News Desk

Naegohyang FC will play the South’s Suwon FC on May 20 in the semifinal of the Women’s Asian Champions League.

A North Korean women’s football club will become the first sports team from the country to play in South Korea since 2018 when they visit this month, Seoul’s Ministry of Unification has confirmed.

The neighbours remain technically at war after their 1950-53 conflict ended in an armistice rather than a peace treaty, and sporting and cultural exchanges between them are very rare.

Naegohyang Women’s FC will play the South’s Suwon FC Women on May 20 in the semifinals of the Asian Champions League.

The visiting delegation will include 27 players and 12 club staff, the ministry said on Monday. South Korea’s football association told the AFP news agency that the team would arrive on May 17.

They will fly into Incheon airport on an Air China flight from Beijing, a Unification Ministry official said.

The winner of the match at Suwon Sports Complex, south of the capital Seoul, will play the final of Asia’s top women’s club competition against either Australia’s Melbourne City or Japan’s Tokyo Verdy Beleza on May 23.

“The losing team in the semifinal will return home on Thursday, May 21, with no third-place playoff scheduled,” the ministry statement added.

The match will be the first time a North Korean sports team has played in the South since shooting, youth football and table tennis delegations travelled there in 2018.

The last time Pyongyang sent a women’s football team to the South was in 2014, when the North Korean national team took part in the Asian Games in Incheon.

Founded in 2012 and based in the North Korean capital, much of Naegohyang’s squad is “made up of national team-level players”, the ministry said.

North Korea’s national team is one of the dominant forces in Asian women’s football, winning multiple international titles in recent years, especially at the youth level.

The most recent one came in November last year, when they defeated the Netherlands 3-0 in the final of the U-17 Women’s World Cup.

Aaron Hardie’s brilliant all-round performance ensured Peshawar Zalmi clinched their second Pakistan Super League cricket title with a five-wicket win over newcomers Hyderabad Kingsmen, despite an early wobble in the run chase in the final.

Hardie grabbed 4-27 to bowl out Hyderabad for a below-par 129 all out in 18 overs and then hit a fluent 56 not out off 39 balls to anchor Peshawar to 130-5 in 15.2 overs, in front of a packed crowd at the Gaddafi Stadium in Lahore on Sunday.

It completed a redemption arc for Peshawar’s captain Babar Azam, who finished the franchise-based T20 tournament as its leading run-scorer after finding himself in and out of Pakistan’s T20 squad in recent years.

“It’s a very big achievement for me, for Peshawar Zalmi and all the fans,” Babar said after winning his first PSL title as skipper.

“Throughout the tournament, we’ve performed really well as a team … Every player executed the plans they were given in batting, bowling, and fielding. Our plan was to go match by match.”

The crowd at the Gaddafi Stadium in Babar’s hometown chanted his name and erupted in joy when Hardie scored the winning runs for the team in yellow and pink kits.

Peshawar, who won the toss and chose to chase, had slumped to 40-4 inside the first five overs after losing Babar for a golden duck, while Mohammad Haris, Kusal Mendis, and Michael Bracewell also fell for single-digit scores.

But Hardie, who smashed nine fours, then combined in a match-winning stand of 85 runs with Abdul Samad (48), who missed out on his half-century before holing out in the deep when Peshawar needed only five runs for victory.

“It was just a great game of cricket,” Hardie said. “Kingsmen came out of the blocks really hard. They’ve certainly had a lot of momentum from the last couple of games and they carried that in, but I’m really proud of the way the boys were able to fight back.”

Peshawar were favourites for the title after losing only one game in the tournament, with Babar, who scored two centuries, equalling Fakhar Zaman’s PSL record of 588 runs in one edition of the tournament.

Earlier, Saim Ayub (54) scored a fighting half-century to help Hyderabad post 129.

Hyderabad had a productive power play of 69-2, despite Hardie having captain Marnus Labuschagne (20) caught behind off a rising delivery, and Maaz Sadaqat’s early aggression was cut short to just 11 runs when he half-heartedly pulled pace bowler Mohammad Basit to deep backward square leg in the first over.

However, Hyderabad lost momentum and crashed to 73-6 in the space of nine balls after the power play for just two runs.

The slide began when Usman Khan, coming into the final with half-centuries in the last three successive games, was trapped leg before wicket by the tournament’s leading wicket-taker Sufyan Moqim (1-23).

Irfan Khan and Kusal Perera were run out due to some sharp fielding by Bracewell, and between those dismissals, Glenn Maxwell was undone by Nahid Rana’s (2-22) pace and got caught first ball while going for a pull against the Bangladesh fast bowler.

Ayub stretched the total beyond the 100-run mark with a knock of 54 off 50 balls before he fell in Hardie’s last over as he top-edged a pull to mid-on, before the fast bowler wrapped up the innings by having No 11 batter Akif Javed caught behind.

The Australian batter, who was visibly moved to tears after leading Hyderabad into the final in a dramatic last-over win over Islamabad United in the second qualifier on Friday, admitted that his team did not post an imposing target.

“As a batting group, we probably left a few runs out there,” Labuschagne said. “We showed once again that belief in the side and what we can do, putting them four for 40, but just not enough runs on the board tonight.”

Hyderabad had a fairytale run in the tournament when they came back strongly after losing their first four league games, and also knocked out both former champions Multan Sultans and Islamabad United in the playoffs.

“Tonight hurts,” Labuschagne said. “But reflecting on what an amazing tournament we’ve put together, coming from four losses to winning four in a row, getting bowled out for 80 then winning by 100, and then winning two games to get into the final, we’ve made so many great memories and I’m just so proud of the team, it’s been an awesome effort.”

The Redondo Beach Pier reopened Sunday afternoon, hours after police and city officials ordered its evacuation for reasons law enforcement has declined to disclose.

The Redondo Police Department issued its initial evacuation order at about 11 a.m. through the city’s alert system.

“Police Activity on the Pier. Anyone in the area of the pier is requested to evacuate safely,” the statement read. “Catalina [Avenue] between Torrance [Boulevard] and Beryl [Street] are closed. Please stay away from the pier area until further notice.”

The department issued an update on X at 11:57 a.m. saying that the pier would remain closed until further notice.

At 2:21 p.m., the department sent out another message through the city’s alert system saying that police activity had concluded and that pier and its surrounding area were once again open to the public.

Redondo Beach City Councilmember Brad Waller weighed in on the evacuation in the comments section of BeachLife’s initial postponement announcement on Facebook.

“There was a threat made to the pier, and the area was evacuated to allow the police and dogs to clear the area,” Waller wrote. “Police are still going over the pier area and have expanded to BeachLife. There was no threat made to BeachLife, but out of an abundance of caution, they want to ensure that the area is safe before thousands of people enter. The pier area and BeachLife space were searched, and nothing was found. BeachLife should be ready to open and proceed.”

The Times has reached out to the Redondo Beach Police Department for more information.

The evacuation came on the last day of the Redondo Beach-set BeachLife Festival, which was scheduled to open at noon and feature performances by My Morning Jacket, Peach Pit, Sheryl Crow and James Taylor.

In a social media announcement, organizers for the festival said the start of Sunday’s event would be delayed at least an hour.

“Safety comes first. In cooperation with our public safety professionals in the City, out of an abundance of caution, we have coordinated to temporarily delay doors until 1 p.m. due to ongoing police activity on the Redondo Pier near Torrance Boulevard,” BeachLife wrote in the statement.

In a subsequent post that went live at 1:43 p.m., the organization said it had been given the all-clear to open its doors to the public.

“Per the direction of local safety officials, we have been given the go ahead to safely open doors momentarily,” the statement said. “We appreciate the patience from our community and look forward to a wonderful of day of sun, fun, and great music.”

Inter Milan win their 21st Scudetto, edging Napoli, with three matches remaining in the Italian football league season.

Celebrations have erupted across Milan after Inter clinched the Serie A title with a 2-0 victory over Parma, sending thousands of supporters into the streets.

The Piazza del Duomo was filled with fans clad in blue and black on Sunday, moments after the final whistle at the nearby San Siro, as flares and fireworks lit up the night sky.

Marcus Thuram opened the scoring in first-half stoppage time before Henrikh Mkhitaryan sealed the win 10 minutes from time. The winners moved up to 82 points and clinched their 21st Scudetto with three matches remaining in the campaign.

Inter entered the match knowing a point would be enough after second-placed Napoli were held to a 0-0 draw at Como on Saturday, and their own result the next day handed them an unbeatable 12-point lead at the top.

Despite the scarcity of clear-cut chances, Inter controlled much of the first half and established themselves deep in the Parma half.

The hosts came close in the 25th minute when a powerful close-range shot from Nicolo Barella struck the underside of the bar. The rebound then hit Parma goalkeeper Zion Suzuki on the back, but the Japan international reacted quickly to tip the ball away from near the line and out of danger.

Thuram sparked a frenzy among the home supporters in first-half stoppage time, slotting home after being found unmarked by a Piotr Zielinski through ball to put Inter ahead.

The second half followed a similar pattern with Inter remaining in control but failing to capitalise on their dominance as supporters inside the stadium grew increasingly focused on the clock ticking to 90 minutes.

Federico Dimarco delivered a near-perfect cross to Denzel Dumfries in the closing stages, but the defender failed to control his first touch, sending the close-range effort high over the bar and missing the chance to seal the match.

Mkhitaryan sealed the victory 10 minutes from time, tapping in a low cross from Lautaro Martinez to secure the points and spark title celebrations among Inter supporters.

For Inter, the triumph offered redemption after the heartbreak of last season when the club lost the Serie A title on the last match day before a 5-0 thrashing by Paris Saint-Germain in the Champions League final.

“We feel so happy now. It was not easy to start again after a season where we lost all the competitions we were in right at the end, but I am very happy today with this achievement,” Martinez said.

“It was a very important objective for us, perhaps many didn’t see us being favourites considering what happened last term, but we worked so hard on and off the field.”

The atmosphere in the Italian metropolis stood in stark contrast to a year ago when supporters faced the combined heartbreak of losing the league title to Napoli on the final day and suffering defeat in the Champions League final.

“I have no words. In spite of everyone who jinxed us from start to finish. Go Inter, always,” Inter fan Fabio said. “Wonderful. Amazing. And compared to how it ended last year, this year we deserve everything.”

Many supporters were seen in tears at the celebrations.

“It was more than deserved. It was a difficult league season at the start because it was always there, neck and neck,” fellow Inter fan Federico said.

The festivities are expected to continue ahead of the Coppa Italia final on May 13 when Lazio stand in the way of a domestic double for Inter.

Venezuela’s recent Hydrocarbon Law reform has sparked fierce debates about its short- and long-term implications. In this essay, Blas Regnault, an energy policy analyst and researcher, offers an in-depth analysis of the new legislative framework, from the significant changes to the state’s governance over its natural resources to his perspective on a sovereign recovery of the oil industry.

The recent hydrocarbon reform: an overview

It is important to distinguish between two closely connected but analytically separate developments: first, US oversight of Venezuelan oil revenues after Maduro’s kidnapping; and secondly, the new Hydrocarbon Law itself. The first is an externally imposed mechanism that conditions oil sales, revenue collection, transport, and the distribution of oil proceeds to US interests. The second is a domestic legal reform whose constitutionality and political legitimacy have been widely questioned.

It remains unclear whether the new law is fully operative in practice, or whether it is only being applied selectively while its fiscal substance is displaced by the US revenue-control mechanism. ^{But the outcome is largely the same: a loss of fiscal automaticity and a form of fiscal sovereignty under tutelage in relation to Venezuelan oil income.}

In other words, the crisis of governance in the Venezuelan oil sector, together with its chronic lack of transparency since 2017, now culminates in a profound loss of sovereign control over all three dimensions of the business: its rentier dimension, belonging to the nation; its fiscal dimension, belonging to the state; and its shareholder dimension, linked to the role of the state oil company PDVSA as principal participant in extraction and commercialisation.

Therefore, the new law is not simply a technical reform. It is not merely about updating contracts, modernising procedures, or making the sector more attractive to investors. The deeper issue is that the reform changes the way the nation is compensated for the use of the subsoil and therefore alters the very governance of the sector. What is at stake is the relationship between sovereignty, ownership of the subsoil, and public income.

It is true that, on paper, the law formally preserves state ownership over the resource. But the business models it opens weaken the practical substance of that ownership. And that is the crucial point. Ownership is not a decorative legal formula. Ownership means that the state, acting on behalf of the nation, has the right to decide whether the resource remains underground or is extracted; and if it is extracted, under what conditions, with what public charge, and for whose benefit. The recent reform softens the link between ownership and the nation’s participation as owner of the subsoil, turning something that was once grounded in a general rule into something negotiable, adjustable, and highly discretionary.

A useful way of understanding the economic and social significance of the reform is to distinguish the different streams of public income historically associated with oil in Venezuela. Under the former hydrocarbon law, the nation participated in the oil business through three distinct channels: as owner, as tax authority, and as shareholder. The first channel, corresponding to ownership, was royalty. The second was taxation, arising from the state’s fiscal authority over the activity. The third was dividends, arising when the state participated through PDVSA and therefore received income in its capacity as stakeholder rather than as landlord or tax authority.

This distinction matters because the oil business has historically involved different claimants competing over the fruits of extraction. In a sector marked by extraordinary profitability and strategic importance, the owner of the rent, the fiscal authority, and the capitalist operator all seek to maximize their share of the value generated. In the Venezuelan framework that prevailed before 2026, those three roles were clearly present: the nation as owner of the subsoil, the state as fiscal authority, and the operator as capitalist actor. The new law alters the balance between them.

Royalty

The royalty is where the change is most revealing. As already noted, royalty is the clearest expression of ownership. It is paid upfront. It does not depend on profit. It is charged before taxes are assessed and before the remaining income covers the factors of production; that is, wages, interest, profits, and the other claimants on the project. In other words, royalty is not part of the production costs. If the oil price is 100 dollars per barrel and the agreed royalty rate is 30 per cent, the owner receives 30 dollars per barrel straight away. That is the proprietorial logic in its purest form.This has long been a battleground in the global oil industry. The dispute over rent has historically taken place between the operating companies, whether private national oil companies acting as operators, and the owner of the resource, that is, the landlord. Depending on the property-rights regime, that owner may be a private individual, as in parts of Texas, or the state, as in Venezuela and in most oil-exporting countries. Whether in Texas, Alaska, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Norway, the United Kingdom, Nigeria, or Venezuela, the property-rights regime has been the principal legal instrument through which the owner secures a share of the rent. It is a legitimate exercise of sovereignty, recognised by all parties involved in the global oil business.

And yet the new law, in practical terms, empties out that proprietorial logic by turning royalty into a negotiable variable within a range of zero to 30 per cent, something highly unusual in the global oil business. The potential scale of the loss becomes immediately clear once one thinks in terms of export volumes. At an oil price of 86 dollars per barrel, a 1 per cent royalty leaves the nation with less than one dollar per barrel, whereas a 30 per cent royalty yields 25.8 dollars. If Venezuela exports 800,000 barrels per day, that means roughly 688,000 dollars per day under a 1 per cent royalty, compared with 20.64 million dollars per day under a 30 per cent royalty. This is a dramatic compression of the owner’s income. It shows that a high oil price cannot compensate for the hollowing out of the royalty. Put simply, under the new law, higher oil prices will no longer automatically translate into greater income for the nation if royalties are arbitrarily lowered to the benefit of transnational capital. This is not a marginal fiscal concession; it is a radical compression of the nation’s proprietorial income. 

Taxes

Turning to taxes, under the previous legal framework, the fiscal regime included not only taxes on profits, but also local and municipal taxes on oil activity, together with other parafiscal charges and special contributions linked to extraordinary profits. These different channels gave the public side several routes through which to capture value from extraction. Under the new law, much of that architecture is displaced and compressed into an integrated tax on gross income that will also be set in a discretionary fashion up to a fixed ceiling. According to supporters of the reform, this new framework is designed to ensure the project’s “economic equilibrium.” But the political significance of that shift is considerable. What was previously structured through several distinct legal claims can now be more easily absorbed into a flexible package, negotiated project by project. In that sense, this is not simply simplification; it is a substantial thinning of the fiscal claim. Once the fiscal architecture becomes thinner, the public claim over oil value becomes weaker, more flexible, and ultimately more negotiable.

Table 2 illustrates the magnitude of the change using the March 16, 2026, marker Merey 16 price. Under the previous regime, taxes and parafiscal charges alone could amount to about $31 per barrel, or 36 percent of the barrel price. Under the post-reform interim scenario, that could fall to about $17.6 per barrel, or 20.5 percent.

Dividends

Finally, there are dividends arising from state equity participation, and these too must be distinguished from both royalty and taxation. Dividends are not paid because the nation owns the subsoil, nor are they collected because the state exercises fiscal authority over the activity. They arise because the state participates in the business as shareholder and therefore receives part of the profits in its capacity as investor. In other words, dividends represent the state’s participation in the profits of the business itself. But that income is not necessarily available for immediate public use in the same way as royalty or taxation. Part of it may be retained within the company, used for reinvestment, capital expenditure, debt service, or the wider financial needs of the enterprise. So, unlike royalty, which expresses ownership, or tax, which expresses fiscal authority, dividends are tied to the corporate logic of the business. Depending on the ownership structure, this channel of participation may range, illustratively, from zero to 60 per cent of distributable profits.

International jurisdiction of potential oil litigation

There is also an important jurisdictional dimension. By reducing the fiscal share captured by the state and by placing greater weight on contractual flexibility, the reform moves the sector towards a framework that is more exposed to international arbitration. At the same time, the sanctions and licensing regime has become part of a broader architecture of control over the oil business: control over access to the fields, control over marketing channels, and control over financial access to revenues. So, this is not merely a domestic fiscal reform. It is also part of a broader reordering of the legal and financial chain through which Venezuelan oil is governed.

Key takeaways

Supporters of the new law argue that it delivers increased flexibility, greater operability, improved investment prospects, and greater bankability. And that is not a trivial argument. In a country that has experienced production collapse, sanctions, institutional erosion, and a loss of market share, it is understandable that policymakers would seek a framework that appears more attractive to capital. In that sense, the reform may indeed reduce perceived risk and make projects easier to finance. It may also simplify part of the gross take and make negotiations easier. In that sense, the reform should not be caricatured. But it also entails the abandonment of each of the nation’s and the state’s historic roles in the sector, undermining the institutional fabric that once gave the oil economy a degree of stability and rationality.

For that reason, the disadvantages of the reform ultimately outweigh its potential benefits. What is lost is fiscal automaticity. That means the nation is no longer guaranteed a stable share by rule, but must now negotiate it, justify it, or recover it through more uncertain channels. Put differently, the reform replaces payment-by-rule with payment-by-negotiation on a case-by-case basis. In practical terms, each contract will generate its own conditions over each of the principal sources of public income arising from oil activity.

What is also lost is the clarity of a system in which the state charges because it owns the resource, not because the project happens to be commercially convenient. Once royalties become variable and fiscal terms are subordinated to the “economic equilibrium” of the project, the centre of gravity shifts. The guiding principle is no longer the nation as sovereign owner; it becomes the financial viability for the investor/operator. That is a profound political change presented as technical pragmatism.

In summary: the 2026 reform does not abolish formal ownership, but it hollows it out in practice. It replaces a more proprietorial fiscal logic with a more contractualized and discretionary one. That may attract investment, but it also weakens the automatic link between national ownership and national income. Whatever mechanism one chooses to emphasize, the result is much the same: 

• The nation no longer receives royalty by rule, but under externally conditioned arrangements. What is presented as flexibility is a retreat from ownership. 
• The state compresses its fiscal participation at every level. 
• The state oil company weakens its position as an investor. 

Once that happens, the central question is no longer simply, “How much is the state collecting?” but rather “Who decides, under what rules, with what traceability, and with what accountability?”

The historical context of Venezuela’s oil legislation

Venezuela’s oil history is not just a history of contracts or companies; it is a history of how the nation has tried to define its authority over the subsoil. Venezuela did not begin from the same position as many oil-exporting countries in West Asia or North Africa. It was already an independent republic when it developed its mining and hydrocarbons legislation. That matters, because it means Venezuela built a national jurisdictional framework around state ownership of mines and deposits, rather than inheriting a colonial concessionary order imposed from outside. That distinction is central.

From the early twentieth century onwards, successive legal frameworks progressively consolidated the republic’s sovereign claim over oil-bearing land. In other words, Venezuelan oil law was historically moving towards a more explicit assertion of the nation’s right to charge for the extraction of its natural wealth. This is one reason Venezuela mattered so much internationally: not only because it was a major producer, but because it became a reference point for fiscal regimes and sovereign oil governance, including later in the wider OPEC environment. In that sense, Venezuela’s experience was historically complete in a way that few other oil-producing countries were.

Nevertheless, there is a paradox surrounding the 1975-1976 nationalization of the oil industry. On paper, it ought to have marked the culmination of national control, but it did not deepen sovereignty. In practice, it helped produce a shift towards a more internationalized governance structure. The Ministry, as representative of the owner-nation, was gradually displaced by state oil company PDVSA, and PDVSA increasingly operated under a logic of global business rather than one of public sovereign rule. So instead of the owner-state speaking directly, the national oil company became the intermediary, and that had long-term consequences. Put differently, PDVSA, together with international oil capital, gained ground in the long struggle to reduce the landlord’s direct grip over rent.

This is where the historical relationship with Western transnational corporations becomes more nuanced than a simple story of foreign domination versus nationalist resistance. The issue is not merely the presence of Western companies, but the governance structures they operate under. Venezuela moved from a more classic proprietorial regime towards a more cessionary one, and later, especially in the late 1980s and 1990s, towards more liberal or non-proprietorial arrangements. The oil opening (“Apertura Petrolera”) of the 1990s is especially important here, because it reduced the fiscal burden and shifted the framework in a way that centralized the operator’s conditions. That was already a major break.

The Chávez years brought a partial reversal. The restoration of the property right was not merely ideological posturing; it was a restoration of a more classical fiscal logic, in which the sovereign character of the state take was reaffirmed. But that restoration took place amid other contradictions, including the politicization of PDVSA and the accumulation of debt. So even that phase did not resolve the deeper institutional tensions.

The 2026 reform, then, does not emerge from nowhere. It is a new chapter of a long historical movement: from national jurisdiction, to nationalization, to cessionary governance, to the oil opening, to partial reassertion, to crisis and collapse, and now to a new form of contractualization from a position of weakness. Venezuela’s oil history has been a struggle not simply over who owns the oil, but over who governs the terms on which ownership is exercised. The present reform is the latest chapter in that struggle, but it is a particularly radical one because it comes after institutional erosion and under a global order that is far more contractual, litigious, and externally structured than the one Venezuela faced in the mid-twentieth century.

Oil in the present geopolitical battle

The current geopolitical context of the US-Israeli aggression against Iran should, in principle, strengthen Venezuela’s bargaining position. When West Asia becomes more unstable, supply security rises as a strategic concern, and oil regains immediate geopolitical urgency, countries with large reserves and an established production history become more valuable. 

Venezuela has occupied that position before. Venezuelan oil played an important strategic role for the Allies during the Second World War, for example. Today, renewed disruption around Iran and the Strait of Hormuz has again tightened the market and raised the geopolitical value of accessible barrels.

That is precisely why the current outcome appears so paradoxical. If global conditions improve Venezuela’s leverage, one would expect the country to negotiate from a stronger position and to demand a larger participation. One would expect a legal framework that captures more rent, not less; that uses geopolitical scarcity to reinforce state take, not to dilute it. But the current reform, alongside the sequence of deals with foreign conglomerates, and combined with US control over revenues, seem to move in the opposite direction.

This leads to the second point: the geopolitical issue is not only price or supply. It is also about control. What is emerging is a form of sovereignty under tutelage. Venezuela may formally remain the owner of the resource, but effective control over commercialization, revenue channels, and external validation appears increasingly conditioned from outside. Whether one calls that tutelage, external supervision, or subordinated reintegration, the takeaway is the same: sovereignty over the resource is no longer identical to sovereignty over the business. Recent US licenses illustrate the point very clearly. Washington has opened the door to renewed oil transactions with PDVSA, but under Treasury oversight and with proceeds channelled into US-administered accounts. That is not normal sovereign control over national oil income.

This is where the distinction between the origin and the destination of rent becomes especially useful. Even before we ask what is done with oil income socially or politically, we first need to know how that income is generated: through what pricing, what discounts, what fiscal structure, and through which payment channels. If that first level is opaque, then both the origin and the destination of rent become politically indeterminate. In other words, the problem is not only that the country may receive less revenue. The problem is that the country may not even be able to clearly verify what it is owed, how, and why. That is a much deeper sovereignty problem.

As a result, a geopolitical context that would, in theory, favor Venezuela, sees the country re-entering global markets with weakened sovereignty, under a framework of greater flexibility for operators and less certainty for the nation. That is why the debate is no longer only about production volumes or export flows. The real debate is about the jurisdictional and political order that now governs Venezuelan oil: who authorizes, who commercializes, who arbitrates disputes, who tracks the proceeds, and who answers to the country.

What does a sovereign recovery look like?

Moving from critique to programme is difficult, and the first honest thing to say is that no one can predict the exact path ahead. Venezuela is emerging from collapse, sanctions, loss of market share, institutional erosion, and a deep social crisis. Any recovery scenario, therefore, is bound to be politically fraught. But one thing is clear: if the country does not rebuild the public intelligibility of oil income, then any so-called recovery may simply reproduce opacity, distrust, inequality, and social tension.

A sovereign recovery does not mean autarky. It does not mean excluding foreign firms, nor does it mean mechanically returning to an earlier model. It means something more precise: restoring the link between ownership, public rule, and accountable income capture. In other words, if the nation owns the resource, then the nation must be able to know, verify, and govern how value is extracted from it. That means transparency over net prices, discounts, taxes, royalties, exemptions, payment channels, and the destination of funds. Without that, there can be no recovery in any meaningful sovereign sense. It would simply be resumed extraction.

A sovereign recovery also requires stripping away some of the ideological confusion that usually surrounds debates on natural resources. As Bernard Mommer argued more than twenty years ago, the governance of natural resources is, in many ways, a more elementary question than the conventional left-right divide suggests. In the case of oil and minerals, the deeper divide is above versus below. It is the tension between those who live and work on the surface (the nation, society, the public realm) and those who make their living from the subsoil.

That is why the question of ownership comes before the question of distribution, that is, before the question of what is done with the income generated by oil activity. Only after establishing the governance over the resource and the rules over its extraction does the familiar left-right question properly arise: how that income is used, whether for social spending, public services, etc., or private accumulation. 

The first step, then, is transparency. Not as a slogan, but as an institutional obligation. Who is selling? At what net price? Under what discounts? With what deductions? Paid where? Audited by whom? These are not minor administrative questions. They are the very mechanics of sovereignty in an extractive economy. If the country cannot answer them, then the state is no longer exercising full command over its principal source of income.

The second step is to move away from excessive discretion and back towards intelligible general rules. Contracts will always matter in oil. But there is a difference between contracts operating within a strong public framework and contracts effectively replacing public rule. Once everything becomes negotiable in the name of investment or “economic equilibrium,” the public realm shrinks and the executive realm expands. That is politically dangerous in any country, but especially in one where oil historically underpinned a broader social pact.

The third step is to reconnect oil income with social legitimacy. This is not an abstract issue. It is whether oil wealth translates to salaries, living standards, public services, social protection, and some minimum sense of collective benefit. If the country enters a new extractive cycle in which more oil is produced but public income remains narrow, opaque, or externally conditioned, then social tensions are likely to intensify rather than diminish. That is why a sovereign recovery cannot be measured by production figures alone. It must be judged by whether the nation regains an intelligible and legitimate claim over the income stream.

In simple terms, the average Venezuelan citizen is aware of fluctuations in crude prices because they know they affect the national budget. Oil income is widely and legitimately perceived as income belonging to the nation, and therefore as something that ought to support public services and collective welfare. Even when that income is later misused (through corruption, clientelism, or mismanagement) the underlying perception remains: oil revenue belongs to all Venezuelans.

That is also why the current situation can be described as one of sovereignty under tutelage. The country may still be sovereign in formal terms, yet it operates under external supervision in practical terms. Unless that gap is closed, the language of recovery will remain politically fragile.

Blas Regnault is an oil market analyst and researcher based in The Hague, whose work explores how oil prices move across time and what they tell us about the global economy. Drawing on years of experience in central banking, energy research, and international consulting, he brings together political economy, business cycles, production costs, and petroleum governance in a way that is both rigorous and accessible.

He has spent much of his career studying the deeper forces behind oil price trends and fluctuations, always with an eye on the institutional and geopolitical realities of the global petroleum market. Later this year, he will publish his book, Political Economy of Oil Prices: Trends and Business Cycles in the Global Petroleum Market, with Routledge.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Venezuelanalysis editorial staff.

SAG-AFTRA and the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers have landed on a new tentative contract.

The actors union’s new agreement with the trade group that negotiates with Hollywood unions on behalf of the major studios will reportedly improve AI protections and boost the guild’s pension fund. Similar to the pact the Writers Guild reached with the studios last month, SAG-AFTRA’s contract will last four years instead of the usual three.

SAG-AFTRA confirmed the tentative deal on Saturday. The union said in a statement that “specific details will not be released” until the SAG-AFTRA National Board reviews its terms.

The contract is set to cover workers who are involved in motion pictures, scripted primetime dramatic television, streaming content and new media.

The actors union began negotiations with the studios in February and extended those talks in March, but paused to allow the AMPTP to finish negotiations with the writers union. Negotiations resumed April 27 and ended May 2.

The tentative contract still needs to be voted on by its members — SAG-AFTRA represents more than 160,000 actors, broadcast journalists, dancers, DJs, stunt performers, voice-over artists and other entertainment professionals.

The union’s current contract is set to expire June 30. SAG-AFTRA joins WGA as the latest Hollywood union to strike a deal with the studios.

The Directors Guild of America is the last union that still needs to reach an agreement with the studios. Negotiation sessions with AMPTP will begin on May 11, as its contract is set to expire on June 30.

Two activists from the Global Sumud Flotilla arrived in the Netherlands after being released from Israeli custody. The flotilla was intercepted in international waters while carrying aid to the Gaza Strip. Two of their fellow activists remain in Israel for questioning.

US President Donald Trump has announced ‘Project Freedom’, a naval mission to escort stranded ships through the Strait of Hormuz starting Monday, warning any interference will be met “forcefully”. The move comes amid a fragile US-Iran truce, with Tehran warning it would treat US intervention as a breach.

Singer Alex Ligertwood, best known for providing lead vocals for Santana over several decades, has died. He was 79.

Ligertwood’s wife and agent, Shawn Brogan, announced in a Saturday evening Facebook post that the vocalist died at his Santa Monica home.

“It’s with great sadness and heartache to announce the passing of my sweet dear Alex Ligertwood, my husband of 25 years, we knew each other for 36 years,” Brogan wrote. “Alex passed peacefully in his sleep with his doggy Bobo by his side yesterday.”

Ligertwood’s cause of death was not revealed.

Alex Ligertwood, left, and Jorge Santana of the band Santana perform Oct. 9, 1993, at Shoreline Amphitheater in Mountain View, Calif.

(Tim Mosenfelder / Getty Images)

“Alex was loved by so many. If you knew him, you loved him. He touched so many with his extraordinary voice. He was all heart and soul,” Brogan’s statement continued. “His favorite thing in life was to make music, sing and to share his gift with us. He performed his last show just two weeks ago. I’m grateful for that. He did it his way, on his terms, till the end.”

The singer had five separate stints as Santana’s lead vocalist between 1979 and 1994.

He famously served as the group’s singer when it performed at Live Aid in 1985. His voice was notably featured on the tracks “You Know That I Love You,” “Winning,” “All I Ever Wanted” and “Hold On.”

Ligertwood also co-wrote such songs as “Somewhere in Heaven” and “Make Somebody Happy,” among others.

Aside from his contributions to Santana, Ligertwood played alongside guitar legend Jeff Beck as part of the Jeff Beck Group in the early ‘70s. He also played in jazz-rock keyboardist Brian Auger’s band Oblivion Express.

Auger, who has played with Rod Stewart and Jimi Hendrix, paid tribute to Ligertwood in a Facebook post Saturday evening.

“To me, Alex aka ‘Wee Eck’ was simply the best singer to ever do it. In all my years of music, I never heard anyone who possessed that kind of range or that effortless, carefree ability to soar through a melody. He didn’t just sing songs; he lived them,” Auger wrote. “The world feels much quieter today without his voice, and I will miss my friend more than words can say. The big band in the sky just got infinitely better with Alex’s arrival.”

The singer also appeared on records with French jazz group Troc in the 1970s, American rock band the Dregs in the 1980s, and the Grateful Dead spinoff project Go Ahead in the late 1980s.

Ligertwood was born in Glasgow, Scotland, on Dec. 18, 1946.

He grew up in a musical household as his father was an amateur drummer. His earliest musical influences were the swooning Motown singers of the ‘50s and ‘60s, including Otis Redding, Sam Cooke and Marvin Gaye. He first performed as a vocalist as part of his school’s choir and at family events.

May 3 (UPI) — Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani has been hospitalized and is in critical condition, his spokesman said Sunday.

Giuliani “is currently in the hospital, where he remains in critical but stable condition,” Ted Goodman said in a statement.

“Mayor Giuliani is a fighter who has faced every challenge in his life with unwavering strength, and he’s fighting with that same strength now. We do ask that you join us in prayer for America’s Mayor Rudy Giuliani.”

Goodman did not say why Giuliani, 81, was hospitalized.

The former mayor’s condition was also noted by President Donald Trump, who wrote on his Truth Social platform, “True Warrior, and the Best Mayor in the History of New York City, BY FAR.”

Trump also took the occasion to praise his political ally and former lawyer, who served as one of the key figures in the president’s baseless campaign attacking the results of his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden as “rigged.”

“They cheated on the Elections, fabricated hundreds of stories, did anything possible to destroy our Nation, and now, look at Rudy. So sad!” Trump wrote.

Trump in November pardoned Giuliani and 76 others tied to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, including participation in what has become known as the fake electors scheme. The strategy involved the creation of false slates of pro-Trump electors in every battleground state that he lost to Biden, including Georgia.

The former mayor’s championing of Trump’s claims also resulted in his own financial troubles.

In September, he reached a confidential settlement with Dominion Voting Systems, which had filed a $1.3 billion defamation lawsuit against him for his allegations the company rigged the 2020 presidential election.

Giuliani was previously disbarred as a lawyer in New York and Washington, D.C.

“For the good of Iran, the Middle East, and the United States, we have told these Countries that we will guide their Ships safely out of these restricted Waterways, so that they can freely and ably get on with their business,” he said in a post on social media without specifying which countries.

Netflix’s Unchosen has topped the streaming charts, but if you found this cult fantasy series underwhelming, there are four gripping alternatives

Unchosen landed on Netflix just over a week ago, with hordes of telly enthusiasts placing it at the top of their lists. Yet, I can’t claim I was particularly impressed by this dull, average cult fantasy.

I hoped to feel unsettled, I hoped to be mystified, but truthfully, this cult drama disappointed. This isn’t a criticism of Asa Butterfield, Molly Windsor and Fra Fre’s acting abilities, but when the script isn’t there to support you, there’s a limit to what can be achieved.

And all of this supposedly unfolding on my doorstep? Blimey, it wouldn’t shock me. I’ll need to keep my eyes peeled next time I head back to Surrey.

Like numerous Netflix smash hits, I’ve noticed the trailer contains more intrigue than the actual programme. Not that Unchosen was dreadful, it simply didn’t quite keep me gripped throughout, reports the Express.

To repeat the text displayed during Unchosen’s opening sequence: “Over 2,000 cults exist in the United Kingdom. Some are closed communities. But many, like this fictional one, live in plain sight.”

While these recommendations may not all centre on genuine cults, they definitely possess a cult-like atmosphere. They’re all wrapped in secrecy, seclusion, and propelled by a mission we ordinary folk won’t entirely grasp.

Here are some of the finest TV programmes, movies and documentaries centred on cults that might capture your attention… and lead you down a deep dive.

Keep Sweet: Pray and Obey (2022)

This four-part documentary series delves into the harsh realities of growing up, living and escaping the polygamous Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, an offshoot of mainstream Mormonism. Multiple members – and survivors – of the FLDS recount their experiences under the leadership of president Rulon Jeffs, who created the phrase that would become the series’ title, and his son Warren Jeffs.

At present, the younger Jeffs succeeded his father as the church’s leader. However, if this gives any indication about the practices exposed in the series, Jeffs is currently serving a life sentence for child sex offences.

Ex-members reveal the realities of existing under the church’s extreme regulations, and how the Jeffs’ wielded their authority over their congregation. We witness siblings, nieces and nephews forced into marriages with family members, with male church members having numerous wives and children.

Yet that’s not the most disturbing aspect of this documentary. It’s the forced marriage of actual teenagers and children to grown men. A medieval custom that belongs firmly in the past, not in contemporary society.

The series almost appears too far-fetched to be true, but then you recall it’s a documentary. The accusations and examination of child sex offences, human trafficking, child marriage, welfare fraud, and mistreatment of members and ex-members has shaped the outside world‘s perception of the church in recent times.

In a world riddled with double standards, this documentary exposes the shocking levels of moral corruption in people masquerading as followers of God’s teachings.

The Village (2004)

Haunted by mysterious, nameless beings, a tiny, isolated settlement in 19th century Pennsylvania exists in perpetual terror. Following a young resident’s death from sickness, Joaquin Phoenix’s Lucius Hunt seeks the elders’ approval to journey through the nearby forest for medical provisions.

When his plea is rejected, the reasoning given is to prevent further catastrophes. Romance develops between Lucius and the visually-impaired daughter of one of the village’s elders (Ivy, Bryce Dallas Howard), before Lucius sustains severe injuries.

I can’t delve too deeply into the storyline without revealing the conclusion, but Ivy sets out seeking assistance. Yet, appearances prove deceiving.

After all, M. Night Shyamalan is directing. There’s a revelation… there’s always a twist.

This thriller feeds on manipulation and falsehoods, essential tools for strengthening members’ conviction in their version of events. And bear in mind, it’s their version of reality, not ours.

The Wicker Man (1973 & 2006)

While the reimagining of The Wicker Man might not represent Nicolas Cage’s greatest performance, its initial commercial failure transformed into a devoted following over subsequent years. The narrative focuses on a police officer’s journey to a fictional remote island while investigating a disappeared girl.

The island’s residents have turned their backs on Christianity and now follow a type of Celtic paganism, but something far more sinister – naturally – is at play.

Louis Theroux’s My Scientology Movie (2015)

Scientology is one of those movements that’s lurked in the shadows of Hollywood for decades. One of your favourite actors or musicians has probably been linked with the organisation.

There’s nobody better equipped to attempt confronting the Church of Scientology than Louis Theroux, particularly after the church declines to participate in the documentary. In typical Louis Theroux fashion, nothing follows the usual script.

Rather, the documentary seeks to recreate testimonies from ex-members regarding incidents involving the church’s top brass, with assistance from former church official Mark Rathbun. Arguably one of the most striking moments from the documentary occurs when Louis and his team find themselves under surveillance and challenged outside the church’s mysterious Gold Base compound in California.

Intimidation seems to be a recurring pattern that extends beyond the documentary itself. Ex-members of the organisation have, over the years, described their encounters with being confronted while carrying out their daily routines – and voicing criticism of Scientology.

It makes for a deeply strange and maddening viewing experience, as we never truly grasp the extent to which the church is allegedly pulling strings behind the scenes. This film brought Scientology to widespread public attention, and even in an age where information is readily available, there remains so much mystery surrounding L. Ron Hubbard’s doctrines and David Miscavige’s tenure as the church’s second leader.

May 3 (UPI) — Enforcement actions carried out by masked U.S. immigration agents triggered an hours-long stand-off and angry protest at a New York City hospital late Saturday, resulting in eight arrests, police officials say.

Crowds gathered outside of Wyckoff Heights Medical Center in Brooklyn, N.Y., around 10 p.m. EDT after images spread online of a man arrested earlier that evening by Immigration and Customs Enforcement and brought to the hospital for treatment of injuries, witnesses told WPIX-TV.

Hospital patients reported they had seen a handcuffed Black man surrounded by ICE agents inside the facility, prompting a crowd estimated at around 200 or more people to gather outside the hospital.

Videos showed scenes of chaos as agitated protesters milled about, throwing garbage containers and fighting with New York Police Department officers as pepper spray is dispersed.

Around 2 a.m., ICE agents were seen dragging a man in handcuffs along the street near the entrance to Wyckoff Hospital while carrying a large canister of what appeared to be pepper spray, amNY reported.

The Department of Homeland Security on Sunday issued a statement to media outlets identifying the arrested man as Chidozie Wilson Okeke, a Nigerian immigrant who had allegedly overstayed his visa and had previous arrests for assault and criminal drug possession.

The DHS said Okeke has requested medical treatment after agents had used force during his arrest.

NYPD officials said eight people were arrested during the melee, adding that they did not assist ICE in the arrest, in keeping with New York’s sanctuary city policies, and responded after receiving multiple emergency calls of people blocking entrances to the hospital.

“People tried to stop the vehicles from leaving,” New York City Councilwoman Sandy Nurse told The New York Times. “That’s when the police arrived, and then it was essentially a standoff for five or six hours, because more and more people showed up from the neighborhood to try to keep that individual from being taken.”

The 60-day clock for President Trump to seek congressional approval for further military actions against Iran was stopped by the April 7 ceasefire, a senior White House official claimed to The War Zone Friday morning. As we previously noted, the president faced a deadline today under the War Powers Resolution of 1973 to obtain permission from Congress to continue fighting.

The White House decision comes as the now-paused war is at a stalemate, with both sides believing they can outlast the other. Meanwhile, Trump is considering options for a new round of strikes while Iranians say they have presented new plans for working toward a peace deal.

“For War Powers Resolution purposes, the hostilities that began on Saturday, February 28 have terminated,” the official told us, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss the matter. “Both parties agreed to a two-week ceasefire on Tuesday, April 7 that has since been extended. There has been no exchange of fire between U.S. Armed Forces and Iran since Tuesday, April 7.”

The administration’s statement today follows War Secretary Pete Hegseth’s Congressional testimony yesterday that “the 60-day clock pauses or stops in a ceasefire.”

Under the War Powers Resolution, the use of armed forces should be terminated within 60 days unless Congress has declared war or voted to approve a 30-day extension. Since Trump formally notified Congress about the Iran war on March 2, that deadline fell today. Even though several other presidents have simply ignored the War Powers Resolution, the Trump administration is now arguing that the measure doesn’t really apply to their operation just yet.

It remains unclear how or if Congress will react. It adjourned yesterday for a week-long recess. On Thursday, the Senate rejected the latest of many resolutions intended to halt the war, The Washington Post noted. 

Republican lawmakers appear to be deferring to Trump on the issue of the War Powers Resolution. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., told The Associated Press on Thursday that he doesn’t plan on a vote to authorize force in Iran or otherwise weigh in.

“I’m listening carefully to what the members of our conference are saying, and at this point I don’t see that,” Thune said.

Republican Sen. Kevin Cramer of North Dakota said he’d vote for an authorization of war if Trump asked for it. But he questioned if the War Powers Act, passed during the Vietnam War era as a way for Congress to claw back its power, is even constitutional.

“Our founders created a really strong executive, like it or not like it,” Cramer said.

EXCLUSIVE: American star Hemky Madera has opened up about joining the Emmy-winning HBO series, Euphoria.

Euphoria’s latest season has certainly got audiences talking after featuring a huge time-jump and some new characters.

Now, one of the stars of Euphoria has teased working on the new season and starring opposite singer and lead Zendaya.

In an exclusive interview with Reach Plc, the publishers of the Mirror, Hemky Madera has spoken about his mysterious new character Jimenez and joining the show.

The 49-year-old star, who is best known for Queen of the South, said: “Being part of this cast is amazing, from the crew, for [creator] Sam [Levinson] all the way to Zendaya and all between, so it was a great experience to be part of this show.”

He went on to tease: “I can’t say much about his character but his moral compass is in a certain way.” Adding: “But it’s a fun, whacky character.”

Although not much is known about Madera’s character, he is set to be playing a key role and will be appearing in six out of the eight episodes of season three.

Get HBO Max free with Sky

This article contains affiliate links, we will receive a commission on any sales we generate from it. Learn more

£4.99

£0

Sky

Get the deal here

Sky is giving away free subscriptions to HBO Max with its £22 Ultimate TV bundle, which also includes Netflix, Disney+, discovery+, Hayu, and around 135 channels at no extra cost.

He said: “Zendaya’s character Rue and my character through many episodes together, working together. So it’s pretty cool.”

On working with the 29-year-old Spider-Man: Homecoming star, Madera said it was “amazing”.

He elaborated: “She’s such a pro. She was very welcoming and she was on from the emotional to the action to everything in between was pretty cool to work with.”

He went on to tease the third season, saying it was a “more mature flavour” and the characters were now adults and “no longer under the blanket of high school”.

He added: “They’re making their mistakes and learning from them.”

Madera admitted that although he’d been familiar with the series, it wasn’t until he started auditioning for Euphoria that he became a fan and binged the first two seasons.

“I’m very honoured to be a part of the show,” he said.

Madera said about the audition process that it was “tricky” because it was his second in-person audition in eight years. Due to shooting Queen of the South, the actor would have to send off self-tapes.

“It was nerve-wracking in the sense of being back in a room, but at the same time very exciting to be part of the room,” Madera explained.

Along with Euphoria season three, Madera has a long list of upcoming projects, including Star Wars: The Mandalorian and Grogu.

He is also going to be appearing in Victor, The Last Horseman, La Máquina, and El Secreto del Retrato.

Euphoria season 3 airs on HBO Max and NOW in the UK on Mondays

May 3 (UPI) — A United Airlines jet struck a light pole while approaching Newark Liberty International Airport on Sunday afternoon, damaging a vehicle traveling on the New Jersey Turnpike, officials said.

United Airlines Flight 169 from Venice, Italy, was on final approach to Newark’s Runway 29 at about 2 p.m. EDT when “the aircraft struck an object over the southbound New Jersey Turnpike, causing damage to a light post and tractor-trailer traveling south on the NJ Turnpike,” the Port Authority Police Department told UPI in an emailed statement.

The driver of the tractor-trailer was taken to the hospital with minor injuries and has been released, the police department said, adding that “minor damage to the aircraft was observed.”

United told UPI that the aircraft, a Boeing 767-400 with 221 passengers and 10 crew onboard, “landed safely, taxied to the gate normally and no passengers or crew were injured.”

“Our maintenance team is evaluating damage to the aircraft,” the carrier said, adding that it will conduct a “rigorous flight safety investigation” into the incident.

“Our crew has been removed from service as part of the process.”

The runway was back to normal operations following an inspection for debris, according to authorities.

The National Transportation Safety Board will lead the federal investigation into the incident, with one of its investigators expected to arrive in Newark on Monday, the agency said in a statement.

United Airlines has been directed to secure and provide both the cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder to the NTSB as part of its investigation, with a preliminary report expected within 30 days.

New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill said she has been briefed on the incident.

“I’m grateful the aircraft landed safely, and all passengers and crew are unharmed,” she said in a social media statement.

“United is investigating how this occurred.”

Shield AI revealed a revised planform configuration and new details about its extremely ambitious X-BAT jet-powered autonomous stealth ‘fighter’ drone at April’s Sea-Air-Space 2026 convention, as detailed by TWZ. At the event, I was able to speak at length with Armor Harris, the chief designer of X-BAT, who was keen to discuss the status of the project. You can read TWZ’s original deep dive exclusive interview with Harris that was published when X-BAT first emerged from the shadows last October here.

The tail-sitting X-BAT, designed to take off vertically and land the same way, is planned to start vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) testing before the end of this year. Harris explained how it is designed to fly combat missions under the control of the company’s Hivemind artificial intelligence “pilot” and how Shield AI has designed-in payload bays that are roughly the same size as those found on the F-35, which will enable it to carry many of the same weapons as the stealthy crewed fighter.

The X-BAT concept is aimed to disrupt not just the budding advanced autonomous drone marketplace, but parts of the fighter market too. So much hangs on the VTOL element that the airframe is designed around, so to say that a lot is riding on those tests is an understatement.

Here is the full interview from the show floor at Sea-Air-Space:

Meet The Man Behind The X-BAT Autonomous VTOL Fighter Drone

Coronation Street boss Kate Brooks has teased summer and beyond in Weatherfield in the fallout to Theo Silverton’s murder, with two new characters and the identity of Theo’s killer

There’s plenty of drama coming up on Coronation Street in the fallout to murder week.

We finally know the victim, as Theo Silverton was killed off on Friday night. But who killed him and how did he die? All of that is to come.

That’s not all, as there are big scenes ahead for two other characters. Debbie Webster has a busy few months, while teenager Sam Blakeman’s mental health continues to spiral.

Then there’s the arrival of two new characters, both of which have links to current Weatherfield residents. Speaking to The Mirror and other press, Kate Brooks teased what was on the cards.

READ MORE: Coronation Street spoilers: Victim ‘revealed’ and missed evidence ‘outs killer’READ MORE: Emmerdale spoilers: Todd’s revenge on Jacob, Bear exit ‘sealed’ and Joe’s downfall

Whodunnit teasers

Kate revealed: “Obviously, there’s lots of people who are in the frame for Theo’s death – George, Todd, Summer, Carl. He’s created a lot of enemies. Gary’s another one who’s kind of in the mix, who’s really been betrayed by him.

“It’s Todd rebuilding his life – this is a guy who’s been subjected to the most horrific abuse, who is traumatised, who was grieving. And it’s how he kind of tried to rebuild his life while still kind of struggling to comprehend the fact that this man’s been murdered by potentially somebody he knows or maybe even him.

“It’s an interesting mix of ‘whodunnit’ thriller story, but also about Todd’s family and friends, George, Christina, Summer, Sarah, all rallying around Todd to make sure that he’s okay, to try and build them and repeat them back together. What he’s been through at the hands of Theo has been such an ordeal for him, and to get that love and to get that trust in people again, it was very important to show that with Todd.”

Megan and Will fallout

“The stuff with Megan and Will, there’s a bit of a journey to go on with that story. So obviously she’s been exposed, but Will at this point, he believed it was love.

“He believed it was all genuine. Scales fall from his eyes and Tim’s going to be so instrumental in kind of making them realise what’s gone on and how unacceptable and how wrong it was.

“It’s about the family falling apart, but then kind of building themselves back up again as they try desperately to kind of repair the damage that Megan’s done. Obviously, there are soap Gods, and as in soap God’s law, there’ll be some kind of retribution for Megan.

“She cannot get off of this scot-free. We will go down the proper channels. Whether it goes on to plan or not, I cannot say, but it goes down quite a very big path.” Will will be quite badly affected by what he’s been through with Megan. It does go a bit dark as well.

Sam’s mental health and Daniel spirals

“Getting him across the Megan story and having him be another victim of her manipulation felt like a really interesting way of telling the story. But as a result of that, his mental health has been really, really damaged by everything that’s happened – by the manipulation, by the fact that he wasn’t believed, by the fear that he felt every time he was with Megan.

“We’re going to tell a big mental health story with Sam, and he’s going to really, really struggle over the course of spring and early summer. It’s about his family realising, hopefully before it’s too late, that he’s in desperate need of help – and he’s really vulnerable. It’s showcasing that, Megan’s actions have not just directly impacted Will and the Driscolls, Sam’s also collateral damage.

“Similarly, with Daniel as well, he met somebody who’s on the same page as a teacher, apparently respectable, and he’s been completely duped by it, and it completely makes him unravel. Rob Mallard who plays Daniel is such a phenomenal actor and we’ll see him slowly start to lose it, because of wondering who to trust.

“He’s been bitten so badly by this relationship, and by the fact that he was the one who defended her as well, he feels like he’s let Will down. He feels like he’s let Bertie down. We’re really going to chart the impact she’s had on him and his life and his attitude to relationships going forward.

David and Shona’s future after Jodie drama

“Jodie is desperately trying to get what she feels is rightfully hers. She’s still definitely kind of on that trajectory, but David and Shona are a really strong, united couple. They adore each other. They love each other. They’ve been through a lot.

“We’ve obviously got Harper still in hospital. Ultimately, Harper will come home and the stresses of family life will start to really take its toll. Whether Jodie is able to exploit those weaknesses within that relationship, whether she’s able to kind of tempt David over to the dark side, or because she wants to punish Shona for leaving her, she’s certainly going to try and come between them.

“But as I say, David and Shona are pretty solid couple. It’s whether they can unite and see Jodie for who she is and what she is in time. Similarly, Jodie’s story will dovetail off into Daniel’s story as well.

“An unlikely little friendship will be formed, which I don’t think many people see coming, but it’s a really different insight into what makes them both tick. For the first time, Daniel’s able to be truthful about how he feels. And similarly, Jodie’s able to be quite truthful with Daniel, because he’s in a quite a dark place. There’s some interesting dynamics between them.

Debbie’s future

“We’ll see her symptoms start to take hold slightly more, but she’s still very much the Debbie we know and love throughout the spring and summer. Her friendships with the women who she holds so dear are still very much at the front and centre of the show.

“Her relationship with Ronnie is still really, really strong, but it’s the relationship with Carl that needs the most repair and I think the thing with Carl is he is such a complex individual. He’s incredibly selfish and self-serving. Debbie, as his mother, can see that.

“It’s how those two people can come together and forge a relationship that’s not based on Carl trying to get money. It needs to kind of go back to basics and becomes about the sincerity of their relationship. And it takes a while to get there.

“And it does all come to a head, kind of a big head with the fellas in Debbie’s life. It’s about trying to give Debbie that bit of happiness before she goes too far down the line.

“Christina, Glenda, Sally, Debbie, Bernie, those five women are just phenomenal actors, and the warmth and the comedy that they all emanate, is just contagious. It won’t just be Debbie at the front and centre.”

Two new characters as Cassie exits

“Tyrone’s dad makes an appearance in the show. Needless to say, he comes with quite a bit of drama, and it’s going to cause quite a lot of friction within that family, obviously with Cassie’s history.

“As you know, Cassie’s leaving us, and so it will contribute to her exit, which is going to be massive and quite explosive. It’ll be full of all the twists and turns that you can come to expect from an exit.

“He comes into the world of Fiz and Tyrone. Tyrone’s in the mindset of, I’m in my 40s, I’ve survived this long without a dad. The dad is very keen to connect with Tyrone. It’s not long before the dad makes eyes at one of the residents, and maybe a bit of a relationship starts there.

“It’s very domesticated. It really shines a spotlight on Fiz and Tyrone as a couple and that dynamic as a family. Cassie is, needless to say, not happy that this guy has turned back up.

“We also have Idris. He’s Alya’s cousin. He is very, very charming, like the charm oozes out of every pore of this guy. He’s a savvy kind of business guy, he’s got a bit of a ruthless streak, he’s not ready to get his hands dirty slightly, but he can charm the birds from the trees.

“He’s a new love interest for Leanne. The attraction is instantaneous. It kind of gives Leanne a new lease of life somewhat. She’s been harbouring a deep-rooted resentment them towards Toyah and Nick, because that’s the life she had.

“And this guy comes along, he’s got it all, he makes her laugh. He’s funny, he’s a handsome chap, and he ruffles a lot of feathers, but he’s not without an edge. He’s not soft, and he’s certainly no pushover. He butts heads with some of our more alpha kind of characters quite early on. We’re really excited about Idris. He brilliant.”

When will find out who the killer is?

“It’s later in the summer. We reveal to the audience who it is during late June, July. There’s lots of people you definitely think it could be. It’s a massive story, there’s so many different twists, and there’s so many different offshoots to the story as well.

“You think you’re watching one thing, and then it diverts into a completely new kind of story territory. It’ll definitely keep people guessing.”

Other characters set for big storylines

“There’s a massive storyline coming up for Bernie further down the line, and which will involve Kit and her family dynamic. That’s too far ahead, but certainly late spring, early summer.

“There’s a massive story for Sally and Tim that comes to the to the fore, and it’s a story that tests them as people, test them as a couple, but tests them as foster parents as well. It’s a bit of a curveball, and it comes from slightly left field, but absolutely upends their lives.

“It’s how they navigate that situation going forward. Sally and Tim are so beloved, and I just adore them. And it’s seeing them in a slightly different position than what we’ve seen them in before.

“That story will also dovetail further down the line with a Christina story. Christina and George are a really great, strong couple in the show. It’s those friendships alive. There’s a connection there as well.”

Coronation Street airs weeknights at 8:30pm on ITV1 and ITV X. * Follow Mirror Celebs and TV on TikTok , Snapchat , Instagram , Twitter , Facebook , YouTube and Threads .

Tens of thousands of partygoers gathered for an illegal “free party” at a military firing range near Bourges, despite warnings about unexploded World War II ordnance. Authorities warned of serious risks, while organisers said the event was attended by 40,000 to protest against proposed laws targeting unregistered raves.

Iran protests as Trump announces ‘Project Freedom’ to escort stranded ships out of the Strait of Hormuz.

Two couples from opposite sides of the wealth divide swapped wedding budgets

A Rich Wedding, Poor Wedding bride couldn’t believe the “extravagant” price of her big day.

During the first episode of the new Channel 5 series, which aired on Sunday (May 3), two couples from opposite sides of the wealth divide swap budgets for their weddings.

One duo, who are used to the finer things in life, had to plan a wedding on a small budget, meanwhile the other pair had a lot of money to burn.

Taking part in the experiment was millionaire couple Col and Raz, who gave up their unlimited budget to Janet and Gary, who have spent years scraping and saving and even a modest wedding felt out of reach.

Gary and Janet, who live in Salford, have been madly in love since meeting at a health care call centre 11-years-ago. Gary popped the big question while on a romantic holiday two-years-ago.

Since then, they have been excited to walk down the aisle however the pair’s low paid jobs in customer services make it a struggle to make ends meet.

To bring in extra money Gary works as a wedding singer but even with the second job their combined disposable income is just £157 a week, so their big day dreams have been put on hold.

It was a completely different story for Essex couple Col, 37 and Raz, 34, who are used to champagne lifestyles and money is no issue to them.

The couple have only been together for two years but Col, who owns multiple businesses, revealed that it was love at first sight after meeting at an event.

Ever since Col proposed, Raz has been planning her big day and it hasn’t included cutting down on anything. The bride had dreams of an elegant princess wedding and Col wanted a big party with free flowing drinks.

The couple wanted to swap budgets because they both revealed that they hadn’t always had the finer things in life and grew up without a lot of money.

Getting stuck into their wedding planning, Col and Raz were left speechless after finding out that they had just £3,500 to cover everything, meanwhile Gary and Janet couldn’t believe their eyes after getting an unlimited budget.

At first, Col and Raz struggled to get everything they needed with their small budget especially after bride Raz went over budget with her dress. After a few bumps in the road and some help from family members they managed to pull through and overall enjoyed their special day.

Meanwhile Janet and Gary felt like they’d won the lottery and made the most of their unlimited budget. The couple splashed out on a £17,000 venue and £5,000 enchanted forest. Janet spent £3,000 on her dream wedding dress and even had a singer for their reception celebration. The couple enjoyed their lavish wedding surrounded by their friends and family.

Things took an emotional turn after both couples reunited following their wedding swap as Janet broke down in tears after finding out how much she spent on her wedding.

After opening an envelope revealing the price of the wedding, Gary gasped as he revealed: £50,118.60.” He then joked: “What was the 60p on?”

Janet was visibly moved as she said: “There are so many people in the world that have got nothing that..” The bride broke down as she admitted: “It upsets me actually, to spend that kind of money on one day. It’s extravagant, it’s too much.” Gary comforted his wife as he said: “Do you know what though, you work hard all your life and it’s nice to get something back.”

You can catch up on Rich Wedding, Poor Wedding on Channel 5

Three of six passengers who fell ill from suspected rodent-transmitted virus have died, and one is in intensive care, the WHO says.

Three people have died on a cruise ship in the Atlantic, with at least one confirmed to have suffered from hantavirus, a rare disease transmitted to humans from rodents.

Health authorities are now investigating a suspected outbreak of the virus on the MV Hondius, which is sailing from Ushuaia in Argentina to Cape Verde.

In a statement on Sunday, the World Health Organization said that one case had been confirmed and at least five other passengers were suspected of being infected.

“Of the six affected individuals, three have died, and one is currently in intensive care in South Africa,” WHO said in a statement.

“Detailed investigations are ongoing, including further laboratory testing and epidemiological investigations. Medical care and support are being provided to passengers and crew. Sequencing of the virus is also ongoing.”

WHO added that it was “facilitating coordination” between countries to evacuate the two other passengers showing symptoms of the infection.

Hantavirus, a rare disease transmitted to humans through the droppings or urine of infected rodents, can be fatal in severe cases and cause hemorrhagic fever.

Infected couple among casualties

South Africa’s National Department of Health said earlier on Sunday that there had been an outbreak of a “severe acute respiratory illness”, which had killed at least two people, and that a third person was in intensive care in Johannesburg, according to the AFP news agency.

The ministry’s spokesperson, Foster Mohale, confirmed that the patient being treated in Johannesburg tested positive for hantavirus.

A 70-year-old was the first to develop symptoms. He died on the ship, with his body now being held on the island of Saint Helena, a British territory in the South Atlantic, the spokesman said.

The patient’s 69-year-old wife also fell sick and was evacuated to South Africa, where she died in a Johannesburg hospital, he added.

Mohale told AFP that authorities have not confirmed the nationalities of the deceased. But the person in intensive care was reported by AFP to be a 69-year-old Briton.