Deputy minister for skills and tertiary education Cefin Campbell spoke with Sion Barry

University mergers in Wales are to be considered part of an extensive, independent review of the nation’s troubled higher education sector that will look at all options for the under-pressure sector.

Universities need “meaningful change” if the severe financial challenges they face are to be resolved, Deputy Minister for Skills and Tertiary Education Cefin Campbell said in an interview with WalesOnline.

The minister also said tackling the growing number of young people not in education, employment or training – known as NEETs – is a priority, while the new Plaid Cymru administration in Cardiff Bay could be open to setting a specific target to reduce their numbers.

The financial challenges facing the Welsh university sector have resulted in well over 1,000 job losses at higher education institutions across Wales over the past year.

Mr Campbell said: “It has to be meaningful change, as the definition of insanity is that you keep on doing the same old thing expecting different results.”

He said developing skills and trying to retain young people in Wales were all being considered with the aim of increasing productivity and contributing to a higher-skilled workforce in Wales.

He said the first major audit of the skills requirements of Welsh employers for 14 years, which is currently under way, will help better align support with the needs of businesses seeking to expand.

UK Government visa restrictions on family members of international postgraduate students, together with shorter post-study visas for graduates, have led to falling numbers of higher fee paying international students. This has pushed many universities into financial difficulty.

The market for international students is global, while Chinese universities are improving in international rankings and attracting more domestic students who might previously have taken up places at UK universities.

According to the latest published figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA), the number of international students at Welsh universities fell by around 7,000 in the 2024–25 academic year compared with the previous year.

The biggest decline in overseas non-EU students was at the University of South Wales, where numbers fell by just over 2,000.

While smaller institutions such as Bangor University, Aberystwyth University and the University of Wales Trinity Saint David remain solvent, the latest HESA data show they each have little more than 30 days’ net liquidity.

On the challenges facing the sector, Mr Campbell said: “We recognise that our universities are facing serious financial pressures, and that is why we are committed to ensuring the system is financially sustainable moving forward, and that more of the overall value of public investment benefits Wales.

!That is why I have announced – and it was in our manifesto – that we will be conducting a review of higher education funding. It is a priority.”

On the size of the review panel, he added: My inclination is to have a smaller number rather than a larger group, because I think it’s easier to concentrate efforts with a smaller group focusing on really granular detail and coming up with some really far-reaching and radical proposals.”

But how radical could the panel’s conclusions be? Could they recommend mergers and universities focusing on building particular areas of expertise? Also, while there could be VAT implications, could new vehicles be set up to provide back-office functions across institutions?

Mr Campbell said: “Nothing is off the table, and our terms of reference will ask the panel to look at all kinds of options, including some of the ones that you’ve referenced, so that they have a wide scope to look at all the potential options available to making our university sector more sustainable.”

He was asked whether Welsh university management teams and their respective boards should shoulder an element of responsibility for their challenging trading positions, having pursued the overseas student market and, in some cases, taken on increasing levels of debt to expand campuses.

He replied: “So, you play what’s in front of you, and there were opportunities for universities to tap into that international market, and they did that very successfully until it basically changed overnight… and they couldn’t foresee that. “So there’s no criticism of them. Like any business case, it is a matter of how you spread your investments, and some have suffered more than others.

“My priority now is thinking ahead to where we take our universities because they are so important, not only as seats of learning, but also because of their work in research and innovation. They are anchor institutions in their regions and employ thousands of people.

“When you think of Aberystwyth, Bangor and Trinity Saint David universities, and the number of people they employ in rural areas, they are so important. So, we have to help them to become more resilient moving forward. There is no doubt that there have been a number of factors at play as to why our universities are under pressure. One of them is the change in visa regulations.

“Some of our universities in Wales, but across the UK as well, put a lot of their eggs into that basket, and now those changes have put their business plans under pressure.

“So this will be looked at in the round and it will be part of the panel’s work. Unless things change with an Andy Burnham UK Government on visa policy, we will have to play the cards that we have. The international student option might not be one that is a reasonable consideration in the future.”

He said he will be looking for the review panel to conclude its work relatively quickly. He explained ““I don’t want this to be a long process because we want to start implementing some of the recommendations as soon as we can. Some individual universities in Wales are teetering on the brink. They need support as soon as they can get it rather than waiting for a medium-term plan of action.”

If the panel recommends mergers, they would require buy-in from the universities themselves. Attempting to force any mergers could end up in a legal quagmire, and one only has to recall how the previous Welsh Government of Rhodri Morgan failed in trying to force Cardiff Metropolitan University to merge with what were then Newport and Glamorgan universities.

However, Mr Campbell said: “It has to be meaningful change, as the definition of insanity is that you keep on doing the same old thing expecting different results.

“It needs to be part of a wider picture as well, in terms of how universities can play their role in increasing productivity in Wales and contributing to a higher-skilled workforce in order to grow the economy.”

Part of Plaid’s higher education strategy will involve aiming to increase the number of Welsh students attending universities in Wales, as part of wider efforts to reduce the ‘brain drain’ and the negative impact this creates for the economy.

The minister said: “What I would like to see is more of our young people staying in Wales and enrolling in universities here because a recent graduate destination survey showed that about 50% of those who responded, who went to universities in England, stayed there.

“They stayed there to work and then obviously settled down there, and they don’t return to Wales. So, we know we are losing a lot of that young talent already.

“So if we could get them to stay in Wales and help build our economy, and make our universities more aware of our economic aims, we could align and create job pathways through further education, apprenticeships and higher education to help create meaningful employment.

We also need a scheme to attract those who are working in England at the moment, young graduates in particular, back to Wales by creating high-value jobs here.”

He is not advocating preventing Welsh students from studying at universities in England, while also recognising that English students who study in Wales often remain after graduating to work.

However, on the net brain drain out of Wales, he added: “This is a net loss that needs to be recognised. What we want to see is as much Welsh Government funding staying in Wales as possible.

“Now, we don’t want to deter any young person from studying in England. That is not the point. And there will be very good reasons why they want to go to England or anywhere else to study.

“But what I want to see is our Welsh universities becoming more competitive so that they can gain more of that domestic market than they are currently achieving.”

Plaid is calling for publicly funded UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) funding to be devolved. Welsh universities currently secure just under 2% of the billions of pounds distributed annually to UK universities.

There is an argument that they have failed to position themselves, including by bringing in expertise and research capacity, to ensure Wales receives at least a fair funding allocation in line with its share of the UK population, which is around 5%.

Mr Campbell said: “It is disappointing that Welsh universities don’t get a fair slice of that funding. There are many reasons.

“Some universities have aligned themselves to be more research-orientated, whereas others have concentrated on a broader spectrum of learning as opposed to research intensification. Universities are autonomous at the end of the day, and they decide what they think is best.

“I’ve had conversations with some universities that are currently thinking about realigning themselves to being something different from what they are now in order to try and reach out to a different kind of market.

“So all of these models will be considered by the panel. But I think we should have control over that UKRI funding, so it takes an element of UK competition out of it and creates competition within Wales that would allow universities to become more innovative and work with industry and businesses.”

As well as responsibility for the review of higher education, Mr Campbell’s wide-ranging portfolio includes skills.

On the rationale for the skills audit currently under way, which is being undertaken by Learning Skills Wales, the minister said: “The previous national skills audit for Wales was 14 years ago, so there is a gap in our data with regards to our knowledge of the skills needs of Wales.

“It will identify the skills we need now and in the future to grow the Welsh economy. I am obviously working closely with Adam (Price, the Economy Minister) on this.

“It includes identifying the sectors and roles where demand is likely to be strongest in the future.

Essentially, it will help us plan a skills system that responds to employers’ needs and, more importantly, the direction we want to take the economy.”

He added: “What we will then do is convene a future skills summit, and we are looking at dates in October where we will bring representatives from business, industry, further education and higher education together.

“I am keen that those experts create the skills system of the future with Welsh Government.”

Wales has a higher than UK average number of 16 to 24-year-olds classified as NEETs. The figure currently stands at 17%.

The minister said: “It is hugely concerning, and it is a priority for me and for this government. When you look at 17% of young people in that age group who are not in any way engaged with education, employment or training, it is frightening to think what will become of that generation.

“So it will be a priority for this government because we need to give it a strong focus in terms of prevention and early intervention. “The recent Alan Milburn report shows that one of the key factors behind why so many of these young people are NEETs is linked to Covid and the mental health issues around that.

“We need to work with stakeholders who provide welfare and mental health support to get those young people to take that first step back into training and education.”

Asked whether he would be keen on introducing a target for reducing NEET numbers in Wales, alongside the stated aim of reducing the Welsh productivity gap with the UK by half over the next decade, he said ““It may well be something we would look at, but at the moment we are trying to understand the NEETs agenda.

“We are working closely with Careers Wales because they have a key role in identifying and supporting this at-risk group of young people. But the target for us is to bring it down.”

He acknowledged that the financial cost of university meant more young people were considering earlier career pathways.

The argument had traditionally been that, over a career, graduate average earnings would outperform those of non-graduates, even accounting for tuition fee costs. However, this is now coming under increasing pressure, particularly for some non science-related degrees.

Mr Campbell said: I’’m really keen to allow young people to see what different pathways are available to them. “Let’s be honest, university isn’t for everybody. So personally, and for this government, I want to see more emphasis on vocational training and vocational opportunities.

“That goes right down to the 14 to 19 pathway model. I want schools, further education and training providers to work together far more effectively in providing a suite and range of options that are vocational and academic.

“But what is absolutely crucial for me is that there is parity of esteem between the vocational and academic routes, because we know there are different pathways into employment.

“Universities are one route, but apprenticeships are another pathway into employment. I want to make sure that young people are aware of all these different pathways and that we can support them in whatever choice they make.”

NEW YORK (AP) — The Associated Press honored Breanna Stewart before the New York Liberty’s game Tuesday night for being one of the greatest women’s college basketball players during the Top 25 poll era.

The AP celebrated the 50th anniversary of the women’s basketball poll last season. As part of it, a 13-member panel voted for the greatest college players of the past five decades. Stewart and Cheryl Miller were selected as the top players over the past 50 years.

The UConn great won four straight national championships and was selected as the Most Outstanding Player of the Final Four each time. She was presented with her trophy at center court by AP Global Sports Editor Josh Hoffner a few minutes before tipoff of the Liberty’s game against the Dallas Wings.

Miller accepted her trophy at the Final Four in Phoenix last April at the “The AP Top 25 Fan Poll Experience,” which was held at Arizona State’s First Amendment Forum in the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication. Stewart couldn’t make that ceremony.

___

AP WNBA: https://apnews.com/hub/wnba-basketball

White bedding can turn dingy fast, but there is one way to keep it bright and fresh

Maintaining white clothing and bedding in pristine condition can prove difficult. White laundry tends to show stains more prominently than other shades and loses its brightness far more quickly.

Daily use, spills, perspiration, and frequent washing can affect fabrics, making white fabrics appear worn. The good news is that with appropriate care, it’s entirely possible to keep whites looking fresh and bright for considerably longer.

This includes a range of natural techniques and the separation of colours from whites during washing.

On occasion, using a whitening booster can be useful for restoring whites without being damaging to fabrics.

One of my preferred methods for keeping white bedding bright is to simply dry it outdoors in the sunshine.

Sunlight contains ultraviolet (UV) rays, which have a natural bleaching effect that can help whiten fabrics and reduce the appearance of yellowing over time.

Fresh air also helps to create a clean, fresh scent to bedding, making line drying a straightforward, natural approach to keeping sheets looking at their finest.

Moreover, drying sheets outdoors without tumble-drying is considerably gentler on the fabric, meaning they’ll endure much longer.

Advertisement

For optimal results, position white items in direct sunlight and ensure they are evenly distributed so the light reaches as much of the fabric as possible.

Rotating larger items, such as duvet covers and sheets, midway through drying can help ensure they dry evenly on both sides.

While sunlight is an excellent natural way to maintain white fabrics, it’s equally crucial not to expose delicate materials to intense sunlight for extended periods.

Lengthy exposure may compromise certain fibres over time.

For routine items, including cotton bedding, towels, and durable white garments, regular outdoor drying can provide a straightforward way to preserve that clean, brilliant look.

I’ve previously relied on Napisan, an antibacterial stain remover, on some grimy, lacklustre socks to eliminate persistent marks.

It’s a trusted solution for sanitising and tackling tough stains on baby clothes, but it can equally help revive whites.

Simply dissolve a scoop in warm water and allow your items, such as socks, to soak for one to two hours before washing. It’s also effective at preventing school shirts and white trainers from becoming grey.

The defence investment plan sets out the UK government’s funding choices for the British armed forces. Over a year late, it allocates an additional £15 billion to the ministry of defence.

Its priorities are the nuclear deterrent and submarine programmes, a sixth generation fighter jet and an expansion of autonomous systems and guided weapons.

Across land, sea and air, the defence investment plan points towards a force that depends more on space-based systems, not less. So it is disappointing that the new plan is unclear on its long-term plan for space.

Both the 2025 strategic defence review and the 2026 defence investment plan tend to speak of space-based capabilities in the broadest terms, providing no clear sense of direction in many areas.

The newest planp is following the tradition of past defence reviews by approaching space as a list-making exercise, where generic capability categories are listed as desirable and important but no prioritisation is made. The DIP does not offer any rationale for which specific capabilities the UK military should develop first.

Some space-based capabilities remain sovereign – operationally controlled by the UK. Others are acquired from external providers: allied countries such as the US, or commercial entities.

Limited defence budgets mean that many space services rely on a mixture of sovereign and external systems. These include satellite communications, space control (ensuring freedom of action in space and denying it to others) and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. This is a broad category and includes many different kinds of imagery and other data gathered from spy satellites.

Political leaders have a responsibility to explain the trade-offs and why they are made. But the defence investment plan does not explain which specific space services the UK armed forces will demand from its allies and from commercial third parties, or how the rest of the force will operate within those constraints.

High-intensity warfare

The headline treatment of space – across one and a half pages – appears positive. Space is recognised as “critical national infrastructure” by the UK government, in line with years of established policy.

Space infrastructure is seen in the defence investment plan as “the central nervous system of modern, high-intensity warfare”. The defence investment plan allocates £3.2 billion to space capabilities up to 2030 and promises at least £9 billion more between 2030 and 2035.

But most near-term spending remains concentrated in satellite communications, with £2.3 billion allocated to the Skynet satellite system, which provides secure communications to the British military. Delayed by two years, the Skynet 6A satellite is scheduled for launch in 2027.

Plans were underway for Skynet satellite systems that would cover the wideband and narrowband frequency ranges respectively. The narrowband system has now been cancelled, but the defence investment plan does not explain the operational consequences of this move, or what will replace it.

The planned Deep Space Advanced Radar Capability (Darc), along with Skynet, is one of the few specific space related programmes named in the plan. It will provide radar coverage of the geostationary belt, a region of space where satellites orbit at the exact speed of the planet’s rotation.

Darc will monitor satellites, space debris and potential space-based threats from other nations. Based in Wales, Darc will be networked with similar installations in the United States and Australia to provide global coverage.

A worrying omission in the defence investment plan is the relationship between its £880m allocation for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance and space control and the existing Istari programme. Istari is described as a £970 million multi-satellite programme to support global surveillance and intelligence for military operations.

One of the satellites under the Istari programme, Tyche, launched on August 16 2024. Tyche is the ministry of defence’s first sovereign optical imagery satellite. Another Istari satellite programme, called Oberon, is expected to provide two synthetic aperture radar satellites for day and night, all-weather 3D radar imagery.

Yet the defence investment plan does not clarify whether the £880 million allocated for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance in the plan continues, replaces, or accelerates specific capability types within Istari – or whether it will go to services acquired from external providers.

New or old?

It remains unclear how much of the £3.2 billion for space represents new spending or restates earlier commitments in the 2021 integrated review, the 2021 national space strategy, the 2022 defence space strategy and the 2023 national space strategy in action.

The UK requires a much clearer account of what space services its future force assumes responsibility for, which of those services it must own or control, and which it is willing to access through allies or its commercial providers.

Much of the defence investment plan’s wider logic amounts to a rediscovered faith in old 1980s-era reconnaissance-strike battle doctrines. It prioritises finding and neutralising the enemy’s command and control, logistics, and reconnaissance capabilities using long-range precise weaponry.

The issue is not that this model is the wrong way to organise combat forces, but that it is highly dependent on space infrastructure. This will require multiple integrated technologies that are able to convert raw operational data into actionable intelligence, not least from space.

The defence investment plan recognises this in rhetoric but does not explain how the UK will secure access to the required space infrastructure.

The consequence is that British military operations will continue to depend on a “central nervous system” that is not sovereign. That places greater weight on UK diplomacy, foreign policy, and contracting mechanisms to ensure continued access to US, European, and transnational commercial space infrastructure.

More spending on space is not always the answer given other pressing needs. Rather, detail is lacking about what the UK military intends to invest in with its existing funding. It is also unclear whether UK government understands the strategic consequences of Britain’s reliance on allies and commercial third parties for essential military space infrastructure.

The defence investment plan was a moment in which the government could have converted five years of strategy documents into a modestly funded order of clear, specific capability development priorities. The government declined to do so.

Until it can, the £3.2 billion buys continuity rather than direction: a communications programme, a new ground radar, a small down payment on divergent types of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, and another list. Admitting the limitations would set a more grounded foundation for public and professional debate on British defence policy in the space age.

Readers of the Mail titles, and the journalists working for them, have cause for great celebration following Mr Justice Nicklin’s judgment yesterday in the High Court.

Every claim against the Daily Mail and The Mail on Sunday – including extremely damaging ones made in the full glare of publicity by Prince Harry – was dismissed. There were no caveats. No exceptions. This was a triumph for both newspapers, and their journalists.

For the case against Associated Newspapers, publisher of the two titles, amounted to nothing less than a conspiracy to blacken the papers on the altar of public opinion – and if possible to close them down.

The 436-page written judgment is therefore also a triumph for the entire free Press and the right of newspapers to report on the goings-on of the rich and powerful, so long as they do so within the law.

Those who challenge that right – as well as those who bend the rules or indulge in illegality – will sleep a little less easily in their beds as a result of what happened yesterday.

The whole printed Press has suffered from circulation decline over the past two decades, and some titles have found it difficult to adjust to the digital age. This judgment will give every newspaper, and all the journalists who work for them, a hugely welcome boost.

But, triumph though it undoubtedly is, no one should think that it has been easily achieved. For one thing, the cost of the case on both sides has been enormous – more than £50million, of which Associated Newspapers has so far paid over half. The judge is yet to make a determination over costs.

No less serious has been the stress which the case has brought to almost everyone who works for Associated. Particularly under the cosh were the 40-odd journalists required to give an account of themselves in court.

Mr Justice Nicklin singled out a number of Mail journalists for being ‘honest’ and ‘impressive’ witnesses

It is cheering, of course, that Mr Justice Nicklin should have been impressed by the integrity of these witnesses, a number of whom were singled out by him for being ‘honest’ and ‘impressive’ during the 11-week court hearing. This was a tribute to the quality of the journalists who have worked, and still work, for the Mail titles.

Among the seven claimants, by contrast, while the Judge accepted that the individual claimants were honest, they were found to have limited direct evidence in support of the claims. Only one witness – David Furnish, husband of Sir Elton John – was deemed impressive.

In fact, after the claimants’ key witness, former private investigator Gavin Burrows, withdrew an earlier statement, they had no credible evidence at all, and were reduced to making unsubstantiated allegations.

But the paucity of the evidence did not dispel the anxiety consuming many Mail journalists. They were falsely accused of career-destroying activities. Reputations were at stake.

The journalist who had most to lose, and whose considerable achievements were called into question, was Paul Dacre, the Mail’s editor from 1992 until 2018.

Along with others, Mr Dacre was accused by the claimants of having lied to the Leveson Inquiry in 2012 when he stated that the Mail titles had never taken part in phone hacking. The judge found no truth in these baseless allegations.

Probably more painful to Mr Dacre were the accusations of Doreen Lawrence, whose son, Stephen, was murdered by thugs in south London in 1993. Almost four years later, after police attempts to charge the culprits had foundered, the Mail ran its famous front page with the single headline: ‘Murderers’.

Most of the political establishment and several newspapers immediately criticised the Mail, though Lord Denning, the legendary former Master of the Rolls, described it as a ‘marvellous piece of journalism’.

Former F1 president Max Mosely also tried to damage the Mail after it revealed he was the publisher of a racist election pamphlet used by his father Oswald

Advertisement

Baroness Doreen Lawrence outside at the High Court with friend and lawyer Imran Khan

Ex-Lib Dem MP Dr Evan Harris pictured outside court during the hearing 

It was a measure of Denning’s greatness that he could grasp that the Mail was fighting for truth and justice by standing up for a murdered black teenager whose unprivileged parents had been failed by the police and the prosecuting authorities.

So it was a bitter pill when, for reasons that are still not clear, Baroness Lawrence joined the ranks of the claimants, accusing the Mail of targeting her with unlawful information-gathering techniques. These allegations were entirely dismissed by the judge.

All this shows the intolerable strain under which many Mail journalists, past and present, have been living as they were subjected to groundless – and also potentially ruinous – claims.

These claims did not appear out of a clear blue sky – which is why I can confidently speak of a conspiracy. A number of individuals consciously set out to damage – and preferably destroy – the Mail.

One of them was Press-hating Max Mosley, famous for winning a libel case in 2008 against the now defunct News of the World, which had accused him of orchestrating a ‘Nazi-themed orgy.’ They were right about the orgy, where blood was shed, but couldn’t prove the Nazi bit.

In 2018 the Mail was able to prove that Mosley was the publisher of a squalid racist election pamphlet used by his father, the fascist Oswald Mosley, in 1961. This revelation only increased Mosley’s determination to damage the Mail.

Suffering from terminal cancer, he shot himself in May 2021, but not before he had used some of his enormous fortune (much of it inherited from his obnoxious father) to benefit Hacked Off – the group that campaigns for state oversight of the Press.

One of the beneficiaries was Graham Johnson, to whom Mosley gave at least £565,000, some of which was used to pay witnesses against the Mail. Another was Professor Brian Cathcart, a founder member of Hacked Off, who received generous funding from Mosley to write a book.

The exact role of Hacked Off in the campaign to bring down the Mail is for another day. Suffice to say now that one of those giving evidence on behalf of the claimants, the ex-Lib Dem MP Dr Evan Harris, was once an executive director of the group. He was described by the judge as having been ‘particularly prone to reconstruction’.

The Daily Mail has triumphantly seen off its enemies in this case, but let no one suppose that they will creep away from the battlefield never to cause trouble again.

Prince Harry, who has waged a seven-year war against the Press, admittedly winning against the publishers of the Sun and Daily Mirror, is likely now to desist, although he showed remarkable ill grace yesterday in describing the judgment as an ‘obvious whitewash‘.

But Hacked Off, and sympathetic voices on the Labour benches, won’t stop calling for so-called ‘Leveson Part Two’, whose objective, they hope, would be to curtail a free Press and institute some form of state control.

Indeed, Hacked Off responded to yesterday’s judgment by calling for a public inquiry. That takes some brass neck in the circumstances. However discredited the organisation and its cause may be, they won’t give up.

So vigilance should be our watchword. A decisive battle for a free Press has been won but the war will never be over. There will be other rich chancers such as Max Mosley who will want to muzzle the Press, and more celebrities who will make false accusations.

But for the moment let us be thankful to Mr Justice Nicklin for his good sense, and congratulate this newspaper’s journalists for holding the line in such trying circumstances. I am proud to be their colleague.

In The Mixer’s World Cup special

Everything you need to know about the World Cup – England updates, the games to watch and stories you missed – in five minutes, at 1pm, every day.

Officers are searching for Jamie Foster, 34, from Holgate, who was last seen in the Hob Moor area of Acomb at about 11pm on Sunday (July 5).

North Yorkshire Police on Tuesday night (July 7) said Mr Foster may be in the South Yorkshire area.

The force said Mr Foster is a “keen walker and may have travelled some distance from where he was last seen”.

Mr Foster is described as white, 185cm tall and of slim build. He has shoulder length brown hair and fair complexion.

He was last seen wearing a red long sleeved top, blue jeans and trainers and had a bandanna on his head.

But police said Mr Foster was carrying a backpack with clothing so “may have changed what he is wearing”.

A police spokesperson urged anyone who sees Mr Foster not to approach him directly and to phone 999.

“If you see Jamie, please do not approach him directly, but call 999 immediately,” they said.

“If you have any other information that could help us find him, please call us on 101 and select option one to speak to our control room.

“Please quote 12260126753 when sharing information.” 

A high-rise building in New York City under construction is structurally unstable after two of its support columns started buckling on Tuesday morning. The building was evacuated along with surrounding buildings after reports of falling bricks.

Video from inside the building shows the buckling beam.

New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani said in a press conference that the building remains unstable.

Djokovic serves first and wins the opening point, 1-0. AA overcooks another backhand, 2-0, missing by a long way. AA gobbles up a loopy return to send down a forehand winner, 2-1 Djokovic. The Serb doesn’t get lucky this time with another net chord, instead the ball sits up perfectly for AS to engineer a backhand volley, 2-2.

Big return from AA to execute a fine angle on a forehand winner 2-3 AA. AA finds the net with a tame forehand effort 3-4. The Canadian strokes a sliced volley which Djokovic scampers towards but loops beyond the baseline. 4-3 AA, who then overcooks his return on Djokovic’s serve, 4-4. The Serb follows up with a superb backhand down the line to lead 5-4.  

HUGE serve from AA, 5-5. Just the slow 124 mph..a timely ace and eighth of this set. His subsequent serve is another quality one to pile the pressure on Djokovic, 6-5.

The Serb serves out wide to target AA’s weaker backhand and is rewarded… 6-6. Nothing to separate these two at the moment. AA overcooks his return on Djokovic’s second serve.. The Serb goes 7-6 up. AA’s forehand has just enough top spin to dip and tickle the baseline.. 7-7. Djokovic throws the kitchen sink at the Canadian on the next point – some great defence from AA – as Djokovic leaks a surprising unforced error with his forehand.

The Serb recovers by finding the line on his first serve, 8-8, before slipping again during the next rally. He gets away with it, as AA pushes a forehand effort behind the baseline, 9-8 to Djokovic.

Oh dear, Djokovic’s backhand return floats wide, 9-9. He mistimed that. AA strokes a forehand, 10-9. This is a monster tie-break.

Weird rally ensues.. Djokovic completely mishits his forehand, it swerves ridiculously but lands inside the court, before AA overcooks another forehand. AA returns long to hand Djokovic another set point.. And he has it! He takes the set after AA rips a long forehand winner. 

A marathon first set, which Djokovic take 7-6 (12-10).