UK Column News Podcast 9th April 2025

Good afternoon. It's Wednesday the 9th of April 2025, just after 1:00. Welcome to UK Column News. I'm your host Mike Robinson. Joining me by video link, we have Charles Mallett, Vanessa Bailey and Sandy Adams. Now, later in the programme, we're going to be covering gene editing, the Middle East and food security. But we're going to begin with censorship because the news

today is a bit shoot. The video sharing platform has decided to shut down operations in the UK as a result of the Online Safety Act. I'm going to do something I don't normally do. I'm going to read the statement in full because I just want to make it clear in their words why

they've done this. So they said that after careful review and ongoing evaluation of the regulatory landscape in the United Kingdom, we regret to inform you that Bitshot will be discontinuing it's video sharing service for UK residents. The introduction of the UK Online Safety Act of 2023 has brought about significant changes in the regulatory framework governing content and community interactions.

Notably, the ACT contains sweeping provisions and onerous collective corrective measures with respect to content moderation and enforcement. In particular, the broad enforcement powers granted to the regulator of communication services, Ofcom, have raised concerns regarding the open ended and unpredictable nature of regulatory compliance for our

platform. The Bit Shoot platform has always operated on the principles of freedom of speech, expression and association and strive to Foster and open an inclusive environment for content creators and audiences alike. However, the evolving regulatory pressures, including strict enforcement mechanisms and potential liabilities have created an operational landscape in which continuing to serve the UK market exposes our company to unacceptable legal and compliance risks.

Despite our best efforts to navigate these challenges, the uncertainty surrounding the Online Safety Acts enforcement by Ofcom and it's far reaching implications leaves us no viable alternative but deceased normal operations in the UK. Therefore, effective immediately, Bit Shoot platform users in the UK will no longer be able to view content produced by any other Bit Shoot user because the OS as primary concern is that members of the public will view content deemed

unsafe. However, we will permit UK BIT should users to continue to post content. The significant change will be that this UK user posted content will not be viewable by other UK users but will be visible to other users outside the UK. Users outside the UK may comment on that content, which the creator will be will continue to be able to read, delete, block, reply and flag. Users outside the UK may share UK user produced content to other users outside of the UK as normal.

In other words, for users in the UK, including content creators, the Bit Shoot platform is no longer a user to UK user video sharing service. We deeply regret the inconvenience and disappointment this decision may cause to our UK users and partners. This decision was not taken lightly. It reflects our commitment to maintain the highest standards of compliance, protecting our community and ensuring that our platform remains a safe and sustainable place for creative expression globally.

We recognise the value of our UK community and extend our sincerest apologies for the disruption caused by this necessary step. Our support teams are being available to answer any queries or concerns regarding this transition. We appreciate the support and engagement of our community around the world and remain dedicated to providing a platform that champions free expression and innovative content sharing in an environment of regulatory certainty. Thank you for your understanding.

Now I'm going to say that's the end of their statement, but I'm going to say that I do understand this absolutely. But of course, for UK users, the way to deal with this is to use AVPN, which everyone should be doing by default anyway because the particularly since the requirement under the investigative Paris legislation for Internet service providers to collect all the metadata for every website you visit on

behalf of the British regime. So this is another platform falling in the UK. And Charles, I'd be interested to get your comments on this because it follows on, of course, as we've been talking about over the last couple of weeks, the announcement of small forums shutting down because of the restrictions imposed by the regulatory regime around so called user to user platforms. What are your thoughts?

Well, I think in the first instance, although it's not expressly written down in the Online Safety Act 2023, I think this is precisely the consequence that they have been intending to engineer. Now of course with the assistance of Ofcom, who as they point out have been handed enforcement tools to to the tune of being able to find

astronomical fees. So this is really exactly what was hoped to be delivered, the shutting down of free speech and indeed the gifting of the space to magnify the narrative by the mainstream who do not fall foul of this. And you know, I use the rather crass analogy, but what this has done is to turn responsibility for an action into that of the the holder or the hoster of the of the platform.

And I said it would be a bit like a pub being held liable if a fight broke out inside it. Now, unless the pub had specifically conducted an action to incite such violence, then why on earth should it be held liable? But in this instance, of course, bit shoot anybody that has what's described as a user to user content is now being held liable. So I can appreciate exactly what

it is they're saying. I think of course it's regret, but they're not minded to challenge it because we, UK call them, certainly believe that the first port call is to is to challenge this in the strongest possible terms. Well, that that's absolutely right. But of course, by doing what they're doing, they they're vastly raising the profile of the situation, so that's got to be a good thing. Yeah, absolutely.

No, it has I mean, I think, I think, you know, the majority of people will of course be be blissfully unaware of this. And and indeed what what possible gain does the mainstream have for reporting this? Absolutely none at all. They fund Ofcom and therefore they're to be protected by it. So I yeah, you are quite right. And I think bit shoot, you know, is fairly well known across the board. So hopefully there will be that sort of effect. And that's I think that's what

we have to hope for. And of course that people are watching this are going to continue to put that word out. I think that this there is that sort of degree of separation, people not really understanding how freedom of speech is absolutely directly affected by this. Yes. And I'll just end by reinforcing the idea of using a virtual private network of VPN because although they're not, they don't do what they claim to do in terms of privacy and, and protection and so on.

At least getting your connection to the Internet outside of UK jurisdiction means that it's much harder for the UK government to Snoop on which website you're you're visiting and so on. And of course, it gets around this particular limitation if you happen to be in the UK. Now related to this, of course, is data protection.

And well, let's just remind ourselves about the UK's Data Use and Access Bill. It's been mentioned many times on this programme along with its predecessor, the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill. Now the main features of this bill are all encompassing. It's an all. Sorry, I'll try that again. The main features of this all encompassing a bill include a huge relaxation of data sharing rules it takes. It expands the definition of what are class class's legitimate interests.

It creates a new parse for the Secretary of State to amend the scope of Article 9 of the U KG DP are prohibition on the processing of special categories of personal data. Now what are those? Well, that's things like political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, genetic data, biometric data, health data, these kinds of things. And it's also removes cross border restrictions on data sharing, allowing the mass export of data to the United

States in particular. Now this needs to be seen in the context, I believe of operational Operation Stargate and the massive building out of the AI powered bulk data processing capability which was announced by the Trump regime immediately following his inauguration. So it should perhaps come as no surprise then that the EU, which is until now being famous for its regulatory regimes, is moving in the same direction as it possibly can.

The European Commission has now finalised its plans to simplify and potentially remove many of the regulatory requirements imposed by the General Data Protection Regulation, otherwise known as GDPR, which has until now been widely seen as the global lead in data protection legislation.

But not for much longer. So according to Michael McGrath, who is the European Commissioner overseeing data privacy laws, the aim of the exercise here is to, quote, improve the competitiveness of the European economy through a whole range of simplification measures. Recently, he said it's an objective of the European Union to continue with full implementation, enforcement of the data privacy framework. And he also announced the E US intention to permit data sharing

with U.S. companies. It's my expectation, he said, because of the mutual benefits that it provides for European companies, for American companies, that there's a willingness in both sides at the of the Atlantic to continue with us. So the question is, will, will Trump put tariffs on data? I I suspect not.

But meanwhile, here in the UK, the Apple saga continues to rumble on. And if you remember, under the latest iteration of invest investigatory powers claimed by the Starmer regime, the UK government demanded that Apple provide a backdoor to encrypted data on Apple's iCloud data storage infrastructure, and Apple refused to comply. Instead, they removed the ability to enable advanced data protection functionality on Apple devices here in the UK.

And they then took the case to the Investigatory Parse Tribunal, which is the court responsible for overseeing the use of this legislation. But those hearings were to be held in secret, so a group of privacy campaigners, including open rights group Big Brother Watch and Index on Censorship, took this issue to the tribunal and a judge has ruled that the hearings should be heard in public.

So the tribunal said that it did not accept that the revelation of the bare details of the case would be damaging to the public interest or prejudicial to national security. And this is a good step in the right direction. The Investigatory Powers Act and its recent amendments are really an anathema to data protection and anything which helps expose

it for what it is is good news. But the key point here is that while you and I want our data to be private, and Apple, for marketing reasons, perhaps wants that to be private as well, the regime in this country does not want that to be private. And worse than that, they want the fact that they don't want it

to be private to be private. So that means that under this legislation, if you remember, it is against the law for a tech company to let any individual know that the spokes have demanded access to the personal data. Again, Charles, any thoughts on this? Because this is, I think, a bit of a win. Well, I mean, yes, I suppose we have to be a little bit guarded in, in what we really do regard as a win in the first instance. But no, I mean, I would, I would absolutely totally agree with

that. I think there's like with all of these sorts of topics, I think that the, the main point is the hope that this goes out to a wider audience and that people do actually get some sense of what not just what is going on, but what has been going on. Of course, this is something that's been covered on the news in its various guises for so many years. And yet the the traction that it gains is invariably very, very little.

And, and often when it is appreciated exactly what the situation is in effect, the door has closed and it's too late. But yes, I would absolutely agree. I mean, let's, let's just hope that we can put it down as a win. OK. Thank you for that, Charles. Now let's come on to, well, what you're calling a digital prison. I'm, I'm calling it a digital

prison. I'm, I'm referring to what's happened just yesterday with the news that Companies House is to introduce a new verification scheme for identity. Of course the word verify creeping into virtually everything that pertains to online or digital activity, as though in some way it confers the idea of security, which is the one of the main selling points.

But the reason for describing it as a prison is it seems that that the walls are in effect closing in or or there is an attempt for the walls to close in from directions over which people have very little control. So of course, company's house is the conduit that draws people in who are going to be conducting any sort of business activity, at least in the first instance where they're incorporating their their organisation.

And indeed they're going back to company's house to file all the various documents that are required over the course of the year. So it should be made clear that first of all, this is not going to affect the records that are already on the company's house book, but this will take a

future effect. And the reason this is happening is because of the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act going back to 2023. Now it really has a rather misleading title, as I'll go on to articulate, but it's said that the role of the Act was to reform the role of Companies House and improve transparency over UK companies and other legal entities to strengthen our business environment, support our national security and disrupt economic crime.

Now I think it's questionable as to whether any of those things will be achieved, certainly not all of them and certainly not via the mechanism of that particular piece of legislation. But there will be certain other consequences which I would imagine are fairly predictable and therefore have been

engineered into the system. One of which is reported by the UK Cybersecurity sectoral analysis of this year, published quite recently by the Department of Science, Innovation and Technology. And of course, no great surprise, but the industry has swelled by over 12% in the last year and now delivers a return of just over £13 billion and I think we can expect an exponential increase there.

And of course the important point to note is that many organisations in that field are in effect covering both sides of the fence by saying that they're going to provide the security, but also providing the the systems themselves that require the security. So it, it's all fairly well covered off 1 might say. Now this obviously relates to the, the notion of digital identity.

I just think it would be worth remembering the facile terms in which the government put their message for this in order to try to convince people that it was a good idea. So here's Peter Kyle, the minister for the department. We've just been speaking about trying to advertise this product. All right, mate, Can I get a pint of lager, please? Yeah, of course. Can I just use my? Yeah, no worries, It's got this. Someone here? Hi, can I have a pint of Christmas cracker please? Certainly.

I know it's a surprise for everyone, but I don't get asked for my ID anymore. But for loads of young people, they get asked all the time and they want to buy a drink. So we're changing the law so that next Christmas young people will have their ID on their phone so they won't have all the hassle of needing to get ID or leaving their ID at home or their paper ID getting lost or damaged.

There's already 50 digital apps like this one, but what it means is that bar staff can scan to prove somebody's identity and it doesn't give away any personal information. So it means that giving your ID is safer than it's ever been before. Changes like these are going to create economic growth for our country, which is key to our plan for change. There you are. Great, thanks. You put it on the tab. So this means by next Christmas, buying a pint will be a little

bit easier. Well, I'm not sure if it would have been able to cram any more untruths into such a short video clip, but he had a fairly good go at it. Of course, first thing to note might be that the government minister didn't try to help a member of the public who'd just dropped something right next to him, which I thought was quite

indicative. But the the point is that he is really honestly trying to make a case for security and convenience versus the possibility that you might occasionally drop something that is physical on the floor. And that's really his only selling point. But this is the direction that we are to be consistently

pushed. And that's why this verification scheme that companies are trying to roll out is just yet another trap by which people are going to be ensnared and forced into something that really has absolutely no benefit and plenty of risk. And that's what I want to go on to talk about because a report has been published by tallers of all people, the defence business of course, who stand again in

this theatre. And they've constructed a report where they say that they're concerned about digital identity storage on mobile telephones, of course, exactly what Peter Carl's been talking about. But he's suggesting they're all trying to suggest that because it's digital and there's a biometric security verification that it therefore is impregnable, which could not really be further from the

truth. And so this is referring to people who've got images stored of identity documents and therefore there's a low security threshold there. And therefore there should be a a mechanism by which we're able to deal with that via this this much vaunted idea of digital ID.

And so let's just have a quick look at some of the companies that are involved in this space and we'll be holding some of the infrastructure that we are supposed to rely on, one of them being Capgemini. And here's a the piece from Hedgehog talking about 20 gigabytes of sensitive

information having been stolen. Now the reason I've highlighted them is because I put in a Freedom of Information request to the Ministry of Defence recently about the veteran ID card in order to find out who's going to be dealing with the data, because it certainly isn't going to be the Ministry of Defence. And as seen on screen now, it says the main third party provider of support to the development of the digital card service is a company called Cap Gemini. So it's a fail for them.

The next one we look at is a data breach reported here by Bearings Law and in this instance we're talking about Shared Services Connected Limited, SSCL. And again in response to the Freedom of Information request I put in they state, the Ministry of Defence state the personal information of veterans applying for the digital veteran card will be processed and held by Shared Services Connected Limited. So they don't, they don't, they

don't get it right either. Next, of course, and entirely probably the the whole company's house infrastructure is run by Amazon Web Services. So first of all, we've got the enormous conflict of interest when we're looking at transparency and how companies actually conduct their business. And it's worth noting that Amazon paid no corporation tax between 2020 and 20/20/24. And yet here they are providing the very basis upon which Companies House is trying to

build all this nonsense. So we then see that Amazon Web Services, of course, certainly many government services on the back of it, but they've had plenty of breaches as well. So that doesn't work either. And I think it's beginning to look increasingly like dropping your wallet on the pub floor might be the best possible outcome. And just to round this off, it's worth noting that all this goes

full circle because the. If there is an issue with this, who do you get in touch with via the outsourced contact centre

service? None other than Hinduja Global Solutions and they they are indeed part of the many businesses that the Hudinja brother, Sorry Hinduja brothers involved in the 2001 cash for passport scandal with Peter Mandelson refers back to. So, so really just an absolute nest of incompetence and dishonesty and and frankly, what should be another nail in the coffin of digital identity. Thank you, Charles. Thank you for that. Now let's move to the Middle East then.

And Vanessa, what's going on, escalation happening in that in the region? Yeah, definitely. It looks like some kind of escalation, but I would also say it's very much about fake news both in the UK, the EU and the US to try and portray Iran as. Severely weakened prior to the indirect or direct, according to Trump talks that are going to take place in Oman on Saturday. So let's have a quick look at a few of the reports that have been coming out in the last few

days. So first of all, there was a claim, and actually this was in the Telegraph. Iran abandoned Putin's under relentless US bombardment. This was a claim that Iranian advisers were fleeing Yemen under the US heavy bombardment, which of course has been denied both by and Shrullah in Yemen and by Iran itself. And of course, the fact is that while Trump is claiming that the US aggression has basically beaten and Shrullah back, of

course it hasn't. The missiles are still coming both towards the occupied territories of Palestine and towards US and Israeli shipping in the Red Sea. Then this report came out. Again, very recently, Iran backed Iraqi militias considered disarming amid threats from the

Trump administration. Again, this is denied, but it was picked up by let's say soft Zionist media in Haaretz, which we can have a look at that report again it talks about with disarmament of militias in Iraq. Iran signals a major strategic shift. It's saying that pro Iranian militias of course, again describing them almost as proxies of Iran, which is untrue, have agreed to disarm.

But it doesn't necessarily indicate a weakening of Iran's power in Iraq, but does point to Tehran recalibrating it's strategy following the blows to it's Ring of Fire, which of course include Lebanon, Palestine and the international coup in Syria last December. So effectively what it's trying to say is that Iran is in a weakened position.

It's prepared to compromise during the talks on Saturday in Oman. This is an article again in what I would call as a sort of soft centrist Israeli media as reconstruction stalls Lebanon, victims of Israeli strikes, which was during the previous war between Hezbollah and Israel, say they won't bow to US pressure to normalise with Israel. So what is the US trying to do?

It's trying to withhold funding for the reconstruction of the South and and that includes the 1000 southern suburbs of Beirut through the IMF and the World Bank. Which of course is a. Very typical strategy of the United States. On the 6th of April, the US envoy, what's her name, sorry, Morgan Otargas, came to Lebanon.

And of course, she is pushing for the full disarmament of Hezbollah again using the threats that IMF and World Bank won't put any funding into the rebuilding of Lebanon, but also threatening that the. US will withdraw. From the Oversight Committee, which effectively will give Israel full freedom to act in the South without any kind of calibration by the United States.

Next false. Report Hezbollah is apparently ready for disarmament talks if Israel withdraws from South Lebanon. Well, Israel should have already withdrawn under the original ceasefire agreement. And in reality, what this is trying to do is to go for not only the withdrawal of Hezbollah from the southern region to the north of the Litani River, which is part of the UN Resolution 17 O1, which was part of the ceasefire agreement.

But as I've mentioned, of course, Israel has maintained its presence, military presence in five areas of the S 5 strategic high areas from which it is on a regular basis attacking civilians in in that area. But it's also been carrying out air strikes on a regular basis, drone surveillance, drone strikes, drone assassination. So it's not at all holding to the ceasefire agreement.

And and then finally today, this was a major report that came out in Saudi Arabian media, of course, Saudi Arabia working regularly to reinforce a Zionist agenda in the region. And it looks like we have lost Vanessa, unfortunately, so well, she'll be back in a second. But anyway, there is a final You're back. No, you're not back. Am I back? Yeah, you're back. Yes, OK, right. Sorry. You were talking about Iran's Alkyd Special forces are used by root for to smuggle weapons for Hezbollah.

Yeah, which of course is is clearly untrue, but it may signal an attack by Israel on the port itself. We could hear Israeli jets in the skies yesterday. And finally, there were reports on social media that there were special US representatives landed in Israel yesterday for talks. But also Ben Gavir, one of the most extremist members of Netanyahu's government, has embarked on an official visit to the US after being boycotted by

Biden administration. So what we seem to be seeing is a build up of stories to facilitate some kind of escalation, but also prior to the meeting on Saturday between Stephen Witkoff and the Iranian representatives. Thank you for that well, more for the Middle East just after the ad break. So let's have a look at at this.

If you like what the UK column does, you'd like to support us, support.ukcolumn.org it's a place to go and you can join us. You can make a donation. You can join us as a member. These are two different things. If you want to watch UK Column News Extra, please make sure you join as a member and there are various time periods that you can join over.

You can pick something up from the UK Column shop and we still have a few T-shirts from the event at the weekend and those will be going up in the shop in the next day or two. Or if you would like to get something from Clive to card.com, if you use the link on this page, we get a small Commission on that. But if you can't do any of that,

that's absolutely fine. But please do at least share the material you see on the UK Column website and prefer if you share content from the the website rather than sharing stuff that's on the platforms. The share links are provided and of course you can use other platforms if you wish. No yesterday's interview thinking with your heart. This was yours, Charles. It was indeed absolutely terrific. It's it's gone down really well.

So I'd very much encourage you to, to get a good listen to Jonathan Marshall, who I met last year at a country show. He performs with amazing Stallion and Falkons. But he he addresses the what he he describes as the anti nature agenda absolutely perfectly. And it's a really, really delightful and and uplifting interview. So please do have a listen. Thank you, Charles, and tomorrow at 1:00 PM Brian will be putting out the second part of his discussion with Carl Schwantz Schwartz on 9/11.

And so do join us at 1:00 PM for that if you possibly can. There is a Glasgow Peace Walk being run by Stanford Peace. It's taking place on the 12th of April 2025 at 12:00 PM St Enoch Square. Details on screen. The details be in the show notes as well. Please get to that if you possibly can and Diane has. Just to highlight this crowdfunder on give, send go send go for this is legal defence for slap suits against freedom of speech. This is sorry.

This is sorry, Charles, can you remind me who this is? Because. It's completely fallen out of my head. I, I'm afraid to say I can't help. Like I, I don't, I don't know who that is. So I'm. I do apologise, well I do apologise for that as this is life and it's completely fallen out of my head. So. So anyway, the details will be in the show notes for that as well. So do please support that if you can.

This is about what's going on in libraries and freedom of speech and defamation lawsuits and all kinds of stuff around that in the United States. But nonetheless, it should be of importance to everybody. Vanessa, let me come back to you then. And well, we're looking at Iran

again, but what's obviously Netanyahu's meeting Trump in the last day or two. So what? What were they saying? Yeah, well, I just wanted to play this excerpt from the meeting, or rather the press conference between Trump and Netanyahu, which was what Trump said on the upcoming Iran meeting. So let's just roll this. Wait, wait, wait. We're having direct talks with Iran and they've started. It'll go on Saturday. We have a very big meeting and

we'll see what can happen. And I think everybody agrees that doing a deal would be preferable to doing the obvious. And the obvious is not something that I want to be involved with or frankly that Israel wants to be involved with if they can avoid it. So we're going to see if we can avoid it. But it's getting to be very dangerous territory and hopefully those talks will be successful and I think it would be in Iran's best interest if they are successful. We hope, we hope that's going to

happen. So here Trump basically is saying, despite the reports saying that these talks would be indirect talks, in other words, they would be overseen or moderated, let's say by Oman. He's now saying they're direct talks with his envoy, Stephen Witkoff. And Reuters picked this up. So Trump says US, Iran set for direct nuclear talks. Tehran says that they will be

indirect. And in fact, the Iranian foreign minister went on X immediately after to basically point out that as far as he's concerned, if we can just put the tweet up, Iran and the United States will meet in Oman on Saturday for indirect high level talks. It is as much an opportunity as it is a test. The ball is in America's court.

Interesting that everybody seems to be using the ball in the court analogies, including, of course, the United States and Trump over the Russian Ukraine negotiations. But I think for me, what this signals is America is basically setting Iran up for failure by Trump saying this will be a direct talk by Iran basically saying no, We maintain that they

should be in direct talks. There is potential, of course, for the United States and it's it's slavish media to basically portray Iran as as being obstructive even prior to the talk. So we'll wait and see. And that, of course, in the context of the previous report suggesting Iran's weakness in the region and the weakness of its allies that are under threat but are certainly not as weak as they're being portrayed by Trump and Western media. So we will see what happens on Saturday.

Thank you for that. Thank you very much, Vanessa. Now Dan Kleiman was who was the crowd founder was for. I do apologise, Dan. I'm very sorry about that. I'm very embarrassed, but there we go. We will move on. Now back in March, at the

beginning of March, we introduced you to this company, Colossal, the genetic manipulators who are trying to raise money for Jurassic Park, it seems. Now if you remember they were into they are into gene editing to recreate what they say. So let's quote this the last megafauna and other creatures of the past. But only the ones they say that had a measurably positive impact on our fragile ecosystems, like the woolly mammoth.

If you remember, they hope that having mammoths running around the Arctic tundra will encourage grasses to grow, which will capture loads of carbon dioxide. So if you remember, they edit, they gene edited, sorry, they gene edited a mouse to give it long. Hair as the first step. To getting to the woolly mammoth. But don't worry, they've they'll only start experimenting on actual elephants when they're convinced the process is safe and. Effective.

Well, anyway, they've taken a step forward with the creation of three Dire Wolves. Wolves. So this is the the announcement page on their website. The three dire wolves are called Romulus, Remus and Khaleesi in assault to Game of Thrones. At least the last one is. Where dire worlds were a thing, Colossal says that on the 1st of October 2024, for the first time in human history, Colossal successfully restored a once eradicated species through the

science of de extinction. After a 10,000 plus year absence. Our team is proud to return the Dire wolf to its rightful place in the ecosystem. Colossal's innovations in science, technology, and conservation made it possible to accomplish something that's never been done before, the revival of a species from its long standing population of zero. Well of course this is total nonsense. The reality is they took an existing animal like grey wolf and they played with its genome very slightly.

They in fact adjusted 14 very specific genes to make it look like the extinct dire wolf. And then they declare that they've brought back the extinct species. They didn't bring back the extinct species and their claims are just as fictional as the CGI dire wolves in Game of Thrones. Now remember, in this country this nonsense is enabled by by the Genetic Technology Precision Breeding Act 2023.

And if you remember when it was introduced, Joe Churchill, Minister for Agri Innovation, said new tech genetic technologies could help us tackle some of the biggest challenges of our age around food security, climate change and biodiversity loss. But as Charles reported some time ago, this isn't just about vanity projects like woolly mammoths and direwolves. This is happening to our food supply. And so the question is, what

could possibly go wrong? Well mate, let's let's have a look at it. Because meanwhile in Australia, efforts are afoot to deal with the cane toad problem there by genetically engineering those animals to create a keen a cane toad tadpole which never grows up. Instead it remains A tadpole, A cannibalistic tadpole that voraciously eats other cane toad eggs. And the nut jobs have done this claim.

This will reduce the wild population of claim toads of of Ken toads sorry, which is out of control in Australia now. The project, which is a collaboration between a number of universities and foundations and also state governments, has so far received permits to run experiments in controlled settings in WA and the NT and the gene edited tadpoles have not been tested in the wild yet, but field trials are expected in WA later this year after what they laughingly call a risk

assessment. Now the depressing irony here of course is that Ken Totes were initially released in Queensland in 1935 in order to control Ken Beatles, but ended up creating a bigger problem than the one that they were trying to solve in the 1st place. So again, I'm going to ask what could possibly go wrong? What could possibly go wrong, Charles? Well, I think the list is probably limitless. And as far as I recall, when Pandora's Box was opened, it was it was not a great outcome.

So I think this is absolutely extraordinary for in so many respects. I mean, it's, it's completely beside the point whether the technology exists or not, the, the idea that the introduction or the removal of one species can be done in such a way as to not disrupt that ecosystem with a negative, a net negative outcome is, is perfectly extraordinary. Nobody knows.

And so it's the same, you know, with, with all of these things to, to suggest that just because it can be done, that therefore somehow it's legitimate to, to do it is perfectly bizarre. And you know, you referred to the gene editing, the spring trials this year. I mean, if you read the safety data or the, the, the provisions in place to try to stop anything happening, they're absolutely laughable.

It's you just put a 20 metre strip around the edge of a field that you're growing something in and then you hope for the best. I mean, that is it, that is literally what you do. So, so this is, I mean, it's a terrible joke, but it is a joke. Absolutely, Sandy, let me welcome you to the programme

then and food related stuff, but let's look at beef prices to start off with. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Mike. I mean, obviously we were at the UK column conference at the weekend and there are a number of farmers there, which was great. So interaction with them is always good to see what's going on, on the ground. And there were a few very concerned beef farmers at the conference. Beef prices are rising significantly and obviously this will affect both farmers and and

consumers. The decrease follows A sustained reduction in cattle numbers, influenced by factors such as declining direct payments to farmers and challenges in business profitability. Specifically, the beef female breeding herd experienced a 4.5% drop to 1.34 million per head, marking the largest annual reduction in cattle per head in

in the country in UK ever. The tightening supply has led to record high prices paid to farmers which are called farm gate prices, which is really the the the the price they reach at market. For instance, farmers I spoke to at the conference said that beef had formerly fetched 400 to 600 lbs per animal at market and it's now fetching anything up to 1800 lbs at market and rising. So farmers are facing high costs for feed, energy and transportation also.

These combined factors have led to a noticeable price increases to to you know, in beef and abattoirs play a major role in influencing the price of the beef in the UK. Even though they don't officially set the prices, they exert power in the market, often to the farmers disadvantage. Their role is in grading pricing and controlling access to the supply chain gives them a sort of quasi pricing power.

I think from what I can gather, the UK meat processing industry has been consolidated in recent years down to three larger corporations. I mean we're seeing this across the board with this consolidation of of power to larger corporations from small and medium sized businesses and and that's what's what's happened to the meat processing.

And according to the Cattle and sheep UMM Farmers Association, a lot of the farmers feel that these companies are operating like cartels and they struggle to get a fair price on at the markets. They're the three big UMM companies that have consolidated are UMM, ABP Food Group, which is Anglo Beef, UMM Processors UMM and they employ about 13,000 people across divisions and they operate in nine countries in Europe with a turnover of €5 billion a year.

Massive company. And there's another one called Dawn Meats, which have been sort of amalgamated with Dun Dunbier. Now there's a picture here of them and they, they, they've, they've invested 9 million in net zero climate commitments, which is what they're getting that, that kind of that, that, that what what's happening in that, that photograph.

They seem to be having a big conference about it and they have something called Pan Vault 40 to Plan 40, which is targeting net zero operation emissions by 2040. So the next one is the Keypad Group and Keepap is an an Irish owned company with significant operations in the UK and that again reported a revenue of 1.2 billion in its financial year. So we've you know, these are big movers and shakers. So it's not about market control, it's it's, it is about

market control. The dominance of these large processors means that they have substantial control over the meat supply chain and this consolidation can limit the bargaining power of of individual farmers. What we have to remember also when you know going back to Dunbaynet Dunbia which is one of the biggest meat processors is that they they are aligning to the 17 goals.

Now, given that the government net 0 policies call for no meat production by 2049, will they collapse the meat processing eventually to fulfil their commitments? As a Plan 40 focus focuses on environment, food, farming and society and it would seem that meat production is a bit of a conflict of interest for these corporations. So what is really happening anyway?

That aside, the recent price increase in beef is forcing some farmers to sell sooner and destock, especially those struggling with rising input costs like feed, fuel, energy, interest rates and tax. So, you know, a lot of them fearing a a price drop, there's a sort of selling and destocking and it's keeping farmers in in quite a high anxiety state because some of them are exiting the industry altogether due to regular, you know, regulating or financial pressure.

But in the long term, this this reduces the breeding herd, which tightens the future supply and drives up the prices. So will this push up the supermarket beef price? Well, of course it will. You know, we expect continued price hikes or smaller portion sizes and what they call shrink flation, you know, when they reduce the size of the product but sell it at the same price. So also the supermarkets could easily push the sale of cheaper lab grown highly processed

artificial meat. And I think they will with real meat being priced out of the supermarket. What a great opportunity to replace it with all these meatless products. Supermarkets are profit driven and alternative proteins offer lower production volatility and higher margins and and they also appeal to the ESG investors and net 0 agendas which are being pushed by the UN. So we've got all these these agendas all pushing, pushing the

meatless market, if you like. So, you know, they've got control over, you know, food supply chains and they don't have to deal with stubborn farmers and activists and stuff. Now supermarkets are already subtly nudging. They're being pressured really with ESG frameworks and government incentives to promote sustainable proteins, which increasingly includes, you know, lab grown, you know, insect based or plant based substitutes. Lab growing meat is on the horizon.

It's, it's getting regulatory approval in various markets in the UK and that's next in line. We've got 3D printed meat. It's in its early stages, pilot testing mostly abroad, but it's a flashy tool for for shaping texture and and the poor product and fake meat, obviously plant based. It's already here in our supermarkets with products like Beyond Porn, Vivera and it's likely to be heavily promoted if

beef beef prices stay high. And as we know, it's all part of the UN Environment programme to fulfil the SDG goals and to, to promote veganism. So this isn't just about price, it's about control and reshaping the food system. You know, high beef prices, pharma hardship, consumer anxiety, which creates the perfect opening to push solutions aligned with net 0 synthetic food economies and vertical integration. That's vertical brewing.

The the UK government has allocated approximately 75,000,000 towards the development of sustainable protein sources including Cultivate meat, insect protein, all of that kind of, you know, meatless agenda stuff. And to facilitate the introduction of lab growing meat products. The Food Standard Agency has received 1.6 million to establish efficient safety assessment process for all these novel foods.

Meanwhile, Morrison's and other major UK supermarkets have been closing their fresh meat and fish counters. Morrison's announced in March 2025 that they plan to close 35 meat counters and 35 fish counters by April by the end of April and already Tesco and Sainsbury's have have already closed their fresh fish and meat counters. Well, the supermarkets can continue with their meatless agenda and pedal inferior, highly processed meat products.

I mean, uh, fake meat products. Um, but I, I think it will fail. Um, it, you know, it really is time that we moved away from, from the supermarkets. You know, we know that yes, farmers are under pressure but the future depend depends on us really. It, it presents a crucial moment for consumers to make informed choices that support the farmers by prioritising high welfare and socially locally sourced meat and, you know, veg. Can you know, all those locally

sourced veg and meat products? Consumers can help sustain British farmers and rural communities. While the UK beef industry faces significant, significant challenges, it's not doomed. Instead, it's, it's an opportunity for for all of us to see it as a sector of transition, you know, requiring the support of consumers. And so really the answer depends on our collective choices.

We have to support our farmers. It's in our hands and it's a perfect opportunity for people to rethink the way they buy their food. It certainly is, particularly if the if the price is getting closer in the supermarkets to to good quality food that's available direct from the farms. Thanks, Sandy and and Charles sticking with food security

then. Yeah, very closely related. But really as Sandy articulates, the question is what is either the response of the public or indeed government to any of this? And this concerns what's being referred to as a wheat strike. The farmers encouraged by the Farming Forum to withhold wheat supplies from flour Millers, which is being described as being likely to give rise to a shortage of bread and other sort of bakery products in the shops.

Particularly in relation to Easter weekend coming up and of course hot cross buns and that kind of thing. Now I will be playing the ball and not the man, but it does bear relation to think that the person behind this is chap called Clive Bailey who as I say has been managing the Farming Forum and it was he that was coordinating gatherers and protesters in London back in November 2024 and inviting people to register via via a digital platform.

Now, it was said at the time that the data was not being held, but nonetheless, there seem to be a few question marks around that. Now, another person who's been involved in this is a chap called Ollie Harrison, just shown there on the tweet. And obviously this has been pushed out by some of the sort of the usual channels. So we're just going to have a look at what he himself, Ollie Harrison, says about the intent behind this withholding of

wheat. You might be wondering why bread and hot cross buns are being short at shops at the moment, and I'll tell you why. Because mill and wheat is staying on farms, farmers that are growing milling wheat have gone on strike. From the 1st of April they will not be loading any trucks with milling wheat and we're probably going to run out of flour which will result in run out of

Hoskos, Bruns and bread. So if you wonder why the shells are empty, get on to your local MP and say you need to help these farmers out. You can't carry on putting them out of business. It's not good. So yeah, if there's Russian bread and cakes and hot cross buns, it's the politicians fault. It's not our fault we can't carry on no longer, but we won't

be in business. No, I can't be sure exactly who came up with the idea or indeed what sort of take up there's been from farmers and what the effect will be either with the Millers or with the shelves in shops and supermarkets. But there do seem to have been a number of considerations that that have not been taken into account.

One of which is the sort of legacy effect of the poor harvest last year and indeed the effect of the environmental Land Management schemes that have been introduced by the previous Conservative government and then brought in and indeed changed recently by the Labour government. So we have the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board here stating that there's likely to be an increase in imports by 13%, which equates to about 2.75 million tonnes of wheat this

year. So the point there is that in actual fact, if it were necessary, it seems possible to imagine that this shortfall in wheat from UK producers could easily be augmented by imports, which of course would entirely nullify any attempt at at protests via that. But also it's, you know, worth pointing out this doesn't actually affect the government, not even one bit, but it's seems

to be in direct response. What he's referring to is the instant withdrawal of the sustainable farming incentive SFI and the inheritance tax changes that were made in the Autumn budget. But the the point with this is that SFI was not a food growing scheme in the 1st place.

The the, the whole point of it was that it was supposed to take land out of food production in order to supposedly benefit the environment, with the effect that 107% increase in uncropped parable land became an almost immediate consequence as the scheme was oversubscribed, which is why it's been stopped. So it's almost as though these people are wanting to have it both ways by complaining about a scheme that's been stopped, but also suggesting that food should be withheld.

So it really all is leading to the same place, which is, as he quite rightly identifies, a food shortage. Now, the problem with that is that it's an absolute gift to the government because it illustrates that there is an emergency that the government needs to take control of. And that in itself is a problem. Now, the other thing I want to draw attention to is Olly Harrison himself.

I've showed this before. His pinned tweet on on Twitter is reads the number of people who've died from glyphosate exposure in 40 years. 0. Number of people died from consuming GMOs in 22 years, zero. It carries on in this vein. The point is that he is very much invested in the what's become a traditional and very destructive form of industrial agrochemical farming.

Now, I would just like to point out that safety data sheet from Bayer, the manufacturers of glyphosate via many of their Roundup products is runs entirely contrary to what he says. And I think people just really do need to think about this. I've just drawn out a few to humans. It causes serious eye irritation. I mean, that frankly, be the least of your worries. It's toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects. It's toxic to honey bees or

chief pollinators. And it talks about avoiding risks to human health and the environment. So this is not a good thing to be splashing about the place. And if you consider that it is applied very liberally to crops and indeed to exactly the sort of wheat he's pointing out that's going to flour Millers, how is your body supposed to cope with that? First of all, it's coated in a

highly toxic chemical. But secondly, that is a chemical that the crop itself is able to withstand because of various processes via either hybridization or gene editing that it's it's undergone. So I think that's in relation to human health. That is something that people

really do need to consider. On that score, the government have just reinforced the point that they made a change to the law in November. This is to do with birth defects, which they say are going to be prevented by fortifying flour with folic acid. Now the drama with folic acid. They say here that they're going to fortify bread with it, reducing neural tube defects by 20% in the UK. How on earth can they know that? The answer, of course, is they can't.

The NHS here saying about folic acid. Folic acid is available on prescription. Your doctor will explain how often to take it. Exactly like fluoride, it is a medication. It therefore requires A dosage that is a appropriate to the person taking it. So to apply it liberally or in whatever quantity to a bread that you cannot regulate the consumption of is reckless in the extreme and people should be

made very, very aware of that. So we've got glyphosate and folic acid coming together also to to refer back to the state of emergency. The govern government may easily extract from this and therefore start to dictate in a way that they might not be doing now. I point back to the National Preparedness Commission, which has had specific insight into the idea that there is going to be a food security.

Of course, we should bear in mind that food security is, is really a completely nebulous concept anyway in terms of national self sustainability, because we have had not really more than about 50% capability for a long, long time, certainly not 100% capability since the 18th century. So, so this is sort of slightly arbitrary debating now. I would just like you to to draw your attention in closing to a

couple of things. First of all, I, I've written an article that's been on the UK column website for for a little while, but suggesting really that the the chief target here is supranational. This is exactly what Sandy has been talking about. This is the sustainable development goals of the United Nations and so much else besides. But also good spectre of climate change and of course the nonsense that's behind that.

And also, please go to the farming section on the UK column website where there's so much more about all of this sort of thing. Thank you, Charles, Vanessa,

let's finish off with you then and more on the Trump and Netanyahu meeting. Don't worry about the time. Just take your time and do it. Yes, so interesting that the Economist has actually just very recently published an article talking about Turkey and Israel are becoming deadly rivals in Syria. Of course we've been talking about that at UK column for some time now, a few months now.

How the Economist frames that. It's very much that Israel fears that Hamas will end up in Syria and under the the umbrella of Turkey. Turkey fears the relationship between Israel and the Kurdish factions in the North East of Syria, but both of them are united over the common ground of keeping Iran and Iranian influence out of the region.

Now Netanyahu has been lobbying the US, in particular Marco Rubio who's known to be one of the the most ardent pro Zionists in the administration, although the entire administration I would argue is pro Israel, pro Zionist. So he's been regularly calling Rubio to tell him to to cancel the sales of F30 fives to Turkey. And I just want to roll this again the section of the press conference between Netanyahu and and Trump where Trump covers the Turkey issue. So let's have a look at this.

And I told the Prime Minister, I said, just baby, if you have a problem with Turkey, I really think I'm going to be able to work it out. And I have a very, very good relationship with Turkey and with their leader. And I think we'll be able to work it out. So I hope that's not going to be a problem. I don't think it will be a problem. Now, with that being said, I believe it was Turkey. And I said that to him. I said it. I said congratulations, You've done what nobody's been able to

do in 2000 years. You've taken over Syria with different names, but same thing I said, you've taken it over. He's taken it over through surrogates. He goes no, no, no, no, no, no, it was not me. I said it was you, but that's OK. You don't have to say, well, if sort of maybe was me, OK. But what he did, he said, look, he's a tough guy and he's very smart and he did something that nobody was able to do. You know, you got to hand it to him.

Any problem that you have with Turkey I think I can solve. Now, what's interesting here is that Trump is actually laying the blame for the international crew that finally toppled the Syrian government after 14 years of of regime change, which was backed by the US, the UK, the EU, the Gulf states, Israel, and and suddenly it all becomes Turkey's problem. That's one aspect of this. The other thing, of course, is that Trump is pushing for deconfliction.

In other words, I think what he's pushing for because his attitude towards Israel, in my opinion, would be favourable to that of his attitude towards Turkey, even though Turkey is a NATO member state. And what's interesting is the slight change in rhetoric from Turkey, not since the meeting, but just leading up to that meeting. And of course, we can assume that there were back channel conversations going on with Turkey. So let's have a look at what Mr Fidan, the Turkish foreign

Minister, has said. So he's basically saying the bottom section. One by one, out of all these capabilities that the new state can use against ISIS and other terrorist threats. Yeah. So, so basically, of course, what they're referring to is Israel's bombing of the T4 airport and Palmyra and also Hama to the South of Idlib. So they're basically making the claim that they're only installing air defence and military capabilities for Jolani's government in Damascus

in order to combat ISIS. Well, I mean, where if we heard that one before and he says it again here basically. Sorry, Mike, if you can just read that for me again, I'd really appreciate it. Yeah, it says. So basically what Israel is doing in Syria is not only threatening the security of Syria, but also paving the way for future instability of the region. I don't think that it's good for Israel's future.

In the region. Yeah. So again, we have here Turkey using the combating ISIS card, which again was used for years by the West, while of course ISIS is a proxy of the West inside Syria. So now Turkey and Israel Mull A deconfliction line in Syria. So again, this is post the, the, the Trump press conference. So Trump is clearly, in my opinion, putting pressure on Turkey to back down and basically retreat behind an agreed line, which doesn't appear to to yet have been

finalised. But I just wanted to show here the why this area in particular is so important. So I've put in a circle there, basically the area that Israel has been intensively bombing, that Turkey was planning to move forward with air defence and military capability in order to allegedly combat ISIS. But look how close that entire circle of military air bases is to the potential of Israel's expansion up that eastern corridor. So the last thing that Israel wants is a Turkish expansionism

into that central Syrian area. And of course, again, just to remind everybody, Israel is looking to partition Syria. Turkey is looking to maintain a so called unified Syria under Turkish control. And one interesting point that I just wanted to make, this actually came out in Newsweek and it's talking about Syria's new resistance. There are a number of resistance factions forming in Syria since the international coup in December last year.

But this is a fairly interesting and in depth article on the formation of what is known as Kuli al Bas, which is effectively claiming to represent a segment of the population in southern Syria to combat Israeli expansionism in the South of Syria, which of course has been ongoing since December the 8th. So again, interesting regional developments, but the potential for conflict to some degree between Turkey and Israel is definitely still.

There with the US. Trump showing that he wants to act as arbiter in that potential confrontation. Brilliant. Thank you for that. Well, we've got to leave it there for today and would say thank you very much to Vanessa, Charles and Sandy for joining me today. Thank you all for watching. We'll be back in a few minutes for UK column news Extra if you're AUK column member. I won't be back for two weeks and I'm off on holiday so I hope everyone has fun while I'm away.

But join us for extra in a couple of minutes if you're a member and we'll see you on, or at least Patrick and Charles. We'll see you on Friday as usual. See you then. Bye bye.