Putin’s allies attend Victory Day parade in Moscow after Trump backs 30-day ceasefire

US president Donald Trump has suggested Russian leader Vladimir Putin should “ideally” accept a 30-day ceasefire, backing similar calls from Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky after the two spoke on the phone on Thursday.

“Talks with Russia/Ukraine continue. The US calls for, ideally, a 30-day unconditional ceasefire,” Mr Trump said on his Truth Social network after speaking to Mr Zelensky.

Mr Trump has also threatened further sanctions on Moscow if any potential ceasefire is violated. “If the ceasefire is not respected, the US and its partners will impose further sanctions.”

Mr Zelensky said in his nightly address that the two leaders had shared a “warm and constructive” phone call, and that Ukraine is “ready for peace from this moment”. He said a 30-day ceasefire would be a “real indicator” of progress towards peace with Russia.

On the frontline, Russia has already violated its unilateral Victory Day ceasefire a total of 734 times, the Ukrainian military said.

Later today Moscow will host a large military parade with China‘s president Xi Jinping among world leaders in attendance.

I’ve found the key to midlife reinvention in a world run by the young

There’s a brilliant comedy sketch in which Alexander Armstrong boasts to fellow plane passenger Ben Miller about his busy job criss-crossing the world for important meetings. “What do you do?” Miller asks. An exasperated Armstrong raises his hands and replies: “I don’t know. I have literally no idea.”

Neither do I. And yet this week, at an age when I’m supposedly meant to be slowing down, I landed the biggest contract of my career – my new career, not the old one. I’m living proof that the International Monetary Fund is right when it says “70 is the new 50,” because the mental capacity of older people now far surpasses that of previous generations. However, in concluding that we can work longer, they miss a crucial point about succeeding in a world run by people younger than you.

The secret, I’ve learned, is to make it up as you go along.

For the past 12 years, I’ve gradually built a company that defies every piece of business advice from successful entrepreneurs, executives, and manuals – the kind that insists you must have a plan with specific goals that define your purpose, and delivers a sustainable strategy.

When I was made redundant at 43, I sat in my kitchen with my head in my hands, wondering whether it was time to turn my back on the profession I’d loved for years. Should I reinvent my life, find a gap in the market, and become my own boss? “The biggest mistake you can possibly make,” warned a friend and former colleague. “You’re too old for that, mate.”

But in the years since, I’ve built a corporate training business from scratch – one that now earns a much healthier six-figure income than I ever would have enjoyed had I stayed in my old job in media.

And I’m not alone in my reinvention. More middle-aged people are doing the same. A third of 45–55-year-olds reportedly want to change their career “before it’s too late.” When I speak to people considering that leap, they always ask:

“But how do I do it?” As if I knew. Actually, I do. Wing it.

When you hit middle age, you’ve earned the right to become an MIU – a make-it-upper. And while I’ve made plenty of mistakes along the way, I now realise that my naivety, foolishness, shortsightedness, kamikaze-like bravery, and occasional detachment from reality have worked in my favour. I’ve made a success of my second career exactly because I have ignored the accepted wisdom of having a plan.

A few days ago, a global titan asked me to help them – because of my unconventional approach. Of course, they didn’t say “making it up.” Instead, they talked about all the qualities that AI will gradually eliminate from the workplace: spontaneity, mental agility, creative problem-solving, and adaptability.

I’m now being brought in to help train, coach, and mentor teams in these skills – or, as I call it, the lost art of making it up as you go along.

You could say I’ve had the perfect training for MIU. First, I was a journalist for more than two decades – a job where making it up as you go along is practically a prerequisite. Second, I’m a dad twice over to now-grown-up children who still think I know the answers to life’s big questions. Now, in my entrepreneurial career, I’ve discovered that success depends on not being afraid to make it up, to trip up, and to get up again.

Sure, you can follow the slick advice in business books – plan every detail, be strategic. That may work. But you won’t experience the rare joy of succeeding later in life without having a clue what you’re doing.

It’s better to be 50 than 40. Age is your secret weapon. Everyone – from Gen X to Gen Alpha – wants what you have: life experience at the sharp end. They don’t want you to mimic their skills – they want your skills. The old-school stuff that actually works in a world of shrinking attention spans.

Your experience becomes even more valuable in a different environment. At the heart of the MIU “strategy” is the idea that you step into a job you know nothing about, then apply the skills that industry desperately needs. You’re there to improve something, not just maintain the status quo.

And the more mistakes you make, the better.

Einstein once called compound interest “the eighth wonder of the world”. In this context, it’s about making small, incremental changes that gradually iron out flaws. Watch what others are doing, copy it, and then make it better – knowing that wrong turns are part of the journey. Business gurus call this “rapid iteration.” I call it quietly panicking while appearing calm.

Being an MIU also means getting comfortable with losing control. I spent most of my forties worrying about that – about my career, finances, and life in general. But I eventually realised that everyone’s apparent stability is often just smoke and mirrors. By embracing that fear – because I had no other choice – I got stronger. I’m still rarely sure of what I’m doing, but now I believe most people aren’t either. And by being honest about that, I’ve learned to trust myself more.

Letting go of control also makes you a better listener. I no longer walk into meetings with a rigid script. Instead, I let others influence how I respond. That flexibility – or “fluidity,” to use modern parlance – is a superpower. Most people in meetings are too busy preparing their next point to actually listen. When you’re MIU, your next move depends entirely on what’s being said in the moment.

And yes, winging it takes energy. You’re flying by the seat of your pants, which means your brain is fully engaged. There’s no autopilot. It’s more exhausting not knowing what you’re doing – but that’s also where growth happens.

Of course, making it up doesn’t mean not preparing. Do your homework. Know the people, the politics, the goals of those in the room. But when someone asks if you can do something you’ve never done before, say yes – then buy a book on Amazon that explains it. Everything’s basically common sense, except maybe brain surgery.

Eventually, it all boils down to two things. Ideally, two niche things. One that you know you can do – the “banker”. And one that might become your next big thing – but will take time to discover.

And finally: recognise that you are a nobody. Be proud of it.

When you have status, you can’t be seen to be making it up. You’re “important”. But when you start reinventing yourself, all those titles and trappings of success suddenly mean nothing. You’re a nobody – and that is so freeing.

It also means doing what most people tell you not to: give stuff away. Be generous with your time, your ideas. Stop guarding your intellectual property like it’s gold. You’re a nobody, it doesn’t matter. But it will come back to you in spades. And whatever you think you should charge? It’s probably 50 per cent too high.

But in MIU mode, that doesn’t matter either. Those small wins? They grow.

Good luck!

PS. You can forget everything I said. You’re making it up, remember!

Woman accused of having illegal abortion in lockdown found not guilty

A woman has been cleared of carrying out an illegal abortion during Covid lockdown.

Nicola Packer, 45, took abortion medicine at home in November 2020 and later took the foetus to Chelsea and Westminster Hospital in a backpack, her trial at Isleworth Crown Court heard.

Ms Packer cried and wiped her eyes with a tissue after she was acquitted of the charge of “unlawfully administering to herself a poison or other noxious thing” with the “intent to procure a miscarriage” at the southwest London court on Thursday.

The 45-year-old’s best friend said she was “persecuted” for a “tragic accident” as Helle Tumbridge joined calls from MPs, royal colleges and abortion providers for reform to abortion law.

“Nikki and I have spoken about [abortion law reforms] a lot, and we both said that we really believe it, until the law has changed and abortion is decriminalised, then women are going to remain second-class citizens in this country,” Ms Tumbridge said.

Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi, who went to court to support Ms Packer during the trial, branded the four-and-a-half-year investigation “cruel and unnecessary” as she urged reform of the law.

“The true injustice here is the years of her life stolen by a law written decades before women had the vote, for a ‘crime’ which doesn’t even apply in two nations of the United Kingdom,” she said. “Nicola’s experience, in her own words, includes being taken from her hospital bed to a police cell, denied timely access to essential medical care, and spending every penny she had on lawyers defending her case.”

The case will have been a “shocking wake-up call to many that women are still being investigated and prosecuted for having an abortion today in this country”, said another Labour MP, Stella Creasy, calling for a change to the law so that “the right to choose is a human right”.

Both Labour backbenchers are believed to be laying separate amendments in parliament on decriminalising abortion in England and Wales, with MPs set to vote on a change to the law this summer.

The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) said the trial of Ms Packer had shown “just how outdated and harmful” current abortion law is.

President Dr Ranee Thakar said: “Restrictive abortion laws in England and Wales nurture an environment of fear, stigmatisation and criminalisation. They needlessly subject women to prolonged investigation, criminal charges, and custodial sentences for ending their own pregnancy.”

The RCOG said it had joined with healthcare professionals and experts “from over 30 other medical, legal and public health bodies” to call on parliament to “take urgent action to protect women’s essential reproductive rights and stop these criminal proceedings”.

Katie Saxon, chief strategic communications officer at the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), said: “A woman who sought medical attention after experiencing a traumatic event has had to endure a protracted police investigation and public trial, her private life picked apart by prosecutors and reported in the national press, at a huge emotional and financial cost. Prosecuting women for ‘illegal’ abortion is never in the public interest, and no woman should ever have to go through this again.

“In recent years, we have seen record numbers of women investigated for suspected illegal abortions. Women are being arrested straight from the hospital ward, their homes searched, and their children taken away. This cannot continue. Members of parliament have a moral duty to decriminalise abortion for women and end the threat of police, prosecutions, and imprisonment once and for all.”

The government said any changes to abortion laws in the UK are “a matter of conscience for parliamentarians rather than the government”.

“All women have access to safe and legal abortions on the NHS,” a government spokesperson added. “Decisions to prosecute, within existing legislation, are for the CPS and are incredibly rare.”

Abortion provider MSI Reproductive Choices said the verdict showed “common sense and compassion” but urged legal reform to “stop women facing criminal prosecution”.

The trial heard Ms Packer had told two midwives that she had taken abortion pills received in the post from an NGO then known as Marie Stopes, now called MSI Reproductive Choices.

Jonathan Lord, the clinician in charge of Ms Packer’s care while working at MSI and co-chair of the RCOG abortion taskforce, said: “No woman should ever have to endure institutionalised public shaming and humiliation, yet alone in 2025 in England.

“The issue is not simply that Nicola had the misfortune of encountering some callous organisations or individuals, but that our current abortion laws directed and encouraged the actions taken against her.

“What’s happening, the horrific way the women and their children are being treated – including those with premature labours and natural later pregnancy losses – is a national scandal.”

Ms Packer, then 41, took the prescribed medications mifepristone and misoprostol when she was around 26 weeks pregnant during the second coronavirus lockdown, jurors previously heard.

The legal limit for taking medication at home for an abortion is 10 weeks. The typical full gestation term is 40 weeks and the outer limit for abortions in the UK is normally 24 weeks, though there are grounds where there are no limits.

Prosecutors had alleged Ms Packer knew she was pregnant for more than 10 weeks, which she had denied, speaking of her “shock” and “surprise” at being pregnant.

She tearfully told the jury of nine women and three men that she would not have taken the medication if she had known how far along she was, telling the court: “I wouldn’t have put the baby or myself through it.”

Ms Packer, who sat near her defence team throughout the trial, did not discover she was pregnant until she took a test on 2 November 2020, the court heard.

She took abortion medication on 6 November and went to hospital the following day, having passed a foetus into the toilet, her trial was told.

Jurors heard Ms Packer spent the night of 7 November in hospital and was arrested by police the next day.

Following six hours of deliberations, the jury reached its unanimous not guilty verdict. Ms Packer was supported by five people in the public gallery, with some hugging each other after the verdict was read to the court.

The Crown Prosecution Service said its prosecutors “exercise the greatest care” when considering “traumatic cases” like the trial of Ms Packer.

The spokesperson continued: “We recognise the profound strength of feeling these cases evoke, but have a duty to apply laws passed by parliament fairly and impartially.

“The role of the Crown Prosecution Service in this case was not to decide whether Nicola Packer’s actions were right or wrong, but to make a factual judgement about whether she knew she was beyond the legal limit when she procured an abortion.

“Prosecutors considered there was enough evidence to bring this case for a court to decide, and we respect the jury’s decision.”

Amorim solves Athletic problem with super subs to send United into Europa League final

Ruben Amorim had wondered which Manchester United would show up. Two did, the bad followed by the good, the insipid followed by the inspired. The side who could misplace simple passes followed by the team who finished with the flourish of a wonder goal by Mason Mount from 50 yards. When United looked to be stumbling and bumbling their way into the Europa League final, they instead surged into it, Mount borrowing from Beckham when they could have been buried by Athletic Bilbao.

Amorim’s schizophrenic side could yet end a historically bad season on a genuine high, with a trophy and a return to the Champions League. Only Tottenham, who have beaten them three teams this season but are even lower in the domestic table, can stop them.

“It would be massive especially after this season in the Premier League,” Amorim said. Their Europa League has been different. Even when Athletic threatened a comeback that might have been outlandish even for the watching Sir Alex Ferguson, United had a couple of trump cards to play.

A man who set up the winner in a Champions League final took them to the Europa League showpiece. Mount’s belated first Old Trafford goal, almost two years into his United career, cancelled out Athletic’s lead. A £55m signing’s long-range finish into an empty net in injury time meant he doubled his tally for the club in one, devastating cameo.

“Sometimes you are on the bench but you can change the game,” reflected Amorim. Amad Diallo was unleashed with him and he set up Rasmus Hojlund for the simplest of finishes.Meanwhile, Casemiro, who had headed United into a lead in the San Mames last week, had repeated the feat, stooping to meet Bruno Fernandes’ free kick. After scoring three goals in 15 minutes in San Mames, United mustered four in 19 at Old Trafford.

And yet Athletic Bilbao, like Lyon before them, had led at Old Trafford. United retain their status as the only unbeaten side in all three European competitions this season but they keep flirting with defeat. “We did quite well in Europe but we struggle a lot in Premier League,” mused Amorim.

At times, they justified his lowly pre-match billing of his side. For much of the match, they seemed to prove him right. “We have so many weaknesses,” he sighed. The side he said can lose their minds threatened to lose the game. Had Bilbao got the second goal they almost conjured, there may have been a wider loss of composure.

“I should be a better manager in this moment,” said Amorim, assessing his initial impact at Old Trafford. He nevertheless merits credit for United’s rousing finish. The second half was one-way traffic until he introduced Luke Shaw, Amad and Mount, while moving Fernandes back into midfield. “When you have a full squad, you can think about the game,” Amorim said. It was a strength in depth Athletic lacked. It brought an emphatic turnaround.

“The tie wasn’t a walk in the park for United in either the first or second leg; it was much more even than the scoreline suggests,” lamented Athletic manager Ernesto Valverde. He had a point. “if you look at both games, it was so much tougher than just the result,” Amorim accepted. The glory belonged to the losers, the sense a depleted group mounted a heroic effort. A club whose budget is dwarfed by United’s were without their four best players, the suspended defender Dani Vivian and three injured attackers in Oihan Sancet and Inaki and Nico Williams. For an hour, Athletic were relentless.Valverde has his own traumatic experience of 3-0 first-leg leads in European semi-finals: his Barcelona then lost 4-0 at Anfield in 2019. His search for a cathartic remontada ended with another of his sides conceding four in England.

Yet it had begun better. Just Mikel Jaureguizar’s third goal for Athletic was a special strike, a magnificent curler from 20 yards nestled in the top corner. United were culpable, Harry Maguire giving the ball away to Unai Nunez; after creating a goal with his unexpectedly slick skills on the right wing last week, Maguire redressed the balance with slack play on the edge of his own box.

The scoreline suggests otherwise, but the glory belonged to the losers, the sense that a depleted group mounted a heroic effort. A club whose budget is dwarfed by United’s were without their four best players: the suspended defender Dani Vivian and three injured attackers in Oihan Sancet and Inaki and Nico Williams. For an hour, Athletic were relentless.

Ernesto Valverde has his own traumatic experience of 3-0 first-leg leads in European semi-finals: his Barcelona then lost 4-0 at Anfield in 2019. His search for a cathartic remontada ended with another of his sides conceding four in England.

Yet it had begun better. Just Mikel Jaureguizar’s third goal for Athletic was a special strike, a magnificent curler from 20 yards nestled in the top corner. United were culpable, Harry Maguire giving the ball away to Unai Nunez. After creating a goal with his unexpectedly slick skills on the right wing last week, Maguire redressed the balance with slack play on the edge of his own box. For a moment, United may have wished he was still masquerading as a right winger.

Meanwhile, United had begun camped behind the ball, too passive, too error-prone and, when given the opportunities to counter-attack, missing the delivery, or the touch, or the timing of the run. When they got all three, Patrick Dorgu delivering a defence-splitting pass in an otherwise erratic display, Alejandro Garnacho dinked a shot wide.

But, for all their many failings, this United side have shown a capacity to mount comebacks. This comeback revolved around Mount as Amorim turned problem solver. The former Chelsea man produced a deft turn before curling a shot into the net. His second was glorious, latching on to a poor pass from Julen Aguirrezabala, which left the goalkeeper stranded outside his box, to find the empty net.

Over the two legs, Fernandes and Casemiro made the biggest contributions to taking United on, scoring two goals apiece, and they combined for their second on the night. Hojlund, who had looked out of sorts, was given a tap-in.

Once again, it felt cruel for Athletic. Their hopes of a hometown final felt extinguished last week, but neither the spirited players or the vocal fans showed it. The raucous Bilbao supporters had travelled in their thousands, but there will be a Mancunian invasion of the Basque country later this month for the final. “If you don’t win it, it is nothing,” said Amorim.

The temptation is to say that United will need to play rather better on their return to the San Mames than they did in the first hour here. Although, as they are facing Tottenham, maybe they won’t.

The fall of Weight Watchers isn’t the victory against diet culture you think it is

It’s a scene that has played out in community centres up and down the country. A cluster of people, most of them women, inevitably, are nervously waiting to stand on the scales in front of their peers. Will they have lost or gained a few pounds since their last communal weigh-in? But although set-ups like this were once a defining part of diet culture, soon they may become extinct entirely, an archaic throwback to another era.

This week, Weight Watchers, the company that commercialised the diet group and has reigned over the industry for around six decades, announced that it had filed for bankruptcy, reportedly in an attempt to eliminate $1.15bn (£863m) worth of debt. Under Chapter 11 rules in the United States, the business has the chance to reorganise its liabilities while continuing to operate. The company also recently revealed a 14 per cent drop in subscribers compared to the same time last year; revenues had decreased by almost 10 per cent over the same period. Its fortunes have been on the slide for a couple of years: in 2024, it reported a net loss of $364m.

What’s responsible for this dramatic change in fortunes? Perhaps the most obvious culprit is the seemingly inexorable rise of Ozempic, and other drugs like it, which have transformed the way that we approach weight loss. Semaglutide was originally developed as a diabetes medication, but over the past few years, its ability to help control blood sugar levels and regulate appetite has made it popular as a so-called “skinny jab”. Ozempic has turned the diet industry upside down, and left more traditional brands struggling to keep up.

Weight Watchers started out in Sixties New York. Housewife Jean Nidetch had struggled with her weight for most of her life, testing out diet pills (including prescription amphetamines – it was the Sixties, after all), crash diets and hypnosis in an attempt to lose pounds. But none of these methods worked; as soon as she stopped, she’d end up putting the weight back on. Spurred on by a neighbour who’d asked her when her next baby was due (she wasn’t pregnant), Nidetch headed to the city’s obesity clinic for advice.

Her experiences with the clinic’s weight loss group helped inspire Weight Watchers; its hallmarks were a plan of recommended and prohibited foods, and weekly group weigh-ins, where a lower number on the scales would be rewarded with prizes (and the praise of your peers). In 1968, five years after its launch, the group boasted more than 1 million members around the world. Ten years later, the business would sell for more than $71m (roughly equivalent to around $347m or £260m today).

By the Nineties, the brand name was practically synonymous with a culture that encouraged women (who made up the vast majority of the Weight Watchers customer base) to constantly scrutinise their bodies and find them wanting. You’d see flyers outside community centres and church halls, advertising weekly meetings, and would hear anecdotes of friend groups and family members (typically mums and daughters) signing up together in solidarity.

Head into the aisles of any supermarket and you’d also spot ready meals emblazoned with the Weight Watchers logo, proudly proclaiming the amount of “points” that they contained. This now ubiquitous aspect of the Weight Watchers universe – whereby certain foods would be awarded a certain number of “points” based on their nutritional and calorific content, and members would tot up their daily and weekly allocation – was in fact only introduced around this time.

Celebrity ambassadors, including a post-divorce Sarah Ferguson, only seemed to make the brand more omnipresent. In the UK, we also had our own homegrown equivalent, Slimming World, which used a system of “syns” to manage calorie intake. “Syns” were, as you can probably guess, attached to stuff with higher calories – and the counter-intuitive spelling was introduced some time in the Nineties (perhaps the original version was deemed too shamey, because there’s nothing like a superfluous “y” to soften the potential demonisation of certain foods).

Weight Watchers, and all the similar programmes that sprang up in its wake had their own success stories. Many members reported finding a sense of community and accountability in their groups. But the rhetoric of these diet plans was so all-pervasive that, even if you weren’t a paid-up member, it seemed to infiltrate the way you thought about food. Anecdotally, at least, I know of far too many women in their twenties and thirties whose early attitudes to their diet were shaped by the calorie-counting systems they heard about from older relatives, or who still find themselves doing mental maths when comparing food labels in the supermarket aisles.

When programmes like these were everywhere, it was near-impossible not to absorb some of their rhetoric, or to start feeling like you should be scrutinising every morsel that passes through your lips. I’ve never felt more self-conscious of my eating habits than a brief period in the mid-2010s, when a couple of housemates embarked on a Slimming World stint, filling the kitchen with talk of foods that could be enjoyed “unlimited”, and which would be branded as “syns” (side note: I have never, before or since, seen as many low-fat yoghurts as I did whenever I opened the fridge during this time).

By this point, though, Weight Watchers and its ilk were starting to feel out of kilter with a prevailing cultural mood that valued wellness over constant dieting, and body positivity over standing on the scales. But in 2015, Oprah Winfrey helped to revitalise the company’s fortunes when she bought a 10 per cent stake and became its most popular celebrity ambassador yet; three years later, revenue had risen by one-fifth. If it worked for Oprah, people seemed to think, then maybe it’ll work for me.

In 2018, they rebranded as WW, part of an attempt to move away from explicitly aligning the company with, well, weight loss. Instead, their new tag line was “wellness that works”. It’s safe to say, though, that the new name didn’t exactly capture people’s imaginations. The pandemic meant that their in-person weigh-ins were off the cards, so the brand formerly known as Weight Watchers leaned into online plans instead.

Their one-time saviour Winfrey then became something of a canary in the coalmine when, in 2023, she revealed that she’d been using weight loss drugs as a “maintenance tool”. It felt like the first major blow for WW’s more traditional take on dieting, and Winfrey later stepped down from the board. Her departure prompted shares in the company to drop by around 25 per cent.

Where celebrities go, we mere mortals tend to follow. And so has been the case with Ozempic, Mounjaro, Wegovy and other semaglutides prescribed for weight loss. It’s now estimated that around one in eight adults in the United States have used them at one point, and it’s thought that increasing numbers of British people are paying to access the drugs online. These appetite suppressants seem to render a calorie-counting platform like Weight Watchers, well, pointless; you don’t need to stress over adding up your daily points if your semaglutide injection has drastically curtailed the impulse to eat. Weight Watchers did recently acquire a digital health company, with the aim of focusing on remote prescriptions for similar medication, but it felt a bit like too little, too late (although recent stats from the company show that this is one part of the operation that is actually doing OK right now).

As someone with a deep-rooted suspicion of the diet industry in all its many guises, from food-tracking apps to meal-replacement shakes, I thought that I might experience some vague sense of triumph upon learning of Weight Watchers’ floundering. But I’m surprised to find that the victory feels pretty hollow. Why? Because Weight Watchers is the symptom of a problem, not the cause, and it’s not like we’ve managed to stamp out the diet culture that broadly underpins enterprises such as this one.

We’re just as obsessed as we ever were with being thin – we’ve simply found another potential way to achieve it (or, at least, another way to spend lots of money in its pursuit). And Ozempic seems to have ushered in a new era of super-skinniness, where already extremely thin celebrities are shrinking before our eyes, at a speed that previously seemed impossible – all while denying that they’ve ever touched the stuff. It’s all creating a sense of cognitive dissonance that’s arguably just as damaging for our body image; growing up in the size zero epoch of the Nineties and Noughties was bad enough, but I feel slightly sick thinking about the messages that young girls are absorbing now.

The brave new world of weight loss jabs makes the traditional diet group seem almost quaint by comparison – at least, you might think, those programmes fostered some sense of togetherness, rather than having us injecting meds in silo and, in some cases, in secrecy. The decline of Weight Watchers isn’t a sign of a better culture around weight loss and diet – just a more complicated one.

Bucket-list beaches: Crystalline waters and secret shores in Dalmatia

Dalmatia’s coastline is, quite simply, spectacular. With the lion’s share of Croatia’s 1,200-plus islands, islets and reefs, Dalmatia’s stretch of the Adriatic has some of the country’s most beautiful beaches and seascapes. Whether you’re on the mainland coast or island hopping, you’ll be wowed by towering cliffs that hover over sheltered, pine-fringed coves, and broad sweeps of beaches

The sheer variety of swimming spots means there’s something for everyone; families in search of long stretches of beach with watersports, vibing beach bars and all the facilities to romantics looking for secluded pebbly coves to revel in tranquillity.

If Croatia’s beaches weren’t appealing enough, the coastal waters have just been crowned the cleanest in Europe, beating holiday hotspots including Greece, Spain and Italy to be ranked number one. The European Environment Agency checked out more than 22,000 beaches throughout the European Union, and Croatia’s coastal waters came out on top. In fact, out of nearly 900 Croatian beaches tested, over 99 per cent got the highest rating of ‘excellent’, owing to low industrial pollution, minimal over-construction and a lack of mass commercialisation.

So, beyond being picture-postcard idylls, Dalmatia’s beaches should be your top choice for a relaxed, sustainable holiday in a protected natural environment. To get you started, here’s a selection of Dalmatia’s unmissable beaches.

A popular inclusion in ‘world’s best beach’ lists, Zlatni Rat (pictured above) – also known as Golden Horn – is a curvy, V-shaped beach of fine white pebbles flanked by vivid turquoise waters on the southern coast of the island of Brač. Watch the windsurfers in action as you bask in the sun, or take respite at one of the wood-shaded beach bars. Follow the coastal footpath to the seafront promenade of the much-loved village of Bol – and as it’s only a 20-minute walk to Zlatni Rat, this makes the perfect base for your stay.

For a more laid-back vibe and beautifully calm sea, just a few miles west of Bol is the blissful Murvica. Find a shady spot under the pines to flop after your swim and snorkel in crystal clear waters, or take in vistas of Vidova Gora, the highest peak on the island. There’s a delightfully rustic beach bar where you can grab a cold drink and a bite to eat, and while you’ll have to bring your own parasols, you can reach the beach easily from the carpark.

Punta Rata’s Blue Flag beach is used to vying for the title of Europe’s top beach, and once you set foot on its long expanse of pebbles, it’s clear why. This breathtaking idyll, north of the Makarska Riviera town of Brela, appears to go on forever – fringed with pine trees and surrounded by waters that offer fabulous snorkelling. Look out for the Brela Stone, a giant rock that rises from the sea and is found on many local postcards.

It takes a bit of effort to reach award-winning Stiniva Bay on the southern coast of Vis island, but it’s 100 per cent worth it. Take the rocky footpath downhill to this glittering bay sheltered by two curving cliffs that almost close the cove off from the sea, with only the smallest boats able to squeeze through the gap. There’s just enough room for a beachside café, with its terrace offering superb views.

Heading to the northeastern coast of Vis, and easier to access than Stiniva Bay, you’ll find scenic Stončica Beach. Its sparkling blue waters and mix of white sand and pebble beach, shaded by woods, make this truly picture perfect. The shallow waters, with a very gradual slope, are perfect for children. Stop for lunch on the covered terrace of the waterside restaurant and feast on freshly grilled fish and meat.

Tucked away on Hvar island’s southern coast is the unassuming Dubovica beach – surrounded by tumbling slopes covered in maquis and olive trees. In contrast to the sophisticated beach clubs of Hvar Town, this tiny coastal treat, set in a cove beside a 17th-century church, is perfect for relaxing, while the turquoise waters are made for sea safaris. Refresh and refuel at the beach restaurant or bar.

Back on the mainland on the Makarska Riviera, Velika Duba is a peaceful, pebbly bay backed by fragrant pines and connected to the village of Blato via a pleasantly shaded footpath. It’s all about simple pleasures here: swimming in gin-clear waters, lazing in the sun, doing a bit of snorkelling, having a cold drink in the beachside bar and falling under the spell of a Dalmatian sunset.

For more travel inspiration, information and to plan your trip visit Central Dalmatia

Bill Gates accuses Elon Musk of ‘killing children’ through budget cuts

Bill Gates has lashed out at Elon Musk, accusing the world’s richest man of “killing the world’s poorest children” through huge cuts to the US foreign aid budget.

It comes as Gates pledged to give away $200bn via his charitable foundation by 2045.

The 69-year-old co-founder of Microsoft said he was speeding up his plans to divest almost all of his fortune and would close the foundation on 31 December 2045, earlier than previously planned.

Gates said he hoped the money would help eradicate diseases like polio and malaria, end preventable deaths among women and children, and reduce global poverty.

His announcement follows moves by governments, including President Donald Trump‘s administration, to slash international aid budgets. The US cuts have been overseen by the Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency (Doge).

“The picture of the world’s richest man killing the world’s poorest children is not a pretty one,” Gates told the Financial Times.

In an interview with Reuters, Gates warned of a stark reversal to decades of progress in reducing mortality in the next four to six years due to the funding cuts.

“The number of deaths will start going up for the first time … It’s going to be millions more deaths because of the resources,” Gates said.

“I think governments will come back to caring about children surviving” over the next 20-year period, though, he said.

Gates and Musk, the CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, once agreed over the role of the wealthy in giving away money to help others but have since clashed several times. “People will say a lot of things about me when I die, but I am determined that ‘he died rich’ will not be one of them,” Gates wrote in a post on his website.

“There are too many urgent problems to solve for me to hold onto resources that could be used to help people.”

He added: “It’s unclear whether the world’s richest countries will continue to stand up for its poorest people,” noting cuts from major donors including Britain and France alongside the US, the world’s biggest donor.

Gates said that despite the foundation’s deep pockets, progress would not be possible without government support. He praised the response to aid cuts in Africa, where some governments have reallocated budgets, but said that, as an example, polio would not be eradicated without US funding. Gates made the announcement on the foundation’s 25th anniversary. He set up the organization with his then-wife Melinda French Gates in 2000, and they were later joined by billionaire investor Warren Buffett. “I have come a long way since I was just a kid starting a software company with my friend from middle school,” Gates said.

Since its inception, the foundation has given away $100bn, helping to save millions of lives and backing initiatives like the vaccine group Gavi and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. It will close after it spends around 99% of Gates’s personal fortune, he said. The founders originally expected the foundation to wrap up in the decades after their deaths.

Gates, who is valued at around $108bn today, expects the foundation to spend around $200bn by 2045, with the final figure dependent on markets and inflation.

The foundation is already a huge player in global health, with an annual budget that will reach $9bn by 2026.

It has faced criticism for its outsized power and influence in the field without the requisite accountability, including at the World Health Organization.

Gates himself was also subject to conspiracy theories, particularly during the Covid-19 pandemic. He has spoken to Trump several times in recent months, and twice since the president took office on 20 January, he told Reuters on Thursday, on the importance of continued investment in global health.

“I hope other wealthy people consider how much they can accelerate progress for the world’s poorest if they increased the pace and scale of their giving, because it is such a profoundly impactful way to give back to society,” Gates said in the statement.

A&E and maternity services under threat over NHS savings targets

Hundreds of doctors and nurses’ jobs could be scrapped and maternity and A&E services scaled back to meet the government’s “eye watering” NHS savings, a new report has revealed.

A survey of trust leaders by NHS Providers found clinical jobs have already been slashed or are under threat, while outpatient services such as diabetes clinics, rehabilitation centres and talking therapies are at risk of being reduced.

Two trust leaders also said they were considering reducing maternity or emergency departments from multiple hospitals in order to maintain safety and meet the government’s savings demands.

Another trust is cutting end-of-life and palliative care beds in the community, restricting stop-smoking services and working to reduce hospital referrals. One trust chief said they were already “restricting” non-emergency care and surgeries, while 600 clinical roles have been axed at another trust.

The NHS, which is facing a £6bn to £7bn deficit, was allocated £22bn over two years by the government in the last budget. However, this financial award came with strict efficiency-saving requirements.

Interim chief executive of NHS Providers, Saffron Cordery, said: “Most of the money that was allocated to the system was already spoken for. So whilst that money feels like a lot of money and it is, the demands outstripped the supply of finances there, and there’s very little money left to invest in the measures to tackle these challenges.”

“These [savings targets] are at eye wateringly high levels. This comes on the back of a year-on-year focus on efficiencies and trying to tackle that high demand. So, I think it is fair to say that it’s going to be extremely challenging.”

“Politicians are going to have to give trusts air cover locally and nationally when they need to make some changes, because even if trusts aren’t cutting services or closing services, they may well be moving services.

“Moving a maternity service or changing an A&E is an incredibly controversial thing to do. We know that that controversy is there, and so we need the political will as well to follow that.”

The survey, which ran last month, included responses from 160 NHS chief executives, chairmen and other board executive directors. These cover 114 trusts in England and account for 56 per cent of the sector.

Royal College of Nursing, General Secretary and Chief Executive Professor Nicola Ranger, warned:“Cutting nurse jobs costs lives and Wes Streeting will need to decide if this is acceptable on his watch….Ministers must realise that in the drive for savings, it is patients who are paying the price.”

The poll found 47 per cent of leaders are making cuts to services, with a further 43 per cent considering this option.

More than a third, 37 per cent, said their organisation was cutting clinical posts to balance their books, with a further 40 per cent considering this.

More than nine in 10 leaders, 94 per cent, said their plans would have a negative impact on staff wellbeing and the culture of their organisation.

One trust chief executive said: “It’s really difficult to find a way to protect, to safeguard patients, arguably to strengthen safeguards and to deliver the financial efficiencies, like others, we’re taking difficult decisions

“We’re having conversations about moving away from local provisions to asking patients to travel 20 to 30 miles for care now, but on the basis that that travel will mean that their care will be delivered in a better environment, will be safer, and faster. We provide a number of maternity services. It’s an opportunity to bring those together to standardise them.”

“We are restricting access now to planned [non-emergency] care. We’ve got a series of services which are unfunded, and we’ve written back to NHS England to say we no longer want to provide those.”

Another said: “Demand has gone up across all ages by 10 per cent in my services on the year before…I think the differences this year is they’re [the savings targets] are eye watering… at the moment, I don’t know how I’m going to do it.”

The trust chief also called for a reform of the system, which allows private providers with a local NHS contract to provide services nationally, which it said was leading to patients “queue jumping”

Talking about their maternity services, a trust chief said they were considering amalgamating services.

“So I mention maternity, we’ve got an ED with only 200 beds. So we’re going to have to think about what we do with that because it’s not just that we pay a lot of money to run two Maternity services…So how do we reduce costs and be able to take some brave decisions?”

A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: “We invested an extra £26 billion to fix the broken health and care system we inherited, and through our Plan for Change, are determined to tackle inefficiencies and drive-up productivity in the NHS.

“We have underlined the need for trusts to cut bureaucracy to invest even further in the front line, so we can support hard-working staff and deliver a better service for patients and taxpayers’ money.”