Whilst I absolutely respect this gentleman's right to feel the way he does, and to define his identity in whatever way he sees fit, I can't help but question the proposition he presents as fact: “If you were born here, you're indigenous.” There is an important distinction, in my view, between belonging to a place and being indigenous to it. To say that someone born in a country belongs there is an absolute fact, it is home. But to suggest that birthplace alone renders questions of ancestry, historical continuity and indigeneity irrelevant seems to me to reduce something extremely complex to a single geographical fact. We must question what we lose when we do this. If people who arrived in a country only a few generations ago become indigenous simply by virtue of being born there, does the history of their ancestors before that migration somehow cease to exist? Do their ancestors, cultures, traditions, faith, languages and collective memories become irrelevant? Does everything that came before the moment of migration have to be discarded in order to establish belonging in the present? I find this argument particularly interesting when it is presented as a means of combating racism. If the objective is to create a society in which people are not judged by the colour of their skin or the circumstances of their ancestry, surely the answer cannot be to make ancestry itself something that must be forgotten. My identity does not diminish my sense of belonging here, nor does my knowledge of where I come from. If anything, knowing who I am, where my ancestors came from, what they endured, what they created and what they believed gives me a greater sense of rootedness. Knowledge tends to have the power to do that. A person who knows their history can understand themselves in a way that someone deliberately severed from their history cannot. Interestingly, this debate takes place at a time when we're taking things even further, this week we hear of a debate around the removal of words such as "mother" and "father" from our vocabulary. What is the destination of this journey? Why are we hellbent on creating Huxley's Brave New World? People detached from the past, from history, from any sense of belonging and knowledge of who they are, simply manufactured as commodities for the needs of the present. A person without memory may be easier to define, to sculpt into the image of this Brave New World, but a person who knows who they are, where they came from, and what they stand for is much harder to turn into a commodity. So far the debate is being approached from the point of view of white people holding on to their ethnic identity, and being painted as racist. But flip the argument, recall when the argument was made that we must allow more migrants into the country because white people were not willing to do the demeaning jobs migrants are doing. What would those people, in those demeaning jobs that are beneath everyone else in society, amount to once stripped of all history, all identity, all pride in ancestory? Just a convenient underbelly of society? The Epsilons of Huxley's Brave New World? It is impossible to do that to a people who are rooted in a sense of pride in the knowledge of who they are, what their history is. And I'm very suspicious of any argument that pushes us down a path in which all that is sacred to the human experience is stripped away.

That was the best wrestling TV show ever. And there isn't a close second either.

This is total madness. Anyone can see that this is unsustainable. This projection means PIP expenditure will overtake the entire budget of almost every government department in the next few years. The Timms Review has already said PIP is not fit for purpose. We don’t need to wait for anything else. Nor is this complicated. As a start we must straightforwardly say you aren’t getting PIP for anxiety. There’s over half a million people in that category alone. The best and most supportive thing the state can do for someone with mild anxiety is set up the incentives so they are encouraged to get out the house and engage in society

This person is effectively asking people to report me to parkrun so it can “have a word” about my stated view that men should not compete in the female category. They also misrepresent what I said. I did not claim that times were the “only motivator” for attending parkrun. What I actually said was - I quote: “I’ve been involved in parkrun for more than a decade - as a runner, volunteer and now an event director. And I have never met a parkrunner who doesn’t care about their time or placing, regardless of age, ability or fitness.” I spend around 20 unpaid hours each month supporting my local parkrun community. I follow parkrun’s rules, but I am not obliged to agree with every policy - or pretend that I do. Nor did I suggest that I was speaking on parkrun’s behalf. Parkrun is well aware of my position, not least because I had to raise a safeguarding concern earlier this year - after an anonymous letter was sent to our venue claiming that my views made me an unsuitable event director. Instead of engaging with the points I’ve made about fairness in women’s sport, this person is asking parkrun to “have a word” with me for making them. Which looks remarkably like an attempt to silence a woman for expressing an opinion about women’s sport.

You can’t even call it a genocide.

Genuine good faith question, no political agenda - does anyone believe work experience placements for teens make a blind bit of difference to anything? I’ve supervised WXp kids, did WXp myself, watched my own kids do it. Every case has been a massive waste of time.

One of the first "outrageous" claims I saw as Jason Arday's media hounding unfolded was that he ran 30 marathons in 35 days! Wow! What a thing to claim! And the newspapers all suggested there was no evidence he actually did it. Well, they clearly didn't look very hard 🙄 🧵 1/26

One of those thoughts. Jason Arday died at Daley Thompson Way, which is 68% social housing. So, odds on Arday's place was social housing - and do correct me if wrong. Umm, why was a professor at Cambridge - 65 miles away - in subsidised housing in London? The income, the location, why the subsidy? Might that be something we might want to look at, our allocation system for housing subsidy? As I say, could be wrong here, so correct me if so.

It's very clear that the media wanted this very same outcome for Meghan Markle. In fact, they still do.

Does any city punch below it's weight more than Birmingham? I know locals will point out one or two things they like, but come on. It's the second largest city we have and is outclassed in every way by all the ten cities below it in the list.

Debbie Harry in her New York apartment with Andy Warhol Portrait of her 1988

When a divisive figure dies, there is always a pattern to the responses - people who admired the deceased tend to use their own name while the most vicious critics tend to be anonymous cowards. If they really felt that strongly they'd use their own name. Cowards and weasels.

We just lost someone I would never in a million years have been expected to be friends with, or probably even to have made peace with... A larger than life 'Marmite' character, controversial, sometimes infuriating, but terribly witty, sharp and fun. And capable of extreme kindness, empathy and charm, especially in private. Gone far too soon. Desperately sad news 💔

People will feel happier when they their lives change for the better; sitting around in a pub chatting about pork scratchings doesn't quite do it for most.

Oh good, my bus fares will be capped at £2 per journey. That will save me, my family, and extended family precisely £0 per year. Excellent. Andy Burnham - Labour have zero ideas to stimulate the UK economy.