Chairman Aiyawatt Srivaddhanaprabha Confirms Manager’s Departure Amid Struggling Results

Leicester City have explained their decision to part ways with Brendan Rodgers, citing the club’s ongoing struggle to maintain Premier League status. The Foxes’ drop into the relegation zone after a last-minute defeat to Crystal Palace extended their winless streak to six matches, prompting the decision to sack the manager.

Rodgers, who had been at the helm for over four years, enjoyed considerable success during his tenure, leading Leicester to two top-five finishes in the Premier League and winning the club’s first-ever FA Cup in 2021. However, despite these achievements, his position became untenable following disappointing performances this season.

Club chairman Aiyawatt Srivaddhanaprabha acknowledged the remarkable moments the team had enjoyed under Rodgers but emphasised that results this season were falling short of expectations. In a statement, Srivaddhanaprabha said, “Brendan’s place in Leicester City history is assured… the achievements of the team under his management speak for themselves.” However, he added that with only 10 games remaining, the board felt compelled to make a change to protect the club’s top-flight status.

Rodgers’ departure came after a series of underwhelming results, including defeats to relegation rivals like Southampton and Crystal Palace. Assistant manager Chris Davies and fitness coach Glen Driscoll also left the club, with Adam Sadler and Mike Stowell taking interim charge ahead of the crucial match against Aston Villa.

Rodgers’ tenure began in February 2019, and he quickly turned Leicester into a competitive force. Despite narrowly missing out on Champions League qualification in two consecutive seasons, Rodgers guided the club to their first-ever FA Cup victory and a semi-final berth in the Europa Conference League. However, financial constraints over the summer led to player departures and limited signings, leaving Leicester in a vulnerable position for the current season.

The former health secretary sees himself as a victim of a larger misinformation campaign.

Matt Hancock, a figure often vilified in public discourse, has found himself at the centre of a storm following the release of leaked WhatsApp messages. Known for his controversial tenure as health secretary during the pandemic and his personal life, Hancock is perceived by many as a mix of ineptitude and scandal. However, he argues that these messages will ultimately vindicate him amid widespread criticism.

One of the most serious allegations against Hancock has been his handling of hospital discharges during the early stages of the pandemic, particularly concerning the transfer of vulnerable individuals into care homes without adequate Covid testing. Critics have claimed that this policy led to unnecessary deaths among the elderly and at-risk populations.

Reflecting on the past, I recall press conferences where Hancock and officials like Deputy Chief Medical Officer Jenny Harries assured the public that testing would occur in care homes, but only during outbreaks. This approach felt inadequate, and Hancock’s and Boris Johnson’s claims of “throwing a protective arm” around care facilities seemed hollow. This narrative painted Hancock as culpable, but the leaked messages suggest a different story.

According to the revelations from The Daily Telegraph, Hancock was indeed intent on testing individuals being discharged from hospitals into care homes. Chris Whitty, the Chief Medical Officer, recommended that everyone entering care should be tested; however, this was hindered by a lack of testing capacity at the time. The absence of rapid lateral flow tests and limited lab resources posed significant challenges.

From the leaked messages, two important points emerge that could rehabilitate Hancock’s public image. First, he recognized that not every individual could be tested before entering care facilities due to insufficient testing resources. Instead, the strategy shifted to focus on hospital discharges, which was likely a risk management decision. Knowing a patient’s Covid status before discharge would aid in isolating them appropriately in care homes.

Hancock’s alleged “crime” was advising that a press release downplay this prioritisation to avoid confusion. While transparency could have been improved, it appears he was trying to maintain a positive narrative about the government’s response. If pressed by journalists, he might have had to disclose the limitations of the policy, but the underlying intent was to ensure that hospital discharges were tested when possible.

The second point of contention involves Hancock’s commitment to reaching a target of 100,000 Covid tests per day. Critics have suggested this focus detracted from protecting care homes, but in reality, ramping up testing was essential for safeguarding everyone, including NHS staff and patients. Former health minister Lord Bethell supports this viewpoint, stating that Hancock’s efforts were crucial in achieving necessary testing levels.

It seems that the Telegraph’s reporting, particularly through selective quotations, is driven by an agenda that undermines the measures taken during a critical time. While hindsight may render some rules excessive, the context of the pandemic necessitated those actions to avoid catastrophic loss of life.

Accusations suggesting that public health measures were part of a conspiracy for social control are not only misleading but dangerous. The reality is that these measures, including masks and lockdowns, were vital in preventing even greater fatalities and long Covid cases.

The narrative surrounding Hancock suggests that he is merely a scapegoat in a broader effort to discredit governmental actions during the pandemic. This is compounded by attempts from certain media outlets to preemptively label public inquiries as “whitewashes,” particularly regarding the redaction of names of junior civil servants to protect them from conspiracy theorists.

In my view, this type of journalism poses a genuine threat to public health. Instead of fostering informed discussions about accountability and learning from past mistakes, it spreads misinformation and fear, potentially undermining future public health responses.

Recent incidents highlight the risks associated with railway travel despite an overall safety record.

A recent head-on collision between a passenger train and a freight train in Greece has resulted in multiple fatalities and injuries, serving as a stark reminder of the dangers inherent in rail travel in Europe. Although train journeys are generally considered safe and convenient, the following examples illustrate some of the most devastating rail disasters in recent history.

Funicular Fire in Kaprun (2000)
In November 2000, a fire broke out in a funicular railway cable car within a mountain tunnel in Kaprun, Austria, leading to the tragic loss of 155 lives, primarily those of skiers and snowboarders heading to the Kitzsteinhorn mountain.

Eschede Train Disaster (1998)
In June 1998, a high-speed train in Germany collided with a bridge at Eschede, causing it to collapse. This catastrophic event resulted in the deaths of 101 people and over 100 injuries, marking it as the deadliest rail disaster in post-war Germany.

Santiago de Compostela Train Derailment (2013)
In July 2013, a commuter train derailed near Santiago de Compostela, Spain, while travelling at 179 km/h in a zone with a speed limit of 80 km/h. The incident claimed 80 lives and injured 145 individuals. Legal proceedings against the train driver and a former railway security director are currently ongoing.

Valencia Subway Crash (2006)
In July 2006, a subway train in Valencia, Spain, crashed while travelling at excessive speed in an underground tunnel, resulting in 43 deaths and numerous injuries. It took 13 years for a court to convict four subway system managers of negligent homicide for their failure to implement necessary safety measures.

Montenegro Train Tragedy (2006)
In January 2006, a train derailed and fell into a ravine near Podgorica, Montenegro, due to a braking system failure, killing 45 people, including five children. This incident remains the worst train disaster recorded in Montenegro’s history.

Viareggio Station Explosion (2009)
In 2009, a freight train carrying gas derailed at the station in Viareggio, Tuscany, causing an explosion that killed 32 individuals. Investigations attributed the disaster to poorly maintained train axles.

Paddington Rail Crash (1999)
The most severe rail accident in the UK in three decades occurred in October 1999 when a train leaving London’s Paddington station ran a red light and collided with a high-speed train, resulting in 31 fatalities and approximately 400 injuries.

Puglia Commuter Train Collision (2016)
In July 2016, two commuter trains in southern Italy collided head-on, leading to 31 deaths and a significant number of injuries. An investigation revealed a lack of communication between the two stations from which the trains had departed.

Brussels Commuter Train Crash (2010)
On 15 February 2010, during the morning rush hour, two commuter trains crashed near Brussels after one ran a red light. This tragic incident resulted in 19 deaths and 171 injuries, marking it as Belgium’s worst train disaster, compounded by previous incidents where promised safety upgrades were not implemented.

These tragic events underscore the potential hazards of rail travel, even in a region renowned for its railway safety standards.

Investigation reveals lavish purchases amid ongoing scrutiny of the Russian president’s finances.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, 70, is accused of funnelling millions of illicit funds into high-end properties for his girlfriend, Alina Kabaeva, a 39-year-old Olympic gold medalist. An investigation by Project, a Russian opposition website banned by the Kremlin, claims that Putin purchased the largest apartment in Russia and a luxurious wooden mansion for Kabaeva.

The report details a lavish 2,600 square meter penthouse located in Sochi, the resort city on the Black Sea that hosted the 2014 Winter Olympics. Registered under the name of Oleg Rudnov, a known ally of Putin, the penthouse boasts 20 rooms, a private cinema, swimming pool, rooftop helipad, spa zone, and a Japanese relaxation courtyard.

Additionally, Kabaeva’s relatives are said to own multiple properties, including a three-storey manor near Moscow valued at nearly £10 million. A wooden mansion, reportedly constructed on Putin’s orders, is located near another property owned by the president and is believed to be where Kabaeva and their children spend much of their time. Satellite imagery indicates that the property features a go-kart track and a large playground.

The mansion is alleged to be registered to a company controlled by Yury Kovalchuk, a billionaire closely linked to the Kremlin and known as Putin’s banker. Reports suggest that Putin travels to this property aboard an armoured train from a secret station in Moscow.

Kabaeva, who has publicly supported Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, served as a member of Putin’s ruling United Russia party from 2007 to 2014 and later became the head of the National Media Company, earning an annual salary of £7.7 million despite lacking media experience. In August 2022, she was sanctioned by the U.S. government due to her ties with Putin amid the Ukraine conflict.

The investigation also included leaked photographs purportedly showing the interior of one of Putin’s hideaways in northern Russia, near Kabaeva’s mansion. These images depicted extravagant features, including a bedroom and study adorned with luxurious decor.

In 2021, allies of imprisoned opposition leader Alexei Navalny claimed that state funds were misused to lease and renovate this property. The investigation further revealed the alleged ownership of an offshore company, Ermira Consultants, registered in Cyprus. Although officially owned by a Russian lawyer, sources indicate it is linked to Putin.

The Cypriot company reportedly holds accounts at Rossiya Bank, associated with Svetlana Krivonogikh—who amassed considerable wealth after a rumored affair with Putin—and at SMP Bank, founded by Arkady Rotenberg, a long-time friend of the president.

In 2008, a Moscow newspaper was shut down shortly after publishing allegations about Kabaeva’s relationship with Putin, which he has consistently denied.

Historic moment as Jackson’s unanimous opinion addresses state dispute over unclaimed funds.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has made history by writing her first majority opinion for the Supreme Court. Released on Tuesday, the opinion addresses a dispute between states regarding unclaimed money and is one of several she is expected to write before the court concludes its session in late June. While the decision was unanimous, not all justices signed on to the entire opinion.

Typically, each justice authors at least one opinion from the court’s seven separate two-week argument sessions running from early October to late April. However, due to a limited number of argued cases—only seven in January and February—there aren’t always enough cases for every justice to write an opinion.

Justice Jackson joined the Supreme Court on June 30, following the retirement of Justice Stephen Breyer. At 52, she is the first Black woman to serve as a justice and only the third Black person to hold this position, alongside Justice Clarence Thomas and the late Justice Thurgood Marshall.

Previously, Jackson authored her first dissenting opinion in November, supporting death row inmate Davel Chinn, who sought Supreme Court review of his case. Jackson argued that the state had suppressed evidence that could have influenced the trial’s outcome, and she expressed her belief that lower courts should reconsider the case. Only Justice Sonia Sotomayor joined her in that opinion.

New rules could ease restrictions on pets and goods for travellers.

The Windsor Framework, a new agreement following the “oven-ready” Brexit deal struck by Boris Johnson, aims to alleviate barriers for travellers from England, Wales, and Scotland to Northern Ireland. The original Northern Ireland Protocol imposed numerous restrictions, affecting everything from pets to packed lunches. Here’s what you need to know about the changes.

Current Rules for Travellers
Under the Northern Ireland Protocol, Northern Ireland is treated as part of the EU Single Market for customs purposes, leading to a range of regulations. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak noted that this protocol effectively created an international customs border for goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland, resulting in extra costs and complex paperwork for businesses.

Pets
Bringing pets into Northern Ireland currently requires compliance with the EU Pet Travel Scheme. Pets from EU countries need:

A microchip
A rabies vaccination from an authorised vet, with a waiting period for immunity
A pet passport
Tapeworm treatment
For pets coming from Great Britain, a single-use EU animal health certificate is necessary, adding significant costs and effort.

Customs
Travellers need to be cautious with food. The rule prohibits bringing in Products Of Animal Origin (POAO), including meat and dairy items. There are limited exemptions for certain baby foods and some fruits, while fish can be brought in up to 20kg, and honey in quantities of 2kg or less is also allowed.

Cash
Travellers carrying €10,000 (£8,800) or more must declare this when travelling from Great Britain to Northern Ireland.

What Will Change?
Pets
The Windsor Framework will eliminate the need for EU-standard compliance. Prime Minister Sunak announced that pet owners will only need to ensure their pet is microchipped and simply tick a box when booking travel.

Customs
Goods transported from Great Britain to Northern Ireland that do not proceed further will be permitted to use a new “green lane,” which will bypass routine customs checks. This change aims to streamline the process by replacing burdensome customs bureaucracy with existing commercial data sharing, while still allowing checks to combat smuggling and crime.

Cash
The requirement to declare large amounts of cash is expected to be removed, simplifying travel for holidaymakers.

These changes under the Windsor Framework are set to make travelling to Northern Ireland more straightforward for British holidaymakers, reducing the barriers that have been in place since Brexit.

Transport Minister demands exemption for synthetic fuels in the 2035 proposal.

Germany’s transport minister has announced that the country will not support the European Union’s planned ban on the sale of new combustion-engine cars starting in 2035. This decision follows the lack of assurance from the EU’s executive regarding an exemption for synthetic fuels.

Last year, EU lawmakers and member states reached a preliminary agreement requiring car manufacturers to cut emissions from new vehicles by 55% by 2030, relative to 2021 levels, and to achieve 100% reduction by 2035. This plan, part of the EU’s broader strategy to lower greenhouse gas emissions, effectively prohibits the sale of new cars powered by hydrocarbon fuels such as petrol.

Germany, among other nations, had requested the EU Commission to consider an exemption for vehicles using e-fuels, which can be produced using renewable energy and carbon captured from the atmosphere. These fuels are argued to be more environmentally friendly since they would not contribute additional climate-warming emissions.

Transport Minister Volker Wissing stated that without a proposal from the Commission, Germany would not support the ban. He emphasised the urgent need for large-scale production of synthetic fuels to cater to the demand for cars sold before 2035, as well as for heavy goods vehicles, ships, and planes. “The EU Commission should propose regulations that allow for the registration of combustion engines post-2035 if they can be verifiably powered by synthetic fuels,” he remarked to reporters in Berlin.

This issue has created a rift within Germany’s government, pitting Wissing’s libertarian Free Democratic Party against the environmentalist Green Party, which supports a total ban on combustion engines. The main opposition party, the center-right Union bloc, has also opposed the EU-wide ban, cautioning that it could damage Germany’s renowned automotive industry.

Critics argue that battery-electric technology is better suited for passenger vehicles, with synthetic fuels being more appropriate for sectors where alternatives are limited, such as aviation. Benjamin Stephan from Greenpeace pointed out that studies indicate the same amount of electricity can drive a battery-powered vehicle five times further than one using e-fuels. “This inefficient and costly fuel will not be viable for cars, especially not for new models by 2035,” he stated, suggesting that it would be more advantageous for the German automotive sector to invest in electric vehicle technology.

Technical limitations block monthly support payments for winter 2023-24.

The Treasury Committee has disclosed that outdated government systems prevent the rollout of more frequent cost of living payments next winter. Despite agreeing in principle with proposals for monthly payments, the government cites technological constraints in its welfare payment system.

In December, the cross-party Committee recommended spreading cost of living payments over six months to reduce abrupt financial “cliff-edges.” These cliff-edges often leave individuals who marginally exceed eligibility criteria without any support. Similarly, households earning slightly more or qualifying for benefits late miss out on much-needed assistance.

The government’s response, published today, acknowledges the logic behind smaller, frequent payments but states that implementing them would disrupt core benefit delivery. Eligibility periods are intentionally announced retroactively to mitigate work disincentives and minimize fraud risks.

The response also highlights gaps in data collection regarding the effectiveness of existing support mechanisms like the Household Support Fund. Limited insights exist into how many low-income households fall outside the benefit system.

The Committee’s proposal aimed to provide a smoother financial safety net during the winter months, ensuring equitable distribution of support across vulnerable groups. However, the government’s system limitations remain a significant hurdle in adapting to such a policy shift.

While the Treasury Committee continues advocating for improvements, addressing these technological barriers appears critical to enhancing future cost of living support programs. Without updates to these systems, targeted and timely assistance for households may remain unattainable.

Updated regulations aim to enhance transparency and tighten rules for Members of Parliament.

A new Code of Conduct for MPs and an accompanying Guide to the Rules will come into effect on 1 March, introducing stricter measures and greater transparency. Key updates include an outright ban on paid parliamentary advice, along with tightened regulations to close existing loopholes.

The Code of Conduct outlines the standards of behavior expected of all Members of the House of Commons in their public roles. It also specifies rules regarding additional income, gifts, and personal interests, requiring MPs to declare them for inclusion in the Register of Members’ Interests. Alleged breaches of the Code are subject to investigation by the independent Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards.

For minor breaches, MPs may resolve issues through a “rectification” process if they agree with the findings. More severe cases are referred to the Committee on Standards, which determines appropriate sanctions based on the specifics of the case.

This updated Code marks the first significant review in over eight years, delayed by early general elections in 2017 and 2019. Typically reviewed during each Parliament, this iteration reflects extensive consultation, four interconnected reports, and a detailed inquiry conducted by the Committee on Standards.

In July 2022, the Committee on Standards published its final recommendations. Following this, the government presented motions to Parliament, resulting in approval of most of the Committee’s suggestions after thorough debates and discussions.

One of the significant changes in the updated Code is the increased emphasis on preventing conflicts of interest and ensuring MPs’ actions align with public trust. By banning paid parliamentary advice, the Code seeks to reinforce the impartiality and integrity of elected officials.

The revised Code demonstrates a commitment to maintaining high ethical standards and public confidence in parliamentary conduct. This launch represents a step forward in ensuring transparency and accountability within the UK’s legislative framework.

An inquiry seeks public input on challenges, innovations, and opportunities in the horticultural sector.

The Horticultural Sector Committee has launched an inquiry into the future of the horticultural industry, inviting written submissions from professionals and stakeholders. The call for evidence, open until midday on 10 April, aims to gather insights on the sector’s challenges, risks, and potential.

Horticulture, a vital branch of agriculture, encompasses the cultivation of fruits, vegetables, and ornamental plants. Contributing billions to the UK economy and supporting hundreds of thousands of jobs, including seasonal work for overseas laborers, the sector plays a crucial role in food security and tourism.

The inquiry will address rising input costs, labor and skill shortages, and the impact of climate change on productivity and food supply. It will also examine how innovative technologies can offer solutions and how government policies can support the industry in aligning with goals such as levelling up and post-Brexit trade strategies.

This initiative represents a significant step toward ensuring the sustainability and growth of the UK horticultural sector, positioning it to thrive amidst modern challenges.