You always compare yourself to the best in your sport. The human being is like that. It’s like the baker comparing himself with the best bakers around him: who makes the best croissant, the best pain au chocolat? Of course I watch the games of other great players to see what they do. I think it pushes players to raise their level. I think other players watch me too. ‘OK, Kylian does that, I can do that too’
Mbappe talking to Simon Kuper in 2021, quoted by him in the Financial Times (29th June 2026)
Mbappe is a contender for the player who will score the most goals at the 2026 World Cup. He is currently leading the competition for the Golden Boot
185 years ago the world’s first working-class party was formed at a meeting in a Manchester pub
The National Charter Association, the first working class party anywhere in the world, was formed at a delegate meeting which began 186 years ago on 20th July 1840.
The NCA provided an organised structure to attempts to win the vote for working men around the Six Points of the People’s Charter.
It had an elected provisional Executive, and a branch structure with a paid membership. It lasted until 1860.
The concept of a trade union focused party came much later in the nineteenth century, although the NCA did work with the trade unions of the day which were often Chartist focused. The NCA did however encompass a wide range of views from moderate Parliamentary reformers to those who supported a socialist revolution such a George Julian Harney.
The meeting took place in the Griffin pub in Great Ancoats St, Manchester. The pub dated from 1791 and was closed in 2005 by which time it was known as the Land O Cakes. It is now the Bem Brasil restaurant*
Perhaps typically of how much of Britain’s working class history is either forgotten or not remembered at all I don’t believe there is any current plaque on or near the spot to mark the event.
*thanks to @gwilty200 for info on what the pub is now
Who attended (the conference started on a Monday)
Source: Manchester Conference 1840 | chartist ancestors
The following names are those of the delegates to that first Manchester conference (source: History of the Chartist Movement, 1837-1854, by R.G.Gammage ).
John Arran and Joseph Hatfield, West Riding of Yorkshire. James Leach and James Taylor, South Lancashire. J.Deegan, Staleybridge and Liverpool. David John, Merthyr Tydvil and Monmouth. J.B.Hanson, Carlisle. W.Tillman, Manchester. George Halton, Preston. Samuel Lees, Stockport. Richard Littler, Salford. Mr Andrew, Glossop. Mr Lowe, Bolton. Samuel Royse, Hyde. William Morgan, Bristol, Bath and Cheltenham. James Cooke, Leigh. George Black, Nottingham. James Williams, Sunderland. Thomas Rayner Smart, Leicester and Northampton. James Taylor, Loughborough. Richard Spurr, London. Richard Hartley, Colne.
What the meeting decided
A NCA Executive Council, consisting of seven full-time, paid members, was responsible for the co-ordination of the national Chartist movement.
The general secretary was to be paid £2 a week, and members of the executive were to receive 30 shillings a week while they were sitting.
The Executive Council was to be elected annually by a ballot of all NCA members with each county being able to nominate one candidate.
Members of the NCA had to sign a declaration agreeing to the Association’s principles and buy a 2d quarterly membership card. Where possible members were organised locally into classes of ten under a class leader who was responsible for collecting each member’s 1d subscription.
Classes were grouped into wards or divisions and monthly ward meetings heard reports from class leaders.
There was to be a ‘collector’ for each ward responsible for forwarding subscriptions to the National Executive.
The membership was divided into classes of ten, whose leaders fed into was, town, ‘county and riding’ that had its own councils with officers elected democratically.
There were to be local branches, and an annually elected general council and an executive.
Half of the money collected by local branches was to be at the disposal of the executive and plans were formulated to stand Chartist candidates at the next general election.
Before Starmer’s Imperial Delusions: Welfare & Warfare, a Social Democratic View. The 1970 Labour Manifesto
Keir Starmer has made what will hopefully be his last major speech before departing Downing St. A summary of it comes down to paying more for defence while cutting things that make Britain worth defending. It is arguably a traditional Tory view and perhaps that of a section of the old Labour right. It is not social democratic let alone socialist.
While defending the UK from attack, as likely from the US as Russia in the current moment it might be thought, is appropriate, expenditure on global warmongering is not. Surely Britian was meant to have learnt that lesson in the 1960s. The pressure for more defence spending and less welfare comes from the political hard right and from defence industry lobbyists (often former senior armed forces figures).
Starmer who is most definitely not a (labour) history man says that Labour Government’s have always prioritised defence spending and security. That is 50% right. When those Government’s have also been social democratic they have balanced that with welfare spending, understanding that the two go together.
The extracts below are from the June 1970 Labour Election Manifesto. Labour lost to the Tories but the two extracts strike what might be considered a social democratic balance between welfare and warfare.
Certainly from the formation of NATO Labour was (and still is) committed to warfare- that is defence spending. During the Cold War defence was seen by the Labour right as a key issue but there was a quid pro quo. What was being defended and why? It was a country that looked after the sick and aged in a ‘compassionate’ welfare system.
The 1970 Manifesto arguably leaned a little to the left and the left position of welfare not warfare can be seen. It didn’t mean ignoring defence spending, but it was focused on decent public services and welfare provision.
The Starmer Government wanted to try and diverge from both the classic positions of the Labour right and left. Considerable increases on defence spending are proposed at the same time as considerable cuts in public investments.
The result may over a period of time (perhaps not immediately in each case) leave considerable numbers in poverty and economic infrastructure crumbling even more than it is now. It’s not a recognisable social-democratic position based in the historical context of Labour policy
1970 Labour Manifesto
We must make a rising standard of provision for those who, on account of age, sickness or other circumstances, are unable to provide for themselves. A compassionate society is one that does not grudge help for those in need
in the world as it is today, Britain must maintain her defences and her firm commitment to NATO. It is true – and it is a truly Socialist shift in priorities – that we now spend more on education than on defence, and that in the near future the health and welfare service expenditure will also exceed defence spending. Yet, because of our shrewd and sensible reduction in commitments, with Labour, the armed forces are better paid, better equipped and more effective in NATO than ever before. More than that, in contrast to the hundreds of millions of pounds wasted on costly prestige projects under the Tories, Labour’s defence planning gives the taxpayer value for money.
Andy Burnham gave a major policy speech at the People’s History Museum on 29th June.
He was dressed in trademark jacket and dark T.
He already has a place in the Museum. A jacket he wore in 2020 at the peak of the COVID crisis and which saw him dubbed King of the North is an exhibit
The style is impeccable but turning policy into meaningful change will require the second half of the traditional labour movement slogan, the past we inherit the future we build. Building in this case will require organisation and campaigning from below, something the People’s History Museum rightly documents going back to Peterloo in 1819 and before
Footballers & Managers at the World Cup. Multinational & Multilingual
I’ve extracted a few key points from a longer piece Simon Kuper wrote in the Financial Times on 13th June 2026
Kuper notes that football clubs became multilingual workplaces from 1995 when the European Court ruled that EU citizens could play sport in any EU country.
Numbers of squads at the World Cup have players representing them who were not born in the country and don’t necessarily speak the language well.
Until recently Kuper argues this was a problem. He quotes Carlo Ancelotti when he managed PSG from 2011-2013 ‘first you tell the Italians in Italian, then you tell the Brazilians in pseudo-Italian and then you tell David Beckham in grunts and gestures’.
On occasion translators have been used but in general things have moved on.
Kuper notes that Kylian Mbappe learnt Spanish at PSG well before he moved to Real Madrid. Mbappe told Kuper ‘it is important to speak multiple languages if you are playing with players of international dimensions’.
Belgian striker Romelu Lukaku grew up in Brussels where Kuper notes ‘he used to start a sentence in French and finish it in Dutch and throw in some Spanish or Portuguese or Lingala depending on the neighbourhood’
Kuper concludes ‘some multinational businesses could learn from the linguistic sophistication of football teams’.
I think we may also see here why Nigel Farage is really not that interested in football. It is a world of which he wishes to have no conception
A banner currently on display at the People’s History Museum
Andy Burnham chose the People’s History Museum in Manchester to make a policy speech on 29th June.
Unlike most such speeches it did actually have some content, how radical or implementable it is will be discussed.
The choice of venue was significant. Manchester is full of venues where such an event can take place. Burnham however used an events hall at the People’s History Museum. The Museum is an important research archive for historians but its general exhibitions are of considerable interest not just for labour historians but for anyone interested in the history of the fight for democracy and equality.
One exhibit is the ‘donkey jacket’ that Michael Foot wore at the Cenotaph in 1981
However much of his Blairite past Burnham still has, this is not a location where Blair would ever think about making a speech.
It does indicate, and its likely that Burnham learnt this during his Manchester years, location, theatre and style matter in politics. These are things which passed Starmer completely by.
E P Thompson wrote in Homage to Tom Maguire that the British socialist movement was formed not in London Head Offices but in ‘those shadowy parts known as the Provinces’. The Independent Labour Party was formed in Bradford in 1893, although shortly after it operated from Manchester. London was shunned.
How much of that history Burnham knows is another matter but what it does tell us, is whatever is to be made of his speech, if he is to make a difference for the better, it will require organised pressure from below from trade unions, communities and campaigns. There is a lot about that on display in the People’s History Museum.
In March 2026 the US medical cannabis and craft beer company acquired Brewdog out of administration for £30m
The CEO of Tilray has told the Times that since then they have put £50m into Brewdog to keep it going and invest in its future. This is hardly unexpected, but does of course come with the hope that the investment pays off.
Simon also revealed the key reason why Tilray bought Brewdog- essentially for access to market for its US beer brands
“Do you know how hard it would have been for me or for Tilray to come to the UK and introduce our American brands without having Brewdog?
“We would have spent millions of dollars to get distribution and to get the consumer aware of it. This is a big, big plus for Tilray and a big, big advantage.”
Since the takeover, Tilray has introduced 24 new American beers to bars in the UK as well as an energy drink, Hi*Ball.
Beard, Shorts & Sandals Season. Campaigners warn of trouser cultists
The Beard Liberation Front, the informal network of beard wearers, has said that the 2026 Official Beard, Shorts and Sandals Season is under threat from trouser cultists, particularly in workplaces.
As temperatures have soared above 30C across Europe and look set to continue in the coming weeks, evidence has emerged that some employers, followers of the trousers cult are banning the wearing of shorts at work.
The Bank of England, based in the City of London, does not allow shorts with Bank Governor Andrew Bailey telling the Sunday Times (28th June) that no one wants to look at his knees.
The Head of the Financial Times Tokyo Bureau Leo Lewis (27th June) reports that while FT staff are mainly shorts wearers, Tokyo is only slowly distancing itself from the trousers cultists. He underlines that an instance on trousers reflect a refusal to grapple with the impact of climate change.
No Guidelines in 2026
The Beard Liberation Front, one of whose founding principles is that people should be able to dress and appear as they want, is increasingly concerned about official diktats on how people should or should not appear.
For the first time the voluntary option of wearing shades or sunglasses has been added after consultation within the network.
However the BLF urges those participating in the 2026 Beard, Shorts and Sandals Season to take care out there:
1 UV levels. It’s not just sun that can lead to sunburnt legs
2 Pogonophobia. Participants should beware beard haters
BLF Organiser Keith Flett said, the Beard, Shorts and Sandals season has been a major influence on summer fashions in recent times and the 2026 season is no different. We are very concerned about the activities of trousers cultists and will be focusing campaigning to oppose their Victorian dress codes.
Kmflett's Blog 