Connect with us

Published

on

The mother of a five-year-old boy who died after he was accidentally exposed to the wrong milk at school is calling for a new law to keep other children with allergies safe.

Benedict Blythe, a reception pupil at Barnack Primary School in Stamford, Lincolnshire, suffered fatal anaphylaxis after he was accidentally exposed to cow’s milk protein, probably from his own cup during break time.

An inquest into his death found the school’s delay in giving him his EpiPen, a failure to share his allergy plan, and a failure to learn from a previous allergic reaction, all likely contributed to his death.

Benedict died in December 2021, and the family have now waited more than three years for answers, with the inquest concluding this week.

Benedict's mother, Helen, has channelled her heartbreak into protecting other children. Pic: Family handout
Image:
Benedict’s mother Helen is working to ensure no other children die at school from an allergy. Pic: Family handout

He had a number of allergies, including cow’s milk protein, eggs, nuts and kiwi fruit.

Benedict, who joined the high-IQ society Mensa at the age of four, loved school, his mother Helen told Sky News.

“He was ferociously intelligent,” she said. “He was doing Year Five maths when he had just started school.”

More on Health

He was also “kind and considerate”, she said, describing how her son once spent his entire lunchtime helping a friend find a lost scooter.

“We walked into school one day and he noticed a child that looked a bit nervous, and said, I’ll take you in, took his hand and walked him into school.”

She continued: “That kind of calm, positive energy, that is always missing and we will never come across it again. It’s a really hard thing to have lost.”

Pic: Family handout
Image:
Benedict and his sister. Pic: Family handout

During break time, Benedict was to be served oat milk, which was stored in the staff fridge with his name on. The usual process was to take this into the classroom and pour it into his cup, handing it to him directly.

But on the day of his death, his milk was poured in the staffroom and then taken into the classroom.

It is not clear how the cross-contamination or mix-up of milk could have happened, but the foreperson of the jury at the inquest said: “We deem the probable source of the allergen that caused the fatal anaphylaxis is the ingestion of cow’s milk protein, most probably from his own receptacle during break time.”

Benedict vomited twice and lost consciousness before his adrenaline pen was administered.

By the time he reached hospital, it was too late. Benedict was five years old when he died.

Pic: Family handout
Image:
There is currently no specific legislation to protect children with allergies. Pic: Family handout

Helen said the school had been told vomiting was “always” the first sign of an allergic reaction, but the pen was given too late to be effective.

“The advice is, if in doubt, don’t delay,” she said.

“The worst that will happen with giving adrenaline is that they will feel a bit ropey, but the risk of delaying it… probably even a minute earlier could have had an impact.”

A previous reaction

This was the second time Benedict had an allergic reaction at school, having previously been sick while eating a pizza.

Pic: Family handout
Image:
Benedict had an allergic reaction at school once before. Pic: Family handout

And while she was keen to stress she did not blame individual staff members, the inquest found no allergy plan was created by the school, and there was no specific allergy policy when he started school. Staff responsible were also not privy to key information about Benedict’s allergy.

“Benedict’s death was preventable and was caused by a cascade of failures – individual, institutional, and systemic,” Helen said, shortly after the inquest returned its verdict.

In a statement, Benedict’s former school said: “The only comment that Barnack Primary School wishes to make at this point in time, is to offer its sincere and heartfelt condolences to Benedict’s family at the tragic loss of Benedict.”

Benedict’s Law

There is currently no legislation that exists to protect children with allergies, and so Helen is working to ensure no other children die at school from an allergy.

“Schools are left to interpret patchy, vague guidance and to carry life-or-death responsibility alone. This is unforgivable,” she said.

Following a campaign by the Benedict Blythe Foundation, set up in his memory, Redditch MP Chris Bloor presented the Schools (Allergy Safety) Bill, also known as Benedict’s Law to parliament on 9 July.

Pic: Family handout
Image:
Pic: Family handout

“With an ever-growing number of children requiring allergy care, it has never been more vital that the place we entrust with the care of our children – the school where we drop them off every day – is a safe and secure environment, but too often it is not,” he told the House of Commons.

The law would require an allergy policy in every school, training for staff on how to identify reactions and deal with them, and spare adrenaline pens in every school.

It is backed by more than 50 MPs, a petition signed by more than 10,000 members of the public.

“We’ve done a huge amount of research and kind of built a really strong evidence base for this, including kind of a way of delivering Benedict’s Law so that it means it doesn’t cost the government any money,” Helen told Sky News.

Most children with undiagnosed allergies have a reaction for the first time at school, she said.

“Humans will always make mistakes, but there has to be a system in the background that allows for that because at the moment it is left up to chance when things go wrong.”

A Department for Education spokesperson said what happened to Benedict was a tragedy.

“Our thoughts remain with all of those who loved him,” they said.

“We recognise that allergies can be a barrier to children feeling safe and included at school, and are planning to consult on strengthened guidance for schools later this year.”

Continue Reading

UK

Senior King aide was head of royal protection when Prince Andrew ‘asked officer to dig up dirt on accuser’

Published

on

By

Senior King aide was head of royal protection when Prince Andrew 'asked officer to dig up dirt on accuser'

A current senior member of the King’s household was the head of royal protection at the time Prince Andrew allegedly asked one of his police officers to dig up dirt on Virginia Guiffre, Sky News has discovered.

Lord Peter Rosslyn, who is now Lord Steward and Personal Secretary to the King and Queen, was head of Royalty and Diplomatic Protection between 2003-2014.

It is not clear if Lord Rosslyn – known at the time as Commander Peter Loughborough – was made aware of Prince Andrew’s request. However, it reportedly happened in 2011 when it’s claimed Andrew wrote in an email that he passed the date of birth and confidential social security number of his accuser, Virginia Guiffre, to one of his close protection team to find out information about her.

Lord Peter Rosslyn arriving at the Duchess of Kent's funeral. Pic: PA
Image:
Lord Peter Rosslyn arriving at the Duchess of Kent’s funeral. Pic: PA

At the weekend, the Metropolitan Police said it was “actively looking into the claims made”.

Sky News approached Lord Rosslyn for comment, which was passed to Buckingham Palace.

A palace spokesperson said: “As you may or may not be aware, Lord Rosslyn works for The Royal Household and thus this issue has been referred to me. However, since this matter relates to his time in service with the Metropolitan Police, they would be the appropriate body to approach with media enquiries of this nature.”

The Met Police had nothing further to add.

Police sources have told Sky News the officer (CPO) involved would have been expected to escalate this request from Andrew to his superiors.

While there may have been other members of senior staff between the CPO and Lord Rosslyn, the request should have been considered serious enough to be referred to the top of the Royalty and Diplomatic Service.

Those with knowledge of the royal household tell us Lord Rosslyn is one of the King’s closest and most trusted members of staff.

His role as Lord Steward involves managing all aspects of the King’s personal affairs, and the non-state business of the monarch.

Who is Lord Peter Rosslyn?

As well as being much respected by Queen Elizabeth II, and affectionately known as her “favourite policeman”, in 2014 Lord Rosslyn was appointed as Master of the Household of the then Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall at Clarence House.

In February 2003, he was made Lord Steward by the King, thereby becoming the “first dignitary of the King’s court” – a sign that the monarch wanted to keep him around.

While Andrew’s alleged attempts to smear Virginia Guiffre would have been morally wrong, he also would have been asking his police officer to put his career on the line.

Any attempt to use police databases to find information on an innocent individual not connected to a crime would have been a sackable offence, and unlawful.

In his statement on Friday, Prince Andrew again stressed that he vehemently denies the allegations against him.

A Buckingham Palace source told Sky News that the recent claims that have emerged are being viewed by the Royal Family with “very serious and grave concern” and “should be examined in the proper and fullest ways”.

Prince Andrew's signature
Image:
Prince Andrew’s signature

Andrew should give evidence to US authorities – minister

The revelation comes as a government minister said Andrew should give evidence to US authorities – and anger grows after it emerged he had been paying “peppercorn rent” for two decades.

On Friday, Andrew announced he was giving up his royal titles, including the Duke of York, after new, damaging reports about his relationship with paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein.

Passages from the memoir released on Tuesday of the late Virginia Giuffre, who accused Prince Andrew of sexually assaulting her, provide further details of their alleged encounters.

Prince Andrew has always strenuously denied the allegations.

Business Secretary Peter Kyle said on Tuesday he would “support” Prince Andrew giving evidence to US prosecutors.

He added he would also support any decision by the Met Police to investigate allegations that Prince Andrew used a Met bodyguard to gain information on Giuffre.

It comes as anger continues to grow over Prince Andrew’s housing arrangements.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘Victims should be in driver’s seat’

‘Peppercorn rent’

The royal has only paid “peppercorn rent” for more than two decades at his Windsor mansion, according to a National Audit Office report published in 2005.

“Peppercorn rent” is a legal term used in leases to show that rent technically exists, so the lease is valid, but it’s nominal, often literally £1 a year or just a symbolic amount.

In practice, it means the tenant pays no rent.

It also shows he was required to pay a further £7.5m for refurbishments.

A document from the Crown Estate also shows he signed a 75-year lease on the property in 2003.

It reveals he paid £1m for the lease and that since then he has paid “one peppercorn” of rent “if demanded” per year.

Read More:
Pressure grows on Andrew to be stripped of dukedom
Key claims from Andrew accuser’s posthumous memoir

The agreement also contains a clause which states the Crown Estate would have to pay Andrew around £558,000 if he gave up the lease.

Pressure is mounting on him to give up the 30-bedroom mansion.

Senior Tory Robert Jenrick called for Prince Andrew to live privately.

‘He has disgraced himself’

He said: “It’s about time Prince Andrew took himself off to live in private and make his own way in life.

“He has disgraced himself, he has embarrassed the royal family time and again. I don’t see why the taxpayer, frankly, should continue to foot the bill at all. The public are sick of him.”

Virginia Giuffre's posthumous memoir was released today. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Virginia Giuffre’s posthumous memoir was released today. Pic: Reuters

Mr Kyle, however, said that would be a question for King Charles.

But he did say MPs could bring forward a motion to strip Prince Andrew of his remaining titles, adding it would be up to Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle to choose one of these motions for debate.

Continue Reading

UK

Bank tax could hurt households and business lending, UK’s biggest mortgage provider says

Published

on

By

Bank tax could hurt households and business lending, UK's biggest mortgage provider says

The chief executive of Lloyds Banking Group has warned that a tax raid on the banks could harm lending to households and businesses.

In an exclusive interview with Sky News at the government’s regional investment summit, Charlie Nunn urged the chancellor to ignore calls for a windfall tax on commercial banks even though the sector is enjoying record profits.

“If we are going to have the ability and the confidence to continue to lend into the real economy, to help households and businesses invest, we need to make sure that the financial services system and Lloyds Banking Group really remains healthy in that context,” he said.

Money latest: Which country pays the most for a pint?

Charlie Nunn was appointed Lloyds boss in November 2020. Pic: PA
Image:
Charlie Nunn was appointed Lloyds boss in November 2020. Pic: PA

Britain’s four largest banks – HSBC, Barclays, Lloyds Banking Group and NatWest – posted record profits of £45.9bn last year and are on course for another bumper performance this year, thanks to higher interest rates.

Their financial success has raised speculation that the sector could be in the chancellor’s firing line at next month’s budget.

More on Banking

Rachel Reeves could raise the bank surcharge – a levy on bank profits in addition to corporation tax.

The Conservative government cut the levy from 8% to 3% in 2023. Returning it to 8% could raise £2bn for a chancellor who needs to find anywhere up to £50bn to meet her fiscal rules.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Chancellor faces tough budget choices

Some have suggested a separate windfall tax, which could raise closer to £8bn.

Mr Nunn said such a move risked undermining the health of a sector which underpins the country’s economic prosperity.

“Obviously, taxes are a matter for the government to look at. But it’s definitely one of the factors that impact our ability to support the real economy in the UK,” he said.

A raid on the banks would cause pain to a sector that is already facing substantial costs because of the car finance scandal.

Lloyds, one of the most exposed lenders, has set aside nearly £2bn to cover potential compensation arising from the Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) redress scheme.

The FCA established the scheme to draw a line under the long-running mis-selling scandal, in which lenders failed to disclose commission paid to brokers, meaning many customers ended up paying more than they should have for their car finance.

Under the FCA’s scheme, eligible customers – as many as 14.2 million – could receive an average of £700 each.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Payouts due after motor finance scandal

There is mounting anger within the industry at the way the scheme, which is going out to consultation, has been set up. Mr Nunn said the proposal was too generous to customers and not proportionate to the harms actually caused to customers.

He did not rule out the possibility of a judicial review but, in the first instance, called for a rethink, warning that the current scheme risks scaring away investors, causing an exodus from the market and driving up the cost and availability of credit.

“When you look at the implication of what’s being proposed by the FCA, it’s going to potentially take 20 years of profitability of the car finance industry. And, what does that mean for invest ability in that industry and for other investors and businesses looking to invest in the UK? There’s real concern that this is going to create an invest ability issue,” he said.

“Our concern is will the industry continue to function? Will it support all customers across the whole of the UK that need finance? Will other investors be looking at this and wondering whether the UK is a place they should invest, if retrospectively we can take away 20 years of profits?”

Continue Reading

UK

Anger grows over Prince Andrew’s ‘peppercorn rent’ arrangement as accuser’s memoirs released

Published

on

By

Senior King aide was head of royal protection when Prince Andrew 'asked officer to dig up dirt on accuser'

Prince Andrew should give evidence to US authorities, a government minister has said, as anger grows after it emerged he had been paying “peppercorn rent” for two decades.

On Friday, Prince Andrew announced he was giving up his royal titles, including the Duke of York, after new, damaging reports about his relationship with paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein.

Passages from the memoir released on Tuesday of the late Virginia Giuffre, who accused Prince Andrew of sexually assaulting her, provide further details of their alleged encounters.

Prince Andrew has always strenuously denied the allegations.

Business Secretary Peter Kyle said on Tuesday he would “support” Prince Andrew giving evidence to US prosecutors.

He added he would also support any decision by the Met Police to investigate allegations that Prince Andrew used a Met bodyguard to gain information on Giuffre.

It comes as anger continues to grow over Prince Andrew’s housing arrangements.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘Victims should be in driver’s seat’

‘Peppercorn rent’

The royal has only paid “peppercorn rent” for more than two decades at his Windsor mansion, according to a National Audit Office report published in 2005.

“Peppercorn rent” is a legal term used in leases to show that rent technically exists, so the lease is valid, but it’s nominal, often literally £1 a year or just a symbolic amount.

In practice, it means the tenant pays no rent.

It also shows he was required to pay a further £7.5m for refurbishments.

A document from the Crown Estate also shows he signed a 75-year lease on the property in 2003.

It reveals he paid £1m for the lease and that since then he has paid “one peppercorn” of rent “if demanded” per year.

Read More:
Pressure grows on Andrew to be stripped of dukedom
Key claims from Andrew accuser’s posthumous memoir

The agreement also contains a clause which states the Crown Estate would have to pay Andrew around £558,000 if he gave up the lease.

Pressure is mounting on him to give up the 30-bedroom mansion.

Senior Tory Robert Jenrick called for Prince Andrew to live privately.

‘He has disgraced himself’

He said: “It’s about time Prince Andrew took himself off to live in private and make his own way in life.

“He has disgraced himself, he has embarrassed the royal family time and again. I don’t see why the taxpayer, frankly, should continue to foot the bill at all. The public are sick of him.”

Virginia Giuffre's posthumous memoir was released today. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Virginia Giuffre’s posthumous memoir was released today. Pic: Reuters

Mr Kyle, however, said that would be a question for King Charles.

But he did say MPs could bring forward a motion to strip Prince Andrew of his remaining titles, adding it would be up to Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle to choose one of these motions for debate.

Continue Reading

Trending