costs

Connor Cipolla, an Eaton wildfire survivor, last year praised Southern California Edison’s plan of burying more than 60 miles of electric lines in Altadena as it rebuilds to reduce the risk of fire.

Then he learned he would have to pay $20,000 to $40,000 to connect his home, which was damaged by smoke and ash, to Edison’s new underground line. A nearby neighbor received an estimate for $30,000, he said.

“Residents are so angry,” Cipolla said. “We were completely blindsided.”

Other residents have tracked the wooden stakes Edison workers put up, showing where crews will dig. They’ve found dozens of places where deep trenches are planned under oak and pine trees that survived the fire. In addition to the added costs they face, they fear many trees will die as crews cut their roots.

“The damage is being done now and it’s irreversible,” homeowner Robert Steller said, pointing Maiden Lane to where an Edison crew was working.

For a week, Steller, who lost his home in the fire, parked his Toyota 4Runner over a recently dug trench. He said he was trying to block Edison’s crew from burying a large transformer between two towering deodar cedar trees. The work would “be downright fatal” to the decades-old trees, he said.

Altadena resident Robert Steller stands in front of his Toyota 4Runner that he parked strategically to prevent a Southern California Edison crew from digging too close to two towering cedar trees.

(Ronaldo Bolaños / Los Angeles Times)

The buried lines are an upgrade that will make Altadena’s electrical grid safer and more reliable, Edison says, and it also will lower the risk that the company would have to black out Altadena neighborhoods during dangerous Santa Ana winds to prevent fires.

Brandon Tolentino, an Edison vice president, said the company was trying to find government or charity funding to help homeowners pay to connect to the buried lines. In the meantime, he said, Edison decided to allow owners of homes that survived the fire to keep their overhead connections until financial help was available.

Tolentino added that the company planned meetings to listen to residents’ concerns, including about the trees. He said crews were trained to stop work when they find tree roots and switch from using a backhoe to digging by hand to protect them.

“We’re minimizing the impact on the trees as we [put lines] underground or do any work in Altadena,” he said.

Although placing cables underground is a fire prevention measure, consumer advocates point out it’s not the most cost-effective step Edison can take to reduce the risk.

Undergrounding electric wires can cost more than $6 million per mile, according to the state Public Utilities Commission, far more than building overhead wires.

Because utility shareholders put up part of the money needed to pay for burying the lines, the expensive work means they will earn more profit. Last year, the commission agreed Edison investors could earn an annual return of 10.03% on that money.

Edison said in April it would spend as much as $925 million to underground and rebuild its grid in Altadena and Malibu, where the Palisades fire caused devastation. That amount of construction spending will earn Edison and its shareholders more than $70 million in profit before taxes — an amount billed to electric customers — in the first year, according to calculations by Mark Ellis, the former chief economist for Sempra, the parent company of Southern California Gas and San Diego Gas & Electric.

That annual return will continue over the decades while slowly decreasing each year as the assets are depreciated, Ellis said.

“They’re making a nice profit on this,” he said.

Tolentino said the company wasn’t doing the work to profit.

“The primary reason for undergrounding is the wildfire mitigation,” he said. “Our focus is supporting the community as they rebuild.”

It’s unclear if the Eaton fire would have been less disastrous if Altadena’s neighborhood power lines had been buried. The blaze ignited under Edison’s towering transmission lines that run down the mountainside in Eaton Canyon. Those lines carry bulk power through Edison’s territory. The power lines being put underground are the smaller distribution lines, which carry power to homes.

A power line outside the home of Altadena resident Connor Cipolla.

(Ronaldo Bolanos/Los Angeles Times)

The investigation into the fire’s cause has not yet been released. Edison says a leading theory is that one of the Eaton Canyon transmission lines, which hadn’t carried power for 50 years, might have briefly reenergized, sparking the blaze. The fire killed 19 people and destroyed more than 9,000 homes, businesses and other structures.

Edison said it has no plans to bury those transmission lines.

The high cost of undergrounding has become a contentious issue in Sacramento because, under state rules, most or all of it is billed to all customers of the utility.

Before the Eaton fire, Edison won praise from consumer advocates by installing insulated overhead wires that sharply cut the risk of the lines sparking a fire for a fraction of the cost. Since 2019, the company has installed more than 6,800 miles of the insulated wires.

“A dollar spent reconductoring with covered conductor provides … over four times as much value in wildfire risk mitigation as a dollar spent on underground conversion,” Edison said in testimony before the utilities commission in 2018.

By comparison, Pacific Gas & Electric has relied more on undergrounding its lines to reduce the risk of fire, pushing up customer utility bills. Now Edison has shifted to follow PG&E’s example.

Mark Toney, executive director of the the Utility Reform Network, a consumer group in San Francisco, said his staff estimates Edison spends $4 million per mile to underground wires compared with $800,000 per mile for installing insulated lines.

By burying more lines, customer bills and Edison’s profits could soar, Toney said.

“Five times the cost is equal to five times the profit,” he said.

Last spring, Pedro Pizarro, chief executive of Edison International, told Gov. Gavin Newsom about the company’s undergrounding plans in a letter. Pizarro wrote that rules at the utility commission would require Altadena and Malibu homeowners to pay to underground the electric wire from their property line to the panel on their house. He estimated it would cost $8,000 to $10,000 for each home.

Residents who need to dig long trenches may pay far more than that, said Cipolla, who is a member of the Altadena Town Council.

An oak tree stands tall in an area impacted by the Eaton fires. Homeowners worry such trees could be at risk in the undergrounding work.

(Ronaldo Bolanos/Los Angeles Times)

Last week, Cipolla showed a reporter the electrical panel on the back of his house, which is many yards away from where he needs to connect to Edison’s line. The company also initially wanted him to dig up the driveway he poured seven years ago, he said. Edison later agreed to a location that avoids the driveway.

Tolentino said Edison’s crews were working with homeowners concerned about the company’s planned locations for the buried lines.

“We understand it is a big cost and we’re looking at different sources to help them,” he said.

At the same time, some residents are fuming that, despite the undergrounding work, most of the town’s neighborhoods still will have overhead telecommunications lines. In other areas of the state, the telecommunications companies have worked with the electric utilities to bury all the lines, eliminating the visual clutter.

So far, the telecom companies have agreed to underground only a fraction of their lines in Altadena, Tolentino said.

Cipolla said Edison executives told him they eventually plan to chop off the top of new utility poles the company installed after the fire, leaving the lower portion that holds the telecom lines.

“There is no beautification aspect to it whatsoever,” Cipolla said.

As for the trees, Steller and other residents are asking Edison to adjust its construction map to avoid digging near those that remain after the fire. Altadena lost more than half of its tree cover in the blaze and as crews cleared lots of debris.

1

2

3

1. A pedestrian walks past Christmas Tree lane in Altadena. Christmas Tree Lane was officially listed in the National Register of Historic Places in 1990. 2. A “We Love Altadena” sign hangs from a shrub on Christmas Tree Lane. 3. Parts of a chopped down tree rest on a street curb in Altadena.

Wynne Wilson, a fire survivor and co-founder of Altadena Green, pointed out that the lot across the street from the giant cedar trees on Maiden Lane has no vegetation, making it a better place for Edison’s transformer.

“This is needless,” Wilson said. “People are dealing with so much. Is Edison thinking we won’t fight over this?”

Carolyn Hove, raising her voice to be heard over the crew operating a jackhammer in front of her home, asked: “How much more are we supposed to go through?”

Hove said she doesn’t blame the crews of subcontractors the utility hired, but Edison’s management.

“It’s bad enough our community was decimated by a fire Edison started,” she said. “We’re still very traumatized, and then to have this happen.”

Mumbai, India — For Indian cricket fans travelling to Sri Lanka this weekend, the opportunity to watch their team take on archrivals Pakistan in the T20 World Cup has come at the cost of inflated airfares, soaring hotel prices and a long wait for matchday tickets.

But these are mere sacrifices that thousands are willing to make to witness the most heated rivalry in the sport as it unfolds on Sunday at the R Premadasa Stadium in Colombo.

Fuelled by a decades-long fraught political relationship, cricket encounters between India and Pakistan are among the biggest spectacles in sport — often framed as bloodthirsty contests of national pride.

For the first time in the history of the World Cup, geopolitical tensions threatened to put the marquee contest in doubt until Pakistan’s government reversed its order for a boycott of the match.

While the near-last-minute U-turn revived excitement, it came at a price for the Indian supporters making late travel plans. Pakistan’s participation was confirmed only six days before the fixture, triggering a sharp surge in airfares from several Indian cities.

Fans who booked their air tickets weeks in advance, too, paid significantly higher fares due to the significantly higher demand surrounding any India-Pakistan match, which is commonly deemed the most lucrative fixture in cricket.

“I paid a premium of approximately 50 percent compared to the usual rates,” Aditya Chheda, a finance professional from Mumbai, told Al Jazeera. “This was despite booking a month in advance and opting for a layover instead of a direct flight.”

Flight, hotel prices skyrocket

A nonstop round-trip journey from India’s western metropolis Mumbai to Colombo, which typically costs approximately $275, went upwards of $1,000 two days before the match.

Similar fares were spotted for nonstop journeys from Bengaluru in southern India, while round-trip nonstop flights from Chennai to Colombo – a route that takes only about an hour and 20 minutes – had surged to at least $550, up from its usual fare of $165.

Planning ahead helped Bengaluru resident Parth Chauhan secure deals at a good price, but his friends accompanying him to Colombo had to pay a steep premium – three times the usual cost – after booking closer to the match date.

Accommodation costs rose sharply as well. Tariffs at five-star hotels in Colombo ranged between $400 and $1,000 per night from Saturday to Monday, when most spectators were expected to fly in and out.

Chauhan, who works in a cybersecurity organisation, had to wait a whopping four hours in a virtual queue to buy match tickets, but he insists the hassle was worth the wait, as he gears up to watch India play abroad for the first time.

“It’s an opportune moment, and there is a lot of exuberance to witness this because it’s a historic fixture,” he said.

For a lucky few, the surprise came not from the difficulty of securing tickets but from their unusually low price. Piyush Nathani, an IT professional from Bengaluru, paid only $5 for the fixture, which draws millions in broadcast, sponsor and advertising revenue.

“This is the cheapest ticket I’ve ever purchased. Just $5 to watch a World Cup match, that too of the magnitude of India vs Pakistan, is a steal,” said Nathani, who has travelled with a group of six friends.

‘More than a cricket match’

Having been part of the Ahmedabad crowd in 2023 that saw India beat Pakistan in a 50-over World Cup group game, Nathani is relishing the chance to watch Sunday’s match in a neutral venue, where fans from both countries are expected to be present.

“The feeling of beating Pakistan is something money cannot buy,” added the 29-year-old.

Like Nathani, Chheda has also travelled abroad previously to watch Team India. The 32-year-old watched India lift the 2024 T20 World Cup in Barbados and now wants to “pick up where I left off”.

“When there’s a World Cup, the first thing Indian fans hope for is to beat Pakistan,” he added.

“Winning the World Cup is the biggest target, but beating Pakistan feels like a moral victory – it’s more than a cricket match.”

The Trump administration has unveiled a sweeping set of regulatory proposals that would substantially change health plan offerings on the Affordable Care Act marketplace next year, aiming, it says, to provide more choice and lower premiums.

But it also proposes sharply raising some annual out-of-pocket costs — to more than $27,600 for one type of coverage — and could cause up to 2 million people to drop insurance.

The changes come as affordability is a key concern for many Americans, some of whom are struggling to pay their ACA premiums since the Republican-led Congress allowed enhanced subsidies expired at the end of last year. Initial enrollment numbers for this year fell by more than 1 million.

Healthcare coverage and affordability have become politically potent issues in the run-up to November’s midterm elections.

The proposed changes are part of a 577-page rule that addresses a broad swath of standards, including benefit packages, out-of-pocket costs and healthcare provider networks. Insurers refer to these standards when setting premium rates for the coming year.

After a comment period, the rule will be finalized this spring.

It “puts patients, taxpayers, and states first by lowering costs and reinforcing accountability for taxpayer dollars,” Mehmet Oz, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services administrator, said in a news release Monday.

One way it would do so focuses heavily on a type of coverage — catastrophic plans — that last year attracted about only 20,000 policyholders, according to the proposal, although other estimates put it closer to 54,000.

“This proposal reads like the administration has found their next big thing in the catastrophic plans,” said Katie Keith, director of the Health Policy and the Law Initiative at the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law at Georgetown University Law Center.

Such plans have very high annual out-of-pocket costs for the policyholder but often lower premiums than other ACA coverage options. Formerly restricted to those under age 30 or facing certain hardships, the Trump administration allowed older people who lost subsidy eligibility to enroll in them this year. It is not known how many people did so.

The payment rule cements this move by making anyone eligible if their income is below the poverty line ($15,650 for 2026) or if they’re earning more than 2½ times that amount but lost access to an ACA subsidy that lowered their out-of-pocket costs. It also notes that a person meeting these standards would be eligible in any state — an important point because this coverage is now available in only 36 states and the District of Columbia.

In addition, the proposal would require out-of-pocket maximums on such plans to hit $15,600 a year for an individual and $27,600 for a family, Keith wrote this week in Health Affairs. (The current out-of-pocket max for catastrophic plans is $10,600 for an individual plan and $21,200 for family coverage.) Not counting preventive care and three covered primary care doctor visits, that spending target must be met before a policy’s other coverage kicks in.

In the rule, the administration wrote that the proposed changes would help differentiate catastrophic from “bronze” plans, the next level up, and, possibly, spur more enrollment in the former. Currently, the proposal said, there may not be a significant difference if premiums are similar. Raising the out-of-pocket maximum for catastrophic plans to those levels would create that difference, the proposal said.

“When there is such a clear difference, the healthier consumers that are generally eligible and best suited to enroll in catastrophic plans are more motivated to select a catastrophic plan in lieu of a bronze plan,” the proposal noted.

However, ACA subsidies cannot be used toward catastrophic premiums, which could limit shoppers’ interest.

Enrollment in bronze plans, which have an average annual deductible of $7,500, has doubled since 2018 to about 5.4 million last year. This year, that number likely will be higher. Some states’ sign-up data indicate a shift toward bronze as consumers left higher-premium “silver,” “gold” or “platinum” plans following the expiration of more generous subsidies at the end of last year.

The proposal also would allow insurers to offer bronze plans with cost-sharing rates that exceed what the ACA law currently allows, but only if that insurer also sells other bronze plans with lower cost-sharing levels.

In what it calls a “novel” approach, the proposal would allow insurers to offer multiyear catastrophic plans, in which people could stay enrolled for up to 10 years, and their out-of-pocket maximums would vary over that time. Costs might be higher, for example, in the early years, then fall the longer the policy is in place. The proposal specifically asks for comments on how such a plan could be structured and what effect multiyear plans might have on the overall market.

“As we understand it thus far, insurers could offer the policy for one year or for consecutive years, up to 10 years,” said Zach Sherman, managing director for coverage policy and program design at Health Management Associates, a health policy consulting firm that does work for states and insurance plans. “But the details on how that would work, we are still unpacking.”

Matthew Fiedler, senior fellow with the Center on Health Policy at the Brookings Institution, said the proposed rule included a lot of provisions that could “expose enrollees to much higher out-of-pocket costs.”

In addition to the planned changes to bronze and catastrophic plans, he points to another provision that would allow plans to be sold on the ACA exchange that have no set healthcare provider networks. In other words, the insurer has not contracted with specific doctors and hospitals to accept their coverage. Instead, such plans would pay medical providers a set amount toward medical services, possibly a flat fee or a percentage of what Medicare pays, for example.

The rule says insurers would need to ensure “access to a range of providers” willing to accept such amounts as payment in full. Policyholders might be on the hook for unexpected expenses, however, if a clinician or facility doesn’t agree and charges the patient the difference.

Because the rule is so sweeping — with many other parts — it is expected to draw hundreds if not thousands of comments between now and early March.

Pennsylvania insurance broker Joshua Brooker said one change he would like to see is requiring insurers that sell the very high out-of-pocket catastrophic plans to offer other catastrophic plans with lower annual maximums.

Overall, though, a wider range of options might appeal to people on both ends of the income scale, he said.

Some wealthier enrollees, especially those who no longer qualify for any ACA premium subsidies, would prefer a lower premium like those expected in catastrophic plans, and could just pay the bills up to that max, he said.

“They’re more worried about the half-million-dollar heart attack,” Brooker said. It’s tougher for people below the poverty level, who don’t qualify for ACA subsidies and, in 10 states, often don’t qualify for Medicaid. So they’re likely to go uninsured. At least a catastrophic plan, he said, might let them get some preventive care coverage and cap their exposure if they end up in a hospital. From there, they might qualify for charity care at the hospital to cover out-of-pocket costs.

Overall, “putting more options on the market doesn’t hurt, as long as it is disclosed properly and the consumer understands it,” he said.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.

The United States has hosted its first critical minerals summit aimed at challenging China’s dominance of the global supply chain for rare earth elements. But political economist Stefan Zylinski warns that Global South countries are likely to bear the greatest cost from any plan conceived by the Global North.

FANCY a mini-break but don’t want to spend too much money? Well, how about a short cruise to Europe for the same price as a meal at Pizza Express for a family of four.

Travellers can head off on a two-night cruise between Hull and the Netherlands.

The P&O Ferries mini cruise allows you to travel overnight, usually leaving Hull at around 8:30pm and arriving in the Netherlands around 8:45am.

You can opt between heading to Rotterdam or Amsterdam on a return sailing from Hull to Europoort, with two nights in an en suite cabin, return coach transfers into the city centres and the live entertainment on board.

In between you will also get to explore either Rotterdam or Amsterdam – all for just £65 per person.

For example, one £65pp sailing heads off on March 3 and returns on March 5.

Read more on travel inspo

ALL IN

I found the best value all inclusive London hotel… just £55pp with free food & booze

HOL YEAH!

I’ve been to Disney 50 times but one £30-a-night UK seaside town is just as good

Included in the price you pay is a two-bunk cabin with an en suite shower room with a WC.

Towels and bed linen are included too.

There are of course add-ons, if you wish to include them – such as the kitchen dinner for £25 per person, which is a buffet of international dishes.

If you fancy breakfast on board, that will set you back £13.50 each too.

Or you could get a package for both dinner and breakfast for £35.95 per person.

Though it is worth baring in mind, these prices are all per way.

Coach transfers from the port to either Rotterdam or Amsterdam are listed as £12 per person, per way – though they are included in the £65 per person price.

The cities of Amsterdam and Rotterdam in the Netherlands are both great to explore for a day.

In Rotterdam, you can head to one of the maritime museums to learn about its history as a port city.

Then, you could swing by the Cube Houses, known for their unusual architecture.

Opposite the Cube Houses you will find Markthal, which is a large market hall home to around 96 food stalls.

Alternatively, if you choose to head to Amsterdam you can explore the intricate network of canals that sprawl across the city.

One of the most popular tourist spots in the city is the Anne Frank House, which is a museum inside the actual house where Anne Frank hid during World War II.

To explore the canals further, you can also hop on a canal tour via boat.

If you fancy an even more memorable sailing you can head on a Mini Cruise Live.

These cruises have different entertainment onboard, often including celebrities.

For example, you could head on a Noughties Takeover cruise from February 27 to March 1.

On board, the entertainment includes JLS star Marvin Humes and Blazin’ Squad star and former Love Islander, Marcel Somerville.

This sailing costs from £139 per person.

With the family? Then head on the Family Cruise from April 8 to 10, with K-Pop Live and Cirque: The Greatest Show – a circus-musical experience with songs from The Greatest Showman, La La Land, Rocketman and Moulin Rouge.

There will also be face painters on board, and tickets to this sailing also cost from £139 per person.

Fancy something a little different? Head on the Murder Mystery Mini Cruise from March 4 to 6.

On board, passengers will get to enjoy two murder mystery experiences with Cheeky Blinders on night one and 1925-based mystery The Maiden Voyage on night two.

This sailing costs from £99 per person.

In other cruise news, the ‘affordable luxury’ Nordic cruise where temperatures hit 28C.

Plus, our pick of the eight best cruises for both hot and cold weather – from Caribbean sailings to Icelandic glacier tours.

BRITAIN’S first-ever Michelin breakfast tasting menu has just arrived – but how does it really compare to a cheap fry up?

The five-course meal is found at the Four Seasons Hotel’s Pavyllon restaurant on London’s swanky Park Lane, setting you back a whopping £70 for the ‘basic’ option.

On the menu are lobster dishes and decadent French toast – for an extra slice of luxury, you can even add a side of caviar at an extra fiver A GRAM. 

Bizarrely there’s not even a whiff of a Full English listed on the extravagant menu, and a morning cuppa will add even more to the extortionate price.

And if you go for the £20 juice pairings and add 15 per cent service charge, the bill tops £100 a head.

But is it worth it? I decided to give the fine dining option a go and compare it to my favourite fry-up at the Regency Café just over a mile away in Pimlico – which is a tenth of the price.

B-EAT IT

Destinations where you should skip hotel breakfast – plus where to find best ones

BEEFED UP

Best hotel breakfast buffet in the world has ‘unlimited steak & beer’ for £12

Pavyllon’s £100 breakfast

The tasting menu, only available at weekends, kicks off with a sweet pastry. 

From the tray of delightful-looking tarts our friendly waiter brought over I picked out the ‘special’ – a light, crisp and buttery pastry filled with gooey pistachio cream and glazed with clementine marmalade. 

As I’d added in the drinks pairing I washed it down with a tiny cold moka, a chocolate-infused coffee topped with Chantilly cream. 

Up next was a lobster croast – a Pavyllon invention where the topping sits on a toasted croissant. 

As tasting menu diners are seated at a counter around the open-plan kitchen I could watch senior sous chef Nicholas Bussi prepare it, delicately dolloping spoonfuls of lobster mayo onto the croissant followed by rocket leaves and heaps of freshly grated parmesan.

It tasted out of this world, while the pineapple and cherry juice pairing added a sharp hit.

Then came a chia seed pudding soaked overnight in coconut milk and served with sticky mango and pineapple pieces. 

A sprinkling of salt added a twist, although the celery and apple juice pairing failed to excite. 

Next, eschewing the egg muffin which came with the optional caviar – the Benedict version had the menu’s only bacon – I chose instead the chef’s weekly special.

The beautiful wafer-thin omelette filled with prawns and cod roe in a lobster bisque was the stuff of dreams and came paired with a beetroot flavoured alcoholic-free kir royale.

Somehow I managed to squeeze in an indulgent French toast, made with brioche-style bread and caramelised hazelnut and tasting like your gran’s best-ever bread and butter pudding. 

A couple of cappuccinos added a further £16 to the bill so with the 15 per cent service charge, my bill ended up coming out to a staggering £121.90.

The Regency Café’s £10 breakfast

This well-known greasy spoon is decidedly down-to-earth, with formica tables, traditional half-mast checked café curtains and black and white photographs.

The 80-year-old caff may seem familiar – it’s appeared in films and TV shows like Layer Cake and Judge John Deed. 

If you go on a Saturday (it’s closed on Sundays) you’ll likely have to queue to get served at the counter. 

But when I visited on a wet Wednesday I could order immediately and opted for the popular set breakfast – two bacon rashers, a sausage, a fried egg, tomatoes or beans plus bread or toast and a mug of tea or instant coffee. 

Priced at a very reasonable £9.99 you can also add extras like bubble and squeak for £1.75 or chips for £3.50.

I managed to find myself a table, and tucked in. My bacon was done to perfection – thick cut and browned to a crisp yet chewy in the middle. 

The chunky banger was beautifully seared while the tomatoes were lightly singed on top yet juicy inside. 

My egg was slightly overdone – no oozing yolk – and if I was being picky I’d have liked more butter to smear on my white sliced toast. 

The tea however was tasty and piping hot.(Just don’t ask for anything fancy like a cappuccino – I’d asked for decaf tea and was told sternly, “Eh? We have tea.”). 

None of the meal was greasy and afterwards I was comfortably full without that sickly-stuffed feeling. 

Verdict

When it comes to the Pavyllon breakfast taster menu, the variety and the surprise element kept adding exciting twists.

I’m still dreaming of that lobster croast which I would happily have by itself without the rest of the menu.

And with the experience lasting a leisurely two hours, I didn’t need to eat again for most of the day.

But I’ve got to agree with social media reviews – The Regency Cafe is surely London’s best fry-up.

While the eggs were the slightly let down, I was seriously impressed with how well cooked the bacon and sausages were.

And at £10 it’s fantastic value for money – so with the alternative being a £120 pricetag? I’ll stick with the greasy spoon, thanks. 

Plans for the city of Neom, once envisioned as the future of Saudi Arabia, have reportedly been dealt another blow, with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, ordering a reevaluation of the project

Ambitious, controversial, and startlingly futuristic in its design, the city of Neom was intended to drastically change the future of Saudi Arabia, helping the country diversify beyond its oil-dependent economy.

Now, plans for the uniquely striking metropolis have been scaled back considerably, with spiralling costs and mounting delays meaning the extortionate project may well now be “far smaller” in scale. Launched by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, with an eyewatering budget of £365bn, the £6.8tn mega-city was initially given a deadline of 2030, with the most striking feature set to be The Line.

In a design straight out of a sci-fi film, The Line was intended to be a row of mirror-clad skyscrapers, stretching 125 miles across the desert, and connected by leafy walkways. Reaching a half-kilometre into the sky, these bold structures were intended to accommodate some nine million residents, meeting the needs of a country whose booming population of 35 million is now outgrowing existing cities.

READ MORE: Huge £6.8tn mega-city spanning 125 miles of desert faces massive issue

Built on just 34 square kilometres, these properties were designed with “a reduced infrastructure footprint” in mind, “creating never-before-seen efficiencies in city functions”. According to the Neom website, “The ideal climate all year round will ensure that residents can enjoy the surrounding nature. Residents will also have access to all daily essentials within a five-minute walk, in addition to high-speed rail, with an end-to-end transit of 20 minutes.”

Unfortunately for Saudi Arabia, which has already poured billions into this project, the practical realities of such an endeavour have hampered the original vision, and it’s believed construction could now be significantly cut back.

As reported by The Times, the Crown Prince has grown increasingly frustrated about delays to his grand plan for diversifying the nation’s economy over the course of the next decade, and has already postponed or scrapped various other projects.

Now, the de facto ruler has ordered a reevaluation of Neom, which he has previously hailed as a way to “tackle the challenges facing humanity in urban life today” and to “shine a light on alternative ways to live”. It’s thought likely this lofty mission will now change tack somewhat, focusing on smaller-scale goals such as artificial intelligence data centres.

One source familiar with the ongoing matter told the publication that this review is still in progress, and that it is not currently clear whether or not The Line would continue on as a more modest, manageable project.

Neom was initially envisioned as including a 6,500 square kilometre nature reserve, alongside the mountainous retreat Trojena, anticipated to feature Saudi Arabia’s debut outdoor ski slopes, freezing winter conditions and a “moderate year-round climate”.

However, while Trojena had originally been scheduled to welcome the 2029 Asian Winter Games, officials have acknowledged it won’t be completed on time. Indeed, at the time of writing, the only part of the project to open so far is the Red Sea yachting resort of Sindalah, widely regarded as a costly failure, which ultimately led to the firing of Neom’s chief executive.

The extravagant launch party, which saw 40 private yachts docked at the resort, while guests were treated to performances from Will Smith and Alicia Keys. Crown Prince Mohammed reportedly wasn’t pleased by the outcome, however, and had questions about the steep price tag.

The Mirror has reached out to Neom for comment.

Do you have a story to share? Email me at julia.banim@reachplc.com

READ MORE: ‘I haven’t used the sink’ since getting no-plumbing dishwasher now £50 off

WASHINGTON — Donald Trump’s promises on affordability in 2024 helped propel him to a second term in the White House.

Since then, Trump says, the problem has been solved: He now calls affordability a hoax perpetrated by Democrats. Yet the high cost of living, especially housing, continues to weigh heavily on voters, and has dragged down the president’s approval ratings.

In a poll conducted this month by the New York Times and Siena University, 58% of respondents said they disapprove of the way the president is handling the economy.

How the economy fares in the coming months will play an outsize role in determining whether the Democrats can build on their electoral success in 2025 and seize control of one or both chambers of Congress.

With housing costs so central to voters’ perceptions about the economy, both parties have put forward proposals in recent weeks targeting affordability. Here is a closer look at their competing plans for expanding housing and reining in costs:

How bad is the affordability crisis?

Nationwide, wages have barely crept up over the last decade — rising by 21.24% between 2014 and 2024, according to the Federal Reserve. Over the same period, rent and home sale prices more than doubled, and healthcare and grocery costs rose 71.5% and 37.35%, respectively, according to the Fed.

National home price-to-income ratios are at an all-time high, and coastal states like California and Hawaii are the most extreme examples.

Housing costs in California are about twice the national average, according to the state Legislative Analyst‘s Office, which said prices have increased at “historically rapid rates” in recent years. The median California home sold for $877,285 in 2024, according to the California Assn. of Realtors, compared with about $420,000 nationwide, per Federal Reserve economic data.

California needs to add 180,000 housing units annually to keep up with demand, according to the state Department of Housing. So far, California has fallen short of those goals and has just begun to see success in reducing its homeless population, which sat at 116,000 unsheltered people in 2025.

What do the polls say?

More than two-thirds of Americans surveyed in a Gallup poll last month said they felt the economy was getting worse, and 36% expressed approval for the president — the lowest total since his second term began.

The poll found that 47% of U.S. adults now describe current economic conditions as “poor,” up from 40% just a month prior and the highest since Trump took office. Just 21% said economic conditions were either “excellent” or “good,” while 31% described them as “only fair.”

An Associated Press poll found that only 16% of Republicans think Trump has helped “a lot” in fixing cost of living problems.

What have the Democrats proposed?

The party is pushing measures to expand the supply of housing, and cut down on what they call “restrictive” single-family zoning in favor of denser development.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Democrats plan to “supercharge” construction through bills like California Sen. Adam Schiff’s Housing BOOM Act, which he introduced in December.

Schiff said the bill would lower prices by stimulating the development of “millions of affordable homes.” The proposal would expand low-income housing tax credits, set aside funds for rental assistance and homelessness, and provide $10 billion in housing subsidies for “middle-income” workers such as teachers, police officers and firefighters.

The measure has not been heard in committee, and faces long odds in the Republican-controlled body, though Schiff said inaction on the proposal could be used against opponents.

And the Republicans?

A group of 190 House Republicans this month unveiled a successor proposal to the “Big Beautiful Bill,” the sprawling tax and spending plan approved and signed into law by Trump in July.

The Republican Study Committee described the proposal as an affordability package aimed at lowering down payments, enacting mortgage reforms and creating more tax breaks.

Leaders of the group said it would reduce the budget deficit by $1 trillion and could pass with a simple majority.

“This blueprint … locks in President Trump’s deregulatory agenda through the only process Democrats can’t block: reconciliation,” said Rep. August Pfluger (R-Tex.), who chairs the group. “We have 11 months of guaranteed majorities. We’re not wasting a single day.”

Though the proposal has not yet been introduced as legislation, Republicans said it would include a mechanism to revoke funding from blue states over rent control and immigration policy, which they calculated would save $48 billion.

President Trump has endorsed a $200-billion mortgage bond stimulus, which he said would drive down mortgage rates and monthly payments. And the White House, which oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — the two enterprises that back most U.S. mortgages — continues to push the idea of portable and assumable mortgages.

Trump said the move would allow buyers to keep their existing mortgage rate or enable new homeowners to assume a previous owner’s mortgage.

The Department of Justice, meanwhile, has launched a criminal investigation into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell over the Fed’s renovation costs, as Trump bashed him over “his never ending quest to keep interest rates high.”

The president also vowed to revoke federal funding to states over a wealth of issues such as childcare and immigration policy.

“This is not about any particular policy that they think is harmful,” Rep. Laura Friedman (D-Burbank) said. “This is about Trump’s always trying to find a way to punish blue states.”

Is there any alignment?

The two parties are cooperating on companion measures in the House and Senate.

The bipartisan ROAD to Housing Act seeks to expand housing supply by easing regulatory barriers. It passed the Senate unanimously and has support from the White House, but House Republicans have balked, and it has yet to receive a floor vote.

A bipartisan proposal — the Housing in the 21st Century Act — was approved by the House Financial Services Committee by a 50-1 vote in December. It also has yet to receive a floor vote.

The bill is similar to its twin in the Senate, with Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.) working across the aisle with Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles). If approved, it would cut permitting times, support manufactured-housing development and expand financing tools for low-income housing developers.

There was also a recent moment of unusual alignment between the president and California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who both promised to crack down on corporate home buying.

What do the experts say?

Housing experts recoiled at GOP proposals to bar housing dollars from sanctuary jurisdictions and cities that impose rent control.

“Any conditioning on HUD funding that sets up rules that explicitly carve out blue cities is going to be really catastrophic for California’s larger urban areas,” said David Garcia, deputy director of policy at UC Berkeley’s Terner Center for Housing Innovation.

More than 35 cities in California have rent control policies, according to the California Apartment Assn. The state passed its own rent stabilization law in 2019, and lawmakers approved a California sanctuary law in 2017 that prohibits state resources from aiding federal immigration enforcement.

The agenda comes on the heels of a series of HUD spending cuts, including a 30% cap on permanent housing investments and the end of a federal emergency housing voucher program that local homelessness officials estimate would put 14,500 people on the streets.

In Los Angeles County, HUD dollars make up about 28% of homelessness funding.

“It would undermine a lot of the bipartisan efforts that are happening in the House and the Senate to move evidence-backed policy to increase housing supply and stabilize rents and home prices,” Garcia said.

The president’s mortgage directives also prompted skepticism from some experts.

“Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were pressed to get into the riskier parts of the mortgage market back in the housing bubble and that was a part of the problem,” said Eric McGhee, a researcher at the Public Policy Institute of California.

Carney has been under pressure from the opposition to lower prices of food and other essentials for lower-income people.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has announced a multibillion-dollar package as part of a series of measures aimed at lowering the costs of food and other essentials for low-income families.

On Monday, Carney announced a five-year 25 percent boost to the Goods and Services Tax (GST) credit that starts this year.

The GST credit, which is being renamed the Canada Groceries and Essentials Benefit, will provide additional, significant support for more than 12 million Canadians, Carney said in a statement.

The government will also provide a one-time top-up equivalent to a 50 percent increase this year to eligible residents.

“We’re bringing in new measures to lower costs and make sure Canadians have the support they need now,” Carney said.

The measures would cost the government 3.1 billion Canadian dollars ($2.26bn) in the first year and between 1.3 billion Canadian dollars ($950m) and 1.8 billion Canadian dollars ($1.3bn) in each of the following four years, he told reporters at a news conference, according to the Reuters news agency.

While overall consumer price inflation in Canada has eased and came in at 2.4 percent for December, “food price inflation remains high due to global and domestic factors, including supply chain disruptions, higher US tariffs from the trade war and climate change/extreme weather”, Tony Stillo, director of Canada Economics at Oxford Economics, told Al Jazeera.

The government is also setting aside 500 million Canadian dollars ($365m) from the Strategic Response Fund to help businesses address the costs of supply chain disruptions without passing those costs on to Canadians, and will create a 150 million Canadian dollar ($110m) Food Security Fund under the existing Regional Tariff Response Initiative for small and medium enterprises and the organisations that support them.

Changing landscape

“The global landscape is rapidly changing, leaving economies, businesses, and workers under a cloud of uncertainty. In response, Canada’s new government is focused on what we can control: building a stronger economy to make life more affordable for Canadians,” Carney said.

The new measures were unveiled on the day Parliament resumes after its winter break.

Opposition parties have urged Carney to reduce prices of daily goods, especially as sections of the economy have come under pressure from United States President Donald Trump, who has slapped 35 percent tariffs on the country as well as separate tariffs on steel, aluminium and lumber, leading to job losses in those sectors.

Over the weekend, Trump escalated his threats and said he would impose a 100 percent tariff on Canada if it makes a trade deal with China. Carney has been working on diversifying Canada’s exports away from the US, its biggest trading partner and to which nearly 80 percent of its exports went last year, including by increasing business with other markets like China.