BRFR Cake Stop 'breaking news' miscellany

[First Aspect]

It's just a bit of a history/culture lesson that helps people to understand more about the country. I was opposed to it when they brought it in (perhaps I am masking my secret desire to read the Telegraph), but everyone who has done it has found it worthwhile. If I visit a country I often end up reading similar stuff albeit in less detail.

I think your polling may not be reflected by other pollsters.

But either way I cannot draw a line between understanding life and work in the UK and,

"When did the Habeas Corpus Act become law?" (all the possibly answers are within a 16 year period of the late 17th century)

Or, "Which of these concert venues is located in Greenwich?"

Or, "When was The First British Prime minister (Sir Robert Walpole) in power?"

It isn't a citizenship test it's Trivial Pursuits.

 

[Pblakeney]

I think your polling may not be reflected by other pollsters.

But either way I cannot draw a line between understanding life and work in the UK and,

"When did the Habeas Corpus Act become law?" (all the possibly answers are within a 16 year period of the late 17th century)

Or, "Which of these concert venues is located in Greenwich?"

Or, "When was The First British Prime minister (Sir Robert Walpole) in power?"

It isn't a citizenship test it's Trivial Pursuits.

I decided to try out of curiosity and am relieved that I passed but yes, it is just Trivial Pursuits.
PS - Q22 is incorrect.

 

[Mr Celine]

Where do you find this stuff? I find out lots of things on the internet about politics, F1, football, cycling and cats (which are unavoidable on the internet), but I have never stumbled across masturbation therapy news stories.

He's always going onan on about random stuff.

 

[Pross]

Dammit, I don't know the height of the London Eye either. Should I report myself for deportation?

View attachment 13817

I assume giving the answer in metres rather than feet is an automatic fail and marks you out as a real Jonny Foreigner?

 

[BoldonLad]

Obviously *the* news you need to hear...

View attachment 13803

Zak wasn't there, giving, "therapy", was he?

 

[BoldonLad]

I think your polling may not be reflected by other pollsters.

But either way I cannot draw a line between understanding life and work in the UK and,

"When did the Habeas Corpus Act become law?" (all the possibly answers are within a 16 year period of the late 17th century)

Or, "Which of these concert venues is located in Greenwich?"

Or, "When was The First British Prime minister (Sir Robert Walpole) in power?"

It isn't a citizenship test it's Trivial Pursuits.

My daughter-in-law is an "immigrant". She applied for and got citizenship, complete with UK passport.

We attended the ceremony, it was totally underwhelming, embarrasingly so, IMHO

I would hazard a guess that less than 50% of the indigenous UK population could have answered the questions in the "test".

 

[secretsqirrel]

Starmer not getting much coverage on the front pages of the papers for 2 days in a row.

He must be playing an absolute blinder.

 

[briantrumpet]

Starmer not getting much coverage on the front pages of the papers for 2 days in a row.

He must be playing an absolute blinder.

No doubt they are really laying into Farage and Badenoch for their shameless U-turns... surely?

 

[briantrumpet]

He's always going onan on about random stuff.

Come again?

 

[briantrumpet]

An interesting case defended by @PurplePenguin's favourite lawyer, Dan Neidle, about being sued for defamation for £8mn.

Dan Neidle
March 11, 2026 at 12:58 PM GMT

A tax barrister sued me personally for £8m for libel after we linked him to a tax avoidance scheme. Today the High Court struck out the claim, granted summary judgment, and ruled it was a SLAPP. The judgment is highly critical.

The barrister, Setu Kamal, objected to being linked to an absurd tax avoidance scheme sold by a firm called Arka Wealth. They claimed to eliminate all corporate tax, income tax, capital gains tax and inheritance tax – not just in the UK but across Europe. Laughable.

Kamal declined to comment on our article, either before publication or immediately afterwards. Months later, he threatened defamation proceedings unless we removed the article, although he was never very specific about what, precisely, his complaint was.


He then sent a bizarre legal threat, requiring that I pay him 80% of amounts his clients claimed he'd lost in fees. And demanding I publicly state my "sincere belief" that he is "the leading barrister in the field of taxation in the country".

He then applied for an "on notice" injunction requiring me to take down the article. But Kamal gave me no notice - a serious breach of court rules. (This is what Mrs Justice Collins Rice said in today's judgment)

He then filed a defamation claim, which had several extraordinary features. Mainly, he didn't like being linked to the Arka Wealth scheme. That was super weird when their website said he gave an opinion for it. (This point wasn't litigated in our strike out)

This would have been a joke of a claim, but when someone is suing you for £8m you have to take it seriously. And any lawyer will say that even the most overwhelming legal case always has a 10-20% chance of failing... So I hired an excellent team of lawyers - Matthew Gill and Charlotte Teasdale at the Good Law Project, and Greg Callus and Hannah Gilliland from 5RB. The strategy was to try to get rid of the claim as quickly and inexpensively as possible. We applied to strike it out. In part because the claim just made no sense, in part because it relied on a factual untruth, and in part because the article was clearly opinion. This was a conventional old-fashioned strike out.

We then did something else. the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 created a new way to strike out defamation claims if they were "SLAPPs" - litigation intended to chill free speech. It had never been used. We used it. We won on all of this. Got the conventional strike out. Got the SLAPP strike out. Good news for free speech campaigners. But... This case, laughable in many ways, and struck out in forceful terms by Mrs Justice Collins Rice, still cost me six months and over £100k in fees. I should be able to recover this from Kamal - I don't know if in practice I'll be able to. I could do this. I don't have a day job. I am financially secure. I'm a lawyer who relishes litigation... But - obviously - I'm immensely privileged. A blogger or tweeterer receiving Kamal's threat would be irrational to fight it. Many people couldn't afford the £3k+ an initial lawyer letter would cost.

And that's the problem with libel law. The law itself is pretty reasonable. Our hypothetical blogger would be reasonably confident of winning, if their article was fair But they couldn't afford to. This is the chilling effect of libel law. No other area of litigation has libel law's potential to damage public life. Libel law enabled Jimmy Savile, Robert Maxwell, Cyril Smith, and many other monsters (note that I'm too cowardly to mention the still-living examples). Rules that are rational in commercial litigation become actively dangerous when they can be weaponised to silence critics of wrongdoing. And so it's right that we should treat libel law differently from other litigation.

 

[briantrumpet]

I'm guessing that this is the Telegraph. I wonder if she'd considered not doing all the stuff that she was fined for. Just a thought. Though not having a car in London wouldn't be a bad move, as (assuming that's where she is) she's got the best public transport system in the country on her doorstep.

 

[Pblakeney]

I'm guessing that this is the Telegraph. I wonder if she'd considered not doing all the stuff that she was fined for. Just a thought. Though not having a car in London wouldn't be a bad move, as (assuming that's where she is) she's got the best public transport system in the country on her doorstep.

View attachment 13859

Living and working in the city?
It has never been worthwhile having a car.

 

[icowden]

I'm guessing that this is the Telegraph. I wonder if she'd considered not doing all the stuff that she was fined for.

Yup. Two speeding fines, one fine for £160 for driving down a road because she failed to read the signage that stated that cars were not permitted (presumably outside of certain times). She also failed to read the signs that the resident parking bay was suspended for a neighbours building delivery.

Apparently the only way you find out if you have been speeding (at 34mph in a 30 zone) is with the delivery of a fine from the Police making you feel like a criminal, almost as if speeding is a statutory criminal offence under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.

In a desperate cry for help, Miranda's friend Jemma wails that having moved to Brighton she's got three speeding fines and two bus lane tickets in 6 months.

Some numpty called Brian (described as a retired chemical industry executive living between Darlington and Stockton - it completely slips Miranda's mind that Brian is the Direct of the "Alliance of British Drivers" a right wing Brexit supporting agit-prop group) bemoans that the tax payer had to shell out £800k for the new Bath 20mph zone and that the Council had the gall to bolster their budgets with the proceeds (which seems to indicate that the zone was very cost effective and cost the tax payer nothing at all)

Fiona got fined for driving down a bus lane, and for driving into the green zone in a polluting car.

Amazingly Miranda does actually make a good point, which is the sheer expense of getting the train to/from Manchester.

Then we get a rant about the lack of parking spaces, charges for Hospital parking.

Finally Miranda lists an agit-prop rant from Brian again about the "War on Drivers", telling us we should back Reform as they have pledged to get rid of LTNs (even though they can't do it easily as it would take legislation).

So, what have we learned?
We have learned that Miranda , Jemma and Fiona shouldn't be driving because they can't read farking road signs.

As a footnote, the article starts with a picture:

Miranda Levy is forced to question whether to keep her Fiat 500 in London Credit: Rii Schroer

Now, I'm no car expert, but my daughter has a Fiat 500 and that does not appear to be a Fiat 500.

 

[Pross]

Thought it was a poster for a new series of The League of Gentleman.

 

[C R]

Yup. Two speeding fines, one fine for £160 for driving down a road because she failed to read the signage that stated that cars were not permitted (presumably outside of certain times). She also failed to read the signs that the resident parking bay was suspended for a neighbours building delivery.

Apparently the only way you find out if you have been speeding (at 34mph in a 30 zone) is with the delivery of a fine from the Police making you feel like a criminal, almost as if speeding is a statutory criminal offence under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.

In a desperate cry for help, Miranda's friend Jemma wails that having moved to Brighton she's got three speeding fines and two bus lane tickets in 6 months.

Some numpty called Brian (described as a retired chemical industry executive living between Darlington and Stockton - it completely slips Miranda's mind that Brian is the Direct of the "Alliance of British Drivers" a right wing Brexit supporting agit-prop group) bemoans that the tax payer had to shell out £800k for the new Bath 20mph zone and that the Council had the gall to bolster their budgets with the proceeds (which seems to indicate that the zone was very cost effective and cost the tax payer nothing at all)

Fiona got fined for driving down a bus lane, and for driving into the green zone in a polluting car.

Amazingly Miranda does actually make a good point, which is the sheer expense of getting the train to/from Manchester.

Then we get a rant about the lack of parking spaces, charges for Hospital parking.

Finally Miranda lists an agit-prop rant from Brian again about the "War on Drivers", telling us we should back Reform as they have pledged to get rid of LTNs (even though they can't do it easily as it would take legislation).

So, what have we learned?
We have learned that Miranda , Jemma and Fiona shouldn't be driving because they can't read farking road signs.

As a footnote, the article starts with a picture:
View attachment 13861
Miranda Levy is forced to question whether to keep her Fiat 500 in London Credit: Rii Schroer

Now, I'm no car expert, but my daughter has a Fiat 500 and that does not appear to be a Fiat 500.

There's an SUV version, the 500X, which seems to be what this lady owns.