Latest news with #MiddleEngland
Telegraph
15-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Telegraph
Hallow Road: Rosamund Pike faces every parent's worst nightmare in this absurd thriller
Mobile phones have a well-known power to ruin films, if someone's texting or (worse) scrolling in your field of vision. On screen, they can be even more of a menace. Exhibit A is Hallow Road, a suspense thriller that essentially relays all its tension by speaker-phone. Eighty minutes ought to be a tight frame for this sort of hokum, which takes no effort to watch, but the only thing that escalates is how silly it is. Two Middle England parents, not given names but embodied with pained intensity by Rosamund Pike and Matthew Rhys, have just had a furious row with their pregnant daughter, who has stormed out and driven off into the night. Somewhere in the woods, about a 45-minute drive away, she has knocked down a pedestrian, while possibly high on drugs, and calls them up hysterically to sort things out. Pike happens to be a paramedic, who tries to talk her through CPR, while Rhys drives them both as quickly as possible to the scene. They assume emergency services will beat them there, but it could well be that their daughter – a snivelling problem child we never see, but hear panicking plenty – is telling porkies on that front. There's some thematic ambition to the piece: writer-director Babak Anvari (Under the Shadow; Wounds; I Came By) is evidently thinking about parental responsibility, and the point where protective instincts might snap under duress. Pike and Rhys take it as seriously as they can, but the camera is given to interludes of just wafting over their anxious faces, and there's nothing they can do about a big daft crunch in the sound mix when CPR goes wrong and the victim's ribs cave in. Much is left to the imagination here – Anvari may be aiming for the slippery logic of a Grimm's fable. At the same time, his overeager screenplay spells out too much. What should be the sore aftermath to a familial bust-up has the telltale ring of a recap. The writing is several drafts away from being jagged or suggestive the way Anvari's terrific Under the Shadow was – it's stuck being blunt and obvious. As for the twist, it's too risible to be disturbing. The mystery vocal performances flaunted in the end credits give it a campy Twilight Zone quality that sends you out bemused. In cinemas now
Telegraph
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
I was wrong before. Only net zero immigration can now save Britain
For thirty years, at every election, Labour and the Conservatives pledged to reduce immigration, and then did the opposite. Far from feeling any contrition, let alone apologising, many of these politicians, convinced of their superior morality and grasp of economics, seemed proud to defy a 'bigoted' electorate. This was the foundational lie at the heart of modern politics, an unforgivable breach of trust. More so even than economic failure and creeping anomie, it is the ultimate source of the anger and anti-establishment resentment engulfing Middle England. This deception went hand in hand with an anti-democratic drive to gaslight ordinary voters, to cast doubt on their memory, to downplay the scale of what was happening and trivialise its consequences, to deny that promises were being broken. History was rewritten, social tensions covered up, a fake economic narrative constructed, inconvenient truths memory holed and dissidents demonised or cancelled. Tony Blair promised 'firm control over immigration' before throwing the borders open. David Cameron said he would cut net migration to 'tens of thousands a year', a promise he broke every single year. A furious electorate voted for Brexit, and what did the Conservative Party do? Terrified to take on the Blob, out of ideas to grow an economy crippled by socialism and lockdowns, the Tories doubled-down. The UK always had a migrant component to its long story, but it was never really a country of immigrants, until now. In the 25 years to 1997, total net migration into Britain was 68,000. In the 25 years to 2022, it was close to 6 million; in 2023, it hit 866,000 (and gross arrivals are much larger). This is orders of magnitude greater than anything experienced in the 19th or 20th centuries, and total recent immigration, as a share of the population, is far greater than the Roman, Viking or Norman settlements. Like in every other European country, voters are losing patience with this madness, and are turning to political disruptors, in our case Nigel Farage. In response, Sir Keir Starmer, a lifelong pro-migration activist, would love us to believe that he has suddenly discovered the virtues of civic nationalism. Britain is becoming an 'island of strangers ', he says, and has unveiled a series of reforms to cut arrivals. 'Settlement in the UK is a privilege that is earned, not a right', he tweeted, a great sentiment that is incompatible with his love of human rights law. Few will trust Starmer, and his 'solutions' are tweaks when only a revolution will suffice. Every orthodoxy of the past 30 years must be rejected. We were told that largescale immigration was necessary to boost productivity, and yet its rate of growth has diminished; we were assured it would save the NHS, and yet it is in crisis; we were told we needed workers, and yet, of the 956,000 visas issued in the year to December 2024, only 210,000 went to main applicants in all work categories. Some of these were doctors, investment bankers or PhD scientists, but most were not. Economists are finally acknowledging that many immigrants, even some who work, will end up a net drain on the public finances. Relatively high earners are net contributors; low wage migrants are not, especially if they have dependents. The NHS surcharge isn't enough. Migration cannot save unfunded state pension systems either: to rely on migrants that also age is akin to believing in Ponzi schemes. By the standards of virtually all of British history, I'm a liberal on immigration. I support a multi-faith, multi-racial, colour-blind society, united by a love of Britain, its democratic institutions, its values and its traditions. My family's story is born out of immigration. I'm very comfortable in today's pluralistic Britain of hyphenated identities. Millions of migrants make a massive contribution. But no mature society can cope with the scale of inflows we have experienced, and the woke, self-loathing ideology that dominates in Whitehall has led to the deliberate fragmentation of our country. We are heading towards disaster, and everything that is great about our country, including our remarkable tolerance and our success at integrating previous waves of arrivals, is now at risk. I worry about the threat of Islamism, and the rise of anti-Semitism, about the loss of social cohesion and the increase in intra-minority tensions. I worry about the emergence of openly sectarian politicians, and about the idiocy of policies that discriminate against white people, that tell the young that Britain's history is shameful or pit one group against another. I worry about our failed colonial-style model of policing, which seeks to keep the peace between different groups rather than treating everybody as individuals. I worry about the insanity of trapping millions of UK-born adults on out of work benefits, and recruiting foreigners to work instead. I now realise only drastic solutions will do. We need a five-year moratorium on net migration – in other words, zero net migration until 2030, before returning to 1990s volumes. Given annual departures – 450,000 in 2023 – this would still at first allow a large number of arrivals, diminishing rapidly over the next few years, allowing the economy to adapt. This would allow the country to take stock, trust to be rebuilt and our creaking infrastructure and housing to catch up. Becoming British ought to become a lot more like joining a club: race or religion must not matter, but the applicant should need to show commitment, demonstrate how he or she will contribute, and explicitly pledge support to our democratic institutions and rule of law. Those who can't or won't make the commitment should either be given temporary visas or rejected. Citizenship ceremonies and the current vacuous 'British values' are insufficient. We should welcome a generous number of refugees, but should choose who we let in to bar criminals or those who dislike our values. This would require quitting the European Convention of Human Rights and several other international treaties, and being willing to treat anybody who arrives illegally like ordinary criminals.
Daily Mail
10-05-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
How to profit from the rush to protect firms from M&S-style cyber attacks
Words such as 'cyber attack', 'malware' and 'automated phishing' used to sound futuristic. But once a threat stops us from buying Percy Pig sweets and comfy underwear, we know it has struck at the very heart of Middle England – and it is time for investors to sit up and take notice. At the time of writing, M&S still isn't offering online shopping after a huge cyber hack, while the Co-op is struggling with stock issues and a customer-data breach. The hackers have cost these companies dear – Deutsche Bank puts the cost to M&S at £15 million a week – and experts warn many more companies are vulnerable to similar attacks. 'Cyber threats are growing in size and severity,' warns Mike Seidenberg, portfolio manager at Allianz Technology Trust, who says there were more than six billion malware attacks globally in 2023. 'Bad actors have increased their ambition, with critical infrastructure, government departments and crucial industries permanently at risk.' For investors, cyber warfare represents both an opportunity and a threat. On the one hand, poorly prepared companies undergoing a cyber attack will hit their shareholders squarely in the pocket, with M&S stocks down more than 6 per cent in the past week. However, investing in companies in the cyber security sector could allow you to benefit from a trend, with Cabinet minister Pat McFadden stating this week that the Government would 'turbo charge' the cyber security sector. 'Cyber security is not a luxury but an absolute necessity,' he says. If investment in the sector continues, investors may feel the same. Protect your wealth from hackers As the fall in M&S shares last week has shown, hackers can seriously damage your wealth. A report from security experts Cisco suggests that only 4 per cent of businesses have reached what they call a 'mature' stage of readiness where they can withstand a cyber attack, with 70 per cent of companies either in the 'formative' or the 'beginner' stages of readiness. This suggests that many household names are as vulnerable as M&S and the Co-op. However, Laith Khalaf, head of investment analyst at investment group AJ Bell, says it is difficult to predict where hackers may strike next, which makes it extremely difficult to protect your portfolio. 'Even companies which provide cyber security have found themselves the victims of attacks, such as CrowdStrike and FireEye,' he says. 'Probably the best and simplest tonic is to hold a diversified portfolio so that if a company sees its share price fall because of a cyber attack, it doesn't damage your wealth too badly.' Khalaf adds that the share-price reaction to cyber attacks tends to be short-lived. Many companies have strong cyber security insurance policies, so if you buy firms where you believe the management makes good decisions about risk, chances are they will be protecting themselves. However, it is always an area you could ask about at an annual general meeting if you are concerned or check the firm's risk factors' section of its annual report. Searching for cyber security opportunities With governments and businesses spending more on cyber security, many experts believe now is the time to invest in those securing us all against the hackers. 'Investment capital is pouring into cyber security businesses alongside aerospace and defence firms,' says Jason Hollands, managing director at investment platform BestInvest. The Cisco study also showed that more than nine in ten companies increased their budget for cyber security in the past two years. Many of the biggest players in cyber security are either unlisted or listed in the US, but there are various ways you can invest. Good options for individual stocks For those who prefer to pick individual shares and are untroubled by the volatility that entails, there are some good options. Tiny SysGroup, based in Manchester, is backed by Ken Wotton, manager of Baronsmead Venture Capital Trusts, who says that the business is 'well positioned for sustained growth'. SysGroup supports small and medium-sized businesses with their cyber security. 'It assists in building robust cyber security systems spanning not only the core business but also its supply chains – a critical yet often overlooked area of vulnerability for many groups,' Wotton says. SysGroup shares have been volatile – down 26 per cent in the past six months, up 10 per cent in the past month. At the other end of the scale in the UK, defence giant BAE has a cyber security division – although, as Khalaf at AJ Bell points out, it comprises less than 10 per cent of the business. Lee Wild, head of equity strategy at Interactive Investor, says cybersecurity firm NCC stands out as one of the remaining UK players not to have gone private. It is down 25 per cent this year, but there's always the possibility that it will attract a suitor with a hefty premium at this level. Funds and trusts that back cyber specialists There are also trusts and funds that allow you to take a mixed slice of the cyber security market. Darius McDermott, managing director at FundCalibre, likes the HANetf Future of Defence ETF. This is 43 per cent invested in technology firms, most of which are cyber security specialists. It launched in 2023, at just the right time for cyber security, and has seen its shares rise 46 per cent. Other specialist ETFs in this area include the Legal & General Cyber Security ETF and iShares Digital Security ETF. James Carthew, head of investment companies at QuotedData, recommends Polar Capital Technology, which invests in leading players such as CyberArk Software, Crowdstrike Holdings and Cloudflare. Polar Capital has had a torrid three months – down nearly 17 per cent following President Trump's tariff announcements, but has recovered somewhat in the last month.
The Guardian
21-02-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
An exiled group within Labour is making a comeback – it could hold the key to repelling Farage
As one poll this month placed Nigel Farage's Reform UK ahead of Labour and the Conservatives for the first time, I sought distraction on holiday in Jonathan Coe's latest novel. Set during the brief seven-week premiership of Liz Truss, The Proof of My Innocence is a Graham Greene-style 'entertainment', rather than another Coe state-of-the-nation book like Middle England or Bournville. But it does deal with a serious political theme: the morphing of British conservatism, from the 1980s onwards, into the radical, insurgent force that culminated in Brexit, Boris Johnson and Kwasi Kwarteng's budget. Coe writes wonderfully well, and with empathy about very different social worlds. But his overall perspective generally stays within an embattled liberal-left comfort zone. Towards the end of the book, a twentysomething character offers her take on the disruptions that led to our present discontent: 'Britain changed. What we had before: consensus more or less. What came after: libertarianism/individualism. Every man and woman for his/herself.' Earlier, the revelation of a secret plot to sell the NHS out to big pharma – involving a high-profile Brexiter – underlines a gradual eclipse of public virtue by private monied interests. Malign and greedy motives cloaked in false patriotism, driving an elite that is bent on misinforming and hoodwinking the less well off and the less well educated. This is one standard progressive explanation for how Britain went off the rails. And as I turned the final pages of The Proof of My Innocence, politics was imitating art in the House of Commons. At a recent prime minister's questions, Keir Starmer used a planted backbench question to sound the alarm over Reform's plans to sell out the NHS. Farage's sympathy for insurance-based healthcare, Labour research suggests, is viewed with deep suspicion in the kinds of seats that Reform hopes to win en masse in 2029. There will be much more of the same before May's council elections, as Starmer seeks to detach blue-collar voters from a movement that is visibly reassembling the Get Brexit Done coalition of 2019. Fair enough. 'When in doubt, campaign on the NHS' is an unwritten law on the British centre-left. Obeying it is an understandable manoeuvre from a government increasingly traumatised by Farage's rise. But as the wind from the radical right blows ever harder through western democracies, the politics of the moment require more than defensive pieties, buttressed with technocratic talk about policy 'delivery'. All over again, Labour is losing its working-class audience. Among non-graduates and young men, among the inhabitants of unlevelled-up towns, and among those nostalgic for a lost sense of community cohesion, Farage is making hay. As talk of an electoral pact between Reform and the Conservatives begins on the right, the remain/leave divide in British politics is back. It never really went away – although Covid and its scandals scuppered Johnson's attempt to seize the moment for the right. A post-industrial cleavage both cultural and economic was never just about the case for and against leaving the European Union. At its most basic, the blue-collar leave vote expressed a desire for rupture with a globalised capitalism that had undermined the power and agency of the western working class. It also reflected a latent perception that compassionate 'one world' social liberalism coexisted happily with a callous economic version; one that had stripped people and places of dignity, status and self-esteem. So what now? Following the post-pandemic Tory implosion, the last election represented a historic opportunity for a radical social-democratic response to an ongoing crisis of trust. But whether through naivety, timidity or a hapless lack of curiosity regarding the social class it was founded to represent, Labour took its handsome victory as evidence of a national desire that normal 'grownup' service should resume. Predictably, after six arid months amid plunging poll ratings, it is now planning tougher Reform-style rhetoric on immigration, in the hope of shoring up its position among the Farage-facing. The heart sinks at the lack of ambition and insight. But there is still time to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past in the lead up to 2029. It is, for example, heartening to learn that the much maligned, much misunderstood Blue Labour movement is now getting a hearing in Downing Street. A fledgling caucus of sympathetic MPs has also formed in parliament, interestingly including a number from the former Corbynite left. Founded in 2009 by the iconoclastic peer Maurice Glasman, Blue Labour made brief waves as a proto 'left-conservative' grouping, focused on protecting blue-collar communities from the depredations of free-market capitalism. It then sank beneath those waves – in a tide of opprobrium – when it emerged that such protections would include restrictions on the import of cheaper migrant labour. Support for Brexit, and a communitarian emphasis on 'family, faith and flag', further scandalised secular liberal progressives. Glasman and other leading figures were anathematised. Jonathan Rutherford, a former speechwriter for the ex-Labour MP Jon Cruddas, made a list of the insults that came their way. 'Weirdos, misogynists, authoritarians, Brexit, thick leave voters, ageing left-behind men, not welcome, fuck off and join the Tories' were at the politer end of the spectrum. Yet in its analysis of the dynamics of western democracies in the early 21st century, Blue Labour got a remarkable amount right. On immigration, the issue that supposedly rendered it beyond the pale, its views will never mesh with those of Labour's liberal left, but are no longer outlying. The crucial point is that they were always contained within a wider critique of contemporary capitalism, and the contemporary left, that will be key to challenging a Faragian right. Over the past quarter-century, progressive parties became more middle class, more city based and focused more on individual rights than social class. As Blue Labour has argued, they failed to seriously challenge the economic and social consequences of a world constructed to suit the restless, indifferent, profit-seeking interests of financial capital. The result has been a growing division of people and, just as significantly, places into winners and losers – a deepening divide that individualist rhetoric about equality of opportunity will not bridge. Phyl, Coe's youthful protagonist in The Proof of My Innocence, was right. Thatcherism did deliver, and morally justify, a selfish 'me first' world. But Faragism, as it prosecutes an exclusionary politics of identity and belonging, is as much a response to that legacy as a continuation of it. Faced with a form of rightwing communitarianism that is shaping a dark future, Blue Labour thinking can be part of a successful response. Time for it to come in from the cold. Julian Coman is a Guardian associate editor
