Tens of millions of people across Spain and Portugal have been plunged into a huge power blackout blamed by the Portuguese operator on extreme temperature variations, leaving them without trains, metros, traffic lights, ATMs, phone connections and internet access.

People were trapped in lifts, stuck on trains, stalled in traffic and abandoned in airports. Hundreds stumbled along pitch-black metro tunnels using their phone torches; others scrambled for basics in supermarkets that could only take cash, or began long trudges home from work.

Mobile networks went down and internet access was cut as power failed at 12.33pm (11.33 BST). Hospitals postponed routine operations but used generators to attend to critical cases, and while electronic banking was able to function on backup systems, most ATM screens were blank.

The mayor of Madrid, José Luis Martinez-Almeida, urged people to minimise their journeys and stay where they were, adding: “It is essential that the emergency services can circulate.” Play at the Madrid Open tennis tournament was suspended.

The Spanish government convened a crisis meeting at the national grid operator, Red Eléctrica, to discuss the outage. It was attended by the prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, who said early on Monday evening a problem in Europe’s grid was to blame but the precise cause was still unclear.

Spanish media reported that the national cybersecurity institute was investigating the possibility of a cyber-attack. However, António Costa, the European Council president and a former Portuguese prime minister, said there were “no indications of any cyber-attack”. Spain’s Teresa Ribera, a European Commission vice-president, also said there was no evidence the incident was deliberate.

By 10pm local time on Monday, 62% of Spain’s substations were back online (421 of 680) and 43.3% of the power demand had been met. Although Red Eléctrica had previously cautioned that it could take between six and 10 hours to fully restore supply after what it called an “exceptional and totally extraordinary” incident.

Along a major thoroughfare in Madrid’s Argüelles neighbourhood, the restoration of the power supply prompted whoops of delight and a round of hearty applause among the many people wandering the street.

The Portuguese operator, REN, said the outage was caused by a “rare atmospheric phenomenon”, with extreme temperature variations in Spain causing “anomalous oscillations” in very high-voltage lines. Red Eléctrica did not immediately respond.

REN said the phenomenon, known as “induced atmospheric vibration”, caused “synchronisation failures between the electrical systems, leading to successive disturbances across the interconnected European network”.

It said it was deploying all available resources but it was impossible to say how long it would take for the situation in Portugal to return to normal. The prime minister, Luís Montenegro, said he hoped power would be restored “in the coming hours”.

The French high-voltage operator RTE said parts of south-west France had been briefly affected but power was restored by mid-afternoon. It said it could export power to Spain “as soon as the Iberian grid has the technical capacity to receive it”.

Widespread outages are unusual in Europe. In 2003, a problem with a hydroelectric power line between Italy and Switzerland caused blackouts for about 12 hours, and in 2006 an overloaded power network in Germany caused electricity cuts across parts of the country and in France, Italy, Spain, Austria, Belgium and the Netherlands.

In scenes reminiscent of the 2003 outage that caused widespread blackouts in the US north-east, rail services across the Iberian peninsula were halted, air traffic disrupted and traffic lights extinguished. Hundreds of people had to be rescued from jammed lifts.

Spain’s railway operator, Adif, said the power cut stranded trains throughout the country. The transport minister, Óscar Puente, said intercity train services would not be restored until Tuesday as the country battled to return to normal.

“We are working to ensure that, once the power supply is restored, we can resume these services, which will no longer be possible today,” Puente said. Airports were largely operating as normal using backup supplies and generators, he added.

In Madrid and other cities, traffic lights ceased to function, causing gridlock as vehicles slowed to avoid collisions, while metros were halted. Spain’s national road authority, DGT, urged motorists to avoid using the roads as much as possible.

El País newspaper posted photos and video on its website of passengers navigating darkened metro tunnels in the Spanish capital and police directing traffic on the city’s streets. Footage also showed its own reporters working by torchlight.

The Spanish health ministry said in a social media update it was in contact with regional authorities to assess the scope of the widespread blackout but reassured the public that hospitals had supplementary systems in place.

In Portugal, the outage hit the capital, Lisbon, and surrounding areas, as well as northern and southern parts of the country. Lisbon metro carriages were evacuated and ATMs and electronic payment systems cut out.

The Portuguese water supplier EPAL said water supplies could be disrupted, prompting queues to form at stores as people rushed to buy bottled water and other emergency supplies such as gas lights, generators and battery-powered radios.

A graph on Spain’s electricity network website showing demand across the country indicated a steep drop at about 12.15pm, from 27,500MW to almost 15,000MW.

The European Commission said it was in contact with Spanish and Portuguese authorities to understand the underlying cause of the blackout. The commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, said she had spoken with Sánchez.

Spain, Portugal and some of south-west France suffered a massive power cut on Monday, with major cities including Madrid, Barcelona and Lisbon among those affected.

Houses, offices, trains, traffic lights and even the Madrid open tennis tournament were all hit, causing chaos for millions of people and prompting a scramble by the Spanish and Portuguese governments and network operators to understand the problem and race to fix it.

Senior Whitehall officials have asked golf bosses whether they can host the 2028 Open championship at Donald Trump’s Turnberry course after repeated requests from the US president, sources have said.

Officials had asked senior people at the R&A, which organises the world’s oldest major golf championship, what the hurdles would be to hosting the 2028 Open at Turnberry.

One source described the talks as direct lobbying from the government, although others said officials had asked about hypothetical problems with the idea, rather than insisting that it happen.

One person with knowledge of the discussions said: “The government is doing everything it can to get close to Trump. One concrete thing is that the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) have been involved in pushing for the Open to return to Trump-owned Turnberry.”

Both the DCMS and Trump Turnberry declined to comment.

Two other people briefed on conversations between the US president and Keir Starmer said Trump had asked the prime minister multiple times about hosting the Open at Turnberry, which the Trump Organization has owned since 2014.

Trump has previously lobbied publicly to host the Open at the Ayrshire course, saying in 2023: “Everybody wants to see the Open championship here.”

King Charles acknowledged the course’s importance to Trump when he wrote to him offering a visit to one of his Scottish estates should the president already be in the country visiting Turnberry.

Hosting the Open could provide a welcome financial boost for SLC Turnberry, the course’s operating company, which is run by the president’s sons, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. Last year the company lost £1.7m, having made £571,000 in the previous year – its only profit in 10 years.

The R&A has a list of nine or 10 historic courses it would consider for hosting the Open, including famous venues such as St Andrews and Royal Birkdale. Turnberry is on that list, having hosted the championship in 2009. However golf experts point out that the event has grown substantially since then. While the 2009 Open attracted 123,000 people, the event at Royal Troon last year was attended by over 250,000.

The R&A previously said it would not host the tournament at Turnberry in the wake of the January 6 attack by Trump supporters on the Capitol in 2021. Last November, the then head of the organisation, said he did not want “media noise” detracting from the game.

Since then however the R&A has changed leadership. And in an apparent shift of position Mark Darbon, the new chief executive, said last week he would like to see the championship return to Turnberry “at some point”.

Those briefed on the discussions between government officials and the R&A say they have mainly focused on the logistical challenges to hosting the Open at Turnberry. They said the main problems would be getting the sheer number of spectators in and out of the site by road, rail and air, given Turnberry is a two-and-a-half hour train trip from Glasgow, or a one-hour drive along a single A-road.

Darbon said last week: “At Turnberry, there are definitely some logistical and commercial challenges that we face around the road, rail and accommodation infrastructure. We’re doing some feasibility work around what it would look like to return to that venue and the investment that it would require.”

One minister told the Financial Times earlier this year the venue would need “tens, or hundreds, of millions of pounds of investment” to make it easier to reach and to provide enough high-quality hotel accommodation in the area.

A spokesperson for R&A said: “We regularly engage with government and local government regarding venues. We have explained the logistical challenges around Turnberry to the government and they are aware of the position.”

Vladimir Putin has declared a three-day full ceasefire in the war with Ukraine in May to mark the 80th anniversary of the victory of the Soviet Union in the second world war.

The Kremlin said the 72-hour ceasefire would run from the start of 8 May to the end of 10 May, and called on Ukraine to join it as well. “All hostilities will be suspended during this period,” the Kremlin said in a statement. “Russia believes that the Ukrainian side should follow this example.”

The Kremlin said that in the event of violations of the ceasefire by the Ukrainian side, Russian armed forces would deliver an “adequate and effective” response.

Ukraine responded to Putin’s announcement by calling for an immediate month-long ceasefire.

Its president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, said in his nightly address: “For some reason, everyone is supposed to wait for May 8 and only then have a cease fire to ensure calm for Putin during the parade.

“We value people’s lives and not parades. We believe that the world believes that there is no reason to wait for May 8. And the ceasefire should be not for a few days only to resume the killing afterward.”

Zelenskyy called for a “full and unconditional ceasefire for at least 30 days” to provide “a basis for real diplomacy”.

“If Russia truly wants peace, it must cease fire immediately. Why wait until May 8th? If the fire can be ceased now and since any date for 30 days – so it is real, not just for a parade,” the country’s foreign secretary, Andrii Sybiha, added on social media.

“Ukraine is ready to support a lasting, durable, and full ceasefire. And this is what we are constantly proposing, for at least 30 days,” he added.

The White House said Donald Trump wanted to see “a permanent ceasefire” and that the US president was becoming “increasingly frustrated” with the leaders of both Russia and Ukraine.

Putin, in his statement, also said he was ready to engage constructively with international partners to address the “root causes” of the conflict.

For Russia, that terminology serves as code for some of its more hardline aims in a broader settlement – including preventing Ukraine from joining Nato, limiting the size of its military, and having a say over Ukraine’s domestic politics.

If respected by both sides, the May ceasefire would mark the first full ceasefire since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine more than three years ago.

However, the temporary nature of the truce suggests that US efforts to broker a broader peace deal remain elusive.

Russia has previously rejected a US proposal for an immediate and full 30-day halt in the fighting by imposing far-reaching conditions. Ukraine accepted it, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the country’s president, has said.

Kyiv and Moscow had previously agreed to a partial Easter ceasefire, though each side accused the other of violating it. Since then, Russia has continued pounding Ukrainian cities, killing scores of civilians across the country.

The announcement of the ceasefire came as the Kremlin and Pyongyang confirmed for the first time that North Korean troops had been deployed to fight against Ukraine, following months of official silence on the widely reported deployment.

Ukraine reacted with scepticism to Putin’s latest ceasefire offer and pointed out that Russia announced a similar truce over the Easter period only to massively violate it.

Commentators suggested the offer was a move to avoid the embarrassing spectacle of Ukrainian long-range drones disrupting the Kremlin’s Victory Day parade on Red Square and embarrassing Russia’s president in front of international leaders in Moscow.

They added that the unilateral move was clearly directed at the White House. It follows Trump’s one-on-one meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Friday in Rome at the pope’s funeral – hailed by both sides as “constructive”.

In reality, Russia intended to continue its war, they suggested. Anton Gerashchenko, a Ukrainian blogger and former interior ministry adviser, noted that Russia broke its own Easter ceasefire more than 3,000 times, according to Zelenskyy.

During the 30-hour period, the Russian army stopped its long-range missile attacks on Ukrainian cities. But it continued drone and artillery attacks across the frontline and even carried out infantry ground assaults, Ukrainian brigades confirmed.

Russian engineering units also used the lull to repair broken crossings and to carrying out de-mining, in preparation for further offensives, they said. There was speculation on Monday that the Kremlin would begin a large-scale offensive after the Victory Day truce ended.

Ukraine agreed in March to a US proposal for a 30-day ceasefire. Russia did not. Zelenskyy has called on the US and other partners to put pressure on Moscow, in order to bring about a “full and comprehensive ceasefire”.

Posting on social media, the Ukrainian journalist Svitlana Morenets predicted: “Putin announcing another short-term ceasefire means only one thing: there will be no peace deal in the coming weeks. And no truce on the frontline either. Putin is just putting on a show to calm Trump down. He also needs to stop Ukrainian drones from ruining his Victory parade.”

At the same time as Russia’s announcement was made on Monday, air raid sirens rang out in several parts of the country, warning of strikes in the east and central Cherkasy region.

In recent weeks, Russia has carried out a series of bloody missile strikes. They include an attack on Sumy – the deadliest this year – in which 35 people were killed. Last Thursday, another 12 people died in Kyiv, after a wave of drones and ballistic missiles struck the Ukrainian capital.

Putin’s ceasefire announcement comes amid mounting US frustration with Russia over its continued attacks on Ukraine.

Trump urged Russia on Sunday to stop its attacks in Ukraine while his top diplomat said the US might walk away from peace efforts if it did not see progress.

“I was very disappointed that missiles were [launched] by Russia,” Trump told reporters as he travelled back to the White House. “I want [Putin] to stop shooting, sit down and sign a deal.”

Although Trump has repeatedly claimed he was close to ending the war, now in its fourth year, his efforts to broker a peace between Russia and Ukraine have so far yielded little result, stalled by Moscow’s hardline demands.

In a series of interviews with foreign media, Russia’s top diplomat, Sergei Lavrov, hinted that Moscow continued to maintain maximalist demands – conditions that both Ukraine and the US have repeatedly pushed back against.

In an interview published with the Brazilian outlet O Globo, Lavrov said that Moscow insisted on the international recognition of its hold over Crimea, as well as the entirety of Ukraine’s Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions, as a condition for peace negotiations.

Speaking to CBS a day earlier, Lavrov also pushed against future western military support for Ukraine.

On 9 May, known as Victory Day, Russians celebrate the 1945 end of what they call the “Great Patriotic War”. The Victory Day parade traditionally features heavy weaponry and is intended as a display of Russian military strength, reinforcing a narrative of resilience and national pride.

Germany’s chancellor-designate, Friedrich Merz, has promised to put staunch support of Ukraine at the heart of his government after announcing that a pro-Kyiv foreign policy expert and former soldier will be the new foreign minister.

Speaking days before he is due to take power, Merz said on Monday it was “no time for euphoria” as his conservative CDU met to approve an agreement to form a coalition government with the Social Democrats.

Promising to tackle Russian aggression and the rise of the far right, he told party colleagues: “The pillars we have relied on over the past years and decades are crumbling around us. Trust in our democracy is damaged like never before in our country’s postwar history.”

Merz, a former banker, said that Johann Wadephul, a conservative MP who has long advised Merz on foreign policy, would become the new foreign minister.

Wadephul has been a supporter of military backing for Ukraine and recently told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) newspaper the war in Ukraine “is not about a few square kilometres in Ukraine but rather the fundamental question of whether we will allow a classic war of conquest in Europe”.

Merz said that despite domestic misgivings about Germany’s role in Ukraine, with some calling for a halt to weapons deliveries, there were “no ifs or buts” about its continued support. Vladimir Putin’s invasion, he said, was nothing less than a battle “against the entire political order of the European continent”.

Germany, he stressed, would remain “on the side of this attacked country and therefore on the side of all people in Europe who are committed to democracy and the rule of law … to freedom and an open society.”

His statement came hours after Boris Pistorius, a social democrat who is widely expected to continue in the role as defence minister, said Donald Trump’s peace deal proposals were “akin to a capitulation”.

Pistorius and Wadephul are expected to work closely together in a newly formed national security council to represent Germany on the European and international stage.

In a nod to Trump but without naming him, Merz said on Monday: “We have come to the realisation that we can no longer be certain of the transatlantic relationship in the spirit of freedom and the rules-based order.”

Merz and his government are due to be sworn into parliament on 6 May, ending six months of political gridlock. His conservative CDU/CSU alliance agreed a deal to coalesce with the Social Democrats (SPD) after winning a federal election on 23 February, in which the far-right populist Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) came second.

The results of a poll of the SPD’s 365,000 members approving the deal is expected on Wednesday. Only once they have given the green light will the SPD announce its cabinet ministers, said the party’s co-leader Lars Klingbeil.

Over recent months, amid a sense of stasis and growing dissatisfaction across the country, the AfD has crept up in the polls and is now for the first time ahead of the conservatives.

Merz has pledged to reduce the AfD, which had managed to take advantage of people’s fear and insecurity he said, to the “marginal phenomenon” it once was. He would do so, he said, by tackling “irregular” immigration that had “got out of hand” over the past decade, an allusion to his predecessor Angela Merkel’s so-called open-door policy during which about 1 million refugees came to Germany.

Among his surprise appointments is that of Karsten Wildberger, the chief executive of Ceconomy, the parent company of the German electronic retailers Saturn and Mediamarkt, who will head a new ministry for digitalisation and modernisation of the state.

He will, in part, be responsible for deciding how a special multibillion euro fund – controversially passed by the outgoing government to boost Germany’s ailing infrastructure and its shrinking economy, as well as strengthening its defence forces – is to be spent.

Canadians head to the polls in a federal election overshadowed by fury at Donald Trump’s threats to the country’s sovereignty and fears over his escalating trade war.

In the final days of a month-long campaign – described by all party leaders as the most consequential general election in a lifetime – the US president yet again re-inserted himself into the national discussion, with fresh threats to annex the country. “We don’t need anything from Canada. And I say the only way this thing really works is for Canada to become a state,” he told Time magazine on Friday.

On election day itself, Trump resumed his provocations with a social media post suggesting he was on the ballot and repeating that Canada should become the 51st state, incorrectly claiming that the US subsidizes Canada. “It makes no sense unless Canada is a State!” Trump posted.

The Conservative leader, Pierre Poilievre, responded to Trump with a post of his own.

“President Trump, stay out of our election. The only people who will decide the future of Canada are Canadians at the ballot box,” Poilievre posted. “Canada will always be proud, sovereign and independent and we will NEVER be the 51s state.”

As recently as January, Poilievre was poised for the largest and most resounding electoral victory in more than half a century. Canadian pollsters and political pundits struggled to find fresh ways to describe the bleak prospects for the then prime minister Justin Trudeau’s Liberal party, which seemed on track for a catastrophic blowout. The party trailed the Conservatives by as many as 27 points in some polls. .

But Trump’s detonation of the US’s closest diplomatic and economic relationship has fundamentally reshaped how many feel about their southern neighbour and heavily influenced how Mark Carney, the former central banker who inherited control of the Liberal party to become prime minister in mid-March, has shaped his electoral bid.

That framing has the possibility of producing a result that would have been unfathomable three months ago.

Now the Conservatives’ chances of an electoral victory are slim – and would require a significant polling miss and a groundswell of support in key battlegrounds.

“Almost everything about this campaign is without precedent. For the first time in Canada’s history, our closest geographic, economic and security partner has placed us in the crosshairs, disrupting our sense of economic and physical security,” said Scott Reid, a political adviser and former director of communications to the Liberal former prime minister Paul Martin.

“And then you have this unprecedented situation where Mark Carney, with no electoral experience emerges on to the scene, reverses a 26-point deficit in his party’s fortunes and takes them to the brink of a majority victory. [There’s’] nothing about this that’s happened before. It’s not just that it’s unprecedented, it’s that it’s enormously consequential in all of its implications. It’s all jaw-dropping.”

Still, the prospect of a fourth consecutive Liberal term has frustrated many in the country, who see a government that was unable to rein in a cost of living crisis on the verge of retaining power.

“Ten years of a Liberal government is a long time. They had their shot. And the changes they made are for the worst. We need a new government, we need new ideas, new people and new ministers,” said Sam, who lives in a new housing development in Carney’s electoral district in Ottawa.

He said that although Carney cast himself as a novice, the Liberal leader was a “political insider”, adding: “I’m not saying he’s not a qualified person. But he’s also a businessman. So is Trump. Look how that’s turned out for everyone.”

Running on a message of change, Poilievre, a seven-term parliamentarian, has attracted thousands to his energetic rallies across Canada, and won over young voters attracted by his response to the country’s cost of living crisis.

“Canadians are asking the simple question: can we really afford to allow Mark Carney to have the fourth term of Justin Trudeau, raising exactly the same taxes, running exactly the same deficits, doubling exactly the same housing costs, with exactly the same Liberal team?” Poilievre said during a campaign stop in the city of Saskatoon, a Tory stronghold.

“There’s a generational divide in the country and real questions of whether the Canadian dream is achievable any more. Poilievre was beating the drums about this and Trudeau’s popularity was plummeting. And exactly the wrong moment, we have this threat to the south of us and it completely overturned the tables in Canadian politics,” said Melanie Paradis, the president of Texture Communications and director of communications for the former Conservative leader Erin O’Toole.

“And the question is, what’s at stake? For the older generation, it’s the sovereignty and integrity of Canada. The existential threat to their future is Trump [but] the existential threat to the future of the younger generation is being able to own a home and start a family.”

That shift in political calculus puts the Conservatives in a difficult place.

“We’ve had a bizarre reversal of fortunes. We used to be so reliably strong with the older demographic – people who you could really count on to show up and vote on election day,” said Paradis. “Now we have an incredibly strong showing among young voters, but now we’ve lost the support of senior men.”

A race dominated by the two main party’s leaders is also poised to devastate smaller opposition parties, all of which have struggled to be part of a discussion focused on Canada’s economic and political responses to Trump. The New Democratic party, which previously propped up Trudeau’s minority government, is poised for its biggest-ever loss, and its leader, Jagmeet Singh, is at risk of losing his federal seat in the Burnaby South electoral district.

“Conservative attacks on the [NDP’s support for the Liberals] were highly effective in eroding trust in Jagmeet Singh. But the result was, when you see this threat from Trump, people who would have normally voted for the party are now strategically looking at the Liberals,” said Paradis.

The Green leader, Elizabeth May, is also at risk of losing her seat. A wave of patriotic sentiment, spurred by Trump, has threatened the electoral prospects of the separatist Bloc Québécois to the benefit of the Liberals.

Already, more than 7 million people have cast ballots in early voting – a 25% increase over the previous record, helped in large part by the Easter long weekend. The first polls close at 8.30pm Atlantic time, with seat-rich Québec and Ontario closing at 9.30pm eastern time, with results expected soon after.

Looming over the final day of electioneering was a deadly attack at a bustling street festival in Vancouver that left the country reeling and forced Carney to briefly suspend his campaign in order to make sombre remarks to the nation.

“Those families are living every family’s nightmare,” Carney said on Sunday morning, after a driver killed at least 11 people and injured more at the Filipino community’s Lapu Lapu festival. “I know that I join all Canadians in mourning with you. I know that Canadians are united with you.”

A visibly emotional Carney spoke of “Bayanihan”, the Filipino value of community serving those in need.

“This spirit upon which we must draw in this incredibly difficult time. We will comfort the grieving. We will care for each other. We will unite in common purpose,” he added.

Elon Musk and his companies face at least $2.37bn in legal exposure from federal investigations, litigation and regulatory oversight, according to a new report from Senate Democrats. The report attempts to put a number to Musk’s many conflicts of interest through his work with his so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge), warning that he may seek to use his influence to avoid legal liability.

The report, which was published on Monday by Democratic members of the Senate homeland security committee’s permanent subcommittee on investigations, looked at 65 actual or potential actions against Musk across 11 separate agencies. Investigators calculated the financial liabilities Musk and his companies, such as Tesla, SpaceX and Neuralink, may face in 45 of those actions.

Since Donald Trump won re-election last year and Musk took on the role of de facto head of Doge in January, ethics watchdogs and Democratic officials have warned that the Tesla CEO could use his power to oust regulators and quash investigations into his companies. In the role, Musk, the richest man in the world, holds sway over agencies that regulate or contract with his companies. The subcommittee report outlines the extent of Musk’s liabilities, which include potentially facing $1.19bn in fines to Tesla alone over allegations it made false or misleading statements about its autopilot and self-driving features.

Although the report gives a total estimated amount, it also states that the $2bn-plus figure does not include how much Musk could avoid from investigations that the Trump administration declines to launch. It also excludes the potential contracts, such as communications deals with his Starlink satellite internet service, that Musk’s companies could gain because of his role in the administration.

“While the $2.37 billion figure represents a credible, conservative estimate, it drastically understates the true benefit Mr Musk may gain from legal risk avoidance alone as a result of his position in government,” the report states.

The Trump administration has downplayed concerns over Musk’s conflicts of interest in recent months, with the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, stating in early February that he would “excuse himself” if there was any issue. Democrats have pressed the administration for answers on how Musk is addressing these conflicts, while also seeking to put the increasingly unpopular billionaire at the forefront of their attacks against the Trump administration. The Democratic senator Jeanne Shaheen introduced a bill earlier this month targeting Musk that would prohibit awarding government contracts to companies owned by special government employees.

“Despite numerous requests from members of Congress, the Trump Administration has failed to provide any relevant documents or information, the authorities relied upon for these actions, or an explanation of how Mr Musk is navigating the conflicts they inherently pose,” the report states.

Musk’s conflicts span multiple agencies, including the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) which oversees SpaceX rocket launches and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), which has multiple open investigations into Tesla’s operations. In February, Doge fired workers at the NHTSA that were experts in self-driving car technology.

The permanent subcommittee on investigations is a bipartisan subcommittee with a Republican majority and Democratic minority, the latter of which is chaired by Connecticut senator Richard Blumenthal. The subcommittee’s report issues a series of demands to Trump, executive departments and regulatory agencies to take stronger oversight action against Musk, including allowing for independent audits of major contracts given to Musk-affiliated companies.

“No one individual, no matter how prominent or wealthy, is above the law,” the report states in its conclusion. “Anything less than decisive, immediate, and collective action risks America becoming a bystander to the surrender to modern oligarchy.”

Elon Musk and his companies face at least $2.37bn in legal exposure from federal investigations, litigation and regulatory oversight, according to a new report from Senate Democrats. The report attempts to put a number to Musk’s many conflicts of interest through his work with his so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge), warning that he may seek to use his influence to avoid legal liability.

The report, which was published on Monday by Democratic members of the Senate homeland security committee’s permanent subcommittee on investigations, looked at 65 actual or potential actions against Musk across 11 separate agencies. Investigators calculated the financial liabilities Musk and his companies, such as Tesla, SpaceX and Neuralink, may face in 45 of those actions.

Since Donald Trump won re-election last year and Musk took on the role of de facto head of Doge in January, ethics watchdogs and Democratic officials have warned that the Tesla CEO could use his power to oust regulators and quash investigations into his companies. In the role, Musk, the richest man in the world, holds sway over agencies that regulate or contract with his companies. The subcommittee report outlines the extent of Musk’s liabilities, which include potentially facing $1.19bn in fines to Tesla alone over allegations it made false or misleading statements about its autopilot and self-driving features.

Although the report gives a total estimated amount, it also states that the $2bn-plus figure does not include how much Musk could avoid from investigations that the Trump administration declines to launch. It also excludes the potential contracts, such as communications deals with his Starlink satellite internet service, that Musk’s companies could gain because of his role in the administration.

“While the $2.37 billion figure represents a credible, conservative estimate, it drastically understates the true benefit Mr Musk may gain from legal risk avoidance alone as a result of his position in government,” the report states.

The Trump administration has downplayed concerns over Musk’s conflicts of interest in recent months, with the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, stating in early February that he would “excuse himself” if there was any issue. Democrats have pressed the administration for answers on how Musk is addressing these conflicts, while also seeking to put the increasingly unpopular billionaire at the forefront of their attacks against the Trump administration. The Democratic senator Jeanne Shaheen introduced a bill earlier this month targeting Musk that would prohibit awarding government contracts to companies owned by special government employees.

“Despite numerous requests from members of Congress, the Trump Administration has failed to provide any relevant documents or information, the authorities relied upon for these actions, or an explanation of how Mr Musk is navigating the conflicts they inherently pose,” the report states.

Musk’s conflicts span multiple agencies, including the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) which oversees SpaceX rocket launches and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), which has multiple open investigations into Tesla’s operations. In February, Doge fired workers at the NHTSA that were experts in self-driving car technology.

The permanent subcommittee on investigations is a bipartisan subcommittee with a Republican majority and Democratic minority, the latter of which is chaired by Connecticut senator Richard Blumenthal. The subcommittee’s report issues a series of demands to Trump, executive departments and regulatory agencies to take stronger oversight action against Musk, including allowing for independent audits of major contracts given to Musk-affiliated companies.

“No one individual, no matter how prominent or wealthy, is above the law,” the report states in its conclusion. “Anything less than decisive, immediate, and collective action risks America becoming a bystander to the surrender to modern oligarchy.”

Ronen Bar, the director of Israel’s Shin Bet internal security service, has said he will resign in less than two months, after weeks of tension with Benjamin Netanyahu, who has tried to fire him, bringing Israel to the brink of a constitutional crisis.

“After 35 years of service, in order to allow an orderly process for appointing a permanent successor and for professional handover, I will end my role on 15 June 2025,” Bar told a Shin Bet memorial event on Monday.

The battle between Netanyahu and Bar intensified after the supreme court blocked a decision by the cabinet to dismiss Bar from his post – the first Shin Bet head to be fired.

Netanyahu said he had lost trust in Bar’s capacity to lead Shin Bet and accused him of a conflict of interest and of politicising the agency.

Bar’s decision to step down will now spare the supreme court from making a potentially divisive and contentious judgment.

Last week, in a 31-page affidavit to the supreme court, Bar, 59, alleged that Netanyahu had tried to fire him for refusing to pledge his loyalty to the prime minister over the courts and tried to use the agency to spy on anti-government protesters.

Netanyahu filed his response with the court on Sunday, rejecting Bar’s accusations. He has repeatedly referred to a “deep state” in Israel that he alleges seeks to thwart democratically elected leaders and undermine elected governments.

The relationship between Netanyahu and Bar, a former special forces soldier who holds degrees from Tel Aviv and Harvard universities, deteriorated after the publication in March of a Shin Bet report on the 7 October 2023 attacks by Hamas militants in southern Israel. The service admitted to mistakes but criticised policies of the Netanyahu government that it said had enabled Hamas to build up its strength in Gaza and catch Israel by surprise.

Netanyahu has never accepted any responsibility for Israel’s worst national security disaster, which killed 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and led to 251 being abducted and held hostage in Gaza. Eighteen months after the attack, many of the senior officials in post at the time have resigned or been forced out. Netanyahu appears unlikely to leave power before elections late next year and may stay on beyond then.

Bar’s authorisation for Shin Bet to open two investigations into Netanyahu’s close aides, including one for allegedly taking payments from Qatar to promote its interests in Israel at the same time that Qatar was partly financing Hamas in Gaza, has been widely cited as a motive for his dismissal. Netanyahu is already facing a multitude of corruption charges in court, and political opponents have alleged the prime minister wanted to remove Bar in order to sabotage the investigations.

Netanyahu has consistently denied any improper or ulterior reasons for firing Bar.

“To this day, the reason for my firing is not clear to me,” Bar wrote in his supreme court affidavit. “But … it was not rooted in any professional metric, but out of an expectation by Netanyahu that I would be personally loyal to him.”

Yair Lapid, Israel’s opposition leader, praised Bar’s decision and criticised Netanyahu. “Of those responsible for the greatest failure in the history of the country, only one remains, clinging to the chair,” Lapid said.

The priority of Shin Bet is counter-terrorism, but the service also investigates espionage, manages security clearance for thousands of sensitive posts and has a legal duty to defend Israel’s democratic system.

Bar took over the service in 2021, having been appointed by the then prime minister, Naftali Bennett, and was expected to serve the standard five-year term.

Bar was one of the first senior security officials to accept responsibility for the many failures that led to the 2023 attacks, and made it clear he intended to resign.

He has stayed on this long, associates and supporters said last month, to work towards the release of hostages still held by Hamas in Gaza and to protect Shin Bet from political manoeuvres.

The UK and the EU have outlined a “new strategic partnership” aimed at bolstering trade and presenting a united European front in Ukraine in defiance of Donald Trump’s threat to upend decades of transatlantic alignment.

A draft declaration being drawn up by London and Brussels ahead of a UK-EU summit on 19 May points to a “common understanding” on a number of shared interests.

EU ambassadors will meet in Brussels on Wednesday for a briefing from officials who have spent the past few months in a “tunnel” working on the areas where agreement could be reached over the next year.

A defence and security pact that would see closer cooperation on Ukraine is top of the shopping list along with migration, which is a hot topic on both sides of the Channel.

The French are determined to carve out new arrangements on fishing but diplomatic sources say there will be no change for the time being.

Several EU capitals are pushing for a “youth experience” programme, which would allow people from the EU to spend at least 12 months in Britain under a reciprocal visa programme that would not add to migration figures.

The draft communique being finessed by officials is designed to be the basis of a political declaration and framework for talks over the range of issues.

“We confirmed our shared principles of maintaining global economic stability and our mutual commitment to free and open trade,” the draft noted. It added that the sides would continue working “on how we can mitigate the impact of fluctuations in the global economic order”.

However, the summit comes as the UK continues tariff negotiations with the US in the hope of carving out a special deal. Britain is facing a 10% tariff, while the EU faces 20%.

Ahead of a meeting with the UK prime minister, Keir Starmer, last week, the leader of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, called for a drive to unlock investment for renewables in the North Sea.

“We are friends. And we are Europeans. It means that we share interests and democratic values. And that we are ready to face global challenges as like-minded partners,” von der Leyen said after their meeting.

Downing Street declined to comment on the text but said it was in line with the UK’s objectives.

Starmer’s spokesperson said: “The prime minister’s being clear that there are significant benefits to be had by having a better partnership with the EU in terms of jobs, British businesses, reducing trade barriers, driving growth and keeping us safe in an increasingly dangerous world. So you’d expect us to be discussing a wide range of issues with the EU and obviously get an update on that at the summit.

“The prime minister has spoken extensively recently about the benefits of free and open trade and the fact that we’re looking to strengthen alliances around the world to reduce barriers to trade, working with other economies. And that is actually a feature of our discussions, not just with the EU, but the US, India, and other countries as well.”

For many cyclists, Jeremy Vine’s commitment to filming drivers he regarded as endangering his fellow two-wheeled travellers made him a hero. It also made the presenter the target of some extraordinary online hate from those who accused him of persecuting motorists.

After years of documenting clashes and close shaves on the road, Vine has announced he is ending his sharing of footage, saying the fallout they generated had become too hard to bear. “I’m stopping my cycling videos,” he announced. “The trolling just got too bad. They have had well over 100m views but in the end the anger they generate has genuinely upset me.”

He said a “regular theme” had been an apparent desire by some online attackers to see him “crushed under a truck”, something he described as a “very real danger” to commuting cyclists.

Vine accompanied his announcement with posts he had received from angry critics. One stated he was “beyond hated” and asked him to upload another video “if it’s you getting run down and hospitalised”. Another said they hoped the next motorist he confronted “kicks your traitor head in”. A third said: “It may be terrible but I hope he falls under the wheels of five cars that reverse and make sure the job’s done.”

The BBC Radio 2 and Channel 5 host said his aim had been to make drivers think about the dangers of trying to navigate a busy city on a bike. He admitted he could get a “little cross when a driver has, say, pulled out without looking”, but said he had only ever uploaded the videos to highlight the dangers involved.

Vine said his decision to stop the recordings followed the theft of his bike last week – an incident also captured on camera and posted online. “Do I want to get a replacement and go back into the trolling-furnace? As I say, it just got too hot,” he said. “A new cycle video would make my phone physically heat up in my pocket. There are at least two death threats against me currently being investigated by police.

“I enjoy debates but not abuse. It’s strange that getting interested in road safety can actually endanger a person. I see other cyclists facing the same and wonder how they deal with it. So when I get my new bike I’ll stay vigilant but won’t share my adventures.”

Vine’s latest and perhaps last video appears to show a taxi dropping off a passenger directly into a cycle lane – a move that prompted Vine to ring his bell in warning, only for the driver to honk his horn back at him. Some of his latest videos featured AI-generated imagery and songs, including one that riffed on a driver telling him he was “drifting to the middle” of a lane.

In 2017, a driver who beeped her horn and shouted abuse at Vine was convicted of threatening behaviour and a driving offence. The exchange was captured by Vine’s cameras. He posted it to Facebook, where it was viewed more than 15m times.

“I never made a penny from my videos,” Vine said. “They have gone completely crazy at times. They’ve started debates about whether, for example, you can undertake a vehicle turning left while you are in a cycle lane that is paint-only.

“In a lot of cases the answer is: yes, but don’t do it if you want to stay alive.”

Marks & Spencer has been forced to pause deliveries of some packaged food items to the online grocery site Ocado as the high street stalwart continues to battle the consequences of a cyber-attack that began a week ago.

The latest issue is understood to affect a small number of items listed on Ocado, which is co-owned by M&S, which halted all orders through its M&S.com website and apps on Friday. M&S did not confirm the number of items affected but said it had worked with Ocado and its suppliers “to minimise any disruption to the small proportion of the range delivered through our network to Ocado”.

The disruption caused by the hack – and uncertainty over when it will end – has wiped more than £500m off the stock market value of M&S in the past week as experts said it had clearly suffered a cyber-attack on a huge scale.

The company has apologised to shoppers for the “inconvenience” caused by the attack, which will hit its online clothing and homeware sales amounting to almost £3.8m a day on average.

On Monday, the retailer told 200 agency staff at its main distribution centre for its clothing and homewares at Castle Donington in Leicestershire to stay at home as orders on M&S.com remained on hold for the fourth day in a row, as first reported by Sky News.

Shoppers are still able to browse online and shop in M&S’s physical stores using cash or cards, but some difficulties continue in stores with gift cards not currently being accepted. Returning goods is only possible at tills in clothing and homeware stores or via post. Food stores are not currently able to accept returns.

However, the company said shoppers did not need to take any action – suggesting no customer data had been accessed.

M&S has hired cybersecurity experts to help investigate and manage the problem and said it was taking actions to further protect the network to ensure it could continue serving shoppers.

It has limited access to its systems via its virtual private network for staff working from home to try to stop the spread of the attack, the Sunday Times reported.

Clothing suppliers told the Guardian they had not been asked to pause deliveries as yet but feared this could be the case if online orders were paused for another week or more.

“If it is not resolved by the end of this week it is going to become an issue,” one said.

He said the difficulties came at a time that “sales are going exceptionally well in stores and things are looking fantastic”. May was likely to be a “huge month” for some clothing products given the burst of warm weather, which has kickstarted demand for summer gear and before the wedding and school proms season.

The retail website closure came after several days of problems in stores where contactless payments and the collection of online orders were hit from Monday. Contactless payments were restarted late on Thursday.

A separate technical problem on the Saturday of the busy Easter weekend affected only contactless payments.

Shoppers said problems with picking up online orders made before the website shut down continued over the weekend.

“I have received several emails asking me to collect, made a special journey to my local store, 18 miles, only to be told I could not collect. Staff were brilliant,” one shopper wrote on Facebook.

Another said: “I returned an online order in store yesterday but it’s not showing on my account.”

M&S told shoppers on social media that orders placed after Wednesday 23 April would be refunded. Those expecting to pick up online orders in stores this week that had been placed before Wednesday were told to wait for a “ready to collect” notification email before heading to a store. It admitted to additional difficulties for those who had ordered party food, including wedding cakes, with some orders cancelled while notification emails were not always working even if orders were arriving in stores.

Security experts warned shoppers to watch out for scammers capitalising on the high-profile incident.

Kate Calvert, an analyst at Investec, said the longer it took for online sales to resume, the worse the hit would be for M&S. “There will be a short-term profit impact without a doubt,” she said.

M&S said in January that it had rung up strong sales over the Christmas period. It is due to publish full-year results on 21 May.

In what was once a red-light district, between a furniture shop and a recruitment agency, Jeff Goldblum is selling T-shirts.

And not only T-shirts, the Hollywood A-lister is also selling his own jazz albums, while meeting fans and signing their merchandise. He has not had to work too hard to sell himself to the crowds of people waiting to meet him on a sunny Monday afternoon in London – the queues stretched more than 50 yards.

“From when I was very young, I always had a great passion for films, and I never really thought I could do it,” said 18-year-old actor Jack Foley, who was waiting in the queue to meet Goldblum. “Watching his films, seeing how big he is and how much of a great actor he is, really has pushed my career to be better. His music is class and he’s just an inspiration to everyone.”

Rather than in the now-gentrified surrounds of Granary Square in King’s Cross, Foley had envisaged meeting Goldblum “in a parking lot”, adding: “You know where you’ve paid for your ticket and you’re just kind of walking up, you see Jeff Goldblum and you say, ‘oh, there’s Jeff Goldblum’?”

He suggested the actor and musician had a quality that made him seem just like everyone else – as long as everyone else was a style icon and a Hollywood actor. “He’s the greatest person … he cares for people,” he said, adding that Goldblum was taking time to meet his fans.

Goldblum was in the UK for the launch of his fourth album as well as playing several concert dates with the Mildred Snitzer Orchestra and meeting fans, declaring: “I love London, I love England.”

He appeared at a popup shop in Spiritland, a cafe, bar and radio studio near King’s Cross.

“Honestly, I just love him,” said Peach Richmond, a children’s book illustrator. “He got me out of a bit of a twisty-turny place when I was younger with his comedy. So that’s why he’s a bit of an idol for me, I think. It’s just his energy, it’s just his whole joy that he gives off. And he’s just himself – it’s what’s really inspires me to be who I am as well.”

Goldblum is in the class of actor whose “energy” – or perhaps, more specifically, his distinctive delivery – has set him apart.

It was with that idiosyncrasy that he spoke to Amelia Wilding, a musician. He seemed to be listening intently while simultaneously holding sway over the conversation. Here, repeatedly asking her to spell out her first name so he could sign her record cover; there, crooning her surname as he scribbled his own.

“He has a really distinctive style and sense of humour,” said Stephen Barber, who was queueing with Laura Shorthall and dog Fiadh – all three apparently Goldblum fans, two of them wearing Jurassic Park T-shirts. The actor’s performance in the 1993 Oscar-winning dinosaur film was in Barber’s “top three”.

Sanny Hoskins, who runs a London events TikTok account, said she had never expected that a cafe a few doors down from an Indian restaurant would be the place she would meet one of her favourite actors. “You can connect with someone who you see through cinema, through TV, and get a face-to-face moment with them. I think that’s what makes London so amazing.”