Global Trade

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has vowed to retaliate against the Houthis after a missile fired by the group struck the grounds of Israel's main airport.

In a video posted on social media, Netanyahu threatened strikes, saying: "We attacked in the past, we will attack in the future".

The missile, fired from Yemen by the Iran-backed group, landed near the main terminal of Ben Gurion airport on Sunday morning, Israeli authorities said.

Four people were injured by the blast, with another two injured on their way to a shelter, Israeli media reported, citing emergency services. None were seriously hurt.

Later on Sunday, the Houthis said they would impose "a comprehensive aerial blockade" on Israel by repeatedly targeting its airports, in response to Israeli military plans to expand operations in Gaza.

Israel's defence minister, Israel Katz, responded to the attack by saying: "Anyone who hits us, we will hit them seven times stronger".

In a later statement, Netanyahu said "attacks by the Houthis emanate from Iran", adding Israel would respond to the Houthi attack, and to Iran "at a time and place of our choosing".

Unverified footage posted online appeared to show drivers on a road nearby pulled over to take cover as a projectile lands, creating a plume of black smoke near the airport, which is on the outskirts of Tel Aviv.

New equipment to provide uninterrupted chest compressions to patients being treated by the air ambulance team will "enhance" the care provided.

The equipment is designed to free up staff so they can focus on defibrillating the patient back to a pumping heart rhythm during a cardiac arrest.

The Schiller automated compression device was funded by the Henry Bloom Noble Healthcare Trust for the fixed-wing service, which transports inpatients to the UK for treatment.

Medical lead for the Isle of Man Air Ambulance Service said it was an an "exciting development" that would "enhance the care we are able to provide whilst transporting our patients".

The device can be used as the patient is being moved out of the aircraft and replaces the previous bulkier equipment, which the service said was harder for a lone member of staff to fit to an unconscious patient.

The equipment can now be kept in the aeroplane at all times due to its smaller size, the service said.

The coastguard helicopter, which is used by the service during poor weather and at night, already has one of the automated compression devices on-board.

The home of a former lord mayor of Leeds has been seized by the UK law enforcement agency responsible for tackling organised crime and drug trafficking.

The National Crime Agency (NCA) won a High Court battle with Abigail Marshall Katung over the rights to the house on Sandmoor Drive in Alwoodley.

The house had been previously owned by a businessman who was suspected of money laundering offences. He handed it over in 2020 as part of a deal with the NCA.

Labour councillor Mrs Katung, who was not aware of the accusations made against the home's former owner, said she would appeal against the decision.

During the court hearing, Mrs Katung said she had entered into an agreement with the previous owner to buy the house in 2015.

Mrs Katung said she had paid him about £400,000 of the contracted £1m purchase price, but the remaining sum was never provided.

The court heard the majority of the funds were sent from Nigeria, where Mrs Katung was born, to the UK using an informal money transfer service which she described as the "black market", although she said it was not illegal.

On 6 June the High Court ruled, despite the payments, Mrs Katung had no legitimate interest or right to the property, which will now be transferred to the NCA.

In his ruling Mr Justice Jay said there were "telling omissions" from Mrs Katung's evidence, adding that he was "not satisfied that she was a particularly reliable witness".

In a statement Mrs Katung said her account was "consistent".

The NCA will be entitled to damages for Mrs Katung's use of the house since 2020, as well as to its costs.

Rob Burgess, head of asset denial at the NCA, said a "substantial sum would be returned to the public purse" following the ruling.

Mrs Katung said she had made "full disclosure" of the ruling prior to it becoming public knowledge, adding: "Whilst this is dreadfully upsetting to me and my family, I have not sought to hide away.

"I want to continue to represent my constituents, it is the most satisfying task I have ever undertaken and it is a complete privilege to be able to do so.

"I recognise that enquiries will have to be undertaken in order to preserve public confidence in the political system in which I operate. I will cooperate with that process fully and unreservedly."

Mrs Katung became Leeds' first lord mayor of African descent when she took over the ceremonial role for a 12-month term in May 2024.

She has lived in the city since she came to the UK to study at the University of Leeds in 2000 and has represented the Little London and Woodhouse ward since being elected in 2019.

A spokesperson for the Labour Party said an internal investigation into Mrs Katung was taking place.

A Leeds City Council spokesperson said they were unaware of case, adding: "We are currently examining the High Court judgement and are unable to comment further at this time."

West Yorkshire on BBC Sounds

Thousands of vulnerable people in Bradford could see sharp rises in day care charges from next month, prompting fears many may be forced to cancel lifeline services.

Bradford Council has approved plans to phase out a long-standing subsidy known as the "discretionary buffer", which determines how much support the authority gives before people must start paying for their own care.

Scrapping it could see some users' weekly care bills rise by up to £58 – over £3,000 a year, according to council figures.

The authority has said everyone affected would get a full financial reassessment before being asked to pay more, but affected families have urged the council to reconsider the end of the subsidy.

About 4,000 people – mainly older adults and those with learning disabilities who live, and are cared for, at home – are expected to be affected by the new rules.

Bradford's 25% discretionary buffer, introduced over a decade ago, allowed individuals needing day care to retain more of their income before charges kicked in.

The authority said its arrangements had been "generous", but its own financial pressures had forced a rethink.

Scrapping the buffer would bring the city in line with other West Yorkshire councils, and was expected to raise £5.6m annually towards the cash-strapped authority's £133m adult social care spend.

The council said the buffer would not be removed all at once, but would be phased out over two years – with 50% to go in July this year and the rest in July 2026.

However, affected families have said the delay offered little comfort, with a recent public consultation revealing that 17% of respondents feared they would have to cancel their day care services if the charges went through.

Nearly 70% of respondents said they would need to cut other household spending or total care hours, while over half expressed concern about the toll on their mental and physical health.

Jo Brearton, a full-time carer in Bradford, told the BBC that if the subsidy was lost, she would have to cancel the only day of external care her 26-year-old son, Danny, received each week

Danny, who is autistic and has complex needs, attends a day centre in Keighley every Friday.

Ms Brearton said that single day provided variety in his weekly routine and gave her a rare moment of respite – and its loss could be devastating.

"That leaves me and Danny at home 24-7," she explained.

"That one day off from Danny I have, I don't think it's a lot to ask.

"When that Friday session is gone, that's his routine blown out of the water.

"He'll be thinking, in his own way, 'why aren't I going?' But he can't explain to me how he's feeling and what he's thinking."

'Sugarcoat the pill'

Ms Brearton said the contribution for Danny's care could jump from £21 to £71 a week under the changes.

"They might say, 'we'll just do it by 50% this financial year', but that's still an extra £100 a month for me. Next year, it will be £200 a month," she said.

"Where am I expected to find an extra £2,000 a year?"

Ms Brearton said the proposed phased introduction of the changes was the council "trying to sugarcoat the pill".

"The council has mismanaged budgets for years. They are now saying, 'we've subsidised you, we're not doing it any longer'. Then they just pull the rug out from your feet," she stated.

Ian MacBeath, the Labour-run authority's strategic director for adult social care and health, said the phased approach "gives people time to make adjustments to their living expenditure so they're more able to manage that financial increase".

Speaking at a meeting of the decision-making executive, Mr MacBeath acknowledged the changes would have a "significant financial impact" on some people.

But he said: "The council's financial position means we've got to consider this in order to be fair to all residents."

Mr MacBeath added that more social workers would assess any cases where people felt pressured to cancel services, to ensure "no one's safety is compromised".

Sarah Ferriby, Bradford Council's executive member for healthy people and places, said the authority had to make a "difficult decision", but she was "reassured" there would be enough safeguards in place to reduce the burden on families.

However, opposition politicians have expressed concerns over the loss of the subsidy.

Green Party councillor Neil Whitaker warned that some people "didn't fully understand the increases, or what would happen if they couldn't pay".

He suggested that decision-makers "might not have a full picture of the financial challenges people are facing", and urged better overall communication of the changes and their impact.

Meanwhile, as she braced for the change to get under way in July, Ms Brearton said: "They say they recognise the burden on families, but all they're doing is piling on even more stress."

West Yorkshire on BBC Sounds

A council tackling so-called fly campers has issued its first fines using Public Space Protection Orders.

Last month Cumberland Council said it would use the orders to crackdown on people leaving human waste, litter, lighting fires and equipment while camping in the Lake District.

The council said officers had issued two £100 fines in the Buttermere area in connection to breaching the order.

It added officers spoke to "numerous individuals to remind them about the importance of being responsible and respectful in our outdoor spaces".

The National Trust previously said it spent about £1,000 repairing a single site that was damaged by campers last year.

Although wild camping is not permitted in the Lake District without the landowners' permission, the Lake District National Park Authority said it was normally tolerated if people abided by a number of rules, including camping above the highest fell wall and leaving no trace they were there.

Cumberland Council said it was keen to engage with and educate the public around wild camping, but it would now be issuing fixed penalty notices of up to £100 when required.

Police are appealing for witnesses to come forward after a woman was punched and had a large quantity of cash taken off her by a man she knew in Leicester.

Leicestershire Police said the woman was robbed on Sunday at about 00:35 BST near to the lifts on the lower ground floor of the NCP car park in Lee Circle, Leicester city centre.

The woman screamed during the robbery and two witnesses then came over to assist her, the force added.

Det Con Zaeema Osman of Leicestershire Police said: "If you are either of these two men, or someone else who may have information about what happened, please get in touch with us."

President Donald Trump and House Republicans continued to negotiate a far-reaching tax and spending bill on Wednesday, holding discussions at the White House ahead of a potential vote.

Trump and his staff spent several hours with members of the House Freedom Caucus, who have refused to support a bill they say does not go far enough in cutting spending.

Many of Trump's top priorities are in the legislation: extending tax cuts passed in 2017, eliminating taxes on tips, spending more on defence and border security, and cutting government health care programmes.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates the bill would add about $2.3tn (£1.7tn) to the US national debt over the next 10 years.

Trump campaigned on promises to reduce the US budget debt – the cumulative gap between the government's tax revenue and its spending – which currently stands at around $36.2tn (£27tn).

Negotiators worked through the night on Tuesday, including a meeting of a House committee which began at 01:00 local time (05:00 GMT) Wednesday.

Because Republicans hold a narrow majority in the House and Democrats uniformly oppose the legislation, Trump can only risk losing a handful of votes from his own party. He and congressional allies are also under the pressure of a self-imposed deadline to get the bill passed by the end of the month, which is now 10 days away.

After it wins approval in the House, the bill will head to the Republican-led Senate, which could make its own changes.

After leaving the White House negotiations on Wednesday, Speaker Mike Johnson said the full House could vote on the bill Wednesday night or Thursday morning, according to Politico.

The president has called his proposal a "big, beautiful, bill" – the measure is now officially known as the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" – but has faced opposition from members of the House Freedom Caucus who want additional spending cuts.

At the same time, several Republicans representing districts in Democratic-leaning states want bigger tax cuts for their voters – to be achieved by increasing credits those voters receive for paying state taxes at relatively high rates.

Trump and Johnson are trying win over both dissenting factions, which could prove to be a delicate balance.

Kentucky's Thomas Massie, one of the Republican holdouts in the House, took to X to complain about the closed negotiations. Trump earlier this week labelled him a "grandstander".

"Major provisions of the big beautiful bill are still being negotiated and written, yet we are being told we will vote on it today," Massie wrote. "Shouldn't we take more than a few hours to read a bill this big and this consequential?"

Trump also visited Capitol Hill on Tuesday to push for the bill, meeting with Republicans and urging both the budget hawks and tax-cut proponents to accept the bill on the table.

But it was unclear if he managed to swing many votes.

Democrats, saying the bill would benefit the rich and unfairly punish lower-income Americans, have made it clear in committee hearings and on social media that they will only vote against it.

The White House has dismissed worries about the ballooning US debt, arguing that tax cuts will stimulate the economy. Trump also has said his separate programme of tariffs will bring additional revenue to the federal government. However, most economists and experts agree with the non-partisan CBO that the bill will add to the debt.

The bill's supporters have remained bullish about its eventual prospects.

"Failure is not an option in getting this done," said Republican Jason Smith of Missouri.

A separate CBO analysis reported that the bill would hurt the poorest Americans while benefiting the top 10% of earners.

"We're going to ask Americans to finance tax cuts for billionaires on the national debt – on the credit card," said Democratic Representative Gwen Moore of Wisconsin.

The tight margin between the parties in the House means Trump and his allies need near-unanimous support from Republicans to pass the measure.

House Speaker Mike Johnson has said he wants the bill passed by Monday 26 May, the Memorial Day holiday in the US.

Although it is possible the bill could come up in the full House on Wednesday or Thursday, it is unlikely that the Speaker will risk a vote unless he is confident that the measure will pass.

Even if the bill passes the House, it is a long way from becoming law. The legislation would move to the Senate – and then be subjected to a likely negotiation process to reconcile two versions of the bill – before it can be sent to the president for his signature.

A gentleman's club which voted to continue to prohibit women from becoming members has been called "sexist" by a feminist group.

Women can enter the Castle Hill Club in Lincoln only as guests of men who are members.

Paul Watson, secretary at the club, which opened in 1922, said the rule "had always been the same" and "for the rights or wrongs of it, they wanted to leave it that way".

Ellie Henshaw, 19, from the University of Lincoln's Feminist Society, said the decision was "frustrating" and "it's not the default anymore that women should be excluded".

All 560 members were asked to vote on whether women should be allowed to become members.

In the vote that closed on 7 May, 100 members voted to keep the rule the same while 78 voted for change.

Mr Watson said the vote was "democratic" and "all members had different views on it".

He said he believed women who visited the club as guests of male members were "happy".

"They keep coming. They're obviously comfortable in how the club is set up."

Mr Watson said the venue was historical.

"A lot of it has to do with the history of the club and about not wanting too much change to keep the club running as it has done since 1922."

Ms Henshaw said "times have changed" and women should be allowed to join.

"I'm a history student. I think denying progress in the name of history is a very flawed argument," she said.

Bee Moore, 18, from the society, said she understood men's clubs were "historic".

"But we live in an age where everyone is equal and excluding people is wrong," she said.

"I would call this sexist. I don't see a reason why women have been excluded."

According to Mr Watson, the Grade II listed building dates back to the Middle Ages and used to operate as a pub called the Black Boy.

In 1922, as the pub was struggling to stay afloat, he said pub regulars took over the establishment and made it a gentleman's club.

Eventually, the members bought the pub together and it became the free house run by volunteers, which it remains.

"When I was first there, there were 80 members. There's 560 now," Mr Watson said.

Lincolnshire on BBC Sounds latest episode of Look North here.

Every year, the world's oldest wooden church attracts about 12,000 people from all over the globe, who learn about its impressive legacy from two dedicated volunteer guides.

The timbers of St Andrew's, Greensted, near Chipping Ongar, date back to the reign of Edward the Confessor (1042 to 1066), according to Sheffield University experts.

The Essex church has a unique stave construction – and a connection to England's former patron saint St Edmund, as well as to the early trade unionists, the Tolpuddle Martyrs.

"It's amazing that it's survived all this time without being replaced with a stone church," said guide Jacqui Eykelbosch.

"I enjoy meeting people, I've always been interested in English history – and I just want to tell people what I've found out – and people say I'm very enthusiastic," she said.

Most churches in the Saxon era were made from wood and later replaced with stone buildings.

New Zealand-born Mrs Eykelbosch, who has lived in Greensted for nearly 30 years, said: "We know the current church was built by Saxon Hamo Dapifer in about AD1060, so before the Norman Conquest, and by the time of the Domesday Book (1086), Greensted manor belonged to him.

"The chancel [eastern end at the altar] is Tudor now, with flint and brick, while the vestry tower [used as an office and for changing into ceremonial vestments] is a mix of 14th and 17th Century weather board."

Grade I listed Greensted is famous for the stave (vertical wooden planks) construction used in its walls, which Historic England describe as a unique survivor in this country. About 30 such stave churches can still be found in Scandinavia.

It was revealed to be the world's oldest wooden church – and the oldest stave-built timber building in Europe – after experts from Sheffield University used tree-ring dating to analysis of the timbers at the request of Essex County Council, she said.

There are 51 timber planks in all.

The wall timbers have survived so long because when they were found to be rotting in the ground in 1848, vicar the Rev Philip Ray organised their restoration.

They took out the logs, built a brick sill and put back the timbers resting on the bricks, explained Mrs Eykelbosch.

The origins of a church in Greensted may actually go back much further, to the revival of Christianity in Essex, thanks to missionary St Cedd from AD653.

"A team of archaeologists excavated the chancel in 1960, and they found traces of post holes, so there was an earlier church on the site," said Mrs Eykelbosch.

This was reputed to be a resting place of St Edmund's body in 1013 on its way to Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk. He was killed by Vikings in AD869.

Many of the visitors, who come from "all around the world", are also keen to hear more about the link to the Tolpuddle Martyrs.

These were the six leaders of a trade union set up in 1834 for Dorset farm labourers, who were sentenced to seven years' transportation to Australia for taking an oath of secrecy.

After an outcry, they returned to England three years later, moving to Essex.

Mrs Eykelbosch said: "They were given farm tenancies at Greensted – and in 1839 one of them, James Brine, married Elizabeth Standfield, the daughter of another martyr in our church."

The church also continues to have a very active congregation, with services every week.

"Historic England have us as one of the top 100 sites to visit and in the top 10 for faith and belief, alongside cathedrals like Canterbury and Westminster Abbey, so while it may be a little church, we're up there with them," she said.

A newly elected councillor has resigned her Reform UK membership after she was suspended over a social media post.

Donna Edmunds, who represents Hodnet in Shropshire, was suspended last week after she posted on X about her plans to defect from the party.

The news of her suspension comes days after local elections, with the councillor posting on X she had been suspended "pending an investigation" on Sunday.

When asked for a comment on Edmunds' resignation, Reform UK told the BBC it would not comment further until the completion of its investigation.

In a statement posted on Sunday, Edmunds wrote: "Yesterday I woke up feeling very proud to be one of Reform's 677 new councilors.

"This morning I woke up to an email from [Reform] head office advising me that I have been suspended from the party 'pending an investigation'."

"Why? Because I urged people here on X to lend Reform their support for the short term – for Thursday's elections – even if they felt they couldn't for the long term.

"According to head office, 'this has brought the party into disrepute and damaged the interests of the party.'"

She went on to say the party was brought into disrepute when leadership "unceremoniously ditched" Rupert Lowe.

She said his suspension "provoked a wave of resignations" where whole branches resigned as one in protest.

"I called my branch chair to resign my membership, he asked me to stay on as we were struggling to find candidates.

"Out of loyalty to the party at the local level – all good, hard working people who merely want to live in a country that works for them – I agreed and remained on the ballot", she wrote.

Analysis

By Elizabeth Glinka, Political Editor, BBC West Midlands

Reform's phenomenal performance in the local elections brings new responsibilities, the chance to manage multimillion-pound organisations that deliver vital services, but also increased scrutiny.

These sorts of incidents can and do happen to all political parties, but for Reform, sensitive to assumptions about its membership, it is an issue it had hoped to leave largely in its past.

However, there are now hundreds of newly elected councillors with no prior experience of being working politicians who will face scrutiny from the public and media on a level previously unknown to them.