Twelve police officers would have faced gross misconduct over Hillsborough, report finds

Twelve police officers would have faced gross misconduct proceedings for “fundamental failures” on the day of the Hillsborough disaster and “concerted efforts” to blame fans afterwards, an investigation has found.

The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) published its report into the role of police in the disaster and its aftermath on Tuesday. Ninety-seven Liverpool fans were unlawfully killed at the 1989 FA Cup semi-final, when police opened an exit gate to the ground to alleviate crowding outside and failed to direct supporters away from the tunnel leading to the central pens.

The IOPC report upheld or found cases to answer for misconduct in 92 complaints about police actions. However, the law in place at the time means no officers will face disciplinary proceedings because they had all retired before investigations began.

Twelve police officers would have had a case to answer for gross misconduct in relation to the disaster and its aftermath if they were still serving.

This means that if a disciplinary panel found the allegations proven, they could have been dismissed. Legislation has now been changed so that retired officers can be subject to disciplinary proceedings

Nicola Brook, a solicitor at Broudie Jackson Canter, acting for several bereaved families, said this report does not provide justice for those affected by the disaster as “no one will be held to account”.

She said: “This outcome may vindicate the bereaved families and survivors who have fought for decades to expose the truth – but it delivers no justice.

“Instead, it exposes a system that has allowed officers to simply walk away, retiring without scrutiny, sanction or consequence for failing to meet the standards the public has every right to expect.

“Yes, the law has now changed so this loophole cannot be used in future. But for those affected by this case, that is no consolation. They are left with yet another bitter injustice: the truth finally acknowledged, but accountability denied.”

Among those who would have had cases to answer for gross misconduct if they were still serving were South Yorkshire Police’s (SYP) then chief constable Peter Wright and match commander David Duckenfield, as well as Sir Norman Bettison, who later became Merseyside Police chief constable.

The report’s findings include that Wright, who died in 2011, would have had a case to answer for gross misconduct, had he still been serving, for his part in attempting to minimise culpability and deflect blame for the disaster away from SYP and towards Liverpool supporters.

It reinforces the findings of the Hillsborough Independent Panel Report published in 2012, which concluded that no Liverpool fans were responsible in any way for the disaster and that the main cause was lack of police control. It also supports the Goldring Inquests, which determined in 2016 that all those who died were unlawfully killed.

The new report found that SYP “fundamentally failed” in its planning for the match, in its response as the disaster unfolded and in how it dealt with traumatised supporters and families searching for their loved ones.

It found considerable evidence of a defensive approach adopted by SYP to the investigations and inquiries that followed, as it attempted to deflect blame. This included allegations about the behaviour of supporters, which have been repeatedly disproven.

IOPC deputy director general Kathie Cashell said: “The 97 people who were unlawfully killed, their families, survivors of the disaster and all those so deeply affected, have been repeatedly let down – before, during and after the horrific events of that day.

“First by the deep complacency of South Yorkshire Police in its preparation for the match, followed by its fundamental failure to grip the disaster as it unfolded, and then through the force’s concerted efforts to deflect the blame onto the Liverpool supporters, which caused enormous distress to bereaved families and survivors for nearly four decades.

“They were let down again by the inexplicably narrow investigation into the disaster conducted by West Midlands Police, which was a missed opportunity to bring these failings to light much sooner.

“What they have had to endure over more than 36 years is a source of national shame.”

The West Midlands officers who led the investigation into the disaster, Mervyn Jones, who was assistant chief constable, and the then detective chief superintendent Michael Foster, were referred to the CPS for their failings, but the threshold for prosecution was not found to have been met, according to the report.

The IOPC said both former officers would have a case to answer for gross misconduct after failing to conduct a rigorous investigation because they were “biased towards the force and against the supporters”.

Mr Duckenfield, a chief superintendent on the day, was cleared of gross negligence manslaughter by a jury in 2019.

The IOPC report said he “froze in the crisis” and found he had a case to answer for gross misconduct in respect of 10 allegations, including for failing to respond and telling FA officials, in what he later acknowledged was a lie, that fans had forced their way in.

The IOPC said its investigation also found that 327 statements from officers had been amended, over 100 more than had previously been uncovered, as part of a defensive approach SYP adopted to control the evidence submitted to the public Taylor Inquiry and WMP.

Ian Byrne, Labour MP for Liverpool West Derby, is a Hillsborough survivor and the parliamentary lead for the Hillsborough Law Now campaign. He welcomed the report’s findings but said it was further proof of the need for a change in the law.

The Public Office (Accountability) Bill, known as the Hillsborough Law, will force public officials to tell the truth in the aftermath of disasters. The bill had its second reading in parliament last month.

Mr Byrne told The Independent: “It’s going to be a hard day for the families and the survivors because of the level of detail within [the report], but for me there’s a sense of relief that they haven’t tried to uncover old wounds.”

He added: “The IOPC acknowledged that the Hillsborough Law is much needed and it would have made a whole inquiry a lot shorter, it would have cost a lot less money, because you would have had enforceable duty of candour for the police officers.

“You can face proceedings in retirement now, which is a good thing for any future injustices moving forward. But from a Hillsborough perspective, it sticks in your craw.”

Ms Cashell added: “I hope this report serves as a timely reminder of what happens when organisations focus on protecting their reputation rather than admitting their mistakes and acting to put things right.

“If a legal duty of candour had existed in 1989, it could have helped ensure that all relevant evidence was shared fully and promptly. The families of those who were unlawfully killed would have experienced a far less traumatic fight for answers about what happened to their loved ones. Had that duty existed, our investigations may not have been necessary at all.”

Andrew unlikely to receive compensation for giving up Royal Lodge home

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor is unlikely to receive any compensation for leaving the Royal Lodge early due to repairs needed to be carried out after his tenancy.

The disgraced royal is set to move out of the residence on the Windsor Estate early next year after he was formally stripped of all his titles over his ties to late paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein.

In his 2003 lease, it was agreed he would be paid a “compensatory sum” – amounting to £488,342.21 – if he were to move out of the 30-room mansion before 2078.

But the Crown Estate has told MPs on the Public Accounts Committee that the King’s brother will probably not receive any of this due to the state of the property.

It said after an “initial assessment” of the 30-room mansion on November 12 it was likely he “will not be owed any compensation for early surrender of the lease… once dilapidations are taken into account.”

The Crown Estate also revealed that the Prince and Princess of Wales, who moved into their new home Forest Lodge with their children in the October half term, pay “open market rent” on their 20-year lease.

This comes in contrast to Andrew’s agreement, which saw him live in the property on a ‘peppercorn rent’ since 2003, although he paid £1m for the lease and a further £7.5m for refurbishments.

The details were shared in a letter from the Crown Estate to Public Accounts Committee last week, responding to questions about the lease arrangements for Royal Lodge.

The committee said it will now launch an inquiry into the Crown Estate’s property leases to the royal family as it published the correspondence on Tuesday.

“Having reflected on what we have received, the information provided clearly forms the beginnings of a basis for an inquiry. The National Audit Office supports the scrutiny function of this Committee,” committee chairman Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown said.

“We now await the conclusions the NAO will draw from this information, and plan to hold an inquiry based on the resulting evidence base in the new year.”

In its letter to the MPs, the Crown Estate said Andrew gave the minimum 12 months’ notice that he would surrender the property on October 30, and would have been entitled to the compensation for ending his tenancy on October 30 2026 if no repairs were needed.

It said though it was unlikely he would receive compensation, a “full and thorough assessment” must be carried out first post-occupation by an expert.

As well as details of the Royal Lodge and Forest Lodge properties in Windsor Great Park, the Crown Estate also provided information on other homes including the Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh’s Bagshot Park and Thatched House Lodge in London’s Richmond Park.

Detailing Kate and William’s new lease agreement, the Crown Estate said William made an approach, and after discussions with the Royal Household, the Crown Estate commissioners were asked to consider the lease of the Forest Lodge for use as their “primary private residence”.

“Negotiations were conducted on an arm’s length basis, to ensure appropriate market terms were agreed,” the Crown Estate said.

It said independent valuers from Hamptons and Savills estate agents were appointed to value the Grade II-listed mansion, and William and Kate received independent legal and property advice, as did the Crown Estate.

“The lease for the Property was concluded on a 20-year Common Law Tenancy at an open market rent subject to standard Landlord & Tenant repairing obligations. The rent was assessed by Savills and Hamptons acting on behalf of the Crown Estate. Knight Frank acted for TRH’s The Prince and Princess of Wales,” the Crown Estate said.

Andrew was formally stripped of his last remaining royal titles on Monday, as the King ordered that his membership of the Order of the Garter, to which he was appointed in 2006, be removed.

Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s appointment as a Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order is also to be cancelled and annulled, records published in The London Gazette show.

The 65-year-old has been stripped of both his HRH style and his prince title. He still retains his rank as a vice-admiral in the Royal Navy – but defence minister John Healey has said this is being looked at with Buckingham Palace.

Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s role in the family came to an end over growing concerns about his association with Epstein. The former duke has faced allegations that he sexually assaulted a teenage Virginia Giuffre after she was trafficked by Epstein. He strenuously denies the accusations.

Robin Smith was an England great and one of the best – and bravest – in the face of raw pace

Fine a bowler as Angus Fraser was, he probably wasn’t quick enough to get Robin Smith’s juices flowing. But the former England cricketer, and Independent cricket correspondent, may have summed up his old teammate better than most. “There have been many players who have suggested they would rather face 90mph throat balls than gentle leg-breaks but Smith is the only one I truly believe,” said England’s most skilful bowler of the early 1990s.

Nor was there any false bravado from Smith when he said, in many an interview, that he felt no fear against the quickest of the quicks, especially as he would often caveat it by admitting he was afraid of Shane Warne, whose leg-breaks were not gentle, but were rather less likely to inflict physical damage. Smith’s demons could be mental, but there were few braver batters in cricketing history. Few finer, too, when the speed gun showed deliveries timed at something approaching 100mph. From Donald Bradman to Brian Lara, there have been suspicions that some of the greatest ever had a slight susceptibility to raw pace. Smith was that rarity: he was better against it.

Smith has died at just 62; he played 62 Tests, too, and each number seems too few. But he excelled in the tail end of an era where there were more genuinely fast bowlers than before or since. He was a cricketer for those times; his international career was curtailed by the failings of England coaches and by his own issues with spinners. But when the pace was cranked up and the ball was pitched short, Smith was among the best there has ever been.

Perhaps no one has ever hit a square cut harder, and Smith hit a lot of them, too: it was his signature shot, designed for hard, bouncy pitches. But the other abiding image of him adorns the cover of his autobiography, his body contorted into the shape of a C, feet off the ground, head jutting back, bat going in the other direction, to avoid another bouncer.

He was suited to the gladiatorial arena of Test cricket, where there were more out-and-out fast bowlers. He was, indisputably, a Hampshire great, for his two decades of service and man-of-the-match contributions to two cup final wins in 1991 and 1992. Before then, a freewheeling 38 off 27 balls in the 1988 Benson & Hedges Cup 1988 propelled him into the England team. They faced the West Indies and he looked immediately at home. It felt fitting that Smith, who began with another 38, started off in partnership with Allan Lamb: a close friend, another who left apartheid South Africa and played for England, another who made a reputation for making runs against the West Indies.

Smith had cemented his place during the 1989 Ashes, a series when England were walloped, but he stood alone with 553 runs at 61, including two superb hundreds. Yet it was the West Indies who defined him more. Over Smith’s eight-year Test career, no one made more runs against the West Indies or more hundreds; of those with 500 runs, only Graham Gooch and – just – Mark Waugh averaged more. When Viv Richards’s side visited England in 1991, boasting a bowling attack of Malcolm Marshall, Curtly Ambrose, Courtney Walsh and Patrick Patterson, Smith averaged 83 to rise to second in the world rankings. His 148 at Lord’s was, he felt, his finest innings. His 109 at The Oval helped England’s underdogs draw the series.

In the final months of his time with England, the West Indies encountered a last, magnificent display of defiance. On what Mike Atherton called the worst pitch he had ever experienced, England were shot out for 147 and 89 at Edgbaston in 1995. Smith, with 46 and 41, stood alone, bruised, battered, but brilliant.

His preparation arguably had begun early. There was a cricket pitch in the family backyard in Durban, his father turning up the speed on the bowling machine. There was not too much high-class spin bowling in South Africa in the 1970s and early 1980s; Smith was a product of his environment.

He made an early impression in England after joining his older brother Chris at Hampshire. In his Middlesex days, Simon Hughes hit Smith on the helmet with a bumper. He tried another. It was followed by two sounds: the ferocious crack of ball on bat as he was hooked for six, and then the fielders laughing that he was stupid enough to bounce Smith twice in a row. Smith was only a teenager then, too, but his reputation as a specialist against the short ball was already established.

And if his overall Test record – 4236 runs at an average of 43.67 – is impressive, especially given the age he played in, a couple of his finest innings came in other formats. His 167 not out from 163 balls against Australia stood as England’s record ODI score for more than two decades. Six weeks later, representing Hampshire, he made a majestic 191 against Australia; it was a three-day match but it required just 191 deliveries.

It was, though, an Australia without Warne. Smith had endured a poor tour of India earlier that year and the emergence of the greatest leg-spinner was bad news for him; as Warne later proved, plenty of other England batters struggled against him, but the reputation as a poor player of spin dogged Smith. He had actually made a century against Sri Lanka in Colombo but was omitted for the 1994-95 Ashes. He was recalled to face the quicks of the West Indies and South Africa and was England’s top scorer in what proved his final Test.

It underlined the sense he was dropped too soon, mishandled by Raymond Illingworth, whose brand of unsympathetic man-management led Smith, years later, to call the Yorkshireman an “appalling person”.

Smith, in contrast, had an abiding popularity. The courageous player of fast bowling had a personal vulnerability; struggles with alcohol and mental health presented problems in life after cricket. Before then, he had persuaded his old tormentor Warne to join Hampshire. “The nicest bloke you could ever meet,” said the late Australian.

It was a theme of the tributes from those who knew him. For those who do not, the memories of Smith swaying out of the way of another 90mph bouncer and the noise of him hammering a square cut to the boundary will remain.

‘My ex racked up debts in my name and left our family with nothing’

Nearly 4 million children are believed to be affected by economic abuse, with one in seven mothers claiming their child or teenager had experienced poor mental health as a result.

A study conducted by the charity Surviving Economic Abuse and Ipsos, which surveyed 5,094 adults, found more than a quarter of mothers (27 per cent) have experienced this form of abuse – when a current or ex-partner controls a victim’s money like income and bank accounts – in the past year, suggesting that 3.9 million children are being affected by this “hidden crisis”.

In Becky’s* case, her ex-partner had seemed like the “best thing since sliced bread” when they first met when she was just 18 years old. He would buy her gifts, take her on fancy holidays and encouraged her to move in with him after six months of dating.

Given that he had a decent job and had taken control of the household bills, she was unaware that he was avoiding paying council tax and was racking up significant debts in her name.

After the birth of their first child, he pressured her to give up her job by insisting he would “take care of her”, making it impossible for her to continue working by cancelling the car insurance and refusing to pay for childcare costs.

Isolated from friends and family due to his insistence that they continually move house further and further away, she was then subjected to verbal abuse, which left her depressed, while he became more volatile, throwing plates whenever she stood her ground.

He pressured her into taking out a loan and a credit card for him to use, with Becky eventually suffering stroke-like symptoms during a panic attack while she was eight months pregnant with their second child.

After a brief separation, their relationship continued after he promised to change. “He didn’t change at all; if anything, it got worse,” she said. “He took credit cards out in my name, we moved house again, he wasn’t paying council tax or bills and debt letters were constantly coming in.

“A credit card came through with my name on it, but by that point, I was just in survival mode –don’t argue with him, as the repercussions could be worse.”

Eventually, she was able to free herself from the relationship, but the economic abuse continued.

“He stopped paying child maintenance, stopped paying finance and insurance on the car, which meant I had no way of getting around, knocking on my neighbour’s house and asking who had been in the house and following me,” she added.

She said she contacted both the police and social services for support after he sent her continuous abusive emails, called her workplace, was allegedly drink-driving with the children in the car and showed up at her house with a knife.

While he no longer knows where she lives, moving to her own place was also an ordeal. Her credit card score was so low that she was unable to get wifi or purchase a TV, and struggled to furnish her property with white goods.

“It’s been horrific, it’s so debilitating. It takes over your whole life,” Becky said. “Applying for benefits is mentally draining with the judgement you receive. I’ve always worked and paid into the system, but it’s like you’re no longer seen as a valued member of society.

“I was on antidepressants, I was suicidal, and I had to make a really difficult choice of ‘I’m either going to stay in this pit or pull myself out’. There was a point where I didn’t see a way out other than killing myself.”

Abusive parents have also been found to use tactics that directly target their children’s economic security, with a third of women who have endured economic abuse stating that their ex-partner refused to pay child support or paid it unreliably.

It comes as a survey published by the victims’ commissioner last month found that less than half of the victims surveyed were confident that the criminal justice system is effective.

One in six also reported that a current or ex-partner had stolen money from their child, such as birthday money, or had tried to stop them accessing benefit payments they were entitled to receive.

Of the mothers surveyed, 17 per cent said they could not provide food, clothes or other essential items for their children, while 20 per cent said they felt afraid for their children’s safety or wellbeing because of their current or ex-partner’s economically abusive behaviour.

The Independent’s Brick by Brick campaign with Refuge last year raised almost £600,000 to build two new safe havens for women fleeing abuse. Meanwhile, the Crown Prosecution Service has vowed to tackle the “complex web of harm” relating to violence against women and girls as part of its newly published five-year strategy.

Sam Smethers, CEO of Surviving Economic Abuse, said: “Economic abuse is a dangerous form of coercive control and children are being harmed by it every day. Our research shows that perpetrators are stealing children’s pocket money, stopping mums accessing child benefit, and refusing to pay child support. Economic abuse means women and children go without at Christmas and every day of the year, with some pushed into poverty and homelessness.

“The prime minister has described economic abuse as a national emergency and it’s a scandal that so many mums and their children are living with its devastating consequences. We help families to escape economic abuse by providing vital online information to survivors and training professionals, like children’s services, to spot the signs of economic abuse.”

If you are experiencing feelings of distress, or are struggling to cope, you can speak to the Samaritans, in confidence, on 116 123 (UK and ROI), email jo@samaritans.org, or visit the Samaritans website to find details of your nearest branch.

Sienna Miller is busting the final pregnancy taboo in plain sight

Time was, mothers were expected to “hide away” as soon as they started “showing” their baby bumps – and not just in the 1950s.

The expectations placed on pregnant women to be “very demure, very mindful” (and very discreet) were still in place as recently 14 years ago, when I was shopping for maternity wear: all I found were giant, wafty caftans and “secret” breastfeeding aprons; vest-tops with hidden snap clasps to get your boobs out and huge tents you were expected to smother both yourself and your future baby beneath, so nobody could see you nursing.

Which is why it was so refreshing to see Sienna Miller sashaying onto the red carpet with pride at this week’s Fashion Awards – for not only did she and Ellie Goulding both get their bumps out, loud and proud, but Miller bared it all as an older mother. And we all know that that is the final pregnancy taboo, right there.

At 43, the actor – who is expecting her second child with her partner, Oli Green – is considered medically a “geriatric mother“, for the term kicks in for anyone pregnant over the age of 35 (and believe me, that’s exactly how you’re referred to in the hospital, which is just peachy for the self-confidence). Yet Miller – who is already mother to daughter Marlowe, 13, with her ex, Tom Sturridge, as well as to a 23-month-old daughter with Green, who is 28 – clearly doesn’t give a monkey’s about showing off her bump.

And nor should she – we’ve come a long way since the idea that a blossoming baby belly is somehow shameful or scandalous as per the legacy of the Victorian era, when women would hide their pregnancies with specially designed maternity corsets loosened with side lacing, layered clothing and empire waistlines. Being visibly pregnant was viewed as “indecent” – and pregnant women were hidden away in “confinement” until their babies were born.

Yet even now – despite stars like Demi Moore doing that cover for Vanity Fair in the nude while seven months pregnant in 1991; Rihanna rocking the Met Gala in a pinstripe skirt, tuxedo jacket and bump; Beyoncé’s achingly beautiful Instagram shot announcing that she was pregnant with twins; Khloe Kardashian, who dressed her human bauble in silver tassels for a Keeping Up With the Kardashians Christmas celebration; J-Lo, who glowed on the red carpet in flowing white Versace; or Serena Williams, who draped her belly in gorgeous green at the Met Gala in 2017 – there’s still something deliciously transgressive about it; something eyebrow-raising about being given public access to a woman’s body at such a private time.

Perhaps I’m projecting: speaking as someone who has been pregnant – twice – and knows how every inch of your body feels like a marvel. When you’re carrying a baby, you become hypersensitive to touch, sound and every single ache and twist and lurch. You know each stage of the baby’s development intimately: from tiny sunflower seed to giant watermelon.

You’re also encouraged implicitly and explicitly – as an older mother (like Miller, I had my second child relatively late at 35) – to hide away in the shadows for fear of seeming “past it”, for showing off the horror of not only stretch marks, linea nigra and cellulite, but wrinkles and greying hair, too. We all know that ageism is a problem – you only need to look at the way women are pressured to use Botox and fillers, plus the rise of the “lifted” face, to realise getting older “naturally” in Western society simply isn’t an option – but add age to pregnancy and you’re really fighting a patriarchal battle. And it’s one which, like it or not, women simply can’t win.

Which is precisely why Miller’s presence on the red carpet is so welcome. It may seem like a small, inconsequential thing, but look at what we’re fighting to begin with: we know that mothers spend less time in paid work and more time working part-time, meaning they miss out on earnings growth associated with more experience (and according to the Institute of Fiscal Studies, the pay gap between similarly educated mothers and fathers widens over a period of 20 years after a mother returns to work, leading to a discrepancy of 30 per cent less per hour).

We are all well aware of the gender pay gap, but refine that to mothers and it becomes even more stark and glaring: “young” mothers (those who give birth before the age of 33) are paid a whopping 15 per cent less than their childless peers, according to an analysis carried out for the Trades Union Congress (TUC) by the Institute for Public Policy Research in 2016. And one in nine mothers (11 per cent) report being dismissed, made redundant, or treated so poorly they felt they had to leave their job, according to the Equality and Human Rights Commission. That’s 54,000 competent and capable women wiped out of the British workforce, every single year.

And when it comes to older mothers, well – more than a third of women aged 50+ (36 per cent, or 4.1m) in England say they have experienced discrimination on the grounds of their age, sex or race, while a recent study in the US found the rhetoric around older motherhood to be “ageist, ableist and out of step with current childbirth trends”. That’ll be the “geriatric mothers”, again.

It’s no surprise that this kind of stigma makes older mums feel like they should hide away – we’re viewed as “unnatural” or “irresponsible”, guilty of having kids “too late” (when nobody bats an eyelid at Al Pacino having a baby at the age of 84). It’s a toxic conversational cocktail that strikes when you’re already feeling awkward and uncomfortable, when the last thing you want to do is be scrutinised and dissected.

That’s why Miller’s defiant appearance in the glare of the red carpet is so important. It’s not only vital representation for giving birth in your forties, it’s also sticking a middle finger up at the idea of “keeping mum”.

Education for all: How your skills could make you a great teacher

From construction and engineering to hospitality and beauty, Further Education teaching opens up doors to a wide range of careers. Encompassing a range of technical and vocational courses and qualifications for those over 16 who aren’t studying for a degree, it offers a more hands on, industry-led approach to learning.

Further Education offers a more focused, vocational approach and a fast-track into the workplace. It allows you to build on your existing skills and experience while shaping the next generation of professionals in your field. To find out more, we spoke to Further Education students and teachers about how it works and what they get out of it.

Further Education qualifications can be started from the age of 16. “It’s a step up from school but it doesn’t involve so much independent learning and research as many Higher Education degrees,” explains Susan Simmonds, 52, a Further Education lecturer in Land and Wildlife Management at Sparsholt College Hampshire. “During this time, learners gain so much maturity and a qualification that can take them out into industry,”

Sometimes this study might be full-time in college, while other Further Education opportunities offer apprenticeships, with students gaining qualifications while working on the job. Overall, the courses are generally more practical and directly linked to industry and preparing learners for their future careers. “These courses give students a wide range of relevant experience, knowledge and skills during a time when they’re maturing, and becoming ready to transition into the world of work,” Susan says.

There are often myths and misconceptions about the world of Further Education. From the learner side, many people don’t necessarily realise the opportunities available to them through Further Education, as Meri, 17, who is studying an Extended Technical Diploma in Land and Wildlife Management Level 3 at Sparsholt College, explains. “Many people I have spoken to don’t realise there are multiple ways to prepare for a career in industry, and that courses like mine can open those doors.”

For Meri, it’s been a really positive experience, and one that has helped prepare her for the workplace. “The college has a lot of contacts with industry and the assignments we do are similar to professional reports.” Meanwhile, Zach, 17, who is on the same course, has also thrived at the Further Education college: “I have been able to meet far more friends and great people and I feel as though it has helped me grow. It’s also provided many opportunities to experience real-world practical work.”

For those training or working as Further Education teachers, often after years spent in a specific industry sector, it’s the students that make their new career so rewarding. David Hobson, 54, who teaches the Motor Vehicle course at Stockton Riverside College, found that the job satisfaction he gets from sharing his personal know-how with the next generation of workers has kept him in Further Education teaching for 16 years. “The benefits of passing on my skills to young people keep me going. It’s an opportunity for me to equip learners with the industry skills and knowledge they need to succeed in their careers”

Susan, who teaches Further Education part-time alongside her work as a Community Ecologist, has had a similar experience: “I find the work really energising. Young people are so full of life and enthusiasm that I come home feeling uplifted.”

Whether it’s part-time alongside your current job or a switch to full-time teaching, Further Education teaching can be a really rewarding and valuable career move.

Teaching in a mixture of colleges (often General Further Education Colleges or Sixth Form Colleges) and Adult and Community Learning Centres, as well as workplace and apprenticeship settings, it can fit around your life and other commitments. While typical full-time contracts are around 35 hours a week, there are also some part-time or flexible options available.

Real world industry experience across a wide range of jobs can set you on a path to becoming a Further Education teacher, with opportunities in everything from construction and healthcare, to engineering, digital, hospitality, tourism and beauty. You don’t always need teaching qualifications to start teaching in further education, you can undertake training on the job which is often funded by your employer.

If, like Susan and David, you see the appeal of sharing the industry knowledge and skills you’ve developed with the next generation, exploring the option of becoming a Further Education teacher can be a great next step. As David points out, “You won’t know how enjoyable it is until you try it.”

Looking for a new role that’s rewarding, flexible and draws on your current career? Why not consider sharing your experience where it matters most – helping inspire the next generation of workers in the field you love? Visit the Further Education website to find out more

Warning of fresh economic hit as Brexit accelerates UK ‘brain drain’

The UK’s faltering economy risks worsening due to a steep fall in the number of people moving to the UK for work, exacerbated by Brexit, experts have warned.

Following a warning that the UK is already experiencing a “dangerous” brain drain of some of the UK’s brightest and best, fresh figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) showed nine out of 10 Brits emigrating in the year to June were of working age.

Leading economists said that if the low levels of net migration – the number of people arriving in the UK versus those leaving – continue, the UK’s economic growth forecasts risk being downgraded again just days after the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) slashed predictions for next year and the three years after that.

It comes after the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) on Tuesday sounded an alarm that a slowing in labour productivity, partly due to a drop in the number of workers coming to the UK, was stalling the economy.

The Independent can also exclusively reveal warnings from a senior executive at one of the world’s leading recruitment companies that the brain drain from the UK because of Brexit is worse than previously believed.

It places more pressure on Rachel Reeves, days after she unveiled a Budget that the OBR said contained no measures which would have a “material effect” on growth, but did raise £26bn in taxes.

The ONS figures show that net migration to the UK has fallen by two-thirds in a single year, driven by a huge drop in people coming to Britain for work or study, following a crackdown started by the last Conservative government but continued under Labour.

In the 12 months to June, net migration was an estimated 204,000 – down 69 per cent from 649,000 a year earlier and the lowest annual figure since 2021, after it peaked at 944,000 in 2023. And of the 252,000 British nationals who had emigrated, 90 per cent of them were of working age, Mary Gregory, executive director for population and census at the ONS, said.

Oxford Economics chief UK economist Andrew Goodwin said that if the net migration remains at these low levels, “it increases the chances that the OBR will again be forced to downgrade its forecasts at a future fiscal event”.

Jonathan Portes, economics professor at King’s College London and the former chief economist at the Cabinet Office, said that while the fall was mostly driven by fewer people from outside the EU coming to work and study and more leaving as their visas expire, the impact of people emigrating from the UK would be “negative” as it was reasonable to assume that they were quite skilled and possibly high earning.

He also accused Labour of “incoherent and economically illiterate” statements on growth, which the government insists is its top priority, saying “their policies on work and study visas are reducing growth and making the fiscal position worse”.

“Reducing migration in the way they are doing is an act of economic self-harm, and they are claiming it as a policy success,” he added.

Rakesh Patel, managing director for the UK & the rest of Europe at recruiter SThree, said the issue has been exacerbated by Brexit and is worse among high-skilled science, technology, engineering and mathematics (Stem) workers, who make up the workforce for developing industries in the UK. He claimed that “while the EU moves to attract more international talent through the new EU Talent Pool, the UK is moving in the opposite direction – and is now facing an exodus of skilled talent as a result”.

SThree’s latest Stem Workforce Report reveals that one in four Stem employers has seen talent move overseas in the past year, while 13 per cent of Stem workers are actively planning to relocate.

Another 25 per cent of them are considering relocating, while 62 per cent fear tougher UK immigration rules will damage competitiveness. A third (32 per cent) say the UK’s immigration policy restricts them from hiring candidates from other countries – a further two in five (41 per cent) say their organisation won’t sponsor visas.

Karl Williams, from the Centre for Policy Studies think tank, said it was likely that those leaving the UK are “young, ambitious graduates”. He said that the loss of workers, such as the loss of resident doctors and other healthcare professionals, was “not just a hit on the economy, it’s also a hit on public services”.

Research he conducted a few years ago showed that in order to keep spending on pensioners per head at roughly the current level, without increasing taxes or borrowing, the UK would need an average annual economic growth of 2.9 per cent. The OBR has forecast that it will be just 1.5 per cent this year.

“That just looks so far beyond the bounds of possibility at the moment,” he added. “And the real worry is that the people leaving are going to be the top earners, either now or in the future.”

He said that in order to prevent emigration by younger workers, ministers should tackle the cost of living around housing and energy prices, but stated that this would take time. A more immediate move would be to cut taxes, allowing young people to keep more of the money they earn, but “the Budget has gone completely in the opposite direction”.

Dr Amit Kochhar, chair of the British Medical Association, which represents doctors, said: “Taxpayers invest thousands of pounds in training up UK doctors, only to now watch many of them take their skills abroad. Four thousand left last year and thousands more are filling out the paperwork to get out. Meanwhile, patients are being seen in hospital corridors thanks in part to the overstretching of the workforce that remains. It’s a ludicrous waste of resources.”

He called for the government to address wages and tackle the lack of training places that he said was “robbing doctors of their careers here”.

A government spokesperson said: “We are delivering a more controlled migration system that promotes growth with settlement fast-tracked for high earners and entrepreneurs. That’s while net migration is at its lowest level in half a decade and has fallen by more than two-thirds under this government as we end the use of asylum hotels and crack down on illegal immigration.

“Attracting the brightest and the best to Britain is part of our plan for a strong and secure economy, building on the Budget that delivered on the priorities of the British people – cutting NHS waiting lists, cutting borrowing and cutting the cost of living.”

Witkoff and Trump cannot be trusted – it’s time for Europe to muscle into Putin talks

Whether by accident or design, Vladimir Putin has a useful idiot running America. International diplomacy has been turned on its head, enemies made friends, allies threatened, international laws defoliated.

Russian strategic policy, known as the Gerasimov doctrine, argues that chaos in the ranks of the enemy is victory and a path to greatness. By that standard Putin, should be stringing up bunting in the Kremlin.

He has achieved unimagined strategic effect by manipulating the Trump administration, which has contorted itself in its efforts to force a Russian victory on Ukraine and against Europe.

In the latest effort by the Oval Office to continue its cringing before the Russian throne, Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff – alongside business buddy Jared Kushner – has arrived in Moscow.

Why this is being countenanced by America’s “allies” in Nato is baffling, were it not for the fact that there is no leader in Europe prepared to say out loud what they must all, surely, know. That Donald Trump is not a broker, he’s not even a dishonest broker when it comes to Ukraine – he is on the wrong side.

Witkoff used to be seen as staggeringly inept. He turns up in the Kremlin fawning like Gollum, takes no notes, uses a Kremlin translator, and emerges from meetings with Putin, a former KGB lieutenant colonel, brimming with admiration.

He described Putin in one Tucker Carlson interview as a “great guy”, “super smart”, “honest”, and “not a bad guy”. Descriptions that have disgusted the families of Putin’s dead critics like Alexei Navalny and every resident of the Russian-speaking areas of Ukraine’s Donbas, where Putin’s troops have scorched the earth and killed mercilessly.

Putin is wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes.

The Russian leader has said he is prepared to take a look at the latest version of a ceasefire plan that has been worked out with Ukraine and European leaders and is expected to be discussed with Witkoff.

But he has also said it is a non-starter.

Because he wants to turn it all back to the earlier version negotiated with Witkoff by his envoy Kirill Dmitriev, in secret. Dmitriev is Witkoff’s escort in Moscow.

The same Witkoff that the Bloomberg agency revealed had coached Putin’s foreign policy adviser, Yuri Ushakov, on how to manipulate Trump. In what must have been an intelligence intercept of Witkoff’s unsecured personal mobile phone leaked to Bloomberg, he’s recorded explaining how Putin can get inside Trump’s head and affect an imminent visit to the White House by Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukraine’s president.

In Western intelligence circles, Trump’s envoy has been considered a fool and a liability for months – partly due to his misuse of a personal phone in countries that will always penetrate its contents.

European spies used to call him “Steve Witless”. Now he’s “Dim Philby”, suggesting that he’s too thick to realise he’s working for the wrong side. The original Kim Philby was a clever traitor, and he knew it.

Yet Witkoff is at the centre of the most important diplomatic activity on the planet.

Europe’s leaders, aside from Hungary and Slovakia, are united in saying that Russia poses a clear and present danger to Western security and democracy. Russia is also accused of assassinations, sabotage, and all manner of hybrid warfare as Gerasimov’s doctrine requires.

Yet they leave the talks about the future of the Western world to a man their own intelligence services do not trust. France and Germany are frantically trying to mobilise more troops; Poland is raising its citizens into an army. The continent of Europe is on near red alert.

All hopes are on America, which has repeatedly accepted, as Trump and Witkoff have said, Putin’s demand that, ahead of any talks, Ukraine must agree to withdraw from the front lines it holds now and give up the defences it has prepared.

Trump has put a little pressure on Putin with sanctions against nations importing his oil. He has not threatened to arm Ukraine. He backed away from offering Zelensky Tomahawk cruise missiles to fight Russia after Witkoff’s coaching of the Kremlin.

He doesn’t care what happens to Europe. Along with Witkoff, who is intimately involved in the Trump business empire through members of his own family, Trump is after personal profit and craves the approval of Putin.

The US has no skin in Ukraine’s defence. The only leverage that the US has over Kyiv is the important intelligence feed it gets from Washington. Trump’s administration has threatened to cut this if Ukraine doesn’t agree to capitulate to Russian demands.

Fine. Non-American Nato partners are already setting up systems to cope with this. A final break between Europe and the US over Ukraine that puts the democratic West back in the driving seat of diplomacy is exactly what is needed.

This would end the chaos and therefore end Russia’s weaponisation of chaos.

Europe, which has a real interest in Ukraine and is its biggest source of military and financial aid, should elbow the US aside. As Trump has repeatedly said, Russia is their problem. Not his.