The debate surrounding ticket prices for the 2026 World Cup has escalated from a purely sporting discussion to a political issue within US Congress. Dozens of American lawmakers called on FIFA to review its ticket pricing policy.

A letter from US lawmakers warned that the tournament could become an event that excludes a large segment of the fan base.

The letter, coordinated by Representative Sydney Kamlager Duff and signed by 68 other members of Congress, was addressed to FIFA President Gianni Infantino. It urged him to make tickets affordable for American fans as well as international fans attending the tournament, which will be hosted by the United States, Canada, and Mexico from June 11 to July 19, 2026.

FIFA World Cup: rising costs

A global event that impacts the local economy. The primary reason for this intervention relates to the sheer scale of the event itself. Because the World Cup is not just a football competition, but a massive economic project involving cities and public institutions in the host countries.

The American cities hosting the tournament have already spent billions of dollars on infrastructure, security, transportation, and services related to the World Cup. This means that a portion of these costs is covered by public funds and taxpayers, which gives lawmakers the right to question organizers when they feel that local fans might be excluded due to high prices.

Variable pricing

Lawmakers criticized FIFA’s decision to use a variable pricing system for the first time in the tournament’s history, a system that allows ticket prices to change according to factors such as real-time demand and the popularity of a match.

Critics of this policy argue that this model opens the door to significant price increases, especially for matches involving major national teams or crucial stages, potentially turning the tournament into an event exclusively for the wealthy.

In their letter to Infantino, the lawmakers said that high ticket demand “should not be a green light to raise prices at the expense of the people who make the World Cup the most-watched sporting event in the world.”

FIFA under pressure

Although Congress does not have direct authority over FIFA, such letters represent political and media pressure on the international organization, especially when it concerns a tournament held on American soil.

Therefore, in their concluding remarks, the legislators called on FIFA to “review its policies and take immediate corrective action,” warning that continued variable pricing could transform the world’s biggest football event into a profit-driven enterprise that alienates the fans who have made the game so popular.

Amidst the political and economic debate, the issue of tickets appears to have become one of the most contentious topics in the lead-up to the 2026 World Cup, a tournament that will test not only the readiness of the stadiums but also their relationship with the fans, who are the lifeblood of the game.

Astronomical prices

According to FIFA data, nearly two million tickets were sold in the first two phases of sales, with demand exceeding supply by more than 30 times.

Some tickets for the opening match reach prices of around $900, while tickets for the final exceed $8,000, and the cheapest seats for the final start at around $2,000.

But the biggest surprise came on FIFA’s official resale platform, where a third-tier seat for the tournament final scheduled to be held at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey on July 19 was offered for a shocking price of $143,000, more than 40 times its original price.

Featured image via the Canary

On 12 March dozens of Cut The Ties To Fossil Fuel activists occupied the road outside the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) in London. They used 4-metre ‘oil rigs’ to stretch out a banner demanding “KILL ROSEBANK SO WE CAN LIVE”.

The street filled with smoke and the sound of drums as a line of activists knelt in front of the DESNZ office. Others poured oil over them from containers labelled Adura and Ithaca. The Oil Slicks performance art group was there too, accompanied by a giant ‘Big Oil’ figure.

Secretary of state Ed Miliband is due to make a decision imminently on whether the controversial Rosebank oil and gas field can go into production. Rosebank is the UK’s largest undeveloped oil field and burning its fossil fuel reserves would emit 254m tonnes of CO2. This makes it incompatible with the UK’s 2050 net zero target.

Ali Fleming, an educator from London who is taking part at the action said:

The decision on Rosebank is a stark choice between reckless profit and survival. We ask Ed Miliband not to lose sight of that, whatever the pressure from lobbyists or other government departments.

Climate change is an existential threat and the science is clear; there can be no new oil and gas developments if we are to avoid the climate tipping into an unrecoverable ‘hothouse earth’ state.

Rosebank won’t lower energy bills

If Rosebank gets the green light, the owners will sell the oil on the international market. Around 80% of all UK oil goes for export. So Rosebank won’t lower our energy bills or add to the UK’s energy security.

However the UK public could carry 91% of the cost of developing Rosebank (£3bn) due to generous tax rebates. NGO Uplift calculates that the gap between the tax breaks and the predicted tax payments from sales profits mean the UK exchequer can expect a net loss of more than £258m over the life of Rosebank. And the recent addition of Shell as co-owner could also potentially cost the exchequer £1.3bn.

Also at the action, Dr Ines Smyth, a retired humanitarian worker from Oxford, said:

Ithaca Energy is owned by the Delek Group, an Israeli fuel conglomerate that is linked to violence and the dispossession of Palestinians as it profits from illegal settlements in the West Bank. Delek literally fuels the ongoing genocide by supplying the Israeli occupation forces as they continue to commit war crimes in Gaza.

Approving Rosebank could mean £200m in profits flowing to Delek. Competition over oil and gas also fuels wider conflicts, so cutting ties to fossil fuel will help bring much needed peace and stability to the world.

Rosebank sits 80 miles north-west off the Shetland Isles. A planned gas pipeline would cut through the Faroe-Shetland Belt Marine Protected Area, threatening its unique ecosystem including endangered species of dolphins, whales and fish. Oil spills, construction drilling and seismic work would all have a negative effect on this fragile ecosystem which is already under pressure from climate change.

Also present, Susan Hampton, a writer from Berkhamsted, said:

We are at the point where we must see emissions peak and begin to fall or the planet will overheat with horrendous consequences.

North Sea oil industry jobs have halved in a decade. Propping up this declining industry is just throwing good money after bad; it would only delay the transition to clean energy which is where the growth in the energy market is anyway.

Advertisement

Killing off Rosebank would be a vital win for the planet, as well as a win for clean jobs. We urge Ed Miliband to do the right thing: cut the ties to fossil fuels and kill Rosebank so we can live.

There were two arrests at the protest. Police charged Jessica Upton from Oxford and Alison Fleming from London with Obstruction of the Highway. This came as they descended from the tripods (‘oil rigs’) they were occupying during the protest.

Featured image via Gareth Morris / Cut the Ties

A second horse, HMS Seahorse died at this year’s Cheltenham Festival after sustaining a fatal injury on 11 March. This has reinforced calls by national animal welfare charity the League Against Cruel Sports for a public boycott and government intervention.

It brings the death toll at the Cheltenham Festival to 80 horses since the turn of the century with Animal Aid figures showing a horse dying at every single festival since the year 2000.

The death of HMS Seahorse follows the death of Hansard earlier in this year’s Cheltenham event.

At last year’s festival two horses also died. Springwell Bay was the first casualty before Corbetts Cross died in the festival’s flagship Gold Cup event.

Emma Slawinski, chief executive at the League Against Cruel Sports, said:

Every year horses are raced to their deaths at the Cheltenham Festival and while the death of HMS Seahorse will sadden all animal lovers, tragically it is not a surprise.

The death toll of 80 horses at Cheltenham festival since the turn of the century is simply staggering.

If this death toll happened in any other sport there would be a huge outcry so why is it any different for horses.

Slawinski added:

We are calling on the public to boycott the Cheltenham Festival by staying away, not betting on the races or watching the ITV coverage and advertising which accompanies it.

The government promised the biggest boost for animal welfare in a generation and now it needs to deliver by tackling the terrible death toll at Cheltenham and introducing tighter safety measures in horse racing and banning the use of the whip.

Featured image

The shitrag corporate media are fueling more lies about disabled people defrauding the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) benefits system, this time it’s involving AI.

Media doing the DWP’s job for them

The i Paper ran with the story:

The new PIP mistake making the DWP more suspicious of claimants than ever

‘Dangerous’ over-dependence on AI tools leaves disabled people using wrong or irrelevant information on their forms, say benefits advisers

Basically more DWP propaganda about how disabled people are trying to cheat their way to stealing taxpayers money.

If you look deeper into the story this becomes even clearer. And as usual it’s all an exercise to excuse the DWP’s own failures and bullshit.

The i continued:

The DWP is currently engaged in a Freedom of Information (FOI) battle to prevent the release of training manuals that PIP assessors use with “hidden” conditions, such as Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.

According to FOI documents, the Government has argued that people may use them in combination with AI tools to “craft responses or scripts that mirror the exact requirements needed to score highly”.

The real story here is that the DWP thinks people may fake kidney failure using their own guidance. But now that’s being picked up by the mainstream media, they’re seemingly trying to cover their tracks even more. Conveniently they’ve also thrown AI into the mix, which is a hot topic at the minute.

It also needs pointing out that the FOI battle the DWP are locked in is about the severe conditions criteria (SCC) for the Work Capability Assessment, not PIP. But why let that spoil a good “disability fakers are at it again” story.

This is obviously just another iteration of “fraudsters sharing tricks on TikTok”, but of course the disability hating media lapped it up.

Media missing the point, again

Thankfully the i also featured benefits experts who politely called out the media’s bullshit. However they mainly shared the same viewpoint and expressed concern for people doing this. The worries included that people relying too heavily on ChatGPT will accidentally include false information that could either make them commit fraud or stop them getting benefits.

In one absolutely absurd part of the article, Michelle Cardno, founder of Fightback4Justice claims it will hinder assessment because:

Assessors want a complete picture – good days and bad days

This is so laughably, demonstrably untrue that anyone who’s gone through an assessment can tell you the reviews completely lack nuance.

The article, however, never once addressed why people feel that they have to use AI. Mainly that the PIP is such a difficult benefit to qualify for that unless you say the exactly right thing you risk losing support. The system is so stringent that it doesn’t allow for chronic illness fluctuations. There’s also the fact that the form is 40 pages long. For someone with limited energy or conditions affecting their intellectual abilities, it feels deliberate.

AI undoubtedly can be bad news and for someone in a creative industry, it’s terrifying how much it’s being relied on. However, for disabled people it can be an important accessibility tool.

AI can be used to create summaries, make your tired ramblings make sense and translate voice notes to text. Whilst AI is definitely causing harm, we also can’t ignore that when used in circumstances like this, instead of shitty art, it has a place.

And when you’re already up against it in a system which wants to trip you up whilst claiming to support you, any tools that make that easier can’t be disregarded.

DWP are hypocrites

What’s missing from this that once again is that DWP are hypocrites. Because while they don’t want people using AI to fill in the forms, they use AI to make benefits decisions. This is despite findings that AI use is much more likely to target vulnerable claimants.

This is clearly just another in a long line of the media doing the government’s job for them when it comes to turning the public against disabled people. And as usual the media is more than happy to use us for clicks.

Featured image via screenshot

The unprovoked US-Israel attack on Iran has displaced 3.2mn people, according to the United Nations (UN). And the Iranian Red Crescent has said over 17,000 homes have been damaged. The war is less than two weeks old.

The US and Israel attacked Iran first on 28 February without provocation. Iran was offering unprecedented concessions in negotiations at the time. The Pentagon has since stated there was no imminent threat from Iran. And the UN’s atomic watchdog, the IAEA, has said there is no evidence Iran was developing a nuclear weapon.

The UN’s refugee agency said on 12 March:

Between 600,000 and 1 million Iranian households are now temporarily displaced inside Iran as a result of the ongoing conflict, according to preliminary assessments, representing up to 3.2 million people.

The agency added:

Most of them are reportedly fleeing from Tehran and other major urban areas towards the north of the country and rural areas to seek safety. This figure is likely to continue rising as hostilities persist, marking a worrying escalation in humanitarian needs.

Iran: Afghans taking refuge targeted again

In a perverse twist, Afghans who had taken refuge in Iran have again become victims of US aggression:

Also affected are refugee families hosted in the country, mostly Afghans, who are particularly vulnerable, given their already precarious situation and limited support networks. Families are leaving affected areas amid rising insecurity and limited access to essential services.

The scale of displacement is also reflected in remarkable Iranian Red Crescent figures for homes and businesses struck by US or Israel bombing. Iranian Red Crescent Society chief Pirhossein Kolivand said on March 12 2026 that:

17,300 residential units, 4,120 retail spaces, and 160 healthcare facilities were affected.

Kolivand reported

that nine hospitals ceased operations due to military airstrikes conducted by the U.S. and Israel.

Adding that:

69 schools, 16 Red Crescent centers, 21 rescue vehicles, and 19 ambulances had been hit.

The US-Israeli war has careened out of control with no apparent plan in place. Even after assassination strikes, meant to trigger the collapse of Iran’s government, Iran is apparently stable and capable of fighting back. US president Donald Trump faces resistance at home too.

Senator Chris Murphy said on 12 March:

Everything Israel does is made possible by U.S. support and weapons. Israel should not be telling us when to wage war on Iran. What kind of partnership is this?

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), who has been strongly critical of Trump’s war on Iran, told Drop Site’s Julian Andreone that the United States “should have leverage over Israel” — not the other way around:

“Everything Israel does is made possible by U.S. support and weapons. Israel… pic.twitter.com/JmH6YfSij1

— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) March 12, 2026

Advertisement

US reporter Ken Klippenstein counted 18 countries that have been pulled into the war so far. With the vital Strait of Hormuz at least partly shut, the world economy is under serious strain.

And sources within the Trump administration have estimated:

that the first six days of the war on Iran had cost the United States at least $11.3 billion.

With no obvious off-ramp, and not much visible will to try and find one, the Trump administration looks increasingly stuck. Trump does not want to lose face, yet Iran is unlikely to capitulate or enter talks. The US attacked during productive good-faith negotiations, after all. In the meantime, homes, businesses and people in Iran continue to be bombarded.

Featured image via the Canary

Food bank charity Trussell has released its figures for 2025. And they show that it provided more than 2.6 million emergency food parcels during the year.

A parcel typically contains three days’ supplies for one person. The figures also include some seven day packages. And Trussell acknowledges that there are thousands of other charities and independent groups providing food aid throughout the UK.

Food bank use slightly down on 2024

Trussell reported a 12% drop in the total parcel numbers compared to 2024. This was largely due to easing inflation, which led to a slowdown in the rising cost of essentials. There were also fewer people losing their jobs.

While this means some people have been able to get back on their feet, the charity warns too many are feeling “overlooked and left behind”. Incomes from social security and wages continue to fail to cover the high costs of essentials like food, utility bills, and toiletries.

Parents are among the people shouldering the heaviest burden as families with children received almost two thirds (62%) of all parcels in 2025. This is despite them making up just 42% of the UK population. Trussell is also reporting an alarming rise in hardship among older people. Support provided for people aged 65 and over more than tripled (247% increase) between 2019 and 2025.

Food banks are describing the persistent hardship they witness as “appalling”, with people sitting in the dark to save electricity, parents skipping meals to feed their children, and people in such impossible situations that they open food parcels to eat before leaving the food bank.

At the same time, levels of need continue to outpace donations. Many food banks say they are at breaking point and are having to purchase significant amounts of food just to keep shelves stocked.

Calls for government action on hardship

Helen Barnard, director of policy and research at Trussell, said:

Today’s figures show that too many people across the UK are still being pushed to the brink. Even as we gain hope from people getting back on their feet, we cannot lose sight of the heartbreaking injustice that such shocking numbers of people are still trapped in the grip of severe hardship.

This isn’t right. Too many people are being forced to skip meals so their children can eat, or survive on cups of tea because they don’t have any food left in the cupboards. The pandemic and cost of living crisis have left deep scars. Severe hardship still weighs heavily on daily lives, leaving people feeling overlooked and left behind.

Slowing price rises alone cannot solve the scale of severe hardship still facing our communities. And as we face uncertain times again, progress can be too easily undone.

We need the UK government to continue to take meaningful and lasting action so all of us have what we need to get by. Bold choices like ending the two child limit are a step forward. But we cannot stop until everyone has enough to afford the essentials and we can end the need for food banks for good.

Amie, 45, from North Lincolnshire who has two children, said:

I had to use the food bank when my husband left and I lost my job in quick succession. I was able to access food through the food bank but still felt like I was floundering.

I managed to get a temporary job, then set up my own business, but I still needed to access community food support.

Unfortunately it didn’t work out with my business, but I managed to find work in a similar job. However, this is now at risk due to the lack of funding. I receive Universal Credit because my income from work isn’t high enough to support my family as a single mum. If I lose this paid work I will struggle to pay for even the essentials every month.

I am worried that I may need to access a food bank again. Making sure my children eat will always be my priority. It’s a terrible state that we’re in where in 2026 so many people have to use food banks. Everyone should have enough money to afford the essentials.

A host of famous faces including actor Christopher Eccleston, singer Tom Grennan, TV star Carol Vorderman and actors Mark Bonnar and Brian Cox are joining Trussell’s call to end the need for food banks across the UK.

Eccleston, said:

Today, Trussell’s shocking new figures show that millions of people are being forced to turn to food banks because they don’t have enough money to live on. This isn’t right.

Everyone should be able to afford the essentials like food, utility bills and toiletries. They are not luxuries, but they have become them to people living on the lowest incomes because work or social security just isn’t enough.

Hunger in the UK isn’t a food problem, it’s an income problem. Our social security system should be there for all of us when we need it most – but right now, it’s not enough to cover the cost of the essentials and it’s pushing people to food banks.

That’s why I’m standing with Trussell to call on the UK Government to make policy changes so that everyone can afford the essentials we all need to get by.

Advertisement

Grennan, said:

It’s shocking how many people are having to turn to food banks to get by because they do not have enough money to live on. This is unacceptable.

I’ve spent time volunteering at my local food bank and the conversations you have there stay with you. No one wants to go to a food bank for support. It’s where people turn when they have no other option.

The fact that so many parcels go out to families with children is heartbreaking. It’s clear that the system isn’t working, and that too many people are just one step away from facing hunger and hardship.

Food banks are a lifeline, but they aren’t the answer. Everyone should have enough money to cover the essentials like food and bills. That’s why I’m standing with Trussell to call for change. We need our politicians to commit to ending food bank need for good.

Advertisement

With growing uncertainty around the cost of essentials, Trussell says now is the time for the UK government to build firmer foundations for people on the lowest incomes. The charity is calling on the UK government to:

• Lift the freeze on Local Housing Allowance and create a permanent link between rents and support, so more people are protected from runaway rental costs.
• Establish an independent process to advise on the minimum level of Universal Credit payments, moving us closer to an Essentials Guarantee that ensures the basic rate of Universal Credit always covers the cost of essentials and can never be pulled below that level.

Food banks need everyone to play their part to move us towards ending the need for emergency food in the UK. The public can help make sure food banks can continue to provide warm, compassionate, practical support and advice in the year ahead by donating food or funds to Trussell or your local food bank to help end hunger in the UK.

Find out how many emergency food parcels were provided to people facing hardship in your local area.

Featured image via the Canary

Research shows that UK shoppers intend to buy 20 million bouquets of flowers for loved ones this Mother’s Day. But as each bouquet often comes wrapped in a plastic sleeve, this contributes to a disheartening amount of plastic waste.

New data shows that equates to around 2.7 million m² of plastic film. This would be enough to cover 378 football pitches or enough to wrap Buckingham Palace 35 times.

All of this comes with a significant carbon footprint, with 124.2  tonnes of CO₂ emissions generated from the production of this plastic. That’s the same as approximately 15 UK households’ annual emissions.

Each bunch of flowers also often comes with one or two sachets of food in a plastic container, which further adds to plastic waste. Rubber bands usually hold each bouquet together, potentially adding 20 million rubber bands to landfill every Mother’s Day.

Rubber bands take up to 50 years to biodegrade and can be incredibly harmful to the environment. If burned they release carcinogenic pollution into the atmosphere. Rubber bands can be dangerous for wildlife too, causing them to become tangled up and injured. And animals and birds can eat them and die.

Most sleeves for flower bouquets are made specifically from clear polypropylene film. This material can be recycled, but it’s unlikely local council collection services will take it. This means people can’t generally put it in household recycling bins.

Some retailers and large supermarkets may offer in-store recycling for soft plastics, which could include polypropylene film. However, availability can differ locally.

How can we reduce flower waste this Mother’s Day?

Choose sustainable packaging. Flowers wrapped in paper or reusable fabric avoids unnecessary plastic waste. Alternatively, potted plants over cut flowers can be a more sustainable option.

Avoid flower food sachets; these add further plastic waste. It’s best to avoid them altogether with a better option being to make plant food at home instead.

Avoid or reuse rubber bands – String or ribbon can be both an aesthetic and environmentally friendly way to hold together bouquets as opposed to rubber bands, but if bouquets do have elastic bands, it’s best to reuse them.

Mark Hall, waste management expert at BusinessWaste.co.uk, commented on plastic waste:

Mother’s Day provides us with the opportunity to show gratitude to one of the most important people in our lives, but many don’t realise how the impact gifts can have on mother nature.

The plastic film used to wrap bouquets can be problematic as most councils are unlikely to collect it for recycling, meaning most of the 2.7 million m² of wrap is likely to head for landfill.

Advertisement

This doesn’t mean consumers need to stop purchasing flowers, but we’d encourage them to stop and consider the packaging used, opting for the most sustainable option where possible.

We also believe it would be helpful for florists and retailers to work to provide takeback schemes for this type of plastic and ensure thorough signage and guidance is given.

The flower market has significant global transport factors and often poor conditions for workers. Maybe it’s time to think more creatively about how to celebrate Mother’s Day.

Featured image via the Canary

What is “penguin walking”?

What should I do once the grass seeds have been planted?