Helen Langton

As Dr Jack Fletcher, chair of the BMA Resident Doctors Committee writes in the Mirror, the Government have unilaterally axed 1,000 NHS specialist training jobs for doctors. These are not just numbers on a spreadsheet. These are doctors who would have gone on to become the future NHS Consultants, Surgeons, Radiologists, Psychiatrists and GPs that the public rely on. Doctors cannot become NHS specialists without training jobs, and the Government controls how many of those posts exist. Think about the last time you or someone you love was in hospital. The doctor who saw you in A&E in the middle of the night. The doctor reviewing your scan. The doctor on the ward explaining what was happening and what would happen next. None of those doctors became specialists by accident. They became specialists because there were training posts available and someone allowed them to train. So when the Government removes 1,000 future training posts, what they are really doing is removing 1,000 future NHS specialists. At the same time as removing these training jobs, the Government also watered down their offer to doctors, reduced the level of investment, and stretched the deal over three years instead. Those are not the actions of a serious negotiation partner acting in good faith. That is the behaviour of a Government trying to pressure a workforce into accepting worse terms. Wes Streeting and Keir Starmer have made a political choice. They have chosen to remove future specialist training jobs. They have chosen to reduce investment. They have chosen to make it harder for doctors to progress. And that decision does not just affect doctors. It affects patients, waiting lists, cancer diagnoses, surgery delays and access to GP appointments. Fewer future training posts now means fewer specialists in the future, and longer waits for the public. The BMA has repeatedly said it is willing to negotiate and willing to end strikes if a fair deal is reached. Wes Streeting needs to be willing to end this dispute too with a credible offer.

You’d think this headline was satire. But it isn’t. I was sexually abused from the age of 5. The mass rape of little girls like me is NOT a “price worth paying”. We are not lambs to be sacrificed at the altar of migration. We are not sex slaves to be traded for political gain. This is pure evil. I was sexually abused from age 5. I still feel their hands on my skin. I still have nightmares. I still get scared sometimes walking around my hometown. Girls like me were traded for votes. Called slags, sluts, or troublemakers. Told that we were asking for it. And now, we are being told that the abuse we suffer is merely a “price worth paying” to allow hordes of violent rapists into the country to abuse MORE little girls like us. In towns like Rotherham, Rochdale, and Telford, little girls are being passed around like meat by gangs of Pakistani-Muslim men in taxis and takeaways while Labour councils, police and social workers turn a blind eye. Across the country, little girls are being kidnapped, molested, tortured, beaten, sodomised, assaulted, and killed by violent migrant men. These men come from countries that see women as subhuman. Where they can marry a 6 year old girl or take a Christian woman as a sex slave. Where they can flog and beat women for daring to show their face or hair in public. Where they can deny girls a basic education and use them as little more than broodmares. Where they can rape a little girl then invoke Sharia Law to force her to marry them. Then, they hop on a plane to England and try to replicate that evil culture on our shores. And those in power are allowing it. All to protect “community relations”. Saying “quasi-consensual” assaults on white women are just the cost of assimilation? That it’s beautiful? That it ends racism? That it leads to genuine relationships and marriage? They are literally describing Stockholm Syndrome. These cretins are seriously suggesting that women and girls are supposed to be raped by migrant men, then fall in love and build a ‘diverse’ home from a bedrock of abuse. What a disgusting proposal. The girls in Rotherham, Telford, Oldham, Rochdale et al were not “acceptable losses”. Our daughters are not sacrifices for your utopia. These people are evil. They want to import more of the same men who destroyed us, then call it progress. And offer women and girls up as sacrifices for the “greater good”. Absolutely not. Every single person who contributed to this article belongs in prison. Deport the rapists. Close the borders. Put our kids first.

Tonight, @Keir_Starmer and @wesstreeting have decided to cut the number of offered specialist training jobs for doctors. Doctors need these jobs to train to become the specialist Consultants and GPs of the future that the NHS so desperately needs. Instead, this Government has decided to make it harder for you to see a specialist and is effectively holding doctors’ jobs hostage. We are already an under-doctored country compared to other OECD countries. In 2025, around 40,000 doctors applied for just 10,000 speciality training jobs. That means tens of thousands of qualified doctors ready to train, ready to work, and ready to treat patients are being turned away every year. The Government can train more specialist doctors when they want to. They are simply choosing not to. Remember this the next time you can’t get an appointment or your surgery is delayed.

While patients wait years for surgery and months to see a specialist, Wes Streeting and Keir Starmer are threatening to cut the number of NHS specialist doctor training jobs. Most people don’t realise this, but doctors can’t just become Consultants, Surgeons or GPs on their own. They have to get a speciality training job first. These jobs are controlled and capped by the Government. So when the Government talks about cutting speciality training jobs, what they are really talking about is cutting the number of future specialist doctors in this country. At a time when the NHS already doesn’t have enough doctors. At a time when waiting lists are in the millions. At a time when patients are waiting months just to see a specialist and years for operations. Cutting the number of specialist training jobs will not fix the NHS. It will make waiting lists longer. It will make it harder to see a doctor. It will make the NHS worse for patients. Threatening to reduce the number of future doctors while patients are already struggling to access care is not just a deliberate workforce policy decision. It is a direct threat to the NHS and to the public who rely on it, coming from a ‘Labour’ Government.

BBC News: Keir Starmer and Wes Streeting are trying to bribe doctors to call off next weeks strike, by saying that if they don't extra training places won't be created Just to be clear, these aren't 'extra' training places, these are training places And if the general public understood the meaning of this, they would be standing alongside doctors striking Never thought I'd be as disgusted with Labour as I was disgusted with the Conservatives, but here we are

This week the NHS will undergo one of the most radical – and scandalous - changes in its history. From 1st April (the public are the fools in this), GPs will be contractually obliged to seek remote, electronic “advice and guidance” from hospital ‘clinicians’ (note, not necessarily doctors), making it even harder for patients to see a hospital specialist. Does this sound part of a plan to genuinely ‘fix’ the NHS, as Wes Streeting vowed he would do so effusively when taking up office - or more like a tactic to ration hospital care by overriding GPs in order to massage the waiting list figures? It is, of course, the latter, an extra layer of bureaucracy that at best will delay patients’ access to the specialist treatment they need, at worse sacrifice those patients on the altar of fake news about “falling” waiting lists. You don’t need me to point out the patient safety risks it potentially entails. We all know that time, in medicine, can be everything. The Royal College of GPs has been crystal clear: “The use of advice and guidance should not be mandated in any area… We have heard reports of risks of delays, with tests being required before any referral, lost messages and staff without appropriate senior clinical oversight handling requests.” The aim, says the Times, is to reduce the number of hospital outpatient appointments by 30 million annually. And the government, in a really quite breathtaking example of political spin, is presenting this as “good” for patients - as though all those people who’ve been waiting years months or even years for the first Rheumatology, Neurology or Orthopaedics appointment they so desperately need are just, you know, malingering. (I recently spoke to a patient with a new diagnosis of multiple sclerosis who’d been waiting over six months to see a neurologist for the first time – simply scandalous.) I believe this is a national health scandal from a government that apparently cares more about good spin than it does about good patient care. If you feel the same, please – please – write to your MP or the Secretary of State and tell them why. Please shout about this online, in the press, anywhere you can. Don’t let this slide. Thank you.

How much more are women expected to put up with? Because appointing a man who identifies as a woman to represent people suffering from endometriosis is not inclusion, it is disrespect. At best, it is tone-deaf. In reality, it's outright misogyny dressed up as progress. A man representing women with endometriosis. Think about that for a moment. Women fought for decades to get this disease recognised, treated, researched and taken seriously. Now they are told to step aside and let a man represent them. Call it inclusion if you like. Many women will call it something else. If women can’t even speak for women’s health anymore, what exactly are women allowed to speak for? Endometriosis is not an abstract identity. It is a painful, often debilitating medical condition that affects women because they have female reproductive systems. One in ten women in the UK suffer from it. Many spend years being ignored by doctors, misdiagnosed, or told the pain is “normal”. Women have fought for decades just to have this condition taken seriously. And now, after all that, they are told a man will represent them. You could not design a more insulting situation if you tried. Novelist Amanda Craig, who has personally suffered from acute endometriosis, said the appointment was “absolutely ridiculous” and compared it to a white person claiming to speak for black people. It is a harsh comparison, but you can understand the point she is making: representation should come from lived experience, not political fashion. This is the problem with identity politics when it loses all connection to material reality. Women are told to be quiet, be kind, be inclusive, and accept that even their own medical conditions are no longer theirs to speak about. So again, the question stands: How much more are women expected to put up with? Because when women cannot even speak about women’s health without being told to step aside for a man, that is not equality. That is erasure. And dressing erasure up as progress does not make it progress. It just makes it harder to challenge. #WomenMatter

We are at Leeds Employment Tribunal hoping to live tweet the 1st day of LS v NHS England. LS, also known by the pseudonym Faye Russell-Caldicott, has filed a legal claim against NHS England (NHSE), alleging ..

Dear friend (who thinks I’m unkind - or even homophobic), Remember how much we loved Boy George and Marilyn when we were growing up? Our parents weren’t thrilled by men in make-up and dresses - but we thought they were cool. They were expressing individuality and challenging rigid gender stereotypes. You and I both grew up supporting gay rights for a simple reason: people shouldn’t be punished, excluded or shamed for who they love. That belief hasn’t changed. But being gay, lesbian or bisexual is about who you’re attracted to. Gender identity is about how someone understands or describes themselves. Those are not the same thing. And treating them as if they are puts women and girls at risk. Here’s the crucial difference. Many of the pop stars we grew up with played with gender expression - flamboyant clothes, make-up, theatrical performance. David Bowie made a whole art form out of it. But we still understood they were men - and so did they. They weren’t demanding entry to women’s spaces. They weren’t claiming women’s awards or competing in women’s sporting categories. And women weren’t being forced to agree that the man standing in front of them was a woman - or risk social or professional consequences. We both have daughters now - young women just starting their adult lives. I’ve taught mine that no means no and I’m sure you’ve taught yours the same. But that message becomes meaningless if our girls are also being told they must say “yes” to any man who says he’s a woman - even when their instincts say otherwise. If a girl isn’t interested in make-up or stereotypically feminine things, she may be told she’s actually a man - rather than simply a strong, independent young woman who dresses and behaves as she pleases. And if she’s same-sex attracted, she may face pressure from men who identify as “lesbians” and expect access to her spaces - and her body - something we'd never have accepted as progressive or 'kind' when we were younger. Single-sex spaces - toilets, changing rooms, hospital wards, refuges, prisons - exist because women need them. Not because all men are dangerous, but because male violence is a reality and sex-based boundaries reduce risk. Women cannot know which men pose a threat and which don’t. That’s why all must stay out of women's spaces. Good men understand this - without question. I know you want to be kind. So do I. But kindness isn’t asking women and girls to surrender their privacy, dignity or safety in order to prove they’re “tolerant”. Or calling them 'homophobic' or bigoted for saying no. With love, Janet

This is Charlotte Nichols MP. Charlotte was raped after a work event, which she attended as the Labour MP for Warrington. And she just obliterated her own government’s plan to scrap jury trials. It took 1,088 days for her case to go to court. And she was one of the lucky ones. 98.6 per cent of rape cases in England and Wales never see the inside of a courtroom. They are dropped by the Crown Persecution Service without any charges being filed, whether due to “insufficient evidence”, the “historic nature” of a crime, or simply because the victim “wouldn’t present well in court”. Meanwhile, of the few cases that are pursued, many still don’t get a jury trial or jury sentencing. We have seen judges let child rapists off with no prison time, violent serial abusers given a lighter sentence than petty thieves, and even victims painted as willing participants. For those victims, there is no second opinion. Just one person acting as judge, jury and executioner. Labour claims that they care about victims and are scrapping jury trials to speed up the wheels of justice. They scoff at anyone who highlights the blatant flaws, and sneer in our faces that they know what we need better than we do. “We’ve been told that if we have concerns about this Bill, it’s because we’ve not been raped.” Well, Charlotte Nichols has been raped. And she is defying her own government because she knows what it’s like to live knowing that your rapist is walking free, not knowing when… or if… they will ever be punished for what they did to you. For over three years, she waited for the justice system to do her justice. And there was a 98.6 per cent chance that they wouldn’t. A 98.6 per cent chance that the British penal system would drop her like a piece of rubbish, leaving her to deal with the lifelong trauma of her abuse and denying her the most basic tenet of civilised society: justice. Scrapping jury trials only serves one person: the criminals. All it takes is for one judge to have a bad day, or to hold prejudiced beliefs in a case, or to rule in a way which serves their own private political agenda. It only takes one judge to be too scared of being branded “racist”. It only takes one judge to decided that working class white girls are “child prostitutes” instead of victims. It only takes one judge to be overwhelmed with their increased caseload and develop a years-long backlog or allow cases to be shoved off onto magistrates or other lower courts. We all know that this isn’t about justice for victims. We all know that Labour doesn’t care about us. We all know that they are only interested in saving their own skins and covering up their own corruption. “You haven’t been raped” “you don’t care about abuse victims”. Their lazy excuses and sneering superiority falls flat when the very people they are trying to discredit are the victims they are claim to care so deeply about. So, bravo to Charlotte Nichols. For sharing her story. And for speaking out against the evil of her own regime

It's some job, isn't it? Use your Peership to secure a contract for a subsidiary company; deliver a pile of shit (£24m of unusable PPE); then the company liquidates before the govt can recoup that £24m. £24,000,000 And the sanction is a one-year suspension? Seriously, WTF!

@George_Clarkey were so sorry we couldn’t re open the lift doors. Love you ❣️

Today we remember a hardworking, well respected head teacher, Ruth Perry, who is very much missed. Ofsted’s new framework does not address the harm inherent in a grades-based schools accountability system, and it does not address significant risks to staff wellbeing and safety. We call for a new system that is supportive, effective and fair – one that will support school leaders, not punish them.

15 surprising things about the Peggie v NHS Fife ET judgment - a thread 🧵 1. Top of the pops has to be mis/partial quoting of the Supreme Court judgment in a way that badly misrepresents what it said. x.com/WingsScotland/…

@GenomiccStudy Thank you little Elves 😀

As a small end of year thank you, we are delighted to be sending GenOMICC tote bags to all research teams who do so much for us! We're busy packaging these up at the moment and they should be with you very soon!📦

This evening I met the woman responsible for the trans crime UK website. She told me how she didn't want men's crimes to be recorded as women and so she set up this website to record the facts. transcrimeuk.com

“I was shocked that in so many countries a child would lose a parent, maybe due to an accident, conflict, imprisonment or abandonment but there was no system of financial and practical support for the surviving parent that would allow them to raise them alone. We have always placed children’s voices at the heart of our work, enabling children and young people with lived experience to speak to ministers and decision makers and shape reform.” Read the full reflections on two decades of care reform from former Lumos Interim CEO, Sir Roger Singleton CBE. wearelumos.org/sir-roger-sing…

As it’s been mentioned by a few people, by popular demand, here is Nellys famous Binky video ❤️❤️

“For 20 years, Lumos has been illuminating a better path – partnering with governments to reform care systems, create community-based services, prevent family breakdown, support families in conflict zones, and reunite institutionalised children with biological, foster or adoptive families… As we celebrate our 20th anniversary, we are preparing to positively impact the lives of millions more children in more countries, more quickly, in our next decade.” – J.K. Rowling, Lumos Founder & Life President. “This moment of change presents an opportunity to re-shape care for children globally and child protection efforts to work more effectively and more impactfully in the years ahead.” – Howard Taylor, Lumos CEO. wearelumos.org/lumos-celebrat… Photography by Joel Luedtke © Lumos Foundation.

Hit like Hit share It costs nothing, takes no time and makes a massive difference for our little charity ❤️ Harry is worth it. He deserves a chance at his best life. I wish you knew the power of a like ❤️