Getting A Non-em B Visa Without Job/marriage
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
-
2
.thumb.jpeg.d2d19a66404642fd9ff62d6262fd153e.jpeg)
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
-
Latest posts...
-
0
Keir Starmer Braces for Local Election Setbacks as Reform Gains Ground
Keir Starmer Braces for Local Election Setbacks as Reform Gains Ground Sir Keir Starmer has warned that Labour is heading into a “tough” series of local elections this Thursday, with Nigel Farage’s Reform Party posing a significant threat in Labour’s traditional northern strongholds. Polls suggest that Reform could overturn Labour’s 14,700 majority in the Runcorn & Helsby by-election, a contest triggered by the resignation of former MP Mike Amesbury following his conviction for assaulting a constituent. Labour is also battling to hold off potential defeats to Reform in two key mayoral elections: the newly established Hull & East Yorkshire mayoralty and in Doncaster, where Labour’s mayor secured a 10,000-vote majority just four years ago. Meanwhile, the Conservatives are bracing for heavy losses of the 940 council seats they won in 2021, at the peak of Boris Johnson’s popularity. The Liberal Democrats are optimistic about their chances in the south of England, aiming to seize dozens of seats from the Conservatives and possibly control more councils than Kemi Badenoch’s party by the end of the night. The Conservatives are additionally worried about losing the Lincolnshire mayoral race to Reform, a development that underscores the wider threat facing both major parties. A senior Conservative strategist highlighted the deep frustration among the electorate, stating that the prevailing mood among voters was now “anyone but the Tories and Labour,” a stark contrast to the general election, when Labour achieved a landslide victory at the Conservatives' expense. Acknowledging the difficult road ahead, Starmer said on Monday, “It’s going to be tough. Most governments after a general election face a tough set of local elections at the first opportunity afterwards, and of course we’ve had to take tough but right decisions.” He nevertheless insisted Labour had “a positive story to tell,” pointing to “record investment put into the NHS” and the increase in the minimum wage. Starmer also went on the attack against Reform, accusing them of wanting to charge patients to use the NHS, voting against workers’ rights, and having a “pro-Putin foreign policy.” He added, “We’ve got a positive case to tell. It’ll be tight, I know that, every vote will count and we are fighting for every vote.” Kemi Badenoch admitted the elections were also a major challenge for the Conservatives, especially amid criticisms over the party’s faltering campaign and lingering leadership speculation. There has been frustration within Conservative ranks, particularly as both Baroness Maclean of Redditch, the party’s head of strategy, and Lee Rowley, Badenoch’s chief of staff, were on holiday as polling day approached. Maclean returned from the Himalayas only this week. Justin Tomlinson, a former minister and MP for North Swindon, was appointed as campaign director for the local elections but faced criticism from activists for reportedly working only three days a week. Defending his role, Tomlinson said he had been brought in as an “experienced campaigner” to provide “support and training” and to “share best practice.” He insisted, “That is exactly what I do.” Appearing on ITV’s Good Morning Britain, Badenoch urged voters to focus on local rather than national issues. “This is not a referendum on national issues, but local ones,” she said. “I’ve been travelling all around the country, and one of the councillors I was with, we were on a doorstep, and he showed a leaflet of Reform saying ‘we’re going to stop the boats’. That’s not what people are voting on on Thursday. We have said that we are going to tackle immigration, but this week’s elections are about who’s going to fix the roads, pick up the bins.” Professor Sir John Curtice, a leading polling expert, said the elections would become a five-way battle, noting that Reform had fielded 1,640 candidates — more than any other party. Speaking on BBC’s Today programme, he said, “Reform are now at 25 per cent in the national opinion polls as opposed to the 15 per cent they got at the last election. So if they can emulate that kind of performance then it may well be that not only do Reform pick up votes but in contrast to the general election start to pick up [significant numbers] of seats.” Adpated by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-04-30 -
0
Young Doctors Slam Supreme Court's Definition of Woman as "Biologically Nonsensical"
Young Doctors Slam Supreme Court's Definition of Woman as "Biologically Nonsensical" The British Medical Association’s resident doctors have strongly criticised a recent Supreme Court ruling that defines a woman strictly by biological sex, labelling the decision “scientifically illiterate” and “biologically nonsensical.” During a conference held on Saturday, the union’s resident doctors, formerly known as junior doctors, voted to condemn the judgment, arguing that the binary view of sex and gender “has no basis in science or medicine while being actively harmful to transgender and gender-diverse people.” Representing around 50,000 young doctors, this branch of the British Medical Association (BMA) declared it “condemns scientifically illiterate rulings from the Supreme Court, made without consulting relevant experts and stakeholders, that will cause real-world harm to the trans, non-binary and intersex communities in this country.” The stance is expected to generate concern that some in the medical profession may resist implementing new NHS guidelines concerning transgender patients, which are being drafted following the Supreme Court decision. Last summer, the BMA similarly opposed the Cass Review into transgender healthcare for children and advocated lifting the ban on puberty blockers for minors. In response to the doctors' latest motion, the campaign group Sex Matters criticised the resident doctors, calling them an “embarrassment to their profession” and warning it is “terrifying” that individuals with years of medical training could claim there is “no basis” for biological sex. The motion, obtained by The Times, was passed during the BMA’s annual resident doctors' conference and reflects the position of the BMA’s junior division. However, it will not become official BMA-wide policy unless approved at the Annual Representative Meeting in June. Resident doctors recently rebranded from their previous title as junior doctors, and their committee is currently co-chaired by Dr Ross Nieuwoudt and Dr Melissa Ryan. The Supreme Court had ruled unanimously two weeks ago that the definition of “woman” under equalities law is based on biological sex. This means transgender women will no longer be housed in women-only NHS wards, nor will NHS staff born male be allowed to use women’s changing rooms or toilets. The decision clarified previous high-profile disputes, such as the Darlington nurses' case and the controversy surrounding Dr Beth Upton, involving transgender NHS staff accessing female-only spaces. Reacting to the decision, the BMA’s resident doctors stated: “This meeting condemns the Supreme Court ruling defining the term ‘woman’ with respect to the Equality Act as being based on ‘biological sex’, which they refer to as a person who was at birth of the female sex, as reductive, trans and intersex-exclusionary and biologically nonsensical. We recognise as doctors that sex and gender are complex and multifaceted aspects of the human condition and attempting to impose a rigid binary has no basis in science or medicine while being actively harmful to transgender and gender diverse people.” The motion also affirmed the BMA’s commitment to “affirming the rights of transgender and non-binary individuals to live their lives with dignity, having their identity respected.” The BMA has faced internal strife over transgender policies before. Last year’s decision to reject the Cass Review led to hundreds of doctors resigning, alleging the union had been taken over by an ideologically driven “vocal minority.” Helen Joyce, advocacy director at Sex Matters, said: “It’s terrifying that a group of young doctors, all of whom have been through several years of advanced education and training in biology, have been indoctrinated by trans activism to such an extent that they claim categorisation by sex — male and female — is ‘reductive’ and has ‘no basis in science or medicine’. These junior doctors are an embarrassment to their profession. What next: young geographers claiming that the Earth is flat, or junior vets who think it’s bigoted to suggest that cats can’t identify as dogs?” Joyce pointed to practical consequences, such as the case involving nurse Sandie Peggie and Dr Beth Upton, where a male colleague accessed female facilities, to highlight what she termed the dangers of such beliefs. She added, “These junior doctors wildly misunderstand the role of the Supreme Court, which interprets the law rather than creating it or reflecting public opinion. They also seem to have missed the fact that no trans rights group such as Stonewall applied to intervene.” On Monday, Conservative minister Kemi Badenoch addressed concerns over facilities for transgender individuals following the ruling. She suggested that transgender people could use disabled toilets, remarking: “Almost all businesses I see have disabled loos. They are unisex, different from gender neutral. Trans people can use those. But if you are providing a single-sex space, it has to be a single-sex space.” A BMA spokesperson said: “Attendees at the BMA’s resident doctor conference voted to show their opposition to the Supreme Court ruling on Saturday. However, BMA-wide policy is set at the Annual Representative Meeting (ARM), with the next meeting coming in June. The BMA respects trans patients’ dignity, autonomy, and human rights and continues to believe that trans doctors, NHS workers and patients deserve dignity, safety and equitable access to healthcare and healthcare facilities.” Related Topics: Starmer U-turns on Gender Identity Following Supreme Court Ruling UK Supreme Court Rules ‘Woman’ Means Biological Female, in Landmark Decision Supreme Court Ruling Sparks Protests Wave of Threats and Backlash Amid Gender Rights Debate Adpated by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-04-30 -
0
Democrats Demand Transparency Over White House Financial Transactions Amid Tariff Pause
Democrats Demand Transparency Over White House Financial Transactions Amid Tariff Pause Concerns A growing number of Democrats are urging the White House to release information regarding financial transactions conducted by Trump administration officials ahead of President Trump's unexpected announcement of a 90-day suspension on reciprocal tariffs. In a pointed letter addressed to White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, Democratic leaders Sen. Adam Schiff of California and Rep. Mike Levin, also of California, expressed serious concerns about possible violations of federal ethics and insider trading laws. “Newly identified data raises concerns about potential violations of federal ethics and insider trading laws by those close to Trump with access to information not available to the public,” they wrote. “We are deeply concerned about reporting of call volume spikes minutes before the President’s public announcement of his change in tariff policies.” The lawmakers are demanding that the White House fully disclose the periodic transaction reports from all executive branch and White House employees dating back to the beginning of the administration. They argue that the lack of transparency could suggest that some officials might have exploited nonpublic information regarding the 90-day tariff freeze for financial gain. President Trump has rejected the notion that his administration might have leaked sensitive information to Wall Street figures, despite earlier reports suggesting that officials had provided an early warning about progress on a trade deal with India. According to federal ethics rules, senior government officials, including the president, must submit periodic transaction reports in addition to their annual financial disclosures to ensure the public is aware of their financial activities. Federal law mandates that these transaction reports must be filed within 30 days of officials receiving notification of a transaction, or no later than 45 days after the transaction takes place. Once completed, agencies are required to send the reports to the Office of Government Ethics (OGE). In their letter, Democrats voiced concern over the absence of any such periodic transaction reports from White House officials on the OGE database since Trump’s inauguration on January 20, 2025. “There is reason to doubt that not a single senior White House official or employee has made any financial transactions triggering a periodic transaction report since the start of the Administration,” they wrote. Highlighting the enormous influence senior White House staff have over policy decisions capable of swaying financial markets, the Democrats emphasized the need for strict adherence to ethics standards regarding conflicts of interest and disclosure obligations. “Therefore, we ask that you and appropriate White House officials urgently certify any periodic transaction reports filed by White House employees and expeditiously transmit those to OGE,” the lawmakers demanded. The letter further requests that the White House submit a detailed plan by May 9 outlining how it intends to manage potential conflicts among its employees. The Democrats warned that failing to act would mean withholding crucial information from the public. “By failing to take these steps, the Administration would be withholding critical information from the American people regarding potential violations of federal ethics and insider trading laws,” they concluded. In addition to Schiff and Levin, the letter was endorsed by 23 other Democratic members of Congress. Adpated by ASEAN Now from The Hill 2025-04-30 -
7
Report Pattaya Cannabis Shop Attack Sparks Urgent Security Concerns
Having police out at night on patrol in hot spots would be a good start. I passed a noodle shop in my slightly remote village yesterday morning and 2 police cars were there badly parked, and many uniformed officers, presumably 'on duty' were sat feeding their faces. -
141
Transport Driving Licence Renewals Go Digital: No More Tests Needed
Nice. But did you need to get a letter from immigration to give to the DLT confirming your address? -
0
Meghan Markle Faces Criticism for Continuing Use of HRH Title Despite Previous Agreement
Meghan Markle Faces Criticism for Continuing Use of HRH Title Despite Previous Agreement Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, has come under scrutiny once again after it was revealed she is still using her HRH title, despite a previous agreement with the royal family not to do so following her and Prince Harry’s departure from royal duties. The breach became public during a podcast interview posted on YouTube, where Meghan was interviewed by her friend Jamie Kern Lima, the founder of IT Cosmetics. During the conversation, an image appeared showing a gift basket of ice cream and homemade strawberry sauce Meghan had sent to Kern Lima. Alongside the gift was a note, written on monogrammed paper, which read: “With the compliments of HRH the Duchess of Sussex.” This revelation reignited controversy, as Meghan and Harry had formally agreed not to use their HRH prefixes after stepping down as senior working royals in March 2020. Following their exit, widely referred to as “Megxit,” an agreement with the late Queen stipulated that the couple would no longer use their HRH titles, particularly for any commercial purposes. In line with this decision, the Duke of Sussex had his HRH designation removed from the official royal family website, Royal.uk, in late 2023. On their biography pages, they are now listed simply as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, unlike others who retain the His or Her Royal Highness styles. A Palace statement from 2020 had made the arrangement clear, stating that the couple “will not use their HRH titles as they are no longer working members of the royal family.” Since then, some critics have gone further, calling for Harry and Meghan to be stripped of their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles altogether, a designation originally granted by Queen Elizabeth II upon their marriage in May 2018. As part of the broader terms of their departure, Harry and Meghan also relinquished various patronages and military appointments, including Harry’s role as captain general of the Royal Marines. In the same podcast interview, Meghan hinted at future literary ambitions. When asked about the possibility of writing another book, she said: “Yes maybe, for sure.” While she did not confirm plans for a memoir, she added: “People are often curious about whether I’d write a memoir but I’ve got a lot of life to live before I’m there.” The idea of Meghan penning a memoir is not far-fetched. In a 2022 interview with The Cut, she had remarked, “I’ve never had to sign anything that restricts me from talking. I can talk about my whole experience and make a choice not to.” Her comments come in the wake of Prince Harry’s own memoir Spare, released in 2023, which stirred significant controversy, particularly over allegations that Prince William physically attacked him. During the podcast, Meghan also reflected emotionally on her life in California with Harry, describing it as a "honeymoon period" following their tumultuous years in England. “You have to imagine, at the beginning it’s all butterflies — but then we immediately went into the trenches together. Right out of the gate, like six months into dating. So now seven years later, when you have a little bit of breathing space, you can just enjoy each other in a new way,” she said. In an especially touching moment, Meghan broke down in tears while reading a heartfelt letter from her children, Archie, five, and Lilibet, three. The note said: “From Archie and Lili via Papa. We love your cooking. We love your pancakes and we love, love, love your hugs. You’re the best mummy and we love you.” Meghan commented on the British spelling of “mummy” rather than the American “mommy,” saying, “So sweet. I also love that it’s mummy, instead of mommy, which is very British.” Fighting back tears, she added, “I wasn’t expecting this, they’re just so great. This is why it’s so nice to have no make-up on, thank you.” Meghan also revealed a touching family tradition, sharing that she sends her children an email every day to create a “time capsule” for them to revisit when they grow older. Adpated by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-04-30
-
-
Popular in The Pub
-
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now