The service has been described as a ‘community asset’

Cambridge locals have been left “dismayed” after an NHS trust confirmed the closure of a “community asset” that supports adults with learning disabilities. Darwin Nurseries and Farm Shop in Teversham, will close within the next two years, according to the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust.

The trust said that in a “challenging financial environment” with “rising site costs” it has “needed to prioritise its limited resources towards core NHS services”. The trust will not extend its contract at Darwin Nurseries and Farm Shop beyond its conclusion in April 2028.

Adults with learning disabilities and mental health challenges have worked in the shop, and helped with farming, gardening, and taking care of animals at the site, for more than 25 years.

In a statement by the trust, a spokesperson said: “We are proud that Darwin Nurseries and Farm Shop has made a valued and lasting contribution to people’s lives in our local community. In a challenging financial environment with rising site costs, the Trust has needed to prioritise its limited resources towards core NHS services.”

Councillor Matthew Morgan said the service is a “community asset that is very dear to many village residents, and the principle of helping individuals with learning disabilities and autism to work, whilst providing genuinely good, hardy plants is very well loved”.

He said he is hoping to speak with the trust and Cambridgeshire County Council officers to understand the “rationale” behind the decision. Alternatively, he hopes they can ensure there are other provisions for the workers affected.

A spokesperson for Teversham Action Group (TAG) said they are aware that many people have been “upset and dismayed” by the announcement. The trust added it would “continue to work with Cambridgeshire County Council to ensure continuity of care for all individuals who attend the service”.

What a disaster the war against Iran has been for Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu. The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the United States and Iran signed on June 17 has formally brought a halt to the devastating war. Yet, as the ink dries on the 14-point preliminary framework, the reality of the document stands in stark contrast to the grandiose, megalomaniac rhetoric that defined the start of the conflict.

Only a handful of analysts and scholars that I know of foresaw what is now unfolding, stressing the realities of Iran’s resilience in the face of international pressure for decades. I was one of them: back in 2012, I warned that there could be no military solution to curbing Iran’s nuclear programme and noted that the US not only knew this, but had warned Israel that this would be the case.

When Trump and Netanyahu launched the initial military campaign on February 28, the objective was explicitly stated: the complete destruction of Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programme, an end to Tehran’s support for regional proxies such as Hezbollah, the Houthis and Hamas – and regime change. But the text of the MoU reveals a profound pivot from those aims, at least as far as the White House is concerned.

Ultimately, the agreement marks the final collapse of Pax Americana in the Persian Gulf region and highlights the resilience of Iranian state sovereignty against external pressure. At the onset of the war, both Washington and Tel Aviv projected absolute confidence in their military capabilities.

Following initial waves of brutal strikes and a campaign involving more than 900 targets, both leaders repeatedly asserted that the Islamic Republic’s military capabilities were fundamentally broken.

Trump regularly claimed that victory was just around the corner, maintaining – erroneously – that Iran had “nothing left in a military sense”. Weeks into the campaign, he declared that the US military would “destroy their missiles and raze their missile industry to the ground” until it was “totally”, again, obliterated.

Promising the Iranian public that their rulers would soon be gone, Trump insisted he was successfully steering the country toward “regime change”. As the first strikes landed on Iran, he called on the people to rise up and seize control of institutions. Netanyahu echoed these exact sentiments, framing the conflict as a definitive campaign to forcibly reshape the geopolitical architecture of the region.

But intelligence assessments and events on the ground quickly exposed these claims as foolish. Despite severe structural damage, Iran retained its strategic depth, adapting by moving equipment and launching retaliatory drone and missile strikes across the region.

Rather than causing the regime to collapse, the external aggression resulted in a hardening of the state structure.

What’s in the deal

The terms of the MoU demonstrate that Washington was ultimately forced to negotiate with Tehran as an equal sovereign power, rather than a defeated adversary accepting terms of capitulation.

The agreement directly contradicts the initial war aims of the US-Israeli coalition across three major pillars. First, the framework explicitly binds the US to respect Iran’s territorial integrity and abstain from internal interference.

For an administration that spent months demanding regime change, this clause serves as a legal acknowledgment of the Islamic Republic’s permanence. It calls to mind the Algiers accords of 1981, when the US agreed to the unfreezing of Iranian assets and non-intervention in Iran’s affairs in return for 52 American hostages held since the revolution in 1979.

Faced with the reality of an intact Iranian government, Trump reversed his rhetoric at the G7 summit. Claiming that “I never cared about regime change”, the US president pivoted to describing the new Iranian negotiators as “rational, strong, and smart”.

The MoU also mandates the immediate lifting of the US naval blockade and the implementation of emergency Treasury Department waivers to allow the resumption of Iranian crude oil exports. It also signals the unfreezing of up to US$100 billion (£75 billion) in restricted Iranian assets and the creation of a $300 billion international reconstruction fund for economic development.

From a critical perspective, this demonstrates that economic blockades are ultimately unsustainable when met with asymmetrical regional deterrence. Again, this should not have been new to the US government – it’s something that we have researched and written about for years.

As I argued as early as in 2011 on a flagship show on Al Jazeera, sanctions, gunboat diplomacy and even war don’t work. Iranian society is too connected and the economy and the state too agile. And, as we now know, Tehran’s threat to close down the vital Strait of Hormuz waterway, should have been seen by Iran’s adversaries as a potent deterrent. Hopefully, decision-makers will learn their lessons from this ill-fated war.

Indeed, perhaps the most notable aspect of the MoU is what it leaves out. There is no mention of Iran dismantling its ballistic missile programme. Nor is there a requirement for Iran to sever ties with its regional proxies. Additionally, the ceasefire explicitly covers “all fronts,” effectively mandating a halt to hostilities in Lebanon – a point of major friction for the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, who has vowed to maintain an Israeli security zone in the south.

Geopolitical shift

So this deal indicates a structural shift in regional politics. By launching a high-intensity campaign and failing to achieve either the destruction of Iran’s military capabilities or the toppling of its government, the US and Israel have inadvertently demonstrated the limits of their military power. No propaganda by lobbyists and diasporic pro-war monarchists can change the hard truths of scientific inquiry.

The world is transitioning rapidly into an increasingly non-polar, certainly post-western order. The MoU will stand as a historical marker where the rhetoric of superpower might surrendered to the practical necessity of diplomatic accommodation.

And yes: we’ve been predicting this for a long time, too.

Manzambi was once a goalkeeper for his youth team – and his first footballing idol was Germany’s Manuel Neuer.

Now he is a creative midfielder who enjoys getting forward.

And his goalscoring exploits against Bosnia-Herzegovina suggests he could be far more than just a “super-sub” at this World Cup.

He broke into the Freiburg first XI last season and helped the German club reach the Europa League final.

Manzambi started against Aston Villa in the final and although he could not help his side win – they were beaten 3-0 – he has been linked with moves to Napoli, Chelsea and Manchester United.

His performance on Thursday at the Los Angeles Stadium suggests there could be more competition for his services this summer.

It could have been even better had he been allowed to take his side’s 97th-minute penalty, with captain Granit Xhaka stepping up to convert instead,

If Manzambi had taken it and scored, he would have become the third-youngest player to hit a World Cup treble, after a 17-year-old Pele for Brazil against France in the semi-finals in 1958 and 19-year-old German Edmund Conen against Belgium in 1934.

Manchester United, Arsenal and Chelsea were all linked with Manzambi in March and, if he continues making an impact like this, the interest will only increase.

Speaking about Manzambi’s first goal to give Switzerland a 1-0 lead, former Crystal Palace forward Clinton Morrison told BBC Radio 5 Live: “It’s a brilliant finish.

“Switzerland needed to make changes because they weren’t doing anything, they were dominating possession but weren’t a threat.

“It’s a fantastic volley and great technique to give Switzerland the lead.”

Work is ongoing to open the new convenience store at the site of the former Elm Ridge Garden Centre on Council Road, Darlington. 

Residents had questioned whether the scheme was still going ahead after work at the site appeared to have slowed in recent months. 

But Councillor Kate Mammolotti, Green Party member for Hummersknott ward, said she recently spoke with the developer, who confirmed further work is expected to take place later this year. 

Work is ongoing to open the new convenience store at the site of the former Elm Ridge Garden Centre on Council Road, Darlington. (Image: PETER REIMANN)

Applicant Ward Estates said the new store will occupy the ground floor, with offices on the first and second floors. A new car park with 44 spaces is also proposed. 

A roof is expected to be put on the structure in the Autumn, with work set to be completed by the end of the year, Cllr Mammolotti added. 

A Darlington Borough Council spokesperson said: “We are awaiting an update from the developer before further work can commence. We have been in discussions with them and they hope to have this submitted as soon as possible. We will continue to work with the developer on their planning application.” 

Plans for the facility were approved by the local authority in 2024 before Tesco applied for a licence to operate from the site. 

Sainsbury’s was previously signed up to the scheme but later withdrew. 

But during the planning process, residents questioned the need for the store. 

At a council planning meeting in October, Kate Heljula said: “We are an area that is very well serviced for convenience stores. We seem to be adding something that residents don’t need in a place that is not suitable.”

Work is ongoing to open the new convenience store at the site of the former Elm Ridge Garden Centre on Council Road, Darlington. (Image: PETER REIMANN)

The owners of the nearby Blackwell Stores also objected to the plans, saying it threatened the future of their business. “Customers have expressed their worry about this development to us and what it will do to their community,” they said. 

Existing convenience stores include the nearby petrol filling station, two stores on Cleveland Terrace, and the Co-op at Mowden.

A planning committee heard that the new store is intended to be marketed as a ‘top up’ store that allows more convenient access for local customers, reducing the need for dedicated, larger shopping trips to conventional supermarkets, and reducing the need to travel by car.

Labour’s Andy Burnham wins the Makerfield by-election, paving the way for him to challenge Sir Keir Starmer as Labour leader.

“Everyone knows that politics isn’t working,” he says in his acceptance speech. “Tonight could, just could, be the turning point”.

Burnham previously said he would seek to enter any Labour leadership contest – he would need the support of at least 81 Labour MPs to join the race.

The newly-elected MP for Makerfield, who held cabinet positions under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, says he always knew he would seek to return to Westminster to “complete that unfinished business” so the north of England could fulfil its “potential”.

In his first term of office Donald Trump achieved the lowest average job approval ratings (41%) among Americans since the end of the second world war. In his second term he has fallen well below that with an approval rating of only 35% in a recent Economist/YouGov poll.

Much of this can be explained by voter perceptions of the state of the US economy. The chart below shows the relationship between the percentage of Americans who approve of the president’s handling of his job and consumer confidence. It covers almost 50 years of monthly data with the consumer confidence data coming from surveys conducted at the University of Michigan.

Presidential approval and consumer confidence in the US, 1978 to 2026

The two series track each other closely and so demonstrate a moderately strong relationship with a correlation of 0.44 (If they were unrelated the correlation would be 0 and if they were exactly the same it would be 1). In both cases higher scores denote greater approval and increasing consumer confidence. This confirms the well-known fact that the state of the economy is a big driver of presidential approval.

If we look closely at the consumer confidence index, the average score over the entire period was 84. In the late 1970s Jimmy Carter had low and falling approval ratings and consumer confidence scores. This goes a long way to explaining why he was a one-term president who lost to Ronald Reagan in the 1980 election.

A decade later, when Republican George HW Bush was president between 1989 and 1993, consumer confidence plummeted as an official recession in the US economy was declared in July 1990, leading to declining growth and rising unemployment. The Federal Reserve, which is responsible for US monetary policy, exacerbated a weak financial situation by raising interest rates in order to combat inflation. The result was that Bush senior became another one-term president and lost the 1992 election to his Democrat rival, Bill Clinton (whose campaign motto was famously: “It’s the economy, stupid.”).

However, the largest fall in consumer confidence over this period occurred after the financial crash of 2007-2008, which in turn produced a serious recession and rapidly declining consumer confidence. On this occasion George W Bush was in his second term as US president and his collapsing approval ratings paved the way for the victory of Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential contest.

Finally, when Donald Trump won the presidential election in November 2016, consumer confidence was relatively high. In January 2017 at the time of his inauguration the consumer confidence index stood at 99. Four years later in January 2021 when Joe Biden was inaugurated as president the index was at 79, a dramatic decline in historical terms.

The midterm elections for the House and the Senate take place in November this year and currently things do not look good for the Republicans. Pollsters have been asking what is called a “generic” question in their surveys about who respondents would vote for if the midterm elections took place today. They are virtually unanimous in their agreement that the Democrats will win control of the House of Representatives. In addition, it is possible, though less likely, that the Democrats will win control of the Senate.

A thought experiment

An interesting thought experiment is to suppose that we were looking at a presidential election in November rather than the midterms. What light does the current consumer confidence data throw on such a hypothetical election?

The second chart shows the relationship between voting for the incumbent’s party in the 19 presidential elections since 1978 and consumer confidence in the month of these elections.

Incumbent vote shares and consumer confidence in presidential elections since 1978

Once again, the relationship is moderately strong between the two series with a correlation of 0.43. Voters reward or punish the incumbent president or his party’s candidate depending on how they feel about the economy. As we observed in the first chart, the consumer confidence score was at its lowest at 55 in the 2008 election which Obama won. But the score on the index in June 2026 was 49, so – if consumer confidence continues to fall – then in a hypothetical presidential election in November Trump would lose very badly.

This is a thought experiment rather than a prediction of what is likely to happen in the presidential election of 2028. But when the war in the Middle East launched by the US and Israel threatens to produce a global recession it seems unlikely that consumer confidence in the US will improve any time soon.

Trump will not be on the ballot in 2028. But the Republican candidate in that election is likely to take a historical beating if the US and world economies do not improve in the meantime.

A fire broke out at an elementary school in downtown Tokyo Friday, but all of about 300 students and teachers were evacuated or rescued, officials said.

The Tokyo Fire Department said the fire at the Takinogawa No. 3 Elementary School broke out near a music room on the top floor of the four-story building late morning Friday.

Firefighters rescued one teacher and several schoolchildren out of the building, with non-life-threatening injuries, the department said.

Television footage showed black smoke billowing out of windows on the fourth floor, as firefighters combated the fire at the scene. Dozens of fire engines were deployed.

All others inside the building when the fire broke out had evacuated to a nearby park on their own and no one was left behind, officials said.

The cause of the fire is still under investigation.

Andy Burnham is heading back to Parliament after winning the Makerfield by-election.

The newly elected Labour MP easily beat Reform UK candidate Robert Kenyon.

It marks the end of weeks of campaigning in the constituency based south of Wigan, and the start of the next political race in Greater Manchester for Andy Burnham’s old job as mayor.

Click here for the latest on Greater Manchester’s politics in our newsletter

Becoming an MP disqualifies Burnham from being Greater Manchester mayor, so a replacement needs to be found for the region’s top political job.

That means another by-election is about to take place, with voters across Greater Manchester choosing the next mayor.

It is set to be a massive operation, with 2.1 million people registered to vote in the contest, and around 400,000 expected to do so by post.

Ahead of the crucial race, the Manchester Evening News takes a look at what happens next and when the mayoral by-election will be held.

What date will the by-election for Greater Manchester mayor take place?

The Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) has confirmed July 30 as the date for the mayoral by-election. The GMCA’s returning officer, Caroline Simpson, told the Manchester Evening News earlier this month: “If the Makerfield by-election result triggers a mayoral by-election, Greater Manchester will be legally required to hold a by-election within 25-35 working days.

“To ensure we are ready, we have identified July 30 as the date which will allow the maximum number of people to vote, whether in person, by post or by proxy.

“This will avoid holding an election during the peak holiday period in August and will mean that postal votes will arrive just before, or only a day or two into, the school holidays.

“While Greater Manchester’s returning officers are very experienced at running elections, the lead time for a mayoral by-election would be shorter than for a scheduled poll.

“So, following legal advice, and with support from government and the Electoral Commission, we have begun essential preparation work such as booking polling stations. We are doing this in advance of, not in anticipation of, the Makerfield by-election outcome on June 19.”

The by-election touches all corners of Greater Manchester, so expect to see candidates campaigning across all ten boroughs of the city-region.

Counting for mayoral elections usually takes place the day after polling day, so the result should be known by Friday, July 31.

What voting system will be used?

The government has just changed the voting system for how mayors are elected.

A system called supplementary voting will be used to elect Greater Manchester’s next mayor, rather than the previous first-past-the-post method.

The change came into force on June 18 after passing through Parliament wrapped up in the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act.

It could have a huge impact on deciding who becomes the next mayor of Greater Manchester. Voters choose a first and second preference among candidates in supplementary voting.

If no candidate gets 50 per cent of vote in the first round of voting, a second round of voting is held between the two candidates with the most support.

That’s the stage where secondary votes are added and could flip the entire result on its head.

One potential scenario could see party A win more votes in the first round of voting, but still go on to lose the mayoral by-election if party B picks up more second preference votes in round two.

Reform UK said earlier this week that the change was a ‘cynical attempt’ to sway the race in Labour’s favour. Labour didn’t comment when asked about the claims from Reform.

The change in voting system was debated in the House of Lords on June 16.

Lord Hayward, a Conservative, said: “Let us be honest about this order. It is not normal to identify who would be affected by a particular change of law, but this order is an attempt to prevent Reform winning the possible Greater Manchester mayoralty by-election.

“There is no other justification for the haste with which this order has been introduced, other than that it solves the Labour Party’s problems and prevents Reform winning a mayoralty.”

Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, for Labour, responded: “The Government were very clear during the passage of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act that we intended to make this change for mayoral and PCC elections after May 2026. There is now the potential for such an election; I will come on to more about that in a moment. We are therefore acting to deliver on our commitments made to Parliament.”

What happens next?

Political parties will choose their candidates to stand in the mayoral by-election before campaigning begins.

The rumour mill about who could stand for each party has already kicked in, with names being suggested by sources. Official announcements and campaign launches are expected to happen in the next few days.

What follows will be weeks of campaigning to try and convince voters to back their various visions for Greater Manchester.

The scale of the by-election means parties will be out and about across the region, from Wigan to Stockport and everywhere in between.

Whoever wins the race will be handed one of the most important political jobs in the country, running Greater Manchester.

The mayor of Greater Manchester has a huge range of responsibilities, from deciding the transport budget for the region from government, including over the future of bus services, to being the public’s voice on policing matters, and being in charge of funding for housing and regeneration schemes.

The stage is set for a fascinating race.

Greater Manchester Police (GMP) said officers were called to reports of a disturbance on Market Street at around 10pm on Tuesday, June 17.

A GMP spokesperson said: “Officers responded to reports of a disturbance on Market Street, Little Lever at around 10pm yesterday (17/06/26).

“One man in his 20s was arrested on suspicion of criminal damage and possession of an offensive weapon.”

Lano’s front door was severely damaged (Image: NQ)

Damage was caused to the front door of Lano Store and the front window of Village Chippy.

The Village Chippy was also damaged (Image: NQ)

A worker at Lano Store, which reopened as normal the following morning, confirmed the incident had damaged the shop’s front door.

He said he was unaware of many of the details surrounding the disturbance but confirmed that nothing had been stolen from the premises.

“There was just damage to the front door,” he said.

An eyewitness reported seeing a man running down Market Street carrying a hammer shortly before police arrived.

The area was also reportedly cordoned off.

Other neighbouring businesses said they were unaware of the disturbance and had not suffered any criminal damage.

Police enquiries into the incident are ongoing.

Andoni Iraola and his Liverpool team face a big season after the Basque coach took over from Arne Slot but transfer progress is being made

Liverpool will discover their Premier League fixture schedule on Friday, bringing their summer transfer plans into sharp focus. The Reds are embarking on a first window with Andoni Iraola at the helm and have already been busy.

Jeremy Jacquet became the Reds’ first new arrival, with a move from Rennes agreed long before Iraola agreed to replace Arne Slot in the dugout. Victor Munoz looks to be next and there is plenty to say about the pursuit of the young Spaniard.

There have also been a number of departures, with out-of-contract pair Andy Robertson and Ibrahima Konate finding new clubs. Robertson’s move to Tottenham was confirmed before the transfer window opened, while Real Madrid confirmed on Thursday that they would add Konate to their ranks for the 2026/27 season.

Today, though, our attention has turned to potential incomings before Liverpool begin their pre-season campaign in July. Here are our latest lines from around Anfield.

FOLLOW OUR LIVERPOOL FB PAGE! Latest Reds news and more on our dedicated Facebook page

Munoz deal ‘includes surprise transfer clause’

According to reports in Spain, Liverpool’s move for Osasuna star Victor Munoz includes a sell-on clause. However, it doesn’t relate to the Pamplona club but rather to Real Madrid.

Los Blancos were reportedly paid around £4.3m by Osasuna for 50 percent of Munoz’s rights in 2025, with Madrid also enjoying a buy-back clause. Liverpool are reported to have approached Jose Mourinho’s side to ensure they didn’t use the clause to re-sign the 22-year-old forward.

Liverpool are also understood to be paying Munoz’s £34.7m release clause in full but allowing Real Madrid to retain an unspecified buy-back clause which they could use in 2027. The fee paid between for the youngster will be split between the two Spanish clubs.

Reds pip Newcastle again

A move for Munoz would see history repeat itself. Newcastle United had also been pushing for the Spaniard but their failure to immediately meet his release clause has allowed Liverpool to enter the chase.

It’s an all-too-familiar situation for Eddie Howe’s side. Last summer, the Magpies made an early push for Hugo Ekitike at the start of the summer window only to see the Frenchman move to Anfield.

Newcastle also saw star striker Alexander Isak move to Liverpool on deadline day and looked as though they would also lose out to the Reds for defensive target Marc Guehi. Ultimately, though, Guehi’s move to Anfield fell through and he ended up joining Manchester City midway through the season.

Join our LFC WhatsApp community and get all the latest LFC news, views, transfer gossip and more, as it happens We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don’t like our community, you can check out any time you like. If you’re curious, you can read our Privacy Notice.

Get Liverpool’s new 2026/27 home kit

This article contains affiliate links, we will receive a commission on any sales we generate from it. Learn more

£85

LFC Shop

Buy Now on LFC Shop

Liverpool FC have launched their new home kit for the 2026/27, inspired by iconic adidas strip worn during the club’s 1989/90 title-winning campaign.