US President Donald Trump has celebrated the 100th day of his second term in office with a campaign-style speech, touting his achievements and targeting political foes.

Hailing what he called a “revolution of common sense”, he told a crowd of supporters in Michigan that he was using his presidency to deliver “profound change”.

The Republican mocked his Democratic predecessor, Joe Biden, and aimed fresh criticism at the US Federal Reserve’s chairman, while dismissing polls that show his own popularity slipping.

Trump has delivered a dramatic fall in the number of migrants crossing illegally into the US, but the economy is a potential political vulnerability as he wages a global trade war.

“We’ve just gotten started, you haven’t seen anything yet,” Trump told the crowd on Tuesday in a suburb of Detroit.

Speaking at the hub of America’s automative industry, Trump said car firms were “lining up” to open new manufacturing plants in the Midwestern state.

Earlier in the day he softened a key element of his economic plan – tariffs on the import of foreign cars and car parts – after US car-makers warned of the danger of rising prices.

At his rally, Trump also said opinion polls indicating his popularity had fallen were “fake”.

According to Gallup, Trump is the only post-World War Two president to have less than half the public’s support after 100 days in office, with an approval rating of 44%.

But the majority of Republican voters still firmly back the president. And the rival Democratic Party is also struggling in polling.

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) said Trump’s first 100 days were a “colossal failure”.

“Trump is to blame for the fact that life is more expensive, it’s harder to retire, and a ‘Trump recession’ is at our doorstep,” the DNC said.

• Trump’s first 100 days – in numbers
• Trump’s breakneck start is fraught with political risk
• ‘Kicking butt’ or ‘going too fast’? Trump voters reflect on 100 days

Trump conducted his own informal poll in Tuesday’s remarks, asking the crowd for their favourite Biden nicknames. He also mocked his Democratic predecessor’s mental agility and even how he appears in a swim suit, while continuing to insist he was the real victor of the 2020 election, which he lost.

Other targets of his ire included Jerome Powell, head of the US central bank, whom the president said was not doing a good job.

Trump touted progress on immigration – encounters at the southern border have plummeted to just over 7,000, down from 140,000 in March of last year.

The White House also said almost 65,700 immigrants had been deported in his term so far, although that is a slower pace than in the last fiscal year when US authorities deported more than 270,000.

Part of the way through his speech Trump screened a video of deportees being expelled from the US and sent to a mega-prison in El Salvador.

His immigration crackdown has faced a flurry of legal challenges, as has his effort to end the automatic granting of citizenship to anyone born on US soil.

During Tuesday’s speech he insisted egg prices had declined 87%, a claim contradicted by the latest government price figures.

Inflation, energy prices and mortgage rates have fallen since Trump took office, although unemployment has risen slightly, consumer sentiment has sagged and the stock market was plunged into turmoil by the tariffs.

Before the speech, Joe DeMonaco, who owns a carpentry business in Michigan, said Trump’s patchwork of on-again, off-again import taxes were starting to increase prices, which he will have to pass on to his customers.

“I was hoping. . . he would approach things a little bit differently seeing that he’s a little seasoned coming into a second term,” Mr DeMonaco told the BBC. “But we’re just treading water and seeing if things get better from here.”

But it’s clear that Trump’s most steadfast supporters stand by him.

“I’m just thrilled,” Teresa Breckinridge, owner of the Silver Skillet Diner in Atlanta, Georgia, told the BBC.

“He’s handling things wherever he can, multiple times a day, and he’s reporting back to the people. . . I think the tariffs will end up definitely being in our favour.”

An Australian woman accused of cooking a fatal mushroom meal admits to picking wild funghi, lying to police and disposing of evidence, a court has heard, but will argue the “tragedy” was a “terrible accident”.

The Supreme Court trial of Erin Patterson, 50, began in the small Victorian town of Morwell on Wednesday and is expected to last six weeks.

She is charged with the murder of three relatives and the attempted murder of another, with the case centring on a beef wellington lunch at her house in July 2023.

Ms Patterson has pleaded not guilty and her defence team says she “panicked” after unintentionally serving poison to family members she loved.

Three people died in hospital in the days after the meal, including Ms Patterson’s former in-laws, Don Patterson, 70, and Gail Patterson, 70, as well as Gail’s sister, Heather Wilkinson, 66.

A single lunch guest survived – local pastor Ian Wilkinson – after weeks of treatment in hospital.

The fact that the lunch of beef wellington, mash potatoes and green beans contained death cap mushrooms and caused the guests’ illnesses is not in contention, the court heard.

“The overarching issue is whether she intended to kill or cause very serious injury,” Justice Christopher Beale said.

Opening the trial on Wednesday, prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC said this case was “originally thought to be a mass food poisoning event”.

But she alleges Ms Patterson “deliberately poisoned” her guests “with murderous intent”, after inviting them for lunch “on the pretence she’d been diagnosed with cancer”.

Dr Rogers said the jury would hear evidence that Ms Patterson had travelled to a location, near her home in Leongatha, where death cap mushroom sightings had been logged on a naturalist website.

And in the days after the lunch, she took a number of steps to “conceal” what she had done, the prosecution alleged.

There’d be evidence that she lied to investigators about the source of the mushrooms in the dish – saying some had come from Asian grocery in Melbourne and she’d never foraged wild ones. And she made a trip to a local dump to dispose of a food dehydrator prosecutors say she used to prepare the toxic meal.

“You might be wondering, ‘What is the motive?'” Dr Rogers said to the jury, “You might still be wondering this at the end of this trial.”

The prosecution will not be suggesting a specific motive, she explained.

“You do not have to be satisfied what the motive was, or even that there was one.”

What the jury could expect to hear, she said, was testimony from a range of witnesses, including: Mr Wilkinson, Ms Patterson’s estranged husband Simon Patterson, medical staff who treated the lunch guests, and police who investigated.

However the defence, in opening their case, reminded the jury they had not heard any actual evidence yet and needed to keep an open mind.

Barrister Colin Mandy says while the prosecution will try to cast Ms Patterson’s behaviour after the lunch as “incriminating”, jurors should consider how someone might react in that situation.

“Might people say or do things that are not well thought out, and might make them look bad?”

“The defence case is that she panicked because she was overwhelmed by the fact that these four people had become so ill because of the food she had served them. Three people died.”

He said Ms Patterson did not deliberately serve poisoned food to her guests.

“She didn’t intend to cause anyone any harm on that day… what happened was a tragedy, a terrible accident.”

The prosecution also detailed allegations of what took place in the lead up to the lunch, and at the table, in open court for the first time.

The trial heard that, in 2023, the accused had been amicably separated from her husband Simon Patterson for years.

“Simon remained hopeful for some time that he and the accused would someday reunite,” Dr Rogers told the jury.

He was also planning to attend the gathering but pulled out at the last minute because he had noticed a recent “change in his relationship” with Ms Patterson and felt “uncomfortable”, the prosecutor said. This was something that “disappointed” Ms Patterson who “emphasised the effort she had put into preparing the lunch”.

The jury was told it would hear testimony that Ms Patterson served her guests on large grey plates, but ate off a different, tan orange dish – prompting one of the guests to later ask if she had “a shortage of crockery”.

They said grace, dug in, and exchanged “banter” about how much they had eaten, before discussing how Ms Patterson should share her cancer diagnosis – which the defence admits was fake – with her children.

The lunch party broke up in the early afternoon, and by that night, all of the guests were feeling ill, Dr Rogers says. Within a day, the four had gone to hospital with severe symptoms. Donald Patterson – who had eaten his portion of lunch and about half his wife’s – told a doctor he’d vomited 30 times in the space of a few hours.

The prosecutor said the Wilkinsons had asked whether Ms Patterson was also in hospital, as she’d eaten the same meal as them.

She had gone to the hospital, reporting feeling ill, but repeatedly declined to be admitted, the court heard. A doctor who had treated the other lunch guests was so concerned for her welfare he called police to ask for help.

Likewise, the jury was told Ms Patterson kept refusing to seek treatment for her children, who she said had eaten the beef wellington leftovers – albeit with the mushrooms scraped off as they didn’t like them.

“Lots of people might have opinions or theories, but they aren’t based on the evidence,” the defence warned the jury at the end of the day.

“None of that should have any bearing on your decision.”

Taiwan has condemned Somalia for banning travellers with Taiwanese passports from entering or transiting through the East African country.

The ban took effect on Wednesday following an order issued by Somali aviation authorities last week, Taiwan’s foreign ministry said.

Somalia is yet to comment on the ban which comes as Taiwan, a self-ruled island claimed by China, boosts ties with Somaliland, which broke away from Somalia 34 years ago, but remains mostly unrecognised internationally.

In 2020, Somaliland and Taiwan set up embassies in each other’s capitals, angering both China and Somalia.

Somalia’s civil aviation authority issued a notice to airlines saying that Taiwanese passports “will no longer be valid for entry into or transit through the Federal Republic of Somalia” from 30 April, Taiwan’s foreign ministry said in a statement late on Tuesday.

• Somaliland and Taiwan: Two territories with few friends but each other

“The ministry of foreign affairs has strongly protested Somalia’s action made under the instigation of China to restrict the travel freedom and safety of Taiwanese nationals and has demanded that the Somali government immediately revoke the notice,” the ministry said.

It condemned Somalia’s “misinterpretation” of UN Resolution 2758 by linking it with the “one China” principle.

The ministry urged Taiwanese against traveling to Somalia or Somaliland for their own safety before Somalia reverses the ban, Taiwanese media reported.

Neither Somaliland nor Somalia has commented.

China said it “highly appreciates” the ban, calling it a “legitimate measure” that “reflects Somalia’s firm adherence to the one-China principle”, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun told journalists on Wednesday, according to the AFP news agency.

Taiwan has its own constitution and holds regular, multiparty elections to choose its own leaders.

China insists Taiwan is part of its territory and has threatened to use force if necessary to bring the island under its control.

Following a diplomatic push by China, Taiwan – officially known as the Republic of China – is only recognised by a handful of countries.

Somaliland, which is not recognised by any other sovereign state, unilaterally declared independence from the rest of Somalia in 1991, following the collapse of the dictatorial regime in Somalia led by the late General Mohamed Siad Barre.

Somaliland also holds regular elections, while many parts of Somalia are under the control of the al-Shabab militant group, which is linked to al-Qaeda.

Somalia sees Somaliland as part of its territory and has condemned Ethiopia for striking a deal with the Somaliland authorities to lease one of its ports.

• What’s behind China-Taiwan tensions?
• The unrecognised nation where 15-year-olds vote
• eSwatini – Taiwan’s last friend in Africa

Pakistan’s information minister says that the country has “credible intelligence” that India intends to launch a military strike within the next 24 to 36 hours.

Attaullah Tarar’s comments come after India accused Pakistan of supporting militants behind an attack in Indian-administered Kashmir that killed 26 tourists last week. Islamabad rejects the allegations.

Tarar said that India intends to use the attack as a “false pretext” for a strike and that “any such military adventurism by India would be responded to assuredly and decisively”.

The BBC has contacted the Indian foreign ministry for comment.

The attack near the tourist town of Pahalgam was the deadliest attack on civilians in two decades in the disputed territory. Both India and Pakistan claim the region and have fought two wars over it.

Troops from both sides have traded intermittent small-arms fire across the border in recent days.

There has been speculation over whether India will respond with military strikes against Pakistan, as it did after deadly militant attacks in 2019 and 2016.

Authorities said last week they had conducted extensive searches in Indian-administered Kashmir, detaining more than 1,500 people for questioning. More people have been detained since then, although the numbers are unclear.

Authorities have demolished the houses of at least 10 alleged militants. At least one was reportedly linked to a suspect named in the shootings.

Kashmir, which India and Pakistan claim in full but administer only in part, has been a flashpoint between the two nuclear-armed countries since they were partitioned in 1947.

Indian-administered Kashmir has seen an armed insurgency against Indian rule since 1989, with militants targeting security forces and civilians alike.

India has not named any group it suspects carried out the attack in Pahalgam and it remains unclear who did it. A little-known group called the Resistance Front, which was initially reported to have claimed it carried out the shootings, issued a statement denying involvement. The front is reportedly affiliated with Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based militant group.

Indian police have named three of four suspected attackers. They said two were Pakistani nationals and one a local man from Indian-administered Kashmir. There is no information on the fourth man.

Many survivors said the gunmen specifically targeted Hindu men.

The attack has sparked widespread anger in India, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi publicly saying the country will hunt the suspects “till the ends of the earth” and that those who planned and carried it out “will be punished beyond their imagination”.

If you say the name Donald Trump in the halls of wholesale markets and trade fairs in China, you’ll hear a faint chuckle.

The US president and his 145% tariffs have not instilled fear in many Chinese traders.

Instead, they have inspired an army of online Chinese nationalists to create mocking memes in a series of viral videos and reels – some of which include an AI-generated President Trump, Vice-President JD Vance and tech mogul Elon Musk toiling on footwear and iPhone assembly lines.

China is not behaving like a nation facing the prospect of economic pain and President Xi Jinping has made it clear that Beijing will not back down.

“For more than 70 years, China has always relied on self-reliance and hard work for development… it has never relied on anyone’s gifts and is unafraid of any unreasonable suppression,” he said this month.

His confidence may come in part because China is far less dependent than it was 10 years ago on exports to the US. But the truth is Trump’s brinkmanship and tariff hikes are pushing on pressure points that already exist within China’s own struggling economy. With a housing crisis, increasing job insecurity and an ageing population, Chinese people are simply not spending as much as their government would like.

Xi came to power in 2012 with a dream of a rejuvenated China. That is now being severely tested – and not just by US tariffs. Now, the question is whether or not Trump’s tariffs will dampen Xi’s economic dreams, or can he turn the obstacles that exist into opportunities?

With a population of 1.4 billion, China has, in theory, a huge domestic market. But there’s a problem. They don’t appear willing to spend money while the country’s economic outlook is uncertain.

This has not been prompted by the trade war – but by the collapse of the housing market. Many Chinese families invested their life savings in their homes, only to watch prices plummet in the last five years.

Housing developers continued to build even as the property market crumbled. It’s thought that China’s entire population would not fill all the empty apartments across the country.

The former deputy head of China’s statistics bureau, He Keng, admitted two years ago that the most “extreme estimate” is that there are now enough vacant homes for 3 billion people.

Travel round Chinese provinces and you see they are littered with empty projects – lines of towering concrete shells that have been labelled “ghost cities”. Others have been fitted out, the gardens have been landscaped, curtains frame the windows, and they appear filled with the promise of a new home. But only at night, when you see no lights, can you tell that the apartments are empty. There just aren’t enough buyers to match this level of construction.

The government acted five years ago to restrict the amount of money developers could borrow. But the damage to house prices and, in turn, consumer confidence in China, has been done and analysts have projected a 2.5% decline in home prices this year, according to a Reuters poll in February.

And it’s not just house prices that worry middle-class Chinese families.

They are concerned about whether the government can offer them a pension – over the next decade, about 300 million people, who are currently aged 50 to 60, are set to leave the Chinese workforce. According to a 2019 estimate by the state-run Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, the government pension fund could run out of money by 2035.

There are also fears about whether their sons, daughters and grandchildren can get a job as millions of college graduates are struggling to find work. More than one in five people between the ages of 16 and 24 in urban areas are jobless in China, according to official data published in August 2023. The government has not released youth unemployment figures since then.

The problem is that China cannot simply flip a switch and move from selling goods to the US to selling them to local buyers.

“Given the downward pressure on the economy, it is unlikely domestic spending can be significantly expanded in the short term,” says Prof Nie Huihua at Renmin University.

“Replacing exports with internal demand will take time.”

According to Prof Zhao Minghao, deputy director of the Center for American Studies at Fudan University, “China does not have high expectations for talks with the Trump administration… The real battleground is in the adjustment of China’s domestic policies, such as boosting domestic demand.”

To revive a slowing economy, the government has announced billions in childcare subsidies, increased wages and better paid leave. It has also introduced a $41bn programme offering discounts on items such as consumer electronics and electric vehicles (EVs) to encourage more people to spend. But Prof Zhang Jun, the Dean of Economics at Fudan University, believes this is not “sustainable”.

“We need a long-term mechanism,” he says. “We need to start increasing residents’ disposable income.”

This is urgent for Xi. The dream of prosperity he sold when he took power 13 years ago has not become reality.

Xi is also aware that China has a disheartened younger generation worried about their future. That could spell bigger trouble for the Communist Party: protests or unrest.

A report by Freedom House’s China Dissent Monitor claims that protests driven by financial grievances saw a steep increase in the last few months.

All protests are quickly subdued and censored on social media, so it is unlikely to pose a real threat to Xi for now.

“Only when the country does well and the nation does well can every person do well,” Xi said in 2012.

This promise was made when China’s economic rise looked unstoppable. It now looks uncertain.

Where the country has made huge strides over the past decade is in areas such as consumer electronics, batteries, EVs and artificial intelligence as part of a pivot to advanced manufacturing.

It has rivalled US tech dominance with the chatbot DeepSeek and BYD, which beat Tesla last year to become the world’s largest EV maker.

Yet Trump’s tariffs threaten to throw a spanner in the works.

The restrictions on the sale of key chips to China, including the most recent move tightening exports from US chip giant Nvidia, for instance, are aimed at curbing Xi’s ambitions for tech supremacy.

Despite that, Xi knows that Chinese manufacturers are at a decades-long advantage, so that US manufacturers are struggling to find the same scale of infrastructure and skilled labour elsewhere.

President Xi is also trying to use this crisis as a catalyst for further change and to find more new markets for China.

“In the short term, some Chinese exporters will be greatly impacted,” says Prof Zhang. “But Chinese companies will take the initiative to adjust the destination of exports to overcome difficulties. Exporters are waiting and looking for new customers.”

Donald Trump’s first term in office was China’s cue to look elsewhere for buyers. It has expanded its ties across South East Asia, Latin America and Africa – and a Belt and Road trade and infrastructure initiative shored up ties with the so-called Global South.

China is reaping the rewards from that diversification. More than 145 countries do more trade with China than they do with the US, according to the Lowy Institute.

In 2001, only 30 countries chose Beijing as their lead trade partner over Washington.

As Trump targets both friend and foe, some believe Xi can further upend the current US-led world order and portray his country as a stable, alternative global trade partner and leader.

The Chinese leader chose South East Asia for his first trip abroad after the tariff announcement, sensing his neighbours would be getting jittery about Trump’s tariffs.

Around a quarter of Chinese exports are now manufactured or shipped through a second country including Vietnam and Cambodia.

Recent US actions may also present a chance for Xi to positively shape China’s role in the world.

“Trump’s coercive tariff policy is an opportunity for Chinese diplomacy,” says Prof Zhang.

China will have to tread carefully. Some countries will be nervous that products being manufactured for the US could end up flooding into their markets.

Trump’s tariffs in 2016 sent a glut of cheap Chinese imports, originally intended for the US, into South East Asia, hurting many local manufacturers.

According to Prof Huihua, “about 20% of China’s exports go to the US – if these exports were to flood any regional market or country, it could lead to dumping and vicious competition, thereby triggering new trade frictions”.

There are barriers to Xi presenting himself as the arbiter of free trade in the world.

China has subjected other nations to trade restrictions in recent years.

In 2020, after the Australian government called for a global inquiry into the origins and early handling of the Covid pandemic, which Beijing argued was a political manoeuvre against them, China placed tariffs on Australian wine and barley and imposed biosecurity measures on some beef and timber and bans on coal, cotton and lobster. Some Australian exports of certain goods to China fell to nearly zero.

Australia’s Defence Minister Richard Marles said earlier this month that his nation will not be “holding China’s hand” as Washington escalated its trade war with Beijing.

China’s past actions may impede Xi’s current global outreach and many countries may be unwilling to choose between Beijing and Washington.

Even with all the various difficulties, Xi is betting that Beijing will be able to withstand any economic pain longer than Washington in this great power competition.

And it does appear that Trump has blinked first, last week hinting at a potential U-turn on tariffs, saying that the taxes he has so far imposed on Chinese imports would “come down substantially, but it won’t be zero”.

Meanwhile, Chinese social media is back in action.

“Trump has chickened out,” was one of the top trending search topics on the Chinese social media platform Weibo after the US president softened his approach to tariffs.

Even if or when talks do happen, China is playing a longer game.

The last trade war forced it to diversify its export market away from the US towards other markets – especially in the Global South.

This trade war has China looking in the mirror to see its own flaws – and whether it can fix them will be up to policies made in Beijing, not Washington.

President Trump used a rally in Michigan to mark what he claimed had been “the most successful first 100 days of any administration in the history of our country, according to many, many people”.

He highlighted his efforts to tackle illegal immigration, to bring back jobs to the US and end what he called “the inflation nightmare”.

BBC Verify has looked into some of the main claims from his speech.

Trump said “gasoline prices are down by a lot” since he took office.

On 29 April, the average price for a gallon of “regular” gas – or petrol – across the US was $3.16 (£2.36), according to data from the American Automobile Association (AAA).

That is slightly up from the $3.125 (£2.33) recorded by the AAA on the day Trump entered the White House.

In his speech, he added that gas prices had “just hit $1.98 in a lot of states”.

This is a claim he has made several times but we cannot find evidence of prices this low.

As of 29 April, no state had an average gas price lower than $2.67 (£1.99), according to the AAA.

The US president also spoke about the cost of eggs – a concern for many US consumers due to an ongoing bird flu outbreak – and said: “Since I took office, the cost of eggs is down 87%.”

This claim is false.

The average national price for consumers of a dozen large Grade A eggs when Trump entered office in January was about $4.95 (£3.70).

This rose to a record high of around $6.23 (£4.65) per dozen in March – according to the latest available figures.

The White House has pointed to wholesale egg prices as evidence of improvement.

Wholesale prices have gone down since Trump took office – but by about 52% – from $6.55 (£4.89) for a dozen large white eggs in January to $3.15 (£2.34) in the past week, according to the US Department of Agriculture.

Trump spoke at length about his efforts to tackle illegal immigration – a key campaign issue in last year’s election.

He said: “For two months in a row, we have set all time records for the lowest number of illegal border crossings ever recorded.”

This claim is backed up by the latest monthly figures on “encounters” of illegal migrants recorded by officials at the US-Mexico border.

In March, there were 7,181 encounters of migrants there and in February there were 8,346.

These are the the lowest numbers since these monthly records began in 2000.

By comparison, there were about 140,000 encounters at this border in each of those months last year under President Biden.

His term saw record numbers of border crossings which then fell towards the end of his presidency.

The Migration Policy Institute think tank has studied monthly averages of annual figures available before 2000 and says this year’s illegal border crossings are the lowest since the late 1960s, rather than the lowest for “all time”.

President Trump praised Elon Musk’s work at the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) saying: “They’ve saved over $150bn on waste, fraud and abuse”.

Doge, an advisory body, publishes a running total of its estimated savings on its website – it was $160bn the last time the site was updated on 20 April.

However, less than 40% of this figure is broken down into individual savings – which include cancelling government contracts, grants and leases.

Analysis by BBC Verify found only about half of these itemised savings had a link to a document or other form of evidence.

Doge says it is working to upload all receipts in a “digestible and transparent manner”.

Federal contract experts we spoke to also raised questions about Doge’s biggest claimed savings and said some had been overstated.

Trump said: “In three months we have created 350,000 jobs.”

This claim is backed up by official figures.

During Trump’s first two full months in office up until March (the latest available data) 345,000 jobs have been added, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics.

However, over the same period last year 468,000 jobs were added under President Biden.

Trump also said: “For the first time in recent memory, job gains for native-born Americans now exceed job gains for foreign workers.”

It is true that during President Trump’s first two full months in office more jobs have been created for native-born workers than foreign-born workers.

This also happened between February and April last year under President Biden.

What do you want BBC Verify to investigate?

Swedish police have arrested a teenager after a fatal triple shooting in the city of Uppsala on Tuesday.

The shooter reportedly fled on a scooter following the attack in a hair salon in the centre of the city, triggering a manhunt.

Police confirmed on Wednesday that the person arrested for the shooting is under the age of 18.

All three victims were aged between 15 and 20 years old, Swedish police told a news conference, though the region’s chief of police Erik Åkerlund said their identities have not been “100%” confirmed.

Police are investigating the possibility the deaths are related to gang crime, Swedish media reported.

One of those murdered at the hair salon is reportedly known to the police, local media said.

The victim was involved in a police investigation over a planned attack against a relative of gang leader Ismail Abdo, according to the reports. The person was never charged.

Abdo, nicknamed ‘jordgubben’ or ‘the strawberry’, is a well-known gang leader.

A new, violent chapter in Sweden’s gang wars began when Abdo’s mother was murdered in 2023 at her home in Uppsala, north of Stockholm.

Sweden has seen a wave of teenage gang crime in recent years, with suspects accused of a range of offences from vandalism to murder.

The Swedish government has proposed new legislation that would allow police to wiretap children under the age of 15 in an attempt to grapple with the problem.

In a pre-planned press conference on gang violence on Wednesday, the Minister of Justice Gunnar Strömmer suggested police would not need concrete evidence to conduct the wiretaps.

While he has acknowledged the proposals involve a major breach of privacy, Strömmer has suggested the measures are necessary to stop the recruitment of children as young as ten and 11 to gangs, Swedish media reported.

The government has also said it wants to tighten the country’s gun laws.

The attack came on the eve of the Walpurgis spring festival, when large crowds are expected to descend on the streets of Uppsala, a university town north of Stockholm.

Known in Sweden as Valborg, university students gather in the city for champagne breakfasts, herring lunches and a raft race on the river.

There is a huge bonfire on the outskirts of the city planned for Wednesday evening.

Åsa Larsson, a local police chief in Uppsala and Knivsta, said that Swedes planning to visit Uppsala for its annual Valborg spring festival events, popular with students, should not change their plans.

However, visitors were urged to contact police if they spotted anything they were concerned about.

She said that there would be a large police presence across Uppsala in the coming days, but that there were “no guarantees” that further violence could be avoided.

Following the shooting, police officers cordoned off a large area near the hair salon.

“Everything happened so fast. It just went bang, bang, bang,” a witness told Swedish channel TV4.

Another man said he was cooking at home when he heard “two bangs that sounded a bit like fireworks” going off outside on the street.

He told Swedish television he was “very surprised and scared” and shortly after “swarms of police and ambulances” started blocking off the street and telling people to move back.

On the journey into Yarrabah, there is nothing to suggest a national election is just days away.

Posters for candidates, inescapable in other parts of Australia, are conspicuously absent as you drive past fields of sugar cane and down a gently winding coastal road.

After entering this small Indigenous community near Cairns in far north Queensland, with fishing nets sitting on palm-lined shores, the only thing fighting for attention is a truck selling ice cream – urgently dinging a bell as it avoids the wild horses and dogs that wander the streets.

“It’s weird,” says Suzanne Andrews, chief executive of the town’s Gurriny Yealamucka Health Services. “We don’t see any placards. No-one’s visiting us.”

Watching the leaders of Australia’s two major parties debate each other on television, the Jaru Bunuba Bardi woman was dismayed that “they didn’t talk about any Aboriginal issues or concerns”.

“So,” she asks “what the hell’s going on?”

Indigenous Australians, who represent about 3.8% of the nation’s 26 million population, are by most socio-economic measures the most disadvantaged people in the country – something successive leaders have for years called a “national shame”.

Yet in this election campaign, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Opposition leader Peter Dutton have had little to say on First Nations issues.

One glaring exception occurred this week, when during the final leader’s debate Dutton said Indigenous “welcome to country” ceremonies – where a local Aboriginal person acknowledges and give consent to events taking place on their traditional lands – were “overdone” and should not take place so frequently.

The comments represent one of the only times on the campaign trail that Dutton has publicly addressed issues specifically relating to First Nations people – and not to discuss disadvantage, but within the context of a culture war.

Part of the reason politicians try to steer clear of First Nations issues, according to experts and advocates, is that many believe they are too divisive and therefore electorally risky – especially after the failure of the Voice to Parliament referendum in 2023.

That referendum, which was loudly supported by Albanese in the most polarising moment of his leadership, saw 60% of voters reject a proposal to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australia’s constitution and give them greater political say through a Voice to Parliament.

Those opposing it said the idea was divisive, would create special “classes” of citizens where some have more rights than others, and the new advisory body would slow government decision-making.

Ahead of the vote, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people on both sides of the debate told the BBC they hoped the unprecedented level of interest in their lives would build momentum for more policies to improve them.

Ms Andrews was one of them. But now she looks back at the result with sadness, believing it has now led political parties to “play it safe” and avoid “the hot Aboriginal issues”.

Others, including those who loudly opposed the Voice proposal, agree.

On referendum night, prominent anti-Voice campaigner Warren Mundine told the BBC “now the hard work starts”.

Some 18 months on, he says the reality is that people on both sides of the political aisle promptly disengaged with Indigenous issues after the referendum.

“This is one of the sad things about this election campaign here: whether the Voice got up or didn’t get up, we still had work to do,” he said.

“What’s happened now is that this is probably the first election that I’ve been in where there is no conversation about an Aboriginal policy. It’s just gone silent.”

Lidia Thorpe, an independent senator in Victoria, told the BBC that “Albanese particularly is too scared to mention us [Indigenous Australians] because of his failed referendum that we should never have had in the first place”.

Thorpe spearheaded an Indigenous-run Blak Sovereign movement opposing the Voice, calling instead for priority to be given to a legally binding treaty between First Nations peoples and the Australian government.

“In previous elections, even though we may have been an afterthought and tacked on the end of the sentences, like we always are, at least we were mentioned. Now it’s complete silence,” she said.

“This election could have been a real opportunity for both leaders to unite the nation and tell some truth about the plight of our people. They need to tell the truth that these injustices continue, and they need to tell the truth that they are in a position to change that, to turn that around.”

Since 2008, the Australian government’s Closing the Gap strategy has sought to reduce levels of Indigenous disadvantage through the annual tracking of 18 key measures in areas such as health and education.

The latest review, however, found only four were on track to be met, while four were worsening – including the annual rates of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander incarceration, which was up 12% in a year.

Despite these trends, Professor Rodney Smith of the University of Sydney says the defeat of the Voice – including in many Labor strongholds – makes it “electorally foolish” to talk too much about First Nations issues this election.

He points to Coalition adverts that tie money “wasted” on the referendum – which is estimated to have cost more than $A400m – into the discussion about cost of living and a struggling economy.

Prof Smith also argues, however, that the 2025 election is not unprecedented in its lack of focus on Indigenous affairs, but rather a return to the norm after several years of the issues receiving more attention than usual.

“I’m not saying people shouldn’t care about this,” he says. “I’m just saying that generally speaking, the electorate doesn’t particularly care about it.”

Recent data from Australian National University (ANU) seems to back that up. A long-term study of voter attitudes found that between January 2024 and January 2025 there was a sharp decline in the number of people believing it was the government’s responsibility to reduce the gap in living standards between First Nations Australians and the rest of the population.

“This lack of policy focus (by Labor and the Coalition) reflects a low prioritisation amongst the Australian population” ANU’s Professor Nicholas Biddle said.

Independent MP Bob Katter puts it more bluntly.

A former minister of Aboriginal Affairs when a Queensland state MP in the 1980s, Mr Katter says he thinks about the struggles of many Indigenous Australians “every night before I go to bed”.

He told the BBC he believes in more self-governance and has campaigned to give greater access to farmable land and fishing rights.

He also admits he doesn’t talk about those issues on the campaign trail, though.

“As a politician that’s got to win votes in the election, I wouldn’t be game,” he told the BBC.

That’s hard for many Indigenous people to swallow given the toll the referendum took – on those on both sides of the debate.

A report published by Sydney’s University of Technology last month found that the Voice referendum led to an increase in hostile levels of racism towards First Nations People, recording 453 “validated” incidents of racism roughly six months either side of the vote.

About a fifth of all complaints contained mention of the failed referendum.

“While there was significant thought and debate given to the ideas of nation building and the righting of wrongs, the undercurrent of racism was ever present,” said the report’s guest author Professor Lindon Coombes in his introduction.

“This is its insidiousness.”

In Yarrabah, Ms Andrews becomes suddenly tearful, telling how her two daughters, studying at university in Brisbane, were intimidated and got “so many racist remarks” after the vote.

“To do this to young people, who have left community to better their life and to be something, is so wrong,” she said.

It was not just increased racism that caused harm, but the tone and intensity of the debate leading up to the vote, many say.

Mr Mundine says his participation in the toxic and polarised national discussion meant he felt alienated from many in his community.

“I got kicked off boards. I lost jobs… [I] was ostracised.”

“Being the topic of every discussion for such a long period of time was overwhelming and extremely damaging to people’s social and emotional well-being,” says Clinton Schultz, a Gamilaroi/Gomeroi man, psychologist and Director of First Nations Strategy at the Black Dog Institute.

“The aftermath of that has left a lot of people not willing to engage in in the debates moving forward.”

Millima May, a Kulumbirigin Danggalaba Tiwi woman from the Northern Territory, in 2023 told the BBC all First Nations people wanted was “a seat at the table” where decisions about their lives were made. But now there’s been a “tactical” decision by some in the community to “lie low”.

“I think a lot of Aboriginal people have really chosen to opt out of the political space and of so -called democracy in Australia,” she says.

“If you could trust our political leaders and candidates to have nuanced and informed conversations, then you would be able to have debates and conversations in a respectful and safe way.

“But that is not how Australian politics is operating at the moment.”

Shahida’s face crumpled with grief every time she thought about the choice in front of her: Stay for love or go back to her siblings?

Shahida Adrees, now 61, moved to India from Pakistan in 2002, when she married her maternal cousin Adrees Khan, a resident of Punjab state (marriage between cousins is practised in some communities in South Asia).

The couple lived a peaceful, predictable life – Khan working as a driver and Shahida looking after their home and child.

Every few years, Shahida, who is staying in India on a long-term visa, would obtain a travel permit and make a trip to Pakistan to meet her family.

But that sense of routine was shattered last week when India suspended almost all visas for Pakistani citizens as part of its response to the brutal attack in Indian-administered Kashmir that killed 26 people. Pakistan, which denies any involvement, has hit back with tit-for-tat measures and also cancelled most visas for Indians.

When Shahida heard the news, she knew what it meant; she could either go back to her siblings and other family members in Pakistan now, or stay and risk never seeing them again.

She chose to stay. Earlier this week, she cancelled her plans of going to Pakistan to see an ailing aunt. “If I had gone, I wouldn’t have been let back into India. But now that I am here, I don’t know if I’ll ever see my brothers and sisters again,” she says.

Shahida’s family is among hundreds in India and Pakistan who, with members on both sides of the borders, now face the risk of separation.

Despite neighbours India and Pakistan sharing a hostile relationship, love stories and marriages between its citizens are not uncommon. That’s because of the deeply intertwined cultural history of the countries which were partitioned along religious lines in 1947, forcing millions to leave their homes and migrate to the other side.

The border between the nations runs not just through the ground, but also through families – many Indians have relatives and their hometowns in Pakistan, and vice versa.

Some, like Shahida’s family, have tried to stay in touch with their roots through marriages with relatives across the border. In recent years, many couples have also met online, often overcoming insurmountable odds to stay together.

Many of them apply for long-term visas that need to be renewed periodically while others apply for citizenship of the respective countries – but the process can take years.

This week, as the visa restrictions took effect, heart-breaking visuals of people – young and old couples, desperate sons and daughters, and elderly parents – pleading with authorities for help were splashed across television screens and on social media.

The BBC has contacted the Indian foreign ministry for comment.

“I came here with my mother. Now they are asking us to leave without her. How can I do that?” mumbled a tearful Mohammed Ayat, 17.

A Pakistani national, Ayat came to India last month to meet his maternal relatives. His mother is an Indian citizen who was living in Pakistan on a visa that is pending renewal.

But even as her children returned to Pakistan, she had to stay in India as she wasn’t sure whether she would be allowed into the country.

“They can punish them [the militants], but what is our fault?” Ayat told ANI news agency.

The exact number of people leaving both countries due to the latest tensions is not clear – but is estimated to run into hundreds.

Sitting in a bus that was taking her to the Attari-Wagah border, Parveen (who uses only one name), told reporters that she had lived in India for 41 years.

“I have no mother, brothers or sisters in Pakistan. I have nowhere to go there. I am completely helpless,” she said.

Families say the abruptness of the visa suspensions and the resulting chaos have left them feeling uncertain.

The restrictions imposed by Delhi exempt those like Shahida, who have been living in India on a long-term visa which needs to be renewed every few years. Valid for up to five years, these visas are given to women of Pakistani and Bangladeshi nationalities who are married to Indian citizens.

Under Indian rules, all long-term visa holders are allowed to visit their home country after obtaining a second permit, called the No Objection to Return to India (NORI) visa.

But in the days following the attack, there have been reports of NORI visa holders also being stopped from crossing the border into India, as officials waited for clarity.

Shahida says that in her case, Indian authorities have assured her that NORI visa-holders would be exempted from the restrictions.

But she is not willing to take the risk of leaving India.

She wondered if things would’ve been better if she had got an Indian citizenship.

“I did apply for it in 2009, but the file never moved. I never received a response,” she said.

For Tahira Ahmed, even becoming an Indian citizen has not been enough to allay her anxieties. A Pakistani by birth, Ms Ahmed moved to Punjab state in 2003 after marrying Maqbool Ahmed, an Indian . In 2016, Tahira was granted Indian citizenship, 13 years after her marriage.

But she is still fearful about the prospect of being separated from her family and sent to Pakistan.

“Whenever tensions escalate between the two countries, our lives get caught up in the middle,” she said. “My own wedding was postponed for two years in 2001 when the border was closed after an attack on India’s parliament.”

While they wait for answers, some couples are desperate.

Earlier this week, BBC Punjabi met Maria Masih, a Pakistani citizen who moved to India in 2024 to marry her lover Sonu.

The two met through social media and knew each other for many years before they decided to get married. According to Sonu, the couple applied for a long-term visa for Maria immediately after their wedding. But their application is still under process. Maria is now seven months pregnant.

“I want to live here. I don’t want to go back. Please give me a visa and let me stay,” a forlorn Maria told reporters earlier this week.

The couple has since reportedly been absconding and an investigation is under way.

Miles away, Ms Ahmed wonders if one can really blame them or anyone for trying to escape.

“What is their fault anyway? They came here for love,” she said.

On a searing afternoon in Vietnam, Tung Linh declared she “basically knows nothing” about the bloody, decades-long war that pitted her country’s Communist-run North against the United States-backed South.

“My grandparents fought in the war and because of that today we can look at the sky and see an airplane and we don’t feel scared, like they did,” says the 20-year-old college student.

Stuck to her right cheek was a little yellow star on a red rectangle – the Vietnamese flag. Like her, Ho Chi Minh City, where she lived, was gearing up to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the end of the war, when the Communists triumphed.

Today’s Vietnam is a remarkably different country than the one American troops withdrew from in defeat – it’s enterprising, it’s growing fast and it’s getting richer.

Its authoritarian Communist leadership has embraced capitalism. They aspire to follow in China’s footsteps, and have ploughed money and effort into becoming a reliable manufacturing hub, even an alternative to China.

But that is a risky ambition during US President Donald Trump’s trade war – it’s partly why he is threatening a 46% levy against the South East Asian nation. That could shatter the country’s economic potential.

Vietnam was a French colony, a Chinese vassal and for 20 years, the proxy battlefield in America’s bloody struggle to stop China spreading communism across South East Asia.

But it cannot escape its geography. Nestled beneath China’s wide rump, it is once again on the frontline in a new American battle –which hopes to stem Beijing’s rise as an economic superpower.

Vietnam is a young country in a hurry. The median age is 33, considerably younger than Thailand or China (40), and far younger than Japan (50).

“I want to do a job that will bring more success to Vietnam,” said Linh in fluent English. She is studying economics and marketing. “And yes, success for me too,” she admits, with a smile, when prodded.

It’s a dream that suits her bustling city – now a sprawling metropolis of 10 million people, Ho Chi Minh City has the same choking traffic, glass-clad skyscrapers, five-star hotels, restaurants and seedy massage parlours as any Asian mega city.

You would be hard put to find traces of the socialist ideology that led to the city’s capture in 1975, when it was the capital of South Vietnam. The victors renamed it city Ho Chi Minh, after the revolutionary father of North Vietnam. But to locals, it is still Saigon.

And when it fell on this day 50 years ago, South Vietnam ceased to exist as North Vietnamese tanks smashed through the tall iron gates of the presidential compound and raised the red flag with a yellow star over the presidential palace.

America’s ally, the southern regime, was vanquished. Its last president had fled the previous day. More than two decades of bitter conflict was over.

The victory had come at an enormous cost. An estimated three million dead and millions more injured. Between 1968 and 1975, a greater tonnage of bombs was dropped on this slender piece of land than in all theatres in World War Two.

But few here want to talk about the war even as they celebrate the anniversary of their “reunification”.

Linh and her friends screamed in delight as a truck carrying soldiers drove past. The shy idols waved back – they were on their way to the barracks after rehearsals for the anniversary parade.

“I am excited because this is the day when we reunited, when we became one country again,” Linh said.

Her answer sounded a little rehearsed, not least because of the government-appointed minder who accompanied the BBC throughout. But her enthusiasm for her future – and her country’s – is not uncommon.

A little further down the road, 18-year-old Minh, who did not want to share her last name, told us she was studying to be a lawyer so she could “become successful”. With a laugh, she added: “And rich!”

When we asked about how young people feel about Americans, the minder winced visibly and tried to stop her answering.

“We’re not angry,” she says. “We don’t hate them. That was the past. Now we want to trade with America. You know globalisation? We want to learn from America.”

Vietnam’s new leaders appear to have the same ambition. In January the country’s new Communist party chief, To Lam, embarked on a program to slash bureaucracy that could impress Elon Musk, who has been overseeing the Trump administration’s controversial cost-cutting team.

The country’s 63 provinces and municipalities are being reduced to 34, and government ministries and agencies cut from 30 to 17. This year, 100,000 government employees are being laid off, according to official estimates.

The ambition is huge. So far only one country in South East Asia, Singapore, has managed to escape the “middle-income trap”, where economic growth slows before countries become rich. Vietnam, whose economy is growing at a steady 5%, intends to be the second. It has flung its doors wide open to investment – and is welcoming back those it once drove from its shores.

After the 1975 victory around two million southern Vietnamese fled the country. Many were ethnic Chinese. They packed on to flimsy boats and set out across the South China Sea. They became known as “the boat people”. Today their descendants make up a diaspora of nearly six million stretching from the United States and Canada to France, Germany, Japan and Taiwan.

“Since 2017, I have promoted many Taiwanese companies to invest in Vietnam, and I myself am an advisor to several large electronics companies that I brought here,” said Lisa Wu, who was born in Saigon but spent three decades in Taiwan. Now she is back.

“The most attractive thing is that the Vietnamese government is very supportive. The electronics industry is expanding out of China and a lot will choose Vietnam.”

It’s no coincidence this shift began around 2018, when Trump declared his first trade war against China.

Two young businesswomen from southern China, who did not want to share their names, tell us they have spent the last two years setting up a shoe factory here: “Now it’s ready to go.”

They plan to export to the US. They are concerned about the possibility of higher tariffs for Vietnam – it currently faces a 10% levy, like most of the world – but “it’s a lot better here than China”, they say with a laugh. Chinese imports to the US face a range of tariffs that go up to 245% for some goods.

Still, Vietnam is feeling the impact, Ms Wu said. “I had several factories preparing to begin operations here this May. But because of the policy change, all have stopped and everyone is waiting.”

Vietnam is again being asked to choose – America or China. But it’s not a choice it can or will make because it needs both.

Less than two weeks ago, they rolled out the red carpet to welcome Chinese leader Xi Jinping in the capital Hanoi. Warm words were spoken of fraternal friendship and support. But relations with their big neighbour are trickier than they may appear. For years, Vietnam has walked a tightrope between Washington and Beijing – the latter’s expansive ambitions can be a threat to neighbours, especially growing economies that are keen to woo US businesses.

As Vietnam insists on “looking forward”, it appears to have almost forgotten the men and women who fought in the jungles and through the hell of American bombs.

But even they say there must be no return to the past. “I used to have a scar here,” says Le Thanh Gian, pointing to his right hand, where a bullet had once lodged.

“There are still some pieces of shrapnel in my body that couldn’t be removed. There were battles where it seemed like we would all be killed. But some of us survived while others fell.”

But he says he bears no anger anymore.

“We must have peace. We have already made a lot of progress. People’s lives are more prosperous and fulfilled. Now we must work together with the Americans for the future.”

Nestled in the mountains of Iraqi Kurdistan sits the picturesque village of Sergele.

For generations villagers have made a living growing pomegranates, almonds and peaches and foraging in the surrounding forests for wild fruits and spices.

But Sergele, located 16km (10 miles) from the border with Turkey, has become increasingly surrounded by Turkish military bases, which are dotted across the slopes.

One, perched halfway up the western ridge, looms over the village, while another in the east is under construction.

At least seven have been built here over the past two years, including one by a small dam that regulates Sergele’s water supply, rendering it off limits to villagers.

“This is 100% a form of occupation of Kurdish [Iraqi Kurdistan] lands,” says farmer Sherwan Sherwan Sergeli, 50, who has lost access to some of his land.

“The Turks ruined it.”

Sergele is now in danger of being dragged into what’s known locally as the “Forbidden Zone” – a large strip of land in northern Iraq affected by Turkey’s war with the Kurdish militant group the PKK, which launched an insurgency in southern Turkey in 1984.

The Forbidden Zone spans almost the entire length of the Iraqi border with Turkey and is up to 40km (25 miles) deep in places.

Community Peacemaker Teams, a human rights group based in Iraqi Kurdistan, says that hundreds of civilians have been killed by drone and air strikes in and around the Forbidden Zone. According to a 2020 Kurdistan parliamentary report, thousands have been forced off their land and whole villages have been emptied out by the conflict.

Sergele is now effectively on the front line of Turkey’s war with the PKK.

When the BBC World Service Eye Investigations team visited the area, Turkish aircraft pummelled the mountains surrounding the village to root out PKK militants, who have long operated from caves and tunnels in northern Iraq.

Much of the land around Sergele had been burned by shelling.

“The more bases they put up, the worse it gets for us,” says Sherwan.

Turkey has been rapidly growing its military presence in the Forbidden Zone in recent years, but until now the scale of this expansion was not publicly known.

Using satellite imagery assessed by experts and corroborated with on-the-ground reporting and open-source content, the BBC found that as of December 2024, the Turkish military had built at least 136 fixed military installations across northern Iraq.

Through its vast network of military bases, Turkey now holds de-facto control of more than 2,000 sq km (772 square miles) of Iraqi land, the BBC’s analysis found.

Satellite images further reveal that the Turkish military has built at least 660km (410 miles) of roads connecting its facilities. These supply routes have resulted in deforestation and left a lasting imprint on the region’s mountains.

While a few of the bases date back to the 1990s, 89% have been constructed since 2018, after which Turkey began significantly expanding its military presence in Iraqi Kurdistan.

The Turkish government didn’t respond to the BBC’s requests for interviews, but has maintained that its military bases are necessary to push back the PKK, which is designated a terrorist organisation by Ankara and a number of Western nations, including the UK.

The sub-district capital of Kani Masi, which is only 4km (2.5 miles) from the Iraqi-Turkish border and parts of which are within the Forbidden Zone, may offer a glimpse into Sergele’s future.

Once famous for its apple production, few residents remain here now.

Farmer Salam Saeed, whose land is in the shadow of a large Turkish base, hasn’t been able to cultivate his vineyard for the past three years.

“The moment you get here, you will have a drone hover over you,” he tells the BBC.

“They will shoot you if you stay.”

The Turkish military first set up here in the 1990s and has been consolidating its presence since.

Its main military base, featuring concrete blast walls, watch and communication towers and space for armoured personnel carriers to move inside, is much more developed than the smaller outposts around Sergele.

Salam, like some other locals, believes Turkey ultimately wants to claim the territory as its own.

“All they want is for us to leave these areas,” he adds.

Near Kani Masi, the BBC saw first-hand how Turkish forces have effectively pushed back the Iraqi border guard, which is responsible for protecting Iraq’s international boundaries.

At several locations, the border guards were manning positions well inside Iraqi territory, directly opposite Turkish troops, unable to go right up to the border and potentially risk a clash.

“The posts that you see are Turkish posts,” says General Farhad Mahmoud, pointing to a ridge just across a valley, about 10km (6 miles) inside Iraqi territory.

But “we cannot reach the border to know the number of posts”, he adds.

Turkey’s military expansion in Iraqi Kurdistan – fuelled by its rise as a drone power and growing defence budget – is seen as part of a broader foreign policy shift towards greater interventionism in the region.

Similar to its operations in Iraq, Turkey has also sought to establish a buffer zone along its border with Syria to contain Syrian armed groups allied with the PKK.

In public, Iraq’s government has condemned Turkey’s military presence in the country. But behind closed doors it has accommodated some of Ankara’s demands.

In 2024, the two sides signed a memorandum of understanding to jointly fight the PKK.

But the document, obtained by the BBC, did not place any limitations on Turkish troops in Iraq.

Iraq depends on Turkey for trade, investment and water security, while its fractured internal politics have further undermined the government’s ability to take a strong stance.

Iraq’s national government did not respond to the BBC requests for comment.

People outside the UK can watch the documentary on YouTube

Meanwhile, the rulers of the semi-autonomous region of Iraqi Kurdistan have a close relationship with Ankara based on mutual interests and have often downplayed the civilian harm due to Turkey’s military action.

The Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), an arch enemy of the PKK, dominates the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) and has officially been in charge since 2005, when Iraq’s constitution granted the region its semi-autonomous status.

The KDP’s close ties with Turkey have contributed to the region’s economic success and have strengthened its position, both against its regional political rivals and with the Iraqi government in Baghdad, with which it tussles for greater autonomy.

Hoshyar Zebari, a senior member of the KDP’s politburo, sought to blame the PKK for Turkey’s presence in Iraqi Kurdistan.

“They [the Turkish military] are not harming our people,” he told the BBC.

“They are not detaining them. They are not interfering in them going about their business. Their focus, their sole goal is the PKK.”

The conflict shows no signs of ending, despite the PKK’s long-jailed leader Abdulla Ocalan calling in February for his fighters to lay down arms and disband.

Turkey has continued to shell targets across Iraqi Kurdistan, while the PKK claimed responsibility for downing a Turkish drone last month.

And while violent incidents in Turkey have declined since 2016, according to a tally by the NGO Crisis Group, those in Iraq have spiked, with civilians living on the border region facing growing risk of death and displacement.

One of those killed was 24-year-old Alan Ismail, a stage-four cancer patient hit by an air strike in August 2023 while on a trip to the mountains with his cousin, Hashem Shaker.

The Turkish military has denied carrying out a strike that day, but a police report seen by the BBC attributes the incident to a Turkish drone.

When Hashem filed a complaint in a local court about the attack he was detained by Kurdish security forces and held for eight months on suspicion of supporting the PKK – an accusation he and his family deny.

“It has destroyed us. It’s like killing the whole family,” says Ismail Chichu, Alan’s father.

“They [the Turks] have no rights to kill people in their own country on their own land.”

Turkey’s Defence Ministry did not respond to the BBC’s requests for comment. It has previously told the media that the Turkish armed forces follow international law, and that in the planning and execution of their operations they only target terrorists, while taking care to prevent harm to civilians.

The BBC has seen documents suggesting Kurdish authorities may have acted to help Turkey evade accountability for civilian casualties.

Confidential papers seen by the BBC show a Kurdish court closed the investigation into Alan’s killing, saying the perpetrator was unknown.

And his death certificate – issued by Kurdish authorities and seen by the BBC – says he died because of “explosive fragments”.

Failing to mention when victims of air strikes have died as a result of violence, rather than an accident, makes it difficult for families to seek justice and compensation, to which they’re entitled under both Iraqi and Kurdish law.

“In most of the death certificates, they only wrote ‘infijar’, which means explosion,” says Kamaran Othman from Community Peacemaker Teams.

“It can be anything exploding.

“I think the Kurdish Regional Government doesn’t want to make Turkey responsible for what they are doing here.”

The KRG said it acknowledged the “tragic loss of civilians resulting from military confrontation between the PKK and Turkish army in the region”.

It added that “a number of casualties” had been documented as “civilian martyrs”, meaning they have been unjustly killed and entitling them to compensation.

Almost two years after Alan was killed, his family is still waiting, if not for compensation, at least for acknowledgement from the KRG.

“They could at least send their condolences – we don’t need their compensation,” says Ismail.

“When something is gone, it’s gone forever.”

Two cookbook authors have accused TikTok influencer Brooke Bellamy of copying their recipes.

Nagi Maehashi, the Australian founder of popular food website RecipeTin Eats, said Ms Bellamy’s cookbook contains recipes with “word-for-word similarities to mine”.

Ms Bellamy, who owns the popular Brooki Bakehouse, has rejected her allegations, saying her book contains “100 recipes I have created over many years”. One of those in question was created before Ms Maehashi published hers, she claims.

Hours after Ms Maehashi’s raised her allegations, US author Sally McKenney also accused Ms Bellamy of plagiarising her vanilla cake recipe.

Ms Maehashi said that a reader pointed out what she described as “remarkable similarities” between her caramel slice recipe and the one in Ms Bellamy’s best-selling cookbook Bake with Brooki.

She said she later also discovered similarities between her baklava recipe and Ms Bellamy’s, offering a side-by-side comparison in a statement on RecipeTin Eats.

Ms Maehashi is the author of two cookbooks and her website, which she started in 2014, attracts a monthly readership of 45 million page views.

Ms Bellamy is the owner of three Brooki Bakehouse branches, all in Queensland, which were set up in 2022. She is also a popular baker on TikTok with two million followers.

Ms Maehashi said she had contacted Ms Bellamy’s publisher, Penguin Random House Australia, adding that they “brought in lawyers and resorted to what felt to me legal intimidation”.

“It feels like a blatant exploitation of my work. To see them plagiarised and used in a book for profit, without permission, and without credit, doesn’t just feel unfair,” she added.

Ms Maehashi has retained her own legal counsel and has written to both Ms Bellamy and Penguin.

Bake with Brooki was published in October 2024 and has since sold A$4.6m (£2.1m; $2.9) worth of copies.

Penguin and Ms Bellamy have both strenuously denied the accusations, with the publisher issuing a response to Ms Maehashi confirming “the recipes in the BWB Book were written by Brooke Bellamy”.

Despite maintaining no wrongdoing, Ms Bellamy said she offered to take down the recipes from future reprints “to prevent further aggravation”, and that this was communicated “swiftly” to Ms Maehashi.

She added that she had “great respect for Nagi”, but has stood by her recipes in a series of Instagram stories.

“Recipe development in today’s world is enveloped in inspiration from other cooks, cookbook authors, food bloggers and content creators,” she said, adding that the “willingness to share receipes” is what she loves about baking.

Both Ms Maehashi’s and Ms Bellamy’s cookbooks have been shortlisted for this year’s Australian Book Industry Awards.

Ms McKenney, who authors the website Sally’s Baking Addiction, accused Ms Bellamy of copying her vanilla cake recipe, which is included in Ms Bellamy’s cookbook and YouTube channel.

“Original receipe creators who put in the work to develop and test recipes deserve credit – especially in a best-selling cookbook,” Ms McKenny wrote on Instagram.

At least 14 people, including two children, have been killed after a massive fire broke out at a hotel in the eastern Indian state of West Bengal.

Two people were also seriously injured in the fire, which started on Tuesday night at Rituraj Hotel in Kolkata city.

The blaze is now under control, but authorities say they are still carrying out rescue operations.

It’s not yet clear how the fire started. Police have set up a special investigation team to look into the incident.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi wrote on X that he was “anguished by the loss of lives” and announced financial compensation to the families of the victims.

Deadly fires are often reported in buildings in Indian cities, with poor planning and lax enforcement of safety regulations playing a role.

Last year, at least 27 people died in a massive fire at a games arcade in the western state of Gujarat.

Months later, 10 newborns were killed in Uttar Pradesh state after a blaze broke out in the neonatal unit of a hospital in Jhansi district.

In Kolkata, reports say guests at the hotel fled to the building rooftop and used flashlights from their phone to signal for help. Videos show people climbing onto ledges outside their room windows to escape the fire.

Hydraulic ladders were used by firefighters to rescue those stranded on the ledges, the Indian Express newspaper reported. Most of the victims were guests who were not able to get out of their rooms, police told the newspaper.

Manoj Kumar Verma, Kolkata police chief, said that the special investigation team will look into the difficulties faced by hotel guests in evacuating and whether fire exits were operational.

The state’s social welfare minister, Sashi Panja, called the fire an “unfortunate incident”.

“The fire brigade tried to rescue all the people but some of them unfortunately died because of suffocation,” she told reporters. “Two children were among those killed.”

Sukanta Majumdar, a junior federal minister and chief of West Bengal’s opposition Bharatiya Janata Party, has criticised the state government and called for “stricter monitoring” of fire safety measures to prevent such tragedies in future.

US President Donald Trump has taken action to ease the impact of new tariffs on the car making industry, which had sparked warnings about higher prices and the potential for significant hits to sales and production.

The change will allow companies with US factories to reduce the amount they pay in import taxes on foreign parts, using a formula tied to how many cars they sell and the price.

The provision is intended to provide relief to businesses for two years as they rework their supply chains, the White House said.

Officials also moved to shield car firms from facing mounting tariffs on the same items.

They said businesses that have to pay tariffs on cars and parts would not be charged other duties the administration has imposed on steel, aluminium and goods from Canada and Mexico.

The changes came as Trump visited Michigan on Tuesday for a rally to mark his first 100 days in office.

The state is home to the so-called Detroit Three carmakers – Ford, General Motors (GM) and Stellantis – and a network of more than 1,000 major suppliers to the industry.

Those firms and the wider industry have been plunged into uncertainty since Trump announced new 25% tariffs on cars and car parts in March, saying he wanted to expand domestic car manufacturing – an industry the White House sees as key to national security.

Trump’s tariff announcement drove a spike in sales, as consumers rushed to get ahead of the tariffs. But it has also left businesses scrambling to respond.

Ahead of the latest announcement, General Motors and other carmakers said they welcomed the plans to soften the impact of the measures.

“We’re grateful to President Trump for his support of the US automotive industry and the millions of Americans who depend on us,” GM chief executive Mary Barra said in an emailed statement.

“We appreciate the productive conversations with the President and his Administration and look forward to continuing to work together.”

General Motors, which reported its quarterly performance to investors on Tuesday, also said on Tuesday that it needed to rework its forecast for the year and pulled its prior guidance.

In an unusual move, it also postponed the call with analysts that had been set to discuss the results.

Tariffs on foreign-made cars – which accounted for nearly half of US sales last year – went into effect last month.

The duties on parts were expected to come into force on 3 May.

Under the modified plan, carmakers will be able to claim an “offset” for what they pay in tariffs on car parts, worth up to 3.75% of the suggested retail price of all the cars they assemble in the US.

That share would fall to 2.5% in the second year.

The White House said the rules were designed so that a car with 85% of its parts made in the US – or in Canada or Mexico under the terms of an existing free trade deal – would not face any tariffs, a threshold that rises to 90% in the second year.

The adjustment is a recognition of the global nature of the industry’s current supply networks, where even cars that promote themselves as American-made often source a significant share of their parts from abroad.

In remarks to reporters ahead of the signing, Trump downplayed the easing, saying they applied to a “very, very small part of the car” and while noting he did not want to penalise companies with factories in the US.

“We just wanted to help them during this little transition, short-term,” he said.

Last week, a coalition of US motor industry groups called on the president to not impose the measures on parts.

A letter to his administration from groups representing companies including GM, Toyota and Volkswagen said the levies would “lead to higher auto prices for consumers, lower sales at dealerships and will make servicing and repairing vehicles both more expensive”.

Ford said it appreciated Trump’s decision, which it said would “help mitigate the impact of tariffs on automakers, suppliers and consumers”.

“We will continue to work closely with the administration in support of the president’s vision for a healthy and growing auto industry in America,” a statement added.

The car maker said policies that encouraged exports and ensured affordable supply chains to promote more domestic growth were “essential”.

“It will be important for the major vehicle importers to match Ford’s commitment to building in America,” the company said, adding that if they did, the US would see a “windfall of new assembly and supplier factories and hundreds of thousands of new jobs”.

Stellantis chairman John Elkann echoed the sentiments of his rival carmakers in response to the tariff reliefs.

“We look forward to our continued collaboration with the US administration to strengthen a competitive American auto industry and stimulate exports,” he added.

US President Donald Trump has called Amazon founder Jeff Bezos after it was reported that the retail giant planned to detail the cost of trade tariffs to its customers.

Amazon said it had looked into itemising the impact for shoppers using Amazon Haul, a low-cost site it launched in the US last year to compete with Shein and Temu.

But it said it had decided not to move forward and the idea had never been under consideration for its main platform.

The White House decision to go on the attack over the report is an indication of the pressure it is facing over its new import taxes, which analysts say will lead to higher prices for consumers and increase the chances of a recession.

At a news conference marking the president’s first 100 days in office on Tuesday, press secretary Karoline Leavitt said she had discussed Amazon’s reported move with the president and argued it represented “another reason why Americans should buy American”.

“This is a hostile and political act by Amazon,” she said. “Why didn’t Amazon do this when the Biden administration hiked inflation to the highest level in 40 years?”

Trump has ramped up tariffs since re-entering office in January, measures he argues will boost manufacturing and raise tax revenue for the US.

Even after rolling back some of his initial plans this month, Trump’s announcements have left many foreign imports facing new duties of at least 10%, while products from China are facing import taxes of at least 145%.

The measures have prompted a sharp drop in trade between the two countries, and raised fears of supply shocks and shortages of products from baby prams to umbrellas, items for which China is a major supplier.

Some businesses are starting to detail the costs of the measures for customers, with Shein and Temu, known for business models that ship directly from Chinese manufacturers to customers, among the online platforms to already announce price hikes.

Merchants from China represent about half of the sellers on Amazon in the US, according to analysts.

Amazon’s plan to detail the tariff impact for customers was first reported by Punchbowl News on Tuesday, citing an anonymous source.

Asked about the report, Amazon spokesperson Tim Doyle confirmed that the company had considered the idea of listing import charges on certain products for its Amazon Haul store.

“This was never approved and is not going to happen,” he said in a statement to the BBC.

A source familiar with the Amazon discussions said they had been sparked by the end of the exemption from tariffs for shipments from China worth less than $800.

The person said the decision not to spotlight the new costs was not a response to the White House complaints on Tuesday.

But asked by reporters about his call with Mr Bezos, Trump said the billionaire, who stepped down as chief executive in 2021, had “solved the problem”.

“Jeff Bezos was very nice. He was terrific. He solved the problem very quickly. He did the right thing. He’s a good guy,” he said.

Amazon was among the many businesses to donate money to the president’s inauguration and Mr Bezos was given a seat of honour at the event.

Mr Bezos, who owns the Washington Post, met Trump after the election and has praised his push for deregulation and lower taxes.

But the two men have had a tense relationship in the past.

Trump repeatedly criticised Amazon and the Washington Post during his first term, while Mr Bezos in 2016 accused Trump of using rhetoric that “erodes our democracy around the edges” and once joked about blasting him to space in a rocket.

In 2019, Amazon filed a lawsuit against the Pentagon, alleging that it had been denied a $10bn contract due to Trump’s decision to “pursue his own personal and political ends” to harm Mr Bezos, “his perceived political enemy”.

BBC’s North America team asked for your questions to mark US President Donald Trump’s first 100 days in office.

Here is a selection of those answered by our staff writers and correspondents.

They have aimed to explain the context and facts behind several of the biggest topics in the Trump administration, including the economy and how Trump would handle a war.

A UK-based reader asks how the UK economy might be impacted by tariffs.

The decisions made thousands of miles away will affect the UK economy. Most directly affected are those exporters selling into America, contending with that 10% extra charge (or even more in some cases) being applied to their goods: Do they try to compensate for that by cutting costs elsewhere – or risk a blow to sales?

And complex supply chains mean that disruption to other economies could be felt here. Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey last week referred to a “growth shock” – many economists have cut their forecasts. No one yet is clear on how this trade war will play out, the uncertainty itself is damaging.

But the impact on inflation could work the other way. Countries such as China may be tempted to divert goods here instead, given the barriers they face in America. And the drop in oil and other commodity prices, amid market turmoil, could also bode well for keeping bills down.

So many economists reckon that with a weaker growth and inflation outlook, interest rates could fall faster than previously thought. A cut of 0.25 percentage points is widely expected next week, another could follow in June.

Another reader asks how Trump’s immigration policy is likely to affect Canadian-American relations, especially for dual citizens or people with mixed-status families.

If the first 100 days are anything to go by, relations between Canada and the US are almost certainly going to continue to be tense – both as a result of tariffs and Trump’s repeated, and near constant calls for Canada to become part of the US.

We had a taste of that just this week, when – as Canadians headed to the polls in their general election – Trump took to Truth Social to call on Canadians to elect him, seemingly referring to himself as a candidate, to reap the benefits of being the “cherished” 51st state.

“America can no longer subsidise Canada with the hundreds of billions a year that we have been spending in the past,” he said. “It makes no sense unless Canada is a state”.

How that impacts dual citizens or mixed-status families is a bit harder to answer.

But we’re seen a newfound sense of nationalism among many Canadians in response to Trump’s rhetoric and policies, and some Americans in Canada have even reportedly given up their citizenship.

While cross-border ties are very unlikely to ground to a standstill, many Canadian citizens – even those with US families – are likely to be more cautious when crossing the border, particularly after high-profile cases of Canadians being detained at the border.

In one case, an actress named Jasmine Moody was detained by ICE for about two weeks, later writing about her experience in a viral article in the Guardian.

A reader asks what Trump’s first 100 days tell us about how he’d handle a major international crisis, like another pandemic or a war.

It’s hard to say how exactly Trump would handle a major international crisis, but we have had glimpses that may provide a few clues.

Trump’s first crisis came just over a week into his administration on 29 January, when a US Army helicopter collided with a passenger aircraft over the Potomac river in Washington DC, killing 67 people.

Later that morning, I sat in the White House briefing room as Trump – with no evidence – alleged that the diversity, equity and inclusion policies at the Federal Aviation Administration may have led to the crash.

This suggests that in the event of a crisis, Trump is later to “fire from the hip”, sometimes speaking before all the facts are established. Many will remember Trump’s initial dismissal of the Covid-19 pandemic in his first administration, sometimes downplaying it as something that would soon “disappear”.

More so than other presidents, Trump also leans heavily on the power of the executive branch, making decisions from the Oval Office that have real-world implications, sometimes bypassing any discussion on Capitol Hill.

Those close to Trump are quick to say that he listens intently to his advisors, often letting discussions play out amongst them before his eyes. This is, for example, largely what happened with the tariffs issue.

Ultimately, however, he is the one who decides the government’s course of action, even if he lets his inner circle – which is perhaps more loyal and disciplined than in the last administration – carry out the details.

Arafin in Bangladesh wants to know how developing countries can navigate this evolving trade landscape and mitigate the risks.

There is just no way poorer countries could ever eliminate their trade surplus with the United States.

The world envisioned by Donald Trump – where citizens of developing countries buy as many American products as are sold the other way – is simply not possible.

The average Bangladeshi citizen, for example, is 32 times poorer than the average American.

In this case, the best Bangladeshi officials could do is promise Washington they will reduce some non-tariff barriers that are in place that make it hard for American companies to do business there.

For example, they could scrap quotas on imports, cut red tape or tackle corruption more effectively.

These small concessions – along with the assumption that American consumers won’t put up with rocketing prices – may lead to a softening or removal of Trump’s tariffs.

After all, if countries with large and cheap workforces can’t sell Americans affordable goods, then who will?

One other thing that developing countries will want to consider closely is the role of China in all of this.

If you’re a worker in a clothing factory in Bangladesh, a 37% US tax might seem a crippling blow to your livelihood – but it’s still better than the 125% tariff that Chinese manufacturers are facing.

As a Malaysian rubber glove manufacturer told me recently: “We’re not exactly jumping with joy, but this may well benefit us”.

Limiting dealings with China has been suggested as a way for developing countries to get a better trade deal with the White House. But that isn’t very realistic.

Beijing is by far and away the number one investor in the developing world. If you live in Africa, Asia or South America – it’s probably China building your railways, factories and power plants, not the United States.

The American consumer market is still the richest in the world and developing countries will want to fight tooth and nail to maintain access to it – but equally there is no way they can side with the US over China.

Chris in County Durham, UK, asks if Donald Trump is making millions of dollars on the US stock market by initiating a slump in share values, buying heavy, then reversing his policies to watch his share prices rocket up.

Critics are accusing President Trump of manipulating the stock market. White House officials have denied the allegations, with Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt calling it part of Trump’s “art of the deal”.

Here’s what we know so far:

On 9 April, Trump posted on Truth Social, in all caps: “THIS IS A GREAT TIME TO BUY! DJT.” Shortly after, he announced he was pausing the toughest tariffs for 90 days. In between, options traders placed big bets on a market rebound, which ended up being spot on.

This led to accusations of market manipulation and insider trading, with Democrats like Senator Adam Schiff calling for an investigation.

However, these cases are hard to prove – and even harder when you’re talking about the president. Legal experts say it would be a “high” bar to prove Trump did something illegal in this case. Plus he posted the information publicly.

Claims of insider trading might have some merit under the STOCK Act, which restricts public officials from profiting off non-public information. Although the White House could argue that the President can’t “gain” information about policy changes if he “created” them.

So, it’s still up in the air – but probably not something he needs to lose sleep over.

Jean-Claude asks if there any way within the US Constitution by which Congress could stop Trump’s tariffs and take away his freedom to issue Executive Orders at will.

Donald Trump has been pushing the boundaries of presidential authority with both his tariff declarations and more than 130 executive orders.

To do so, he has been asserting that Congress has given him the power to take these actions. To answer your question simply, then – any power that Congress gives, Congress can take back.

Traditionally, executive orders are a presidential interpretation of how laws should be implemented. Congress could step in and tell the White House that those interpretations are wrong.

Trump has been citing a 1977 law that grants him power to enact tariffs in cases of national emergency. Congress could amend that law or pass legislation that says no such emergency exists. There has already been a bipartisan proposal in the Senate to do exactly that.

The challenge for Trump’s opponents is finding a majority in the two chambers of Congress, both narrowly controlled by Republicans, to do so. The House of Representatives, in particular, is full of Republicans who are marching in lockstep with the president. The House recently adopted a provision that would make it much harder to rescind Trump’s proposed tariffs on Canada and Mexico, for instance.

Even if Congress was able to reach agreement on curtailing presidential power, Trump could decide to exercise his veto to block it from becoming law – something he’s already threated to do with the Senate tariff bill. And if he did that, it would take two-thirds of both chambers to override the president.

So Congress does have the ability to stop Trump, but perhaps not the interest or will to do so – at least not unless and until next year’s midterm elections shift the balance of power in the legislature toward the Democrats.

Rachel in Canada wonders if we can comment on what the real threat of annexation is for Canada with Trump in office. Should we be worried?

A lot depends on what the US president means when he talks about making Canada the 51st state.

It’s unlikely that both the US and Canada would agree to it through formal means – the bar is high.

It would need to be approved by both chambers in the US Congress, including at least 60 votes in support in the Senate, which has 100 seats.

It would also likely require amending the Canadian constitution, which would likely require unanimous provincial consent – no easy task – as well as Parliament’s approval.

It’s also highly unlikely that the US would invade Canada militarily.

Trump has spoken about forcing the issue through economic pressure – with Canada sending roughly 75% of its good south of the border, he does have some leverage.

Canada has already been hit with tariffs from the US, including the blanket tariffs on goods, though there is currently an exception for products covered by the USMCA trade deal. Those US tariffs are already being felt in some sectors.

However, Trump also appears willing to come to the negotiating table. He has said he is ready to start talks with Canada’s prime minister after the federal election.

Kevin in Stockport has two questions for James Lansdale, BBC News diplomatic correspondent: Not long ago President Trump said that if Russia didn’t agree to take serious steps towards ending the war he would apply massive sanctions. Russia has shown no desire to reach a peace settlement. So why is Trump not going to apply these threatened sanctions before considering ending the peace initiative?

Donald Trump is becoming increasingly frustrated at the refusal of Vladimir Putin to agree an immediate unconditional ceasefire. Recently, after his talks with President Zelensky at the Vatican, Mr Trump questioned whether Mr Putin really wanted peace and wondered if the Russian leader was leading him on. He also once again threatened “banking” or “secondary” sanctions.

The latter refers to sanctions on countries that are still trading with Moscow, especially those countries – like China and India – that are fuelling the Russian war machine by buying cheap Russian energy. But imposing those sanctions would be a big step with serious economic and geostrategic consequences. So for now, Mr Trump appears to want to threaten these sanctions rather than impose them.

What is the hold that Putin has over Trump?

Analysts say that Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin developed a genuinely warm personal relationship during his first term in the White House. They say Mr Trump sees in Mr Putin an equal on the world stage whom he respects.

The US president also made clear he wants a rapprochement between the US and Russia, one that will reset the relationship and boost trade. Strategists say the White House is also currying favour with the Kremlin because it wants to divide Moscow from Beijing, with many US policymakers seeing China as the greater threat. As to whether Mr Putin has some kind of “hold” over Mr Trump, there have been many allegations about the close business links the President had over the years with Russian figures who helped his investments.

There were also many claims of secret Kompromat about the President held in Kremlin archives. The FBI investigated. But there was always more speculation than hard fact. So Mr Trump’s relationship with Mr Putin remains something of a mystery.

Ray in the UK asks: As a convicted felon, Donald Trump isn’t allowed in the UK, so how can he address Parliament?

It is a bit more complicated than that.

Government guidance – which you can read here – spells out where it is mandatory that someone is refused entry and where it is discretionary.

In reality, the elected leader of an ally, in particular an ally as important as the United States, is always likely to be invited, because a government is likely to conclude that this is in the UK’s national interest.

That is the conclusion of Sir Keir Starmer – and hence the state visit being offered to President Trump.

The opportunity, or not, to address Parliament is a separate question and something some are arguing should be blocked.

One reader, Ray, asks our BBC Security correspondent Frank Gardner: Is Trump going to give Europe the time to step in, if he decides to ditch Ukraine?

The transatlantic alliance – the strategic partnership between Europe and North America based on shared values – is now under more strain than at any time since the Suez Crisis of 1956.

Within his first 100 days President Trump has completely upended the policy of the previous US administrations. For most of the time since taking office, he has appeared to favour relations with Moscow over those with Kyiv. He has also gone against the wishes of most of Europe by vowing to end Russia’s isolation and talked of lifting sanctions.

Whereas the prevailing attitude in Europe towards Ukraine is to keep supporting its war effort ‘for as long as it takes’, Trump has been in a hurry to end the war and normalise relations with President Putin.

Trump’s oft-repeated intent to ‘get’ Greenland and make it a part of the US has appalled Denmark, of which it is a self-governing part and it has rattled Scandinavian governments. Denmark lost 257 soldiers killed and wounded in the US-led campaign in Afghanistan. It had the highest per capita death toll of all America’s allies in that war.

Trump has, however, galvanised Europe into finally doing more for its own defence.

After the US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth told NATO in February that Europe should no longer take US strategic protection for granted, budgets are being revised and Germany has now lifted its longstanding restrictions on defence spending.

A university has awarded a posthumous degree to its first indigenous female student more than 100 years after she began her studies.

Born in New Zealand in 1873, Mākereti Papakura is believed to be the first indigenous woman to enrol at the University of Oxford.

The university said she had explored the customs of her people of the Māori Te Arawa iwi [tribe] from a female perspective through her “groundbreaking” research. But she died in 1930, just weeks before she was due to present her thesis.

Prof Irene Tracey, Vice Chancellor of the University of Oxford, will award the degree of MPhil in Anthropology at a ceremony in the Sheldonian theatre later in the year.

Ms Papakura was born Margaret Pattison Thom at Matatā in the Bay of Plenty to an English father, William Thom, and a Māori mother, Pia Ngarotū Te Rihi.

She enrolled in 1922 to read anthropology at Pitt Rivers Museum, where much of the teaching was conducted at the time, and at the Society of Home Students, now St Anne’s College.

The university said her scholarship, combined with her indigenous worldview, “earned her the respect of many Oxford academics at the time”.

It added that it had gone on “to be celebrated by members of Māori communities and researchers worldwide”.

After her sudden death, her family agreed that her good friend Thomas Kenneth Penniman, a Rhodes Scholar and fellow Oxford anthropologist, published her work.

The book titled The Old-Time Māori became the first study of Māori life published by a Māori author and is recognised as such by the New Zealand Royal Society.

The posthumous award was requested by the School of Anthropology and Museum Ethnography, which applied to the university’s education committee.

The application was supported by St Anne’s College and the Pitt Rivers Museum, to which Ms Papakura and her family donated numerous artefacts and papers both during her lifetime and after her death.

Prof Clare Harris, head of the School of Anthropology and Museum Ethnography, called Ms Papakura “an inspiring figure, not only to many in Aotearoa [which has been used when referring to New Zealand in Māori] but to students and scholars around the world”.

Members of her family and representatives of the Māori community are expected to attend the award ceremony.

June Northcroft Grant, on behalf of Ms Papakura’s family and Tūhourangi – Ngāti Wāhiao iwi, said her story was “a testament to the lasting power of education, culture, and the determination of one woman to ensure that Māori stories would not be forgotten.

“This recognition belongs to Mākereti, to our ancestors, and to the Māori community worldwide”.

The power is out and nothing is working. How am I supposed to get through the day?

That was the question faced by millions of people on Monday across Spain and Portugal during the worst electricity blackout in their history.

We ask people who spent the day without electricity about what helped them get on with life and what outage essentials they were missing.

Paying with phone and card has become the norm, but in cities across Spain and Portugal, queues formed at cash machines – at least the ones that were still working – as shops switched away from card payments.

“We managed to pay for our coffees with card when the outage first started, [but later] we didn’t have any cash so we couldn’t buy a thing,” Ed Rowe, 26, in Madrid told the BBC.

“All the restaurants that were open were cash only.”

Grace O’Leary, 32, who also lives in Spain’s capital, said she and her mum were counting coins to see if she had enough money to buy wine from a corner shop.

“Cash, apparently, is in fact, king.”

Jaime Giorgio, 28, was lucky enough to have some cash on him, which allowed him to buy food and other essentials.

“In Madrid it was quite chaotic, there was no tube and you couldn’t take out any cash.

“I had cash, but my flatmate didn’t, so I had to lend him money to buy things.”

The power cut also led to an information blackout, as people spent the day without internet, WhatsApp, calls, and TV.

“The complete loss of communication was the most confusing and concerning thing… we were only left to speculate as to the cause and piece together news from people in the neighbourhood,” said Daniel Clegg from Barcelona.

The 42-year-old said the absence of information led him to looking at the sky to see if planes were still flying.

For Siegfried and Christine Buschschlüter, an old windup transistor radio helped tune in to local radio stations to find out what was happening after their phones stopped working and power went off at their rural home outside Spain’s capital.

Christine, 82, explained: “You had to keep on winding and winding.

“It was quite a strange situation. I was born in Berlin during the war and it reminded me of those days when my parents tried to get some news – it took me back.”

The couple reckon the outage will lead to a boom in demand for battery-operated radios.

And it is also on Daniel’s shopping list. “Essential kit for back to basics communication and staying informed that I completely neglected to remember.”

Microwaves, air fryers and some hobs and ovens all demand electricity.

But on Monday food that does not require electricity to heat or prepare it were in demand.

In supermarkets, shoppers formed long queues and panic-bought essentials – echoing scenes from the Covid-19 pandemic.

“We bought a lot of food that wasn’t going to go off, like tuna in cans, just in case,” says actor Jaime.

“The outage only lasted a day and now we have so much food, but most of it isn’t going to go bad, as it is easily preserved.”

Lesley Elder, in town Fortuna in south-eastern Spain, said: “Trying to find food you don’t need to heat up, that was more difficult than we thought.

“So we ended up having ham and cheese for dinner.”

She adds a little gas stove to heat up food in a pan would have been helpful.

Across the Iberian peninsula, people turned to candles to light up dark spaces.

Richard, who lives in the Spanish city of Alcalá de Henares, said not a single street light was on when night fell.

“People were finding their way around by torchlight. It was quite surreal seeing the view from my window totally black especially as I live next to a dual carriageway,” he said.

“In my spare time, I make candles and luckily I had a few going spare so I could see in the dark.”

Sarah Baxter, from Barcelona, said she even used a candle stovetop to heat up food.

“We could heat beans and rice, and bring water to a boil for instant potatoes,” she said.

“It was much safer than a propane camping stove inside the apartment.”

Although candles and naked flames can pose a fire risk.

With no power people relied on having battery in their devices.

In Madrid, people queued outside tech shops to get their hands on a power bank.

Luckily for Sarah she had a solar charger that kept her phone charged through ten hours of blackout, and helped her elderly neighbour do the same.

Lesley says her Kindle ran out of battery. “No TV, no Scrabble puzzle on my phone. So having a couple of books would have been helpful,” she said.

But for others, not having access to the internet and their devices was a relief.

“Everyone relies on technology so much that it’s quite a nice reminder you can be more independent,” said Ed.

“You don’t have to be connected with everyone all the time,” said his flatmate Hannah Steiner, 23. “I was having a good time with my flatmates.”

Sara Francisco, 24, from Leiria, in central Portugal, said: “I feel this thing that happened was important to make us be more aware and be more conscious about our habits.”

Mark Carney’s Liberals have won Canada’s federal election – riding a backlash of anti-Trump sentiment to form the next government.

It is a stunning political turnaround for a party who were widely considered dead and buried just a few months ago.

It’s not yet clear if the party – which has been in power for almost a decade – will be able to secure a majority as results continue to roll in.

Either way, the prime minister faces major challenges, including divisions in the country laid bare by the campaign.

Here are five takeaways from an election which saw the Conservative opposition make major gains but still lose.

There is no doubt the US president’s tariff threats and comments undermining Canada’s sovereignty played an outsized role in this election, suddenly making leadership and the country’s economic survival the defining issues of the campaign.

Mark Carney used it to his advantage, running as much against Trump as he did against his main opposition rival, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre.

Carney warned Canada was at a crisis moment, saying frequently on the campaign trail – and in his victory speech – that Trump “wants to break us so America can own us”.

Poilievre brought Trump up much less frequently during the campaign, focusing his message on domestic issues – the cost of living, the housing affordability crisis, and crime – and targeting the Liberals for their record on those matters.

Carney – who has declared the old relationship with the US “over” – plans to start negotiations on a new economic and security relationship immediately following the election.

Kevin O’Leary, a Canadian businessman close to Trump who previously ran for the Conservative leadership, acknowledged it was a successful campaign strategy.

“Right now Canadians are very frustrated with America and Carney has used that to his advantage,” he told the BBC just before polls closed. “He was able to distract Canadians from his own mistakes… and say ‘Stop looking at that. Look south of the border and I can save you’.”

At the start of the year, Carney was a former central banker with no experience as a politician. By mid-March, he was being sworn in as prime minister – the first to have never held elected public office before – after a resounding win in the Liberal leadership race.

Now, he’s faced the Canadian electorate as a first time campaigner, won an Ottawa-area seat in the House of Commons and steered his party to an unlikely victory.

Carney had long flirted with entering Canadian politics – and he seized his moment, swooping in after former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s sudden resignation in January.

He also took full advantage of the new political landscape, leaning into his experience helping Canada and the UK navigate previous crises at a time when Canadians were feeling anxious about their economic future.

Trump’s late-March announcement of global levies on foreign automobile imports gave Carney the chance to publicly audition to keep his job during the campaign. He was able to step away from the trail and take on the prime minister’s mantle, setting up a call with the president and bringing together his ministers on the US file.

• REACTION: Follow the latest live
• RESULTS: How Canada voted – in charts
• ANALYSIS: A turnaround victory made possible by Trump
• EXPLAINER: What happens next?

In a different election, this would have been a successful one for the Conservatives.

In 2011, the Conservatives won a majority with 39.6% of the vote. Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre is on track to beat that this time, with roughly 41.4% of the vote with most polls reporting, according to Elections Canada.

They are currently projected to have won 144 seats – that’s up from 120 at dissolution, when the election was called in March.

But with the progressive vote coalescing around the Liberals, those numbers weren’t enough this time.

The bitter blow was Poilievre losing his riding (parliamentary seat) in Carleton, Ontario.

Only months ago his party had a clear path to victory and they will now need to figure out a way forward after a series of electoral defeats.

Whether that includes the diminished figure of Poilievre as leader is the first big question for them to face.He is the third leader they’ve had since the Liberals swept the 2015 election.

The election results have highlighted divisions in Canada that could pose a challenge for Carney.

Notably, the Liberals are largely shut out of Alberta and Saskatchewan – oil-rich and gas-rich prairie provinces where a sense of alienation from the centre of power in Ottawa has long festered.

Even before the election, some in those regions were warning of a national unity crisis if the Liberals won another mandate.

Carney touched on those divisions in his victory speech, acknowledging the millions who had voted for a different outcome.

“I intend to govern for all Canadians,” he said.

Meanwhile, Poilievre’s message, which relentlessly focused on cost of living issues, especially on housing affordability, resonated with many young people.

Support for the Conservatives outpaced Liberals by 44% to 31.2% among 18 to 34 year olds, a Nanos poll on 25 April indicated. The divide was more stark among younger men.

Separately, Abacus Data polling found that about 18% of 18 to 29 year olds were worried about Trump. That jumped to 45% for voters over 60, suggesting a polarisation on issues between generations.

On Monday night, Poilievre remarked on demographic breakthroughs Conservative had made, including with younger Canadians.

“We gave voices to countless people across the country who’ve been left out and left behind for far too long,” he said.

In this election, the smaller political parties have taken a hit as Canadians choose to park their votes with either the Liberals or the Conservatives – especially the left-wing New Democrats, or NDP.

Some of the smaller parties have lost a significant amount of vote share – particularly the NDP who have received just 6% of votes counted across Canada so far, compared with 18% in 2021.

Jagmeet Singh, who has been NDP leader for almost eight years, lost his own riding in British Columbia and announced he will step down.

“Obviously I know this night is a disappointing night for New Democrats,” he said, adding: “We’re only defeated if we stop fighting.”

The Greens have also seen their vote share cut in half from 2% to 1%.

Shachi Kurl, president of the Angus Reid Institute, a non-profit public opinion research organisation, told the BBC that Trump’s rhetoric was behind the shift to the Liberals.

“The threats, the annexation talk, all of that has been a huge motivator for left of centre voters,” she said.

The sovereigntist Bloc Québécois have maintained a vote share of around 7%. They are on track to win 23 seats in Quebec.

This is based on around 97% of polls reporting.

Canada doesn’t have a two-party system, even though it has historically voted in conservative or liberal governments in some form.

In the country’s political system, these smaller parties still play a role in Parliament. Both the NDP and the Bloc have at some points formed Official Opposition in the House of Commons.

From an office perched on the scalloped edge of the continent, Victoria Bradley jokes that she has the most beautiful doctor’s practice in Australia.

Outside her window, farmland rolls into rocky coastline, hemming a glasslike bay striped with turquoise and populated by showboating dolphins.

Home to about 3,000 people, a few shops, two roundabouts and a tiny hospital, Streaky Bay is an idyllic beach town.

For Dr Bradley, though, it is anything but. The area’s sole, permanent doctor, she spent years essentially on call 24/7.

Running the hospital and the general practitioner (GP) clinic, life was a never-ending game of catch up. She’d do rounds at the wards before, after and in between regular appointments. Even on good days, lunch breaks were often a pipe dream. On bad days, a hospital emergency would blow up her already punishing schedule.

Burnt out, two years ago she quit – and the thread holding together the remnants of the town’s healthcare system snapped.

Streaky Bay is at the forefront of a national crisis: inadequate government funding is exacerbating a shortage of critical healthcare workers like Dr Bradley; wait times are ballooning; doctors are beginning to write their own rules on fees, and costs to patients are skyrocketing.

A once-revered universal healthcare system is crumbling at every level, sometimes barely getting by on the sheer willpower of doctors and local communities.

As a result, more and more Australians, regardless of where they live, are delaying or going without the care they need.

Health has become a defining issue for voters ahead of the nation’s election on 3 May, with both of Australia’s major parties promising billions of dollars in additional funding.

But experts say the solutions being offered up are band-aid fixes, while what is needed are sweeping changes to the way the system is funded – reform for which there has so far been a lack of political will.

Australians tell the BBC the country is at a crossroads, and needs to decide if universal healthcare is worth saving.

Healthcare was the last thing on Renee Elliott’s mind when she moved to Streaky Bay – until the 40-year-old found a cancerous lump in her breast in 2019, and another one four years later.

Seeing a local GP was the least of her problems. With the expertise and treatment she needed only available in Adelaide, about 500km away, Mrs Elliott has spent hundreds of hours and tens of thousands of dollars accessing life-saving care, all while raising three boys and running a business.

Though she has since clawed back a chunk of the cost through government schemes, it made an already harrowing time that much more draining: financially, emotionally and physically.

“You’re trying to get better… but having to juggle all that as well. It was very tricky.”

When Australia’s modern health system was born four decades ago – underpinned by a public insurance scheme called Medicare – it was supposed to guarantee affordable and accessible high-quality care to people like Mrs Elliott as “a basic right”.

Health funding here is complex and shared between states and federal governments. But the scheme essentially meant Australians could present their bright green Medicare member card at a doctor’s office or hospital, and Canberra would be sent a bill. It paid through rebates funded by taxes.

Patients would either receive “bulk billed” – completely free – care, mostly through the emerging public system, or heavily subsidised treatment through a private healthcare sector offering more benefits and choice to those who wanted them.

Medicare became a national treasure almost instantly. It was hoped this set up would combine the best parts of the UK’s National Health Service and the best of the United States’ system.

Fast forward 40 years and many in the industry say we’re on track to end up with the worst of both.

There is no denying that healthcare in Australia is still miles ahead of much of the world, particularly when it comes to emergency care.

But the core of the crisis and key to this election is GP services, or primary care, largely offered by private clinics. There has historically been little need for public ones, with most GPs choosing to accept Medicare rebates as full payment.

That is increasingly uncommon though, with doctors saying those allowances haven’t kept up with the true cost of delivering care. At the same time, staff shortages, which persist despite efforts to recruit from overseas, create a scarcity that only drives up prices further.

According to government data, about 30% of patients must now pay a “gap fee” for a regular doctor’s appointment – on average A$40 (£19.25; $25.55) out of pocket.

But experts suspect the true figure is higher: it’s skewed by seniors and children, who tend to visit doctors more often and still enjoy mostly bulk-billed appointments. Plus there’s a growing cohort of patients not captured by statistics, who simply don’t go to the doctor because of escalating fees.

Brisbane electrician Callum Bailey is one of them.

“Mum or my partner will pester and pester and pester… [but] I’m such a big ‘I’ll just suffer in silence’ person because it’s very expensive.”

And every dollar counts right now, the 25-year-old says: “At my age, I probably should be in my prime looking for housing… [but] even grocery shopping is nuts.

“[I] just can’t keep up.”

This is a tale James Gillespie kept hearing.

So his startup Cleanbill began asking the question: if the average Australian adult walked into a GP clinic, could they get a free, standard appointment?

This year, they called almost all of the nation’s estimated 7,000 GP clinics – only a fifth of them would bulk bill a new adult patient. In the entire state of Tasmania, for example, they couldn’t find a single one.

The results resonate with many Australians, he says: “It really brought it home to them that, ‘Okay, it’s not just us. This is happening nationwide’.”

And that’s just primary care.

Public specialists are so rare and so overwhelmed – with wait times often far beyond safe levels – that most patients are funnelled toward exorbitantly expensive private care. The same goes for a lot of non-emergency hospital treatments or dental work.

There are currently no caps on how much private specialists, dentists or hospitals can charge and neither private health insurance nor slim Medicare rebates reliably offer substantial relief.

The BBC spoke to people across the country who say the increasing cost of healthcare had left them relying on charities for food, avoiding dental care for almost a decade, or emptying their retirement savings to fund treatment.

Others are borrowing from their parents, taking out pay-day loans to buy medication, remortgaging their houses, or selling their possessions.

Kimberley Grima regularly lies awake at night, calculating which of her three children – who, like her, all have chronic illnesses – can see their specialists. Her own overdue health checks and tests are barely an afterthought.

“They’re decisions that you really don’t want to have to make,” the Aboriginal woman from New South Wales tells the BBC.

“But when push comes to shove and you haven’t got the money… you’ve got no other option. It’s heart-breaking.”

Another woman tells the BBC that had she been able to afford timely appointments, her multiple sclerosis, a degenerative neurological disease, would have been identified, and slowed, quicker.

“I was so disabled by the time I got a diagnosis,” she says.

The people missing out tend to be the ones who need it the most, experts say.

“We have much more care in healthier, wealthier parts of Australia than in poorer, sicker parts of Australia,” Peter Breadon, from the Grattan Institute think tank says.

All of this creates a vicious cycle which feeds even more pressure back into an overwhelmed system, while entrenching disadvantage and fuelling distrust.

Every single one of those issues is more acute in the regions.

Streaky Bay has long farewelled the concept of affordable healthcare, fighting instead to preserve access to any at all.

It’s why Dr Bradley lasted only three months after quitting before “guilt” drove her back to the practice.

“There’s a connection that goes beyond just being the GP… You are part of the community.

“I felt that I’d let [them] down. Which was why I couldn’t just let go.”

She came back to a far more sustainable three-day week in the GP clinic, with Streaky Bay forced to wage a bidding war with other desperate regions for pricey, fly-in-fly-out doctors to fill in the gaps.

It’s yet another line on the tab for a town which has already invested so much of its own money into propping up a healthcare system supposed to be funded by state and private investment.

“We don’t want a gold service, but what we want is an equitable service,” says Penny Williams, who helps run the community body which owns the GP practice.

When the clinic was on the verge of closure, the town desperately rallied to buy it. When it was struggling again, the local council diverted funding from other areas to top up its coffers. And even still most standard patients – unless they are seniors or children – fork out about A$50 per appointment.

It means locals are paying for their care three times over, Ms Williams says: through their Medicare taxes, council rates, and then out-of-pocket gap fees.

“No-one would say this is the Australia that we want, surely,” Elizabeth Deveny, from the Consumers Health Forum of Australia, tells the BBC.

Like many wealthy countries, the nation is struggling to cope with a growing population which is, on average, getting older and sicker.

There’s a small but increasing cohort which says it is time to let go of the notion of universal healthcare, as we’ve known it.

Many doctors, a handful of economists, and some conservative politicians have sought to redefine Medicare as a “safety net” for the nation’s most vulnerable rather than as a scheme for all.

Health economist Yuting Zhang argues free healthcare and universal healthcare are different things.

The taxes the government collects for Medicare are already nowhere near enough to support the system, she says, and the country either needs to have some tough conversations about how it will find additional funds, or accept reasonable fees for those who can afford them.

“There’s always a trade-off… You have limited resources, you have to think about how to use them effectively and efficiently.”

The original promise of Medicare has been “undermined by decades of neglect”, the Australian Medical Association’s Danielle McMullen says, and most Australians now accept they need to contribute to their own care.

She says freezes to Medicare rebates – which were overseen by both parties between 2013 and 2017 and meant the payments didn’t even keep up with inflation – were the last straw. Since then, many doctors have been dipping into their own pockets to help those in need.

Both the Labor Party and the Liberal-National coalition accept there is a crisis, but blame each other for it.

Opposition leader Peter Dutton says his government will invest A$9bn in health, including funds for extra subsidised mental health appointments and for regional universities training key workers.

“Health has become another victim of Labor’s cost of living crisis… we know it has literally never been harder or more expensive to see a GP than it is right now,” health spokesperson Anne Ruston told the BBC in a statement.

On the other side, Albanese – whipping out his Medicare card almost daily – has sought to remind voters that Labor created the beloved system, while pointing out the Coalition’s previously mixed support of the universal scheme and the spending cuts Dutton proposed as Health Minister a decade ago.

“At this election, this little card here, your Medicare card, is what is at stake,” Albanese has said.

His government has started fixing things already, he argues, and has pledged an extra A$8.5bn for training more GPs, building additional public clinics, and subsidising more medicines.

But the headline of their rescue packages is an increase to Medicare rebates and bigger bonuses for doctors who bulk bill.

Proposed by Labor, then matched by the Coalition, the changes will make it possible for 9 out of 10 Australians to see a GP for free, the parties claim.

One Tasmanian doctor tells the BBC it is just a “good election sound bite”. He and many other clinicians say the extra money is still not enough, particularly for the longer consults more and more patients are seeking for complex issues.

Labor has little patience for those criticisms, citing research which they claim shows their proposal will leave the bulk of doctors better off and accusing them of wanting investment “without strings attached”.

But many of the patients the BBC spoke to are sceptical either parties’ proposals will make a huge difference.

There’s far more they need to be doing, they say, rattling off a wish list: more work on training and retaining rural doctors; effective regulation of private fees and more investment in public specialist clinics; universal bulk billing of children for all medical and dental expenses; more funding for allied health and prevention.

Experts like Mr Breadon say, above all else, the way Medicare pays clinicians needs to be overhauled to keep healthcare access genuinely universal.

That is, the government needs to stop paying doctors a set amount per appointment, and give them a budget based on how large and sick the populations they serve are – that is something several recent reviews have said.

And the longer governments wait to invest in these reforms, the more they’re going to cost.

“The stars may be aligning now… It is time for these changes, and delaying them would be really dangerous,” Mr Breadon says.

In Streaky Bay though, locals like Ms Williams wonder if it’s too late. Things are already dangerous here.

“Maybe that’s the cynic in me,” she says, shaking her head.

“The definition of universal is everyone gets the same, but we know that’s not true already.”

The Prince and Princess of Wales are spending their second and final day on the Isle of Mull with children taking part in an outdoor learning session with forest rangers.

William and Catherine celebrated their 14th wedding anniversary on Tuesday as they began an official visit to the island off the west coast of Scotland.

The royal couple were greeted by more than 200 cheering tourists and local residents who had lined the main street of Tobermory.

Their final day of the mini-tour will focus on the natural world, which Catherine has previously described as her family’s “sanctuary”.

The Royal Foundation’s Community Impact Programme is providing funding to safeguard two nature warden roles on Mull and neighbouring Iona.

The couple joined a group of children for a session on nature trails, den building and animal tracking at Ardura Community Forest.

The visit aims to highlight the importance of protecting and championing the natural environment.

Afterwards, William and Catherine will spend private time on Iona after taking the public ferry from Mull.

The couple released a romantic image on their social media accounts on Tuesday evening to mark their 14th anniversary.

They were married at Westminster Abbey on 29 April 2011, when tens of thousands of people lining the streets for their wedding procession to Buckingham Palace.

The Duke and Duchess of Rothesay, as they are officially known when in Scotland, met while studying at the University of St Andrews.

Sign up here to get the latest royal stories and analysis every week with our Royal Watch newsletter. Those outside the UK can sign up here.

To their fans, west Belfast rave-rap group Kneecap are a rowdy, subversive force of nature. But to many others, their inflammatory political messages make them dangerous and amoral.

Following in the footsteps of anti-establishment rap groups like NWA and Run The Jewels, the trio present themselves as dissident underdogs, giving a voice to the oppressed.

Their lyrics, delivered in a rapid-fire mix of English and Irish, cover everything from drug-fuelled parties to their desire to free Northern Ireland from British rule.

On stage and on film, they’ve created a riotous experience that’s thrilled Glastonbury, won a Bafta award, and inspired what’s been called an “Irish language revolution“.

But their rising profile has resulted in increased scrutiny and anger about their political statements.

During an incendiary performance at the Coachella music festival in California earlier this month, they described Israel’s military action in Gaza as a US-funded genocide. As a result, they’ve been called anti-Semitic and branded “terrorist sympathisers”.

Now, footage from two previous gigs is being assessed by counter-terrorism police in the UK.

In one, the band allegedly call for the death of Conservative MPs. Another seems to show a band member shouting “up Hamas, up Hezbollah”. Both groups are banned in the UK and it is a crime to express support for them.

Kneecap have responded with a statement, saying they “do not, and have never, supported Hamas or Hezbollah”.

They claimed that footage where they appeared to say “the only good Tory is a dead Tory” had been “taken out of all context”, and apologised for the hurt caused to the families of murdered MPs Jo Cox and Sir David Amess.

But Cox’s widower Brendan was unimpressed, calling their statement “only half an apology”. Downing Street agreed, describing their words as “half-hearted” and “completely unacceptable”.

The row was discussed in the House of Commons on Tuesday, with Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp calling their comments “evil”.

It isn’t the band’s first brush with controversy. If anything, controversy is in their DNA. But this time, the fallout threatens to engulf their career, with venues and festivals under pressure to cancel the band’s gigs.

To understand how we got here, here’s Kneecap’s origin story.

Kneecap were formed in 2017 by rappers Mo Chara (Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh) and Móglaí Bap (Naoise Ó Cairealláin), alongside beatmaker DJ Próvaí (JJ Ó Dochartaigh).

Their career was sparked by an incident in which Móglaí and a friend were out spray-painting the day before a march in support of an Irish Language Act.

Móglaí had written “cearta” (rights) on a bus stop when police arrived. He fled but his friend was arrested, and spent a night in the cells after refusing to speak English to the police.

They documented the incident in the song C.E.A.R.T.A, which they released “just for the craic. No plans for after,” Mo Chara told the Irish Times.

To their surprise, the song was playlisted by Irish broadcaster RTÉ, only to be removed after listeners complained about drug references in the lyrics.

After that, their output was sporadic. The mixtape 3CAG (slang for the drug MDMA) arrived in 2018, followed by the singles H.O.O.D and MAM – dedicated to Móglaí’s mother, who had died by suicide.

Those early records showcased an ability to move between sharp satire, tender vulnerability and the experiences of Northern Ireland’s “ceasefire babies” – the generation born around the Good Friday Agreement in 1998.

Talking to the BBC in 2023, the band said they were inspired by US bands like Dead Prez, NWA and Wu Tang Clan.

“Rebel music in Ireland has all the same sort of ideas as hip-hop in America. A community that’s oppressed, using songs to revolt in some way,” said Mo Chara.

Unusually, they perform most of their lyrics in Irish, reclaiming the language from rural folk music.

“The only way that Irish history and mythology was passed down was orally. I think that’s why it’s important for us to have that intertwined with our music,” Móglaí Bap told Crack magazine last year.

Kneecap’s lyrics frequently contain Republican slang and slogans. Even their name is a reference to the IRA’s chosen method of punishment for alleged drug dealers during the Troubles.

The messaging has landed them in hot water before. DJ Próvaí lost his job as a teacher in 2020 after his school was alerted to a video of a concert where he’d painted “Brits out” on his buttocks.

Two years later, the band made headlines in Belfast after commissioning a mural of a burning police vehicle with a slogan criticising Northern Ireland’s pre-Good Friday police force, the RUC.

Designed to promote a festival appearance, it was criticised by politicians across the spectrum.

“Loathe to give the band more publicity,” said Alliance leader Naomi Long, “but as a community we need to start asking ourselves what messages we’re sending out about the kind of future we want.”

The band have claimed their take on Republicanism is partially tongue-in-cheek – satirising the self-important sloganeering they grew up with.

“Republicanism is so vast, and on a spectrum,” Móglaí Bap told the New York Times. “We like to toy with it. We like to take the irony on.”

Certainly, the band’s gleeful celebration of drug culture puts them at odds with the old guard of the movement – but the band are serious about their desire for a unified Ireland.

“The British government has failed us for 100 years,” Mo Charra told Vulture last year. “It’s not like this is a trial run. You’ve had enough time and it’s failed.”

Kneecap’s reputation grew in 2024 with the release of a film, also called Kneecap, which presented a semi-fictional, and often hilarious, account of their rise to fame.

Starring the band as themselves, with Michael Fassbender as Móglaí’s father, the movie won the audience award at the Sundance Film Festival, with critics praising its “punky defiance” and “unruly energy“, and was nominated for six Baftas.

It was followed by their debut album, Fine Art, a concept record that threw fans into a hedonistic night out with the band at a fictional Belfast pub called The Rutz.

With songs that skewered the music industry and addressed Northern Ireland’s mental health crisis, it showcased a band with more to say than their reputation suggested.

Still, in an era of sanitised, apolitical music, Kneecap’s instincts for provocation and protest were inevitably going to draw attention.

Pro-Palestinian chants have featured in their gigs since the start of the latest Israel-Gaza war. But when they brought those messages to Coachella, they faced a new level of scrutiny and criticism.

Kneecap weren’t the only people who uttered pro-Palestinian messages at the festival, but accusations of genocide and video screens that declared “F*** Israel” were seen by some as crossing a line into hate speech.

The organisers of Israel’s Nova Music Festival, where more than 360 people were killed by Hamas in 2023, said Kneecap’s message “deeply hurt” their community, and invited the band to visit an exhibition about the victims and survivors – “not to shame or silence but to connect”.

Others took a more strident tone. A music industry group called The Creative Community For Peace, along with Sharon Osbourne, called on the US government to revoke the band’s visas.

The band’s manager defended their actions. Citing Hamas-run health ministry figures that more than 50,000 Palestinians had been killed since the start of the war, Daniel Lambert characterised criticism of the Coachella performance as “moral hysteria”.

“If somebody’s hurt by the truth, that’s something for them to be hurt by,” he told RTÉ1. “But it’s really important to speak truth and thankfully, the lads are not afraid to do that.

“They have the bravery and the conviction, given where they’ve come from in a post-conflict society, to stand up for what’s right, and [they] are willing to do that despite the fact that it may harm their career.”

Right now, their career is under intense pressure.

Since Coachella, Kneecap have received death threats and have been dropped by their booking agents in the US, which could jeopardise their visas ahead of a forthcoming sold-out tour.

The discovery of the concert video in which the band shouted “the only good Tory is a dead Tory” and advised the audience to “kill your local MP” shocked the political establishment, with counter-terrorism police reviewing the footage.

In Scotland, First Minister John Swinney has called for the band to be dropped from Glasgow’s TRNSMT festival, saying their comments had “crossed a line”.

The Eden Project in Cornwall has cancelled their gig in July, and others, including Glastonbury, are under pressure to call off appearances.

Home Office minister Dan Jarvis said on Tuesday: “There is an ongoing live police investigation, so the government would urge the organisers at the Glastonbury Festival to think very carefully about who is invited to perform there later this year.”

At the same time, the criticism has only increased the profile of an act who were essentially an underground act a month ago.

This week, Kneecap’s album entered the iTunes chart in Italy, Brazil and Germany for the first time.

OpenAI has pulled a ChatGPT update after users pointed out the chatbot was showering them with praise regardless of what they said.

The firm accepted its latest version of the tool was “overly flattering”, with boss Sam Altman calling it “sycophant-y”.

Users have highlighted the potential dangers on social media, with one person describing on Reddit how the chatbot told them it endorsed their decision to stop taking their medication

“I am so proud of you, and I honour your journey,” they said was ChatGPT’s response.

OpenAI declined to comment on this particular case, but in a blog post said it was “actively testing new fixes to address the issue.”

Mr Altman said the update had been pulled entirely for free users of ChatGPT, and they were working on removing it from people who pay for the tool as well.

It said ChatGPT was used by 500 million people every week.

“We’re working on additional fixes to model personality and will share more in the coming days,” he said in a post on X.

The firm said in its blog post it had put too much emphasis on “short-term feedback” in the update.

“As a result, GPT‑4o skewed towards responses that were overly supportive but disingenuous,” it said.

“Sycophantic interactions can be uncomfortable, unsettling, and cause distress.

“We fell short and are working on getting it right.”

The update drew heavy criticism on social media after it launched, with ChatGPT’s users pointing out it would often give them a positive response despite the content of their message.

Screenshots shared online include claims the chatbot praised them for being angry at someone who asked them for directions, and unique version of the trolley problem.

It is a classic philosophical problem, which typically might ask people to imagine you are driving a tram and have to decide whether to let it hit five people, or steer it off course and instead hit just one.

But this user instead suggested they steered a trolley off course to save a toaster, at the expense of several animals.

They claim ChatGPT praised their decision-making, for prioritising “what mattered most to you in the moment”.

“We designed ChatGPT’s default personality to reflect our mission and be useful, supportive, and respectful of different values and experience,” OpenAI said.

“However, each of these desirable qualities like attempting to be useful or supportive can have unintended side effects.”

It said it would build more guardrails to increase transparency, and refine the system itself “to explicitly steer the model away from sycophancy”.

“We also believe users should have more control over how ChatGPT behaves and, to the extent that it is safe and feasible, make adjustments if they don’t agree with the default behavior,” it said.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the world’s top tech stories and trends. Outside the UK? Sign up here.

The Colombian government says 15 police officers and 12 soldiers have been killed over the past two weeks in targeted attacks it blames on armed groups.

President Gustavo Petro accused the Gulf Clan criminal gang and other armed groups of targeting members of the security forces in revenge for the recent killing of several of their leaders.

The government has offered a reward for information leading to the arrest of those behind the attacks.

Petro was elected on a promise to bring “total peace” to Colombia, but on Friday his interior minister acknowledged that the strategy was “not going well”, following the breakdown of talks with the Gulf Clan and several other armed groups.

Petro published a list on X of the names of the 15 police officers and 12 soldiers which he said had been “systematically” killed since 15 April.

According to the list, 10 of the police officers were murdered on duty, while five were killed off duty.

Seven of the soldiers on the list all died in a single ambush on Sunday in Guaviare province. The army has blamed that attack on a dissident Farc rebel group.

The Farc, short for Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, signed a peace deal with the government in 2016 and most of its fighters laid down their arms.

But a considerable number of Farc rebels who did not agree with the deal formed dissident groups which have continued to fight the security forces.

In an effort to bring peace to Colombia, Petro’s government held talks with some of these dissident groups, as well as with rebels of the National Liberation Army (ELN), and members of the Gulf Clan criminal gang.

But Petro suspended the talks with the ELN in January, accusing it of having “no will for peace”.

He also opted not to renew a ceasefire with a dissident Farc rebel group in April.

Talks with the Gulf Clan also stalled after police launched an operation against the group’s leader, known as “Chiquito Malo” (Spanish for “Bad Shorty”), in February.

Chiquito Malo escaped unharmed, but days later another senior leader, known as “Terror”, and his bodyguards were killed by police.

The Colombian government says that the Gulf Clan ordered its members to kill on- and off-duty police officers and soldiers in revenge for these operations.

The government has defended its net-zero policies after Sir Tony Blair said limiting fossil fuels was “doomed to fail” and a new approach was needed.

The former Labour prime minister argued the debate on climate change had become “irrational” and people in rich countries no longer wanted to make financial sacrifices “when they know that their impact on global emissions is minimal”.

His comments have been seized on by opposition parties as an attack on Sir Keir Starmer’s plan to achieve net zero carbon emissions in the UK by 2050.

But Labour ministers insist the drive to net zero will not involve any financial sacrifices and have minimal impact on people’s lives.

It comes as a highly critical report by the independent Climate Change Committee says Labour has made very little progress in preparing the UK for the growing threats posed by rising temperatures since coming to power.

Environment Secretary Steve Reed told Times Radio that Sir Tony had made “a valid and important contribution” to the climate change debate.

“I agree with much of what he said, but not absolutely every word and dot and comma of it,” he added.

“But this government is moving to clean energy because it’s best for Britain. It’s more energy security for Britain.”

He said the government’s plan to replace nearly all fossil fuels for electricity generation with wind, solar and wave energy by 2030 was aimed at breaking the UK’s “dependency” on “fossil fuel dictators” like Vladimir Putin and it would lead to lower energy bills.

In a report by the Tony Blair Institute, Sir Tony argues that the expected global rise in fossil fuel use and the doubling of airline travel over the next 20 years undermines current climate policies.

“These are the inconvenient facts, which mean that any strategy based on either ‘phasing out’ fossil fuels in the short term or limiting consumption is a strategy doomed to fail,” he wrote.

The report says existing carbon targets should be kept in place to give certainty to business but a rethink of how they are achieved was urgently needed.

It says the focus should instead be on emerging technologies such as carbon capture and storage and nuclear fusion – and new international effort to persuade the world’s biggest economies, such as China and India, to cut their emissions.

To help achieve the 2050 target, Labour and the previous Conservative government made a series of pledges including “clean” electricity, ending the sale of petrol and diesel cars by 2030 – and installing 600,000 electric heat pumps a year by 2028.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch recently ditched her party’s support for net zero by 2050.

Shadow environment secretary Victoria Atkins said there was “consensus across the board” on the need to protect the environment, but that “we have to take the public with us”.

And she said Sir Tony Blair had sent a “clear message” to the government that it needs to “rethink” its approach to net zero.

Following the response to the former PM’s comments, the Tony Blair Institute emphasised the report’s support for the government’s approach.

A spokesperson said: “The report is clear that we support the government’s 2050 net zero targets, to give certainty to the investors and innovators who can develop these new solutions and make them deployable.

“People support climate action, and it is vital that we keep the public’s support for how we do it.”

But Sir Tony’s intervention has highlighted divisions in Labour over net zero.

Some on the right of the party argue that the government is not doing enough to support workers and save jobs in the oil and gas sector in the transition to clean power.

But Labour-supporting environmental campaigners have accused Sir Tony of handing ammunition to the Conservatives and Reform UK.

One told the BBC the publication of his report on the eve of local elections was a sign that Sir Tony was losing influence over Sir Keir Starmer.

“This is an oddly public and oddly-timed intervention that would usually be made by someone struggling for access,” he added.

In a sign of the acrimony swilling around this debate within Labour, one government source suggested Sir Tony’s comments may have been affected by the Tony Blair Institute having received funding from oil rich Saudi Arabia.

The Labour Party has had a complicated relationship with Sir Tony and his legacy since he left Downing Street in 2007.

Ed Miliband’s election as leader in 2010 over his brother, David, was seen in part as a repudiation of Blairism, as was Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership to a much greater extent.

But since Sir Keir Starmer became leader in 2020 he has often embraced the most electorally-successful leader in Labour’s history. He has also hired some of the leading figures from Sir Tony’s Downing Street.

Jonathan Powell, Downing Street chief of staff under Sir Tony, is now Sir Keir’s national security adviser, and Liz Lloyd, a former deputy chief of staff, is now back as director of policy delivery.

Lord Mandelson, one of Sir Tony’s closest political friends and a former cabinet minister, is now the UK ambassador to Washington.

Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to keep up with the inner workings of Westminster and beyond.

Three more concerts by Irish rap band Kneecap have been cancelled in Germany.

It comes after news that footage of the band allegedly calling for MPs to be killed is being assessed by counter-terrorism police.

A ticket site for the gigs in Hamburg, Berlin and Cologne states that the summer shows are no longer going ahead.

A number of politicians have been calling for the band to be uninvited from some UK gigs, with Tory MP Mark Francois saying the group should not be allowed to play Glastonbury in light of the ongoing police investigation.

Speaking on RTÉ’s Prime Time on Tuesday, the band’s manager said “moral hysteria” had taken hold and that the band are being held to a higher moral standard than politicians.

Daniel Lambert claimed a “concerted campaign” against the group is “solely about de-platforming artists”.

“It’s about telling the next young band, both through the music industry and through the political class, that you cannot speak about Palestine,” he said.

On having gigs cancelled, the band’s manager said: “It’s not for us to worry, it’s for us to have the strength of conviction that we did the right thing.”

He added that going to Coachella was the right thing to do, and “all of this has emerged from that”.

TV personality Sharon Osbourne called for the band’s US work visas to be revoked after their performance at the Coachella music festival in California earlier this month, where they described Israel’s military action in Gaza as a US-funded genocide.

Scheduled appearances at Hurricane and Southside festivals, also in Germany, were cancelled last week.

A gig at the Eden Project in Cornwall has also been cancelled.

On Tuesday, an Eden Sessions Limited spokesperson said: “Ticket purchasers will be contacted directly and will be fully refunded.”

The band are set to support Fontaines DC at Boucher Playing Fields, Belfast, in August.

Speaking to BBC Radio Ulster’s The Nolan Show, councillor Jim Rodgers said “serious consideration should be given” on whether the concert should go ahead.

“I’ve already spoken to some of the council officers and I’m hoping that the necessary action will be taken. We have to lead by example,” he said.

“We would be sending out the wrong message if we were to allow this group to go ahead with their event.”

A Belfast City Council spokesperson said: “Use of the venue for these events is managed via a legal agreement between the council and the promoter. Events programming remains a matter for the organisers.

“Any matter that an elected member wishes to raise would be considered by the relevant committee and full council.”

Kneecap are an Irish-speaking rap trio who have courted controversy with their provocative lyrics and merchandise.

The group was formed in 2017 by three friends who go by the stage names of Mo Chara, Móglaí Bap and DJ Próvaí.

Their rise to fame inspired a semi-fictionalised film starring Oscar-nominated actor Michael Fassbender.

The film won a British Academy of Film Award (Bafta) in February 2025.

Last week, a video emerged of the west Belfast trio at a November 2023 gig appearing to show one person from the band saying: “The only good Tory is a dead Tory. Kill your local MP.”

The daughter of the Conservative MP David Amess whose father was stabbed to death at a constituency surgery called for Kneecap to apologise.

In a statement on X, the band said that “an extract of footage, deliberately taken out of all context, is now being exploited and weaponised, as if it were a call to action”.

They also called some of the backlash a “smear campaign” and said it was “a transparent effort to derail the real conversation” away from their messages of “love” and support for Palestine.

They added: “To the Amess and Cox families, we send our heartfelt apologies, we never intended to cause you hurt.”

On Tuesday, the husband of murdered MP Jo Cox called on Kneecap to give a “real apology”.

Brendan Cox, whose wife was killed in June 2016, said this was “only half an apology”.

None of the members of Kneecap have been charged with any offences.

Taiwan has condemned Somalia for banning travellers with Taiwanese passports from entering or transiting through the East African country.

The ban took effect on Wednesday following an order issued by Somali aviation authorities last week, Taiwan’s foreign ministry said.

Somalia is yet to comment on the ban which comes as Taiwan, a self-ruled island claimed by China, boosts ties with Somaliland, which broke away from Somalia 34 years ago, but remains mostly unrecognised internationally.

In 2020, Somaliland and Taiwan set up embassies in each other’s capitals, angering both China and Somalia.

Somalia’s civil aviation authority issued a notice to airlines saying that Taiwanese passports “will no longer be valid for entry into or transit through the Federal Republic of Somalia” from 30 April, Taiwan’s foreign ministry said in a statement late on Tuesday.

• Somaliland and Taiwan: Two territories with few friends but each other

“The ministry of foreign affairs has strongly protested Somalia’s action made under the instigation of China to restrict the travel freedom and safety of Taiwanese nationals and has demanded that the Somali government immediately revoke the notice,” the ministry said.

It condemned Somalia’s “misinterpretation” of UN Resolution 2758 by linking it with the “one China” principle.

The ministry urged Taiwanese against traveling to Somalia or Somaliland for their own safety before Somalia reverses the ban, Taiwanese media reported.

Neither Somaliland nor Somalia has commented.

China said it “highly appreciates” the ban, calling it a “legitimate measure” that “reflects Somalia’s firm adherence to the one-China principle”, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun told journalists on Wednesday, according to the AFP news agency.

Taiwan has its own constitution and holds regular, multiparty elections to choose its own leaders.

China insists Taiwan is part of its territory and has threatened to use force if necessary to bring the island under its control.

Following a diplomatic push by China, Taiwan – officially known as the Republic of China – is only recognised by a handful of countries.

Somaliland, which is not recognised by any other sovereign state, unilaterally declared independence from the rest of Somalia in 1991, following the collapse of the dictatorial regime in Somalia led by the late General Mohamed Siad Barre.

Somaliland also holds regular elections, while many parts of Somalia are under the control of the al-Shabab militant group, which is linked to al-Qaeda.

Somalia sees Somaliland as part of its territory and has condemned Ethiopia for striking a deal with the Somaliland authorities to lease one of its ports.

• What’s behind China-Taiwan tensions?
• The unrecognised nation where 15-year-olds vote
• eSwatini – Taiwan’s last friend in Africa

Pakistan’s information minister says that the country has “credible intelligence” that India intends to launch a military strike within the next 24 to 36 hours.

Attaullah Tarar’s comments come after India accused Pakistan of supporting militants behind an attack in Indian-administered Kashmir that killed 26 tourists last week. Islamabad rejects the allegations.

Tarar said that India intends to use the attack as a “false pretext” for a strike and that “any such military adventurism by India would be responded to assuredly and decisively”.

The BBC has contacted the Indian foreign ministry for comment.

The attack near the tourist town of Pahalgam was the deadliest attack on civilians in two decades in the disputed territory. Both India and Pakistan claim the region and have fought two wars over it.

Troops from both sides have traded intermittent small-arms fire across the border in recent days.

There has been speculation over whether India will respond with military strikes against Pakistan, as it did after deadly militant attacks in 2019 and 2016.

Authorities said last week they had conducted extensive searches in Indian-administered Kashmir, detaining more than 1,500 people for questioning. More people have been detained since then, although the numbers are unclear.

Authorities have demolished the houses of at least 10 alleged militants. At least one was reportedly linked to a suspect named in the shootings.

Kashmir, which India and Pakistan claim in full but administer only in part, has been a flashpoint between the two nuclear-armed countries since they were partitioned in 1947.

Indian-administered Kashmir has seen an armed insurgency against Indian rule since 1989, with militants targeting security forces and civilians alike.

India has not named any group it suspects carried out the attack in Pahalgam and it remains unclear who did it. A little-known group called the Resistance Front, which was initially reported to have claimed it carried out the shootings, issued a statement denying involvement. The front is reportedly affiliated with Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based militant group.

Indian police have named three of four suspected attackers. They said two were Pakistani nationals and one a local man from Indian-administered Kashmir. There is no information on the fourth man.

Many survivors said the gunmen specifically targeted Hindu men.

The attack has sparked widespread anger in India, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi publicly saying the country will hunt the suspects “till the ends of the earth” and that those who planned and carried it out “will be punished beyond their imagination”.

Singer Katy Perry has admitted feeling “battered and bruised” by the backlash following her recent space trip, but reassured fans she is OK and would “keep looking to the light”.

Writing two weeks after the much-derided Blue Origin voyage, which saw her take an 11-minute flight with five other women, the US star said the “online world” had tried to make her a “human Piñata”.

Her comments came after fans paid for a billboard in New York to show their support for her ahead of her world tour.

Responding to a fan account that posted a video of the billboard, Perry said she was “so grateful” for her fans, adding they were “in this beautiful and wild journey together”.

Perry has been one of pop’s most successful singers over the past two decades, but the narrative around her has become more negative in the past year.

A poorly received album was accompanied by a lead single, Woman’s World, which had a music video which many viewed as regressive.

She was then criticised for her part in Jeff Bezos’s all-female Blue Origin space flight, during which she sang Louis Armstrong’s What a Wonderful World to her fellow passengers, and held up the setlist for her new tour to an in-flight camera.

Some commentators said it was “tone deaf” for celebrities to be taking part in such a fleeting and expensive trip at a time of economic struggle.

However, singer Lily Allen apologised this week for “being mean” about Perry, saying that although she disagreed with the flight, there was no need to join the “pile on” against the singer.

Some fans showed their support for Perry by clubbing together to pay for a digital billboard message in New York’s Times Square for 24 hours.

A Brazillian fan account on Instagram explained fans had done it to “remind her that she is never alone; our love for her is boundless, unwavering, and eternal”.

“We’re so proud of you and your magical journey and we love you to the moon and back.

“Know that you are safe, seen and celebrated. We’ll see you around the world, this is just the beginning.”

Perry left a comment expressing her gratitude, telling fans: “I love you guys and have grown up together with you and am so excited to see you all over the world this year!

“Please know I am OK, I have done a lot [of] work around knowing who I am, what is real and what is important to me.”

She said she is “not perfect”, but rather on a “human journey playing the game of life with an audience of many and sometimes I fall”.

“But I get back up and go on and continue to play the game and somehow through my battered and bruised adventure I keep looking to the light and in that light a new level unlocks.”

She added: “When the ‘online’ world tries to make me a human Piñata, I take it with grace and send them love, cause I know so many people are hurting in so many ways and the internet is very much so a dumping ground for unhinged and unhealed.”

The singer, whose hits include Roar, Firework and I Kissed A Girl, has just started a world tour, which will run until December and visit the US, Canada, South America, Canada, Europe and the United Arab Emirates.

Perry said she was looking forward to “seeing your faces every night, singing in unison, reading your notes, feeling your warmth”.

If you say the name Donald Trump in the halls of wholesale markets and trade fairs in China, you’ll hear a faint chuckle.

The US president and his 145% tariffs have not instilled fear in many Chinese traders.

Instead, they have inspired an army of online Chinese nationalists to create mocking memes in a series of viral videos and reels – some of which include an AI-generated President Trump, Vice-President JD Vance and tech mogul Elon Musk toiling on footwear and iPhone assembly lines.

China is not behaving like a nation facing the prospect of economic pain and President Xi Jinping has made it clear that Beijing will not back down.

“For more than 70 years, China has always relied on self-reliance and hard work for development… it has never relied on anyone’s gifts and is unafraid of any unreasonable suppression,” he said this month.

His confidence may come in part because China is far less dependent than it was 10 years ago on exports to the US. But the truth is Trump’s brinkmanship and tariff hikes are pushing on pressure points that already exist within China’s own struggling economy. With a housing crisis, increasing job insecurity and an ageing population, Chinese people are simply not spending as much as their government would like.

Xi came to power in 2012 with a dream of a rejuvenated China. That is now being severely tested – and not just by US tariffs. Now, the question is whether or not Trump’s tariffs will dampen Xi’s economic dreams, or can he turn the obstacles that exist into opportunities?

With a population of 1.4 billion, China has, in theory, a huge domestic market. But there’s a problem. They don’t appear willing to spend money while the country’s economic outlook is uncertain.

This has not been prompted by the trade war – but by the collapse of the housing market. Many Chinese families invested their life savings in their homes, only to watch prices plummet in the last five years.

Housing developers continued to build even as the property market crumbled. It’s thought that China’s entire population would not fill all the empty apartments across the country.

The former deputy head of China’s statistics bureau, He Keng, admitted two years ago that the most “extreme estimate” is that there are now enough vacant homes for 3 billion people.

Travel round Chinese provinces and you see they are littered with empty projects – lines of towering concrete shells that have been labelled “ghost cities”. Others have been fitted out, the gardens have been landscaped, curtains frame the windows, and they appear filled with the promise of a new home. But only at night, when you see no lights, can you tell that the apartments are empty. There just aren’t enough buyers to match this level of construction.

The government acted five years ago to restrict the amount of money developers could borrow. But the damage to house prices and, in turn, consumer confidence in China, has been done and analysts have projected a 2.5% decline in home prices this year, according to a Reuters poll in February.

And it’s not just house prices that worry middle-class Chinese families.

They are concerned about whether the government can offer them a pension – over the next decade, about 300 million people, who are currently aged 50 to 60, are set to leave the Chinese workforce. According to a 2019 estimate by the state-run Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, the government pension fund could run out of money by 2035.

There are also fears about whether their sons, daughters and grandchildren can get a job as millions of college graduates are struggling to find work. More than one in five people between the ages of 16 and 24 in urban areas are jobless in China, according to official data published in August 2023. The government has not released youth unemployment figures since then.

The problem is that China cannot simply flip a switch and move from selling goods to the US to selling them to local buyers.

“Given the downward pressure on the economy, it is unlikely domestic spending can be significantly expanded in the short term,” says Prof Nie Huihua at Renmin University.

“Replacing exports with internal demand will take time.”

According to Prof Zhao Minghao, deputy director of the Center for American Studies at Fudan University, “China does not have high expectations for talks with the Trump administration… The real battleground is in the adjustment of China’s domestic policies, such as boosting domestic demand.”

To revive a slowing economy, the government has announced billions in childcare subsidies, increased wages and better paid leave. It has also introduced a $41bn programme offering discounts on items such as consumer electronics and electric vehicles (EVs) to encourage more people to spend. But Prof Zhang Jun, the Dean of Economics at Fudan University, believes this is not “sustainable”.

“We need a long-term mechanism,” he says. “We need to start increasing residents’ disposable income.”

This is urgent for Xi. The dream of prosperity he sold when he took power 13 years ago has not become reality.

Xi is also aware that China has a disheartened younger generation worried about their future. That could spell bigger trouble for the Communist Party: protests or unrest.

A report by Freedom House’s China Dissent Monitor claims that protests driven by financial grievances saw a steep increase in the last few months.

All protests are quickly subdued and censored on social media, so it is unlikely to pose a real threat to Xi for now.

“Only when the country does well and the nation does well can every person do well,” Xi said in 2012.

This promise was made when China’s economic rise looked unstoppable. It now looks uncertain.

Where the country has made huge strides over the past decade is in areas such as consumer electronics, batteries, EVs and artificial intelligence as part of a pivot to advanced manufacturing.

It has rivalled US tech dominance with the chatbot DeepSeek and BYD, which beat Tesla last year to become the world’s largest EV maker.

Yet Trump’s tariffs threaten to throw a spanner in the works.

The restrictions on the sale of key chips to China, including the most recent move tightening exports from US chip giant Nvidia, for instance, are aimed at curbing Xi’s ambitions for tech supremacy.

Despite that, Xi knows that Chinese manufacturers are at a decades-long advantage, so that US manufacturers are struggling to find the same scale of infrastructure and skilled labour elsewhere.

President Xi is also trying to use this crisis as a catalyst for further change and to find more new markets for China.

“In the short term, some Chinese exporters will be greatly impacted,” says Prof Zhang. “But Chinese companies will take the initiative to adjust the destination of exports to overcome difficulties. Exporters are waiting and looking for new customers.”

Donald Trump’s first term in office was China’s cue to look elsewhere for buyers. It has expanded its ties across South East Asia, Latin America and Africa – and a Belt and Road trade and infrastructure initiative shored up ties with the so-called Global South.

China is reaping the rewards from that diversification. More than 145 countries do more trade with China than they do with the US, according to the Lowy Institute.

In 2001, only 30 countries chose Beijing as their lead trade partner over Washington.

As Trump targets both friend and foe, some believe Xi can further upend the current US-led world order and portray his country as a stable, alternative global trade partner and leader.

The Chinese leader chose South East Asia for his first trip abroad after the tariff announcement, sensing his neighbours would be getting jittery about Trump’s tariffs.

Around a quarter of Chinese exports are now manufactured or shipped through a second country including Vietnam and Cambodia.

Recent US actions may also present a chance for Xi to positively shape China’s role in the world.

“Trump’s coercive tariff policy is an opportunity for Chinese diplomacy,” says Prof Zhang.

China will have to tread carefully. Some countries will be nervous that products being manufactured for the US could end up flooding into their markets.

Trump’s tariffs in 2016 sent a glut of cheap Chinese imports, originally intended for the US, into South East Asia, hurting many local manufacturers.

According to Prof Huihua, “about 20% of China’s exports go to the US – if these exports were to flood any regional market or country, it could lead to dumping and vicious competition, thereby triggering new trade frictions”.

There are barriers to Xi presenting himself as the arbiter of free trade in the world.

China has subjected other nations to trade restrictions in recent years.

In 2020, after the Australian government called for a global inquiry into the origins and early handling of the Covid pandemic, which Beijing argued was a political manoeuvre against them, China placed tariffs on Australian wine and barley and imposed biosecurity measures on some beef and timber and bans on coal, cotton and lobster. Some Australian exports of certain goods to China fell to nearly zero.

Australia’s Defence Minister Richard Marles said earlier this month that his nation will not be “holding China’s hand” as Washington escalated its trade war with Beijing.

China’s past actions may impede Xi’s current global outreach and many countries may be unwilling to choose between Beijing and Washington.

Even with all the various difficulties, Xi is betting that Beijing will be able to withstand any economic pain longer than Washington in this great power competition.

And it does appear that Trump has blinked first, last week hinting at a potential U-turn on tariffs, saying that the taxes he has so far imposed on Chinese imports would “come down substantially, but it won’t be zero”.

Meanwhile, Chinese social media is back in action.

“Trump has chickened out,” was one of the top trending search topics on the Chinese social media platform Weibo after the US president softened his approach to tariffs.

Even if or when talks do happen, China is playing a longer game.

The last trade war forced it to diversify its export market away from the US towards other markets – especially in the Global South.

This trade war has China looking in the mirror to see its own flaws – and whether it can fix them will be up to policies made in Beijing, not Washington.

President Trump used a rally in Michigan to mark what he claimed had been “the most successful first 100 days of any administration in the history of our country, according to many, many people”.

He highlighted his efforts to tackle illegal immigration, to bring back jobs to the US and end what he called “the inflation nightmare”.

BBC Verify has looked into some of the main claims from his speech.

Trump said “gasoline prices are down by a lot” since he took office.

On 29 April, the average price for a gallon of “regular” gas – or petrol – across the US was $3.16 (£2.36), according to data from the American Automobile Association (AAA).

That is slightly up from the $3.125 (£2.33) recorded by the AAA on the day Trump entered the White House.

In his speech, he added that gas prices had “just hit $1.98 in a lot of states”.

This is a claim he has made several times but we cannot find evidence of prices this low.

As of 29 April, no state had an average gas price lower than $2.67 (£1.99), according to the AAA.

The US president also spoke about the cost of eggs – a concern for many US consumers due to an ongoing bird flu outbreak – and said: “Since I took office, the cost of eggs is down 87%.”

This claim is false.

The average national price for consumers of a dozen large Grade A eggs when Trump entered office in January was about $4.95 (£3.70).

This rose to a record high of around $6.23 (£4.65) per dozen in March – according to the latest available figures.

The White House has pointed to wholesale egg prices as evidence of improvement.

Wholesale prices have gone down since Trump took office – but by about 52% – from $6.55 (£4.89) for a dozen large white eggs in January to $3.15 (£2.34) in the past week, according to the US Department of Agriculture.

Trump spoke at length about his efforts to tackle illegal immigration – a key campaign issue in last year’s election.

He said: “For two months in a row, we have set all time records for the lowest number of illegal border crossings ever recorded.”

This claim is backed up by the latest monthly figures on “encounters” of illegal migrants recorded by officials at the US-Mexico border.

In March, there were 7,181 encounters of migrants there and in February there were 8,346.

These are the the lowest numbers since these monthly records began in 2000.

By comparison, there were about 140,000 encounters at this border in each of those months last year under President Biden.

His term saw record numbers of border crossings which then fell towards the end of his presidency.

The Migration Policy Institute think tank has studied monthly averages of annual figures available before 2000 and says this year’s illegal border crossings are the lowest since the late 1960s, rather than the lowest for “all time”.

President Trump praised Elon Musk’s work at the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) saying: “They’ve saved over $150bn on waste, fraud and abuse”.

Doge, an advisory body, publishes a running total of its estimated savings on its website – it was $160bn the last time the site was updated on 20 April.

However, less than 40% of this figure is broken down into individual savings – which include cancelling government contracts, grants and leases.

Analysis by BBC Verify found only about half of these itemised savings had a link to a document or other form of evidence.

Doge says it is working to upload all receipts in a “digestible and transparent manner”.

Federal contract experts we spoke to also raised questions about Doge’s biggest claimed savings and said some had been overstated.

Trump said: “In three months we have created 350,000 jobs.”

This claim is backed up by official figures.

During Trump’s first two full months in office up until March (the latest available data) 345,000 jobs have been added, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics.

However, over the same period last year 468,000 jobs were added under President Biden.

Trump also said: “For the first time in recent memory, job gains for native-born Americans now exceed job gains for foreign workers.”

It is true that during President Trump’s first two full months in office more jobs have been created for native-born workers than foreign-born workers.

This also happened between February and April last year under President Biden.

What do you want BBC Verify to investigate?

US President Donald Trump has celebrated the 100th day of his second term in office with a campaign-style speech, touting his achievements and targeting political foes.

Hailing what he called a “revolution of common sense”, he told a crowd of supporters in Michigan that he was using his presidency to deliver “profound change”.

The Republican mocked his Democratic predecessor, Joe Biden, and aimed fresh criticism at the US Federal Reserve’s chairman, while dismissing polls that show his own popularity slipping.

Trump has delivered a dramatic fall in the number of migrants crossing illegally into the US, but the economy is a potential political vulnerability as he wages a global trade war.

“We’ve just gotten started, you haven’t seen anything yet,” Trump told the crowd on Tuesday in a suburb of Detroit.

Speaking at the hub of America’s automative industry, Trump said car firms were “lining up” to open new manufacturing plants in the Midwestern state.

Earlier in the day he softened a key element of his economic plan – tariffs on the import of foreign cars and car parts – after US car-makers warned of the danger of rising prices.

At his rally, Trump also said opinion polls indicating his popularity had fallen were “fake”.

According to Gallup, Trump is the only post-World War Two president to have less than half the public’s support after 100 days in office, with an approval rating of 44%.

But the majority of Republican voters still firmly back the president. And the rival Democratic Party is also struggling in polling.

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) said Trump’s first 100 days were a “colossal failure”.

“Trump is to blame for the fact that life is more expensive, it’s harder to retire, and a ‘Trump recession’ is at our doorstep,” the DNC said.

• Trump’s first 100 days – in numbers
• Trump’s breakneck start is fraught with political risk
• ‘Kicking butt’ or ‘going too fast’? Trump voters reflect on 100 days

Trump conducted his own informal poll in Tuesday’s remarks, asking the crowd for their favourite Biden nicknames. He also mocked his Democratic predecessor’s mental agility and even how he appears in a swim suit, while continuing to insist he was the real victor of the 2020 election, which he lost.

Other targets of his ire included Jerome Powell, head of the US central bank, whom the president said was not doing a good job.

Trump touted progress on immigration – encounters at the southern border have plummeted to just over 7,000, down from 140,000 in March of last year.

The White House also said almost 65,700 immigrants had been deported in his term so far, although that is a slower pace than in the last fiscal year when US authorities deported more than 270,000.

Part of the way through his speech Trump screened a video of deportees being expelled from the US and sent to a mega-prison in El Salvador.

His immigration crackdown has faced a flurry of legal challenges, as has his effort to end the automatic granting of citizenship to anyone born on US soil.

During Tuesday’s speech he insisted egg prices had declined 87%, a claim contradicted by the latest government price figures.

Inflation, energy prices and mortgage rates have fallen since Trump took office, although unemployment has risen slightly, consumer sentiment has sagged and the stock market was plunged into turmoil by the tariffs.

Before the speech, Joe DeMonaco, who owns a carpentry business in Michigan, said Trump’s patchwork of on-again, off-again import taxes were starting to increase prices, which he will have to pass on to his customers.

“I was hoping. . . he would approach things a little bit differently seeing that he’s a little seasoned coming into a second term,” Mr DeMonaco told the BBC. “But we’re just treading water and seeing if things get better from here.”

But it’s clear that Trump’s most steadfast supporters stand by him.

“I’m just thrilled,” Teresa Breckinridge, owner of the Silver Skillet Diner in Atlanta, Georgia, told the BBC.

“He’s handling things wherever he can, multiple times a day, and he’s reporting back to the people. . . I think the tariffs will end up definitely being in our favour.”

An Australian woman accused of cooking a fatal mushroom meal admits to picking wild funghi, lying to police and disposing of evidence, a court has heard, but will argue the “tragedy” was a “terrible accident”.

The Supreme Court trial of Erin Patterson, 50, began in the small Victorian town of Morwell on Wednesday and is expected to last six weeks.

She is charged with the murder of three relatives and the attempted murder of another, with the case centring on a beef wellington lunch at her house in July 2023.

Ms Patterson has pleaded not guilty and her defence team says she “panicked” after unintentionally serving poison to family members she loved.

Three people died in hospital in the days after the meal, including Ms Patterson’s former in-laws, Don Patterson, 70, and Gail Patterson, 70, as well as Gail’s sister, Heather Wilkinson, 66.

A single lunch guest survived – local pastor Ian Wilkinson – after weeks of treatment in hospital.

The fact that the lunch of beef wellington, mash potatoes and green beans contained death cap mushrooms and caused the guests’ illnesses is not in contention, the court heard.

“The overarching issue is whether she intended to kill or cause very serious injury,” Justice Christopher Beale said.

Opening the trial on Wednesday, prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC said this case was “originally thought to be a mass food poisoning event”.

But she alleges Ms Patterson “deliberately poisoned” her guests “with murderous intent”, after inviting them for lunch “on the pretence she’d been diagnosed with cancer”.

Dr Rogers said the jury would hear evidence that Ms Patterson had travelled to a location, near her home in Leongatha, where death cap mushroom sightings had been logged on a naturalist website.

And in the days after the lunch, she took a number of steps to “conceal” what she had done, the prosecution alleged.

There’d be evidence that she lied to investigators about the source of the mushrooms in the dish – saying some had come from Asian grocery in Melbourne and she’d never foraged wild ones. And she made a trip to a local dump to dispose of a food dehydrator prosecutors say she used to prepare the toxic meal.

“You might be wondering, ‘What is the motive?'” Dr Rogers said to the jury, “You might still be wondering this at the end of this trial.”

The prosecution will not be suggesting a specific motive, she explained.

“You do not have to be satisfied what the motive was, or even that there was one.”

What the jury could expect to hear, she said, was testimony from a range of witnesses, including: Mr Wilkinson, Ms Patterson’s estranged husband Simon Patterson, medical staff who treated the lunch guests, and police who investigated.

However the defence, in opening their case, reminded the jury they had not heard any actual evidence yet and needed to keep an open mind.

Barrister Colin Mandy says while the prosecution will try to cast Ms Patterson’s behaviour after the lunch as “incriminating”, jurors should consider how someone might react in that situation.

“Might people say or do things that are not well thought out, and might make them look bad?”

“The defence case is that she panicked because she was overwhelmed by the fact that these four people had become so ill because of the food she had served them. Three people died.”

He said Ms Patterson did not deliberately serve poisoned food to her guests.

“She didn’t intend to cause anyone any harm on that day… what happened was a tragedy, a terrible accident.”

The prosecution also detailed allegations of what took place in the lead up to the lunch, and at the table, in open court for the first time.

The trial heard that, in 2023, the accused had been amicably separated from her husband Simon Patterson for years.

“Simon remained hopeful for some time that he and the accused would someday reunite,” Dr Rogers told the jury.

He was also planning to attend the gathering but pulled out at the last minute because he had noticed a recent “change in his relationship” with Ms Patterson and felt “uncomfortable”, the prosecutor said. This was something that “disappointed” Ms Patterson who “emphasised the effort she had put into preparing the lunch”.

The jury was told it would hear testimony that Ms Patterson served her guests on large grey plates, but ate off a different, tan orange dish – prompting one of the guests to later ask if she had “a shortage of crockery”.

They said grace, dug in, and exchanged “banter” about how much they had eaten, before discussing how Ms Patterson should share her cancer diagnosis – which the defence admits was fake – with her children.

The lunch party broke up in the early afternoon, and by that night, all of the guests were feeling ill, Dr Rogers says. Within a day, the four had gone to hospital with severe symptoms. Donald Patterson – who had eaten his portion of lunch and about half his wife’s – told a doctor he’d vomited 30 times in the space of a few hours.

The prosecutor said the Wilkinsons had asked whether Ms Patterson was also in hospital, as she’d eaten the same meal as them.

She had gone to the hospital, reporting feeling ill, but repeatedly declined to be admitted, the court heard. A doctor who had treated the other lunch guests was so concerned for her welfare he called police to ask for help.

Likewise, the jury was told Ms Patterson kept refusing to seek treatment for her children, who she said had eaten the beef wellington leftovers – albeit with the mushrooms scraped off as they didn’t like them.

“Lots of people might have opinions or theories, but they aren’t based on the evidence,” the defence warned the jury at the end of the day.

“None of that should have any bearing on your decision.”

Mark Carney’s Liberal Party has won enough seats in the House of Commons to form a government in Canada.

However, CBC News projects they will fall short of the majority they wanted.

Carney is set to remain prime minister, having only assumed the role in early March following Justin Trudeau’s resignation.

His main rival, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre, has lost his own seat as has Jagmeet Singh, leader of the New Democratic Party (NDP).

Carney’s Liberals have 169 seats according to preliminary results but would need 172 for a majority.

The Conservatives are set to remain in opposition as the second-largest party and are on 144 seats, with over 99% of polls having reported results.

The Bloc Québécois is on 22 seats and only runs candidates in the province of Quebec. The NDP has been reduced to seven seats and the Green Party to one.

Both the Liberals and the Conservatives have seen a significant rise in their share of the national vote compared with four years ago.

Increased support for Canada’s two largest parties has come at the expense of smaller parties, particularly the NDP whose share of the popular vote is down by almost 12 percentage points.

The rise in support for the Conservatives was not enough to save Poilievre, who lost his own seat in Carleton, Ontario.

The 45-year-old had promised a return to “common sense politics”.

Opinion polls at the start of the year had the Conservatives over 20 percentage points ahead of the Liberals. But after the resignation of former Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and the arrival of new PM Mark Carney and the tariffs announced by US President Donald Trump, that lead evaporated.

In his own seat, Poilievre had 90 opponents, mostly independent candidates linked to a group calling for electoral reform.

NDP leader Singh also lost his own seat in the House of Commons, coming third behind the Liberal and Conservative candidates.

Canada has a “first-past-the-post” electoral system.

The candidate who gets the most votes in each electoral district, or riding, wins that seat and become a Member of Parliament (MP).

The Liberals and the Conservatives have dominated the popular vote, with both parties receiving more than 40% each of ballots counted across Canada.

This has them on track to win a combined 90% of seats.

The NDP has received just over 6% of the total vote, but this translates to just 2% of seats in the House of Commons.

The Bloc Québécois has just over 6% of the vote and a similar share of seats.

The Liberals have the most seats in the key provinces of Ontario and Quebec, which account for 200 of Canada’s 343 electoral districts.

The Conservatives took all but three of the 37 seats in Alberta, while it was a close race between the two main parties in British Columbia, where the Conservatives have 19 seats and the Liberals 20.

One of the most closely-watched areas was around Toronto. The “905” are places that all share the same telephone code.

While the Liberals have won in most of Toronto, including a seat they lost in a by-election last year, the Conservatives were able to flip some of the ridings in the surrounding region.

The NDP have lost a seat, Hamilton Centre, that they’d held for over 20 years.

After Ontario, Quebec is the second most populated province of Canada and has a big impact on the results of federal elections.

The Bloc Québécois, which focuses on Quebec interests and only runs candidates in the province, was defending 35 seats, a number which changed after boundaries were reviewed. It is projected to have lost 13.

Most of those have flipped to the Liberal party while one has gone to the Conservatives, according to preliminary results.

The Liberals won Terrebonne from the Bloc by a margin of just 35 votes.

The riding of Abitibi-Baie-James-Nunavik-Eeyou is one of the largest in Canada by land area and has also flipped from the Bloc to the Liberals.

The NDP held on to their seat in Rosemont-La Petite-Patrie in Montreal.

Turnout has surpassed the levels seen in 2015 and 2019, with 69% of registered electors having voted. This is according to the preliminary results from Elections Canada.

More than 7 million Canadians cast their ballots in advance, setting a new record for early voter turnout, Elections Canada said.

• LIVE: Follow BBC’s coverage of the election
• RESULTS: How Canada voted – in charts
• ANALYSIS: Why Carney’s Liberals won – and the Conservatives lost
• WATCH: How Canada’s election night unfolded
• PROFILE: Who is Mark Carney, Canada’s new PM?
• VOTERS: How I decided who gets my vote
• US VIEW: A turnaround victory made possible by Trump

Harvard University President Alan Garber has apologised following the release of internal reports into antisemitic and anti-Muslim prejudice at America’s oldest university.

The reports included testimony from students who described feeling alienated and pressured to conceal their identity from their peers and educators.

In response to the findings, Harvard pledged to review its academic offerings and admissions policies – a key demand of the White House, which accuses the Ivy League institution of failure to stamp out campus antisemitism.

Two taskforces were established to look into bias at Harvard in the aftermath of last year’s pro-Palestinian protests over the Israel-Gaza war.

“I’m sorry for the moments when we failed to meet the high expectations we rightfully set for our community,” Dr Garber said in a letter on Tuesday accompanying the reports.

He said the Hamas attack on Israel of 7 October 2023, and the ensuing Israeli bombardment of Gaza unleashed “long-simmering tensions” on Harvard’s campus.

“Members of our community reported incidents that led them to feel targeted and shunned on the basis of their identities,” Dr Garber said.

“Harvard cannot – and will not – abide bigotry,” his statement added.

The twin internal reports list some “actions and commitments”, including that Harvard will review admissions processes.

The college said it would aim to ensure applicants are evaluated based on their ability to “engage constructively with different perspectives, show empathy and participate in civil discourse”.

But the proposed remedial action appears to fall short of the White House’s demands for Harvard to end all preferences “based on race, color, national origin, or proxies thereof” and implement “merit-based” policies by August.

The Trump administration has threatened to ban the university from enrolling foreign students and strip its tax exempt status if it does not comply.

In response, Harvard has sued the federal government to block the measures, including the freezing of more than $2bn in academic grants.

Lawyers for Harvard argue the government violated the university’s constitutional rights and federal funding was being used as “leverage to gain control of academic decision making” on campus.

Dr Garber, who is Jewish, last month wrote in a letter to students that he had personally “experienced antisemitism directly, even while serving as president”.

He did not offer details, but said it led him to understand “how damaging it can be to a student”.

Swedish police have arrested a teenager after a fatal triple shooting in the city of Uppsala on Tuesday.

The shooter reportedly fled on a scooter following the attack in a hair salon in the centre of the city, triggering a manhunt.

Police confirmed on Wednesday that the person arrested for the shooting is under the age of 18.

All three victims were aged between 15 and 20 years old, Swedish police told a news conference, though the region’s chief of police Erik Åkerlund said their identities have not been “100%” confirmed.

Police are investigating the possibility the deaths are related to gang crime, Swedish media reported.

One of those murdered at the hair salon is reportedly known to the police, local media said.

The victim was involved in a police investigation over a planned attack against a relative of gang leader Ismail Abdo, according to the reports. The person was never charged.

Abdo, nicknamed ‘jordgubben’ or ‘the strawberry’, is a well-known gang leader.

A new, violent chapter in Sweden’s gang wars began when Abdo’s mother was murdered in 2023 at her home in Uppsala, north of Stockholm.

Sweden has seen a wave of teenage gang crime in recent years, with suspects accused of a range of offences from vandalism to murder.

The Swedish government has proposed new legislation that would allow police to wiretap children under the age of 15 in an attempt to grapple with the problem.

In a pre-planned press conference on gang violence on Wednesday, the Minister of Justice Gunnar Strömmer suggested police would not need concrete evidence to conduct the wiretaps.

While he has acknowledged the proposals involve a major breach of privacy, Strömmer has suggested the measures are necessary to stop the recruitment of children as young as ten and 11 to gangs, Swedish media reported.

The government has also said it wants to tighten the country’s gun laws.

The attack came on the eve of the Walpurgis spring festival, when large crowds are expected to descend on the streets of Uppsala, a university town north of Stockholm.

Known in Sweden as Valborg, university students gather in the city for champagne breakfasts, herring lunches and a raft race on the river.

There is a huge bonfire on the outskirts of the city planned for Wednesday evening.

Åsa Larsson, a local police chief in Uppsala and Knivsta, said that Swedes planning to visit Uppsala for its annual Valborg spring festival events, popular with students, should not change their plans.

However, visitors were urged to contact police if they spotted anything they were concerned about.

She said that there would be a large police presence across Uppsala in the coming days, but that there were “no guarantees” that further violence could be avoided.

Following the shooting, police officers cordoned off a large area near the hair salon.

“Everything happened so fast. It just went bang, bang, bang,” a witness told Swedish channel TV4.

Another man said he was cooking at home when he heard “two bangs that sounded a bit like fireworks” going off outside on the street.

He told Swedish television he was “very surprised and scared” and shortly after “swarms of police and ambulances” started blocking off the street and telling people to move back.

Two cookbook authors have accused TikTok influencer Brooke Bellamy of copying their recipes.

Nagi Maehashi, the Australian founder of popular food website RecipeTin Eats, said Ms Bellamy’s cookbook contains recipes with “word-for-word similarities to mine”.

Ms Bellamy, who owns the popular Brooki Bakehouse, has rejected her allegations, saying her book contains “100 recipes I have created over many years”. One of those in question was created before Ms Maehashi published hers, she claims.

Hours after Ms Maehashi’s raised her allegations, US author Sally McKenney also accused Ms Bellamy of plagiarising her vanilla cake recipe.

Ms Maehashi said that a reader pointed out what she described as “remarkable similarities” between her caramel slice recipe and the one in Ms Bellamy’s best-selling cookbook Bake with Brooki.

She said she later also discovered similarities between her baklava recipe and Ms Bellamy’s, offering a side-by-side comparison in a statement on RecipeTin Eats.

Ms Maehashi is the author of two cookbooks and her website, which she started in 2014, attracts a monthly readership of 45 million page views.

Ms Bellamy is the owner of three Brooki Bakehouse branches, all in Queensland, which were set up in 2022. She is also a popular baker on TikTok with two million followers.

Ms Maehashi said she had contacted Ms Bellamy’s publisher, Penguin Random House Australia, adding that they “brought in lawyers and resorted to what felt to me legal intimidation”.

“It feels like a blatant exploitation of my work. To see them plagiarised and used in a book for profit, without permission, and without credit, doesn’t just feel unfair,” she added.

Ms Maehashi has retained her own legal counsel and has written to both Ms Bellamy and Penguin.

Bake with Brooki was published in October 2024 and has since sold A$4.6m (£2.1m; $2.9) worth of copies.

Penguin and Ms Bellamy have both strenuously denied the accusations, with the publisher issuing a response to Ms Maehashi confirming “the recipes in the BWB Book were written by Brooke Bellamy”.

Despite maintaining no wrongdoing, Ms Bellamy said she offered to take down the recipes from future reprints “to prevent further aggravation”, and that this was communicated “swiftly” to Ms Maehashi.

She added that she had “great respect for Nagi”, but has stood by her recipes in a series of Instagram stories.

“Recipe development in today’s world is enveloped in inspiration from other cooks, cookbook authors, food bloggers and content creators,” she said, adding that the “willingness to share receipes” is what she loves about baking.

Both Ms Maehashi’s and Ms Bellamy’s cookbooks have been shortlisted for this year’s Australian Book Industry Awards.

Ms McKenney, who authors the website Sally’s Baking Addiction, accused Ms Bellamy of copying her vanilla cake recipe, which is included in Ms Bellamy’s cookbook and YouTube channel.

“Original receipe creators who put in the work to develop and test recipes deserve credit – especially in a best-selling cookbook,” Ms McKenny wrote on Instagram.