More beers on offer at third Wanstead Beer Festival

The third Wanstead Beer Festival (WBF)is set to kick off on 4 October. Bigger and better than ever. There will be more beers and ciders this time, topping the 50 mark. Gin, wine, prosecco and a selection of soft drinks will also be on offer. Our hosts, Christchurch, will again be offering their superb burgers and hot dogs. Among the beers to look out for are Milestone brewery's Cromwell Best, a deep, slightly malty bitter. Then, there is the lighter East London brewery favourite, the award winning Cowcatcher. The always popular champion winning beer Captain Bob from Mighty Oak brewery will again be available. Those who like a dark beer can't go far wrong with Brentwood breweries stout Walrus of Love. Sussex beer, Harvey's Best, will be on tap. Among the ciders, there will be a good selection from Somerset based Farmer Jim. Get in early for the tasty Rhubarb Bob. The WBF is once again seeking to blend the local with national in the selection of beers. Among local breweries contributing are Brentwood, East London, Redemption, Neckstamper, Pillars, Pressure Drop, Mighty Oak and Pretty Decent. These are tough times for the hospitality sector, with pubs and breweries under pressure. Thousands of pubs are closing every year - it is a real case of use them or lose them. So we all need to do our bit to support the sector. Sadly, since last year Walthamstow brewer Beerblefish has stopped trading. They were an early backer of WBF. Whilst Beerblefish will be missed, we have a new brewery to add in Leyton based, Libertalia. It is hoped that among Libertalia's offering will be the popular new bitter Private Eye. The WBF organisers aim to keep prices around £5 a pint. Tickets are selling fast, so don't miss out. Bought in advance tickets cost £10, which includes the unique WBF glass. This year there is a new twist, with a bit of colour added. Tickets on the door will be £12. The organisers hope to keep most drinks at £5 or less. Thanks go to all those local businesses, who have sponsored the event and help make it possible. The WBF is a real community effort all round. Proceeds raised by the event are to be split between three charities - the Wren Group, Wanstead Community Riding Stables and the Christchurch restoration fund. The funding for the stables will be going towards buying a big horse. "A horse that is safe, strong, kind, well schooled and suitable for riders with disabilities," said a member of the fundraising team. So now the clock is ticking toward kick off at 1pm on Saturday 4 October. To get your ticket, see: www.wansteadbeerfestival.co.uk

Pressure continues to build on West Ham manager Graham Potter, as Chelsea cruise to easy victory

West Ham 1-5 Chelsea The pressure continued to build on beleaguered West Ham manager Graham Potter, following this trouncing at home to Chelsea. Things started well for the home team, when inside five minutes, Lucas Paqueta rifled home from 25 yards. The visitors, though, were quickly level, when Marc Cucurella headed on a corner for Joa Pedro to open his account for his new club with a crashing header. A decisive moment came for West Ham when what looked a good goal for Niclas Fullkrug was ruled out for offside, after a VAR check. Two Chelsea goals followed before half time, knocking the stuffing out of West Ham. First, Paqueta was dispossessed by Pedro, who crossed for Pedro Neto to supply a crisp finish. Then, the industrious Estevao knocked over a cross for Enzo Fernandez to finish. The second half was a story of corners and goalkeeping errors. Both goals coming from corners fluffed by West Ham keeper Mads Hermansen. The first knocked home by Moises Caicedo, the second by Trevor Chalobah. West Ham's best response was a shot from substitute Freddie Potts that was turned over by Robert Sanchez. Any hope West Ham had that Chelsea might be fatigued by their FIFA Club World Cup exploits were quickly dispelled. The West Londoners grew in dominance as the game went on, first to every ball and always looking likely to score when they came forward. West Ham manager Graham Potter said: the manner of the goals was too cheap and too soft. "You can't defend the box like we did - it's basic defending," said Potter, who admitted it had been a tough week. "We have to drastically improve." It is going to be a long hard season for West Ham, who are sadly lacking in a number of areas. Potter will be hoping for reinforcements before the transfer window closes. Something the owners need to make happen, rather than hanging the manager out to dry.

Why so much media coverage of a party with 5 MPs - strange case of Reform UK?

The advance of Reform UK has been in no small part due to it's promotion in the British media. A party of just five MPs appears to dominate the political discourse. Compare the amount of media coverage of Reform UK to say the Green Party, with it's four MPs or the Independents with their five seats. Even the Liberal Democrats do not fair well in the comparison stakes, with their 72 seats. The new party launched by Jeremy Corbyn and Zara Sultana has drawn quite a lot of coverage but these are early days. The spread of Reform UK is amazing to behold. They seem to hold an almost permanent pew on programs like the BBCs Question Time. Leader Nigel Farage has been on the program more than any other politician over the years. In the print media, Reform UK also seem increasingly to make the running. It was extraordinary recently to see respected financial journalist Hamish McRae taking Farage's opinion on the future of pensions as his departure point for an article in the I paper on the subject. Reform UK has ofcourse fanned the flames of the immigration debate, always involved in the discussions over the boats coming across the channel or protests outside asylum hotels. Editors claim that Reform UK are popular, likely to form the next government - if the polls are to be believed - so warrant the coverage. But the next election is four years away. Why was so much coverage, particularly on the BBC, given to the party launching its law and order policy back in July? It was presented, as though an election had been called not that one maybe four years hence. Reform UK are no doubt reaping the benefit of a tendency in recent years to predict rather than report what is going to happen in the news. The danger with such an approach is that the prediction becomes a reality. The failure of the Labour government to communicate it's own narrative is another factor. This has created a vacuum that Reform UK, with it's media savvy leader Farage is always willing to fill. The government often make things worse by appearing to run scared of Reform UK, seeming to want to ape their policies rather than reject and state their own. The editors would claim the coverage is legitimate, given Reform UKs polling. They represent the discontent of much of the population with mainstream parties. Organisations like the BBC would claim they have a duty to cover the new party, scrutinising what it is all about. True enough. This particular approach will be put to the test now that Reform UK are running a number of councils and mayoralities. If the electorate still want Reform UK, what can the media do,? Though, the US media would claim it scrutinised Donald Trump. He even had a first term, yet the electorate decided he should have a second term. A less righteous view is that much of the media like Reform UK because they are good box office. Farage always has a media friendly soundbite to offer. The party has a number of, to put it nicely, eccentrics, who will always entertain. This line of thought no doubt has a role for programs like Question Time, though, they would claim the scrutiny role. It is a difficult argument. Reform UK need to be covered and scrutinised. If the electorate then put them into power so be it. But there also needs to be care taken not to promote the new party, making Farage's ascent to Number 10 seem almost an inevitability. So a fine line has to be trod, otherwise mayhem beckons.

Civil liberties are under unprecedented attack

Civil liberties are under attack in the UK in a way that has never been seen in modern times. There is always a tension between citizens liberties and those who govern, going back through the centuries. These ancient rights, like free speech, right of assembly and trial by jury, go hand in hand with the functioning of a healthy democracy. As democracy falters, so those in power, feel insecure and the need to clamp down. A former chief constable said that the mantra, give me your liberties and I will provide security, has been the refrain of dictators down the ages. It is a threat that is never far away. In modern times the conflict in the north of Ireland provided ample proof of liberties being removed on the back of security. Then, Home Secretary Royal Jenkins first introduced the Prevention of Terrorism Act, in the wake of IRA bombings in England. He introduced the measure in 1974, which allowed for seven days detention by the police, apologetically, declaring it a "temporary" and "draconian" measure. The PTA also allowed for proscribing (banning) terror organisations. There was a debate for renewal each year thereafter. Judge only Diplock Courts came in in the north of Ireland, where the right to silence was first removed. Restrictions on assembly took place. The PTA was,then, effectively used to harass the Irish community throughout the UK. Later, anti-terror legislation was used in similar fashion, against the Muslim community, during the so called war on terror. The scope of anti-terror laws extended over the years. A circular process also developed that saw rights removed under anti-terror law downloaded into the criminal law. The detention period under the PTA extended to 14, then 28 days. Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair tried to get pre- charge detention extended to 90 days. But this was famously defeated in a backbench MP rebellion caused by a revolt in civil society. The threat to civil liberties though continued over these years. The creation of the control order regime, overseen through immigration courts, effectively at one point legitimising detention without trial for terror suspects. Individuals were effectively kept in detention, often not knowing what they were accused of. The ongoing erosion of civil liberties continued, with every atrocity being used as a reason to cut more liberties in the name of security. Come forward to the present day. Peaceful marches through London protesting about what has been going on in Gaza are vilified by successive home secretaries. None of Jenkins reticence, over restricting liberties, from his successor Stella Braverman , who in 2023 branded the protests in London to be "hate marches." The protests have been peaceful.The police have been put under pressure to meet right wing politicians constructs that they are not. Braverman accused them of bias. The police have been on a tightrope, which they have struggled to maintain. Freedom of speech and protest is under pressure. However, what the politicians would do well to heed is that when people have a justice based grievance, just making it more difficult to protest does not make the issue go away. It simply changes the form of protest. Returning to the north of Ireland, where it was the initial failure to respond to the demands of the civil rights protesters, that in part led to the violent conflict that followed. People's grievances found other forms, fuelled by a denial to respond to their demands, then a clampdown on their means to make those demands. Today, politicians who seek to demonise protest and restrict freedom of speech should learn the lessons of history. A strong , thriving democracy is one at ease with itself. Liberties, such as free speech, habeus corpus and right of assembly abound and are celebrated. They should not be removed on a whim. Confident leaders are comfortable and proud of these liberal, pluralist traditions. As the chief constable said it is the dictators, who promise security in exchange for liberties. We cannot sleepwalk down that path.

Next test for old and new political parties comes next year, with the local council elections

The next big test for the political parties comes next May with the local council elections. At present, things seem to be changing by the week in the political lexicon. The Labour government seems to be struggling, despite its huge majority. Many of its problems come from a failure to communicate what it is about and what it is doing. There is no clear narrative, yet many good things are going on. This vacuum is being filled by other parties. So, by contrast, there is a media fascination with Reform UK. It is hard to believe that this party has just five MPs. This contrasts with the Independents, who have the same number and the Greens with four. Arguably, Reform get more coverage than the Liberal Democrats, with it's 72 MPs. Much ofcourse is to do with Reforms continual high ratings in the opinion polls that indicate it could be the next government. But that election is still four years away. Some in the media claim they are providing scrutiny of Reform, whilst others just see Nigel Farage and his party as good box office, always ready with a catchy soundbite. Reform are certainly playing the system, announcing policies as if a general election is imminent. The electorate would, though, do well to look at what is going on in those areas, where Reform are now running things, as well as in America, where the chaos being created by Donald Trump's administration is a forerunner of what would be likely to happen here if Reform ever do become the national government. On the left, there is the emergence of the new party led by former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and fellow MP Zara Sultana. The principles outlined, with emphasis on addressing poverty and inequality and opposing war are more in line with the original principals of the Labour Party. Indeed, the Labour Party should beware the threat it faces from the left, via the likes of the new party, the Greens and Liberal Democrats. All of these changes in the political landscape mean the upcoming local elections are likely to see some major power shifts in the political scene. In Redbridge Labour hold 54, seats, the Conservatives five with four Independents. Recent by-elections highlight the threat posed by the Independents, with Reform also likely to have more of a day this time. For my own part, I have decided that after eight years, I won't be standing for the Labour Party in Redbridge next May. But more on that in due course.