What Susie Wiles was really trying to tell us about Trump

Everyone loves a good political whodunnit. But in Washington this week they’re playing a slight variant of that game; it’s a why-she-dunnit. The who is Susie Wiles, Donald Trump’s fearsome, efficient, no nonsense chief of staff. The why is why did she sit down for a whole series of on-the-record interviews with Vanity Fair to give her unvarnished views on the characters of the administration and the way policies were being implemented?

It’s a mystery.

One of the reasons why this second Trump administration has been so successful – compared to the first – is largely down to her. She is the dealmaker extraordinaire behind the scenes. The president has even called her Susie Trump – and what bigger compliment could she be paid than that? This from the man who loves his surname so much it attaches to hotels, golf courses, and soon to the iconic arts centre in DC, the Kennedy Centre – which is apparently set to become the Trump Kennedy Centre.

It’s not just that she keeps the competing egos around Trump in check. She’s even able to tell Trump to rein it in. This week the president gave a televised address to the nation about America’s struggles with the cost of living. Sure, bits of it sounded like one of his rally speeches. But he stuck to the autocue script. He didn’t ad lib. He didn’t veer from the message. She had told him firmly he had to stick the words in front of him, and he couldn’t go over 20 minutes. He stuck to time; he did exactly as he was told.

For all the noise and clatter there still is, this is a much more disciplined operation that the first term. And Susie Wiles is rightly being accredited with delivering that. But the one law of political survival in the Trump jungle is the unquestioning acceptance that he is king, and if there is one person upon whom all the sunlight and media attention must shine, it is him. Never, ever start generating your own headlines, but that is exactly what Susie Wiles has done.

So let’s go back to our question, why? The person interviewing her from Vanity Fair was Chris Whipple. He is not some rookie reporter. He is an author and has long been a chronicler of the role of the chief-of-staff, that near impossible 24/7 job. And he has spoken to plenty of former chiefs in his time. There’s nothing unusual in that. What is extraordinary is to give those interviews – 11 of them! – while you are still in post, and not on ‘deep background’ but on the record.

In her telling, Trump (who is teetotal) “has an alcoholic’s personality” with a taste for vengeance; JD Vance has been a conspiracy theorist for a decade; Russell Vought, a key figure in the administration and who was behind the blueprint of the second term with Project 2025, is a “right-wing absolute zealot”.

On policy, she makes clear that she counselled Trump against pardoning the most violent rioters from January 6; he ignored her. She disagreed with Elon Musk’s chainsawing of USAID – and she has some choice observations about him and his drug habit. She reckons Pam Bondi, the attorney general, has screwed up the handing of the Epstein files. And that Trump’s imposition of tariffs had been more painful than she had anticipated.

This is not what you expect from a serving chief of staff. What she’s said out loud is what you normally whisper quietly in the president’s ear. JD Vance gave a somewhat ambiguous response to the interview. He said he’d never seen Wiles ever be disloyal to the president. But was that a sentence that ended there or is it left hanging, with the words ‘until now’ missing? I suspect he wanted it to be double-edged.

For the moment there is no talk of Trump disposing of her. She is too valuable to him. But there will be some knives out for her now, and the air of infallibility around her will have gone.

Maybe Wiles, like so many frontline politicians, is worried about her legacy, about how she will be written about in the years to come. She wanted her version of events to be out there before someone else had the opportunity to trample on her record. Maybe she thought – naively – that it would all come out fine. Maybe there was vanity in talking to Vanity Fair, with its glossy mix of glamour, celebrity and politics.

On the subject of which, she is photographed for this edition with JD Vance, Marco Rubio, Karoline Leavitt, Stephen Miller etc – and there are also a series of ultra close-up photos of each of them where you sense the camera lens must have been mere millimetres away from their nostrils. These pictures have caused almost as much of a storm as the words that Whipple extracted from Wiles in the interview. On the Leavitt picture, social media sleuths say they can see the injection marks on her lips where the botox needle has gone in. And in MAGAland they’re crying ‘foul’.

I suppose my first reaction when I looked at these pictures was why on earth did they agree to be photographed like that? How could you be so naïve? But then maybe this is the explanation for everything. This is an administration which thinks it can do what it likes and control everything – so nothing will turn out badly. When, in reality, it is nothing like as savvy or clever as it would like people to think.

In her response to the interview Susie Wiles has railed that her words were taken out of context, it was a “disingenuously framed hit piece”. Karoline Leavitt has amplified that. There have been complaints that the photographs were unkind. Is that it? Is that all they’ve got? When politicians start whining about context and framing you know as a reporter and interviewer you’ve done your job.

David Walliams denies inappropriate behaviour claims as he is dropped by publisher

Comedian and children’s author David Walliams has denied allegations of inappropriate behaviour after being dropped by his publisher Harper Collins.

The TV star, known for appearing in comedy shows including Come Fly With Me and Little Britain, “strongly denies” any claims and was not informed about or party to an investigation by HarperCollins, his spokesperson said on Friday evening.

A spokesperson for HarperCollins told The Independent: “After careful consideration, and under the leadership of its new CEO, HarperCollins UK has decided not to publish any new titles by David Walliams.”

It comes after The Telegraph reported the publisher made the decision after he was accused of behaving inappropriately towards young women. A junior colleague is said to have complained about his conduct, leading to other staff members being interviewed.

Former employees alleged to The Telegraph that they were advised to work in pairs when meeting with him and not to visit his home.

A spokesperson for Harper Collins added: “HarperCollins takes employee wellbeing extremely seriously and has processes in place for reporting and investigating concerns. To respect the privacy of individuals, we do not comment on internal matters.”

A spokesperson for Walliams said in a statement: “David has never been informed of any allegations raised against him by HarperCollins. He was not party to any investigation or given any opportunity to answer questions. David strongly denies that he has behaved inappropriately and is taking legal advice.”

Walliams, 54, rose to fame more than 20 years ago through the comedy series Little Britain, alongside Matt Lucas, and has since become one of the UK’s most established and successful award-winning children’s authors, selling an estimated 60 million copies worldwide.

His books have been adapted for television by the BBC and are widely used in schools, with Harper Collins stating that they have been translated into 55 languages.

In recent years, Walliams has faced criticism after he was caught making obscene comments about contestants on Britain’s Got Talent.

In 2022, a leaked transcript revealed that he called one auditioning contestant a “c***” and said of another: “She thinks you want to f*** her, but you don’t.”

The remarks were made during an audition at the London Palladium in early 2020 and leaked to The Guardian, with Walliams subsequently leaving his role.

At the time, Walliams said that he wanted to apologise for the “disrespectful comments” and that they were part of a private conversation which was “never intended to be shared”. His comments were picked up by the microphones on the desk and were seemingly not intended to be heard publicly – and he sued FremantleMedia, the production company that makes BGT, for the leaking of his private remarks. The matter was settled in November 2023.

He also sparked outcry after giving two Nazi salutes during a recording of BBC series Would I Lie To You?’s Christmas special. He reportedly gave the offensive salutes while filming the episode with host Rob Brydon after an anecdote that was shared by Call the Midwife star Helen George.

Gen X is having a Mounjaro midlife crisis with some terrifying results

Are you on it?” she whispered as we swam out into the lake. It was a beautiful, sunny day and I was leading a group of midlife women – or Queenagers, as I like to call them – on a rejuvenating retreat. I didn’t need to ask what “it” was. The whip-smart fiftysomething meant Mounjaro, or Wegovy – those miracle jabs that aid weight loss are sweeping through the midlife female population like a particularly contagious cold. It’s now so common for women of a certain age to be taking this medication that if – like me – you’ve shed a few pounds just by walking, swimming, and cutting out processed foods, no one believes you.

The next weekend, I sat down next to a friend on a camping trip. She was wearing tight jean shorts and a fitted top (unusual, as she is often quite body conscious).

“I feel great,” she said. “I’ve finally shifted my meno-belly and am back in my old clothes. It’s costing £200 a month, but it’s worth every penny!” The fact that she was on “the pen”, as these injectables are known, didn’t even need to be spelled out. She was messianic about how the food noise in her head had been silenced and how, after a lifetime of always feeling too large, she had finally reached her “ideal weight”.

My friend was only a size 12 before she started the jabs; she certainly didn’t have a BMI of 35 or above, which is meant to be the threshold for a Mounjaro prescription. “Oh,” she said breezily, “I lied to the online clinic. I told them I was 10kg heavier than I am and sent them a really unflattering old photo where my tummy had rolls and looked huge.”

But what about your health, I asked. Her expression said it all: who cares? I’m thin!

Many women I know had a Mounjaro summer. And many, I think, are having a Mounjaro midlife crisis too – which is worrying on a number of levels.

These injections were originally developed to treat type 2 diabetes and morbid obesity by activating two receptors called GLP-1 and GIP, which increase the level of incretins – hormones that raise insulin levels and reduce the amount of sugar produced by the liver. The NHS is still only prescribing them for those with a BMI of 35-40 who have tried everything else, and only in conjunction with a nutrition plan, an exercise regime, and a psychotherapist.

Side effects can include gallbladder disorders, acute pancreatitis, a higher risk of thyroid cancer, indigestion, bad breath, constipation, muscle wastage, and bone loss. It is also worth noting that there is still no peer-reviewed evidence on how these new medications interact with female hormones, because the large-scale trials weren’t done on women, but on men.

My friend ignored my well-meant objections. I wasn’t surprised. Like many of us born in the Seventies, she had been raised by a mother obsessed with weight – not for nothing did that generation believe you could never be too rich or too thin and were taking amphetamines decades before they were declared class-A and became “speed” at their daughter’s raves.

My generation are sitting ducks for this nonsense. We came of age during the “nothing tastes as good as skinny feels” era (thanks, Kate Moss), and went from the heroin-chic Nineties to the circle of shame in the Noughties, where muffin tops were the enemy.

We’ve been fed a constant media diet of eschewing bingo wings and cankles – and were taught to judge ourselves harshly by a beauty industry intent on selling us highly profitable products. Now in our fifties, we’re experiencing entirely normal weight gain linked to the drop in oestrogen during menopause, and suddenly £200 a month feels like a small price to pay for a monthly injection that will transform us to our twentysomething weight. As my friend (a highly respected therapeutic practitioner) said, “I just feel better about myself if I am thinner.”

She is not the only one. A whole swathe of the population are lying about their BMI to access these jabs. It even has a name: microdosing.

“I see so many women who are taking these jabs short term to lose weight for a holiday, wedding, or job interview,” says Dr Nighat Arif, expert in midlife health and author of The Knowledge: Your Guide to Female Health from Menstruation to Menopause. “The side effects include feeling horrible, headaches, low mood, bone loss, and muscle loss – all of which are particularly important to consider in midlife, when perimenopausal symptoms can already cause heightened anxiety.”

Nighat is particularly concerned about the way social media and private clinics are marketing these drugs to midlife women. “I hate the term ‘meno-belly’ – what it describes is a totally normal weight gain of two to three kilos. As we age, the body creates sex hormones in fat cells to counteract other hormonal changes going on within.

“Pushing Mounjaro and Wegovy to menopausal women is simply preying on their vulnerability. Companies are profiting from women’s anxieties and normal body changes.”

Even worse, she explains, is the lack of female-specific data in clinical trials. “The effects on women are hidden in peer-reviewed trials, and we still don’t know exactly how these drugs interact with HRT due to limited long-term data. Yet the market is flooded with messages claiming these jabs cure menopausal weight gain.”

She refers to guidance from the British Menopause Society: “Semaglutide (Ozempic) and tirzepatide (Mounjaro) result in delayed gastric emptying, and gastrointestinal side effects are common. The impact of these medications on the efficacy of co-prescribed oral hormone medications within HRT is unknown.”

Clinicians are advised to switch orally taken progesterone to patches due to slowed digestion. (It also advises that oral contraceptives may not be effective.)

As a midlife expert who runs a community of women in this life stage, I feel uncomfortable with how quickly so many of my peers are resorting to pumping themselves with injections often sourced from the internet. Most people on these jabs (estimates are up to 1.6 million in Britain) do not meet the official prescription criteria. It feels regressive. What happened to all the midlife rhetoric about empowerment, about not giving a damn, and moving into our confidence?

It really is a midlife epidemic. Look around: many of your friends are shrinking in body mass (“being eaten from inside” is how one woman described it ); their faces are drawn, their bodies gaunt, and their breath bad. That once-fun dinner companion who now pushes food around the plate and leaves early because they are exhausted.

Earlier this year, I attended the launch of a new initiative at the House of Commons called What Women Want – a national conversation about improving women’s lives. It aimed to highlight global inequality, violence against women, rape in war, and the gender pay gap. To kick off the conversation, Good Housekeeping magazine surveyed readers about what they wanted. The answer, depressingly, was: to lose half a stone.

So here we are. A generation brainwashed into believing we are only as valuable as the number on the scales, rushing to spend huge sums on drugs intended for the clinically obese.

And the cost may go beyond our bank accounts. Emily Hohler, a nutritional therapist with NatureDoc, which specialises in menopause and midlife women’s health, worries our health could pay the price, too.

“I see many perimenopausal and menopausal women with stressful lives, fluctuating hormones, and debilitating symptoms like anxiety and weight gain.

“I understand the appeal of these drugs, but there are downsides. Women naturally lose up to 5 per cent of muscle mass each decade after age 30. The perimenopause is especially vulnerable due to falling oestrogen, which affects muscle strength and health.

“Rapid weight loss often includes muscle loss. Maintaining healthy muscle mass is crucial, which is why I always stress protein intake and resistance training at this stage – especially for those not on HRT.”

There’s also the issue of diminished appetite. Are women getting the nutrients they need? Used alongside a healthy diet and exercise, these drugs can help with unhealthy weight gain. But used as a substitute, the consequences could be serious. Some people report hair thinning and loss as a particularly distressing side effect.

A colleague of Hohler’s works exclusively with weight loss clients using Metabolic Balance, which emphasises preserving muscle mass while reducing fat. She has seen many women experience miraculous early results with these jabs, only to plateau before reaching their goals. And when they stop injecting, weight often rebounds quickly.

Some women microdose without any medical oversight. Some aren’t overweight; they simply want to be thinner. There is often no psychological support to address emotional eating. “Women overeat for a reason,” the practitioner says. “When they stop the drugs and the food noise returns, they can feel more out of control than before.”

Hohler believes the path to long-term health lies in high-quality wholefoods, regular exercise, and sleep. “I get that these drugs can help prevent serious consequences of obesity. But for women with minor midlife weight gain, simple lifestyle changes can not only help, but also give them back their sense of agency – and that is a wonderful thing.”

Another private doctor I spoke to, who asked to remain anonymous, echoed these concerns, saying the women using these jabs are often the ones already getting tweakments, lip fillers, and IV vitamins. They’re microdosing and not using the drugs as they were intended.

“These pin-thin ‘lollipop women’ are losing touch with reality”, she says. “One woman who came to me had lost so much weight, I suggested she eat more protein. She said, ‘After months on the jabs, protein makes me gag.’”

“There’s a strange belief in our culture that thin equals healthy. But if you’re eating junk (just not much of it), drinking heavily, and skipping exercise, you might be skinny, but you’re not healthy.” Nor will your strength or fitness improve – both of which are vital over 50.

The Mounjaro midlife crisis is a toxic mix of thin-culture, gendered ageism (especially in the workplace), and a screen-obsessed society. Filters and Photoshop fuel a fear of ageing, pushing even sensible women to make poor health decisions.

Are they ready to be on these drugs for life? And if so, what are the consequences – beyond pharmaceutical companies having hit the jackpot?

On Loose Women earlier this year, Sharon Osbourne said that after losing more than 40lbs on Ozempic, she now struggles to gain even 10lbs back. “The injections worked,” she said, “but now I can’t put anything on really.”

It already feels like we’re living in a real-life version of The Substance.

This makes me sad. I see so many amazing, intelligent, wonderful midlife women trying to embrace their authentic selves. My rallying cry is that we come into our prime as Queenagers. That 50-plus is when we become the people we were always meant to be, shedding the programming that says we’re only valuable for our looks.

I understand why so many midlife women are falling for the Mounjaro trap. I just wish they understood that you really can be too thin – and that frailty (the mental state and a physical one marked by being underweight and under-muscled) is never a good look.

Eleanor Mills is the Founder of www.noon.org.uk, the UK’s premier network for midlife women, and the author of Much More to Come: Lessons on the Mayhem and Magnificence of Midlife (HarperCollins)

Strictly Come Dancing has its 2025 finalists – so who will win the Glitterball trophy?

After four unexpected drop-outs, 10 dance-offs and countless spray tans, we now have our Strictly Come Dancing final three: Karen Carney, George Clarke and Amber Davies.

It’s fair to say this year’s series has been a chaotic ride. Amid the furore over Tom Skinner landing a place on the show, Game of Thrones actor Kristian Nairn and ex-Love Islander Dani Dyer were forced to pull out before the curtain even went up. In the weeks that followed, their replacements – Emmerdale star Lewis Cope and Dyer’s fellow Islander Amber Davies – made their mark on the competition.

There was then the bombshell news of Tess Daly and Claudia Winkleman’s decision to leave, before two other celebrities were forced to pull out due to injury, with La Voix’s untimely exit leading to an elimination-free Blackpool.

With the Glitterball trophy in touching distance for the finalists, here are their Strictly journeys so far…

Amber Davies

Davies redefined the term “last-minute addition” when she stepped in to replace Dani Dyer with less than 48 hours to go until the launch show. But you’d never have guessed it when she pulled off a Waltz that wouldn’t have looked out of place in week five or six.

From the moment Davies set foot on the dancefloor, it was clear the 29-year-old was destined for the final. The former Love Islander has delivered plenty of this year’s wow moments, including a lift-packed, Ariana Grande-inspired Cha Cha in Icons Week and a flawless Charleston in the quarter-finals. But Davies has often struggled to win over viewers because of something that is, at this point, out of her control: past dance experience.

Plenty has been said about Davies’ West End training and multiple leading roles. And while it’s undeniable that it’s helped her in the competition, it has worked against her too and ultimately looks set to cost her the Glitterball trophy. Despite easily being the most skilled dancer left in the competition, Davies is the only one of this year’s finalists to have faced the dance-off and she didn’t deserve to be there on either occasion.

Another unexpected and unwarranted side effect has been the relentless negativity and abuse she has faced online. After Davies beat fan-favourite Lewis Cope in the quarter-final dance-off, the comments became so vitriolic that her pro partner Nikita Kuzmin issued an emotional plea to fans.

Karen Carney

While plenty of male footballers have taken part in Strictly – with very little success – Carney is the first female player to do so. And just as she did on the pitch for Arsenal, Chelsea and England, she’s set the bar incredibly high on the dancefloor.

The 38-year-old came out of the blocks incredibly strong in week one, making her Strictly debut with an energetic jive that catapulted her and Carlos Gu straight to the top of the leaderboard. But when it came to taking on a ballroom routine the following week, Carney struggled. In a VT, she revealed she has Scheuermann’s disease, which causes a curvature of the spine. “There are certain elements I won’t be able to do as well as I’d like to,” she said before her Tango. But, in what we now know to be typical Carney fashion, the former footballer threw herself in wholeheartedly – and didn’t let the judges’ controversial comments get her down.

In the weeks that followed, Carney worked tirelessly in the training room, but while she avoided the dance-offs, it wasn’t until the Halloween special that she managed to replicate the success of week one. With a dramatic Peaky Blinders-themed Argentine Tango, Carney reminded everyone she was still in the competition. She’s soared in the live shows since, pulling off a triumphant Couple’s Choice set to Lady Gaga’s “Born This Way”, a Blackpool Paso Doble that scored 39 and, in the semi-final, the best Waltz of the series.

Carney hasn’t just transformed on the dancefloor. Before her Couple’s Choice routine, the star revealed how trolling during her punditry career has impacted her mental health, recalling how one particular unnamed incident “completely knocked my confidence and I’ve not been able to get it back”. The show, she added, “has helped my confidence so much… I can be my true, authentic self.”

The tears, both happy and sad, have often flowed, with Carney and Gu – who have developed one of the strongest bonds of the series – wearing their hearts on their sleeves through all the highs and lows.

George Clarke

While Clarke boasted millions of followers online, most Strictly viewers had no idea who the 26-year-old was when he signed up for the show. The YouTuber introduced himself to viewers with an American Smooth but Clarke has often seemed more comfortable showing his fun side.

His Couple’s Choice came early in the competition and was bizarrely set to a Kpop Demon Hunters track, perhaps in a bid for the show to pull in younger viewers. In Blackpool, Clarke delivered one of Strictly’s most memorable Salsas – to “Party Rock Anthem”, no less – before later revelling in the chaos of the Instant Dance challenge (and getting a telling off from partner Alexis Warr for his quirky and entirely impractical outfit choice).

Despite his love of playing for laughs, Clarke’s dapper displays in the more serious ballroom numbers have also won plaudits from the judges and helped viewers see another side of him. His partnering skills and ability to help Warr shine have also been highly praised by the judges.

Highlights, not just for Clarke but the series as a whole, have included his Phantom of the Opera-themed Argentine Tango for Musicals Week and his week 10 quickstep to Frank Sinatra’s “I Get A Kick Out Of You”. Clarke also showed his vulnerable side in the notoriously difficult rumba, which he dedicated to his mother and grandfather.

As well as being the only male contestant left in the competition, Clarke is the only finalist yet to score a highly coveted 40. Can he change that on Saturday?

The Strictly Come Dancing final airs on Saturday 20 December at 7pm on BBC One.

‘I was abandoned as a baby on Christmas Eve – 80 years later I found my brother living a mile away’

On Christmas Eve in 1944, as London was hit by the intense bombing of the “Baby Blitz”, John Moore was left abandoned on the street. Just days old, he was picked up by a policeman and taken to St Thomas’s Hospital – but his origins and details of his family remained a mystery.

Four years later, he was adopted into a loving family in Kennington, south London, where he lived a “happy” childhood. Between school and helping his neighbours with their market stalls on weekends, his busy life left little time for wondering where he had come from.

Little did he know that his biological father and his half-brother, Lucas Borg, who was born 11 years after Mr Moore, were living just a mile away in Kennington. The pair grew up within touching distance but remained unaware of each other’s existence until a Christmas present from Lucas’s daughter changed everything.

“I had a happy life,” Mr Moore told The Independent. “I had a wonderful mother and father and two brothers. My only concern growing up was: did my biological family know that I survived, that I was safe and had a good life?

“I never really thought much about how to find my biological family,” he explained. “I wouldn’t have known how.”

Decades passed, and the two half-brothers each started their own families. The first inkling of their shared heritage came when Mr Moore’s son took a DNA test through his work and discovered he had Maltese heritage.

Curious about the revelation, Mr Moore decided to take a similar at-home test from a different provider to see if it gave him the same outcome. The results were definitive – one of his parents, who had always been a mystery to him, was from Malta.

Several years later, Mr Borg’s daughter Ella received a MyHeritage DNA test as a Christmas present from her husband, Ryan. She was astonished to find a close match with a man she had never heard of – a man who also had Maltese heritage and had links to south London. It was enough to convince Mr Borg to take a test himself.

“It came back a 50 per cent match with John,” Mr Borg, now aged 70, said. “It was a surprise because I’d always wanted a brother or sister, but my mother couldn’t have any more children.

“It was such a shock.”

Mr Moore, now aged 80, was also stunned to discover he had a family he had never known. “I didn’t expect anything from the DNA as regards to family because of the time factor,” he said. “You know, if anybody had been part of me, they could have now passed on. It’s been so many years.”

The pair reached out to each other and began to share stories and memories. On Easter Sunday this year, they met in person for the first time in what they described as an “emotional” and “nerve-wracking” reunion.

“I was very nervous at first,” Mr Moore said. “I didn’t know whether to shake Lucas’s hand or give him a hug because you’ve never met a person that’s half your genes.”

But conversation flowed, and they soon learnt they had striking similarities in their upbringing – from frequenting Manor Place swimming baths in Kennington, to the pie and mash shop where they were regulars.

Mr Moore discovered his biological father, George, had come to the UK from Malta when he was 18 with nothing but a piece of cheese and a slice of bread.

George, who couldn’t speak English when he arrived, went on to serve in the Merchant Navy and is remembered by Mr Borg as a “kind” and “humble” family man.

The pair said it has “taken time” to go from feeling like strangers to brothers, but that they are glad to have been reunited through the DNA test.

“It’s quite incredible how close we were, but so far apart at the same time,” Mr Moore said.

“It’s a shame that George, our father, didn’t know that John was around, because he would have treated him as a son as well,” Mr Borg added. “He was that sort of person. He was a very nice person, and he would have embraced John as his son.”

It’s about experience: Further Education teachers share what it takes

In the modern world, many of us are working longer than ever. Research based on ONS Labour Market data found that there are almost one million more workers aged 65 and above since the millennium and the state pension is set to rise to 67 by 2028 and 68 by the late 2030s. Subsequently, having multiple careers is becoming increasingly popular. And after decades working in a specific industry, sharing the work-based knowledge you have gained via teaching in further education is one of the most rewarding career shifts you can make.

Further Education teaching (defined as any education for people aged 16 and over who aren’t studying for a degree) allows you to switch up your working days and harness the skills and experience you have developed, all while helping shape the next generation of workers in your field.

To find out more about the role, from what it takes to the best parts of the job, we spoke to Further Education teachers who have switched from doing their day job to teaching it…

John Ryan, 51, from Weston Super Mare, worked for more than a decade on site in the construction industry, mainly in bricklaying and supervising roles, before an opportunity to become a Further Education assessor changed his path in his thirties. Travelling nationally to assess the work of new bricklayers in order to sign off their NVQs (National Vocational Qualification), the college John was associated with then started offering him some teaching work.

With no prior teaching qualifications, John completed these alongside his assessing and teaching roles with the fees picked up by the teaching college. “I liked the idea of passing on my knowledge and giving young people the skills and confidence to progress in a trade,” he says. “Teaching in Further Education felt like a natural next step because it would allow me to combine my practical background with coaching and mentoring.” There were practical draws too. “On site in the construction industry you are self-employed so you do not get holidays or sick pay. The stability of income and regular paid holidays was a big draw of Further Education teaching,” he adds.

Since his first assessing role 18 years ago, John has worked between assessing, teaching and jobs back on the construction site and now, he currently teaches bricklaying and groundwork full-time at South Gloucestershire and Stroud College.

John’s extensive site and supervisory experience has proved to be hugely valuable when it comes to teaching his students there. “I can explain not just the ‘how’ but also the ‘why’ behind industry standards,” he explains. “Learners often respond well to hearing about real jobs, site challenges, and the professional behaviours that employers expect. It makes the lessons more relatable and credible,” he shares.

“For example, I can share stories of accidents when teaching site safety, or explain how a mistake of a few millimetres on a construction site can cost you time to rectify, which in turn will cost you money,” he says. “These hands-on, real world experiences make the theory relatable and show learners the real value of getting it right.”

Coral Aspinall, 52, who became a full-time Further Education teacher 12 years ago, agrees. “My experience allows me to put my teaching into context,” she says. Coral started out her engineering career at 16 as an apprentice in a local engineering company. Following a BSc in Engineering and Business Management, she worked for many years in the engineering industry before enrolling on a part-time PGDE (Professional Graduate Diploma in Education) course for teaching. She’s now the Engineering Programme Leader at the Stockport campus of the Trafford and Stockport College Group. Here, they offer qualifications such as Level 2 Performing Engineering Operations as well as engineering-focused Level 3 T Levels and Level 3 Btec Awards. They also offer Level 3 apprenticeships across engineering including Technical Support, Engineering Fitter and Maintenance Management.

“Because I’ve been an engineering apprentice myself, I understand what the student needs to be successful in terms of skills, knowledge and behaviour,” she explains. “I also have contacts in the wider engineering community and understand what an employer is looking for in an apprentice, and can also share insights in terms of how the sector is shifting and evolving to help support their progress.”

Working for an extensive period of time in a field before passing on that knowledge gives teachers maturity and empathy which can be hugely helpful for students, especially those facing complex life situations.

Beyond the practical techniques, a big part of John’s role is helping learners build confidence, teamwork, communication, and problem-solving skills that employers look for. “Many of my learners have different challenges, so they value teachers who are approachable, who believe in them, and who prepare them for real opportunities in work or further study,” he says. For John, his previous work experience has allowed him to do this. “On site, I worked with people facing all sorts of pressures, from work to life issues, which taught me to be patient and supportive,” he explains.

Coral has had a similar experience. “I see my role as more than imparting knowledge; it is about preparing the young person for the next stage of their journey. The students trust me to have their best interests at heart; they come to me for advice on their next steps and how they can achieve their aspirations, and I’ll support them with both practical advice and words of encouragement.”

For Coral, teaching later in life allows her to draw from a mature perspective, and teach her students positive workplace behaviours alongside skills and knowledge. “Students thrive when they have clear unambiguous boundaries, so I’m firm around expectations in terms of timekeeping, attendance and attitude. This is particularly important to succeeding in the workplace as employers value these behaviours as much as, or even more than having specific expertise or know-how (which can generally be developed).”

If you’re looking for a fresh career option, and keen to share your skills with the next generation, Further Education teaching could be a really enriching new phase. Further Education covers a huge range of career sectors including construction, law, engineering, digital, hospitality, tourism, beauty and more. This includes BTECs (Business and Technology Education Council qualifications), T Levels, NVQs (National Vocational Qualifications) or City & Guilds Qualifications.

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, further education teachers share their years of real world industry skills with a diverse mix of people from those straight out of school aged sixteen to those making career switches later in life.

You don’t always need an academic degree or prior teaching qualifications to start teaching in further education. You can undertake teacher training on the job, often funded by your employer, so you can start earning straight away.. Furthermore, it doesn’t mean you have to stop working in your chosen field. Further education offers hybrid opportunities – so you could teach part time alongside your other commitments. This means you could have the best of both worlds, where you are still working in your chosen industry and teaching alongside it at a time that suits your schedule. Find out if it’s the right move for you here.

If, like John and Coral, you see the appeal in sharing the 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 John shares, the reward is always worth it: “It never gets old passing on my knowledge to people starting on their journey, knowing I have made a difference and getting a smile and thanks in return!”

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 Further Education to find out more

England require Ashes miracle but avoid further humiliation – for now

England avoided the ignominy of losing the Ashes in 10 days of cricket but Australia put one hand on the urn as they closed in on an impregnable 3-0 lead in Adelaide.

After folding in two days at Perth and four in Brisbane, Ben Stokes’ embattled side came dangerously close to setting a fresh low – surrendering the series a day sooner than the 11 Nasser Hussain’s class of 2002-03 managed a generation ago.

They avoided that fate thanks in main to a show of heart from Zak Crawley, who shelved his reputation as a top-order dasher with a gutsy knock of 85 from 151 balls, but a heavy fifth-day defeat in South Australia remained firmly on the agenda.

Set a world-record chase of 435 to keep the contest alive going into the marquee Boxing Day Test in Melbourne, England clawed their way to 177 for three before Nathan Lyon ripped the heart out of their comeback in 20 ruthless deliveries.

The spinner clean bowled Harry Brook and Stokes before having Crawley stumped, to leave them limping on 207 for six at the close. Australia skipper Pat Cummins had earlier done his share of the damage, seeing off Ben Duckett, Ollie Pope and Joe Root with an expert display of precision pace bowling.

Jamie Smith and Will Jacks were together at the close, knowing a 228-run miracle would be needed to engineer the greatest escape.

While Crawley and Brook were building together, the final embers of English hope began to spark up again. The path to victory was narrow and perilous, but it was just about visible.

Then Lyon made his play. The champion spinner’s first 10 overs had been milked for 49 runs, with England deploying a steady flow of sweeps and reverse sweeps to smother the turn and prevent him building pressure.

Australia had even turned to the part-timer Travis Head for variation in a bid to disrupt progress. But when England punched 13 off a ragged sixth over, Lyon was summoned back to the stage and embarked on a devastating spell.

His second ball back hit the jackpot, Brook stooping into the trusted reverse but failing to connect as it snaked past the bat and flicked the top of leg. He stood his ground for a moment, wrongly wondering if there had been a stumping attempt, but the ecstatic celebrations that exploded around clarified his fate.

Out came Stokes, with 258 runs still needed. It was a bridge – or several bridges – too far for a man who has done the unthinkable before and he was only able to chalk off five from that tally before pressing forward in a shallow defence and exposing his off stump. Lyon, with the perfect amount of turn away from the left-hander, did not miss.

If Stokes’ dismissal felt conclusive, the end of Crawley’s occupation provided the full stop. Within sight of what would have been a highly impressive hundred, even in a lost cause, he made it three quick wickets as he was stumped by Alex Carey stepping down the track.

England’s task looked nigh-on impossible when home skipper Cummins made two early breakthroughs, Duckett poking his second ball to slip to continue a dire tour and Pope undone by a sensational one-handed catch in the cordon from Marnus Labuschagne.

Pope scratched out 17, his exact average against Australia, and looks a certainty for the discard pile.

Root made 39 and in a stand of 78 with Crawley, doing better than most in neutralising Lyon. But he fell for the 13th time to his nemesis Cummins, feeling for contact outside off stump when a leave would have kept him in the hunt.

Earlier, their pace attack had relocated its mojo reducing Australia from 311 for six to 349 all out.

There were two wickets for Josh Tongue, who finished with four for 70, and two in two balls for Brydon Carse. Stokes picked up one for 26 in a seven-over spell, having been too fatigued to bowl at all on day three, and Jofra Archer finished things off with his sixth of the match.

It was a brief reminder of how England had envisioned things unfolding when they put this attack together but it was hard to escape the feeling that too much damage had already been done.

Scrap Rayner’s workers’ rights reforms, Starmer-linked think tank says

The think tank that played a key role in Sir Keir Starmer’s campaign to become Labour leader has produced a new document which calls for much of Angela Rayner’s workers’ rights agenda to be abolished.

The unpublished paper by Labour Together criticises the reforms in the Employment Rights Bill, due to become law in January, saying they “sap dynamism” from the economy and that 80 per cent of them should be scrapped.

The think tank admitted it produced the paper but said it was a “provocation” for discussion, and was looking to the future rather than the present. A spokesperson said: “Labour Together totally supports this week’s Employment Rights Act.”

But the proposals risk sparking a major row within the party amid suggestions that a challenge to Sir Keir’s leadership after May’s local election results, widely expected to be disastrous, could see a battle for its future political direction.

Earlier this week Sir Keir praised the changes as “the biggest upgrade to workers’ rights in a generation”.

Union leaders hailed the reforms, saying they would ban exploitative zero-hours contracts, create sick pay for all and repeal anti-union laws.

But businesses have warned that they will lead to a decrease in employment and hold back growth.

The document said the reforms had left the government’s economic agenda “going backwards” as it called on ministers to embrace “easy firing” while hiking taxes on firms and workers to fund higher unemployment insurance for those who lose their jobs, according to the Times, which reported that it had been circulated to some Labour MPs.

It said that the government should “scrap 80 per cent of the Employment Rights Bill and build out unemployment insurance”.

“This could be funded by higher taxes on employers (cheaper than the compliance cost of ERB (Employment Rights Bill)) and small contributions from workers.”

It also said new technology makes the “creative destruction” of job losses inevitable and urged the government to have the “most flexible markets” of superpowers such as the US and China, while “easy firing means easy hiring” which would benefit both companies and workers. The paper also suggests ending spending on infrastructure projects in the southeast of England, saying it can “pay for its own stuff”.

“The brave churn of technology — a political economy for Labour in the 21st century”, which has no listed author, opens with the words: “Tony Blair was right.”

It comes just a week after it emerged that Labour Together was canvassing party members on candidates to replace him, in another sign of trouble for the beleaguered prime minister.

The think tank, previously run by Sir Keir’s chief of staff Morgan McSweeney, asked activists for their opinions on Labour leadership contenders amid growing concern over the direction of the government and devastating approval ratings.

Alongside Sir Keir, eight Labour politicians were named, including cabinet ministers Wes Streeting, Shabana Mahmood, Bridget Phillipson, Ed Miliband and Darren Jones.

Also listed were former deputy prime minister Angela Rayner, Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham and deputy Labour leader Lucy Powell.

It came just days after Sir Keir said the “hugely talented” Ms Rayner would return to his cabinet amid growing speculation she could make a bid for the Labour leadership.

There have been reports that she could run on a joint ticket with Mr Streeting to challenge the prime minister.

When asked if he missed his former deputy, Sir Keir said: “Yes, of course I do. I was really sad that we lost her. As I said to her at the time, she’s going to be a major voice in the Labour movement.”

Pressed as to whether she will be back in the cabinet, he added: “Yes. She’s hugely talented.”

Earlier this week, Sir Keir defended Ms Rayner’s reforms and said: “I couldn’t be prouder to lead the government that made this happen.”

A Labour Together spokesman said: “Labour Together totally supports this week’s Employment Rights Act.

“This paper was a provocation for private discussion about how to build a political economy centred on technological change and innovation.

“It looks beyond current policy, exploring ideas for spreading innovation and investment outside the South East and how to support workers through technological change with a bigger welfare state rather than regulation alone.

“But given the welfare state we inherited from the Conservatives, that is far away. The Employment Rights Act is the best way to give workers much more security now.”