Andy

The UK needs a “culture shift” in how it does business, Andy Burnham has said ahead of a meeting with some of Britain’s biggest bosses.

The prime minister said those who take risks in business should be backed by government and local leaders should have the power to work with companies.

The Labour government has been criticised for increasing costs for firms, such as with the employer national insurance and minimum wage changes under Burnham’s predecessor Sir Keir Starmer.

The meeting comes as Chancellor John Healey prepares for his first Budget next month, with rising borrowing costs in recent weeks adding to the pressure on government finances.

Downing Street said Burnham will meet the chief executives of BP, Shell, HSBC, Morrisons, Sainsbury’s, BT, Vodafone, Rolls-Royce and several others at Number 10.

Ahead of the meeting, Burnham said he would give people “the confidence that if they have a great idea, they’ll get all the support they need to bring it to life”.

“When local leaders have the tools to get things done and government works in partnership with business, you can pull in investment, create jobs and transform communities,” he said.

He added the government would be “a partner for growth to make every part of Britain better off”.

Burnham will host a reception for the business community where local leaders are invited before a private engagement with senior chief executives at Downing Street on Monday evening.

The meeting comes as higher borrowing costs in the UK and other countries present problems for governments looking to spend money on business support or investment.

Separately, hundreds of hospitality businesses have written to the prime minister, calling on him to cut VAT for the sector.

More than 800 pub, restaurant and hotel bosses – include celebrity chefs Heston Blumenthal and Tom Kerridge – signed the letter asking for the hospitality VAT rate to be reduced from 20% to 10%.

When he was still Mayor of Greater Manchester, Burnham said he would argue for the tax to be in line with the lower rates seen in other European countries.

Andy Hernández is a Venezuelan economist and grassroots activist. He currently serves in the parliament of the 5 de Marzo Comandante Eterno Commune in El Valle, Caracas, and has played an active role in the Communard Union, a national alliance of communes. In this exclusive interview, Hernández offers his perspective on local, state-backed projects within the current context of undermined sovereignty.

The 5 de Marzo Comandante Eterno Commune immediately mobilized in response to the double earthquake on June 24. Tell us a little about this and other recent initiatives by the commune.

After the twin earthquakes on June 24, community organizations sprang into action immediately. Collection centers were set up even before the government announced them. In our case, we set up a collection center on the premises of our communal social enterprise (EPSDC) Somos Karive.

At the same time, we noticed that around Somos Karive, many elderly people began leaving their homes, frightened, and taking to the streets. We brought them coffee, talked with them, and before we knew it, we had 300 people inside Somos Karive. There, with the support of the Ministry of Communes and the Caracas Mayor’s Office, we set up a shelter for a few days, until the panic subsided and people felt calm enough to return to their homes.

Somos Karive is one of the community’s main projects. How is it currently operating?

This initiative originally arose from a need to have a space to store food and expand our collaboration with the Pueblo a Pueblo Plan, a rural collective that organizes with urban counterparts to deliver produce at fair prices. The project then grew and now has several branches. The main operation, which generates the most cash flow, partly because it’s coordinated with the Ministry of Commerce, is the meat-processing plant. There, various cuts of meat are cleaned and portioned, vacuum-sealed, and then sold retail and wholesale to about 30 grocery stores in El Valle.

The second most important activity is our supermarket, which sells groceries and other products. There’s also the café, a space at the entrance that serves coffee, breakfast, and lunch. In fact, we also prepare large-scale lunches on demand. Another project here is a water treatment plant. And finally, a Family Production Unit (UPF) operates here, selling screws and other tools. This UPF contributes to the community through the social reinvestment fund. For now, that fund is used to support community activities. But according to the Law of Communes, the fund must be managed by the communal bank, which we are currently reactivating.

In short, Somos Karive has had its successes and failures, but it is a key initiative. I believe the most complex issue is establishing a management model. While all economic activity must generate a surplus, social property companies propose a different framework for labor relations. There is no boss; rather, there is administrative coordination that answers to the commune. No taxes are paid; instead, contributions are made to the social reinvestment fund. There are no social security contributions, but there must be a fund to support producers and a fund for necessary reinvestments. So we’ve been facing these challenges, in addition to the difficulty of operating EPS in the city, where retail activity makes sense but there is a lot of competition.

The Venezuelan government announced a new popular consultation [for communities to select state-funded projects] for October. What has been the outcome of previous consultations in the commune?

The consultations have led to progress and also provided valuable lessons in our territory. Before the first consultation in 2024, we drew up a wish list without asking ourselves whether those items were feasible or not. Now, after several votes, and with some tools provided by the Venezuelan government for systematic planning, such as the Concrete Action Agenda or the Map of Solutions, we’ve been able to ground the projects in reality. Today we can say that we manage the proposed initiatives and the resources obtained much more effectively. Sometimes we even prepare two reports: one institutional and one community-based.

The most recent one was an extremely complex water project. Our community has gone 30 years without a regular water supply. There are no formal water supply connections, just hoses everywhere. First, the project was formulated: to fix the problem for 291 families without service, and it really did have a significant impact. 

Other initiatives proved more difficult. For example, with a project to purchase water tanks, the funds raised were enough for only 10 tanks, yet hundreds of families needed them. The same thing happened with the project from the last consultation, which was to replace gas cylinders. We’ve managed to replace about 500, but there are 2,700 in total that need replacing. And the biggest challenge was with the rooftops. We needed 16,000 zinc sheets, but the project funds only allowed us to purchase about 850. So in situations like these it is difficult to manage everyone’s needs. In the end, we identified the most vulnerable homes, but we were only able to assist 65. No matter how well we manage the resources, they simply aren’t enough.

So we’ve had our share of setbacks, along with a lot of lessons. People now understand that we have to identify the scope of the problems that can actually be solved through these consultations. Rather than having a wish list, we’re learning to formulate real, concrete, and feasible projects.

What do you think of Acting President Delcy Rodríguez’s proposal to extend consultations to condominium boards and neighborhood associations?

To be honest, I find it interesting. The initial reaction, which I’ve seen in discussions with comrades, is to view it with suspicion, thinking of middle-class condominiums that have never believed in popular power.

The central issue is that a condominium board merely manages infrastructure, whereas the commune must implement policies on health, education, recreation, etc. It must act as the government in the territory, even if we aren’t fully exercising that role. So it might seem that by extending the consultation to condominiums, our presence is being undermined. However, our legislation doesn’t prevent condominium boards from participating in these processes.

Ultimately, the commune is the structure that defines the methodology for these consultations. Perhaps if, at some point, the consultations begin to prioritize the perspective of condominium boards, this concern would be justified. To me, that would indeed be a colossal mistake because it would violate the principle that the citizens’ assembly is the body that decides and has the final say on local projects.

Turning to the national scene, some analysts describe the situation in Venezuela as “tutelage,” while others call it a “protectorate,” where the country’s fate is essentially decided in Washington. In this context, what role should grassroots organizations play? Is it justified to maintain unconditional support for the government?

Here I will speak in a personal capacity, not on behalf of my commune or the Communard Union, because this is a complex and highly contentious debate taking place within social movements, with many different perspectives.

There are several positions: some speak of tutelage, others of a protectorate, and others of a new form of neocolonialism. I believe we must ask ourselves what defines sovereignty. For me, there are two models of sovereignty currently clashing worldwide: one defined by corporations and the other by organized peoples. Now, in more concrete terms, I defend the Venezuelan revolutionary process, our history, and our struggle. I do not agree with some of the government’s decisions, but it remains my government nonetheless.

However, this is a very complex context in the wake of a foreign military intervention. How can a government be evaluated while under military coercion? That is a difficult question to answer. Regardless of whether or not one supports the government, January 3 [US military strikes and kidnapping of Maduro] is a turning point in our process. For me, the central issue is not whether to defend the government or not, but rather to defend our institutions. For example, I do not agree with reestablishing relations with Israel, nor do I agree with the terms of our relationship with the United States. But this is still my government.

I know this may sound illogical or contradictory, but as a popular movement we must understand that sovereignty is being contested on a global scale. Our goal is to build a new form of state, one that has the commune as its foundation. We must strive to ensure that these 5,400 communal circuits form a network for the defense of the territory, fighting for a new hegemony, and with a leadership that allows us to advance and influence national politics. However, this begins with exercising power from the territories in a coordinated manner, managing resources, and sustaining new social relations.

The communes are not even at 10% of our potential. Public consultations, for example, are a glimpse of what we can do, but they account for less than 1% of the national budget. This means that social organizations are not managing oil revenues, which are our primary source of wealth. We must develop political awareness not only to identify imperialist interests in our resources but also to create economic models that can scale up so we can challenge the status quo on different terms. For example, we could envision a communal corridor to exploit minerals in an alternative way. This would turn us into a real threat to those who seek to impose corporate sovereignty. 

But returning to the more practical question: should we support the government or not? I believe we must support it because it is the government that establishes our institutional framework, even if it takes the form of a bourgeois state that we want to transcend. Now, should we support every decision? Of course not. But defending sovereignty means defending our institutions against foreign powers that seek to impose themselves upon them. For example, the assassination of Niño Guerrero struck me as a very dangerous precedent.

Finally, I believe it is important to have these discussions, both individually and within our organizations. In the case of the Communard Union, we are preparing a congress where we will need to collectively establish positions regarding this reality and, from there, define the actions we will take to try and revert the situation we are currently facing.

In recent months, we have seen a series of measures and reforms clearly geared toward the interests of transnational capital, such as the reform of the Hydrocarbons Law. What stance should communards take on these issues of national interest?

The reform of the Hydrocarbons Law is an example of this advance of the corporate sovereignty model. And in our context, the coercion and plundering began immediately after January 3. The attacks against Venezuela to seize its resources did not begin a few months ago, but before there was some care about appearances. Now the United States has moved on to directly stealing the country’s export revenues. This is like going back to the 19th century.

It is a complex time for the world. We are sometimes a bit chauvinistic; we believe that Venezuela determines what happens everywhere else. Although we certainly have an impact. We have the world’s largest energy reserves, minerals, fresh water, and other resources. Naturally, without independence there is no commune, and defending the process means defending national independence in order to envision a different world.

Now, what steps should we take to defend ourselves against this plundering? We have our Constitution, but this scheme falls outside even the international legal framework. Some might say the solution is to sabotage our own oil industry, but others would ask whether that would help shift the correlation of forces. Because we’re not just interested in being right. We want to change reality. We could issue a statement from the Communard Union right now, outlining everything we disagree with, and perhaps we should do so, but we must collectively decide what our coherent course of action will be, in terms of politics, communication, and so on, to defend our national project.

Venezuelan communes have also been characterized by their internationalism. How do you assess recent events, ranging from “joint” military operations with the US to the reestablishment of ties with Israel?

We believe that the commune is a civilizational project that we are implementing in a specific territory: Venezuela. Elsewhere, people may call it something else or pursue it with a different strategy, but we believe it is a civilizational project that is being debated around the world. So, based on that, the commune is obviously anti-Zionist and anti-imperialist. However, we are being subjugated and subdued. Not just the communes, but the country as a whole.

I believe that in the aftermath of January 3, elements such as the rapprochement with Israel were imposed on us. January 3 and the subsequent coercion were decisive in shifting the balance of institutional power, both within the Venezuelan state and in its foreign relations. The United States violated the Constitution, subdued our armed forces, and killed more than 200 people, including those extrajudicially murdered at sea, not to mention the piracy of hijacking our oil tankers. Thus, these disastrous changes are an imposition based on the logic of the military victor getting the spoils. In fact, US officials have openly stated this.

But the concept of the commune is and always will be anti-imperialist, anti-Zionist, and in support of the self-determination of peoples, with a vision of how resources and community life should be organized, the full exercise of our sovereignty, and so on. In this context, the communes must resist by demonstrating their existence, their socially owned enterprises, their assemblies, and their impact on the territory. Demonstrating that another way of life is possible is a way to fight back both locally and internationally.

Andy Murray has long been a guiding figure for British tennis, but newly-married Katie Boulter will not be following his lead when it comes to keeping her wedding ring safe.

Three-time Grand Slam champion Murray, who married wife Kim in 2015, famously briefly lost his wedding band after playing with it tied to his shoe laces.

Murray had left his trainers – with the ring still attached – under a car to dry out after a practice session in California in 2021, and after discovering they were missing the next day, was eventually reunited with both after putting out an appeal for their return.

Boulter, who married Australia’s world number seven Alex de Minaur this summer, said she will not be making the same mistake.

“I learned from Andy. I’m not going to do that,” the 30-year-old said. “I don’t wear it. Not during matches.”

Boulter and De Minaur tied the knot at a small, private ceremony in England before holding a bigger celebration in Tuscany, Italy, in July.

Speaking to BBC Radio 5 Live, Boulter said: “One was in the UK for my nearest and dearest. It was like eight people – very, very small, very much for my grandpa.

“It was a huge contrast to the Italian wedding, which had all of our closest people, all of our friends, and was a little bit more of a party and a lot of fun.”

When it came to De Minaur’s speech, however, Boulter admitted she was “sceptical”.

“I hadn’t seen him do any preparation for the speech at all. And he was like, ‘I’m just going to wing it. It’s fine. How hard can it be?’,” she said.

“He was amazing. He was so, good. I was crying the whole time. I think I permanently cried for like three hours straight during all the speeches.”

Since their wedding, the world number 60 has wasted no time in throwing herself back into tennis before the US Open, which gets under way on Sunday.

“I actually just chose to go straight back into the conditions, go into the deep end and see what we’ve got,” said Boulter, who lost in the first round in Washington and Toronto before suffering a second-round exit in Cincinnati.

“I do think the conditions in the States are very different from the UK. I think you can’t really replicate them.

“So I felt like I’d be a little underprepared coming to the US and just getting used to the conditions again would have been quite difficult.”

Boulter’s US Open begins with a first-round encounter against American wildcard Carol Young Suh Lee, who is ranked 143rd in the world.

Aug. 24 (UPI) — On his first visit to Ukraine as British Prime Minister Andy Burnham promised Monday to share Anglo-French long-range cruise missile technology with Kyiv in its fight with Russia, saying Britain would stand with Ukraine until there was “a just and lasting peace.”

Burnham said European defense contractor MBDA would be authorized to declassify blueprints for the parts of the Storm Shadow/Scalp missiles that are made by Britain to help Ukraine build its own version of the weapon that Britain has for the past three years been giving to Kyiv.

The Storm Shadow enables Ukrainian forces to hit targets 150 miles inside Russia.

Burnham said Britain would join forces with France to build production plants in Ukraine following a similar pledge of help by President Emmanuel Macron, who also told Zelensky at the weekend that France would supply Kyiv with more anti-missile interceptors in the wake of a series of deadly ballistic missile strikes.

“On Ukraine’s 35th anniversary of independence, the Ukrainian people should be in no doubt: the U.K. is behind you today and for as long as it takes. I am proud of the contribution our country has made to Ukraine and I want the Ukrainian people to hear it directly from me that our support will not waver. After all, Ukraine’s security is our security,” Burnham said in a statement issued Sunday night.

“The friendship between our two countries will long outlast Russia’s illegal war. In both the fight and in the rebuilding to come, we will stand with Ukraine and deliver opportunities for people across both our countries. Russia should be in no doubt of our resolve. We will not back down until there is a just and lasting peace,” said Burnham.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov likened the missile plan to pouring gasoline on relations with Russia and warned Britain over “participating in this war” on Ukraine’s side, saying that the Russian military was actively collecting data to uncover and destroy any missile production sites.

“Britain is methodically and regularly adding fuel to the fire and methodically and regularly plotting to prevent any progress in the peace process,” said Peskov.

Burnham’s high-profile, public backing for Zelensky came as he faces challenges both from nightly Russian ballistic missile strikes and to his authority, amid calls for elections which have been suspended for more than four years since Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022.

As well joining Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky for Independence Day celebrations in Kyiv, Burnham was also scheduled to chair a meeting of the U.K.-France-led Coalition of the Willing for talks on providing more help to Ukraine.

Established in 2025, the focus of the 34 country plus Ukraine partnership is to provide security guarantees in the event a cease-fire agreement is reached, including providing a multinational force to support and monitor it from day 1, though not necessarily in the format of a traditional peace-keeping force.

The stand by Burnham, coincided with a similar pledge from from Brussels, backed up by a multi-billion dollar package of fresh European Union military aid.

“On Ukraine’s Independence Day, we show our unfaltering support. Today, we approved $7.1 billion for the air and missile defense systems, missiles, ammunition and radars that Ukraine urgently needs. Europe stands with you today, tomorrow, and for as long as it takes,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in a post on X.

The package is in addition to $18.7 billion already approved by the 27-country bloc, $9.7 billion of which has already been provided to Kyiv.

Those who were at Dodger Stadium on a gorgeous Friday night seemed to be in for an all-nighter.

They have Tommy Edman to thank for getting home a bit earlier.

With two outs in the 10th, Kiké Hernández on third and Kyle Tucker on first, the second baseman hit a walk-off single against Pittsburgh Pirates reliever Gregory Soto, earning the Dodgers a 5-4 win.

“Yeah, it feels great,” Edman said. “We’ve kind of been struggling a little bit in those clutch situations, myself included, so it felt really good to come through.”

Edman entered the at-bat 0 for 3 and was seemingly on the verge of keeping the 200-minute game alive in an unfavorable way.

Soto, however, threw the same low-middle sweeper that Edman fouled off one pitch earlier, and the second baseman jumped on it the second time around, propelling the Dodgers (78-51) to four consecutive wins for the first time since late July.

“That’s something I really try to take pride in — leaving past at-bats behind me — and I think I’ve done a good job of that this year,” Edman said. “I think that’s something we do really well overall as a group, and that leads to coming through in big situations like that, putting past at-bats behind you.

“One of the best feelings after grinding for 10 innings,” he added. “We had a bunch of pitchers do a really good job today.”

However, the victory was tempered by the loss of center fielder Andy Pages, who was struck in the left hand with a Bubba Chandler pitch in the third inning. Manager Dave Roberts said X-rays showed a fracture and Pages is expected to be out at least four weeks.

Yoshinobu Yamamoto helped make sure the loss of Pages was not in vain.

The right-hander brought the urgency to the mound that the Dodgers were missing during an abysmal 5-11 stretch that ended with a sweep against the Colorado Rockies this week.

“I personally felt like today’s game is very important,” Yamamoto said. “We’re gonna have [Tarik] Skubal starting [Saturday], and I just wanted to maintain the momentum, which started in Colorado.”

Yamamoto surrendered two runs — both via singles from Pirates designated hitter Nick Gonzales — on five hits over 6⅓ innings, striking out nine and walking one.

“My stuff was pretty good today,” Yamamoto said. “I was feeling pretty good out there. So even after letting runners on the bases, I just tried to focus and then take it one hitter at a time.”

Chandler, meanwhile, exited after four innings. Max Muncy hit a two-run homer in the first, and Mookie Betts contributed a two-run single in the third.

The Dodgers, with a 4-2 lead, cruised into the eighth. But Kyle Hurt gave up a tying two-run homer to Oneil Cruz.

Dodgers pitcher Yoshinobu Yamamoto delivers against the Pittsburgh Pirates in the second inning Friday night.

(Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times)

Matters looked grim for the Dodgers in the 10th when Evan Phillips found himself in a one-out, bases-loaded jam.

All was well, though, once Phillips got Henry Davis to ground into an inning-ending, 6-4-3 double play.

“That was great,” Roberts said of Phillips. “I know that he’s trying to kind of build as we’re going through this, and [it] hasn’t been smooth sailing for him and the success that he’s used to. But this is a big one. Big confidence builder for him … to strand those two runners was a big outing for him.”

Edman took care of the rest.

And for maybe the first time in weeks, the Dodgers appear to be inching back to their champion ways.

“I think our guys are kind of reinterested, you know, collectively,” Roberts said before the game. “So, that’s a good thing.”

Andy Pages sustains hand fracture

Dodgers center fielder Andy Pages gets hit by a pitch during the third inning against the Pirates on Friday night.

(Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times)

Roberts said Pages sustained a fracture on the back of his left hand when he was hit by the 100-mph pitch It’s unclear if he will need surgery.

“Well, it’s just really unfortunate, obviously,” Roberts said. “It’s not season-ending. … So, I would expect him back, knowing him, on the earlier side. … I feel for him because he’s having such a good year.”

Roberts said Edman is an option to fill in for Pages in center field.

In a more positive development, Will Smith faced live pitching for the first time since June, and Roberts said that the plan is to activate the catcher during the first week of September.

“Today was a good day for Will,” Roberts said. “Taking at-bats. He’ll catch a couple bullpens today. He’ll do a couple more lives. … He still needs to get his legs back under him before we feel confident that he can take down a major league game and feel good coming out of it.”

Roberts added that Smith is “gonna play in the postseason” and that there is enough time for him to reach 100% strength.

Tyler Glasnow will likely be activated during the Dodgers’ upcoming trip to Atlanta.

“I just saw him. He had a great outing — his last rehab outing,” Roberts said. “I’m not sure which day we’re gonna pencil him in against the Braves, but if all of the things check out, it’ll be that [series].”

Ohtani will return to the mound at some point this season.

“It’s gonna happen,” Roberts said. “[Ohtani] threw another bullpen. … I think that there’s going to be a live or two, and then he’ll be on the mound. I just don’t know when we’re going to do that with the scheduling.”

Dalton Rushing is “pain-free” and close to facing live pitching, according to Roberts, but the catcher is “unlikely” to return to catching this season.

“I hope I’m wrong,” Roberts said. “But he’s determined to go through the process, the progression, the build-up and get back. And we’ll see where we’re at.”

Roberts didn’t rule out the possibility of Rushing being activated as a designated hitter down the line.

The Dodgers just can’t have some peace and calm, can they? Now, an owner is getting in on the fun with some controversy.