sexta-feira, 9 de outubro de 2026

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani stands firmly by his handling of the third anniversary of the October 7 attacks, voicing "no regrets" during a news conference.6

 


Mamdani Stands By His Handling of Oct. 7 Anniversary After Emotional Day

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani stands firmly by his handling of the third anniversary of the October 7 attacks, voicing "no regrets" during a news conference. His approach has drawn heavy bipartisan and community backlash from both Jewish leaders and pro-Palestinian activists.

The Controversy Surrounding the Statement

On the morning of October 7, 2026, Mamdani issued a four-paragraph statement intended to mark the three-year anniversary. While he acknowledged the day as "profoundly painful," condemned the horrific war crimes committed by Hamas, and mourned the lives lost and hostages taken, the remainder of his message sharply focused on criticizing Israel.

  • The Text: Mamdani stated that the suffering "did not begin nor end that day" and denounced what he termed "the Israeli government's devastating, ongoing genocide in Gaza." He also criticized the United States government for its complicity through weapon funding.
  • Jewish Community Backlash: Jewish leaders and organizations expressed outrage, arguing that the statement severely minimized Israeli suffering by disproportionately focusing on the war in Gaza on a day meant for solemn remembrance of the October 7 victims. Even some of his standard political allies criticized the statement as tone-deaf.

Tensions Boil Over at Union Square Vigil

The political friction manifested physically later that evening. Mamdani attended a candlelight vigil at Union Square in Manhattan, organized by Israelis for Peace, an anti-occupation activist group.

During the event, pro-Palestinian demonstrators interrupted the vigil and booed Mamdani, shouting phrases like "Mamdani, you can't hide, we charge you with genocide" and calling him a "traitor". Activists expressed frustration that the mayor was failing to fulfill his absolute campaign promises regarding the Palestinian cause by trying to strike a balance or mourning Israeli victims. Police eventually had to escort the mayor past the angry crowd.

Mamdani’s Defense

Defending his actions at a news conference in Brooklyn the following day, Mamdani asserted that leadership requires staying grounded through disapproval. He emphasized his belief in the "universality of humanity," stating that it is critical to mourn all lives lost in the conflict.

Additionally, Mamdani has remained cautious on other sensitive local issues, stopping short of endorsing a privately funded permanent October 7 memorial proposed by several Brooklyn officials for Gravesend.

 

Mamdani Stands By His Handling of Oct. 7 Anniversary After Emotional Day

 


Mamdani Stands By His Handling of Oct. 7 Anniversary After Emotional Day

 

The mayor expressed no regrets after he was criticized by Jewish leaders over a statement marking the anniversary of the Oct. 7 attacks and later booed by pro-Palestinian activists at a vigil.

 

Video

Mamdani Responds to Backlash After Attending Oct. 7 Vigil

1:13

Mayor Zohran Mamdani of New York City responded to the backlash he received after attending a vigil that marked the third anniversary of the Oct. 7 attacks. The mayor also addressed criticism of his social media post about the attacks that focused more on the people of Gaza.CreditCredit...Hilary Swift for The New York Times

Dana RubinsteinLiam StackSally Goldenberg

By Dana RubinsteinLiam Stack and Sally Goldenberg

Oct. 8, 2026

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/10/08/nyregion/mamdani-oct-7-statement-events-israel-palestine.html

 

Mayor Zohran Mamdani on Thursday voiced no regrets about his handling of the third anniversary of the Oct. 7 attacks, after his efforts to mark the day were transformed into one of the most wrenching moments in his brief tenure leading New York City.

Instead, he reaffirmed his confidence in an approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that had caused some Jewish New Yorkers and pro-Palestinian activists to assail his leadership.

Asked about Wednesday’s events at an unrelated news conference in Brooklyn, Mr. Mamdani expressed no regrets about the statement he had released to mark the anniversary. His statement inflamed tensions with many Jewish leaders, who said it had focused too much on Israel’s war in Gaza, and not enough on the people who had been killed or taken hostage in Israel that day.

“It is critically important to be able to mourn for all of those who were killed and have been killed since, especially given that we know this is ongoing,” the mayor said on Thursday. His intention, he said, had been to reckon with “a horror that devastated the lives of New Yorkers three years ago and it also continues to devastate New Yorkers today.”

Mr. Mamdani said on Thursday that he had been clear, and would remain so, that he believed Hamas had committed war crimes in its attacks on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 hostages abducted. He also said Israel had used that carnage to justify a prolonged assault on Gaza that had led to the deaths of more than 74,000 Palestinians, actions that he believed amount to genocide.

He evinced no doubts about his decision to attend a vigil on Wednesday evening organized by Israelis for Peace to honor those killed in both Israel and Gaza — an event he also attended last year before his election. He did not address the tense scene that developed when a group of pro-Palestinian activists disrupted the gathering, heckled him and called him a “traitor.”

While opposition to the mayor from pro-Israel Jewish leaders has become frequent, he is less accustomed to being publicly jeered by fellow critics of Israel for acknowledging the grief of Israelis and Jews.

But he said on Thursday that New Yorkers would find a way to come together, despite accusations from Jewish leaders that his focus on Israel has threatened the safety of his Jewish constituents amid heightened fears about antisemitism and violence.

There is a political logic to the consistency of his message.

“As a communications consultant and strategist, you would never tell your client to flip-flop,” said Lupe Todd-Medina, a Democratic political consultant. “You’ve got to own your position and stay there.”

But that consistency did little to resolve the predicament facing Mr. Mamdani, who is navigating a fraught relationship with Jewish leaders and growing skepticism from some of his allies on the left.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has dogged Mr. Mamdani since he took office in January as New York City’s first Muslim mayor, a dyed-in-the-wool pro-Palestinian activist and critic of Israel in a city that has a growing Muslim population and remains 12 percent Jewish. As a mayoral candidate, he promised to arrest the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, if he set foot in the city.

His unabashed stance on the issue, in a city where politicians have long been almost reflexively pro-Israel, excited Muslims and young activists who enthusiastically joined his coalition.

But governing is different from campaigning.

It turned out that he had no authority to arrest Mr. Netanyahu, which his team had told him for months but which he only publicly acknowledged in a video in July. That video rattled Jewish leaders, who saw his sharp denunciations of Israel and its leader as a move to reassure his base while distracting from his abandonment of a campaign promise.

In August, during a meeting at City Hall, rabbis beseeched the mayor to lower the temperature and to more carefully consider how his words affected Jewish New Yorkers. And for a time, he seemed to retreat from talking about the Middle East as often.

Tensions resurfaced soon after when, amid the Jewish High Holiday season, the mayor’s office released a report on its efforts to combat antisemitism, which had risen across the United States after the Oct. 7 attacks.

The report steered clear of the thorny issue of Israel, but it nevertheless angered some of Mr. Mamdani’s supporters, who flooded social media with accusations that he was bowing to a Zionist agenda by highlighting hate crimes against Jews, interpreting the notion of hate crimes too broadly, and providing funding to a Jewish community group that supports Israel.

Dana Rubinstein covers New York City politics and government for The Times.

Liam Stack is a Times reporter who covers the culture and politics of the New York City region.

Sally Goldenberg is a Times reporter covering New York City politics and government.

 

Andrew Tate rented supercars to appear ‘uberwealthy’, says his lawyer

 


Andrew Tate rented supercars to appear ‘uberwealthy’, says his lawyer

 

Self-described misogynist and his brother, Tristan, are playing role to generate income from online attention, Miami court filing says

 

Rajeev Syal

Tue 25 Aug 2026 13.25 BST

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2026/aug/25/andrew-tate-rented-supercars-to-appear-uberwealthy-says-his-lawyer

 

Andrew Tate rented supercars and borrowed a yacht to appear “uberwealthy” and generate online engagement, his lawyer has said.

 

Legal representatives for the self-described misogynist social media influencer and his brother, Tristan Tate, have claimed the pair deliberately portray themselves as far wealthier than they are because their “business model depends on online attention”.

 

The submissions come after British police sought the brothers’ extradition from the US over an investigation into rape, assault and facilitating trafficking for ⁠sexual exploitation. The brothers were arrested in July.

 

They have continued to protest their innocence on X from the federal detention centre in Miami, Florida.

 

In a court filing, their lawyers said: “Andrew and Tristan are social media personalities. Their business model depends on online attention.

 

“The outrageousness of the posts by them and about them is the point. The more hyperbolic and outlandish the post, the more likely it will generate views and likes, which in turn generates income. In short, they are playing a role.”

 

The brothers’ legal representatives said images of luxury yachts, supercars and expensive watches shared by the brothers online should not be taken as evidence of their wealth.

 

Their submissions continued: “A promotional video filmed aboard a yacht is not evidence of title to the yacht. The ‘superyacht’ does not belong to the Tates. They received payment to promote the ship on social media.

 

“Further, the Tates are engaged in several businesses ‘teaching’ men how to earn money. It is in their interest to portray themselves on social media as uberwealthy.

 

“For example, the $2.1m Aston Martin and $5m and $7m Bugattis featured in Tristan’s videos were rented. The valuation of Andrew’s watch collection is based on a third-party enthusiast publication.”

 

The filing also mentions Andrew Tate’s X account, and suggestions his tweets generate nine-figure sums, as well as his past claims that he will one day be the UK prime minister. “All of these posts are hyperbole,” his lawyers wrote.

 

Several social media posts by the brothers contain suggestions of unlimited crypto and cash resources. His lawyers say this is not true.

 

The filing in the US also made reference to a “so-called Mexican ‘passport’ bearing the name ‘Vladimir Scorpius’”. The submission said the passport was nothing more than a “cardboard prop Tristan used for a Halloween costume”.

 

“No one can seriously suggest that Tristan adopted a covert identity, with the purpose of evading international law enforcement, under the name of a famous fictional supervillain.”

 

Andrew Tate, 39, and Tristan Tate, 38, were arrested in Miami on 18 July. Britain’s Crown Prosecution Service said on 19 July it had brought new charges against the two relating to alleged offences involving four alleged victims.

 

Separately, Andrew Tate is being sued in England by four women over allegations of sexual violence, with the former professional kickboxer’s lawyers previously telling the high court there was a “total denial of wrongdoing”. Three of the women bringing the civil case reported allegations of rape and sexual assault against Tate to Hertfordshire police in 2014 and 2015, but prosecutors then dropped the case.

 

The civil trial was adjourned in May after the force said it would reinvestigate the alleged offences.

 

The CPS said the 38 additional charges, in addition to 21 existing charges, relate to alleged offences between July 2010 and August 2017.

 

The brothers are also facing legal proceedings in Romania and were due to be extradited to the UK after those proceedings concluded, after Bedfordshire police secured European arrest warrants for the pair in 2024.

 

Andrew Tate wrote on Monday that he would fight extradition. “My life is a movie and I’m my own stuntman,” he wrote on X.

The Rise and Fall of Andrew Tate's $1B Empire

 

Andrew Tate’s Empire of Abuse By Heidi Blake

 


Andrew Tate’s Empire of Abuse

How the defining figure of the manosphere built a fortune—and became a political force—by systematically exploiting women.

By Heidi Blake

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2026/06/15/andrew-tates-empire-of-abuse

 

Investigative reporter Heidi Blake published a comprehensive, nine-month exposé in The New Yorker titled "Andrew Tate's Empire of Abuse," detailing the systematic exploitation, coercion, and physical violence against women by controversial influencer Andrew Tate and his brother Tristan.

Key Findings of the Investigation

  • Exploitation Network: The report details how the Tate brothers built an early fortune through an industrial-scale online webcam pornography business, coercing and trapping women into digital sex work.
  • Violent Allegations: Drawing on hundreds of thousands of leaked private messages, sealed court records, internal documents, and interviews with more than a dozen alleged victims, Blake documented recurring accounts of rape, severe beatings, and throat-strangulation

British authorities have unveiled details of the criminal case against Andrew and Tristan Tate, exposing the specifics of the 59 charges they face in the United Kingdom, which include rape, human trafficking, and sexual exploitation.

 


Britain Reveals Damning Evidence Against the Tate Brothers

British authorities have unveiled details of the criminal case against Andrew and Tristan Tate, exposing the specifics of the 59 charges they face in the United Kingdom, which include rape, human trafficking, and sexual exploitation. Newly public court documents sent to the United States detail what prosecutors say their evidence will show regarding the brothers' operation of a webcam business from 2014 onward.

According to filings submitted by British law enforcement, the primary evidence and allegations against the brothers center around the following:

The "Lover-Boy" Recruitment Model

Prosecutors allege that Andrew and Tristan Tate systematically utilized what investigators call the "lover-boy" model to attract and exploit women.

  • False Romance: The brothers would establish intimate, romantic relationships with women to make them emotionally dependent.
  • Coercion into Pornography: Once a woman believed she was in a genuine relationship with a future together, the dynamic would shift into manipulation, demands, and exploitation. The brothers allegedly coerced these women into traveling internationally to their bases in the UK and Romania to perform online pornography for paying subscribers.

Specific Allegations of Violence and Rape

The unsealed Department of Justice filings detail extreme physical abuse and non-consensual sexual acts against multiple British victims:

  • Andrew Tate is facing 10 counts of rape. The documents allege that he put multiple victims into chokeholds, strangling them until they lost consciousness, before penetrating them without consent. One specific incident detailed an attack at a victim's home in Bedford, England, in 2015.
  • Tristan Tate is facing 5 counts of rape. He is similarly accused of strangling a woman unconscious and raping her.
  • Both brothers are also charged with multiple counts of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. Additionally, Andrew Tate faces charges of making and distributing indecent images of a child and possessing extreme pornography.

Current Legal Status

The Tate brothers, who hold dual US-UK citizenship, were arrested by the US Marshals Service in Miami on July 18, 2026, following Britain's formal extradition request. A US magistrate judge denied them bail in August, and they remain in federal custody in Miami while contesting their extradition. Final extradition hearings are currently being scheduled.

Defense Response

Both Andrew and Tristan Tate deny all wrongdoing. Their American defense attorney, Joseph McBride, has objected to the extradition process. The defense argues that the case cannot be "meaningfully tested" because the British government has withheld the names of the accusers from the defense team, calling them "secret accusers". UK prosecutors have counter-argued that withholding the identities of the victims is a temporary, protective measure until substantive court proceedings officially begin in the UK

 

Britain Reveals Damning Evidence Against the Tate Brothers

andrew Mountbatten-Windsor Fights Back and Wins

Will Andrew Be Charged? | Everything Lownie Has Said On His Arrest

Police raids on former Prince Andrew’s homes were unlawful

 

On October 8, 2026, a UK High Court judge disclosed that search warrants used to raid the homes of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor (the former Prince Andrew) were ruled unlawful and have been legally quashed.

 


Andrew’s Search Warrants Ruled Unlawful

On October 8, 2026, a UK High Court judge disclosed that search warrants used to raid the homes of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor (the former Prince Andrew) were ruled unlawful and have been legally quashed. Both Thames Valley Police and the High Court agreed that the initial application was mistakenly submitted and approved under the incorrect statutory legislation.

Despite this partial legal victory for the former royal, the ruling does not bring the criminal investigation to an end, nor does it mean the broader probe is unlawful.

Key Details of the Ruling & Case:

  • The Investigation: Andrew was arrested in February 2026 on suspicion of misconduct in public office. The probe centers on allegations that he shared sensitive information with late US sex offender Jeffrey Epstein while serving as the UK's trade envoy. He strongly denies all wrongdoing.
  • Properties Raided: The unlawful warrants were used by police to raid his residence on the Sandringham estate and his Windsor home, Royal Lodge.
  • Fate of the Seized Evidence: Although the warrants were thrown out, police have not returned the seized electronic devices and documentary material. The police are utilizing alternative statutory powers to argue they have a retroactive right to retain the evidence.
  • What Comes Next: A private, behind-closed-doors High Court hearing has been scheduled for 2027 to officially determine whether the police can lawfully keep and use the seized items as evidence in their ongoing prosecution.

 

Andrew’s Search Warrants Ruled Unlawful | Expert Explains What Happens Next

The French Riots Expose The Elites' Plan To Destroy Europe…

Jordan Bardella on LCI: "Who is going to pay for the tens of millions of euros in riot damages?

Marion Maréchal: "Behind the student riots, the far-left and the scum!"

The English VS British Identity Crisis Is Burying the Real Problem

Immigration, Identity and a Tired Europe | Douglas Murray's The Strange Death of Europe

Britain’s Immigration Crisis Is Entering A Whole New Dangerous Phase - Steven Edginton

Low In The Polls, High In Morale: Can The Tories Recover?

“The Left Are DOMINATING!” | Badenoch Rejects A Reform Pact As Farage Hits Back

 

Nigel Farage criticized Rupert Lowe and his new political party, Restore Britain, labeling Lowe's 10% polling figures as "utter rot" and accusing him of crossing lines of decency and morality.

 


Nigel Farage criticized Rupert Lowe and his new political party, Restore Britain, labeling Lowe's 10% polling figures as "utter rot" and accusing him of crossing lines of decency and morality.

Key Details of the Conflict

  • Reasons for Removal: Farage stated that Lowe was removed from Reform UK because he advocated for the mass deportation of entire communities, including UK-born individuals, which Farage called "beyond reason, decency, and morality".
  • Dispute Over Alliances: Lowe offered to work with Reform UK under specific conditions—such as holding a referendum on the death penalty, banning halal and kosher meat, and excluding former Conservative MPs from future roles—which Farage dismissed as an unworkable "shopping list".
  • Accusations and Messaging: Lowe accused Farage of running a "cult of Nigel" with a brutal leadership style, while Farage dismissed Lowe's party as an online-driven protest movement heavily boosted on X by Elon Musk.
  • Electoral Impact: Right-wing vote-splitting between Reform UK and Restore Britain—such as in recent local and mayoral by-elections—has drawn concern that it could dilute the conservative vote and benefit the Labour Party

 

“GET RID OF HIM”: Farage Reveals Why He Removed Rupert Lowe

9 hours ago : Greens 'wrong' to pass 'Zionism is racism' policy, says PM

Holborn And St Pancras By-Election: ‘The Shine Has Come Off The Greens’ | James Heale

Labour’s Win In Holborn & St Pancras Is A ‘Vote Of Confidence’ In Burnham | Katie Tarrant

Polanski Could Be Wounded In A Way ‘That Is Not Revivable’ | Anna Mikhailova

 

Holborn and St Pancras byelection loss will disappoint Greens – but there may also be relief

 


Analysis

Holborn and St Pancras byelection loss will disappoint Greens – but there may also be relief

 

Peter WalkerSenior political correspondent

It may sound odd to think Zack Polanski would be happy with second place, but after his most challenging week in politics, it could have been worse

Fri 9 Oct 2026 07.40 BST

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/oct/09/holborn-st-pancras-byelection-greens-zack-polanski

 

Parliamentary byelections can generate all sorts of emotional responses, often very strong ones. But for the main contenders in Holborn and St Pancras, the feeling this morning might be more prosaic: relief.

For Labour, Sagal Abdi-Wali’s victory with just over 45% of the total vote was widely expected, but it allows the party to credibly claim Andy Burnham as a politician able to reach people in both Reform-leaning areas such as Makerfield and in Green-friendly inner cities.

Retaining a constituency formerly held by your last leader, Keir Starmer, and which has been overwhelmingly Labour since it was created in 1983, is in normal political times not that notable an achievement, but these are not normal times.

A low turnout of 38.7% and Abdi-Wali’s numerically modest 3,364 majority that resulted might not appear the greatest endorsement of the government, but it is also likely to have been in part due to the widespread assumption that Labour would win.

And what of the Greens, and particularly Zack Polanski, the party’s leader in England and Wales, who decided to go for the high-profile seat himself? Again, it may sound curious to think he would be happy with second place, but after the most challenging week of his political life, it could have been worse.

Polanski got just under 33% of the vote, well above anyone else apart from Abdi-Wali, a proportion which shows that in an another election, and up against a Labour party not enjoying a Burnham bounce, the Greens could still be highly competitive in seats like these.

When Polanski said he wanted to stand, the hope was for another wave of enthusiasm and publicity of the sort that propelled Hannah Spencer to victory in February in another supposedly safe Labour seat, Gorton and Denton.

He will nonetheless be quietly pleased that the result does not seem to have shown much of a shedding of Green votes after criticisms of, and deep divisions in, the party since it adopted a highly controversial policy on Zionism and Israel last weekend.

Polanski after the count in north LondonView image in fullscreen

Polanski after the count in north London on Friday. Photograph: Jordan Pettitt/PA

The new policy, decided by members at the Greens’ annual conference, equates Zionism, the movement for a Jewish state, with racism, and calls for Israel to be replaced by a single Palestinian state. It is publicly opposed by four of the party’s five MPs, with numerous councillors distancing themselves as well and a handful resigning.

Polanski’s decision to not take a side, and even to absent himself from Sunday’s debate so he could campaign in the byelection, has prompted deep unease among some Greens, who termed it a failure of leadership. It was notable that after the result, Polanski had to state that he intended to stay as Green leader. “Yes absolutely, that’s what leaders do,” he said.

While some in the Greens had questioned Polanski’s decision to contest a seat in north London, rather than east London, where he lives, his allies make the point that Nigel Farage took eight tries to become an MP.

Either way, the result has not made Polanski’s position any worse. Had the Green vote collapsed he would have been under very intense pressure. As it stands, he must try to reassure sceptics in the party before seeking re-election in a year from now, under the party’s policy of two-year terms for leaders.

And what of the others? The Conservatives will be quietly happy with beating Reform UK to take third place, their 7.1% being almost exactly the same proportion of votes as they took in 2024. This might not seem like much of an achievement, but the party’s national poll ratings remain stubbornly below 2024 levels, and thus stasis will most likely be claimed as more evidence of a Badenoch bounce.

Down in fifth place, the emotions are different. While they are byelection specialists, the Liberal Democrats were never going to win here, but they had put in at least some effort to boost their vote, with MPs going out this week to knock on doors. Coming behind Reform on just over 3% of the vote will be a disappointment.

Amid the noisy debates over the leadership of Labour, the Tories and Greens, it can be easy to overlook the disquiet among some of Ed Davey’s MPs that the Lib Dems do not appear to be cutting through. He will not be feeling relief this morning.

 

Labour wins Holborn and St Pancras byelection; Polanski ‘absolutely’ intends to remain Green party leader – UK politics live

 



Labour wins Holborn and St Pancras byelection; Polanski ‘absolutely’ intends to remain Green party leader – UK politics live

Sagal Abdi-Wali defeats Green party leader Zack Polanski to retain the Holborn and St Pancras seat for Labour

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2026/oct/09/holborn-st-pancras-byelection-result-zack-polanski-sagal-abdi-wali-uk-labour-green-party-uk-politics-latest-news?page=with%3Ablock-6ac896828f08c29e8718c3ac#block-6ac896828f08c29e8718c3ac

 

03.46 BST

Labour wins byelection after Greens fall short

Here’s a fuller rundown on Labour’s win in the Holborn and St Pancras byelection that has been a high-stakes battle for the left of British politics.

 

The byelection, called after the former prime minister Keir Starmer resigned from the seat in September, was considered a two-horse race between the Labour candidate, Sagal Abdi-Wali, and the Green party leader, Zack Polanski.

 

Abdi-Wali recieved 12,292 votes to Polanski’s 8,928, Sammy Gecsoyler reports.

 

Turnout was 38.7%, the lowest for any byelection held in England during this parliament and 15.4% down from 2024.

 

The Greens conceded defeat shortly before the result was announced, with a party spokesperson saying “taking the fight to Labour in one of its safest seats shows just how far the Greens have come”.

 

Labour’s victory will be a relief for Andy Burnham in his first big electoral test as prime minister, and reinforces polling that shows he has recovered some public support lost by Starmer, his predecessor in Downing Street.

 

Updated at

03.49 BST

14m ago

08.49 BST

Here is an extract from Prof Sir John Curtice’s assessment of the Holborn and St Pancras byelection in an article for the Times.

 

With 45 per cent of the vote, Labour was much further ahead of the Greens, on 33 per cent, than they had been in May. Yet, Labour’s tally was still four points down on the 49 per cent Sir Keir won in 2024 — a figure that, as in many constituencies with a substantial Muslim population, was well down on the 66 per cent the party won locally in 2019.

 

In short, the result confirmed that, while it is enjoying a substantial recovery from the nadir to which the party fell in the final months of Sir Keir’s tenure, Labour still has significant ground left to recover before it is in a position where it might win another Commons majority.

 

Curtice also points out that the results confirm that Restore Britain is a problem for Reform UK. (See 6.15am.) The Conservative party came third, but Reform UK would beaten the Tories if its candidate had also had just half the votes that went to Restore.

 

28m ago

08.35 BST

And this is what Bridget Phillipson, the Labour party chair, told Times Radio about the byelection result.

 

I think it demonstrates that Labour’s message of hope is really cutting through, that people don’t just want parties like Labour to talk about the progressive change this country needs but they want to see it delivered in action, and that’s what we’re focused on every day as a Labour government.

 

The things that really matter to people about the cost of living, about issues around homelessness as Sagal [Abdi-Wali] was talking about.

 

In Sagal we had a fantastic candidate who really resonated with the public, backed up by Labour’s clear message of hope and I couldn’t be more pleased.

 

32m ago

08.30 BST

Bridget Phillipson, the Labour party chair, told Sky News that the Holborn and St Pancras byelection result showed that Andy Burnham had “got off to an incredibly strong start” as PM.

 

36m ago

08.27 BST

Holborn and St Pancras byelection loss will disappoint Greens, but there may also be relief - Peter Walker's analysis

Here is Peter Walker’s assessment of the Holborn and St Pancras byelection result. He says Zack Polanski should be relieved his result wasn’t any worse.

 

Here is an extract.

 

Polanski got just under 33% of the vote, well above anyone else apart from Abdi-Wali, a proportion which shows that in an another election, and up against a Labour party not enjoying a Burnham bounce, the Greens could still be highly competitive in seats like these …

 

It was notable that after the result, Polanski had to insist that he intended to stay as Green leader. “Yes absolutely, that’s what leaders do,” he replied.

 

While some in the Greens had questioned Polanski’s decision to contest a seat in north London, rather than east London, where he lives, his allies make the point that Nigel Farage took eight tries to become an MP.

 

Either way, the result has not made Polanski’s position any worse. Had the Green vote collapsed he would have been under very intense pressure. As it stands, he must try to reassure sceptics in the party before seeking re-election in a year from now, under the party’s policy of two-year terms for leaders.

 

41m ago

08.22 BST

Polanski plays down claims his leadership under threat, and says he will stand again for parliament

Under Green party rules, leaders have to get re-elected every two years, which means there will be a contest next summer. Asked how confident he was of being able to win again, Polanski told Sky News:

 

What I’m experiencing is the immense amount of people who are saying they’ve never been prouder to be a Green party member.

 

It is being difficult being leader of any party, particularly the Green party or a decentralised party.

 

Very often the media – and I think this is fine that they do that - talk about the Green -arty as if we’re like the other parties. But that is a different kind of party. We’re led by the grassroots and ultimately the leader is partly a primary spokesperson for the party. That is difficult. But I signed up for that difficult job, and I’m more than ready to continue.

 

Asked if he would stand again to be an MP, he replied:

 

I want to be an MP. I don’t think it’s the be all and end all. I think I’ve demonstrated over the last year that you can create change from outside of parliament.

 

But, if another seat came up in London where he had a connection, he would stand again, he said.

 

47m ago

08.16 BST

Polanski rejects claim by Caroline Lucas that he failed to show leadership as Greens debating Zionism motion

Asked about Caroline Lucas, the former Green party leader, saying that he failed to show leadership during the Zionism debate and that he should have voted (see 2.55am), Polanski replied:

 

There was a national byelection going on, one of the most important elections in our recent history. And people in that election said they wanted to see me on the ground. They wanted to see me dealing with local issues. So I did exactly that. I went on the ground and dealt with local issues.

 

In terms of me and Caroline, I think we’re actually united in making sure that we want to push this government for a two-way arms embargo to stop selling arms licenses and F-35 components to fighter jets, to make sure that we’ve got boycott, divestment and sanctions, and to push Andy Burnham.

 

Ed Miliband, the foreign secretary, has said many people were right about Gaza, but they’re still arresting pensioners for holding up cardboard signs saying I support Palestine Action.

 

Polanski accepted that Lucas was still a “significant figure” in the party, but he said people in the party were entitled to hold different views.

 

54m ago

08.09 BST

Polanski says it's 'absurd' to say 'Zionism is racism' motion antisemitic

Asked about claims from the Board of Deputies of British Jews and others that the motion was anti-Jewish, Polanksi replied:

 

I think that’s absurd. And I think it’s actually dangerous rhetoric, because we really need to separate antisemitism from criticism of the Israeli government.

 

I say that as a Jewish man, but actually the co-composer of this motion was a Holocaust survivor.

 

So I think we do need to respect that there’s a diversity of opinion amongst the Jewish communities.

 

1h ago

08.05 BST

Polanski says he agrees with 'substance' of Green 'Zionism is racism' motion, but not actual wording passed at conference

On Sky News, Sam Coates, the deputy political editor, said the Green vote in the Holborn and St Pancras byelection was broadly the same as it had been in the constituency in the local elections in May. He put it to Zack Polanski that this showed there was no evidence that Polanski was bringing “electoral stardust” to the campaign.

 

Polanski said he had been party leader at the time of the May elections. And he claimed that, in the campaign, he felt people were “very excited” by his campaign.

 

He also said the Greens had achieved their two best byelection results ever under his leadership.

 

Asked if he accepted the Green party conference vote for the “Zionism is racism” motion had been disastrous for the party, he replied:

 

I think what this demonstrated is that we do politics differently to the other parties. In other parties, [the] leadership decide the policy. They decide how everything goes.

 

Polanski said Labour deliberately chose to hold the byelection a few days after the Green party’s conference.

 

Asked if he regretted the fact that the “Zionism is racism” motion was passed, he replied:

 

I grew up in a Zionist household. I grew up with this idea of a land without people, a people without a land [the Zionist argument that, when Jews moved to Israel to found a state, there was no one else living there.]

 

But in recent years I’ve been discovering what happened to those people in the land. They were displaced. And at the moment there’s a genocide that our government is not just complicit in, but actively selling arms licenses to.

 

And so I think that is a racist ideology.

 

Asked if he supported the motion, Polanski said:

 

I would have supported the motion as amended. It wasn’t amended. So no.

 

Ultimately I agree with the substance of the motion. Where I disagree is the idea the Green party should be deciding what the future of the region looks like.

Mornings | Labour wins Holborn and St Pancras by-election - beating Green leader Zack Polanski

 

The Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has proposed an internal policy shift that distances itself from its foundational pledge to immediately exit the euro zone.

 


The AfD’s retreat on exiting the euro shows how it’s eyeing power

The Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has proposed an internal policy shift that distances itself from its foundational pledge to immediately exit the euro zone. Political analysts and economists note that this "reform first, exit later" strategy is a clear attempt to normalize the party's image and signal its readiness for mainstream governance ahead of its 2029 target to enter the federal government.

The Strategy Shift: From "Dexit" to Reform

A strategy paper drafted by cross-parliamentary AfD lawmakers marks a notable shift from its 2025 federal election platform, which explicitly demanded that Germany leave the euro system. The new approach pivots the party toward renegotiation rather than immediate termination:

  • A "Union of Sovereign Nations": Instead of a full exit, the document advocates for fundamentally rewriting EU treaties to stripping Brussels of central powers, refocusing the bloc purely on border control, security, and a shared internal market.
  • Euro Currency Overhaul: The party seeks to minimize the European Central Bank's intervention in national economies, pushing for individual state liability regarding sovereign debts rather than an outright replacement of the currency.
  • Referendum as a Last Resort: The option to leave the currency or the EU has not been entirely discarded, but it has been moved to the very end of the process; a public referendum would only be triggered if the demanded sweeping reforms fail.

Eyeing the Chancellery

Political analysts view this shift as a calculated victory for AfD co-leader Alice Weidel, who has eyes on the federal chancellery. Weidel has previously argued that it is practically too late to neatly extract Germany from the euro zone, preferring instead to soften the party's platform to look like a more stable governing option.

Following significant state election surges, toning down radical economic isolationism directly targets voters who want stricter immigration and economic changes but fear the financial chaos that a chaotic "Dexit" would bring to Europe's largest economy. While mainstream parties maintain a "firewall" refusing to cooperate with the AfD, this programmatic pivot is systematically designed to erode that resistance

 

The AfD’s retreat on exiting the euro shows how it’s eyeing power

 


The AfD’s retreat on exiting the euro shows how it’s eyeing power

 

Germany’s far-right party may drop one of its founding tenets to broaden its electoral appeal.

TOPSHOT-GERMANY-POLITICS-PARTIES-FAR RIGHT-AFD

Alice Weidel addresses delegates at the Alternative for Germany party congress in Erfurt on July 4, 2026. | John MacDougall/AFP via Getty Images

October 8, 2026 1:59 pm CET

By Johanna Treeck

https://www.politico.eu/article/alternative-for-germany-afd-exit-euro-power/

 

A move by the far-right Alternative for Germany to soften its pledge to quit the euro is the latest sign that the party is adapting itself to an ambition that once seemed remote: governing Germany.

The shift, proposed in a strategy paper by the German right-wing party seen by POLITICO, turns a long-standing, unequivocal commitment to abandoning the euro into something more acceptable to average Germans. It's the kind of pragmatic move radical parties across Europe have made as a rising tide of support has brought them closer to real power.

In the paper, first reported by Bild am Sonntag, the AfD drops its demand for Germany to withdraw in an “orderly” manner from the EU’s flagship monetary integration project. Instead, it proposes putting the issue to a national referendum if its partners refuse to implement a series of radical reforms to the way the currency union operates.

“The AfD is now trying to sand down its most controversial edges,” said ING’s global head of macro research, Carsten Brzeski. “It probably wants to look more fit for government ... It is repackaging the exit debate within a more nuanced, euroskeptic platform.”

Others were more blunt.

“This will make them sound less mad,” said EFG Bank chief economist Stefan Gerlach.

Delegates raise their voting cards during an AfD convention in Magdeburg, Germany on July 11, 2026. | Jens Schülter/AFP via Getty Images

The proposal is not yet official policy: The AfD’s current platform, as expressed in its manifesto at last year’s federal elections, still calls for leaving the euro, and a party convention is expected to consider any changes only next year. René Aust, president of the Europe of Sovereign Nations group in the European Parliament, of which the AfD is part, argued in a social media post that the shift merely elaborates an existing position.

However, its symbolism is important, as it would mark a clear departure from its founding ​principles. The AfD began life as an anti-euro party, energized by the controversial ad hoc bailouts of governments including Greece, Ireland and Portugal during the sovereign debt crisis between 2010 and 2012. But after founder Bernd Lucke was pushed out in 2015, immigration and other hot-button issues of the culture war took center stage and euroskepticism receded into the background.

The new shift also appears to represent a victory for AfD leader Alice Weidel, who has eyes on the federal chancellery. She has argued for the last couple of years that it is “much too late” for Germany to extract itself from the euro and, in a keynote interview with state broadcaster ZDF in August, she deflected questions about the manifesto commitment to leave, preferring to rail against the currency’s shortcomings and perceived abuses in its governance at Germany’s expense.

Marcel Lewandowsky, professor of politics at the University of Halle and an expert on populism, said he sees the shift as part of a broader trend among Europe’s far right in moderating its language and aspirations the closer it gets to power.

After two emphatic victories in regional elections last month, and with a clear and growing lead in national polls, the AfD has never been so close to power. Lewandowsky noted that France’s National Rally (RN) had also dropped pledges to ditch the euro and leave the EU. Those decisions appear to have cemented the party’s lead in national polls, giving Marine Le Pen her best chance yet of securing the French presidency in elections next spring.

Still crazy after all these years?

It’s not that the AfD has abandoned radicalism or suddenly developed a love for the single currency. It wants countries that receive indirect financial support through the European Central Bank’s lending and bond-buying operations to settle their liabilities in the central bank’s payments system (known as TARGET) regularly, either in gold or Bitcoin.

And it wants to succeed where Angela Merkel’s Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble failed, in enforcing a bankruptcy mechanism for eurozone sovereigns. For good measure, it also demands giving Germany more influence in the ECB’s decision-making process, arguing that voting rights on the Governing Council should be tied to the size and economic weight of the member countries.

Beyond that, the strategy paper also floats dissolving the European Parliament and replacing MEPs with country delegations so that national parliaments “remain accountable to the citizens of each nation, rather than developing an internal logic detached from them.” Lewandowsky called this “a move away from supranationalism towards international cooperation at the European level, with rules to govern it.”

“This would require an agreement by all member states, which you won’t get,” EFG’s Gerlach said.  

With Germany’s partners likely to resist calls for such changes to the EU treaties, any future federal government led by the AfD could easily find itself in a situation where it could consider the conditions for a referendum as given.

Brexit echoes

But Germans don’t seem in any hurry for a referendum: 87% support the euro, according to the European Commission’s Eurobarometer survey this spring.

“For populist, far-right parties the call for referendums matter more than actually holding one,” Lewandowsky said. “As long as they keep demanding a referendum, they can say, ‘the real people, whom only we represent, aren’t being consulted.’ That is the point.”

Germans don’t seem in any hurry for a referendum: 87% support the euro, according to the European Commission’s Eurobarometer survey this spring. | Kirill Kudryavtsev/AFP via Getty Images

For Berenberg chief economist Holger Schmieding, the strategy resembles that of former U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron, by suggesting reforms that other countries are unlikely to accept and then letting voters decide what happens if the negotiations fail.

Cameron’s fate is a reminder that the strategy is not without risk. And with increasing calls for ECB support from French politicians of both left and right, those risks may be about to flare up again.

But however that pans out, the nuclear option of blowing up the euro seems off the cards, analysts say.

“A German exit from the euro — or even a credible threat to leave — would be an enormous act of economic self-sabotage,” said Marcel Fratzscher, president of the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW). “An exit would reduce investment, cost millions of jobs, destroy prosperity and trigger a deep financial crisis in Europe.”

It’s a point that other prominent AfD leaders besides Weidel are now grudgingly accepting. Lawmaker Bernd Baumann wryly observed at a press conference Tuesday, the moment for ‘Dexit,’ Germany's exit from the euro had passed, if it ever even existed.

“The longer the marriage,” he said, “the more expensive the divorce.”