Australia blow England away inside two days to win first Ashes Test

Australia blew England away in the first Ashes Test to claim an eight wicket victory inside two days at Perth Stadium.

Following Ben Stokes’ bowling heroics on day one, England seemingly took control of the match by bowling the hosts out for 132 on Saturday morning before Ben Duckett and Ollie Pope steered them safely to lunch.

But, the afternoon session was one of catastrophe as England lost four wickets for just 11 runs as added bounce and wayward strokes caused yet another third innings collapse when England should have taken control of the match.

Scott Boland found movement off the pitch and skittled both set batters, as well as Harry Brook, before Mitchell Starc claimed the crucial wickets of Joe Root and Ben Stokes. Brendan Doggett cleaned up the tail despite a fifty-partnership between Gus Atkinson and Brydon Carse.

Even that wasn’t enough as Travis Head (123), promoted to open the batting after an injury to Usman Khawaja, took the attack to England’s seamers and mullered them around the ground as Australia made light work of the target. Marnus Labuschagne scored an unbeaten 51 and captain Steve Smith hit the winning runs as Australia move 1-0 up in the series.

Follow all the latest updates from Perth, plus analysis and reaction to an already pulsating first Ashes Test down under

Trump’s in trouble – and it’s not just Epstein tearing Maga apart

There is something truly delicious about sitting on the sidelines and watching a really good political spat. It warms the cockles. And the epic falling-out between Donald Trump and the conspiracy-loving, fire-breathing, Maga ultra, Georgia congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene has not disappointed.

In an age marked by utter obsequiousness, Taylor Greene took the fight to Trump. And the name-calling has been fabulous. He now calls her Marjorie Traitor Greene. She says he’s put her life at risk – and in a dramatic new twist has said she will quit Congress, saying: “I refuse to be a ‘battered wife’ hoping it all goes away and gets better.”

If the late, great Tony Benn were alive, he would say politics is about policies, not personalities. I always thought that when he was in his fight with Denis Healey for the deputy leadership of the Labour Party back in the early 1980s, it was a remarkably po-faced response. And so much of politics in the US today is about the personality of Trump. It has been for a decade.

But actually, in relation to the Trump/MTG mega-tiff, Benn’s maxim is right. This is about policy. Sure, the fight is between two combustible personalities, but there are some big issues at stake here. And they have the potential to tear the Make America Great Again movement apart.

It has left the president seething. His view is that Maga is whatever he says it is. It’s not for other people to decide. Say it quietly, it is almost Dr Frankenstein losing control of his monster – and if he has lost control, then is he no longer the all-powerful president we have hitherto thought? Even, perish the thought, a little bit lame?

So let’s dive into this. The main cause of the falling-out between MTG and the president was around the release of the Epstein files. It has been a running sore, and Trump has been all over the place on this. Pre-election, the Maga movement was as one: the files must be released. But as it became clear that the president’s name might feature quite prominently, suddenly those closest to him lost their appetite for publication. The Wall Street Journal revealing the tasteless card Trump sent Jeffrey Epstein for his birthday added to that sense of jeopardy. Trump insists it’s a fake – though he hasn’t explained how or why.

It’s not just that he opposed publication; the Republican Party did everything it could to prevent a vote on the floor of the House of Representatives. But MTG and a handful of others weren’t going to budge on their view that they owed it to the victims of America’s most prolific paedophile. Until 10 days ago, the White House was turning the thumbscrews on the holdouts.

It was only when there was a recognition that the threats were going nowhere that Trump accepted the inevitable and said he would support the release of the files. Be in no doubt, this is a stinging defeat for him. He was free at any time to release the files without the need for a congressional vote. He chose not to. His tetchiness was more than apparent when a woman reporter questioned him about it on Air Force One and he said – disgracefully – to her, “quiet piggy”.

But it doesn’t end there. MTG and others want the administration to focus much more on the economy, not buying the Trump bromides that the US economy is the envy of the world, that trillions of dollars are pouring in from his tariff policy, and that Americans have never been better off. The affordability crisis has been seized on by political opponents – like the Epstein files, Trump is trying to dismiss this, too, as a Democrat hoax.

There is something else tearing at Maga. It is principally about free speech, but it goes much deeper than that. The spark has been an interview that the former Fox News presenter Tucker Carlson conducted with the Holocaust-denying antisemite, Nick Fuentes. The interview could not have been friendlier.

Initially, the controversy was on whether Fuentes should have been platformed at all by someone with such a huge following as Carlson, and whether he should have been given such an easy ride. It was the usual debate about free speech and cancelling.

But it morphed into something else. It became about whether the Trump administration was too close to Israel. If Maga is about America First, why do we care what happens in a country far away with only a few million people in it? Indeed, why did the Trump administration intervene in Argentina, bailing out their beef farmers when America’s farmers are reeling from his administration’s tariff policies?

In the moves of certain key figures, you can see that minds are turning to the post-Trump world and who will be the standard-bearer for the Republicans in 2028. Once that happens, power could drain from this presidency quickly.

But I have been doing this for too long to dare to count Trump out. And let me go back to the Epstein vote to underline why. As I said, 10 days ago, when Trump was still trying to prevent the release of the files, there were only a handful of GOP members who needed to be won over. In the 435-seat House of Representatives, about 215 supported Trump that the files should stay under wraps. But once he said he was in favour of their release, all but one voted for release.

Just think about that. These politicians, each with an electoral mandate from their own electorates, are so supine that all but one changed their minds once freed by Trump to do so. It’s pathetic.

Trump may be weakened. But the Republican Party is yet to discover any kind of backbone.

Strictly Come Misery – it doesn’t need new presenters, it needs to end

Just a few short years ago, Strictly Come Dancing was the shiniest of jewels in the BBC’s broadcasting crown. It was a reliable ratings hit, celebrities were lining up to get vigorously spray-tanned and learn the salsa, and the whole production seemed to exude a genuine sense of niceness. It was comfort telly par excellence, and didn’t leave you with a grotty taste in your mouth, unlike its more exploitative competitors in the reality TV sphere.

But right now, the show feels less like the diamond of public service broadcasting and more like a weight around the corporation’s neck, as yet another bleak headline threatens to extinguish that much-vaunted “Strictly magic”.

Yesterday, The Sun reported that a Strictly star, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was arrested on suspicion of rape in October. The arrest was related to an alleged incident last year, and was confirmed by Hertfordshire Police. “A man was released on police bail under investigation having been arrested in London on Monday 13 October on suspicion of rape,” the force told the newspaper, adding that inquiries are continuing. The BBC, meanwhile, said that it “would not be appropriate to comment on an ongoing police investigation”.

The news comes after another male Strictly star was arrested in August on suspicion of rape; the Metropolitan Police said that he was also suspected of “non-consensual intimate image abuse”. These two grim news stories add to an unenviable roll call of Strictly-related scandals that are proving increasingly difficult for fans of the show (and I include myself in that number) to ignore.

Strictly’s reputation has never been entirely squeaky clean; for a family-friendly show, it has been the rumoured catalyst for a staggering amount of extra-marital goings-on (the so-called “Strictly curse”, which has seen scores of contestants split up with their significant others either during or shortly after their stint in the competition, is is very well-documented). But that arguably lent the programme a bit of a gossipy frisson that only helped cement its position as one of the nation’s most talked-about shows.

But there has been a shadow hanging over Strictly, dimming the gleam of all those diamantés for a while now and that shadow has only darkened. January 2024 saw former contestant Amanda Abbington reveal that she’d been diagnosed with mild PTSD. She would later accuse her dance partner, Giovanni Pernice, of bullying; Pernice, who strongly denied the allegations, was dropped from the show’s line-up. A long investigation upheld complaints of verbal bullying and harassment, but concluded that Pernice had not been physically aggressive.

While this scandal was bubbling away, another professional, Graziano di Prima, left Strictly after admitting to kicking celebrity contestant Zara McDermott during rehearsals (he later apologised, stating that his “intense passion and determination to win might have affected [his] training regime”.

Against this backdrop, last year’s competition just about managed to drag its feet along and go through the motions; the show’s welfare policies got a refresh, too, with chaperones brought in to accompany celebs during rehearsals. But then the Strictly live tour, which sees recent contestants take the routines on the road and perform to arenas full of fans, was engulfed in bad publicity, too. Go Compare opera singer Wynne Evans was dropped by the BBC as a radio presenter after making what he described as “inappropriate and unacceptable” remarks at the launch event.

Not long afterwards, EastEnders star and 2024 contestant Jamie Borthwick was suspended by the BBC after using a slur against people with disabilities on the Strictly set. He apologised ‘sincerely and wholeheartedly’ for the remarks. And in August, the broadcaster launched an investigation into alleged drug use by two Strictly stars, in another blow to the series’ family-friendly image. The two separate arrests on suspicion of rape, then, are bleak additions to a very sorry saga. Against this uncomfortable backdrop, longtime presenters Tess Daly and Claudia Winkleman announced in October that they would both be stepping down from the series at the end of 2025.

The pair’s consummate professionalism has just about managed to keep Strictly afloat through all this behind-the-scenes mess, but they have decided that now “feels like the right time” to leave. Although their goodbye message was a cheery one, you have to wonder whether the beloved duo were simply exhausted by having to grin and bear it every Saturday night as another show-related bombshell seemed to explode around them.

There has been much chatter about who might step into Daly and Winkleman’s presenting shoes as Strictly’s hosts, but less discussion of a question that’s arguably just as pertinent: will any big names actually want to become the show’s latest figureheads, and risk aligning themselves with any future scandals?

The Strictly gig is either the most exciting vacancy in broadcasting right now, or the biggest poisoned chalice, depending on how cynically you look at it. “If it was simply a case of the duo looking to step down and initiate a graceful passing of the baton, then a joint announcement with the new presenters would have been better,” says Nina Sawetz, reputation and crisis adviser. “Constant speculation of behind-the-scenes tensions, salary rumours and endless debates on who will be replacing [Daly and Winkleman] and whether they’ll measure up will only overshadow and heap pressure onto anyone looking to step into their position,” she adds. “Big-name presenters won’t want to inherit instability, even for a show as big as this.”

Is the best solution for the BBC to simply cut their losses and put this floundering show out of its misery altogether? I’ve always previously been of the opinion that Strictly could withstand the bad headlines, but I underestimated the cumulative effect of so much scandal. “Strictly has been living off its legacy for a while, but the problem now is the accumulation of negative stories,” Sawetz adds. “When a show designed to be warm, familiar and cosy becomes defined by uncertainty and disruption, one controversy at a time, it not only starts to drag the programme itself, but its talent and the wider corporation.”

Another tell-tale sign that a series is on its last legs is audience numbers, but Strictly makes an interesting case study here. Viewing stats for the launch shows have been creeping downwards for the past few years, but Strictly is still one of the most watched shows on British TV; the decrease might just reflect changing trends in telly watching, rather than any big judgement on the part of the viewership. It’s hard to dispute, though, that Winkleman’s other blockbuster show, The Traitors, seems to have usurped Strictly’s place in audiences’ hearts.

But 21 years is a very long time in TV, and there’s certainly an argument to be made for quitting while you’re ahead (or, in the case of Strictly, while you seem to be rapidly veering off-piste). “Reality TV shows are harder to gauge when they have passed their sell-by date, due to the unpredictable human element,” notes David Frossman-Miller, global media director at W Communications. It tends to be more obvious when a drama or comedy is going stale, but in the reality bubble, “two ho-hum years could be blown out of the water with a season with some fantastic personalities”.

And so, he adds, the BBC is certainly “in a difficult position”. Cancelling “a hugely loved show, a staple of Saturday night TV, is a huge call to make”, he adds, but “the repeated issues have been a huge internal headache for the BBC”, and the continuing flurry of bad publicity “makes this show ending sooner a necessary reality”.

Perhaps BBC bosses should look over to their rivals at ITV for some examples of what happens when you let a once-beloved show stumble on way past its prime. The X Factor, Strictly’s one-time Saturday night ratings competitor, rumbled along for way too long, throwing in random format shake-ups that only served as a reminder of how much better it used to be. Earlier this week, in a glaring warning sign, Strictly announced a new “Instant Dance challenge” taking place later in the month; it’s the first time producers have had to mix up the tried and true formula, and it felt like an attempt to claw back some positive headlines.

While a bit of low level gossip can do wonders for a show’s reputation, when the backstage dramas utterly obscure what’s happening on screen, you know a programme is in truly dire straits. “Strictly’s off-screen issues have overshadowed the show, and will likely in turn be the nail in the coffin,” Frossman-Miller predicts. It certainly feels like a dead show walking right now.

Senior Labour MPs demand Reeves U-turns on foreign cuts

Senior Labour MPs have demanded Rachel Reeves’ U-turn on her controversial foreign aid cuts by providing a roadmap to restoring the budget to save millions from humanitarian crises.

Key figures, including international development committee chair Sarah Champion and business committee chair Liam Byrne, are calling for Ms Reeves to commit billions more to the budget she slashed to pay for more defence spending last year.

In a letter to the chancellor, who is to unveil her make-or-break Budget on Wednesday, they insist she must chart a path back to restoring the foreign aid budget from 0.3 per cent of gross national income (GNI)– the lowest level in 25 years – to 0.7 per cent to ensure the UK meets its international obligations.

It comes amid concerns that Ms Reeves may try to further cut spending as she struggles to balance the country’s finances and fill a £20bn black hole.

The cuts prompted a furious row within Labour and prompted international development minister Anneliese Dodds to dramatically resign in protest. And analysis by Save the Children, shared exclusively with The Independent, found they will leave 55.5 million of the world’s poorest people without access to basic resources, such as water, and food aid, education and family planning.

While Labour stood on a manifesto pledge in 2024 to restore it to 0.7 per cent, Ms Reeves has offered no plan on restoring the aid budget, which is now mainly focused on Gaza.

The letter to Ms Reeves from senior Labour backbenchers, seen by The Independent, states: “At a time of mounting strain on the international rules-based order, the UK cutting development funding will weaken our soft power, increase the risk to our security and open wider opportunities for rogue regimes.

“We know you are focused rightly on a decade of national renewal, but our manifesto also recognised our international responsibilities as a member of the UN Security Council and the G7 to help reduce the poverty, climate change and instability that fuels global conflicts and increased migration.

“A definitive timetable to return development spending to just 0.7 per cent GNI would enable the FCDO to plan strategically, make temporary reductions, while maximising value for money for taxpayers.”

Signatories unite the different factions in the party and include defence chair Tan Dhesi, former business and Africa minister Gareth Thomas. Alistair Darling’s former adviser in the Treasury Emily Darlington, ex-minister Fleur Anderson, and Worthing West MP Dr Beccy Cooper, chair of APPG on Global Health and Security, have also thrown their weight behind it.

The signatories unite the factions across the party from left to right over the issue.

They noted: “Currently, one-fifth of Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) is allocated to In-Donor Refugee Costs within the UK, rather than to lifesaving programmes overseas. This is projected to rise to one-third of ODA next year. We know you are committed to reducing expenditure on asylum hotels and urge you to return the resulting savings to FCDO to support our development, diplomatic and security agenda overseas.”

Arguing for a definitive timetable to return to 0.7 per cent, they said: “Such an approach would avoid the mistakes of the previous government, where indiscriminate cuts caused severe humanitarian harm and risked public funds through hastily dismantling effective programmes. The damage to global standing from their actions cannot be underestimated.

“We are deeply concerned that the ODA budget cannot withstand any further reductions. Each cut in global development funding puts lives at risk and creates a vacuum that geopolitical competitors such as China and Russia are quick to try and fill.”

The manifesto commitment on which we all stood promised to restore development spending to 0.7 per cent of GNI. The caveat of ‘when fiscal circumstances allow’ risks seeming increasingly hollow.”

They added: “Development spending, much like investment in our armed forces or in research and development, cannot achieve meaningful and lasting results without stability and sustained planning. We hope you will agree that we should now commit financially to a long-term international development plan.”

It is estimated that if the UK returns to 0.7 per cent of it would more than double the overseas development and aid budget to around £20bn in 2027.

This article has been produced as part of The Independent’s Rethinking Global Aid project

Daily Mail owner strikes £500m deal to buy The Telegraph

The publisher of the Daily Mail has agreed a £500 million deal to buy Telegraph Media Group.

Daily Mail and General Trust (DMGT) agreed to purchase the Telegraph from Redbird IMI after an attempted purchase by the Abu Dhabi-backed investment firm was blocked by the then Tory government.

DMGT and Redbird IMI have now entered a period of exclusive talks in which they will finalise the deal and prepare regulatory submissions, which they “expect to happen quickly”.

Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy is set to review the potential new deal, which was announced on Saturday morning.

A spokesperson for the Department of Culture, Media and Sport said: “The Secretary of State notes the announcement of a prospective new deal.

“She will review any new buyer acquiring the Telegraph in line with the public interest and foreign state influence media mergers regimes set out in legislation.”

DMGT Chairman Lord Rothermere said: “I have long admired the Daily Telegraph. My family and I have an enduring love of newspapers and for the journalists who make them.

“The Daily Telegraph is Britain’s largest and best quality broadsheet newspaper, and I have grown up respecting it. It has a remarkable history and has played a vital role in shaping Britain’s national debate over many decades.

“Chris Evans is an excellent editor, and we intend to give him the resources to invest in the newsroom. Under our ownership, the Daily Telegraph will become a global brand, just as the Daily Mail has.”

The purchase would see the Telegraph become part of DMGT’s stable of media organisations, which also includes Metro, The I Paper and New Scientist.

The media group says it will “invest substantially” in the Telegraph, accelerating its international expansion with a particular focus on the US. It says the Telegraph would remain editorially independent from DMGT’s other titles.

A spokesman for RedBird IMI said: “DMGT and RedBird IMI have worked swiftly to reach the agreement announced today, which will shortly be submitted to the Secretary of State.”

Black Friday cruise deals – enjoy luxe all-inclusive trips for less

Already dreaming about your next unforgettable escape? Picture this: gazing at a postcard-perfect horizon, margarita in hand, before tucking into delicious, made-to-order dining amid superyacht inspired luxury…

Well, it’s time to make waves, Sailor: Virgin Voyages’ Black Friday offers are here, running from 21 November – 4th December, with epic savings to be made across 2025, 2026, and their newly-launched 2027 sailings. What’s more, you can get 80 per cent off a second ‘Sailor’ and up to $500 in free drinks – find out more at Virgin Voyages.

And these aren’t just any cruises; these are award-winning, exclusively adult cruises, providing a playground at sea for discerning grownups, with no buffets, and certainly no beige (they favour red, instead). There’s over $1,000/£750 in value built right in, from WiFi and group fitness classes to essential drinks and award-winning dining – all with no hidden extras. Prices are all-in, and stay that way, leaving you to focus on pure, effortless indulgence.

Exemplifying the modern luxury and romance of sailing, there are no  lacklustre, elbows-at-the-ready meals to be queued for here: instead you’ll enjoy freshly prepared food from over 20 unique eateries, guaranteeing culinary flair with distinct, delicious flavours. And prepare to have dinner with a view – every single restaurant on board has panoramas out to the ocean.

When you’re not eating (or sipping), explore the ship’s sleek, design-led spaces. Think nautically cool cabins with roomy rain showers and heavenly hammocks made for lazy afternoons. Hit The Manor, Virgin’s sexy, disco-glam nightclub reached through a mirrored corridor straight out of a K-pop video. Or lose yourself in The Red Room, where cutting-edge shows and dance parties keep the energy high till sunrise. Then there’s The Groupie – your private karaoke den for those ‘we’re definitely forming a band’ moments (crafted cocktails highly encouraged).

Need inspo for which cruise to choose? How about this one: 2026 sees the introduction of one of Virgin Voyages’ most highly anticipated routes – the debut of its sailing to Alaska, running from May to September aboard Brilliant Lady.

The ship will take 16 memorable journeys roundtrip from Seattle (with some from Vancouver), lasting from between seven to 12 nights. You’ll experience the region’s wild beauty and authentic ports which most cruise lines skip, from the dramatic fjords of Tracy Arm to hidden gems like Haines (the Bald Eagle capital of the world) Icy Strait Point, an indigenous-owned destination perfect for whale watching and adventure, and Sitka – where you’ll find a blend of Russian and Native heritage – taking you deeper into America’s Last Frontier.

You can also immerse yourself on-land via Virgin Voyages ‘Shore Thing’ experiences, with over 250 excursions crafted for adults, including bear spotting, dog sledding, glacier hikes, and indigenous-led cultural immersions, designed for adults – not busloads. And with longer port times, you’ll be able to explore exciting destinations like Alaska’s capital, Juneau, without feeling rushed; there are no early departures here, so you can spend a generous eight unhurried hours marvelling at the epic panoramas from the Mount Roberts Tramway, watching whales in Auke Bay, or visiting epic natural wonders like the Mendenhall Glacier.

And it’s never too late to think even further ahead; Virgin Voyages has also just launched its new 2027 itineraries, expanding to a range of fresh destinations. Feeling hot, hot, hot? A few of them depart from Miami and take in the Caribbean, such as the St Thomas, US Virgin Islands cruise – a brand new port which also stops at Tortola, Antigua and St Kitts and Nevis – and the shorter Cayman Isles and Bimini Beach cruise, where you can swim with stingrays, bask in the sun, and savour authentic Caribbean cuisine.

If you’re feeling more adventurous, there’s the Greenland & Transatlantic cruise, where you’ll sail from  Iceland’s hip capital, Reykjavik to Greenland’s colourful villages, Qaqortoq and Nuuk, before making your way towards New York City. And the best part? If you take advantage of Virgin Voyages’ Black Friday offers, from 21 November – 4th December 2025, you’ll make significant savings plus get up to $500 in free drinks. Which leaves all the more money to spend on Christmas presents….

Anchors away! To set sail in style, book now at virginvoyages.com

Hamilton hits new F1 career low after qualifying dead last in Vegas

Lewis Hamilton endured a new F1 career low at the Las Vegas Grand Prix as he qualified slowest in the field for the first time in his career on pure pace.

In treacherous wet conditions on the Vegas strip, Hamilton struggled throughout as the whole grid eventually switched to full-wet tyres, rarely used in modern-day F1.

Yet Hamilton – who has recorded some of his best-ever victories in wet conditions – could not optimise his Ferrari car and will start the race in 20th, having ended up 2.3 seconds slower than teammate Charles Leclerc.

The 40-year-old, who is yet to record a podium with his new team, was hindered on his final push lap due to yellow flags in the final sector and then thought he crossed the timed line on the start-finish straight too late to start another lap. Slow-motion replays have shown, however, that Hamilton actually could have started another push lap, as he crossed the line while the lights were still green.

“I don’t really have words for it,” a deflated Hamilton said in the media pen afterwards. “It’s obviously not good enough.

“I just couldn’t get temperature into the tyres, had a lot of understeer and I think one of my front brakes was glazed so I was really struggling to stop it in the corners.

“It’s very annoying, of course, because in P3 the car was feeling awesome and I thought it was going to be a great day and it turned out to be the worst.

“It can’t get much worse than that.”

It marks a new career low: Hamilton has never qualified last on the grid previously without extenuating circumstances. Leclerc eventually qualified ninth on the grid, while Lando Norris took pole position in another giant step towards a maiden F1 world championship for the Briton.

Hamilton also has the ignominy of being the first Ferrari driver to qualify dead-last since Giancarlo Fisichella at the 2009 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix.

Explaining his issues further at the end of Q1, Hamilton added: “I got yellow flags in the last corner and coming into Turn 17 there were yellow flags, so I had to have a lift and when I came to the line there was red.

“It was very slippery and the first set of tyres didn’t work for us and I just struggled to generate the heat in the tyres for some reason.

“It’s a shame because the guys have done such a great job and the car was feeling awesome in FP3 and I really felt like we had good pace, but then the rain came.

“There’s not a lot to say, to be honest.”

The latest chapter in Hamilton’s year to forget arrived 11 days after he was told by Ferrari chairman John Elkann to “talk less and focus on his driving”. Prior to that, Hamilton described his debut season in red as a “nightmare.”

He has now been out-qualified by Leclerc 17 times this year and is 66 points behind the Monegasque in the drivers’ standings.

Asked for his overriding feeling, Hamilton said: “I don’t really have an answer. It obviously feels horrible; it doesn’t feel good. I just have to let it go and try and come back tomorrow.

“I have done everything I could possibly do in terms of preparation. I felt like we were quickest after practice, and then you come out in qualifying 20th, and this year is definitely the hardest year.

“We have a quick car. But it will be really hard to come back from last.”

‘Rising energy bills mean I can no longer afford to heat my home’

For many, winter time brings family joy centred on Christmas celebrations – but for Claire and Gareth Ferris, this year’s festive season brings only the dread of cold weather.

The couple say rising energy bills and poor home insulation, combined with a drop in temperatures outside, mean they have to resort to switching off the heating, which has forced them to wrap up in blankets and duvets in their living room.

Unable to afford costly window and door replacements, the couple even have to put duck tape in the cracks, just to try to keep some of the warmth inside.

But despite their best efforts to keep their three-bedroom home in Warwickshire insulated, it is a losing battle, which is impacting their mental health.

The couple’s story comes as the mercury plummeted in many parts of the UK last week, which triggered cold weather warnings issued by the UK Health Security Agency.

Mrs Ferris, 52, said: “We’re making do but it makes us depressed. We just try and keep warm under the duvet and blankets. We can’t afford to get the windows and doors redone. There’s always a draft in the winter and it’s freezing in the house.”

“The windows are 30-plus years old now and we get all the condensation between the glass – some days you can’t see out.”

She added: “We have to put duct tape round the windows in winter time…. sometimes it feels warmer outside than it does inside.”

With Mr Ferris, 64, earning £1,200 a month as a shopping centre security guard by working 12-hour shifts, the couple earn roughly £14,500 a year. Mrs Ferris is unable to work due to ill health.

But since the pandemic and the rise in energy bills, they have seen their monthly electricity bill rocket from £57 a month in 2020 to £85.

In October, the energy price cap was increased by 2 per cent by regulator Ofgem, meaning a household in England, Scotland and Wales with typical usage now pays £1,755 a year, up £35, for gas and electricity.

Despite government support, including a one-off £150 grant Warm Home Discount Scheme and Cold Weather Payments of up to £25 a week, and the couple switching utility suppliers, they said they keep the heating off.

It gets so cold inside the house, they said, that temperatures can fall to below freezing and they can see their own breath while sat on the sofa.

Mrs Ferris said: “Sometimes it feels warmer outside than it does inside. I wish it was cheaper – it’s constantly going up and up.”

According to a government survey of adults by the government’s Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, published last month, 47 per cent of people were “worried” about paying energy bills, a fall from 66 per cent in 2023, when prices rose following the invasion of Ukraine.

However, a report by the Money Advice Trust earlier this year found that 7 million adults in the UK were behind on at least one household bill, with 35 per cent of people saying they had reduced energy usage such as heating.

And last week, energy watchdog Ofgem said domestic consumer energy debt had risen to £4.4bn, hope 20 per cent from last year.

The body provides a list of ideas for customer wanting to reduce the bills in their homes; including turning down heating in empty rooms, setting the washing machine to 30C and closing the curtains at night to keep warm air in the home.