Burnham

Burnham announced the decision to approve the drilling of the Jackdaw gas field earlier this week.

Jackdaw is situated 150 miles (241km) east of Aberdeen and is operated by Adura, a joint venture between Shell and Norwegian state energy firm Equinor.

Ministers said the first gas could be produced by the end of this month, helping heat millions of homes, and also announced the creation of a new energy wealth fund.

Environmental campaigners say the decision would hamper efforts to tackle climate change and make “no meaningful difference” to UK energy security.

Based on official forecasts for the amount of gas the UK will need over the next decade, that suggests Jackdaw has the potential to meet around 1.6% of total projected national gas demand between 2026 and 2036.

Operators say it could be connected to the Great British gas network within weeks and could produce gas for the next 11 years.

Trump responded to the decision on Friday, but appeared to confuse oil and gas.

He said: “They’re opening up the North Sea oil. I’ve been after them to do that for two years.”

Trump added: “Andy is getting it done, and I guess it’s against the liberal principle, but he knows what’s right. It’s going to make UK a very wealthy country.”

Earlier this week, on Wednesday, Trump said the decision was “great news for the wealth and prosperity” of the UK.

Writing on his Truth Social platform, Trump urged the UK to go “full blast” and called the North Sea “one of the greatest and most prosperous areas of oil in the world”.

A decision is yet to be taken on whether production can begin at Rosebank, the UK’s largest known untapped oil field, which is located off the coast of Shetland in the North Atlantic.

Andy Burnham’s first Gogglebox appearance!

A sentence we never expected to say. Tonight, PM Andy Burnham and Steve Rotherham will make their debut on the show, sitting at 10 Downing Street. 
The programme airs in aid of Stand Up To Cancer, and Andy is no stranger to charitable causes. Throughout his tenure as Mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy often threw himself into work, helping those around him.

The Guardian says Andy Burnham will face a “climate revolt” by approving drilling at the Jackdaw gas field., external The paper says that, while it will be a “major boost” for Britain’s oil and gas industry, critics will argue it undermines Labour’s green credentials. According to the Financial Times, ministers are expected to say that the project will help increase energy supplies this winte, externalr. The i Paper reports that it will be able to power around a million UK homes., external

The Times reports that the home secretary is facing pressure from her cabinet colleagues to water down plans, external which would make it harder for foreign workers to claim permanent residence in the UK. But an ally of Shabana Mahmood tells the paper that Burnham is “on her side” and is “holding the line”. “Mahmood’s fight to save her migrant crackdown” is the headline.

The Daily Telegraph says a review of anti-Semitism in schools in England is expected to prompt some to ban teachers from wearing pro-Palestinian badges. , externalAccording to the Guardian, the report by Sir David Bell finds that three in five Jewish students have been affected, external by anti-Semitism.

The decision to deploy RAF jets to defend Saudi Arabia is described by the Times as an “expansion of the UK’s role in the conflict in Yemen”, external. A defence source tells the paper that “if Houthi drones or missiles come over the border” then British jets will “take them out”. The Telegraph’s verdict is: “Better late than never”.

The Daily Mirror leads with the Covid inquiry’s findings that government failures during the pandemic allowed the virus to “spread like wildfire” in care homes., external In its leader column, the paper says care home residents were “shamefully abandoned by those entrusted with protecting them”.

Prince Harry’s call for reconciliation with his father and brother is the focus of the Sun’s front page, external. It says the Duke of Sussex is hoping to “fix his bitter family feud”. But the Daily Mail accuses him of “reopening old wounds” in what it describes as a “new Sussex psychodrama”, external. Its headline reads: “Oh, do put a sock in it, Harry!”.

London, United Kingdom – There was a moment towards the end of Andy Burnham’s conference speech in Liverpool that, through silence, spoke volumes.

The new prime minister and Labour leader fell quiet.

For 20 seconds he stood, saying nothing. He hadn’t forgotten his words. He was gathering his emotions for a passage of the speech he hadn’t been able to make it through in rehearsals without crying.

Burnham’s father had died just a couple of weeks before, and this was the section where he’d talk about it.

As the audience realised what was coming they stood, applauding, and urging him on with shouts of “Come on, lad!’ and “Come on, Andy!”

Thanking them, he composed himself and continued.

Conference speeches are theatre, and contemporary British political standards require that a leader be relatable. But there’s little doubt that Andy Burnham handled this moment with an emotional register that struck many as genuine.

His predecessor Keir Starmer sometimes came across as wooden, almost robotic and uncomfortable in front of cameras. Burnham, the seventh prime minister in 10 years, is more emotional.

He talks big ideas and grand solutions and relishes the opportunity to communicate.

In the vibes-denominated currency of modern political discourse, this matters.

The polls speak for themselves. Politico’s Poll of Polls had the Labour Party retake top spot shortly after Burnham became PM – a position it has not relinquished since. At the end of September, Ipsos found Andy Burnham to be the only politician with a positive net favourability rating.

YouGov’s polling also judges him the most popular politician in the UK at the moment.

But to keep up, Burnham must deliver tangible change before the next general election. Unless he calls one early, that will be 2029.

According to political analyst Sam Freedman, “So many in Westminster keep coming back to an early election, despite Burnham ruling it out … No one can quite figure out how Burnham keeps the hope vibe going for three more years with relatively little visible progress.”

‘Going back to what Labour was in the 50s’

In the Welsh town of Port Talbot, terraces of workers’ cottages cluster beside the UK’s largest steelworks.

Like much of Wales, Port Talbot did vote Labour for a century – until elections for the Senedd Cymru or Welsh Parliament in May.

Labour was beaten to an unprecedented third place behind Plaid Cymru’s nationalists, and the anti-immigration Reform UK.

But that was before Burnham took over.

Myles Lewis, who organises social walks for the town’s elderly, told Al Jazeera that Labour had not convinced people on immigration, and Starmer’s communication wasn’t good enough.

“[But now], it’s kind of going back to what Labour was in the 50s and 60s, where they actually looked after the working-class people. I do believe Andy Burnham can get there because I think he has the interests of the working-class people.”

In his first weeks in power, Burnham delivered a quick flurry of eye-catching, domestic, cost-of-living-focused policies.

He capped bus fares, cut the value-added tax (VAT) on electricity bills, and cut business rates for pubs.

He said that he would end street homelessness, reindustrialise the country, take services back into public control, and start the biggest build-out of social housing since World War II.

The mayor of Greater Manchester for nine years, Burnham supports the devolution of powers from Westminster to the UK’s nations and regions.

In July, he announced mayors could keep a share of business rates from April 2027 and of income tax from 2028.

And his conference speech in September set out the contours of some big political battles to come, including a national social care service, free at the point of use, paid for by changing the UK pensions’ triple lock from 2030. It would arrive next parliament. Burnham also pitched a national commission on electoral reform, with a manifesto commitment to overhaul the voting system. And he delivered a blunt verdict on Brexit: that it “has done more harm than good”. He wouldn’t rule out an in-out referendum, or a pledge for the UK to rejoin the European Union, in Labour’s next manifesto, he said.

On foreign affairs, there is less blue water between Burnham and his predecessors.

When he travelled to Ukraine in August, the UK’s new prime minister came with a headline-grabbing gift – British know-how to build the long-range SCALP missile. He was the fourth British prime minister to visit Kyiv since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and pledge steadfast support.

On Gaza, he has said the Labour government “didn’t get it right” and should have called for a ceasefire earlier. And in September, the Burnham government announced a sanctions package against illegal West Bank settlements.

But there has been no genocide declaration, and no full arms embargo against Israel. And Burnham hasn’t overturned the Starmer government’s proscription of the Palestine Action protest group as a “terrorist” organisation.

Defence spending is also a looming problem.

The government’s formal defence pledge is 3.5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2035, and Burnham has declined to say whether he’d pay for it with tax rises or welfare cuts.

John Healey, who resigned as the UK’s defence secretary in June over underfunding, is now chancellor of the exchequer, and will not commit to the 3-percent-by-2030 target he set himself.

Burnham’s first budget comes at the end of this month. A full spending review follows next year. Much will be clearer after these.

His biggest pledges – reindustrialisation, control of public services, a new social care system – are expensive.

Burnham certainly has the vibes. The public likes them, for now. The budget will show whether he can afford them.

On Monday, the GMCA released a statement about Burnham’s meetings with Man City in his role as mayor for the region for almost a decade.

The statement said he had a formal meeting with Al Mubarak in October 2021 at the UK Government’s Global Investment Summit, arranged by the Department for International Trade; and that he met the club chairman “informally in the stands” at a testimonial match in 2019 for former player Vincent Kompany.

It also said that “in his capacity as mayor, he was a guest of Manchester City at home matches on a small number of occasions”.

But the statement did not specify that this referred to, external two hospitality dinners he had with the Manchester City chairman at separate matches.

A previous GMCA register of declarations for Burnham, seen by the BBC, detailed a “dinner with [then-Manchester City Council leader] Richard Leese and Chair of Man City” for an Everton match at the Etihad stadium in August 2017, valued at £300 for hospitality.

Below is another entry for “dinner with the Chairman at the Man City/Man Utd derby at the Etihad” in April 2018, valued at approximately £699.

Burnham previously declared those dinners, alongside a £150 pair of tickets to see Ed Sheeran perform at the stadium in May 2018.

But the register of declarations has since been deleted from the GMCA website, as first reported by The Sun. The BBC understands it is the authority’s policy to only publish entries from the current mayoral term.

BBC News has asked GMCA for more details about this policy – given its website has entries dating back to 2022, despite the current mayoral term beginning in 2024.

Downing Street has defended the two dinners with Man City’s chairman, saying this was hospitality received at home games, which had been declared, rather than separate meetings with the club chairman.

But political pressure on Burnham to be clearer about any former discussions with Man City is continuing to mount.

Tory shadow sports minister Louie French said: “Andy Burnham promised the country and House of Commons full transparency on his dealings with Manchester City.

“This was essential after his inappropriate intervention into football.”

And Reform UK’s Robert Jenrick said “this saga stinks” as he accused Burnham of having apparently “concealed his extensive links to Man City’s owners”.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has demanded for several days that No 10 release all details of meetings between the prime minister and senior figures at the club.

Burnham told the Rest Is Politics podcast last week he was “happy” to do this and would “quite clearly put out there everything that I have done working with them in my previous role as Mayor of Greater Manchester”.

“None of it is recent, actually, in terms of the meetings I had. I only had one significant meeting, actually, and that was in 2021.”

Asked at Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday whether anyone at the club had raised the charges they were facing with him or his team, Burnham said: “They did not raise those issues with me.”

With the PM continuing to face pressure on the issue, he told MPs he was happy for “everything to be set out in full”, referring to the GMCA’s statement as “a full statement of my key dealings with the owners of Manchester City Football Club”.

When asked by reporters why the statement did not refer to the two dinners, and what the difference is between “everything” and “key dealings”, the PM’s press secretary referred back to the GMCA statement.

The list of meetings, which was published by the GMCA on Monday, did not include detail on what was discussed. The BBC has asked GMCA why the two dinners were not specifically mentioned.

In September Man City – which has dominated the top flight of English football for years – was found guilty by an independent commission of breaching Premier League financial regulations.

The commission found City had broken rules over a nine-year period between 2009 and 2018 by creating “sham” contracts with commercial partners to secretly funnel more than £830m into their football operations.

Sanctions are yet to be announced and City, which denies any wrongdoing, has lodged an appeal against the verdict.

Earlier this month, Sir Richard Leese – who was head of Manchester City Council for 25 years until 2021 – defended a decade-old deal between the council and Man City owners Abu Dhabi United Group (ADUG).

Under the partnership between the authority and the company, which is linked to the United Arab Emirates royal family, land was leased to ADUG at “below comparable rates”, according to a University of Sheffield report.

UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham says renegotiating relationship with the EU could reverse some post-Brexit ‘damage’.

UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham has pledged to push for closer relations with the European Union, confirming he will attend a bilateral summit in Brussels next month.

Addressing parliament on Monday, Burnham said parts of the trade deal agreed with the EU after the UK voted to leave in 2016 would be renegotiated.

Burnham said that the British public would be “the boss” at every stage of renegotiating Britain’s relationship with the EU and that he wanted “serious dialogue” about long-term ties.

He told members of parliament that his focus at the summit would be boosting growth in the economy and controlling illegal immigration.

Among the topics of discussion at November’s summit are cutting bureaucracy for British food exports and emissions trading, as well as a “new youth experience scheme” and deeper cooperation on immigration.

The prime minister, who came into office in July, said the agreements could reverse some of the “damage” done to the post-Brexit British economy.

He told MPs that Britain needed to “take a calm, clear-eyed look at the world as it is today”.

“Sticking to the status quo is not good enough,” he said, adding that “public opinion currently supports a pragmatic approach like the one I am suggesting”.

After his address, the leader of the opposition, Kemi Badenoch, said Burnham would be unable to secure a better deal as the EU was ” tough negotiators” and warned that he had already “shown his hand”.

The claim marks the first time a UK prime minister has publicly acknowledged Russia’s interference in the vote to leave the EU.

UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham has said it is “clear” that Russia interfered in the country’s 2016 Brexit vote, warning French and German voters of the same threat.

“I asked the question coming to Downing Street: Was there interference in the 2016 referendum from Russia? And I’ve had the clear answer that yes, there was,” Burnham said in an interview with The Rest Is Politics podcast released on Sunday.

Burnham’s comments mark the first time a UK prime minister has publicly acknowledged that Russia interfered in the UK’s vote to leave the European Union. Burnham did not provide evidence for or details on the claim.

He said that “these things are important now to put clearly on the record, and, I believe, help voters in Germany and France understand that some of this politics is instigated via our enemies, namely Russia.”

Burnham said he spoke with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz about possible links between Russia and the far-right Alternative for Germany party when the two leaders met last week in Berlin.

In his address to the United Nations General Assembly in September, Burnham also condemned Russia’s attempt to interfere in the UK’s 2019 general election.

According to a 2020 report by Parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee, the UK government had failed to ask for a deep assessment of Russia’s interference in the 2016 referendum. The report did confirm that Russia had meddled in the 2014 Scottish independence referendum, however.

Russia has repeatedly denied meddling in Western democracies or interfering in another country’s elections or referendums, casting the UK as being gripped by “anti-Russian hysteria”.

UK reconsiders Brexit

Last month, Burnham argued that the UK should reconsider options for a future relationship with the EU, including rejoining the bloc, reigniting the decisive debate more than a decade after the historic vote.

He said that the UK’s departure from the bloc had failed to fulfil Brexit supporters’ pledge of “taking back control”, and instead has made the UK weaker economically and on immigration.

Burnham was mayor of Manchester from 2017 until earlier this year and his tenure took place during a sustained period of success for City.

As mayor, he championed investment from the Gulf as a way of growing Manchester’s economy, a strategy which was initially pursued by the city’s leaders before Burnham became the inaugural elected mayor of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority.

“I don’t think I misspoke,” said Burnham of his past comments on Man City’s owners.

“What I would say is my mind hadn’t been on all of the issues. My mind had been on Labour Party conference and I was doing interviews in relation to it.

“And also, I didn’t link those two things. You know, the questions linked those two things. What I would say is they’re very separate.

“The football issues are different from the investment issues. People will try and conflate those two things, but they shouldn’t, in my view.

“The football issues, the findings of the independent commission are serious, as I said in the interview.”

The entire process involving the charges against Manchester City is independent of the Premier League.

An independent commission held a 42-day hearing in 2024 which led to the verdict announced last month, with City also guilty of all charges except one relating to non-cooperation with the Premier League investigation.

The commission’s report said that “a number of important club witnesses gave false evidence in key respects and that some knowingly gave untrue and dishonest evidence”.

A separate independent appeal board will hear City’s appeal. The club continues to deny any wrongdoing.

Andy Burnham has called on Green leader Zack Polanski to reverse a motion passed by members of his party declaring Zionism a form of racism.

The prime minister said the motion, approved on Sunday at the party’s conference in Brighton, was “completely wrong” and showed “terrible judgement”.

The motion defined Zionism as an ideology supporting “an ethnonationalist Jewish state” and backed a “single democratic Palestinian state in all of historic Palestine”, which includes modern-day Israel.

In the wake of the vote, Polanski has said he would not accept anyone being excluded from the Green Party “because of the religious or communal body they are part of”.

The Green leader has declined media interviews since the motion was passed and did not answer questions from a BBC reporter about the motion ahead of Burnham’s comments.

It comes as polls close in Thursday’s Holborn and St Pancras by-election, in which Polanski is a candidate.

The motion has complicated the final days of Polanksi’s campaign in the contest, where the Greens have been looking to overturn a substantial Labour majority in the seat vacated by former Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer.

It has sparked days of controversy, with four of the five Green MPs opposing it, its co-deputy leaders split on supporting it, the Green deputy leader in Wales resigning, and condemnation from members and Green counterparts in Europe.

Polanski did not vote on the Zionism motion, having left the conference early to return to London for the by-election campaign.

An amendment he had backed to specify that the motion should not be used to discipline Jewish members attending synagogues that consider themselves Zionist was voted down by members.

Before the vote, he had also said he wanted to see the reference to a single Palestinian state changed, arguing: “I don’t believe we as a Green Party of England and Wales, or even the British government, should be deciding what the future settlement looks like.”

The Green Party has an internal democracy model, under which official party policy is decided by members. However, these positions are not necessarily included in the party’s general election manifestos.

Burnham is set to be greeted with military honours at the German capital’s Chancellery ahead of his first face-to-face meeting with the chancellor.

On Thursday, the two leaders will formally ratify the 2025 Kensington Treaty, a partnership committing both countries to tackle hostile activity through deeper cooperation on science, technology, defence, security and growth.

Speaking ahead of the visit, Burnham said the UK and Germany were “joining forces to find, expose and disrupt” threats.

He continued: “Attacks on our infrastructure, our businesses and our democracies are not a distant threat.

“They reach into people’s homes and workplaces, and they are designed to make us weaker and more divided.”

European leaders have warned the threat of hybrid attacks against Europe by Russia has intensified in recent weeks.

Hybrid warfare or hybrid attacks are loose terms which tend to describe non-military methods designed to exert pressure and destabilise an adversary – for example cyber attacks, sabotage or misinformation.

Last month, a senior Russian diplomat was summoned by the British government over an “egregious and reckless attack” on Leipzig airport.

It is a major international freight hub used for providing support to Ukraine. Moscow has denied any involvement in the incident.

Meanwhile, questions have also been raised this week about Germany’s reliability as an intelligence partner, following the bombshell arrest of a former spy chief on suspicion of espionage.

August Hanning has been accused of espionage, treason and obtaining classified information for a foreign power, the German Federal Prosecutor’s Office says.

He ran the Federal Intelligence Service (BND) from 1998 to 2005 and has since been working as a private consultant.

The talks also come during a period in which Merz’s own political future has come under intense scrutiny.

Burnham replaced Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer in July after the former leader was forced out by his own MPs just two years after winning a landslide election victory.

Similarly, Merz has faced persistent rumours he could be replaced by his party due to his poor approval ratings and following setbacks in regional elections.

Although the chancellor appears to have overcome an immediate crisis in his leadership, questions remain over his future.

Additional reporting by Ottilie Mitchell.

Prime Minister Andy Burnham has scrapped controversial plans to curb some jury trials.

Sir Keir Starmer’s government had introduced proposals to allow judges to make the sole decision on cases that would lead to a sentence of less than three years.

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) said only complex fraud and financial offences would be judge-alone – and it proposes that thousands of medium-level crimes should stay with volunteer magistrates, who sit without a jury.

Justice Secretary Alex Norris said he had changed course came after hearing the “strength of feeling”. Criminal lawyers have welcomed the decision and the Conservatives say it is a “major victory” for those who fought to defend trial by jury.

Former Justice Secretary David Lammy first announced the plans in December following a recommendation in a major review of the court system in England and Wales.

The series of radical reforms, including scaling back jury trials, were presented as the best way of turning around record backlogs which, in turn, were exacerbating the prison population crisis.

The backlog – which has led to record delays for defendants and victims – currently stands at nearly 81,000 cases – having rocketed largely thanks to cuts before the pandemic and court closures during the national lockdowns. Official projections have estimated it could reach 100,000 before the next general election and, in a worst case scenario, climb to double that number by 2035.

There are, however, indications the backlog is now stabilising after the government committed unlimited funding to pay for more judges to sit in courts that were otherwise being unused.

Under the original plans, Lammy had wanted to reserve jury trials for the most serious “indictable” offences – meaning cases that are always sent to Crown Court, including murder and rape.

Less serious offences, where the sentence would be no more than three years, would be decided without a jury in the Crown Court by a judge alone. Even less serious offences would stay in magistrates’ courts, abolishing defendants’ right to ask for a trial by jury when they feel that is their best chance of beig cleared.

The proposals triggered an outcry across many parts of the criminal justice world, with many opponents saying that eroding the 800-year-old right to trial by jury would not solve the backlogs.

British Prime Minister Andy Burnham has said the UK’s security services have “strong indications” of Iranian involvement in the incident at a British Royal Air Force (RAF) station near Fairford this week in which five men were arrested before they were released on bail.

The five British men were spotted near the airbase and arrested on Sunday on suspicion of “terrorism” and explosives offences, before they were released.

The United States has used the British base to carry out operations in various conflicts, including to deploy bombers in its war against Iran.

Iran has strongly denied any involvement with the airbase incident, with Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi saying British authorities are “barking up the wrong tree”.

So, what do we know about the incident, and is there evidence Iran played a role?

What happened at the airbase?

Authorities were alerted to suspicious activity near the base early Sunday morning, including three vans parked oddly and a group of hooded, masked men.

Police responded and arrested five British men in their early 20s in the nearby Whelford area, saying they were suspected of explosives offences. Counter Terrorism police later took over the probe and said the men were suspected of preparing “a terrorist act”.

The suspects were released on bail Monday, but remain subject to “stringent conditions on their movement and contact with others,” according to the United Kingdom’s head of counter terrorism policing, Laurence Taylor.

On Tuesday, after three days of investigations, including using a bomb disposal team, police said they had found no explosives in the vehicles that were parked the near the base, but had retrieved a “quantity of petrol”.

Who is linking the incident to Iran, and have they cited evidence?

Officials in the UK, the US and Israel have all pointed to Iran but offered no details.

Burnham on Wednesday spoke of “strong indications” of Iran’s involvement and said an “ongoing, complex and serious police investigation” is continuing.

However, the prime minister did not give any details on what the suspects were planning or why the UK thinks Iran was involved, saying only that he would “update people more in due course”.

In the US, President Donald Trump said the case “might be” Iran-linked and that the US had been keeping tabs on the suspects “for a long time”. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the case “clearly involved the hands of a foreign actor”, without naming a specific state.

In Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel had forewarned the UK about a potential “Iranian-sponsored attack”.

How has Iran responded?

Iran has firmly denied involvement.

In a statement on Monday, Iran’s embassy in London said it “categorically rejects and strongly condemns” any attempts to link Iran to the individuals arrested near the airbase.

It said the spread of such “fabricated speculations” fuel “Iranophobia propaganda” and that Iran reserves the right to “take appropriate legal measures”.

On Wednesday, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the UK was “barking up the wrong tree” by pointing to potential Iranian involvement.

Why has the UK released the suspects on bail?

It is unclear. Under British “counterterrorism law”, police can hold suspects for up to two weeks before charging them. However, if authorities find little evidence to support their initial suspicion of “terrorism”, they would have far less time – usually 24 to 36 hours, said Chris Phillips, a former head of the UK’s National Counter Terrorism Security Office.

“If it’s not an actual terrorist attack, then the police don’t have anywhere near as long to keep them in custody,” said Phillips. “I think the police just need more time to do their enquiries.”

Andrew Silke, professor of criminology at Royal Holloway, University of London, said the suspects could have also been released on bail while under suspicion of “terrorism” if “authorities feel relatively confident that these individuals do not pose an imminent danger of either carrying out or organising a terrorist attack”, such as if they had “peripheral” or “unknowing involvement”.

Afzal Ashraf, a visiting fellow in international relations and security at Loughborough University and a former senior Royal Air Force officer, said the bail release does not necessarily indicate that the “Iranian-involvement hypothesis has been rejected” but it does mean “police have judged that these individuals did not present any immediate danger”.

Taylor, the head of counter terrorism policing, said the men’s release on bail was an “investigative decision” based on “experience and careful considerations of policing powers.” He stressed that the men are bound by “stringent conditions on their movement and contact with others” as the investigation into them continues.

But their release drew backlash in the US from Trump, who said British authorities “should not have done that”.

“How do you give bail to a terrorist?” Trump asked.

Iran’s Araghchi appeared to suggest that the suspects’ release supported Iran’s position that it was not involved.

“I can confirm Iran’s belief that releasing supposed terrorists working for foreign states really says it all,” wrote Araghchi in a post on X.

What questions about the case are still unanswered?

Questions remain about the circumstances in which authorities were initially alerted to suspicious activity near the base, the extent to which they believe the suspects are linked to Iran and what the suspects may have been planning.

According to the BBC, police received two early-morning calls on Sunday regarding suspicious vehicles near the base, the first of which the media understands was made by one of the suspects themselves.

The Times of London reported that police are looking into the suspect’s motives for making such a call, including “whether he got cold feet or whether it was part of the plan”.

Authorities are also probing whether the incident was a form of “surveillance, a ‘dry run’ to test security or a stunt to send a message to the British government”, reported The Times.

Meanwhile, police have suggested they are looking into whether the suspects could have been unwittingly acting on Iran’s behalf.

In an updated briefing on Tuesday, Taylor said officials were examining whether the activity could have been “committed by proxies, or individuals either knowingly or unknowingly, working on behalf of a foreign state”.

He also spoke more generally about the “increasing breadth and complexity” of threats facing the UK, saying threats often emerge first as small-scale criminal activity, “committed by individuals whose primary aim is not terrorism but a quick financial gain”.

Phillips told Al Jazeera he believes the suspects could have been recruited online to carry out some type of malicious activity that falls short of a “terrorist attack”.

“It sounds as though these people have been paid online to do some naughty work”, such as “setting fire to something”, said Phillips.

He said both Russia and Iran have allegedly paid “stooges” to carry out such acts in recent years. “At first glance now, it seems that that may be the case, but time will tell,” Phillips added.

Royal Holloway’s Silke also said he believes the evidence suggests “a proxy explanation”.

“Certainly, there have been recent cases in Europe where individuals have been used unwittingly as proxies by foreign governments to carry out activities which have a hostile intent,” he said. “The UK authorities in this case may have assessed that something similar had happened here, and that the individuals involved had no inherent terrorist motivation themselves, but had been caught up unintentionally in a larger plot.”

Has Iran previously been accused of plots in the UK?

Yes. MI5 Director General Ken McCallum said in October 2025 that the agency had tracked “more than 20 potentially lethal Iran-backed plots” in the UK within a year.

McCallum alleged that Iran, along with Russia, has resorted to “ugly methods,” such as “surveillance, sabotage, arson or physical violence”.

British Security Minister Dan Jarvis has said Iran often uses criminal proxies to “obfuscate” its involvement in attacks, which have targeted Iranian dissidents and Jewish and Israeli people in the country.

In March this year, British police arrested four people on suspicion of helping Iran spy on the local Jewish community. The month after, police said they were probing possible Iran links to a series of arson attacks on Jewish targets ‌in London.

In June, two Romanian men whom British prosecutors said had acted as proxies for Iran’s government were handed lengthy jail terms for stabbing a British journalist of Iranian origin who wrote for an Iranian media outlet critical of Iran’s government.

Iran’s government has repeatedly denied involvement in any illegal plots or attacks on British.

ANDY Burnham is set to nationalise Avanti West Coast next year as Labour pledges to start “delivering for passengers”.

The Government will take control of the private operator from March 7 as the PM said passengers had been failed “time and time again”.

An extra £10million is set to be invested in power and signalling maintenance in addition to £840million earmarked for infrastructure on the West Coast Main Line, reports ITV.

The government hopes timetable changes will also improve services for passengers as well as boosted WiFi connectivity.

It was also announced that Euston station in London will receive a £50million upgrade.

Transport Secretary, Heidi Alexander said: “For years, we’ve heard stories of Avanti underperforming, with passengers left paying the price. Enough is enough.

SAY HOLA

Spain’s last ‘secret’ island just off the mainland & it’s 28C next week

CAN I HAVE MAUR?

The African island with UK flights, hot winters & breakfast mango picking

“That is why we will bring Avanti into public ownership at the earliest opportunity, in March next year.

“This Labour Government is committed to putting essential services back in public hands, connecting people to opportunity and delivering growth in every postcode and this move reflects that commitment.

“We will also introduce a comprehensive improvement plan, focused on delivering for passengers, not shareholders.”

Avanti West Coast’s contract is due to come to an end on March 7, 2027.

That will leave East Midlands Railway and Cross Country as the only train operators yet to be nationalised.

Prime Minister Andy Burnham blasted Avanti, saying they had failed passengers “time and time again”.

In a post on X he said: “We’re putting essential services back in public hands and building a railway that actually works for the people who use it.”

It comes as Avanti West Coast recorded the highest number of cancellations in the UK this summer, according to analysis by The Times.

That is double the national average as they made 1.4million delay repay claims in the year to March – around a million more than in 2019, according to the outlet.

Andy Mellors, managing director at Avanti West Coast, said: “We’re proud of what we’ve achieved over the last six years – from refurbishing our Pendolino fleet and introducing our new Evero trains to running more services than ever before.

“Together, these improvements have given customers greater choice, more capacity and better connectivity, while we’ve continued to innovate to shape the future of the West Coast and wider rail industry.

“Over the coming months, we’ll work closely with the government to ensure a seamless transition into public ownership while remaining focused on delivering for our customers and communities.”

The Sun reported earlier this month how Avanti had cut back hundreds of its journeys in the run-up to Christmas.

A reduced timetable will also continue between Christmas and the new year due to engineering works, with the scheduled change aiming to “save taxpayers money“.