Just pointing out that I broke the story 7 months ago that Mandelson failed vetting from the security services and put it to Downing Street...so the idea that Downing Street only found out on Tuesday is complete nonsense.
https://t.co/9Zp14BGCoD
Man, too bad Frank decided to pursue a career in coaching (a very successful one at that). He would have made a ridiculous sporting director.
He wanted Garner here back in 2020 and later signed him for Everton.
Rice, Aké, Haaland at Salzburg, Thiago Silva just a few examples of the players he specifically wanted back in 2020.
Someone who has been in winning dressing rooms for majority of his career and knows what is and isn't required to both create and sustain a culture.
Also has an impressive coaching career already.
Took Derby to the play-offs in 2019 despite the club selling their best players the previous summer.
Took Chelsea to UCL football and an FA Cup final despite suffering a transfer ban in just his second season of management. Also a big part in building the squad that would eventually win the UCL in 2021.
His reputation took a big hit at Everton and Chelsea in 2022 – through no real fault of his own.
He's now at Coventry where he is about to win direct promotion to the Premier League by a landslide. Their first Premier League appearance since 2001 – 25 years later.
What a man💙
🗣️ “It’s clearly having a massive impact!”
We got to see @LaticsCommunity ‘Every Player Counts’ programme, which offers weekly football sessions for adults with disabilities.
The sessions are fully supported by the @skybet@EFL Building Foundations Fund 👏
Here’s our recap of the day ⤵️ #WAFC #Ad
"If we can make a difference, then let's try and do it." ❤️
@SkyBet are supporting @TheBHF with their #EveryMinuteMatters Relay and Ian Holloway has an important message:
The @SkyBet EFL Every Minute Matters Relay ❤️
Working with @TheBHF to get 270,000 to learn CPR 🙌
Fans of all 72 #EFL clubs will participate in a relay, travelling over 4,000km from club to club to spread the word 🏃🚴
UK billionaires added £182,000,000,000 to their wealth last year. That’s £35,000,000 every single day.
Their combined wealth is £795,361,000,000.
So don't let anyone tell you austerity is a “necessity”. There’s more than enough wealth to fund our NHS, public services & welfare.
📸
#EveryMinuteMatters 💙
Tap here to learn more ⬇️
#CityAsOn📸
#EveryMinuteMatters 💙
Tap here to learn more ⬇️
#CityAsOn📸
#EveryMinuteMatters 💙
Tap here to learn more ⬇️
#CityAsOn📸
#EveryMinuteMatters 💙
Tap here to learn more ⬇️
#CityAsOne
That's why, if we look at the stats, 87% of inherited agricultural property used less than £1m of APR and so will remain completely exempt.
Almost half the £1bn cost of APR went to 63 estates of median value £8m. Doesn't seem great value for money for the taxpayer.
“Why should small countries in Europe that emit less than 1% of global emissions pursue a net zero agenda when there are much larger emitters like China?”
I was asked this earlier this week when I presented to the @scotenergyforum at @GeolSoc in London.
It’s a common challenge put to people like me who are supportive of the decarbonisation agenda. @_HannahRitchie@OurWorldInData has written what I think is an excellent response to this commonly asked question.
She provides 5 compelling reasons for why small and wealthy countries in Europe and elsewhere should reduce their emissions:
1. Rich countries have a moral responsibility
Rich countries are historically the largest emitters. For instance, the UK, though responsible for only 0.9% of current emissions, accounts for 4.5% of historical global emissions. Germany contributes over 5%. These nations should reach net-zero emissions quickly, not only to reduce climate impacts but also to allow poorer nations space in the global carbon budget to develop.
2. Every country must act, even those with ‘negligible’ emissions
While six countries contribute more than 2% of global emissions (China, the US, India, Russia, Japan, and Iran), many smaller countries collectively account for 36%—more than China alone. If these nations did nothing, a significant portion of global emissions would remain unchecked. Tackling climate change requires action from all countries, but low-income nations with minimal contributions and urgent development needs should be allowed to temporarily increase emissions while wealthier nations cut theirs.
3. Rich countries outsource their emissions
Many wealthy countries outsource emissions by importing goods produced elsewhere, but even when adjusting for this, their overall responsibility remains high. Even after accounting for “consumption-based” emissions, most rich nations continue to be significant contributors, and they must take action.
4. Innovating low-carbon technologies drives global progress
Small countries can make a significant impact by innovating and deploying low-carbon technologies, which helps lower costs for the rest of the world. For example, the cost of solar power has dropped by 99.8% since the 1970s, largely due to scaling up by wealthier countries. These innovations make it easier for developing nations to adopt cleaner energy without hindering growth.
5. Small countries can lead by example
Countries like Norway, responsible for just 0.1% of global emissions, can still set an example by adopting clean technologies. Norway’s electric vehicle revolution, where over 80% of new cars are electric, shows how small nations can demonstrate what’s possible, inspiring others to follow suit.
Full article here: https://t.co/PsWtjPCYIx
Pumping billions into dangerous & ineffective carbon capture tech is letting the fossil fuel lobby off the hook – we should be insulating homes , installing heat pumps and transitioning to EVs , not letting big industry skirt round the real solutions to hit net zero . . .
Heroic Charlton community coach has emotional reunion with five-a-side player after saving his life during cardiac arrest - as Tom Lockyer backs campaign for people to learn CPR https://t.co/c1h1zE8OKF