caught speeding four times in the last three years. He sounds reckless, until I tell you that the speeds involved were 25, 26, 31 and 35. And this ridiculous attitude to people breaking idiotic 20mph limits is just the tip of the anti-car iceberg. It's now virtually impossible to get a driving test, and if by some miracle you do eventually get a licence, you won't want to buy a car because it bongs at you if you drive too quickly or stray out of lane or take your eyes off the road. I drove a Toyota recently which had a bonging paddy fit and flashed up a message saying, 'Sit up straight'. What's next? 'Clean your teeth'? So cars are annoying, you can't drive them at more than walking speed and now comes news that the drink-drive limit is being lowered to a point where you can't pop to the shops in your motor if you've had so much as a sherry trifle. Plus, unless you can see the bracelet Neil Armstrong left on the moon, your eyes aren't good enough, so you'll have to use the bus instead. Naturally, we are told this is all to save the NHS from the cost of patching up the victims of car accidents. But that's rubbish. It's the drive for net zero. They are making driving so difficult, no one will want to do it. Welcome to stadium of hate, Sophie 5 I WAS astonished to hear this week that after posting pictures of herself at an Oasis gig, the Game Of Thrones actress Sophie Turner was slammed by a follower who said she must have forgotten she's a mother. Really? So people with children aren't allowed to go out ever? Honestly, I'm beginning to realise that the world was a much nicer place when strangers weren't able to talk to each other. Social media is like a gigantic football stadium . . . where the rival fans can sit where they like. There's going to be trouble. And there is. LEONARDO DICAPRIO tells us that although he's 50, he feels 32. Yeah, but watch out, mate. I was 19 my whole life. Until I got to 65, when all of a sudden, I became 109. NO PET FOOD A ZOO in Denmark has found itself in a spot of bother after asking local people to donate their pet guinea pigs and rabbits. So they can be fed to the big cats . . . We even read this week of a little girl who donated her poorly pony. Which was turned by the zoo keepers into a lion's lunch. I should explain at this point that the animals are not being eaten alive. They are 'gently' killed before being turned into food. But I can see why everyone's getting their knickers in a twist. Because like you, I can't understand why you'd look at your little hamster whizzing round in his wheel and think, 'You know what. I'd like to feed that to a leopard.' You may say this is hypocrisy as I now spend my days farming. But I have a simple rule on the matter. I never eat anything that had a name. DEAD END ON NAME THE boy wonder Kaleb Cooper, who manages my farm, received word this week that his wife was in labour. 'Right,', he said. 'I'll be there when I've finished harvesting this field.' 5 How farmerish is that?!?! Happily, he finished in time to welcome what for him is baby number three, and then our thoughts turned to a name. One of our mates suggested it should be named after the field he was harvesting when the call came through. Nice idea, except for one small detail. The field was called 'Deadman'. Despite the interruption, we did get the harvest finished. And thanks to the drought we've had this year, it was dismal. Seriously, you could fit all the grain we ended up with in a Hoover bag. And this, after the appalling wet weather of last year, which resulted in the country's second- worst harvest on record. A lot of farmers are going to be in a proper financial mess as a result. But at least we have a government which has their back. No, wait . . .
Rhyl Journal
an hour ago
- Rhyl Journal
Britain's rights watchdog warns against heavy-handed policing amid Gaza demos
The Equality and Human Rights Commission has written to Home Secretary Yvette Cooper and Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley to remind them that the 'right to protest is a cornerstone of any healthy democracy'. The letter, from EHRC chairwoman Baroness Kishwer Falkner, raised concerns about 'reports of police engagement with individuals participating in forms of protest that are not linked to any proscribed organisation'. The commission referenced a report by the Guardian newspaper about a woman said to have been threatened with arrest under the Terrorism Act for holding a Palestinian flag and signs saying 'Free Gaza' and 'Israel is committing genocide'. The woman was reportedly told by police that her demonstration in Canterbury, Kent, in July expressed views supportive of Palestine Action, an organisation which has been banned by the Government. The woman said neither of her signs mentioned Palestine Action and that she had told police she did not support any proscribed organisations. Kent Police confirmed it had 'received correspondence from a legal firm representing a person spoken to by officers in Canterbury on July 14 2025' after the Guardian reported the woman is taking legal action against the force. Baroness Falkner said any interference with protest rights 'must be lawful and assessed case-by-case'. She added: 'Heavy-handed policing or blanket approaches risk creating a chilling effect, deterring citizens from exercising their fundamental rights to freedom of expression and assembly through fear of possible consequences. 'This concern extends beyond those directly affected by police engagement to the broader health of our democracy, because the perception that peaceful protest may attract disproportionate police attention undermines confidence in our human rights protections.' The EHRC said Government and police authorities must 'ensure that all officers receive clear and consistent guidance on their human rights obligations' when it comes to protests. 'This guidance should ensure that the appropriate balance is maintained between public safety and the protection of essential human rights,' Baroness Falkner added. Palestine Action was proscribed by the UK Government in July, with the ban meaning that membership of, or support for, the group is a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison, under the Terrorism Act 2000. More than 500 people were arrested last weekend on suspicion of displaying an item in support of a proscribed group, as demonstrations took place in central London. Downing Street has described Palestine Action as 'violent' and said it has committed 'significant injury' as well as criminal damage, adding that evidence and security assessments shared in closed court supported its proscription. Palestine Action said Downing Street's accusations were 'false and defamatory' and 'disproven by the Government's own intelligence assessment'. Asked for their response to the EHRC letter, the Home Office referred to Ms Cooper's previous statement about last week's march, in which she said: 'The right to protest is one we protect fiercely but this is very different from displaying support for this one specific and narrow, proscribed organisation.' The Metropolitan Police declined to comment when asked for their response to the letter. Meanwhile, campaigners including Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and Quakers in Britain have written to the Attorney General asking for prosecution decisions of those arrested at the London march at the weekend to be delayed until after further legal action over Palestine Action's proscription. A High Court hearing is set to take place in November challenging the group's ban as a terror organisation. In their letter to Attorney General Richard Hermer, the groups argued that 'prosecuting individuals for offences connected to that proscription before the court has determined its legality raises significant legal and moral questions' and said delaying prosecution decisions 'would demonstrate restraint, fairness and respect for the ongoing legal process'. The Attorney General's office has been contacted for comment. Separately, the Liberal Democrat party's home affairs spokeswoman, Lisa Smart, has written to the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, Jonathan Hall, calling on him to review part of the Terrorism Act, to assess whether it is being used correctly or if it 'requires amendment to prevent misuse in future'. She said: 'Acts of terrorism, antisemitic hate and violence, and violent disorder should all be punished to the fullest extent of the law and are totally unacceptable. 'It is right that the police already have the powers to make clear to organisations and individuals that we, as a society, will not stand for it and the consequences will be serious. 'In the case of arresting hundreds of peaceful protesters not engaging in these actions, in a country that prides itself on democratic debate, these measures appear disproportionate. 'The Conservatives clamped down on the right to protest peacefully and this Labour Government now risks doing the same.'
