logo
Vandalising Wes Streeting's office is not protest, it is violent criminal intimidation

Vandalising Wes Streeting's office is not protest, it is violent criminal intimidation

Telegraph3 days ago
It is a sight that is becoming more common as social justice warriors abandon old-fashioned ideas of legal protest: a prominent MP turns up for work at his constituency office only to find the windows smashed and offensive graffiti painted across the front of the building.
The clean-up costs will be met by the tax-payer but the fear and intimidation that the attack was intended to generate will be felt most keenly by vulnerable staff members working in Wes Streeting's Ilford North headquarters, and even by the health secretary's constituents.
Responsibility for the attack was claimed by Trans Bash Back, a 'trans-led direct action project'. Sharing an image of the front of the office shortly after it had been vandalised, they wrote on social media: 'Don't want action? Don't kill kids.'
That sinister threat was even echoed by a Scottish Green candidate standing at next year's Holyrood elections. Iris Duane took to Twitter in the aftermath of the attack to write: 'If you don't want 'child killer' sprayed onto your office, have you considered not killing children?'
The accusation of infanticide comes from Streeting's acceptance of the recommendations of the extensive and authoritative Cass review of health care for adolescents questioning their gender identity, which led to a ban on new patients under 18 being prescribed puberty blockers.
It's natural that people who feel strongly about this issue or the other two topics in the holy trinity of social justice causes – Palestine and climate change – should want to vent their fury at politicians who disagree with them. But the modern era has spawned a new type of activist who sees flagrant breaches of the law, including criminal damage, as an entirely legitimate form of protest. This seems to be based on a belief that their cause is special, even uniquely virtuous, and that because the injustice felt by the protesters when they don't get their own way is felt so intensely, the range of 'remedies' open to them is broadened beyond the limits of the law.
Even when protesters are prosecuted and jailed, there is outrage from these same groups who seem to believe that violence, provided it is perpetrated for the 'right' cause, must be exempt from all consequences.
Even our national broadcaster is partly culpable for encouraging, by its inaction, such dangerous exceptionalism. The attack on Streeting's office is but the latest incident by activists taking out their frustrations and sense of entitlement on the constituency bases of MPs who refuse to vote the way they demand. In November 2023, pro-Palestinian activists daubed Labour MP Jo Stevens's Cardiff office with red paint after she abstained on a parliamentary vote on Gaza. A year earlier former Tory MP Peter Bone's constituency office in Wellingborough was similarly vandalised, apparently in protest at recent sleaze allegations against his party. And earlier this year, the Shrewsbury MP Julia Buckley, was forced to abandon her constituency office after it was targeted three times in as many weeks.
These are all egregious attacks on our democratic process and democratic norms. And each of them was adequately covered on the BBC News website.
But as of today, no word on the latest attack on Streeting's office has been reported by the BBC. Which is deeply odd, since the corporation even has a special designated section of its vast website devoted to trans issues, replete with preferred pronouns and tales of 'stunning and brave' gender transitions. And yet, when the darker side of trans activism is revealed in all its shoddy and unpleasant details, when public sector employees live in fear that the violence perpetrated on buildings will be targeted at them next, the BBC suddenly has nothing to say, and will not even report the facts.
In an era where two MPs in the last decade have been murdered by violent extremists, the need to protect our elected representatives – and their staff – from all forms of violence and intimidation has never been more urgent. But such protection is not nearly enough.
The media must be made to understand that for all the fears of a growth in the threat of the political 'far Right', fascism comes from both sides of the political spectrum, and so does the accompanying violence. Forcing others, by violence or intimidation, to parrot your own political opinions is a fundamental aspect of fascism. Those who cross the line separating legal from illegal protest demean the democratic process because they have demonstrated that they themselves believe it no longer has any value for them.
Only by exposing every incident of vandalism, wanton damage, threatening behaviour or literal violence, whatever the motives of the perpetrators, can the foundations of civilisation be prevented from crumbling.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Is this the summer the British left comes back?
Is this the summer the British left comes back?

The Guardian

time2 hours ago

  • The Guardian

Is this the summer the British left comes back?

Last month, the suspended Labour MP Zarah Sultana announced she was leaving the party to join forces with Jeremy Corbyn and start up a new leftwing party. Although it was a chaotic start – the announcement seemed to take Corbyn by surprise – the pair seemed to strike a nerve at least. Despite not yet having a name, the new party claims to have had 600,000 people sign up as supporters already. Guardian columnist Owen Jones recently sat down with Corbyn to discuss his plans, and explains to Nosheen Iqbal why the Labour government may have a new threat to fear. Political correspondent Aletha Adu, meanwhile, discusses whether there will be any more defections to come, and what Corbyn and Sultana may hope to achieve.

Harry and others criticised in Charity Commission report
Harry and others criticised in Charity Commission report

The Independent

time2 hours ago

  • The Independent

Harry and others criticised in Charity Commission report

The Duke of Sussex and others have been criticised by the Charity Commission for letting a 'damaging' boardroom battle play out in the 'public eye' and harm the reputation of a good cause co-founded by Harry. The charity regulator investigated Sentebale after founders Harry and Prince Seeiso stepped down as its patrons in support of a group of trustees, who resigned following a dispute with board of trustees chairwoman Dr Sophie Chandauka. The watchdog criticised all parties in the fallout for allowing it to play out publicly and described how all trustees contributed to a 'missed opportunity' to resolve the issues that that led to the serious disagreement that risked undermining public trust in charities generally. Harry's spokesperson attacked the findings, saying the report '…falls troublingly short in many regards, primarily the fact that the consequences of the current chair's actions will not be borne by her – but by the children who rely on Sentebale's support'. Dr Chandauka said: 'The unexpected adverse media campaign that was launched by those who resigned on 24 March 2025 has caused incalculable damage and offers a glimpse of the unacceptable behaviours displayed in private. 'We are emerging not just grateful to have survived, but stronger: more focused, better governed, boldly ambitious and with our dignity intact.' The fallout came after Sentebale's trustees sought in 2023 to introduce a new fundraising strategy, with the dispute arising between Dr Chandauka and some of the trustees and Harry, said the regulator. A war of words followed the resignations with Harry and Seeiso issuing a joint statement in March, describing their decision as 'unthinkable', adding the trustees 'acted in the best interest of the charity in asking the chair to step down' while 'in turn, she sued the charity to remain in this voluntary position, further underscoring the broken relationship'. Dr Chandauka hit back in a television interview accusing the duke of being 'involved' in a 'cover-up' of an investigation about bullying, harassment and misogyny at the organisation and said the 'toxicity' of his brand had impacted the charity which had seen a drop in donors since Harry moved to the US. The regulator, which cannot investigate individual allegations of bullying, found no evidence of systemic bullying or harassment, including misogyny or misogynoir at the charity but acknowledged 'the strong perception of ill treatment' felt by some involved. David Holdsworth, chief executive of the Charity Commission, said: 'Passion for a cause is the bedrock of volunteering and charity, delivering positive impact for millions of people here at home and abroad every day. 'However, in the rare cases when things go wrong, it is often because that very passion has become a weakness rather than a strength. 'Sentebale's problems played out in the public eye, enabling a damaging dispute to harm the charity's reputation, risk overshadowing its many achievements, and jeopardising the charity's ability to deliver for the very beneficiaries it was created to serve.' Harry founded charity Sentebale in 2006 with Prince Seeiso of Lesotho to help young people and children in southern Africa, particularly those living with HIV and Aids. The duke's spokesperson said Harry would find alternatives to helping the children supported by Sentebale in Lesotho and Botswana. He said: 'As custodians of this once brilliant charity, Prince Seeiso, Prince Harry and the former board of trustees helped grow Sentebale from the seed of an idea to – like its namesake – a flowering force for good. 'With the original mission of Sentebale firmly in mind – and in honour of the legacy he and Prince Seeiso began – the Duke of Sussex will now focus on finding new ways to continue supporting the children of Lesotho and Botswana.' The commission's role as regulator was not to adjudicate on internal charity disputes and the case sought to establish whether the charity's former and current trustees, including the chair, fulfilled their duties under charity law. After conducting its regulatory compliance case the commission found no evidence of 'over-reach' by either the chairwoman or Harry in his role as patron. But the regulator was critical of the charity's lack of clarity in the delegation of powers to the chair, which allowed for misunderstandings to occur, and trustees at the time did not have proper policies to investigate internal complaints – both issues amounted to 'mismanagement' in the running of the charity. The commission has issued a regulatory action plan setting out steps trustees need to take, including implementing an internal dispute policy, improving the charity's complaints and whistle-blowing procedures, and establishing clearer processes for delegating authority on behalf of the charity. Sentebale said in a statement that since the start of the year the senior executive were now established in southern Africa, closer to operations. It said the action plan aligned with the board's thinking with a new internal complaints procedure in place, alongside a code of conduct for trustees and a new approach to the delegation of responsibilities so that roles were clearly defined, including any future patron relationships. Dr Chandauka said: 'Despite the recent turbulence, we will always be inspired by the vision of our founders, Prince Harry and Prince Seeiso, who established Sentebale in memory of their precious mothers, Princess Diana and Queen 'Mamohato. 'To all who believe in our mission: please walk with us as Sentebale recovers, renews, and rises to meet the hopes and expectations of the next generation.'

Call to vet YouTube ads like regular TV to stop scams
Call to vet YouTube ads like regular TV to stop scams

BBC News

time2 hours ago

  • BBC News

Call to vet YouTube ads like regular TV to stop scams

Ads on YouTube should be vetted like those on traditional TV to protect users from content such as scams, promotion of diet pills and fake celebrity endorsements, the Lib Dems have said. The party wants more YouTube ads to be screened for potentially harmful content before they appear on the platform and for media regulator Ofcom to issue fines. Last week, Ofcom's annual report found that YouTube had overtaken ITV to become the UK's second most-watched media service behind the BBC. Google, which owns YouTube, has said it strives to support an "advertising ecosystem that's trustworthy and transparent for users". Currently, most ads broadcast on TV and Radio are pre-approved by industry bodies Clearcast and Radio Central before being aired, which is not the case for those that appear on YouTube. The Liberal Democrats argue this means "online, irresponsible advertising can too often proliferate before any intervention to review it or take it down".Max Wilkinson MP, a culture spokesperson for the Liberal Democrats said: "It's clearly not right that a platform now more watched than almost any traditional broadcaster is still operating under a 'lighter touch' advertising regime. "Regulations need to catch up with the reality of how people are watching content and unscrupulous advertisers must not be allowed to use loopholes to exploit people.""We cannot allow a two-tier system where traditional broadcasters face robust scrutiny, while a digital giant like YouTube is allowed to mark its own homework."It's time for the regulator to treat YouTube adverts much more like TV and radio adverts, to protect UK consumers from misleading or harmful content. The government needs to act now."The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) monitors TV, radio and online adverts and handles complaints after they have been ASA spokesman said: "The scam ads that the Liberal Democrats are highlighting are fraudulent and tackling them falls to Ofcom under the Online Safety Act, which is designed to hold platforms to account for tackling and deterring fraud on their services. "We readily support Ofcom's efforts to carry out this work and will continue to and play a disruptor role by reporting them and working with platforms to have them removed."Earlier this year, the ASA said that in 2024 it received 1,691 reports of potential scam ads online, 177 of which were flagged to online platforms. It said the biggest scam trends included using AI to create deepfake videos of celebrities, politicians or members of the Royal Family endorsing their products. One scam ad sent to the ASA depicted King Charles recommending a cryptocurrency investment. Users of YouTube can report ads they believe violate Google's ad policies. The policies include banning promotion of counterfeit goods, dangerous products such as recreational drugs and hacking allows some advertising of cryptocurrency services, but says the promoter must comply with local laws for the country where the ad is being targeted. According to Google, it removed 411.7 million UK ads in 2024 and suspended 1.1 million ad accounts. Under the Online Safety Act, online services are required to assess the risk of users being harmed by illegal content - including looking at the risks of fraud. The law also gives Ofcom powers to oversee how services are protecting users from tackling fraudulent watchdog has said it is consulting on a fraudulent advertising code of practice, which will become enforceable once approved by Parliament.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store