The senior Reform official didn’t pull his punches. ‘The point of this conference was to show the country we were ready for office. That we had a plan for our first 100 days. And we’ve blown it.’

Twelve months ago, when Nigel Farage and his party arrived in Birmingham for their first major gathering since the General Election, the prospect of securing power was an ambitious but realistic goal. Keir Starmer’s premiership was already imploding. The Tories were flatlining, with speculation rife Kemi Badenoch was set to be ousted as leader and replaced by Robert Jenrick.

The polls showed Reform UK on 30 per cent, ten points ahead of Labour, 14 ahead of the Conservatives, and on course for an outright majority.

So this year’s conference was – at Nigel Farage’s own insistence – supposed to be a defining moment. The point at which he and his allies transitioned from being scrappy political insurgents to supplanting the Tories as the effective Opposition to Labour, and showing the nation they were the viable alternative government in waiting.

But his colleague is right. They have indeed blown it.

Over the past 72 hours the political agenda has been dominated by Channel 4’s ‘sting operation’ which saw two of Farage’s most senior aides suspended from the party for allegedly discussing improper donations. But in a sense, that represents a side issue. What the 2026 Reform conference has highlighted is the way that over the last 12 months the party has not merely stalled, but regressed.

Yes, there is a greater degree of professionalism about their operation, as anyone walking around the impressive array of corporate stalls dotting the National Exhibition Centre could attest.

There was also some evidence of policy development, with the unfeasible proposal of unilaterally dumping small-boat migrants back on French beaches seemingly replaced by a tentative returns agreement secured with French prime ministerial candidate Jordan Bardella. And the long queues to enter the conference hall showed the energy and enthusiasm of the Reform faithful remain undimmed.

But this was merely papering over the cracks. Cracks that are now turning into gaping fissures.

‘There’s a serious divide between the Tory defectors and Reform traditionalists,’ one party source admitted to me yesterday.

‘The Tories think we have to start to broaden our appeal, detoxify the brand and stop trying to simply appeal to our base.

‘But traditionalists are obsessed with trying to outflank Restore, pushing everything through the prism of migration and fighting a culture war.’

There are also major splits forming within Nigel Farage’s inner circle. In the wake of the Channel 4 exposé, the departure of senior aides Dan Jukes and James Orr was seen by many as a body-blow to the party. But some senior Reform insiders are openly celebrating their demise.

‘Jukes was a liability,’ another Reform official claimed. ‘He was leading Nigel astray.

‘This gives an opportunity to get things back on track.’

Another insider stated: ‘It’s damaged us, but it gives us the chance to push through the changes that are needed at the top of the party. What Nigel needs is a proper chief of staff, not a bunch of courtiers.’

This in-fighting is music to the ears of Reform’s political opponents. One senior Tory official pointed to the ongoing blood-letting and dysfunctionality, and drew a direct contrast with the way Kemi Badenoch last week reshuffled her own top team.

‘You look at how we managed it. A number of senior people were moved and replaced with fresh talent. There were no rows. No tantrums. We’ve had our problems, but we’re now looking like a serious alternative government. They look like a rabble.’

One thing that was notable was that as Reform’s showpiece conference turned into a bin-fire, there was no attempt by Kemi Badenoch or Andy Burnham to leverage or exploit their obvious discomfort. Which is part of a deliberate strategy.

Badenoch has taken the decision that from now on Reform will effectively be ignored.

‘We think the battle lines are clear now,’ one senior aide explained. ‘It’s us as traditional Conservatives versus Burnham and his old-school Labour socialism. That’s the choice facing the country. That’s where our focus is.

‘Reform are too busy looking inward and fighting among themselves.’

Meanwhile, the latest incumbent in No10 views Reform as representing less of a threat and more of a political opportunity.

‘Obviously Reform are splitting the Right, and that’s a big help to us,’ one Burnham ally revealed, ‘but Andy is going to adopt a different approach to them.

‘Keir basically said, “I’m going to destroy Farage and everything he represents”. Andy’s approach is going to be to reach out to Reform voters and say, “I get it. I understand why you’re angry. I don’t think you’re a bunch of ignorant bigots. Let me see if I can help sort some of this.’

French prime ministerial candidate Jordan Bardella, the leader of the National Rally party, with Nigel Farage at the Reform UK conference. The pair have agreed a tentative returns deal over small-boat migrants

Advertisement

In the bars of Birmingham, in the wake of Nigel Farage’s strangely lacklustre speech, the view of the travelling press pack was that this had indeed been a defining moment.

‘There’s no way they recover from this,’ one veteran Reform observer stated, echoing the prevailing consensus. His view was reinforced by a Reform MP. ‘Power isn’t a realistic prospect,’ they conceded. ‘Our strategy now has to be to try to shore up our existing support and see if we can leapfrog the Tories and become the new Opposition.’

That view is almost certainly overly pessimistic. Whatever happens, Reform will continue to exert influence over British politics. There is a small but significant proportion of the electorate who no longer trust the two main traditional parties, and see Farage and his allies as the only remaining hope for their broken nation.

But another truth has emerged from Birmingham. This was supposed to be the conference where Reform demonstrated they are ready for government.

And they are palpably not. They are too fractured internally. The bulk of their policy prescriptions – from Robert Jenrick’s ambitious assertion he would manage to cut public spending by £80 billion a year in his first five years in the Treasury, through their flip-flopping over the two-child benefit cap, to their proposal to effectively penalise pensioners and single mothers in the allocation of social housing – are neither practical nor electorally viable.

The ongoing scandals surrounding their finances expose a recklessness towards important regulations safeguarding our public governance, and an increasingly arrogant belief the rules do not apply to them.

Kemi Badenoch’s aide is correct. This weekend the choice facing Britain became clear. Kemi’s traditional conservatism. Or Andy Burnham’s old-school socialism.

However effective Nigel Farage has been at identifying the problems facing the country, Reform are simply not currently a viable alternative government.

And based on what I just witnessed in Birmingham, it may be many, many years until they are.

– READ MORE: Robert Jenrick vows to cut taxes for millions… and says he’ll quit if pledge isn’t met in the first 100 days 

– READ MORE: Nigel Farage says ‘bad period’ is over for Reform as family urges him to quit as he faces barrage of questions over donations to his party 

The reviews for the new Oasis film have landed. Don’t Look Back In Anger received its world premiere at the Venice Film Festival today (September 5), which saw the Gallagher brothers reunite in front of paparazzi to promote the new film, which will be released in cinemas next week.

From acclaimed directors Will Lovelace and Dylan Southern, the film features behind-the-scenes footage from the band’s Live ’25 reunion tour, as well as the Gallagher’s first joint interview since the series of gigs began last July. It has also been written by Peaky Blinders creator Steven Knight.

Click here for the latest on Manchester’s food & drink scene, gigs and more in our CityLife newsletter

Ahead of its cinema release on Wednesday (September 9) and its arrival on streaming platform Disney+ later this year, reviews for the film have been published today following the world premiere at the prestigious festival and it appears to be a resounding success. The documentary has been hailed as both a ‘beautiful, emotional thing’ and ‘powerfully nostalgic’.

For a review in the Manchester Evening News, What’s On editor Jenna Campbell said the documentary was a ‘triumphant homage to Manchester’s favourite sons’, but features a series of ‘tense’ and ‘even a little stilted’ initial interactions with the brothers as they begin rehearsals for the 41-date tour.

Giving her verdict on the film, she wrote: “There is no other way around it, what you watch is utterly captivating. Whether you were there or not, you feel part of it again – the tears, the sheer euphoria of people dancing and singing their hearts out – it’s pure alchemy. There’s plenty of humour too, as the two personalities collide and eventually find a meeting point.

“Underpinning it, though, is the story arc of the brother’s relationship. Those first few scenes of rehearsals feel like things remain unsaid, but rather than thrash it out, the gigs themselves feel like the perfect remedy for years of misunderstanding, miscommunication and growing distance.”

You can read the Manchester Evening News’ full review of Don’t Look Back In Anger here.

Also praising the film, Time Out Worldwide’s film editor Phil de Semlyen gave it a five-star review as he said the documentary is ‘loud, hopeful and surprisingly emotional’. TheWrap’s Siddhant Adlakha, meanwhile, said it could ‘turn agnostics into believers’ in a positive breakdown.

The Hollywood Reporter described it as a ‘rich and poignant celebration’, with Richard Lawson writing that directors ‘Lovelace and Southern have compellingly stitched together interviews, performance clips, audience reactions, and a few detours into the lives of individual fans’. He also said it may be the most expletive-laden film to arrive on Disney+ yet.

Lawson added that the brother’s interviews are ‘charmingly self-effacing and humble’, which goes somewhat against the reputation they are used to having in the press – suggesting they may be ‘putting on a good act for the cameras’.

NME’s Rhian Daly said the ‘masterfully done doc captures [the Gallagher’s] journey’, and said ‘watching the pair repair their relationship is a beautiful, emotional thing’ to witness on the screen.

In a four-star review, The Guardian’s Peter Bradshaw described it as a ‘mammoth tour movie’ that ‘brings the joy and poignancy of reunion’ to the big screen. He added: “It was always difficult to be cynical about Oasis and now it’s impossible.”

Also giving it four-stars for The Telegraph, film critic Robbie Collin said it is ‘powerfully nostalgic’ but slightly lacking when it comes to any ‘Gallagher gossip’ or drama that some fans may be hoping for.

IndieWire’s Marshall Shaffer also downplayed the drama on-screen, adding: “Anyone expecting fireworks, or even a confrontation of any kind, may be sorely disappointed by how anticlimactic the moment proves.” But the writer said the films ‘offers a definitive behind-the-scenes glimpse of how this secular sanctuary came to be’, even if its lengthy setlist may put off casual viewers.

Advertisement

The film’s release comes as rumours mount over the band’s 2027 touring schedule, as leaks have suggested they could be on the brink of announcing at least 23 UK dates over the summer including a 12-night residency at Manchester’s Etihad Stadium. The band have also been adding to the specualtion with a series of cryptic videos hinting towards Glasgow, Manchester and Munich.

HARARE, Zimbabwe (AP) — A television game show in Nigeria’s commercial hub of Lagos has an unforgiving rule: Speak English and you lose. For a U.S.-born millennial in the audience and a student of her parents’ mother tongue, the high-stakes setting is a perfect classroom.

Meanwhile, a 15-year-old Canadian speaks to a teacher about 13,000 kilometers (8,000 miles) away in Zimbabwe, learning a language her parents feared she would never speak.

“Mhoroi,” Nyashadzashe Machingura says cheerfully with a pronounced Canadian accent while greeting in Zimbabwe’s vernacular Shona.

The scenes capture a new generation of interest and entrepreneurship around African languages once pushed to the margins by decades of colonialism. Often seen as secondary to English, French and Portuguese, they are enjoying a renaissance that is also creating business opportunities.

There are between 1,500 and 3,000 languages in Africa

Africa is home to over 1 billion people speaking roughly a third of the world’s languages, with between 1,500 and 3,000 across 54 countries, according to UNESCO.

Experts say the revival in some of them is driven partly by second- and third-generation Africans in the diaspora finding it easier to reconnect with their roots and communicate with older relatives, thanks to social media, online learning and entertainment.

“There were times I definitely felt left out because my family around me were all speaking Shona. And I just couldn’t understand them,” Nyashadzashe said after a lesson covering traditional greetings, proverbs and ancestral clan symbols. She said she had eaten the food and worn the traditional clothing but still felt left out.

But now her conversations with her grandparents in Zimbabwe are growing longer.

“Being able to connect with them on that level makes me really proud of my heritage,” she said.

African languages were never ‘modernized’

Her Zimbabwe-based tutor, Shungu Chidovi, left her banking career in January to focus full-time on ZimbOriginal, an online platform that teaches Shona through storytelling, book clubs and “buddy pairing” exchanges.

Now she teaches about two dozen learners in Zimbabwe, Canada, Australia, South Africa, Ireland and Scotland, charging $50 a month.

The business, part of a small but growing number of online initiatives teaching African languages, emerged almost by accident. Chidovi began writing a blog about Zimbabwean traditions in 2016. Readers began asking whether she taught Shona.

“I didn’t see it at the time that I was really writing about the Shona language,” Chidovi said.

For more on Africa and development: https://apnews.com/hub/africa-pulse

The Associated Press receives financial support for global health and development coverage in Africa from the Gates Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

Robert Jenrick tried to put Reform UK’s chaotic conference back on track on Saturday by pledging to cut taxes for millions of voters within the first 100 days of forming a government.

Mr Jenrick, who is expected to become Chancellor if Nigel Farage wins the next general election, said that he would raise the tax-free personal allowance to £15,000 – taking 2.9 million people out of income tax altogether and ensuring the state pension remains out of reach of the Treasury.

Mr Jenrick – who promised to resign as Chancellor if he failed to deliver the tax cut within the promised timescale of 100 days – said it was his ‘mission’ to deliver the ‘biggest rise in the personal allowance in its history’. Reform said that for a typical family the move would save £1,000 a year.

The annual earnings at which income tax starts to be paid has been frozen at £12,570 since 2021 and is due to stay at that level until 2031, but that has been penalising ever-greater numbers of workers as rising inflation erodes the value of the allowance. 

And the increase to the state pension next year to £13,000 will push millions of pensioners above the threshold, meaning they will have to start paying income tax.

The move came as Reform tried to escape the controversy over undercover filming aired by Channel 4 on Thursday which led to the suspension of aides Dan Jukes and James Orr over alleged attempts to circumvent electoral law.

Reform says that its long-term aim is to raise the personal allowance to £20,000 a year. Mr Jenrick told the conference in Birmingham: ‘The task is mighty. But our cause is right and our country is worth it. They tried to knock us down. We’re still standing. Now let’s get Britain standing again.’

Mr Jenrick said the cost to the Treasury of raising the allowance would be £17.7billion in the first year, rising to £21billion in the fifth year of the next Parliament, and that it would be funded through £80billion of savings from cutting the welfare bill, Net Zero spending and the foreign aid budget.

Mr Jenrick has promised to resign as Chancellor if he failed to deliver the tax cut within the first weeks of a Reform government

He told delegates: ‘There has never, in our lifetimes, been a worse time to be a worker in Britain. Britain now has the highest tax burden since records began…higher than when we were paying for the war.’

He added: ‘Now, for the first time, the freeze means they’re going to be taxing the state pension. What a disgrace…no wonder so many of our most ambitious young people are seeking their futures abroad.’

Mr Jenrick challenged Prime Minister Andy Burnham to match his pledge, saying: ‘The hard choice for Burnham and for us is exactly the same. It’s either welfare waste, foreign aid and migrants – or the British worker. We choose the worker.’

Speaking to GB News after the announcement, Mr Farage said: ‘I have been arguing for raised allowances for 20 years,’ adding: ‘The next pension increase will take nearly ten million pensioners into paying tax. Just think of the cost and bureaucracy of all of that. So it actually helps simplify the tax system. It takes three million out of tax, but also it widens the gap between whether it’s worth going to work or not going to work.

‘And what Andy Burnham picked up on the door is what I’ve been picking up for ages. People say, “I get up at 5.30, I go to work, the traffic’s awful, the job is hard, and I’m almost no better off than the people next door who sit around and smoke dope all day”.

‘If we don’t get Britain working again, if we don’t increase our productivity, we are going bust. It’s just as simple as that.’

And Mr Farage also repeated his prediction on Saturday that Mr Burnham would call a general election in the spring.

A Labour Party spokesman said: ‘Robert Jenrick only seems to be interested in making people better off when Reform UK are trying to distract from the latest scandal engulfing their party.’

A Tory Party source on Saturday told the MoS: ‘Nigel said he would sack anyone if they can’t deliver on their 100-day plans. We all know Rob wants the top job, so I guess this is one way of getting rid of a leadership rival.’

– READ MORE: Nigel Farage says ‘bad period’ is over for Reform as family urges him to quit as he faces barrage of questions over donations to his party 

– READ MORE: It was meant to be the week Reform showed us they could govern… but even senior aides admit they’ve blown it: DAN HODGES

By GLEN OWEN and GABRIEL MILLARD-CLOTHIER, POLITICAL REPORTER

Published: 00:14 BST, 6 September 2026 | Updated: 03:11 BST, 6 September 2026

Nigel Farage revealed that his family urged him to quit politics in the face of a barrage of questions about the legitimacy of donations to his party.

The Reform UK leader admitted that recent months had been ‘difficult’, saying: ‘For the first time, really, in my political career, I haven’t got my family’s support. They would rather I packed it up and walked away.’

Mr Farage made his remarks after the start of his annual party conference in Birmingham was overshadowed by an undercover sting broadcast on Channel 4 which appeared to show senior aide Dan Jukes and Reform’s head of policy James Orr suggesting a way around electoral law to secure foreign party donations – one of which would have totalled £500,000.

The aides have both stood down pending the outcome of an internal probe into the claims. Reform denies any wrongdoing and say the party has taken no illegal money.

Advertisement

There is also an ongoing Commons standards investigation into a £5million donation to Reform from the crypto-billionaire Christopher Harborne.

Mr Farage told the BBC that despite his torrid few months, he had not been tempted to take the advice to resign, saying: ‘When you’ve got your family begging you to, it’s not easy. But I think we’re through that now. 

‘I believe we’re through that bad period. I think the general public do understand that I have got some unusual circumstances that others don’t have to deal with.’

He added that he ‘frankly wasn’t even listening’ when he met the fake donors in the undercover filming, saying: ‘I was just there to come and say hello.’

Advertisement

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage spoke at the Reform UK annual conference in Birmingham

Mr Farage’s partner Laure Ferrari is pictured watching his keynote speech at Reform’s conference on Friday

Farage spoke with BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg at the Reform UK’s party conference  

Advertisement

He criticised the suspended advisers, saying they ‘should have done basic checks…nobody, nobody should be brought to me, unless they’ve been vetted’. 

In a separate interview with GB News, Mr Farage said that the sting had been part of a co-ordinated attempt to target his party.

He said: ‘There has been a heavy, co-ordinated attempt by political parties, media outlets to try to sully the name of Reform. And I suspect it won’t go away. I asked the voters of Clacton a few weeks ago what they thought of all this, and they returned me with a massively increased majority.’

His comments came as the electoral watchdog faced calls to seize hard drives from Reform UK over the undercover filming, which was carried out by a group called Verbatim Investigations – founded by journalists from the Centre for Climate Reporting.

Advertisement

If the police launch a criminal investigation over the footage the Electoral Commission (EC) would have the power to ‘obtain information’ from the party’s HQ, including the confiscation of equipment. The powers are contained in the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act (2000).

An offence under that law includes whether any money is transferred for the benefit of the party – which could be ‘any study or research organised on or behalf of the party’.

Labour and the Liberal Democrats have reported Reform to the Metropolitan Police over the allegations. The force said on Thursday it would assess the matter and any information provided to it.

Tory MP Joe Robertson said: ‘It appears that Reform may have broken the criminal law in relation to foreign and hidden donations. The Electoral Commission and the police should launch an investigation without delay and take steps to preserve evidence by seizing hardware from Reform premises.’

Advertisement

And Tory MP Charlie Dewhirst added: ‘There are clearly unanswered questions here – not least who are the other individuals Mr Jukes claims may have given potentially illegal donations to Reform UK?’

– READ MORE: Robert Jenrick vows to cut taxes for millions… and says he’ll quit if pledge isn’t met in the first 100 days

– READ MORE: It was meant to be the week Reform showed us they could govern… but even senior aides admit they’ve blown it: DAN HODGES

I never thought I would presume to say that I know how the Prince of Wales feels – but sadly I can now do so.  

Should he twist or stick, reach out to Harry on his return to England or shun him?

Should he act like a wiser big brother or decide that relations have deteriorated too far for that?

Every fibre in my body screams out, go for a reconciliation, see if it is possible. Isn’t that what family means? Doesn’t the New Testament tell him as a future Supreme Governor of the Church of England to turn the other cheek?

Certainly, the tale of the prodigal son has the message of welcoming a renegade member of the family back into the fold. The principle is the same towards a brother – life is warmer together and colder apart.

And yet my drive for a happy family reunion is brought to a screeching halt when I think of one of my own brothers. We have not spoken for eight years and have no intention of doing so. I don’t even know where he lives.

In fact, I am ashamed of admitting this as everything above indicates that we should meet and reconcile. But sometimes theory and reality clash, and they certainly do in our case.

The added sadness is that, like William and Harry, we were once very close. 

There is a 13-year gap between us, and my mother often said I was like a second father to him, changing his nappies as a baby, taking him in the pram to the local playground, spending time with him as he grew up.

It is hard to pinpoint the moments when the relationship soured and the bond snapped. I left home for university and saw much less of him. When I did return home, we squabbled. Somehow it turned to distrust and dislike.

When he was an adult, we also had very different views as to how to look after our ageing parents. 

One result was that when he lived in the family home, he limited access to my mother, initially at my expense and later my children’s. He would say that she was too unwell to see them, which I found unlikely as she adored her grandchildren.

It ended with a complete blackout of all news about her – including her decline, so much so that we were not informed of her death by him or even the funeral.

Hurtful, especially to my children who should not have suffered because of whatever went wrong between he and I.

Did I try to improve the relationship earlier? Yes, although looking back I cannot be sure if I tried as hard as I could have done.

I do take part of the blame for the fall-out, but definitely not all of it. I also know that we are not alone in our fraternal enmity.

Harry, Meghan and their children Archie and Lilibet have recently returned to Britain – but relations between the brothers are complicated

It is surely significant that the very first example of brothers in the Bible – Cain and Abel – is not a story of lovey-dovey harmony with violins in the background.

Instead, it is a tale of a dysfunctional relationship, of jealousy and anger that gets so out of control that it results in one murdering the other. Biblical fratricide is at the extreme end of family feuds. 

Most, thankfully, only feature stubbornness, pride or a sense of betrayal – just ask the Gallagher brothers, who admirably completed their Oasis tour last year after a decade of bubbling animosity, or Brooklyn Beckham, who has severed ties with his family so publicly on social media.

‘Just pick up the phone and make up,’ I hear you cry in exasperation. It’s perfectly sensible advice, but it is not that easy.

For a start, there is a feeling that this is not my task but the other person’s. He offended me, so he should take the first step!

Yes, it might be healthy to reconcile, but pride means I will respond but not initiate. The trouble is that when both parties feel that way, the impasse continues.

Another obstacle is embarrassment. It is awkward to say, ‘Hello, it’s me’ after so long not speaking and plenty of blue air when we did. 

I know the best way would be to write down a couple of lines so as not to blurt out something mangled, but that still begs two questions about how the other person might respond.

The Waleses and the Sussexes are not thought to have communicated for some time

Advertisement

What if he spurns the effort, repeats past insults and slams the phone down? Do I really want to expose myself to that rejection?

Alternatively, what if he accepts, and warmly welcomes the rapprochement? That is wonderful in many ways, but it does come at a cost of having to let go of my own resentments at past hurts and wipe the slate clean.

Maybe I’m just not ready. It is much cosier being wrapped in a blanket of anger and victimhood. It also saves me having to ask where I might have gone wrong.

This is why I do not advise Prince William to offer the hand of peace to his brother. Sometimes a wound is best left untouched.

Instead, he could turn away and let go of the relationship completely. 

There is at least an honesty in recognising that there are points of no return, nor does it trade a deeply held conviction for the thin reward of forced smiles and small talk at the next family occasion.

Therapists will argue that, despite the initial distress contact might cause, it could eventually lead to mutual understanding and a rich relationship. 

Maybe, but in my case, I would want to be convinced of the odds and there are no guarantees.

Giving up on one’s brother may be a painful situation, but at least it has been accepted, put in a box and stored away. It will be even more painful to reopen it.

Still, I am bothered by the fact that as a minister of religion I have frequently met with warring families and my usual response has been that they should err on the side of generosity.

But I also know that some hurts cannot be forgotten and some misdeeds cannot be undone: Prince William has endured the ignominy of his brother divulging their private quarrels to the world for a fast buck. My brother buried my mother without telling me.

This may not be as high a moral or religious a response to which I could aspire, but it is real. I regret it but won’t change it.

I truly hope that Prince William can do better than me, but he will know very well that much depends on the wounds already suffered and the likely response he might receive.

– Jonathan Romain is author of Confessions Of A Rabbi, published by Biteback.

By JOSHUA HAINING, NEWS REPORTER

Published: 01:26 BST, 6 September 2026 | Updated: 02:25 BST, 6 September 2026

At least 22 people have died after a fire erupted at a wedding party in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

The fire started on Friday and continued into the early hours of Saturday at a building in Lingwala, a northern district in the nation’s capital of Kinshasa.  

Guests perished as they attempted to flee through the building’s narrow corridors.

Bodies of the injured and the dead were laid at the roadside by attendees who then rushed to help those who had survived.

Advertisement

Pictures of the aftermath show the scorched exterior of the building spread across two floors.

The interior was also torched in the blaze with only burnt tables, chairs and decorations remaining.

The mayor of Lingwala, Norbert Mushinga, told the Congolese Press Agency that the provisional death toll of the blaze was 22 but said it could rise further in the coming days.

The exact cause of the fire at the wedding party has yet to be confirmed, although an electrical issue or wedding decorations may be to blame.

Advertisement

Scorched table clothes and chairs pictured inside the wedding venue in the Democratic Republic of Congo’s capital city, Kinshasa

The destroyed exterior of the building which was damaged by the fire which spread across two floors

At least 22 people perished in the blaze but the death toll could rise further in the coming days

Advertisement

Mr Mushinga added that attendees who were injured while fleeing the party were ‘transported to various hospital facilities’ in the surrounding area. 

Jacquemin Shabani, Congo’s deputy prime minister and interior minister, who visited the site on September 5 said: ‘It is a tragedy.’

Deadly fires are understood to be commonplace in the densely populated areas of Kinshasa.

Urban development in parts of the city without sufficient safety provisions such as fire services can lead to fires occurring.

Advertisement

During the dry season, the likelihood of fires is significantly higher and several have broken out this year, according to Congolese media. 

Do YOU have a story? Email joshua.haining@dailymail.co.uk 

Roberto De Zerbi took aim at his attacking players after Tottenham’s goalless draw with Nottingham Forest on Saturday.

Spurs earned their first point of the new Premier League season following back-to-back defeats to Brentford and Newcastle United.

But De Zerbi was unhappy with the quality his side showed in attacking areas and highlighted an opportunity wasted by Spurs’ new summer signing Omar Marmoush.

De Zerbi also criticised Mathys Tel, who was replaced by Mykhailo Mudryk in the second half, by claiming that the 21-year-old French winger ‘takes too many wrong decisions’.

Speaking after Spurs’ draw with Forest, De Zerbi said: ‘I think we played well but in the last third we have to improve.

‘We have to take the better decisions. We have to keep more calm when we are very close to doing something important in the last third.

‘I remember the chance when Marmoush shot at goal, the way we had Robertson overlapping. If we take the right decision and we play with Robertson then on the second post there is Kudus to score like this.

‘Or how many crosses went over the second post? From Mathys Tel, two times, Savio, one time. Savio I think it’s the last decision. The ball from Pedro Porro on Mateus Fernandes when he played with Kudus and then for the header of Solanke, Mateus was completely alone to go forward to score.

‘Anyway, I’m very happy for the spirit of the team, for the organisation, with and without the ball. We didn’t suffer nothing. Their style of play is very clear, long ball and second ball. But even this second ball, we won many, many duels. They have good players and taking points in this stadium is not so easy.

‘We are not happy because we didn’t win, but I think this is the right spirit and the right way to move on in this moment. Because we started just last Thursday to work together and to create, to build the team, to build the organisation. It’s not enough the paper, the transfer market.’

When asked about Mudryk’s debut, De Zerbi then took aim at Tel’s decision making.

‘He’s not ready yet,’ De Zerbi said of Mudryk.

‘He’s working to reach the best physical condition. He needs time, he needs work. In that position, we have Mathys Tel, big potential. But also Mathys takes too many wrong decisions, and Mudryk. So, two big players, two big potential players.

‘But anyway, if we want to score, I think Marmoush has 15 goals. Solanke, the chance header for Solanke, I consider a chance to score. It’s not a shot on goal. But how many shots did Nottingham have today? I think, anyway, it was a good game.’

Asked how he can improve on Spurs’ mistakes in attack, De Zerbi replied: ‘Meeting, watching, analysing together with the players. Also, I think, winning the games, because, you know, the confidence, the enthusiasm, it can be crucial to find the right decision.

‘But I love these players. I spoke now about Marmoush. But Marmoush, we have to analyse if he has, or not, 15, 12 goals. I think, yes, because he has all the qualities, enough to score that number of goals. He has to improve, of course.

‘Like Domi Solanke, I think if Domi is fit, is in the best physical condition, the chance he had was completely different.’

For more stories like this, check our sport page.

Follow Metro Sport for the latest news on
Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.

MORE: ‘Should have got him’ – Theo Walcott wishes Arsenal signed £117m star ahead of Chelsea

MORE: Erling Haaland makes Arsenal Premier League claim after Man City beat Coventry

MORE: Frank Lampard highlights ‘difference’ between Arsenal and Man City after Coventry defeat

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has promised to protect military members who deliver religious greetings at New Mexico’s Kirtland Air Force Base.

Hegseth wrote on X Friday that the Pentagon will “never cave” to the Military Religious Freedom Foundation after the nonprofit intervened to stop the religious greetings. The nonprofit’s president, Mikey Weinstein, had a five-word response to the Pentagon chief in an interview with The Independent: “Tell it to the judge.”

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation announced Thursday that it put an end to a “weeks-long blitz” of religious greetings from guards at the front gate of Kirtland.

The press release included two emails that a member of the Air Force wrote to the nonprofit’s president, Mikey Weinstein. The initial email sent Wednesday morning read, in part, “I’m writing because something is happening at the front gate of my base that is absolutely unacceptable, and frankly I’m stunned it’s been allowed to continue.

“For multiple days over the last couple of weeks, the guards have been greeting me with ‘God bless you’ every single morning as I come through. Not once, not twice… repeatedly, consistently, as if it’s an officially sanctioned script.”

The unnamed Air Force member said they want this “blatant violation of the separation of church and state” stopped.

While the Air Force member who wrote the email disclosed that they are not Christian, the nonprofit said they were one of 34 people who wanted the religious greetings stopped and that 24 complaints came from Christians.

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation also shared the “thank you” email that the Air Force member sent Wednesday afternoon, by which time the nonprofit said the issue was resolved.

“I have gone through the same gate a couple times without hearing the religious greeting. After dealing with it repeatedly for weeks, seeing that change happen within hours is honestly incredible,” the email read.

The nonprofit says it has helped nearly 100,000 individuals, including active-duty troops and veterans, with issues of religious freedom in the military — 95 percent of whom are Christians.

But the issue of religious greetings at Kirtland is far from over with Hegseth now interjecting.

“The MRFF is a radical anti-Christian, pro-atheist group that attacks any/all faith inside the @DeptofWar,” Hegseth, who is a Christian, said in his Friday X post.

“We will never cave to them. The @usairforce will confront this. God bless our Airmen.”

The Independent has reached out to the Pentagon for comment.

Hegseth has been known to insert his religious beliefs into the military, whether it’s through monthly Christian worship services at the Pentagon or quoting scripture at a press briefing in March, telling reporters, “Blessed be the Lord, my rock, who trains my hands for war and my fingers for battle.”

“Just tell it to the judge, little Petey,” Weinstein told The Independent in response to Hegseth’s X post.

Weinstein called Hegseth a “Christian nationalist” whose “favorite thing to do is to defecate all over the U.S. Constitution.”

The nonprofit pointed to a clause in Air Force Instruction, which states, “Leaders at all levels must balance constitutional protections for free exercise of religion and the constitutional prohibition against governmental establishment of religion.

“They must ensure their words and actions do not discriminate against any individual or group because of their faith, belief, or absence of belief, or extend preferential treatment for the same.”

Weinstein has threatened legal action against the federal government if the religious greetings continue, and against Hegseth himself, claiming libel over his X post calling the nonprofit “anti-Christian” and “pro-atheist.”

“Hegseth is spewing complete and total lies, and it’s reckless disregard of the truth. And why is that important? Because I’m a public figure. For public figures in America to win a libel suit, you can’t just show regular defamation. You have to show reckless disregard,” Weinstein said.

The unruly passenger was reportedly intoxicated and allegedly began shouting at a fellow traveller sitting next to him before the situation turned violent

A passenger had to be physically restrained and strapped to his seat with duct tape after chaos broke out on board an American Airlines flight.

The traveller, who was making his way from Dallas, Texas, to Newark, New Jersey, appeared to be under the influence when he began screaming at the passenger seated next to him.

Witnesses on board claimed the incident turned physical, with the man allegedly attacking a fellow passenger, destroying his laptop, and hurling both racial and homophobic abuse.

Matters reportedly deteriorated further when the man allegedly shoved a female passenger and attempted to bite two others.

Juan Mejia, a retired police officer who was travelling on the flight, recalled: “Just like a light switch, all of a sudden, it went from quiet to yelling and chaos.”

“I turned around to look, and the poor gentleman that was sitting next to him in the aisle seat, the individual had his hands around his neck and was, like, assaulting him.”

Mr Mejia and a fellow passenger intervened to subdue the disruptive traveller.

Cabin crew provided duct tape, which was used to bind his wrists and secure his head and torso firmly to his seat.

The plane was diverted to Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport, touching down approximately 15 minutes later.

Local police arrested the passenger upon landing, while the FBI is reportedly considering federal charges, according to TMZ. American Airlines confirmed the flight had been diverted owing to a “disruptive customer”.

Once the passenger had been removed, the aircraft continued on its way to Newark.

A spokesperson from American Airlines stated: “The safety and security of our customers and team members is our top priority, and we do not tolerate violence.”

They further added: “We thank our team members for their professionalism and our customers for their understanding.”