Businesses are also seeing wider knock-on effects. Hairdresser Emma Crossley said customers were waiting longer between appointments than they had previously.

She said: “Since the fuel prices went up I have noticed a difference in how often people have their hair done. About five years ago it would have been about six or seven weeks – it’s more like 10 to 12 weeks now.”

Tourism operators have also noticed a change. Pauline Ellis of the Mad Hatter bed and breakfast, said some visitors had cancelled trips because travel costs had become too expensive.

She said: “We are a long way down here and I think it has made an impact on whether people can afford to come this far down, with the prices as they are.”

At Down the Line Surf Shop, owner Justin Lapskas said the higher fuel costs affected the import and transportation of products.

“We bring in products from around the world, so for us, the increase in fuel prices has an effect and something that we’ve kind of got to deal with moving forward,” he said.

“So yeah, I’d say fuel has an impact across the board for us.”

Follow BBC Cornwall on X, external, Facebook, external and Instagram, external. Send your story ideas to spotlight@bbc.co.uk, external.

Story Continues

An emotional Instagram post from “Today” show co-anchor Savannah Guthrie, originally shared in February appealing for prayers and information following her mother’s disappearance, has continued circulating online nearly seven months later, with no suspect arrested in the case as of the most recent update.

Nancy Guthrie, Savannah’s 84-year-old mother, has been missing since February 1, in what investigators have described as a suspected kidnapping. Despite the ongoing investigation, authorities have not announced an arrest in connection with her disappearance, a lack of resolution that has continued to fuel frustration among many who have followed the case closely online. Savannah’s family, however, has continued to express hope publicly throughout the search.

In the February post being recirculated, Savannah appealed directly to the public, and at times to her mother’s presumed captors, to help bring Nancy home. Speaking in an emotional, faith-centered tone, she wrote, “We believe in prayer. We believe in voices raised in unison, in love, in hope. We believe in goodness. We believe in humanity. Above all, we believe in Him.”

Savannah went on to quote a passage of Scripture in the same post, drawing on Isaiah 26:3, which she described as a verse relevant “for all time for all of us.” She wrote, “‘He will keep in perfect peace those whose hearts are steadfast, trusting in the Lord,’ a verse of Isaiah for all time for all of us. Bring her home.”

The post concluded with a direct appeal for continued prayer and for the public to come forward with any information that might assist investigators in locating Nancy. “Thank you for lifting your prayers with ours for our beloved mom, our dearest Nancy, a woman of deep conviction, a good and faithful servant,” Savannah wrote. “Raise your prayers with us and believe with us that she will be lifted by them in this very moment. We need you.”

The renewed attention to the February post comes amid a broader, ongoing pattern of public engagement from the Guthrie family throughout the seven-plus months since Nancy’s disappearance. Savannah has used her public platform, including her role as a national television anchor, to keep attention on her mother’s case, repeatedly appealing to viewers and social media followers for tips, prayers and any information that could help investigators make progress in identifying who was responsible for Nancy’s disappearance.

The case has remained the subject of sustained public interest throughout 2026, driven in significant part by Savannah’s profile as a longtime co-anchor of NBC’s “Today” show. Investigators with the Pima County Sheriff’s Department, who are leading the investigation into Nancy’s disappearance from her home in Tucson, Arizona, have continued to describe the case as active, even as no suspect has been publicly named and no arrest has been announced in the months since Nancy was first reported missing.

The recirculation of Savannah’s February appeal reflects the continued absence of a resolution in the case, with online communities and true-crime commentators continuing to revisit earlier statements, evidence and public appeals from the Guthrie family as the investigation has stretched on without a confirmed breakthrough. Such throwback posts have become a recurring feature of ongoing public engagement with Nancy Guthrie’s case, offering both a reminder of the family’s continued hope and a marker of how much time has passed since the original appeal was first made.

Nancy’s disappearance was first reported to authorities on February 1, with investigators saying they believe she was taken from her home the night before. The case has since drawn extensive national media coverage, including repeated public appeals from Savannah and other family members, ongoing analysis from retired law enforcement officials commenting publicly on the case, and continued scrutiny of surveillance footage and other evidence released by investigators over the course of the year.

As the investigation continues without a confirmed suspect, Savannah’s earlier words, offered at a moment when the case was still in its early weeks, have taken on renewed resonance for those following the story nearly seven months later. The core message of her February appeal, a direct plea to the public for prayer, patience and any available information, remains largely unchanged from what family members and investigators alike continue to emphasize as the search for Nancy Guthrie stretches on.

With no new public updates indicating a break in the case as of the most recent reporting, the resurfaced February post serves as both a reminder of the Guthrie family’s continued hope for Nancy’s safe return and an illustration of how unresolved the investigation into her disappearance remains, nearly seven months after she was first reported missing from her Tucson-area home.

Fiona Cole, from Trussell Trust in Northern Ireland said it was “heartbreaking” to see food banks in this situation, adding the stress on food bank managers and volunteers is increasing on a daily basis.

According to the Trussell Trust, 67,851 parcels were distributed in Northern Ireland, 26,459 of those given to children in 2025.

The policy and public affairs manager said in the last four to six weeks food banks have faced a crisis in terms of stock levels.

“Our biggest fear is that our food banks are prematurely forced to drastically reduce their support, or worse, close their doors because the income they receive falls short and they can no longer afford their household essentials,” Cole said.

She said that fewer donations could be a result of people struggling with cost of living and having to cut their own budgets.

“Our lifelong contributors, they would give us five pounds of food or £10 of food every time they go to shop in a supermarket,” Cole said.

“That £10 of food is just simply not the same amount as what you would have got even six months ago.”

She said three food banks had contacted them directly about concerns with stock and finance, and six in total had to put out emergency appeals for donations on social media.

She added food banks have also had to close distribution centres or reduce their hours.

Cole said there needs to be sustainable funding for food banks to operate as well as support from government and the Northern Assembly.

While food banks are under pressure a Trussell Trust report found that they had been distributing fewer parcels in 2025 than the peak seen in 2023.

“Wider data suggests there has been a corresponding fall in need for food banks, not just use, external“.

The Thai government is negotiating a Free Trade Agreement with the EU, clarifying that no agreement on UPOV 1991 exists and emphasizing farmers’ rights to save seeds under current laws.

---

Key Points

• The Thai government is actively negotiating a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the European Union, refuting claims that it has agreed to the UPOV 1991 convention, which purportedly infringes on farmers’ rights to save seeds.
• Deputy Government Spokesperson Lalida Perisvivatana affirmed that current domestic laws allow farmers to save and replant seeds, with existing legal exemptions for education and non-commercial breeding activities. The EU’s UPOV proposal is merely a starting point for discussions.
• The government is committed to balancing international trade with farmers’ rights, biodiversity, and food security. Any final FTA will require parliamentary review and adherence to the legislative process before making changes to domestic regulations.

The Thai government has confirmed that negotiations for the Thailand-European Union Free Trade Agreement (FTA) are ongoing and has dismissed rumors that Thailand has already agreed to the UPOV 1991 convention, which some claim would remove farmers’ rights to save seeds.

Deputy Government Spokesperson Lalida Perisvivatana stated on September 21, 2026, that the Ministry of Commerce, led by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Commerce Suphajee Suthumpun, is closely monitoring the intellectual property and plant protection aspects of the negotiations. She emphasized that the EU’s proposal regarding the 1991 International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV 1991) is only a starting point for discussions and does not reflect any agreement by Thailand.

Under current domestic law, specifically Section 33 of the Plant Varieties Protection Act B.E. 2542 (1999), farmers have the legal right to save and replant propagating materials they produce, subject to certain conditions. The law also exempts activities for education, research, and non-commercial plant breeding. The spokesperson clarified that while unauthorized commercial sale of protected plant varieties is illegal, it is incorrect to claim that current laws prevent farmers from saving seeds for personal use.

Addressing concerns about UPOV 1991, the spokesperson explained that while the convention strengthens breeders’ rights, Article 15(2) allows member states to create domestic exemptions so farmers can reuse seeds on their own land. Therefore, claims that the convention completely bans seed saving are inaccurate. The government emphasized that the final impact on farmers’ rights will depend on the outcome of negotiations and future domestic legislation.

The Deputy Prime Minister has instructed negotiators to balance international trade and agricultural innovation with protecting farmers’ rights, biodiversity, and national food security. The Ministry of Commerce is working with the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Intellectual Property, and health agencies to thoroughly assess all potential impacts. 

The spokesperson added that any finalized FTA will not automatically change Thai law, as agreements under Section 178 of the Constitution require formal parliamentary review and the standard legislative process before amending any domestic regulations.

Source : Thailand Says No Final Agreement Reached on UPOV 1991 in EU FTA Talks

Artificial intelligence is now part of everyday work across many UK companies. Office for National Statistics research published in July 2026 put usage at around 35 per cent. The figure covers businesses with at least 10 employees using one AI technology. It stood at around 12 per cent during late 2023.

Large language models were the most common technology recorded in June 2026. Around 18 per cent of businesses reported using them at work. The figures show why company rules now need to catch up quickly.

A useful starting point for responsible AI is a complete internal system register. Your register should show every tool currently approved across the company. It should also identify each tool’s purpose and name the internal owner.

The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology recommends maintaining an AI system record. Its AI Management Essentials guidance was updated during February 2026.

Businesses can include these practical details in the record:

• supplier and product name;
• department using the system;
• information entered into the service;
• people affected by its output;
• approval date and next review date;
• known limits and previous incidents.

This record gives managers a clear view of actual internal use. It can also expose unofficial tools before sensitive information reaches them.

Clear AI governance needs named responsibility rather than broad ownership by technology teams. The ICO advises organisations to assign operational roles for systems processing personal information. Senior management should also understand the risks linked with higher-impact systems.

Your company can classify systems according to possible harm or business impact. Meeting summaries need less scrutiny than recruitment screening or customer credit decisions. A three-level process can keep the review proportionate for each use case.

Low-risk tools can receive basic approval after security checks are completed. Medium-risk systems need documented testing before wider staff access begins. High-risk systems should receive specialist review before operational deployment begins.

Practical AI risk management should test failures before real customers encounter them. Your team should examine inaccurate outputs and possible bias during testing. Security weaknesses and personal-data exposure also need separate testing before launch.

Use difficult examples during testing rather than carefully selected successful cases. Teams should record failure rates against agreed measures before approving wider deployment. Testing evidence also gives managers something concrete to review later.

Data protection needs attention before employees upload information into external services. ICO guidance updated in February 2026 says privacy starts during system design. It should continue throughout the processing lifecycle after deployment.

Staff need simple rules covering information that cannot enter external tools. Customer records may need restrictions under your existing privacy controls. Employee files and confidential contracts can require tighter access rules.

Supplier checks should answer these questions before signing contracts:

• Where will company information be stored?
• Can prompts train the supplier’s underlying models?
• How long will submitted information remain stored?
• Which subcontractors can access submitted company information?
• How can your organisation delete stored information?
• What happens after a supplier security incident?

Business AI products can depend on several outside providers behind one interface. Your procurement team should understand those relationships before approving regular use.

Human oversight also needs a defined process with named reviewers. Government guidance says people should retain responsibility for decisions supported by automated systems.

Reviewers need authority to challenge recommendations before they affect customers or employees. Higher-impact decisions need clear instructions about when people must intervene.

Your reviewer should know which evidence requires checking before approval. Staff should also record overrides when they reject automated recommendations.

Those records can reveal recurring problems during later performance reviews. Repeated overrides may point towards weak data or poor system performance.

Training should focus on situations employees encounter during normal working days. Finance teams need different guidance from marketing staff using writing assistants. Your training should cover approved tools and restricted company information.

Employees also need a simple route for reporting incorrect outputs. Managers should know who receives reports involving privacy or security incidents.

AI adoption should include regular checks after a system reaches employees. The ONS found only 10 per cent of adopting businesses used AI extensively. The June 2026 finding covered businesses employing at least 10 people.

Companies can track errors and complaints through existing reporting processes. Human overrides should also form part of routine performance reviews. Clear thresholds can tell managers when access needs temporary suspension.

External AI consulting can support companies without specialist knowledge in technical testing. It can also help procurement teams question complicated supplier claims. Final ownership should still remain with named leaders inside the business.

The practical aim is keeping useful technology within clear company boundaries. A system register gives businesses a sensible place to begin. Risk checks and privacy rules can then support safer daily use.

Human review adds another safeguard when automated outputs affect important decisions. Regular monitoring then gives leaders evidence for deciding where wider use makes sense.

Mumbai: The long-awaited public debut of the National Stock Exchange (NSE) Thursday could be a relatively modest affair if grey market prices for the bourse’s shares are considered an accurate proxy for listing-day demand. However, exit curbs on most large investors could crimp immediate stock supply and boost prices later, analysts said.

Traders in the unlisted market are quoting a grey market premium (GMP) -the amount investors are willing to pay over the expected IPO issue price before listing – of around ₹83 a share, or about 4.8%, over the IPO price of ₹1,785, compared with ₹250-310, or around 14-17%, earlier. The sharp contraction points to expectations of modest listing gains.

“While investors have been waiting for the NSE listing for long, the enthusiasm has moderated because of the large issue size and expected supply,” said Abhay Doshi, co-founder of UnlistedArena.com.

NSE’s ₹22,561-crore IPO, the largest so far in 2026, was subscribed 5.71 times, riding a bullish primary market wave over the past three months. The issue received bids for 505.81 million shares against 88.6 million shares on offer, led by demand from institutional and high net-worth investors.

At the IPO price of ₹1,785 a share, NSE commands a valuation of ₹4.42 lakh crore. Rival BSE’s market cap is at ₹1.33 lakh crore. Some market participants said the demand-supply dynamics could have a significant bearing on NSE’s share price in the initial days after listing.

Read more: Gautam Adani reclaims top spot as India’s richest, edges out Mukesh Ambani: Hurun Rich List
“At a valuation of ₹4.42 lakh crore, the NSE IPO would immediately position it among India’s top companies by market capitalisation,” said Manish Bhandari, founder, CEO and portfolio manager at Vallum Capital Advisors. “While GMP indicators hint at a muted 2-5% premium, the real story lies in its tight initial supply.” Experts said that while the grey market could be pointing to a more modest listing pop, the current limited supply of shares makes the grey market prices more unpredictable.According to unofficial estimates, of NSE’s 2,475 million outstanding shares, 2,348.6 million, or 94.9%, constitute pre-issue capital.

Rules Limit Stock Supply

Under Sebi rules, pre-issue shares held by non-promoter shareholders, barring some categories of Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs), are locked in for six months from the IPO allotment date.

Read more: NSE IPO shares all set to list: GMP signals 2% listing gain ahead of market debut

To be sure, although the Life Insurance Corp is the biggest owner of stock in the bourse, the NSE has no identifiable promoter.

While the IPO involved the sale of 126.4 million shares, equivalent to about 5.1% of NSE’s total equity, 37.8 million of the IPO shares went to anchor investors. These shares are also locked in after listing. That leaves only about 88.6 million shares immediately available for trading when NSE lists on Thursday. NSE’s book-built issue was entirely an offer for sale (OFS) of up to 126.4 million equity shares by 10 existing shareholders, including state-owned insurers and banks.

In the absence of large supply on account of selling soon after listing day, any fresh purchases from institutional or deep-pocketed investors could drive up the stock sooner than what the grey market expects, said brokers.

As of the June quarter, foreign institutional investors (FIIs) held 26.41% of NSE, while individual shareholders with holdings of up to ₹2 lakh accounted for 12.71%. Individuals with holdings above ₹2 lakh held another 9.58%. Alternative investment funds (AIFs) held 5.31% and insurance companies 0.13%.

Among NSE’s major shareholders, LIC held 10.7%, followed by SBI Capital Markets with 4.33% and State Bank of India with 3.23%. PI Opportunities held 2.4%, while investor Radhakishan Damani owned 1.58%. Sunil Kant Munjal held 0.41%, S Gopalkrishnan 0.38% and Indian Bank 0.34%.