As part of plans to deal with nearly-full prisons in England and Wales, Andy Burnham has pledged to bring an end to indeterminate imprisonment for public protection (IPP) sentences.

For those serving these sentences, this is a long-awaited development. IPP sentences were abolished in 2012, but not retrospectively. Currently, 2,271 IPP prisoners remain in custody in England and Wales.

They were introduced in 2005 to protect the public from “dangerous” offenders, but the definition of dangerous was broad and resulted in the sentence being imposed on many lower-risk offenders.

IPPs function like life sentences: prisoners serve a minimum term (say, 10 years), after which point they are eligible to apply for release. Unlike other sentences, IPP prisoners can only be released from prison by the independent Parole Board – there is no automatic release date set.

The IPP sentence has garnered much media interest over the years because of the shocking plight of prisoners serving this sentence. Being incarcerated is bad enough, but the indefinite nature of the sentence has led to widespread feelings of despair and isolation among this population and their families.

The late Lord Brown, a former supreme court justice, described the IPP sentence as the “greatest single stain on our criminal justice system”. Even David Blunkett, who introduced the sentence as home secretary, has expressed regret.

A justice select committee inquiry into the IPP sentence took place in 2022. The government of the time disregarded many recommendations, including the proposal that all IPP prisoners should have sentences reviewed and then be re-sentenced under current rules. Since then, Keir Starmer’s government introduced the IPP Action Plan to improve the support provided to IPP-sentenced prisoners. The plight of IPP-sentenced prisoners was again highlighted in 2024, when Starmer’s government brought in early release to deal with prison overcrowding. However, none were given automatic release.

Appealing for release

Prior to 2016, a condition of the IPP sentence was that these prisoners could only be released by the Parole Board through an oral hearing. Since then, some people can be released without an oral hearing, with the Parole Board making the decision via a paper-based assessment. However, the vast majority of prisoners still have to undergo an oral hearing. These are conducted in a question-and-answer format, where parole board members ask questions and the prisoner and other witnesses answer.

Prisoners and professionals give evidence of the prisoner’s conduct while in custody, the factors that might lead them to reoffend, and reports of their engagement with rehabilitation programmes.

Ultimately, the members of the Parole Board must determine whether it is still necessary to confine a prisoner for the protection of the public. If the answer is no, then they direct the prisoner to be released under supervision of the probation service.

IPP prisoners have found it harder than other prisoners to be released through parole hearings and – once released – face high rates of recall. In September 2022 the number of IPP prisoners who had been recalled exceeded the number of unreleased IPP prisoners. When IPP sentences were replaced in 2012, the same types of offenders did not have as high a recall rate, and the new sentences had a fixed, rather than indefinite, recall period. This suggests that the IPP sentence itself is partly responsible for the overall increase in the prison population.

During the pandemic, the Parole Board was forced to conduct all hearings remotely, either by telephone or video link. Since the removal of pandemic restrictions, the board has continued to use remote technology as the default way to conduct hearings, deeming this to be a “fair and effective” way of holding most hearings. Around 93% of hearings are held remotely. Regardless of mode, oral hearings should be “inquisitorial” and not “adversarial”, according to the Parole Board’s guidance.

Communication breakdowns

Our research, conducted in 2023, reveals some of the additional barriers that IPP prisoners face when working towards release.

Combining our linguistics and criminal justice expertise, we analysed oral hearings involving IPP prisoners to see whether remotely-held hearings were more or less adversarial than in-person hearings. To do this, we focused on “why” questions asked by panel members to prisoners, for example: “Why did you commit the offence?” Questions like this prompt prisoners to answer with an account, for example: “Because I needed to get money”.

“Why” questions can be interpreted as confrontational and “face-threatening”, especially when the recipient is judged to be responsible for engaging in problematic or criminal behaviour. We focused our analysis on particularly adversarial “why” questions, which also displayed the questioner’s viewpoint. For example: “Why did you behave so badly in the beginning?”

We found that in remote hearings, these adversarial “why” questions were used more frequently when compared with in-person hearings, to a degree that was above the level of chance. This could mean it is more difficult for IPP prisoners to represent themselves in this mode of hearing, with implications for fairness and justice.

Why is this the case? It is possible that Parole Board panel members are compensating for some of the broader communication problems with remote technology by asking tougher questions.

Elsewhere, we have found that breakdowns in communication are more common in remote hearings than in-person hearings. This may lead people to interact in more direct ways. Further research has found that participants in oral hearings often view the remote mode as a barrier to productive interaction. Our findings suggest that IPP prisoners are acutely affected by this. Others have similarly found that the remote mode is associated with problems in other justice settings.

The oral hearings analysed for this research occurred before and during the pandemic, it is now the norm to deliver remote hearings in a number of judicial and quasi-judicial settings. In a positive move, the Parole Board has since introduced mandatory training around questioning vulnerable prisoners, which should improve the way remote hearings are delivered.

Few would disagree with Burnham’s pledge to end the IPP sentence, but the exact process is unclear: who will be released and will the process be fair? Despite improvements in technology and a willingness to improve practice in remote settings, the particular vulnerabilities of IPP prisoners needs to be borne in mind. Our research suggests that if IPP prisoners will still need to undergo a hearing, careful consideration needs to be given to how they are carried out.

VENICE, Italy (AP) — The Gallagher brothers brought some rock star energy to a sleepy, and sweaty, Venice Film Festival Saturday, where the documentary about their reunion tour is making its world premiere. And like true rock stars, after giving a few waves for photographers on the Lido docks, they skipped the whole “news conference” bit.

“Oasis: Don’t Look Back in Anger,” is part concert film and part exploration of the contentious relationship between Noel and Liam Gallagher, whose long-held feud led to Oasis disbanding in 2009 in spectacularly theatrical fashion after a backstage altercation moments before they were due on stage in Paris.

Noel infamously said his brother is “the angriest man you’ll ever meet. He’s like a man with a fork in a world of soup.”

Liam told the Guardian in 2018 that his brother “did me out, mate, he threw me under the (expletive) bus, and I won’t forget that. He split the band up and it meant the world to me. Just to further his career.”

The band was founded in working-class Manchester, England, in 1991, and became one of the most popular British acts of the 1990s, hitting No. 1 with their debut album “Definitely Maybe” in 1994. Their 1995 follow up, “(What’s the Story) Morning Glory?” became one of the U.K.’s bestselling albums of all time.

The film looks at the phenomenon of Oasis and the prickly personalities behind the hit songs, most of which were written by the elder Gallagher brother, Noel, from “Wonderwall” to “Live Forever.” It includes never-before-seen rehearsals (where everyone tenses as Liam walks in) and what was, then at least, their first joint interview in 25 years.

In 2025, the brothers ended a 16-year hiatus with a reunion tour that kicked off in Cardiff, Wales to an ecstatic, all-ages crowd of more than 60,000. Many worried that like in Paris in 2009, it might not actually happen. But the show went on, with former Oasis members Paul “Bonehead” Arthurs and Gem Archer on guitar, bassist Andy Bell and drummer Joey Waronker.

The Associated Press wrote at the time that songs like “Supersonic” and “Roll With It,” “sounded as thunderous as ever and sparked mass sing-alongs.”

Steven Knight, who is credited as the writer of the documentary, said he and Noel wanted to explore the question of why the music endured, not just with fans who experienced it in the 90s but with the next generation as well that culminated in such intense demand for reunion tour tickets.

Filmmakers Dylan Southern and Will Lovelace spoke to the brothers separately before the rehearsals had started, and then together while the tour was in full swing, to reflect the true progression of the relationship.

“We set out to make a film about the reconciliation of two brothers, infamous for their volatile relationship, but we also wanted to make a film about the power of music and the way Oasis’ songs have continued to have a life of their own, as the band lay dormant for 15 years,” the filmmakers said in their directors’ statement. “The documentary, like the reunion and the tour, took on a life of its own.”

The filmmakers said their goal was to make their cameras and presence invisible to the band during rehearsals. At the concerts, they wanted to make the audience feel like they were there as well. The film also focuses on various fans from around the world.

“Sometimes you might just bump into someone with a dog called Bonehead and that becomes part of the story,” Southern said.

“Oasis: Don’t Look Back in Anger” will be in theaters shortly after the festival. Disney is giving “Oasis: Don’t Look Back in Anger” an IMAX release on Sept. 11, and it’s expected to arrive on the Disney+ streaming service later this year.

___

For coverage of the 2026 Venice Film Festival, visit: https://apnews.com/hub/venice-film-festival

By JAMIE BOYS, REPORTER

Published: 14:14 BST, 5 September 2026 | Updated: 14:49 BST, 5 September 2026

A Heathrow runway was closed by a grass fire today as several flights were disrupted. 

Britain’s biggest airport’s southern runway was forced to close as the fire took hold – sparking chaos.

Firefighters and emergency services rushed to the scene to tackle the fire. 

One flight from San Francisco was diverted away from Heathrow towards Manchester and another from San Diego was made to land in Birmingham. 

Advertisement

Video footage shows plumes of smoke drifting across Heathrow’s southern runway near a Qantas passenger jet. 

Flyers vented their frustration on social media. 

One said: ‘The one time I fly from Heathrow, it’s down to one runway and the trains down are disrupted by swans on the tracks. Can’t make it up.’

Another added: ‘Fun morning at London Heathrow Airport with a grass fire being dealt with beside runway 27L.

Advertisement

 Video footage shows plumes of smoke drifting across Heathrow’s southern runway near a Qantas passenger jet

A Heathrow runway was closed by a grass fire today as several flights were disrupted

‘Despite the recent rain, the grass is still like a tinderbox.’ 

Advertisement

Heathrow confirmed in a statement that the runway has now reopened.

It said: ‘Earlier today our teams acted quickly to safely resolve a grass fire adjacent to the southern runway. Thanks to their swift response, the fire was extinguished quickly and both runways are fully operational. 

‘A huge thank you to everyone involved. We apologise for any disruption and thank passengers for their patience and understanding. We wish everyone a safe onward journey.’ 

In early August flights were disrupted after a grass fire ignited near Heathrow’s southern runway. 

Advertisement

One hectare of grassland was destroyed by the fire as 18 inbound flights were diverted to other airports.  

As a subscriber, you are shown 80% less display advertising when reading our
articles.

Those ads you do see are predominantly from local businesses promoting local
services.

These adverts enable local businesses to get in front of their target audience – the local
community.

It is important that we continue to promote these adverts as our local businesses need
as much support as possible during these challenging times.

Kerryanne Shaw admits she “hadn’t anticipated how much work it would require” after a two-year fight to have the centre properly licenced.

Owners of a sanctuary for XL Bully dogs have welcomed being granted an animal welfare licence after a two-year legal fight. All Bullie Charity Rescue (ABCR) was twice denied a licence by Angus Council but has now been granted permission to operate.

Based at the Happas Canine Centre near Forfar, the charity is currently looking after 27 dogs in total including four XL Bullies. The licence, which has been approved for 12 months, means the centre will be able to operate as normal for the next year.

Two years ago, XL bullies were banned in Scotland and existing owners had to apply for an exemption certificate. As a result of being a banned breed, hey can’t be bred, sold or re-homed and they must be kept on a lead and muzzled when out in public.

STV News reports a number of changes have been made since the charity first applied for a licence to meet animal welfare standards. Manager Kerryanne Shaw admitted it was more work than initially thought.

She told the news outlet: “We hadn’t anticipated how much work it would require. Thankfully we have managed to get to that standard and are making further improvements.

“Things don’t just stop because we’ve got the licence. All the hard work, determination and care for the dogs has been recognised and we’ve finally managed our goal.

“It has been a difficult, long process, so we’re super chuffed that we’ve got it. It doesn’t really change anything other than we can operate legally from the kennels.”

In a report ahead of the approval, Angus Council noted a “marked improvement” in areas condemned in previous inspections including record-keeping, hygiene and security at the kennels. ABCR will be able to continue to care for the XL Bullies they already have but will not be able to take on more.

A strict limit of 27 dogs total has also been placed on the premises. Inspectors will also visit every three months.

Mark Wilding is a volunteer at the centre and said they are always on the lookout for more help. He said: “I’ve always loved working with larger breed dogs. I wanted to help.

“Some of the situations that some of the animals come from is absolutely awful. I mean horrific.

“So to think that you’re helping any animal out of any of these situations, I think that’s what anybody does it for.

“It’s important for dogs to have this home. They get plenty of love.”

Get more Daily Record exclusives by signing up for free to Google’s preferred sources. Click HERE.

She beat Marilyn, Beyoncé and the current Princess of Wales

Princess Diana has been named the greatest female style icon of all time, beating Marilyn Monroe, Kate Middleton and Beyoncé. Almost a third believe Diana remains the ultimate benchmark for timeless fashion.

Marilyn Monroe came second in the style icon rankings followed by Audrey Hepburn and Catherine, Princess of Wales. Beyoncé was fifth, ahead of Rihanna, Madonna, Grace Kelly, Jennifer Aniston and Jennifer Lopez.

The research for British heritage clothing brand Cotton Traders found Diana’s influence spans every age group. David Beckham was crowned the greatest male style icon, with one in five choosing the former England captain.

Elvis Presley followed, ahead of David Bowie, Sean Connery, Freddie Mercury and Brad Pitt. Marilyn Monroe’s white halter neck dress from The Seven-Year Itch was voted the most iconic dress in history, narrowly beating Diana’s famous “revenge dress”.

And the little black dress was named the most iconic fashion item ever by almost a third of Brits. Jeans were second, followed by the miniskirt, denim jacket, Doc Martens and simple white T-shirt.

Jools Dickson, Cotton Traders stylist, said: “Many women dream of being a princess for the day, and what Diana did so effortlessly was make that possible for every woman. She didn’t have a stylist or the luxury of the relaxed protocol that royals enjoy today, but she managed to steal the show wherever she went and her ongoing impact on fashion is as relevant now as it was then.

“From jaw-dropping ballgowns to slick suiting, and from sweats and joggers to country tweeds, she could make any look her own. Her simple styling trick was to add the unexpected. Her trademark frill collars were seen under dungarees or with jeans, while she would throw her favourite tailored blazer over a sweatshirt and cycling shorts.

“These sorts of styling tricks are commonplace now, but fashion in the 1980s was not as individual and free as it is today. She was a style pioneer long before Instagram and online shopping, and her distinct way of dressing was literally all her own work.

“The fact people still look to their favourite stars for inspiration shows just how powerful a genuine style icon can be. The best looks do not simply belong to one moment in time. They continue to influence what people wear for decades, which is why we are seeing women from Gen Alpha to the Baby Boomers loving these looks today.”

Jools has created a guide showing how to put together three of Diana’s iconic, down-to-earth looks for Cotton Traders.

Manchester City are starting one of their new wingers against Coventry City but another doesn’t make the squad

Iliman Ndiaye has been thrown straight into the Manchester City team to face Coventry – but fellow winger Allan misses out. Ndiaye completed a deadline day move from Everton for £65m and is one of two new faces of the summer in the XI alongside Elliot Anderson.

Enzo Fernandez starts on the bench following his move from Chelsea, with Ayyoub Bouaddi and Geronimo Rulli on there as well. However, there is no space for Allan as he works his way back to fitness. The forward, signed from Palmeiras for £35m in the final weeks of the window, is not fit enough to be in the squad for the Coventry game.

He has, though, been named in City’s Champions League squad for their first eight games in the competition so could travel with the team to Porto next week as they look to get off to a winning start. Ndiaye, Fernandez and Bouaddi will also be relishing the prospect of playing on the biggest stage for City.

City can stay top of the Premier League for at least a few more hours with victory over Frank Lampard’s Coventry. They are one of just four teams to have won their opening two games, and Hull City, Chelsea and Arsenal all play later than them this weekend; the two London clubs face each other at the Emirates on Sunday in an early clash between two of the leading teams.

Maresca will have to have the Champions League in mind though given City have one of their tougher fixtures up first with the game against Porto. When they return, they must prepare for the first Manchester derby of the season

By OLIVIA ALLHUSEN, FOREIGN NEWS REPORTER

Published: 13:46 BST, 5 September 2026 | Updated: 14:02 BST, 5 September 2026

Elon Musk sent dozens of self-driving Cybercabs without steering wheels or brake pedals onto the streets of Austin, Texas, on Thursday, betting that Americans will overcome their fears of rides with “no control” and hop inside.

The rollout of the gold-colored Teslas, which give passengers no way to take control in an emergency, comes as the company prepares to launch the service in other cities. Tesla shares have suffered amid a slump in vehicle sales, but they rose more than 5% Thursday on hopes that the futuristic-looking taxis will catch on quickly.

“No steering wheel, no pedals,” Tesla teased on X before the launch. Musk followed with a post showing a giant Cybercab floating above the Austin skyline and later wrote, “A Storm of Cybercabs.”

An invitation-only launch event was expected to be held later Thursday.

It is unclear how soon Musk intends to roll out the Cybercab service, but he needs to move quickly.

Tesla trails self-driving taxi leader Waymo in the number of cabs deployed and trips completed. To catch up, it must demonstrate that its camera-only system can safely navigate streets and avoid pedestrians. By contrast, Waymo and another rival, Amazon’s Zoox, supplement cameras with radar and a laser-based technology called lidar.

Even if the technology works well, Americans still need to be convinced.

A Pew Research Center survey conducted in February found that seven in 10 U.S. adults were “not too” or “not at all” comfortable riding in a driverless car.

Tesla stock was battered last year after Musk took over President Donald Trump’s government cost-cutting campaign, dubbed DOGE, and embraced extreme-right political candidates, sparking protests at Tesla showrooms and boycotts by car buyers in several countries.

Tesla posted a second consecutive annual decline in vehicle sales last year. Its profits plunged, and it lost its crown as the world’s best-selling electric vehicle maker to China’s BYD.

Austin has had a self-driving Tesla “robotaxi” service since June last year, but those cars are equipped with steering wheels and brake pedals. The service, which has since expanded to five other cities in Texas and Florida, initially carried passengers with safety drivers aboard to take over in case of problems.

Tesla has more than 200 “unsupervised” robotaxis in those cities, meaning they operate without safety drivers aboard, according to the monitoring site RobotaxiTracker. Waymo has more than 4,000 such vehicles in 14 cities.

In the Pew survey, 16% of U.S. adults said they would be “somewhat” comfortable riding in a driverless car, while 7% said they would be “extremely” or “very” comfortable.

Separate Gallup polling conducted in 2025 found that skepticism about the safety of driverless cars had risen over the previous several years. More Americans said all or mostly human-operated cars were the safest option than in a 2018 poll.

It is unclear whether Musk is the right person to coax people into cars with no human controls. Another Pew poll conducted in January found that nearly six in 10 U.S. adults had a “very” or “mostly” unfavorable view of him.

Musk eventually hopes to send full self-driving software to hundreds of thousands of Teslas through a software update. That would allow Tesla owners to turn their cars into taxis for hire when they are not using them.

But regulators in the U.S. and overseas have signaled that he still has some convincing to do.

Tesla has not received approval for drivers to use even its partial self-driving software in most European Union countries. In the U.S., where the software has been downloaded and used, regulators have opened several investigations into its safety.

One probe is examining the software’s role in several Tesla crashes in fog, sun glare and other low-visibility conditions, including one in which a pedestrian was killed. Another is investigating dozens of incidents in which Teslas using partial self-driving software ran red lights or drove on the wrong side of the road, sometimes crashing into other vehicles and causing injuries. A third is examining why Tesla apparently violated regulatory requirements by failing to report crashes promptly.