How predictable, how awful, how depressing, but most of all how very, very, very drear of Keir.

Despite earlier pledges that he would stay on in the House of Commons until the next General Election, Sir Keir Starmer has surprised no one by announcing he is to stand down as an MP to focus on a role in ‘international affairs’ instead.

Look at you, dear Keir. Such a big, important muffin of self-puffing global grandiosity. I mean, international affairs? What might they be? A breakfast meeting with a junior attaché in Tuvalu; a photo op with Zelensky; an exchange of decorative crystal with the supreme leader of Lower Malta?

It’s not as if you distinguished yourself on the world stage during your two years as British Prime Minister. No one has forgotten when you mistook an interpreter for the president of South Korea, or when President Trump made you stick your hand in the air like a schoolboy begging for attention.

You tried to give away the Chagos Islands, you failed to establish a unified stance on the Israel-Gaza conflict, you even made Peter Mandelson our ambassador to the US. Keir, you are an embarrassment, a naïve fool, a constipated, ongoing cultural cringe with all the oratorial skills of a squeaky, slowly deflating balloon.

Nothing in your past qualifies you for a self-appointed role as an international statesman of the future, except your own gilt-edged belief in your diplomatic skills, an affectation shared by few.

Yet, just like a depressing number of leaders and prime ministers before him, Starmer has decided that he is not going to hang around on the back benches post-power.

So crushing for voters! It makes me feel that we are not a valued electorate whose views matter, but just – please steady yourselves for this truth bomb – collateral damage in the power plays of greedy individuals whose determination to become post-political, revenue-creating celebrities is nothing short of monstrous.

Despite his many promises, Starmer will not continue to honourably serve his constituency of Holborn & St Pancras; specifically, those trusting people who voted for him in the first place, generously providing his platform and route to power.

He will not repay their loyalty by fixing local bus services, the high levels of child poverty or the wealth inequality in a community where £5million townhouses and impoverished social housing estates occupy the same postcodes.

You’d think this would be enough to occupy a true socialist for the rest of his political lifetime; such a juicy microcosm of social inequality set within five square miles of inner London, somewhere a man with a mission could really make a difference. Especially after serving six years at the head of a party which runs on the petrol of envy politics and perceived inequality.

Instead, all this class agony is now in Starmer’s rear-view mirror as he presses pedal to the metal and accelerates into his new life. In many respects he’s like Brooklyn Beckham; talentless but addicted to fame. He’s like Prince Harry; powerless but drawn to the stage and the spotlight he feels his status affords him.

He’s a political Cinderella; a blushing wannabe who feels he deserves the glass slipper of international eminence and doesn’t care that his actions have sparked a by-election – one he knows his party might lose, ushering in the spectre of boob-whisperer Zack Polanski snaffling this prime London seat, dear God.

These are not the actions of a patriot, a man we can salute and admire. These are the manoeuvrings of a second-rater out for himself, a politico with an eye on the main chance and hopefully a luscious book deal for his ditch- water memoirs.

And he’s not alone. A distressing number of recent leaders have taken this stance. David Cameron vowed he’d see through whatever verdict the British people delivered in the Brexit referendum, only to flounce off and resign five minutes later.

Tony Blair took a similar view, and went on to make millions for himself, not the country he left behind. Boris Johnson left the House of Commons within a year of losing power, Liz Truss wasn’t given much choice and was booted out by her own electorate, Rishi Sunak stayed on, but one could argue he could afford to, so he did.

Meanwhile, former SNP leader and First Minister Nicola Sturgeon left high office saying she wanted to spend more time with her nieces and nephews. Never mind the scandals massing on the horizon like apocalyptic storm clouds.

Nobody seems to care that Nicola has left Scotland in a red-hot, boiling mess with her husband in jail and a fiscal deficit of £25billion as she reinvents herself as a London-based literary ‘star’ who is considering writing her first novel.

‘I won’t forgive myself if I don’t at least try,’ was the gist of her simpering messaging on Instagram this week. The utter nerve of this woman and these people, who leave us and their countries in disarray, but glide on to the next triumph in their own gilded lives.

There was a time when politicians who held high office would do the decent thing and hang on to see what they could do for their country and their constituents, instead of focusing on themselves.

Now it seems like every man (and every Nicola) is out for themselves.

Sir Keir Starmer rinsed through his time in office like a barrel going over a waterfall, like a snowball tossed off an Alp. He didn’t make much of a difference, we never really knew what he stood for, yet now he somehow sees himself as a global grand vizier; striding across the international stage, staying in a Davos hotel suite on someone else’s dime, ordering the cheese plate and chuntering on about policy to roars of applause in some UN enormodome.

Would golden epaulettes on his off-the-peg suits be a touch too much? He is probably ordering them as we speak.

Nicole’s dress is sheer magic!

Nicole Kidman stunned onlookers in her absolutely epic, black Versace dress in LA this week

Can we just pause to salute Nicole Kidman’s absolutely epic Versace dress, which she wore to the premiere of Practical Magic 2 in LA this week?

The hand-crafted, black lace confection with matching choker was the debut outfit by the label’s new designer Pieter Mulier. The former architect was appointed in February and has wasted no time in putting the struggling label back on the map.

Behold the drama! Somehow this dress marries saloon-girl chic with power-woman grit, making it both seductive and sensational, classy rather than tarty, and somehow entirely appropriate on a 59-year-old woman. That is what great design does, it makes everyone want to applaud it, wear it or just worship it from afar. And that really is practically magic.

Clancy trial is a terrible tragedy – not reality TV

Lindsay Clancy’s murder trial has become entertainment for some, despite the issues at stake

By the time you read this, anything could have happened in the Lindsay Clancy trial. The deadlocked jury could have come back into court and finally made a decision, delivering their verdict after nearly a week of struggle. This would bring some relief, no matter how controversial the judgment might be.

However, if they fail to reach a consensus, the judge could declare a mistrial, bouncing everyone back to a hellish square one.

For a hung jury leaves everyone in limbo; the prosecution have not proven Clancy’s guilt, the defence have not established her innocence, and Clancy would be sent back to the mental health hospital where she’s been detained since 2023, still held on the same charges. A new trial, a plea bargain, all charges dropped? Your guess is as good as mine.

One thing, however, will not change. And that is the terrible, sickening circus that has grown up around this case, surely one of the saddest to ever be brought before a court. The tragic facts are that Lindsay Clancy strangled and killed her three children before slashing her wrists and throwing herself out of a first-floor window, leaving her in a wheelchair.

The 36-year-old former nurse (right) does not dispute that she killed her two sons and daughter in their family home in Massachusetts. Her lawyer argues she was suffering from postpartum psychosis at the time and therefore could not distinguish right from wrong. The prosecution claim Clancy made a calculated decision to kill them. She is charged with three counts of first-degree murder.

In court, her eyes are dark pools of horror, her life over and her future doomed, whatever the legal outcome. Yet, for far too many voyeurs, her trial has become just an entertainment; a pass-the-popcorn, thrill-a-minute amusement for clowns so high on the excitement of it all they forget they are witnessing the harrowing proceedings of a murder trial, not a TV show.

It is grievous that these rubberneckers lack the morality, decency and intellect to appreciate the gravity of these terrible proceedings. One ‘true crime follower’ has been arrested for photographing the jury. A journalist was fired by her magazine for giggling and winking in court. Every day the TikTok mob scrutinise complicated medical testimonies from experts as if considering the words of contestants on a reality show. The mums who post pictures of their babies on social media, saying it could have been me! The armchair sleuths who claim it was the husband that dun it.

Deciding on this case is a lot to ask of a jury, who under US law must unanimously reach a conclusion of ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’. If they cannot, the judge can call a mistrial. There is no majority verdict option, as there is in the UK. Their task has not been made easier by the ghouls following every twist and turn of this case as if it were a soap opera.

The eco-meepers are back

Just Stop Oil returned to Parliament Square this week, glueing themselves to the road nearby

Summer has almost gone, there is an autumnal chill in the air and – please God no! – Just Stop Oil protesters are back after 17 months of peace.

Dozens of these eco warriors were arrested after glueing themselves to a carriageway near Parliament Square this week, just when Prime Minister Burnham was due to decide on whether to allow drilling on the Jackdaw and Rosebank gas and oil fields in the North Sea.

After being detained by the Met Police, the protesters complained about their ‘draconian’ bail conditions. Hankies at the ready, because several of them had their ‘train tickets, senior rail cards and oyster cards confiscated, before being released between 3 and 5am with no means of communication or way home’.

This approach is disgraceful, they meeped. You have to laugh. Heaven forbid they should be inconvenienced after holding thousands of hard-working Londoners to ransom.

Well done, the Met. You played a blinder.

Spain’s women’s football association are to pay for players to freeze their eggs. The agreement would give national team members access to fertility treatment, so they can focus on their sporting career but still have the option of motherhood later.

Is that a good idea? Critics warn it risks making delayed motherhood the norm in elite sport, while supporters argue having a family should not mean sacrificing a high-level playing career. One dream should not have to cancel another dream, they say.

Well, while I admire the sentiment, many things in life are a choice, especially if you are a woman. Encouraging another generation of girls to think they can have it all is, at best, irresponsible.

‘Women have always been an equal part of the past. We just haven’t been a part of history.’ 

These words are more than a truth that the late Gloria Steinem observed, they are the legacy of the work of a true trailblazer who dedicated her life to dismantling the structures of inequality designed to keep women out of the history books. 

Gloria didn’t just talk about change, she made it. 

Founding Ms Magazine, the first mainstream news outlet in the US which was run by women, Gloria sparked an international conversation about the devastating experiences of women that were too often hidden. 

In 1976, it became the first national magazine to feature a cover story which addressed domestic violence.

The following year, it ran a groundbreaking feature on sexual harassment at work and how to stop it.

Many shops refused to sell it at the time because it was seen as too controversial. But let’s remember – this was a time when employers could legally fire women for getting pregnant and abortion was illegal in most states. 

In the UK, women were required to resign from parts of the civil service when they got married. It is unthinkable now but women were denied mortgages and bank accounts unless they had the approval of a man. 

It was also before women had the words to talk about their experiences – too often, violence was normalised. 

This Is Not Right

On November 25, 2024 Metro launched This Is Not Right, a campaign to address the relentless epidemic of violence against women.

With the help of our partners at Women’s Aid, This Is Not Right aims to shine a light on the sheer scale of this national emergency.

You can find more articles here, and if you want to share your story with us, you can send us an email at vaw@metro.co.uk.

Read more:

Advertisement

Speaking at a conference in 2012, Gloria said: ‘When I was growing up, there was no term for domestic violence…It was just called life.’ 

We are indebted to feminists like Gloria who gave us language to name these social plagues, a step on the road to ending them.

Although Gloria began campaigning in America over half a century ago, her work resonates with ours. My own story began in the 1980s in the North East of England where women’s voices were often ignored. 

It was a time when the police would turn a blind eye to a man attacking his wife labelling it as ‘just a domestic’. I looked to trailblazing women like Gloria as I started my career fighting for women who have been victims of abuse and violence at the hands of men.

Before I became a politician, I ran a refuge for women and children fleeing domestic violence. 

This work is what motivates me, it’s why I got into politics in the first place, so that I could bring real, meaningful change for women and girls everywhere.

Founded by my mam – a women’s campaigner in the 1970s just like Gloria – it was one of the North East’s first women’s refuges. 

Growing up in the shadow of that activism, I saw firsthand that for many women, ‘rights’ aren’t abstract concepts, they are the difference between safety and peril.

Today, we stand on the shoulders of giants, like Gloria, and my mam, who navigated a much harsher world so that we could occupy this one. 

I am now part of a record-breaking number of phenomenal women in the UK’s most representative Cabinet ever. 

We are making history, as the first government with a dedicated Cabinet Minister working solely on making the lives of women and marginalised communities better. 

The progress fought for by Gloria has been transformative in improving the lives of women and  girls around the world,. 

But despite all the advancements we have made, our liberties are being challenged.

Whether this is a dangerous rollback of women’s rights in other countries, or calls to abolish the Equality Act at home, I feel acutely reminded that our rights are hard won but can be easily lost.

I am proud to be continuing Gloria’s legacy. Serving women and advocating for the marginalised runs in my blood.

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing Ross.Mccafferty@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.

MORE: Nigel Farage caught on hidden camera ‘celebrating foreign donations’ to Reform

MORE: I’m a teacher – pupils in exclusion breaks my heart

MORE: I can’t listen to ABBA without being reminded of what my mum did to me

A former Dragons’ Den investor has claimed that contestants were sometimes ‘bullied’ and subjected to unfair treatment on the show.

Richard Farleigh, who appeared as a Dragon during the BBC show’s third and fourth series, opened up about his time on the programme.

The Australian-born investor joined the show in 2006 alongside Deborah Meaden, replacing Doug Richard and Rachel Elnaugh, before leaving the series in 2007.

Reflecting on his time in the Den nearly 20 years later, Farleigh said in a LinkedIn post that the experience contestants went through left him ‘uncomfortable’.

‘For the contestants, it was a terrifying experience,’ he wrote.

‘And for many, it was the most important day of their business lives.’

Farleigh explained how entrepreneurs were not allowed to see the set before filming and would walk in to find themselves facing five Dragons and around 20 production crew members.

‘The dragons had all the advantages,’ he said.

‘Only about 10% of the footage made it to the final edit, and I suspect the BBC wasn’t keen on letting the dragons look too silly. In contrast, the same couldn’t be said for the contestants.

‘I was shocked by how nasty some of the other dragons were. The producers said the show needed a bit of nastiness – otherwise, contestants would have nothing to lose. There would be no sense of jeopardy.’

He claimed the Dragons would sometimes ‘over-criticise’ a presentation or contestant ‘to the point of ridicule’.

‘It was an unfair game – the dragons didn’t have much at stake, sitting comfortably in their chairs and sounding clever, while contestants had everything to lose,’ he said.

‘Occasionally, it even felt like bullying, which made me uncomfortable.’

Farleigh then recalled one incident where he was asked to speak to a contestant after filming because the man was extremely upset.

The contestant allegedly said that he had been told: ‘You’re either stupid or dishonest, or probably both. I was shocked.

‘He confided in me that he, too, had come through the care system and had hoped I would be the dragon to invest.

‘I told the director, politely, that if that footage ever made it on air, I would quit the show and publicly condemn it. Fortunately, the moment stayed off screen.’

Farleigh’s comments come nearly two decades after his time on Dragons’ Den, which sees business owners pitch their ideas to a panel of investors in the hope of securing funding in exchange for a stake in their company.

The investor stressed that his criticism did not apply to every appearance on the show, saying the programme was fair to contestants ‘in the vast majority of cases’ and that he enjoyed working with the BBC.

The BBC has declined to comment on Farleigh’s claims.

By RICHARD EDEN, DIARY EDITOR

Published: 12:22 BST, 3 September 2026 | Updated: 12:18 BST, 4 September 2026

Having absent-mindedly left my mobile telephone on my seat when I hurried off a London Underground train last Friday, I had a few days of enforced absence from the wider world until I could obtain a replacement after the bank holiday weekend.

The experience was disconcerting, slightly frightening, and brought home to me how addicted I have become to my smartphone, which contains everything from my emails and social media to my camera, alarm clock and banking app.

However, one sensation which did become increasingly pleasant as the hours and days wore on was the break it gave me from the relentless gossip about the return of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to this country.

If I had a pound for every tip I received about the supposed location of their new home or the school due to be attended by their children, Prince Archie, aged seven, and Princess Lilibet, five, I could buy a country mansion of my own!

Advertisement

It is all that many people have wanted to talk about since Prince Harry and Meghan informed a handful of friendly media outlets a fortnight ago that they were leaving California and moving back to Britain, six years after they quit royal duties to seek their fortune in North America.

The Cotswolds, where the couple had previously rented a country home, was seen as their most likely destination and it sometimes seems as if there was scarcely anyone left in the area’s 800 square miles across six English counties who had not contacted me to provide exclusive information on the Sussexes’ supposed whereabouts. If the couple thought Los Angeles was gossip central, wait until they have spent a few weeks among the country bumpkins of Oxfordshire and Gloucestershire!

William and Catherine have been treated appallingly by Harry and Meghan and should feel no compulsion to mend fences with them, writes Richard Eden

Advertisement

If Harry and Meghan thought Los Angeles was gossip central, wait until they have spent a few weeks among the country bumpkins of Oxfordshire and Gloucestershire

Two people who are determined to ignore the second coming of Meghan and Harry are his estranged brother and sister-in-law, the Prince and Princess of Wales.

Many believe that this situation cannot persist, with Prince William coming under increasing pressure to send Harry an olive branch or two.

My esteemed colleague Richard Kay argued in a compelling Voices video for the Daily Mail’s website that William can’t continue to ignore his younger brother.

Advertisement

‘At some stage they are going to have to engage, because they can’t not engage forever,’ Kay said. ‘I would have thought that in the first instance there would need to be a private meeting between Harry and William and presumably Catherine and Meghan, too, where they can sort of hammer out some kind of official line, even if it’s sort of grip and grin in public, but at least show there is some kind of public-spirited sense of reunion between the two.’

Kay said the estrangement could not be allowed to fester for weeks or months. ‘The public won’t stand for it,’ he said. ‘William knows that, above all, his responsibility to the monarchy, to the institution, has to take first place, so he’ll have to put whatever personal differences he has to one side.’

I rarely disagree with my friend Richard, but on this I do. The pressure being put on William and Catherine is unfair and wrong. They have been treated appallingly by Harry and Meghan and should feel no compulsion to mend fences with them. The Sussexes betrayed and insulted the couple not only in their Oprah Winfrey interview but in their Netflix series, Harry’s memoir Spare and in a seemingly endless stream of interviews that Harry gave.

A friend of William and Catherine tells me that they will go on ignoring the Sussexes. ‘It makes no difference if Harry and Meghan are in Oxfordshire, California or Timbuktu,’ the pal insists. ‘William and Catherine will continue their lives of public service. They intend to lead by example.’

Advertisement

A Kensington Palace spokesman declines to comment.

Meeting my friend Julian for our regular coffee catch-ups is one of the highlights of my month.

From the moment we sit down we barely stop for breath, covering everything from current events, relationship niggles and what our children are up to.

I know I can tell him anything. In short, he’s my best friend.

What you may be surprised to learn is that I’m in a happy long-term relationship with another man. Thankfully, Nick is very accepting of our friendship.

Even more shocking, I was married to Julian for more than two decades until, ten years ago, when I was 49, he broke my heart in the most devastating way.

It came out of the blue – or so it felt at the time.

We had been lying in bed together one night when suddenly Julian started crying and handed me a small white envelope.

Something was obviously very wrong – and my mind raced with possibilities. Was I about to discover my husband was hiding an affair, a hideous debt, a terminal illness?

Hands shaking as I opened the envelope, I desperately scanned the four pages, written in his always elegant handwriting.

Then my eyes fixed on three heart-stopping words: ‘I am gay.’

Impossible, I thought, my mind flashing back to the birth of our three incredible children, then 16, 18 and 20. Then to our wedding day 21 years earlier and the vows we’d taken to love and cherish each other for ever.

Fury bubbling inside me, I wanted to scream, to rip the letter into shreds and yet, in a calm voice I didn’t recognise, I heard myself ask: ‘Is this true? Did you ever love me? Have you been unfaithful? What does this all mean?’

‘I never wanted to hurt you, Leanne,’ he finally replied softly.

But he had. I’d just discovered the last two decades of my life had been a lie.

Was there any way that our marriage could survive this? And how had I not recognised the truth about Julian before?

Perhaps the answer lay in my upbringing. I grew up one of nine, with an abusive father. I hated him and knew I wanted to be with a man who was gentle and kind – the total opposite of my dad.

I coped by reminding myself that I had three beautiful children and most of the time our marriage was good. If a lack of sex was the price I had to pay for the life we had, I accepted that, says Leanne 

The night before our wedding, Julian nervously asked me: ‘Leanne, are we doing the right thing?’

Advertisement

Someone, in fact, exactly like Julian, who I’d met when I was 27 and studying to be a teacher.

For fun I’d gone to have my tarot cards read and when I told the reader I hoped to meet someone, her face lit up. ‘My brother Julian is a Leo, a teacher and from a big family, just like you,’ she said enthusiastically. ‘I think you’d make the perfect match.’

At 25, Julian was handsome and charming but it was his quiet manner that really struck me.

When we met, he asked me questions and really seemed to care about the answers. I couldn’t believe this gentle, intelligent man was single.

At first, it didn’t bother me that he didn’t try to kiss me. But when we went away together three weeks later, he still didn’t make a move. That evening I stared at his long eyelashes and full lips, desperately hoping he’d take the hint, but he seemed oblivious.

Julian had confessed to being a virgin, so I understood that sex was a big step for him.

But the fact we still hadn’t even kissed left me confused, frustrated and a little annoyed.

I suggested that we take a break but a week later his mum called to tell me how sad Julian was without me. I was thrilled; surely this was a sign that we should try again?

This time, Julian was the passionate one and we began having sex, which was both frequent and thoroughly enjoyable.

I was so happy; it felt like the final piece of our relationship puzzle had fallen into place, especially when, six months later, Julian proposed.

But despite having put a ring on my finger, he still shied away from public displays of affection. When I snuggled up to him on a train one day, Julian froze, as if we were doing something inappropriate.

In those moments, when I felt a dart of rejection and uncertainty, I’d tell myself not to be silly. If I chose to be with an introvert, what did I expect?

Besides, Julian was passionate when we were alone and we were so compatible in all other ways. We both wanted children and were thrilled to discover that I was pregnant just two months after the proposal.

Suddenly our plan for a huge wedding the following winter seemed crazy. So we eloped. It felt very romantic. But the night before our wedding, Julian nervously asked me: ‘Leanne, are we doing the right thing?’

‘But while his love for the children was never in question, over the years our own connection began to fray’

I assumed he was concerned about how our families would react to our elopement and reassured him that everything would be fine.

Two decades later I’d remember his words and realise there was a very different worry behind them.

Still, Julian was delighted when I gave birth to our son, and then again when our two daughters followed. But while his love for the children was never in question, over the years our own connection began to fray.

After 11 years of marriage, sex dwindled from occasional to non-existent.

At a friend’s wedding, someone asked: ‘Julian, aren’t you proud of how beautiful your wife looks?’

All we got in reply was a distracted: ‘Mm, yes.’

His disinterest cut deep, especially because he was thoughtful in so many other ways.

I was a woman with desires and needs but was left feeling unloved and ugly. If I tried to bring up our lack of intimacy, he’d either refuse to discuss it or become defensive.

‘I just don’t need sex all the time,’ he’d say, clearly wishing the conversation over. ‘I’m not like other men.’

These were also words that I’d one day look back on through a very different lens.

I coped by reminding myself that I had three beautiful children and most of the time our marriage was good. If a lack of sex was the price I had to pay for the life we had, I accepted that.

Like many midlife women, I didn’t think I deserved more and just assumed this was what happened in a long marriage.

By January 2016, I was 49 and life had settled into a regular, if unexciting, rhythm. I still loved Julian and, after 21 years of marriage, I knew he loved me.

But it had been ten years since we’d had sex and affection was rare. If I was really upset, he might wrap me in his arms and, for a minute, I’d be overwhelmed with how good it felt to be touched. Then it was over.

The night my world collapsed, I walked into our bedroom expecting my usual peck on the cheek goodnight.

‘Julian told me that he’d always thought he was gay but, in his shame, he’d buried it’

Instead, Julian silently handed me the envelope with my name on the front and began to cry.

After reading his letter, hands still shaking, and with the words ‘I am gay’ endlessly repeating in my brain, I found myself listening as he sobbed.

‘Leanne, I had to tell you because I was afraid of what I might do, and you deserve someone so much better than me,’ he explained.

We stayed up the whole night talking, crying and holding each other. I couldn’t remember the last time we’d embraced like that and it felt good, even though I knew it was a life-changing revelation that had brought us into each other’s arms.

Julian told me that he’d always thought he was gay but, in his shame, he’d buried it. That while there had been some fumbles with a man before he met me, he’d never been unfaithful. I know many wives wouldn’t have believed him, but I did. I still do.

As I heard him express his undying love for me, I remembered a line in his letter: ‘I hope we can continue our marriage journey, albeit a different one.’

But I felt sick at the revelation that he’d been getting up early for years to secretly watch gay porn. That it was his guilt and desperation to be with a man that had led him to write the letter.

Yet I loved him and truly believed that now he was being honest, we could make it work.

I see now how utterly naive that was but, as bizarre as it sounds, the next few weeks felt like a second honeymoon.

Julian was a new man, affectionate and desperate to touch me, though in hindsight I can see this came from his desire for our marriage to survive his revelation rather than a newfound desire for me.

We wrote lists of the things we loved about each other and walked along the beach holding hands. I was giddy with love.

I took extra care of my appearance, desperately trying to win his approval. I was willing to do whatever it took. And if Julian needed to look at pictures of men occasionally, I told myself I could deal with that. Which is how I found us having sex again for the first time in over a decade, this time both of us looking at pictures or videos of naked men.

But seeing Julian’s desire for them in the pictures on screen, realising that our relationship would always involve another man, even if only in picture form, was too much.

Two weeks after his letter, my oldest daughter, then 18, found me crying in the garden. I tried to evade her questions but she realised it was something to do with Dad. Had he had an affair, she asked. ‘Not really,’ I replied.

She had always been very intuitive, picking up on things the rest of us might miss.

So I can only assume it was some instinct or inkling from what she’d observed of our relationship throughout her childhood that then made her ask: ‘Is Dad gay, Mum?’ 

I confess that it was with both sadness and relief that I replied: ‘Yes.’ We sat down as a family of five to talk. All three children cycled through confusion and anger.

Meanwhile, I battled insomnia, lying awake for hours, endlessly analysing our years together. I thought about Julian’s doubts the night before our wedding and felt sick.

How different life would be if I’d understood his real reason for fearing saying: ‘I do.’

One moment I was angry at myself for not realising the truth, the next furious at him for making my life, and our marriage, a sham.

I relentlessly asked him questions, believing that if I learned enough, I could move forward. Instead, I only heard things that broke me further.

Did Julian ever think of men when we’d kissed? ‘Sometimes,’ he replied.

The loving Valentine’s cards and wedding anniversary letters he’d written me, were they a lie?

‘I was just keeping up the act,’ he replied sadly, determined to stick to his promise to tell me the truth, no matter how painful. ‘I believed with time we could make it work.’

I desperately needed help. I opened up to a few close friends, who were supportive, but none truly understood the turmoil of my situation. Then I found an online support group for spouses whose partners had revealed they were gay.

It was a lifeline; here were people who knew exactly what I was going through. Sharing our stories, I discovered that many had been through worse, facing sexual infidelity that had put their own health at risk.

Five months after the letter, I was still on an emotional rollercoaster.

I was scared of being alone but also knew that I deserved more than being a substitute for Julian’s real desires.

Eventually I told him our marriage was over.

Julian accepted my decision with sadness but not anger and it took seven more months before he finally moved out.

Watching him drive away, it felt like a huge weight lifted from my shoulders.

While I still cared for him, I couldn’t imagine we’d stay close.

In the weeks that followed, we’d meet up to discuss practical divorce matters or the children.

But to my surprise, we found we could go for a walk or have a coffee and not endlessly rake over the past.

I found myself telling him that I’d begun writing as a way to help me process what had happened. I listened as he told me his hopes of meeting a man one day. Instead of pain at his words, I felt happy for him.

When we hugged goodbye, it felt like a moment with a friend.

Hearing Julian talk about possible future partners, I wondered about my own love life.

I wanted to try to fill the loneliness that I now saw had existed for years before Julian told me his secret. It wasn’t easy. When I tried speed dating six months after Julian left, I realised it was far too soon.

But a relationship with a handsome engineer I met through a mutual friend reminded me how exciting it was to fall for someone again and the sex was passionate and exciting.

He did his best to make me feel safe but it was so hard to truly trust anyone.

In turn, he struggled with my developing friendship with Julian. We split up after a year.

It was only after this that my friendship with Julian really blossomed.

By then, thanks in part to time passing, I’d fully accepted that Julian had never meant to hurt me. He continued to show me care and compassion. It was obvious that he truly wanted the very best for me.

As we continued to meet up and talk, I realised that I wasn’t in love with him as I had been before. My feelings for him were for a friend.

I was genuinely thrilled when he began a relationship with a man, just as he was when, six years ago, aged 53, I met my current partner Nick, then 55.

Nick has never felt threatened by my unusual journey or close friendship with Julian.

Now when Julian – who is currently single – and I see a show or meet for a meal, I’m proud of how far we’ve come.

A decade ago, I opened an envelope and thought my life was over. Instead, I discovered my true strength.

I deserved honesty and love – and want every woman to know that they deserve the same.

Julian’s name has been changed. My Gay Husband: How My Gay Ex-Husband Became My Best Friend by Leanne Azzopardi is out now (£5, amazon.co.uk)

As told to Kate Graham

Town hall chiefs said this will help get the “teams get back on track with collections because we have had more people off sick than usual”.

Officers said that despite sending out extra crews on weekday evenings and on Saturdays to try to catch up, operational issues mean some bins are still waiting to be collected.

 Residents whose entire street has been missed this week should leave their bin out for collection over the weekend and up to the end of the day on Tuesday, September 8.

 Scheduled collections of burgundy bins on Monday, September 7 and Tuesday, September 8 will be cancelled.

(Image: Bolton Council)

 Anyone whose burgundy bin is due to be collected on those days will be able to put out extra bags of recycling on their next scheduled collection day for the burgundy bin only. 

 Additional recycling should be placed in an untied bag next to the burgundy bin.

 The idea is by delaying collections of burgundy bins, the bin waggons can prioritise collections of food waste and non-recyclable waste due to hygiene.

 Burgundy bins are for dry recycling like bottles and cans, but not paper.

 A spokesperson for Bolton Council said:  “We apologise once again for the inconvenience when bins are missed, we know how frustrating it can be.

 “We are doing all we can to get back on schedule and very much appreciate people’s patience.”

 The apology comes after weeks of disruption which has left bins uncollected on hundreds of streets across Bolton.

In a statement the council added: “We’re doing this to help our teams get back on track with collections because we have had more people off sick than usual.

“We’re delaying collections of burgundy bins so that we can prioritise collections of food waste and non-recyclable waste due to hygiene.”

Cllr Baggy Khan and Cllr Hanif Alii have complained about bin collections being missed in Halliwell (Image: Public)

The Bolton News previously revealed that as many as 20 bin wagon drivers had been signed off sick, including 10 on long-term sick leave and another 10 on general sick leave.

The council has now said it has had “more people off sick than usual” as it works to get collections back on schedule.

The disruption has been ongoing for several weeks, with council records previously showing 250 streets where collections appeared to have been missed on August 12 and 13.

There were then 158 entries attributed to operational issues between August 19 and 21.

The council has been deploying additional crews and working extended hours in an effort to recover missed collections.

Cllr Cllr Ismail Ibrahim, of Rumworth ward, told The Bolton News previously: “I have been inundated with enquiries from frustrated residents across Rumworth, where missed collections have affected hundreds of households.

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia (AP) — China has arrested 52 Singapore citizens in the southern region of Guangxi in a law enforcement operation targeting suspected pyramid scheme activities and related offenses, Singapore’s Foreign Ministry said Friday.

Sim Ann, Singapore’s second minister for foreign affairs, said the city-state is in contact with Chinese authorities to obtain more information on the matter. She said staff from the Singapore Embassy in Beijing have visited the 52 detainees and are providing them with consular support.

The ministry said Chinese authorities are continuing their investigations. It didn’t provide details on when the Singaporeans were arrested, their identities or the amount of money involved.

In Beijing, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun told reporters Friday that China investigates and handles criminal cases involving foreign citizens in accordance with the law.

Sim said Singapore’s government doesn’t intervene in other countries’ judicial processes and investigations, but that “due process should be accorded to our citizens,” according to a transcript of her remarks on the Foreign Ministry’s website.

Sim urged Singaporeans to exercise caution when considering business or investment schemes, especially those involving the recruitment of new participants, the upfront payment of substantial sums of money or promises of unusually high returns.

Pyramid schemes typically require participants to pay to join and recruit others, with financial returns depending largely on bringing in new participants and their payments.

Clarkson’s Farm presenter Jeremy Clarkson has said that 11 sheep have been stolen from his Diddly Squat farm.

The 66-year-old said he noticed the livestock were missing while counting his flock in Chadlington, Oxfordshire, alongside co-star Kaleb Cooper.

In an interview with The Sun, he told those responsible to “put them back”.

The former Top Gear and The Grand Tour host stated that the stolen sheep were worth in excess of £2,000 at market, expressing concern that animals kept in other fields on the property might also have been taken.

He suggested the theft took place at night or on a day when filming for Prime Video’s Clarkson’s Farm was paused, explaining that otherwise there is “a film crew here all the time” and “a drone in the air”.

Asked whether he believed the show had made his farm a target, Clarkson said: “It’s more likely to make you a target than less, but I still don’t think they’ve been stolen because they’re on Diddly Squat.

“How can you (stop it) if someone’s determined to steal your livestock?

“This is 1,000 acres, it’s a big farm. Anyone could be anywhere and you wouldn’t know.”

The theft was reportedly raised with Thames Valley Police by Cooper and land manager Charlie Ireland.

Clarkson said: “The police have been very good, actually.

“Once you go through 700 hours of recorded messages, I got through to a girl.

“I said, ‘I know it’s going to sound like I’m from 1856, but I’ve had some sheep stolen’.

Watch Apple TV+ free for 7 day

Advertisement

New subscribers only. £9.99/mo. after free trial. Plan auto-renews until cancelled.

Try for free

ADVERTISEMENT. If you sign up to this service we will earn commission. This revenue helps to fund journalism across The Independent.

“She went through the name and address and then she said, ‘oh, not your Easycares’ (a British breed of sheep). She’s obviously been watching the show, but it is the Easycares.”

He added: “It’s a farm. We’re armed. Just so they know.

“It p***** me off. Honestly, it just p***** me off.”

Earlier this year, Clarkson revealed he had been diagnosed with “aggressive” prostate cancer, which had been discovered early, during an episode of Clarkson’s Farm.

In a subsequent interview with The Sunday Times, Clarkson said that a PSA test in April showed no indication of cancer and he is in remission.

On Wednesday, Clarkson appeared at the premiere of the latest series of Prime Video motoring show The Grand Tour, which will see three new presenters, Francis Bourgeois, Thomas Holland and James Englesman, take over from him, James May and Richard Hammond.

Clarkson and Thames Valley Police have been contacted for comment.

Richard O’Sullivan, who starred in the television sitcoms Man About the House and Robin’s Nest, has died aged 82.

Mr O’Sullivan, who also played the title character in the period series Dick Turpin, died at Brinsworth House, the Royal Variety Charity’s care home in Twickenham, west London.

He had lived in the home for the last 23 years and met the Duchess of Sussex during her visit there in December 2018.

Mr O’Sullivan’s son James said in a statement: ‘My dad was as funny and charming in real life as he appeared on our TV screens over the years.

‘Always kind spirited, good humoured, a doting grandfather and a wonderful dad – I will miss him dearly.

‘Although much of his career happened before I was born, I was fortunate enough to be able to enjoy and witness his incredible talents on the countless re-runs of his shows that made him the respected and loved actor that he was.

‘I would like to thank the incredible team at Brinsworth for their love, kindness and care over the last 23 years.

‘They have been truly amazing and will always hold a special place in my heart.’

He starred as Robin Tripp alongside Tessa Wyatt, who played Vicky Nicholls, in Robin’s Nest

Mr O’Sullivan (left) met the Duchess of Sussex, who visited the Royal Variety Charity’s nursing home in 2018 while pregnant with Prince Archie 

Advertisement

He spoke warmly with the Duchess of Sussex during the visit, which also included a festive sing-a-long

And Giles Cooper, Life-President of the Royal Variety, said: ‘Richard O’Sullivan was a master of effortless charm and impeccable comic timing, bringing pure warmth, wit, and unforgettable joy to millions of living rooms as a true giant of British television.

‘He will be sorely missed by us all at the Royal Variety Charity.’

Born in Chiswick, west London, a young Mr O’Sullivan returned from a family holiday in Ireland with a strong Irish accent and was sent to the Corona Theatre School to soften it.

He went on to debut in The Yellow Balloon, which he filmed at the age of eight in 1952, before playing the main character in The Stranger’s Hand the following year.

As an adult he appeared in two Cliff Richard films in the early 1960s: The Young Ones and Wonderful Life.

In the years that followed he played roles in numerous television series including Redcap, Danger Man, No Hiding Place and Strange Report.

His first prominent television comedy roles came in the early 1970s, when he played Lawrence Bingham in Doctor at Large and a leading part in Alcock and Gander.

In one of his best-known roles Mr O’Sullivan starred as Robin Tripp, a trainee chef, in the flatshare sitcom Man About the House, which first aired in 1973.

After the series ended in 1976 he continued to star in the spin-off – Robin’s Nest – in which the character founded a bistro.

He had relationships with two of his co-stars, Sally Thomsett from Man About the House and Tessa Wyatt, who played his girlfriend Vicky in Robin’s Nest.

During his seven-year relationship with Ms Wyatt the couple had one son, James. 

Mr O’Sullivan had previously married the model Diana Terry in 1971, though the pair divorced the same year.

Mr O’Sullivan with the model Diana Terry on their wedding day in March 1971

He played Simon Harrup alongside Joanne Campbell and Joan Sanderson in Me and My Girl, which aired during the mid-1980s

Comedian Ronnie Corbett (left) and Mr O’Sullivan (centre) in a scene from Now Look Here in November 1971

Advertisement

He starred in the drama series Dick Turpin until 1982 before playing the widower Simon Harrup in the sitcom Me and My Girl in the mid-1980s.

His final acting role was in a one-off 1996 golfing satire named Holed with Tony Robinson.

Three years later he was a guest on This is Your Life, as part of an episode honouring his former Doctor in the House co-star George Layton.

Mr O’Sullivan had been the subject of an episode in 1974 – his participation in Mr Layton’s edition would mark his final television appearance.

After suffering a stroke in 2003, Mr O’Sullivan moved to the Royal Variety Charity’s retirement home in west London, where he remained until his death. 

The popular comedian and wife, Cerys, shared the news with an announcement about creating a new foundation in their son’s honour

Comedian Russell Howard has shared the tragic news that his baby son died shortly after being born.

Baby Felix’s death happened earlier this year and the TV star said it was a moment that “changed his family forever.”

In a statement shared on Instagram, Russell thanked the NHS staff who supported his family and made sure that he and his wife Cerys Morgan were able to have share some “precious memories” with their son.

The 46-year-old said: “Earlier this year, our family changed forever when our beautiful baby boy, Felix, died shortly after birth.

“During the most devastating time of our lives, the hospital staff who cared for us showed extraordinary compassion, kindness and humanity.

“They helped us navigate an unimaginable heartache and gave us support when we needed it most. We were assigned a bereavement midwife, Lauren, who had experienced a similar tragedy.

“After losing her own baby, Lauren retrained as a midwife so that she could help other families going through what she had been through. Her care meant more to us than we can ever put into words.

“During our time in hospital, Felix was placed in a cool cot, which meant that my wife and I were able to spend precious hours with our beautiful boy.

“We could hold him, talk to him and tell him just how much we loved him. Those hours are among the most precious memories we have of Felix.”

The couple are now establishing a foundation in their son’s memory to help others who have to endure a similar loss. Russell added: “We were overwhelmed by the care we received, and we made a promise to each other: that we would try to help other families who find themselves facing the same devastating circumstances.

“And so, in Felix’s memory, we are establishing The Felix Foundation. The foundation will aim to relieve the needs of parents, siblings and other close family members affected by miscarriage premature birth, stillbirth, neonatal death or related bereavement.”

The foundation will kick off with a gala at The O2 in London on February 8, 2027, which will be headlined by Jimmy Carr, Mo Gilligan, Guz Kahn, Michelle Wolf and more.

Russell added: “Every single one of these incredible performers is giving their time completely free of charge. I will never forget their generosity.

“We would absolutely love it if you could join us for what promises to be a very special evening: a night of comedy, laughter and celebration, all in aid of a cause that means everything to our family.”

He concluded: “The Felix Foundation is named after our beautiful son. We miss him dearly, every single day, but we take some comfort in knowing that his name will stand for kindness, compassion and laughter, and that his legacy may help other families through the darkest moments of their lives.

“We would love it if you came along and helped us make Felix’s legacy something truly special.”

Get daily breaking news updates on your phone by joining our WhatsApp community here. We occasionally treat members to special offers, promotions and ads from us and our partners. See our Privacy Notice.