1. Prince William surprises Greg James for a spot of tandem bike riding

2. Prince William also had a pretty savage ‘unpopular opinion’ for Greg James as they rode together

3. Greg James’ emotional support from his mum has been a highlight for many of those following his challenge

4. Day six of the challenge began with a poignant moment in honour of Greg James’ dad on Wednesday

5. Reaching that £1 million mark was a real moment

6. Crowds of supporters have gathered over the course of the route to encourage Greg James on his way

7. His welcome in York was particularly impressive

8. The tear-jerking surprises just keep on coming

9. Oh, and if you’re wondering how Greg has been recuperating after a long day of cycling…

What are ‘clamshell’ exercises?

What are the benefits of ‘clamshell’ exercises?

Ben Fletcher is the Conservative candidate to be mayor of Cheshire and Warrington. He was previously CEO of Boots Opticians and CFO of The Very Group.

The best Conservative governments have been those that grasped the difficult job of fundamental tax reform to ensure stable finances that allow the economy to flourish. In the 1840s the Peel government ushered in a generation of prosperity through the combination of income tax reform and free trade. Disraeli oversaw significant local taxation reform, and, of course, the Howe/Lawson reforms in the 1980s were crucial to changing the trajectory of Britain’s economic performance.

Kemi Badenoch has rightly said she wants us to create a high growth, low immigration economy. There is a big argument that we need to win before the next general election: to reduce tax rates, we must reform the system. High rates are a consequence of the design of the tax system, and just reducing rates will not cut it. Successive chancellors have, in pursuit of a budget day ‘rabbit out of the hat’, tinkered with the system, creating distortions and anomalies that stunt economic growth. This has created a distorted tax system. There has been little sense of what type of tax system we want, what behaviour do we want to reward, and how do we create the environment for faster economic growth.

Reforming the tax system is going to be controversial. Since 1997 the tax code (as measured by Tolleys) has grown nearly fourfold from 7,250 pages to c.24,000 The tax code is now so long, with so many exceptions, that there will, inevitably, be opposition to almost any major change because there are bound to be losers. The need for reform though is immense. We have a Council Tax system based on 1991 housing values, an Income tax system where the marginal rate of tax rises to 70 per cent at certain income levels, meanwhile tax lawyers debate whether product is a cake or biscuit.

As the famous New Zealand Finance Minister, Roger Douglas, showed and argued, reform succeeds when the changes are big enough to create winners who can champion reform alongside the short-term losers. To sustain a reforming agenda in a way that commands the confidence of markets, fends off the ‘losers’ from any reform, and creates a clear direction of travel, we need a set of principles that can be seen to be adhered to over a series of Budgets.

A good tax system has four elements: There are as few taxes as possible, the base for those taxes is as broad as possible, so that the rate can be as low and least distorted as possible, and there are as few exceptions as possible. Adherence to these principles across the tax system would create one that was simpler, which better rewarded hard work and risk taking, and which was much less onerous for the individual or organisation being taxed.

These can be applied to any tax, but it’s VAT that’s urgent. It has become so distorted that it is now killing critical sectors of the economy, most noticeably hospitality. In Cheshire this is particularly acute as hospitality is 10 per cent of our economy, employing 40,000 people. Reforming VAT would be the tax reform that potentially does most to stimulate economic growth.

The current VAT system breaks all four of the principles I described: it is levied on a narrow base meaning the rate is high, the number of exceptions is high, and it is distortive in key sectors. The threshold is set in such a way as businesses manage with the aim of avoiding it, causing growth to be capped.

VAT is levied on only c.40 per cent of consumption. There is no longer any rationale for why the base remains so narrow. Our consumption habits have changed hugely since the introduction of the tax in 1973. In particular, the percentage of household income spent on food has fallen by two thirds, and the exclusions for books and newspapers speaks to a pre-digital age. We’re having fewer children (another VAT exception) and real wages have risen faster than the cost of products.

This has distortive effects. In hospitality, most of their costs are zero rated for VAT meaning it cannot be reclaimed. The consequence for this is that 20 per cent of their income goes straight to HMRC, an unusually high amount. This puts sustained pressure on their cashflow such that when other costs are raised, they have very little left to manage with.

The narrow base causes the rate to be high. We have the highest rate in Western Europe which drives the second distortive effect: incessant lobbying for exceptions to the rate. Food in a pub? Taxed. Food at home? Not taxed. Plain biscuit? No VAT. Chocolate Biscuit? 20 per cent. Buying a pet? Taxed. A Rabbit, though? Not taxed. No wonder the lawyers are doing well.

The other aspect which narrows the base is the threshold for VAT registration, currently £90,000. Entirely unsurprisingly small businesses manage their revenue to the threshold to avoid the rate. The presence of this cliff edge (a lamentable feature of many taxes) means there are sudden movements in tax liabilities for small businesses which hamper growth as owners seek to minimise their cash outflow. We need businesses focused entirely on growing their income, not managing to an effective revenue cap.

The next Conservative government should go big. Taxing consumption is preferable to taxing income or risk taking. We need people to want to work, and found businesses risking their capital, and for that to be rewarding. What families spend their money on is their business.

Extended VAT to all consumption and radically reduce the rate. Extending the base should allow the rate to come in at c. 8 per cent and still raise the same revenue as today. In the same package of reform, we should cut the threshold from £90,000 to zero, so that every company pays VAT from day one. This removes the growth cap of the cliff-edge and because the rate has been cut makes it manageable for all companies. For new companies there should be a three-year transition where a VAT rebate is provided of 75 per cent in year one, 50 per cent in year two, and 25 per cent in year three to support cashflow in the critical early years.

Big changes always mean there are some losers, such as those businesses not currently paying VAT, and tax lawyers. Others, such as hospitality would have their growth prospects transformed. Our highly competitive retail industry would work hard to keep prices keen for the consumer.

Kemi Badenoch and Mel Stride have shown with their announcement on Stamp Duty that they are prepared to be radical about tax. This willingness to make bold choices will be essential in creating a growing economy.

Reforming VAT in a first Conservative budget would create the basis for accelerated economic growth and be consistent with the reforming approach shown by the best of our predecessors.

In a speech outside Downing Street this week, Keir Starmer spoke about his cost of living policies. The thing is, his remarks take the phrase a ‘band aid for a bullet wound’ to new heights.

Nearly all of these policies are reheated. They had already been announced.

Cost of living policies explained

The energy price cap until June — an attempt to shield Britons from volatile international energy prices — was announced in February. However, energy bills still rose on average by 68% (£713) between the winter of 2020 and 2025. This policy does next to nothing to address the overall and spiralling cost of living.

If Labour was serious about homegrown energy, the Prime Minister would deliver a Green New Deal, like he pledged to while campaigning to become Labour leader. This would mean Iran’s retaliatory blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, a key shipping route, would have no impact on UK energy prices. It would also bring energy into public ownership — another way to make bills significantly cheaper.

Instead, Starmer said in his speech on Monday:

we have to reopen the Strait of Hormuz to ensure stability in the market.

Labour’s cut in fuel duty is also not a new policy. It’s a Conservative one from 2022 that Labour is actually removing in September rather than “extending” as Starmer presented in the speech. Labour is in fact bringing the first increase to fuel duty since 2011.

Rather than investing in modern development, Starmer also said he will make provisions for petrol stations to publish prices. The climate crisis means we need to swiftly move away from oil powered vehicles, not encourage them.

The 1945 Clement Attlee government delivered huge change, such as nationalising 20% of the economy. This brought down inflation for decades through a price drop in the essentials that every business and person relies on. It shows the government taking an active and strategic hand in the economy is entirely possible.

Featured image via the Canary

Hours after the shock caused by the Confederation of African Football’s (CAF) decision to award Morocco the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON) title and declare Senegal the loser with a 3-0 scoreline, the Senegalese Football Federation announced it would launch a new legal battle to defend the rights of its national team and fans.

The federation will officially appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) to overturn the decision, considering what happened a serious deviation from legal and administrative procedures.

The federation’s general secretary, Abdoulaye Sow has called the decision a “travesty.” Sow said:

This is a travesty; this decision is based on absolutely nothing. It has no legal foundation … The president of the federation will get in touch with the lawyers; we will engage with the appropriate authorities, and then we will go to the court of arbitration for sport, which will issue the final decision.

He added:

We will not back down. Senegalese people should have no doubt. The truth is on Senegal’s side, the law is on Senegal’s side.

AFCON debacle

The Senegalese Football Federation described the procedures preceding the decision as arbitrary and without any legal basis, anticipating that the case will turn into a lengthy legal battle that could affect the fate of the tournament and reopen one of the most controversial Africa Cup of Nations finals.

In concluding his remarks, Sow reassured the fans, affirming that the fight is not over and that the federation is striving to restore justice and the title that the national team won on the field. He confirmed that communication is ongoing with all relevant parties to guarantee Senegal’s rights.

With the case now before the Court of Arbitration for Sport, the world awaits the outcome of this legal battle, in a new chapter of African football’s history, already full of controversy and drama.

Featured image via the Canary

Angela Rayner, February 2026 (Alamy)

4 min read25 min

Addressing a reception held by Labour soft left group Mainstream on Tuesday evening, Rayner said voters had been given the impression that Labour has “represented the establishment, not working people” and that “at worst, we became it”.

“The very survival of the Labour Party is at stake,” she warned a packed pub basement in Westminster.

“As a party and movement, we cannot hide. We cannot just go through the motions in the face of decline,” Rayner said.

“There is no safe ground for us, and we’re running out of time. The change that people so desperately wanted to see needs to be seen. It needs to be felt.”

The influential backbencher, widely seen as a potential successor to Keir Starmer, started her speech by telling the crowd: “I have a lot to say. I’ve been waiting a long time for this moment.” 

She also joked that she was “really pleased” the reception was being held in a pub that Labour MPs were allowed to enter – “we’ve been banned from a few”, she said.

Rayner went on specifically to criticise Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood’s plan to extend the automatic qualifying period for awarding Indefinite Leave to Remain from five to 10 years retroactively.

The change would “pull the rug” from migrants who have already arrived in the UK, and represent “not just bad policy but a breach of trust”, she said.

“We cannot talk about earning a settlement if we keep moving the goalposts,” she added. “It’s un-British.”

No primary legislation is required to implement the changes being proposed by the government, which means there is no automatic Commons vote on the proposals and no obvious crunch point for a rebellion.

If there are enough rebel MPs, however, there is a possibility they could organise to force a vote, though they acknowledge that this would be difficult.

Tony Vaughan MP, from the 2024 intake, led more than 100 Labour colleagues in signing a private letter to the government urging it to rethink the tightening of immigration rules.

PoliticsHome understands that he is holding a strategy meeting today for Labour MPs concerned about the plans for earned settled status and refugees.

Vaughan also spoke at the Mainstream reception, telling attendees that Mahmood’s reforms were not informed by Labour values of community, solidarity, internationalism and social justice.

“The idea that mere financial contribution is the beginning and end of what we think qualifies somebody to belong in this society is totally wrong,” he said.

“We have to ensure that as a political movement, in every policy debate, we fight not just to win the argument but ultimately to define the terms and the boundaries of the debate before the argument even starts.”

Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham, another figure on the party’s soft left who is touted as a possible successor to Starmer despite not being an MP, today told the BBC that Labour “would always do well to listen to what Angela has got to say”.

Nick Thomas-Symonds, the Cabinet Office minister, denied in response to Rayner’s comment that the plans for immigration reform were “un-British”.

He told Times Radio: “I don’t think that the changes Shabana Mahmood has announced are un-British. I think what they are doing is trying to strike fairness and a balance between, in the first instance, control of our borders and also people who are here still, of course, having the opportunity then to gain a settled status, but also being fair to everybody.”

The Home Secretary doubled down on the reforms in a speech last week, warning Labour MPs that the current asylum system is “eroding trust” with voters, and arguing that restoring order at the borders is necessary, “not a betrayal” of Labour values. 

“Hard-working people across this country engage in the daily struggle to make ends meet.

“They see a state that they pay taxes towards, yet it is unable to stop the flow of dinghies across the channel. They see a state that is paying billions towards hotels. It doesn’t look fair because it’s not fair, and it erodes their trust in government,” she said.

One attendee of the Mainstream event last night said Rayner was “here for nominations”, referring to the 81 MP nominations any leadership challenger or candidate would have to secure. 

Another warned PoliticsHome against interpreting Mainstream’s invitation to Rayner as a leadership endorsement by the organisation, which is also seen as close to Burnham.

Rayner resigned from cabinet in September after being found to have breached the ministerial code over unpaid stamp duty.

There is a feeling among Labour MPs that it will be very difficult for her to stand as a leadership candidate as long as the HMRC investigation into her tax affairs is ongoing.

Image by: RayArt Graphics / Alamy

3 min read7 min

The campaign for a child cruelty register has revealed something important about how Parliament really works: meaningful legal change does not depend solely on who sits on the government benches. Opposition MPs can identify gaps in the law, build coalitions across parties, and ultimately shift government policy. Despite the way Westminster is often portrayed, cross-party collaboration remains one of the most effective engines of legislative progress.

The gap in the law came to light through the work of my constituent, Paula Hudgell. Few realised that individuals convicted of the most serious offences against children can effectively disappear once their sentences end. After release, there is no long-term mechanism to track them, no requirement to notify authorities of their whereabouts, and no system to ensure that the risks they pose remain visible.

Paula’s determination is rooted in the appalling abuse suffered by her adopted son, Tony. At just 41 days old, he was subjected to such extreme violence by his birth parents that both of his legs later had to be amputated. They were sentenced to 10 years at Maidstone Crown Court but released after serving eight. Their supervision will end when their licence expires, even though the risk they pose may not.

Experience shows that offenders can relocate, change identities and disengage from services to avoid scrutiny. Without a statutory framework for monitoring, authorities are left without the tools they need to assess risk or intervene early.

A child cruelty register, modelled on the Sex Offenders Register, would help to close this loophole. It would introduce mandatory notification requirements, make breaches a criminal offence and allow police and probation services to manage and monitor high-risk individuals over the long term. It would give families and communities confidence that serious offenders cannot simply vanish.

Experience shows that offenders can relocate, change identities and disengage from services to avoid scrutiny

Advertisement

The campaign has demonstrated how Parliament can function at its best. Before Christmas, Conservative MPs tabled an amendment to the Sentencing Bill to create such a register. Labour MPs voted against it at that stage, but that was not the end of the story. The same amendment was later tabled to the Crime and Policing Bill in the House of Lords, and discussions continued across party lines.

Through our sustained engagement with Home Office ministers, justice ministers, Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy and, crucially, through constructive dialogue with colleagues cross-party in both Houses, the government has now accepted the principle of our proposal and tabled its own amendment to introduce a child cruelty register. This is a clear example of how opposition-led initiatives can shape government legislation when the case is strong and the collaboration is genuine.

There is still work to do. I remain concerned that the list of offences proposed by the government does not capture all serious violent child cruelty cases, and I will continue to press for a more comprehensive register. But a fundamental shift has been secured: Parliament has recognised that the risk posed by the most serious offenders does not end at the prison gates, and neither should oversight.

This change in the law will help ensure that those who pose an ongoing danger to children remain visible to the authorities. Tony’s experience should never be repeated. Protecting the most vulnerable is a responsibility shared across Parliament, and this campaign shows that, despite public scepticism, cross-party co-operation remains not only possible but essential to achieving it.

Helen Grant is Conservative MP for Maidstone and Malling, and shadow solicitor general

Rumours about a Spice Girls reunion have been rampant since the minute they finished their string of concerts as a four-piece back in 2019, with various reports over the years about whether or not we could expect to see the iconic girl group back together.

In recent history, it was heavily rumoured that the band had a number of plans to mark the 30th anniversary of their debut single Wannabe, which reached number one on both sides of the Atlantic back in 1996.

However, The Sun has reported that the band “failed to reach an agreement” and therefore these plans have all been ditched.

“We are communicating all the time, we want to do something,” she continued. “Who knows when? But I still feel very optimistic – and I keep my fingers crossed – that you will see the Spice Girls together at some point in the future.”

Back in 2024, an unconfirmed report in the Daily Mail claimed that a fall-out between Mel B and Geri Horner had “thwarted” plans for a 30th anniversary celebration that would have included live shows and an official Netflix documentary.

She last performed with the Spice Girls way back in 2012, at the closing ceremony of the London Olympics.