News

Badger and the Europeans

Published

11 years ago

March 5, 2015

badger84image BADGER, as befits a homebody, does not agree with abroad. Not because Badger dislikes foreigners, but because he likes where he is just fine. In fact, Badger has seldom ventured to what used to be called “the Continongt” by people who had studied French — or at least read one of Elizabeth David’s recipe books. Badger went to France many moons ago to discover that it smelled disconcertingly of wee and stale sweat everywhere he went.

He went to The Netherlands (to play rugby, of all things) and discovered through bitter (or, rather, lager) experience that livers have their limits. Other than those experiences, Badger has preferred the attractions of the United Kingdom. Apart from Edinburgh, that is. Badger was aghast to find that Edinburgh was disconcertingly even fuller of angry Scottish people than Pembroke Dock. Badger’s hot tip for recognising a true Scot (other than their accent) is to note that the greater the praise a Scot heaps on virtues of their home nation, the less likely they are to have recently been there.

Badger’s curiosity about “abroad” has been recently captured by the unfolding spectacle of the European elections: on the televisual entertainment doo-dad that sits in the corner casting its baleful gleam, in the newspapers, and by the generous delivery to his door of free toilet tissue bearing David Cameron’s face. Readers, it’s a dirty job, but someone has to do it. Keenly interested in matters political, Badger enjoyed the comedy of the campaign. He was particularly amused by its star turn, Nigel Farage, who appears to be the political equivalent of a dancing dog act on one of Simon Cowell’s no-talent talent shows: a novelty, whose routine appeals superficially but does not bear up to too close scrutiny.

It was delightful to see Nige being dragged away by UK1P’s press officer Patrick O’Flynn, from a gaffe-littered interview. if it didn’t say enough for Nige’s political nous that he managed to be taken by surprise by so many of his policies live on air, the revelation that his press officer worked for the Daily Express must surely call his wider judgement into question. That the English newspapers have been big on UKIP is hardly surprising: owned by trans-Atlantic corporations, tax-dodging family trusts and overseas investment vehicles, national newspaper proprietors are the enemies of the type of regulation and tax enforcement threatened by a closer European union.

Now, after the votes have been counted and the seats allocated, Labour and Conservative politicians are apparently trying to work out how to deal with “the UK1P threat”. They may as well try to nail jelly to a wall. Such are the vagaries of the British electoral system, what can be said of UKIP with certainty is that the votes it takes away from the main parties will serve only to keep one or the other of them in power in Westminster. For all its vaunted success, UK!P captured the votes of fewer than 10% of electors last Thursday. Let’s look at some policies UK1P espoused at the last general election: things we can all rally around, readers. Remember, these are REAL policies espoused by a REAL party at a REAL election. It wanted your votes then and wants them next year, too.
• “UKIP will encourage a return to proper dress for major hotels, restaurants and theatres — smarter dress is part of Britishness, although it is also a British virtue to encourage innovation in fashion.”

• “UKIP will return London’s Circle line to a circle?’
• “UKIP will encourage a return to the glamour, grace and style of the railway companies of the past through its railway policies. UKIP seeks a return to Tullman’ trains where justified, with appropriate branding such as ‘Great Western Railway’, one of the most successful British brands ever.”

To be fair to Nige, he has now disowned those policies and has limited his public pronouncements to less contentious matters such as:

• The gap in pay between men and women is just ‘the way the world works” because of biology. He also said motherhood was “a lifestyle choice”;
• Germans make better neighbours than Romanians (try telling that to the Polish);
• He feels discomfort that people speak languages other than English in public (Da lawn diolch, Nige!).
UKTP can be mocked as a nostalgia trip back to a time when the world was fresh; when the map of the globe was reassuringly largely pink in colour; when everyone could rally round and “chant two world wars and one world cup! Doo-dah! Doo-Dah!” without fear of offending Nick Clegg. UKIP has stepped into the vacuum left by the main parties’ urge to cluster like moths around the flame of the so-called “middle ground”. It has espoused a populist nostalgic appeal to “traditional” values and “traditional” attitudes.

And, readers, nothing could be more traditional than British xenophobia: a phenomenon so remarkable it was considered noteworthy by our European neighbours in the fifteenth century (along with drunkenness and sexual profligacy, by the way — plus ca change…). The large national parties have become divorced from the mass of the people; their leaders are airbrushed professional machine politicians who do not so much make policy pronouncements as strike a pose.

Having stopped being real people with real flaws, national political leaders are now a class apart, kept separate from the mass of humanity lest they express opinions. Where image is all, content is absent. Cameron, Clegg and Milliband could have been stamped out using cookie cutters, so woven from the same cloth are they. Any of them could easily be the leaders of Anyparty in Anyland. Whatever his flaws are – and there appear to be many, readers – the same cannot be said of the UK!? leader.

News

Angle RNLI launch stood down after false distress beacon alert

Published

1 hour ago

December 4, 2025

Tom Sinclair

ANGLE RNLI were paged at 10:47am this morning after an EPIRB (Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacon) was triggered on a local fishing vessel in the Dale Roads area.

Dale Coastguard Rescue Team was also tasked to investigate the alert.

As the lifeboat crew prepared to launch, further checks by HM Coastguard — along with direct contact from the vessel’s skipper — confirmed the beacon had been activated accidentally.

With no-one found to be in difficulty, the launch was cancelled.

Business

Cardiff Airport announces special Air France flights for Six Nations

Published

2 hours ago

December 4, 2025

Tom Sinclair

Direct services to Paris-Charles de Gaulle launched to cater for Welsh supporters, French fans and couples planning a Valentine’s getaway

CARDIFF AIRPORT and Air France have unveiled a series of special direct flights between Cardiff (CWL) and Paris-Charles de Gaulle (CDG) scheduled for February 2026.

Timed to coincide with two major dates — the Wales v France Six Nations clash on Saturday 15 February and Valentine’s weekend — the flights are designed to offer supporters and holidaymakers an easy link between the two capitals.

For travelling French rugby fans, the services provide a straightforward route into Wales ahead of match day at the Principality Stadium, when Cardiff will once again be transformed by the colour, noise and passion that accompanies one of the tournament’s most eagerly awaited fixtures.

For Welsh passengers, the additional flights offer a seamless escape to Paris for Valentine’s Day, as well as opportunities for short breaks and onward travel via Air France’s wider global network.

Cardiff Airport CEO Jon Bridge said: “We’re thrilled to offer direct flights to such a vibrant and exciting city for Valentine’s weekend. Cardiff Airport is expanding its reach and giving customers fantastic travel options. We’ve listened to passenger demand and are delighted to make this opportunity possible. There is more to come from Cardiff.”

Tickets are already on sale via the Air France website and through travel agents.

Special flight schedule

Paris (CDG) → Cardiff (CWL):

13 February 2026: AF4148 departs 17:00 (arrives 17:30)
14 February 2026: AF4148 departs 14:00 (arrives 14:30)
15 February 2026: AF4148 departs 08:00 (arrives 08:30)
15 February 2026: AF4150 departs 19:40 (arrives 20:10)
16 February 2026: AF4148 departs 08:00 (arrives 08:30)
16 February 2026: AF4150 departs 16:30 (arrives 17:00)

Cardiff (CWL) → Paris (CDG):

13 February 2026: AF4149 departs 18:20 (arrives 20:50)
14 February 2026: AF4149 departs 15:20 (arrives 17:50)
15 February 2026: AF4149 departs 09:20 (arrives 11:50)
15 February 2026: AF4151 departs 21:00 (arrives 23:30)
16 February 2026: AF4149 departs 09:20 (arrives 11:50)
16 February 2026: AF4151 departs 17:50 (arrives 20:20)

Crime

Mother admits “terrible idea” to let new partner change her baby’s nappies alone

Published

4 hours ago

December 4, 2025

Tom Sinclair

Court hears from timid mother who was barely audible in the witness box who said she carried out no checks to establish whether Phillips was safe to be around her child

A MOTHER who cannot be named for legal reasons gave evidence yesterday in the trial of Christopher Phillips, the man accused of physically and sexually assaulting her infant son – referred to as Baby C – and causing him life-changing injuries in January 2021.

Phillips, 37 at the time, had been in a relationship with the mother for only a few weeks when Baby C, then around 10 weeks old, suffered catastrophic anal injuries at a flat in Haverfordwest, Pembrokeshire. The child was rushed to Glangwili Hospital in the early hours of January 24 and survived, but the harm was permanent. Phillips denies 11 counts of sexual penetration of a child under 13, four counts of causing grievous bodily harm with intent, and one count of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, all between December 20, 2020, and January 25, 2021. The mother denies two charges of causing or allowing a child to suffer serious physical harm and two charges of child cruelty by neglect.

The prosecution alleges that Phillips deliberately inflicted the injuries while alone with the baby during nappy changes, using a finger coated in Sudocrem as lubricant on multiple occasions, leading to escalating harm including blood in the nappies and ultimately a massive tear and prolapse. A central part of their case is that the mother repeatedly allowed Phillips unsupervised access to her son – including taking him into another room to change his nappy and shut the door – despite knowing very little about him and despite behaviour that should have raised alarm, such as his insistence on privacy and her own unease.

Late on Thursday morning (Dec 4), under lengthy and forceful cross-examination by Caroline Rees KC, prosecuting, the mother appeared composed but spoke so quietly and timidly that people in court struggled to hear her answers. She conceded point after point:

She carried out no checks to establish whether Phillips was safe to be around her child.
She allowed him to be alone with Baby C from the very start of January 2021 (possibly even before 2 January).
She ignored her own concerns and permitted Phillips to shut the door while changing the baby’s nappy, telling her not to enter or accusing her of “micromanaging”.
She accepted that this had exposed her son to “a massive risk” and had been “a terrible idea”.

The mother explained that Phillips had said he wanted to learn nappy-changing because he “never got the chance” with his own child. She initially stayed in the room but soon permitted him to take Baby C into a separate room alone. She also recounted noticing odd details during changes, such as Phillips having Sudocrem around his finger “as if it had come from a pot” – despite her not owning a pot of the cream – and him leaving the room without putting the baby’s babygro back on after fastening the nappy, which immediately struck her as wrong. A few days earlier, she had discovered extensive bruising to the baby’s bottom, a swollen testicle and blood in his nappy, prompting her to confide in family and seek medical advice, though Phillips became angry when she mentioned the appointments.

Key moments from the cross-examination

Caroline Rees KC: “You took no steps whatsoever to keep Baby C safe, did you?” Mother (barely audible): “No.”

Caroline Rees KC: “You did absolutely nothing to keep him safe, did you?” Mother: “No.”

When His Honour Judge Paul Thomas KC asked her to clarify for the jury why she let Phillips change the baby alone, she confirmed:

“I wasn’t allowed in the room. If I tried to go in he would accuse me of micromanaging.”

She said this made her feel “annoyed”, but she “ignored it”.

Caroline Rees KC put it directly to the mother:

“The signs were all there, weren’t they?”
“It was a terrible idea, wasn’t it?”
“You could have stopped it at any time – by doing the changes yourself or by ending the relationship.”
“This man wanted to have your baby on his own more than is normal.”

The mother eventually accepted each proposition, agreeing that: