George Galloway detained under Terrorism Act at Gatwick Airport

George Galloway was detained at Gatwick Airport under the Terrorism Act, his party has said.

The 71-year-old was stopped by the Metropolitan Police’s Counter Terrorism Command at London Gatwick Airport on Saturday (27 September).

The former MP was accompanied by his wife having returned on a flight from Abu Dhabi after initially travelling to Moscow, according to the Herald Scotland.

“We can confirm that on Saturday, 27 September counter terrorism officers at Gatwick Airport stopped a man in his 70s and a woman in her 40s under Schedule 3 of the Counter Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019,” a spokesperson for the Met Police told the Herald.

“Neither of them were arrested and they were allowed on their way.”

The Workers Party of Britain confirmed Galloway had been detained.

In a statement on X, the party said: “At 11am we were informed by police officers in Gatwick that our party leader George Galloway and his wife have been detained at the airport @sussex_police @BTP.”

According to the Investigatory Powers Commissioners Office (IPCO): “Schedule 3 to the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019 gives police the power to stop, question, search, and detain a person at a UK port to determine whether they are involved in hostile activity. The powers also allow an examining officer to retain, copy, use and destroy an article which is found during a search.

“The Investigatory Powers Commissioner (IPC) may authorise retention and use of an article found during a search. This includes authorising retention and use of a copy of an article that consists of or includes confidential material. The IPC can also authorise destruction of any such articles. The IPC also reviews and reports on the operation of the Schedule.”

Galloway is currently the leader of the Workers Party of Britain, which he founded in 2019 having been the former leader of the now-defunct Respect Party.

He has served as a Member of Parliament across five constituencies, first winning as a Labour candidate for Glasgow Hillhead in 1987. He later represented Kelvin, Bethnal Green, Bradford West and Rochdale. Having won his seat in Rochdale in February 2024, he lost it shortly after in July 2024 following a general election.

Strictly’s first live week proved no celeb is bigger than the show

Sparkly hotpants, a stiff-as-a-board cha cha and a set malfunction involving a sparkly pink carousel horse. There’s only one show where you’ll see all of these things together: Strictly Come Dancing.

For many at home, the glitz, sequins and spray-tanned shimmying is a welcome distraction from the nights starting to draw in and the temperature dropping lower. For the second year running though, Strictly has started with a cloud hovering above it thanks to numerous controversies and unexpected exits.

To briefly recap, we’ve already seen two stars forced to pull out, scrutiny over Thomas Skinner’s place on the show, raised eyebrows over which pros are sitting on the sidelines, and the obligatory furore over who has already had dance training.

It’s not exactly the smooth start bosses will have been hoping for. But you wouldn’t have known it from the first live show. Strictly has always delivered escapism and week one showed that no matter what is going on behind-the-scenes, the Strictly cast and crew know the drill.

As is so often the case, it wasn’t the most talked-about celebs who delivered the most notable moments of the night. The best performances were the two jives: the first an energetic routine from Emmerdale actor Lewis Cope and Katya Jones. It seemed unbeatable until ex-England star Karen Carney and her partner Carlos Gu closed the show with a performance as close to flawless as you’ll ever see in week one.

At the other end of the scale, showbiz journalist Ross King delivered in entertainment (though not exactly skill) with a homage to Hollywood complete with a gigantic fur coat and Katy Perry soundtrack. Ever the diplomat, Motsi Mabuse summed it up as she reached for a metaphor to soften the blow: “There’s stairs to climb and we’ll climb them with you.” He wound up bottom of the leaderboard with a dismal 10.

One of the loveliest moments came as Gladiators tough guy Harry Aikines-Aryeetey – aka Nitro – delivered the gear change of the decade when he went from doing press-ups with his partner stood on his back to crying as he explained how much it means to take part in the show.

An honorable mention also has to go to La Voix, the RuPaul’s Drag Race queen who is surely the first Strictly contestant to be more camp than the show itself. In both the VT and the studio, every line she uttered was a perfectly-timed quip. After a malfunction meant her carousel horse couldn’t descend from the sky, she told Tess Daly: “I’m quite pleased though, when they said I was going to be suspended, I thought, ‘What have I said now?’.”

Another dose of camp came from the Aussie contingent, as Stefan Dennis – aka Paul Robinson from Neighbours – and his pro partner Dianne Buswell performed a foxtrot to the show’s iconic theme tune.

So what about this year’s most “controversial” star? Tom “Bosh!” Skinner has undoubtedly had the most press for a wide variety of reasons. On the night, his paso doble essentially consisted of stern marching and Amy Dowden doing her absolute most to keep things on track. While they ended up second from bottom, he wasn’t quite dreadful enough to go down in Strictly history alongside the likes of Anne Widdecombe or Jon Sergeant.

The only real issue is that with so many couples dancing, these first few live weeks can feel like a slog.

But Saturday night’s marathon episode was a reminder of something the BBC knows about its flagship programme: no matter how salacious the headlines, no Strictly star is bigger than the show. And isn’t it great to have it back?

JK Rowling responds to Emma Watson viral interview with parody clip

JK Rowling has responded to Emma Watson’s recent viral interview by sharing a parody video of the actor’s appearance.

The Harry Potter star, best known for her portrayal of Hermione Granger in the film adaptations of Rowling’s bestselling novels, sat down for a lengthy interview with podcast host Jay Shetty earlier this week.

Among the topics covered was her rift with Rowling over their differing views on transgender issues.

Watson, along with her co-stars Daniel Radcliffe and Rupert Grint, who played Harry Potter and Ron Weasley, respectively, have been vocal advocates for trans rights. Rowling, meanwhile, has attracted controversy for several comments that have been criticised as transphobic.

On Friday (26 September), Rowling responded to Watson’s interview by sharing a video created by comedian IntelLady, which spoofed the moment in which the actor said she would be open to speaking with Rowling again.

The author praised the comedian’s video, and in her caption wrote: “I’m here for all the spoofs.”

During the sit-down with Shetty, Watson said of their falling-out: “I think the thing I’m most upset about is that a conversation was never made possible.”

The Beauty and the Beast star added that she “will always believe” in having an open dialogue.

“I really don’t believe that by having had that experience and holding the love and support and views that I have, means that I can’t and don’t treasure Jo and the person that I had personal experiences with,” Watson said.

“I will never believe that one negates the other and that my experience of that person, I don’t get to keep and cherish, to come back to our earlier thing. I just don’t think these things are either or. I think it’s my deepest wish that I hope people who don’t agree with my opinion will love me and I hope I can keep loving people who I don’t necessarily share the same opinion with.”

Rowling has previously lashed out at Watson, Radcliffe, and Grint, with whom she once had close relationships.

Last year, the author, who once stated she would “happily” go to prison for misgendering a transgender person, said she would not forgive the actors for criticising her opinions, telling them to “save their apologies”.

This new interview with Shetty was a rare appearance for Watson, who has not appeared on the big screen since 2019’s Little Women and who has spoken about her dislike of press tours.

Elsewhere during the sit-down, she spoke about trans rights, Palestine, Israel, and the immense scrutiny she faced as a young actor in the spotlight.

Man dead and seven treated after suspected carbon monoxide poisoning at takeaway

A man died and seven others were treated by medics after a suspected carbon monoxide leak at a takeaway restaurant.

The man in his 50s died at the scene in Bloxwich, Walsall, on Friday, West Midlands Police said.

Locals were evacuated from nearby houses and shops after emergency services were called to the burger shop in Cresswell Crescent at around 9.40pm.

Cara Jackson, 23, who was working at the neighbouring One Stop convenience store and who lives nearby, told the PA news agency how medics tried to save the life of the man using CPR.

She said: “There were three ambulances, four cop cars, a fire engine and the forensics obviously came after.

“I did see them doing CPR… I did see everything that happened.

“I’ve scarred a little. I don’t really feel the best today because obviously I breathed it all in.”

She and her colleague were evacuated from shop while tests were performed.

“I didn’t really sleep last night,” Ms Jackson, who lives by the shop, said.

“I wasn’t like scared to sleep but … the fire brigade told us we’re lucky because if we went to sleep last night we wouldn’t have woke back up.”

Among the seven people treated were unspecified emergency service workers. Some of the seven were taken to hospital, police said.

The people who were evacuated from surrounding properties were able to return in the early hours of Saturday following tests.

Local ward councillor Michael Coulson wrote on Facebook that the fire service was called out because an injured person needed assistance but firefighters were unable to access the property because a generator was “releasing a mixture of gases”.

On Saturday, he posted in an update: “After tests were completed residents were allowed back in their homes at roughly 3am, and the shops are back open this morning. There is now a very small police presence and I thanked them for their support.

“I had done two litter picks around the shops in the last few days, including one completed just after 7pm last night, and I briefly spoke to those setting up the takeaway on both occasions.

“It’s so incredibly tragic what has happened.”

Crystal Palace v Liverpool stopped after medical emergency

A fan was suspected to have been taken ill at Selhurst Park during this afternoon’s Premier League clash between Crystal Palace and Liverpool, causing a lengthy stoppage.

In the 13th minute, with Liverpool preparing to take a free-kick on the edge of the Palace box, fans at the bottom of the Main Stand desperately signalled to the referee to halt the game due to an apparent medical emergency.

The referee and players ran over the inspect the situation as medics and other emergency personnel gathered around the area.

As the fan in question received the medical attention required, referee Chris Kavanagh was seen informing Palace captain Marc Guehi of the ongoing incident.

Club medics from both the Palace and Liverpool dugouts also rushed to the scene and after a period of time returned to their stations on the other side of the pitch, with applause ringing around Selhurst Park as they jogged across the turf.

Crystal Palace posted on social media: “There has been a break in play due to an incident in the crowd. Our thoughts are with all those involved.”

The game was halted for around seven minutes before Liverpool were allowed to take their free-kick, one that was hit into the wall by Mohamed Salah before Ryan Gravenberch forced a fine save out of Dean Henderson on the rebound, tipping onto the post.

That denied the league leaders an equaliser, with Ismaila Sarr putting the Eagles in front inside nine minutes on his return from injury.

Ten minutes were added on in first-half stoppage time to account for the delay.

E.ON Next/Independent EV Index: Prices down 7.7 per cent

Electric car prices are dropping fast, according to the first publication of the E.ON Next/The Independent EV Price Index.

The energy giant and media company have combined to produce the UK’s first-ever electric car price index that measures real-world prices (including available discounts) on every EV on sale in the UK.

The first E.ON Next/The Independent EV Price Index has revealed that over the past twelve months the median price of an EV has fallen by 7.7 per cent, a figure of £3,750.

Month-on-month, there’s been a sizeable drop of £1,228 or 2.7 per cent, thanks to the introduction of the government’s electric car grant and the additional discounts car makers introduced while waiting for the grant to be implemented.

The biggest year-on-year drop has been in the competitive small electric SUV segment – including cars like the Citroen e-C4, Mercedes EQA, Peugeot 2008 and BMW iX1 – where a drop of £5,827 or 13 per cent has been seen. Larger medium-sized electric SUVs – like the Audi Q4 e-Tron, Ford Explorer, Nissan Ariya and Skoda Enyaq – show a similarly-large year-on-year drop of £4,666 or 9.8 per cent.

The data for the E.ON Next/The Independent EV Price Index has been compiled by auto industry market insight and pricing data specialists Insider Car Deals. The prices quoted are median prices sourced from Insider Car Deal’s mystery shopping and market research analysis and are based on real-world discounts offered, including any incentives given as part of finance packages.

As well as analysing prices, the E.ON Next/The Independent EV Price Index has also revealed an increase of 25 per cent in the number of electric cars available in the UK over the past year. At the time of research there were 111 electric vehicle models available in the UK, with that number increasing all the time.

When various trim levels and different battery options are taken into account across all available models, there is a choice of 1,029 different electric car choices for UK car buyers – up 32 per cent year-on-year.

The research has also shown that median PCP (Personal Contract Purchase) monthly payments for electric cars have dropped by £55 a month, or 10.8 per cent compared with a year ago. Again, the biggest drop is in the small electric SUV segment, were median monthly payments are down £76 or 16.6 per cent per month.

The quoted PCP terms are based on discounted transaction prices, manufacturer’s APR and GFV and standardised at four years, 8,000-10,000 miles per year and a 15 per cent customer deposit (plus any manufacturer deposit contribution). Where a manufacturer imposes a maximum term of 42 or 36 months, that shorter term is used instead.

One standout deal uncovered by the E.ON Next/The Independent EV Price Index research was for a Vauxhall Mokka 115kW Ultimate 54kWh, with total discount and finance savings of 36.4 per cent (£13,524). That brings the price down to just £24,580, or a possible £292 a month on Vauxhall’s PCP finance plan.

The research also highlighted the difference in average PCP APR finance rates available on electric cars versus hybrid and internal combustion engine (ICE) models. Buyers of EVs will, on average, benefit from PCP APRs that are 3.1 per cent lower than they are for ICE models and 2.2 per cent for hybrids. The average PCP APR for an electric car currently sits at 3.5 per cent.

At the time of research, nine car makers were offering zero per cent finance – the same number as this time last year, although the brands have changed. The scale of finance deposit contributions on electric vehicles has also been revealed with the highest seen being £7,750.

Why would Denmark be the target of a Russian ‘hybrid drone attack’?

Denmark has said it was the victim of a “hybrid attack” after repeated unexplained drone activity near five of its airports this week.

The most recent was Aalborg airport, in north Denmark, which closed on Friday following the drone sightings, while Esbjerg, Sonderborg and Skrydstrup regions all remained open despite similar incidents.

They came just two days after Danish prime minister Mette Frederiksen refused to rule out Russian involvement when drone sightings forced Copenhagen airport into shutdown for four hours, in what she described as a “serious attack on critical Danish infrastructure”.

After Wednesday’s incident, defence minister Troels Lund Poulsen warned that it “certainly does not look like a coincidence, it looks systematic, this is what I would define as a hybrid attack”.

Similar drone sightings occurred in Sweden this week, including two mysterious drones spotted over the Karlskrona archipelago in the country’s southeast, and in Norway, where Oslo airport was forced to close for three hours on the same night as the incident in the Danish capital.

As Danish politicians hint at a real possibility of Russian involvement, The Independent takes a look at why Moscow would seek to target a country so far away.

“What’s been overlooked in a lot of the foreign media coverage is the history, in terms of Russia making angry noises towards Copenhagen,” Keir Giles, an expert on the Russian military and author of Russia’s War on Everybody: And What It Means For You, explained to The Independent.

This includes the “old litany of nuclear threats, precisely because Denmark is interested in defending itself, because it is looking at purchases of long-range precision strike munitions that Russia would not like it to have”, he added.

Last Wednesday, Denmark said it would acquire “long-range precision weapons” for the first time as it cited the need to deter Russia.

“With these weapons, the defence forces will be able to hit targets at long range and, for example, neutralise enemy missile threats,” Ms Frederiksen said, explaining the weapons could include either missiles or drones.

It provoked a sharp reaction from Moscow, with Vladimir Barbin, the Russian ambassador to Denmark, describing the Danish justification about needing to strike long-distance targets as “pure madness”.

Barbin then issued a thinly veiled nuclear threat to Copenhagen.

“No one, anywhere, ever in the world has considered threatening a nuclear power publicly. These statements will undoubtedly be taken into account,” he wrote on Telegram.

“From now on, we must assume that Denmark is not only considering the possibility of a direct military confrontation with Russia, but is also preparing for such a scenario.”

Katja Bego, a senior research fellow in Chatham House’s International Security programme, said that of the countries which don’t border Europe, Denmark has been “one of the frontrunner countries” in terms of challenging Russian aggression.

“There’s been this longer-term pattern that Denmark is one of those places that’s really pushing the rest of the [Nato} alliance to increase [military] support,” she added.

Russia could be cynically trying to sow distrust in the Danish population, which has been largely in favour of significant support for Ukraine, Ms Bego explained.

“[They are] kind of selling distrust or division among the population. Other countries that were targeted here were all very staunch supporters of Ukraine, and countries near Ukraine,” she said.

“These are Ukraine’s strongest supporters, which I think is part of a longer-term pattern. We’ve seen quite a lot of this activity in the Baltic Sea.

“So I think the choice of countries here is certainly not random.”

The benefit of doing this, she explains, is that it “creates fear” and may make populations “less willing to support Ukraine moving forward”.

There is a significant financial cost to use “incredibly expensive missiles” to shoot down “really cheap drones”, as she says was done in the case of Russia’s incursion into Poland with around 20 drones earlier this month.

It’s been widely suggested that Moscow is looking to probe Nato defences to ascertain how they would really respond to a more meaningful incursion of Russia’s military.

“Nobody is in any doubt that Russia’s ambition goes far beyond Ukraine, and to carry out that ambition, Russia needs to know whether it will be opposed,” Mr Giles said.

Although it is unconfirmed whether Russia was involved with the recent drone incidents, he said, Moscow still learns a great deal from it, even if it was “just local idiots”.

“One of the primary benefits is understanding more about the capacity of Nato and individual countries to counter Russian operations and the willingness to actually respond in a meaningful fashion,” he said.

But the capacity for victim states to deal with the threat has been proven to be “very limited”, he added.

The drone incidents would be a good means of “normalising the state of conflict”, he added, allowing Russia to get to a position where “these kinds of Russian actions are part of the background noise, as opposed to something which ought to be unacceptable”.

Ms Bego agrees, arguing that it may be Russia “testing the waters, or trying to see how Alliance members of Nato might respond”.

She added: “In this case, these are kind of lower key drones, but [the response] would not necessarily look that dissimilar if you were looking at a bigger escalation.”

Alcohol is a neurotoxin; there is no such thing as moderate drinking

A new study from the universities of Oxford, Yale and Cambridge has found that any level of alcohol consumption may increase risks of dementia. This wide-ranging study, published earlier this week on BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, suggested there may be no such thing as a “safe level” of booze, where brain health is concerned. Dr Anya Topiwala, lead author on the paper, said: “Even light or moderate drinking may increase the risk of dementia, indicating that reducing alcohol consumption across the population could play a significant role in dementia prevention.”

She went on to say that the common belief that a little bit of alcohol, the odd glass of red, say, might actually be good for the brain – neuroprotective – is almost certainly nonsense. “Genetic evidence offers no support for a protective effect,” she said. “In fact, it suggests the opposite.”

So, there you have it. Never mind congratulating yourselves for sticking to the government’s recommended guidelines on booze (14 units, spread out across seven days). Forget “everything in moderation!” and “A little bit of what you fancy does you good!” and: “I always do Dry January, so…” According to this new report, any alcohol is a potential problem.

Honestly? I’m not surprised. Slightly depressed – but not surprised.

This summer, I published my new book: How the Female Body Works. It is the result of two-and-a-half years of hard, joyful research and writing, all focused around interviews with the most knowledgeable academics, medics, neuroscientists, gynaecologists, psychologists and really any other world-renowned expert in women’s health I could get to talk to me.

It covers every stage of women’s lives, from puberty to older age. I wrote it because I realised I knew virtually nothing about my own body, which was absurd. I’d also watched the internet slowly get flooded with contradictory, confusing “advice” and – often contradictory – “wisdom” about women’s bodies, so I set out to get some definitive answers.

I asked my experts questions like “What’s a brain made of?”, “are we our personality – or are we our hormones?”, “why are breasts the shape they are? “What makes a hot flush happen? Not just ‘falling oestrogen levels’… What’s the actual function?” Dumb-but-illuminating questions, from an ignoramus, to the people whose life’s work is women’s bodies, what happens to them, and how to heal and support them.

One of the facts I came up against really early on was: women are twice as likely to get an Alzheimer’s diagnosis as men. Which troubled me. The other thing, a sort of overarching narrative, which ended up lodged in my consciousness like a bad smell, was that alcohol really isn’t very good for us. It really isn’t. Which is a shame, because it can be so fun.

Alcohol is hard on everyone – implicated in everything from cancer to strokes to heart attacks to infections – but it’s far harder on women than it is on men. This is partly because women’s livers produce less of an enzyme called alcohol dehydrogenase, or ADH, the purpose of which is to break down and eliminate alcohol from the body.

Women’s ADH levels fall further yet, in peri menopause and menopause. Beyond that, the way fat is distributed on a woman’s body means it holds onto alcohol for longer, which means female bodies are exposed to alcohol’s toxicity for longer, leaving women more vulnerable to liver damage, heart disease, and at a higher risk of breast cancer. Oh, and also? While a woman is still experiencing a menstrual cycle, alcohol will act more aggressively on her body at certain points in that cycle, leaving her (for example) far drunker, far quicker, around the time she’s ovulating, than at any other point. This is because her body is uniquely concerned with getting her pregnant, so tedious things like processing and removing alcohol from her system get jettisoned. I know!

I learned all this from Dr Sharon Cox, principal research fellow at University College London, an extraordinary scientist, whose work focuses on addictive behaviours, particularly around alcohol and nicotine. All those existing problems, she tells me, have been further exacerbated by, she says: “Women drinking more than we ever have”. Drinking has gone up in both men and women since the pandemic, when we all spent our time making cocktails along with Stanley Tucci on YouTube because there was nothing else to do, and the world was terrifying. “This is particularly in people over 30, and the increase in drinking was sharper in women.”

“Why?” I ask. “Stress?”

“These large national surveys tell us what is happening – not why. But yeah, it’s probably that alcohol was used as a stress relief – and it’s a difficult rut to get out from. [The increase has] mostly sustained.”

At no point did Dr Cox tell me not to drink. She herself drinks… well, moderately. As do I. Assuming the concept of “moderately” means anything, after this latest report, which it probably doesn’t. In fact, none of the experts with whom I spoke for my book told me not to drink, or told me to tell my readers not to drink. It’s just that, when you interview – in depth – 20-ish of the world’s leading specialists on all aspects of women’s health, and nearly every last one of them alludes, en passant, to booze, in a dispassionate, non-judgemental, scientific, but repeatedly critical way, for all manner of reasons, from all their different perspectives and individual areas of study, it’s tough to ignore.

And now a new study emerges, connecting any alcohol consumption at all with possible increased risk of dementia – one which is already twice as high in women, as it is in men – and… I sort of want to give booze up, right here and now. Don’t you?

Honestly? I sort of already have. If pre-book, I was “moderate” in my drinking, I’d now describe myself as not exactly sober… But really, not not sober, either. Physically, I have felt that enzyme in my liver, ADH, falter with age, got to a point where now, the very first sip of wine (once, so joyful, so promising, so potent!) triggers memories not of my last fun, feckless night out – but of my last hangover, the associated anxiety and anguish, all of which, by the way, were the consequence of barely three-and-a-half glasses of house white!

Being drunk used to be so fun! The silliness of tipsiness, the sweet slipe-slide toward disinhibition! I’m wondering if this instinctual and informed growing wariness around booze, coupled with a desire not to live a sober life, might explain the increasing number of people I know, ditching alcohol. The brilliant neuroscientist I interviewed for the book, Dr Sarah McKay, told me she’s hopeful the way women live their lives now – how much more educated we are, how much more likely to work, and have good, deep, social connections – which also leaves us at an advantage over earlier generations of women in terms of neuroprotection – our brains’ defences against cognitive decline.

So, should we just be giving up alcohol, full stop?

I ask Dr Federica Amati. She’s the head nutritionist at ZOE, a trusted source; earlier this summer, she caused ructions on Paul Sculfor’s This Is Powerful podcast by saying: “If you look at alcohol as a drug – like, as a pharmaceutical drug… they’ve calculated what the safe amount would be to consume before these neurotoxic, genotoxic {when a substance damages DNA] effects. And it’s two units a year.”

“I do [want to] give some nuance to that,” she tells me. Please! I say. Here for the nuance.

“We can choose some exposures we subject our body to,” Dr Amati says. “And alcohol may be one of them. But we need to be informed of the impact on our health. I have the occasional glass of red – but I don’t fool myself, it’s good for me.”

So: drink sometimes, but understand what it’s doing to you?

“Don’t if you don’t… But if you do, make sure you’re clear on the risk.”

‘How the Female Body Works (in all its miraculous glory)’ by Polly Vernon’ is out now