Lack of leadership proved to be the ultimate stumbling block for Cop30

Symbolism was everywhere as Brazil’s Cop30 drew to a close. First, there was the Africa Pavillion dramatically bursting into flames on Thursday afternoon, which – along with the daily bursts of Amazonian rainfall that flooded a number of meeting rooms over the two weeks – gave the impression that climate-induced extreme weather was right there in the room with us in Belém.

Then, there was the news that, after much squabbling between the two countries, the next UN climate conference, Cop31, is set to be hosted by the Australian government in the Turkish city resort of Anatalya, with a pre-Cop world leaders’ summit set to be held on a Pacific island. Quite how this will all pan out is anyone’s guess at this stage – but the decision reflects something of just how hard countries seem to be finding it to agree on anything at the moment.

Nearly a full day after Cop30 was supposed to finish – and several hours after two massive cruise ships hosting national delegations departed from Belém – the final decision document set to drive climate policy back home, or “Global Mutirão” as it is being called here, was released by the Brazilian Presidency. As ever with UN climate conferences, it was a compromise – but one that seemed to be defined by a resignation of ambition, rather than an attempt at genuine trade-offs.

At the heart of the outcome was a failure from rich countries – grappling as they are with weakening political consensus around climate, and cuts to aid budgets – to commit to a target to triple aid available for poorer countries to adapt to climate change by 2030. Instead, the deadline has been pushed back to 2035, while it is to be part of an existing promise to deliver $300bn in climate finance agreed to last year, rather than additional finance, which is what the world’s least developed countries have been asking for.

Meanwhile, the promise of a roadmap to assist countries move away from fossil fuels – which had been backed by Brazil’s President Lula at the opening of Cop30 – failed to appear in the text following intense lobbying from Saudi Arabia and others. The language calling for improved interim emissions targets, which the UN said ahead of Cop30 would only reduce emissions by around 10 per cent by 2035, was also notably weak.

Parties worked on the agreement throughout the night, and negotiators appeared exhausted as they gathered for the final plenary in Belém. “I was there the entire night, and we came to an agreement at 8AM this morning,” Emmanuel Yarkpawolo, chief negotiator for Liberia, told The Independent. “There are some outcomes that are good… It shows us that multilateralism is still working, and the Paris Agreement is working. Without it, the planet will be in a very bad condition.”

As Yarkpawolo attests, reaching any sort of deal is an achievement, given how far apart countries have been. But it is undeniable that Cop30 has failed to meet the twin challenges of closing the gap in ambition on decarbonisation, as well as boosting the amount of money available for poorer countries as climate impacts escalate.

“Cop30 was a failure for the communities on the frontlines of the climate crisis,” said Debbie Hillier, UNFCCC policy lead at the NGO Mercy Corps. “Ten years after the Paris Agreement — in what was meant to be the “implementation COP” — leaders left Belém, Brazil, without the commitments needed to protect people already living with the devastating consequences of climate change.

“Adaptation finance is not abstract,” she continued. “It determines whether farmers can protect their crops, whether coastal communities can reinforce shorelines, whether health systems can withstand climate-related disease outbreaks, and whether countries can build resilience rather than lose hard-won development gains.”

Mohamed Adow, director of Nairobi-based think tank Power Shift Africa, described Cop30 as “baby steps in the right direction” – but added that “keeping the process alive alone will not cool the planet”. Sol Oyuela, from WaterAid, said that the ambition in the wider package agreed to in Belém ultimately “fails those most impacted by climate change”.

At the closing plenary on Saturday, with Amazonian rain echoing through the hall, there was serious disquiet among delegates around Brazil’s management of the process, with complaints around transparency of proceedings and concerns that some countries were being ignored.

But more broadly in Belém, there has been a sense that these talks have floundered due to a failure of other powerful pro-climate countries to take on a leadership role.

The EU, distracted by the war in Ukraine as well as the rise of the populist right, was not the moral authority it has previously been. The UK, with a weak government and Budget on the horizon, arguably failed to live up to its former climate mantle – while the Prime Minister of Canada Mark Carney, formerly one of the world’s foremost climate champion when Governor of the Bank of England, formally launched plans to double the country’s liquefied natural gas (LNG) export capacity in the middle of Cop.

The US – which has traditionally been the country best able to exert pressure on key blocker Saudi Arabia – was of course completely absent from the conference, while hopes that China, the world’s biggest emitter and by far the world’s biggest producer of renewable technology, would take up a climate leadership mantle at the summit failed to materialise.

“China has been under very little pressure in negotiating rooms at Cop30, which is largely the result of an absent US and fragmented EU,” Kate Logan, who has been following negotiations closely for the Asia Society Policy Institute, told The Independent. “Officials see little incentive to actively push ambition, especially as they can point to China’s leadership in bringing down the cost of clean technologies globally.”

China, the EU and the rest of the world’s great powers can continue to hash climate out year after year at UN climate conferences, but as the clock keeps ticking towards irreversible climate breakdown, it is the world’s least developed countries who are set to suffer more and more.

“The Cop process may be in need of some reform,” acknowledged Mohamed Adow to The Independent after the publication of the final outcome. “The need for unanimous voting means that all it takes is for one country to veto progress, which gives undue power to the fossil fuel nations to block changes.

“Thankfully we can still find some solace in the fact that in the real world, clean energy technology is still advancing at speed, and the benefits of wind and solar are being embraced at rapid scale.”

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

‘Beast from the East’ weather phenomenon returning to UK this winter

The UK could be facing another cold snap as the weather phenomenon that brought in 2018’s ‘Beast from the East’ looks set to have “significant implications” on the country’s weather.

The Met Office said “winter has arrived early across the UK, bringing cold Arctic air and a complex mix of weather hazards” after a week of ice and snow weather warnings across stretches of the UK.

Temperatures are set to increase this weekend as milder, more unsettled, Atlantic-driven weather moves in with cloud, rain and winds, but a sudden stratospheric warming (SSW) event in the next week could see colder weather return in the next two weeks.

A SSW involves a rapid increase in temperature in the stratosphere above the North Pole, often leading to a reversal of the stratospheric polar vortex winds, involving the rapid descent of cold air.

According to the forecaster, this increases the likelihood of colder weather in the UK 10 to 14 days later by roughly 70 per cent. While not guaranteed, meteorologists will be keeping a close eye on the weather phenomenon that can lead to a colder than average start to winter.

“From the clash of Arctic and North African air masses to the impacts of heavy rain, flooding, and significant snow, the country is experiencing a wide range of conditions”, the forecaster reported. “Regional differences are stark, with some areas facing substantial snow while others enjoy sunny skies and frosty nights. The outlook remains uncertain, with the potential for further cold spells and unsettled weather as the season progresses. “

A SSW was the same weather phenomenon that led to the brutal ‘Beast from the East’ in 2018, which transported cold air from Siberia to Europe and heavy snowfall to Great Britain and Ireland. Temperatures plummeted across the country with lows of -14.7C recorded in Faversham, Kent, and Storm Emma brought 50 cm of snow in some elevated areas.

Temperatures dropped well below average for this time of the year across the country this week with wind chill making it feel even colder with “feels like” temperatures widely at minus one or minus two degrees. The Met Office recorded lows of -11.7C at Loch Glascarnoch on Thursday night, the coldest night of the season so far.

The recent arctic air mass brought snow to the UK this week as schools were forced to close across the country, with yellow and amber ice and snow weather warnings issued for parts of the UK.

Saturday:

Cloudy, wet and windy weather will move east across England and Wales. Scotland and Northern Ireland will be brighter with sunshine and showers, and brighter skies will reach the north and west of England and Wales later. Temperatures nearer normal.

Rain across central and southeast England slowly clearing. Clearer with showers elsewhere, though persistent rain and blustery winds arriving in the west. Some fog, and patchy frost in the north.

Sunday:

Wind and rain in the west moving north and east, becoming slow moving across Northern Ireland, northern England and southern Scotland. Brighter, showery in the far north, and increasingly south.

Monday to Wednesday:

Showery rain on Monday, especially central and eastern areas. Feeling cold again in blustery winds. Drier and brighter, with winds easing on Tuesday. Rain arriving midweek, though turning milder.

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.

Trump gloats as ‘traitor’ MTG quits, leaving MAGA reeling

President Donald Trump has reacted with glee to his former ally Marjorie Taylor Greene’s decision to resign from Congress, once again calling her a “traitor” and claiming she was quitting because he wouldn’t return her calls.

In a lengthy Truth Social post early Saturday morning, the president called her Marjorie “Traitor” Brown, referencing a previous post in which he said he was changing her surname because “Green grass turns Brown when it begins to ROT!.” He claimed her decision to leave Congress was because she feared a Trump-backed primary election challenger.

The decision to leave Congress by the Georgia Republican – one of Trump’s highest profile and most controversial supporters – has left some in the MAGA movement delighted, but others questioning where the movement currently stands.

Trump wrote: “Marjorie “Traitor” Brown, because of PLUMMETING Poll Numbers, and not wanting to face a Primary Challenger with a strong Trump Endorsement (where she would have no chance of winning!), has decided to call it “quits.” Her relationship with the WORST Republican Congressman in decades, Tom Massie of Kentucky, also known as Rand Paul Jr. because he votes against the Republican Party (and really good legislation!), did not help her. For some reason, primarily that I refused to return her never ending barrage of phone calls, Marjorie went BAD.”

In an abrupt change of tone, the president added: “Nevertheless, I will always appreciate Marjorie, and thank her for her service to our Country! President DJT.”

Earlier, Rachel Scott, ABC News Senior Political Correspondent, said she spoke with Trump about Greene’s resignation on the phone late Friday night.

“I think it’s great news for the country. It’s great,” Trump told Scott, according to her X post.

The president reportedly added that Greene did not give him a heads-up before announcing her decision. “It doesn’t matter, you know, but I think it’s great. I think she should be happy,” he said.

Greene has recently clashed with Trump over several issues, most intensely over her push to release remaining government files on the late sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. The president has fought for months to stop the files being released, calling the demands a “Democrat hoax,” but has agreed to do so in the wake of Republicans led by Greene and Thomas Massie revolting against GOP leadership. Trump was friends with Epstein in the 1990s and early 2000s but has insisted he knew nothing about the financier’s crimes. Trump himself has not been accused of any wrongdoing in relation to the Epstein case.

After she criticized Trump for not acting sooner, the president called her a “ranting lunatic” and backed a potential primary challenger.

Greene announced her resignation in a video message and a statement on Friday, writing, “I have too much self respect and dignity, love my family way too much, and do not want my sweet district to have to endure a hurtful and hateful primary against me by the President we all fought for, only to fight and win my election while Republicans will likely lose the midterms.”

“It’s all so absurd and completely unserious,” she added. “I refuse to be a ‘battered wife’ hoping it all goes away and gets better.”

Her final day in office will be January 5.

News of Greene’s resignation has delighted and worried different wings of the MAGA movement.

Massie, a Kentucky Republican who led the bipartisan effort alongside her to release the Epstein files, said he’d miss Greene “tremendously.”

“I’m very sad for our country but so happy for my friend Marjorie. I’ll miss her tremendously. She embodies what a true Representative should be,” Massie wrote on X.

Right-wing activist Laura Loomer, an influential supporter of the president, criticized Greene for resigning ahead of the midterms.

“So she’s deliberately trying to make it so that Republicans are down a vote to screw Trump over ahead of 2026,” Loomer wrote on X. “She will probably get a deal with CNN or MSDNC to s***talk Trump all day throughout the midterms. She wants the Democrats to win.”

Evan Kilgore, a right-wing commentator, shared a photo of MAGA members on X, including Loomer, Sen. Ted Cruz, commentator Ben Shapiro, FBI director Kash Patel and Attorney General Pam Bondi, writing, “If this is ‘MAGA’ now… Then I want NOTHING to do with it. I’m out.”

Kilgore added in a follow-up post, “Watching ‘MAGA’ celebrate the resignation of MTG, a woman who has reliability (sic) fought for the American people for 5 years, is disgusting. MAGA is dead.”

Loomer herself responded to the first post, writing: ““Now”. I’ve been with Trump since day one. I’m not going anywhere. You don’t get to push me out over your own irrational hatred. What have you ever done to MAGA?”

Elsewhere, conservative commentator and conspiracy theorist Candace Owens sharply criticized Trump in her response to the news.

“Communications from Trump admin be like: ‘Marjorie Taylor Greene is a traitor for demanding a convicted child rapist have his files released. But we are standing by Mike Huckabee who met with a literal treasonous, Israeli spy, Jonathan Pollard,’” Owens wrote on X with a clown emoji.

Other critics pointed out the unusual contrast between Greene’s resignation and Trump’s surprisingly friendly same-day meeting with New York City mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani., someone he and other conservatives had previously branded a “communist” and an “Islamist.”

“MTG turns on Trump and resigns. Mamdani and Trump are new best friends. I am so confused,” Larry Sabato, political analyst and Director of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics and a Trump critic, wrote on X.

Ron Filipkowski, editor-in-chief of the liberal news site MeidasTouch Network, said on X, “So the new version of MAGA is that Marjorie Taylor Greene is a traitor, Rand Paul is a RINO, and Zohran Mamdani is great. Got it.”

Burnham tops list to replace Starmer as PM preferred by Labour members

A poll of Labour members has confirmed that there is an appetite to replace Sir Keir Starmer, with Andy Burnham as the favourite choice to succeed him.

According to a poll of 1,013 Labour members by Survation for LabourList, Mr Burnham would be favoured over Sir Keir by 58 per cent to 32 per cent.

Norwich South MP Clive Lewis last week offered to give up his seat so Mr Burnham could run for parliament to allow him to become leader.

Former deputy prime minister Angela Rayner also has a strong lead of 19 points over the PM by 52 per cent to 33 per cent despite being forced to resign over a failure to pay £40,000 of stamp duty.

Energy secretary Ed Miliband, who lost the 2015 election as Labour leader, is also preferred to Sir Keir by four points with 44 per cent to 40 per cent.

And health secretary Wes Streeting, who was at the centre of accusations recently from Downing Street that he was plotting to overthrow the PM, would win by 33 per cent to 31 per cent.

Speculation has been running high since earlier this month that there could be an attempt to oust Sir Keir as Labour leader after sources in Downing Street put out the briefing against Mr Streeting.

The prime minister has insisted in an interview that he hopes to lead the party until at least 2034, covering two more elections. Officials briefed he would fight any attempt to remove him.

But his government’s growing unpopularity and the threat of Nigel Farage’s Reform on the right and Greens on the left has led some to suggest he could be forced out after the next local elections in May.

Labour have fallen as low as fifth in the polls and now average at below 20 per cent, only just above the Tories.

Other hopefuls to replace Sir Keir though are not favoured by the membership.

Home secretary Shabana Mahmood, who angered many with her draconian new policies on asylum seekers, would lose to Sir Keir by 50 per cent to 16 per cent.

Deputy leader Lucy Powell, who won the contest to replace Ms Rayner on a platform of criticising Sir Keir, would lose to him by 48 per cent to 30 per cent.

Emma Burnell, editor of LabourList, said: “Starmer’s team have made it clear that he would contest a leadership contest were one to arise.

“Of course, that was a week ago and we all know that’s a long time in politics. It may well be that if it came to it Starmer would decide a contest in which he ran – and was possibly defeated – was too damaging to the party in the long term.

“However, the two leading contenders to Starmer both face significant challenges. Rayner because it may be that not enough time has passed since she, very unfortunately, had to step down. Burnham because he faces several hurdles to being able to run. If things move quickly, he may not be able to return to parliament in time to be a candidate.

“This might give Starmer and his team hope. If there is no obvious candidate that can beat him, he will feel much more secure in place.”

She added: “At the moment this is all speculation. But it is speculation the leadership have invited with their own briefings about Streeting. This conversation has gone from mildly discontented whispers to very real speculation as a result.

“This is the first polling of the Labour membership on this question since it burst into the open. It is clear that they are now openly questioning if Starmer is still the right person to lead the party.”

EV owners: Earn £55 with this E.ON Next tariff deal now

Considering getting an electric vehicle or have driven one for a while? You may be searching for the right energy tariff to charge your car, and if so, we have just the deal to help. E.ON Next is offering The Independent readers £55 credit with its Drive Smart EV tariff.

With impressively low overnight rates of 6.5p/kWh, it’s worth noting that when you use E.ON Next smart charging, that same competitive price is also applied to the rest of your home. We’d say that makes this limited-time offer of £55 credit sound even more appealing.

This exclusive offer is only available until 30 November, so you better be speedy to snap it up. Keep reading to learn more about the E.ON Next Drive Smart EV tariff – including eligibility, charting your energy use with the Next Home app and getting a quote.

There are a few straightforward requirements to be eligible for the E.ON Next Drive Smart EV tariff. As well as needing to have a smart meter and EV charger already installed at home, you must own or lease an EV that is a model supported by this tariff. Finally, you can only charge and connect one vehicle with E.ON Next’s EV tariff. Sounds simple? Once you’re signed up with your new tariff, you can set up Smart Schedules by downloading the E.ON Next Home app to get started.

After signing up to E.ON Next’s EV tariff, you need to have the Next Home app. This is a convenient way of accessing all of your EV charging information in one place. From seeing your entire charging history to planning future charging stints, you can view all energy cost savings here too. The app enables you to stay informed about charging rates, as you can map any cost changes according to what time of day or night you’re using energy to power your car. This handy level of monitoring lets you take the wheel when charging.

To get £55 when signing up for the E.ON Next Drive Smart EV tariff and make the most of this exclusive deal, head over to the quotes page here. With the offer only available until 30 November, you’d better put your foot down.

Get £55 credit by signing up to the E.ON Next Drive Smart EV tariff now

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.

Rachel Reeves pledges to support working families with looming Budget

Rachel Reeves has vowed to support working families with an autumn budget that will work to cut waiting lists, national debt and the cost of living.

The chancellor told the economy is not working for working people and pledged to “grip the cost of living” with measures aimed at building a fairer, stronger and more secure Britain.

“Working families will be at the front of my mind as I set out how we will cut NHS waiting lists, cut national debt and cut the cost of living,” she told the newspaper, addressing readers.

“These are the priorities of the country and my priorities as your Chancellor.”

Ms Reeves said the budget would build on work already done to cut waiting lists, extend the freeze on prescription charges, and roll out breakfast clubs.

The chancellor confirmed this week that the cost of a single prescription will be frozen at £9.90, saving patients around £12 million next year.

Towards fairness, the budget is expected to include measures to regularly name and shame employers who breach national minimum wage rules.

A Treasury source said: “We are sending a clear message – those who short change their staff will not be allowed to hide.”

In comments to The Mirror, the chancellor also stressed the importance of cutting national debt and reinvesting the money in public services.

She said there was “nothing progressive” about spending £1 in every £10 on debt interest, and reiterated that the money should be going into schools, hospitals, police and communities.

On Friday, she suffered a blow as official figures showed government borrowing was £3 billion higher in October than the Office for Budget Responsibility had expected.

The chancellor is widely expected to raise levies on 26 November in an effort to bridge a multi-billion-pound gap in her spending plans.

While the government appears to have rowed back on reported earlier plans to increase income tax, it is widely expected to look at other ways to raise cash to tackle the shortfall and meet Reeves’ fiscal rules.

Sir Keir Starmer insisted previously that the second Budget would reflect “Labour values” and be “based on fairness”.

The prime minister said it would prioritise protecting public services, particularly the NHS, cutting the national debt and tackling the cost of living.

He evaded questions on whether Labour’s pre-election pledge to voters would be broken, despite multiple follow-ups including on whether income tax thresholds will be frozen.

Ms Reeves is also expected to announce more planners to support national house building on Wednesday, an initiative raised last year.