MP accuses Apple and Google of profiting from stolen phones
Martin Wrigley, a Liberal Democrat member of the UK parliament's technology committee has accused Apple and Google of profiting from phone-snatching operations. Representatives from Apple and Google were addressing the committee, where Wrigley said: 'Apple and Google continue to make profit and continue to sell more phones because these phones are not removed from the system'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
7 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Free school meal change with savings up to £500 - check impact on your area
Keir Starmer has unveiled plans to extend free lunches to all kids in families who get Universal Credit in England - check how many kids could be eligible in your area More than half a million children will become eligible for free school meals from next year after an expansion of eligibility rules. Keir Starmer has unveiled plans to extend the lifeline benefit to all kids in families who get Universal Credit (UC) in England, in a move that could save parents up to £500 a year. Currently, all children in England can get free school meals until the end of Year 2 but after that they only qualify if their family earns less than £7,400 a year after benefits. In a huge expansion, from September 2026, all children in UC households will be able to get a free lunch. A large proportion of kids on UC already receive free school meals as their household's income falls below the £7,400 threshold point. But some 500,000 more kids will now be eligible, according to the Government's estimates. You can use our digital map to see the number of kids who live in UC households by constituency, as an estimate for how many kids will be eligible for free school meals across the country. Our digital map uses the most recent data available, which was published in November. Figures are subject to change ahead of the announcement coming into force in September next year. The data does not include infants who receive free lunches at nurseries. Writing in the Mirror, Keir Starmer said: "I want every child to have every opportunity and the best support to aim high, achieve good grades, and get the best education possible. That starts with the basics - it's common sense that children can't do well at school if they're hungry." Pressed today if he would scrap the two-child benefit limit, to lift more kids out of poverty, the Prime Minister said: "I would say this (free school meals expansion) is a down payment on child poverty. "We've got a task force. It'll come out with a strategy... I want to get to the root causes of child poverty. One of the greatest things the last Labour government (did) was to drive down child poverty. I'm determined we will do that." Major change to free school meal rules unveiled - saving parents up to £500 He said Thursday's announcement was part of a broader package of provisions including breakfast clubs, "so it needs to be seen within that group of measures". Mr Starmer added: "But yes, it's a down payment on what I want to do in relation to child poverty." Campaigners and unions hailed the decision to widen free school meal provision as a "game changer" for families struggling with cost of living pressures. Paul Whiteman, general secretary at school leaders' union NAHT, said: "No child should ever have to go hungry due to their parents' financial circumstances." During a debate in the Commons today, MPs raised fears that already squeezed budgets would be put under further pressure by the free school meals announcement. Liberal Democrat MP Lisa Smart, a school governor, said: "School budgets are stretched to the limit. Could the minister explain what he means when he says fully funded? Does that mean fully funded from existing school budgets?" Education minister Stephen Morgan said: "We currently spend over £1.5billion on school food annually, delivering free school meals to around 3.5 million children. We will set out further details on the funding as part of our wider child poverty strategy in due course."
BBC News
9 minutes ago
- BBC News
How Southern Water robots are used to reduce sewage in Bognor
Southern Water is using robots to inspect sewers in a West Sussex town as part of a £4m investment to reduce sewage releases into the project will target Bognor Regis' main pipe which leads into the Aldingbourne Rife, a river and wildlife corridor that runs into the sea near Felpham Beach, where bathing water was last polluted on 17 will inspect sewage pipes across the town to identify problems before repairs and upgrades can be Water said it wanted to slow the flow of surface water entering sewers, which it said would ease the pressure on the pipe network to reduce sewage releases going into the sea. "This particular part of the network affects Felpham Beach, so the overflow there we need to reduce to fewer than ten a year by 2027 as determined by our regulators", Nick Mills, head of environment and innovation at Southern Water, said."Storm overflows are unacceptable, we want to address them as quickly as possible, but it's a complex network which we need to understand and address."Once we've done these surveys, we will be spending £4m addressing where that excess [rain] water is getting in and putting it in the environment where it should be." The Bognor Main pipe last had a sewage release on 5 January, which lasted more than 18 hours and polluted bathing water at Felpham government target for storm overflows is to allow discharges due to rainfall to be no more than ten times a year on average by 2050. Felpham Beach is one of the areas where Southern Water is trying to reduce sewage releases to fewer than ten a there are other outfall pipes not part of the £4m scheme which lead into the Aldingbourne Rife that can pollute bathing water at Felpham example, the Lidsey outfall pipe, three miles north of Bognor Regis, had 18 releases, totalling more than 332 hours, between 21 February and March Water said it was looking to invest more than £8.5m in the next five years to prevent groundwater getting into sewers around the Lidsey outfall pipe, and that it was looking to upgrade the Lidsey outfall pipe, which could cost more than £50m.
Telegraph
13 minutes ago
- Telegraph
I don't want to leave ECHR, said peer reviewing Tory support for convention
Britain should remain in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the peer leading the Tories' review has previously said. Lord Wolfson, the shadow attorney general, told the Lords in 2023 that he supported the UK 'being in the convention' even though he disagreed with some decisions from the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Speaking in a debate on Tory plans to enact their Rwanda deportation plans, he also warned that Parliament should not legislate in breach of its international law obligations unless there were 'absolutely compelling reasons' to do so. His past comments have emerged as Kemi Badenoch, the Tory leader, appointed him to head a review into whether the UK should leave the ECHR and how to prevent lawyers 'subverting' government policy. Mrs Badenoch is setting up a commission to investigate how a Tory government could prevent lawyers using human rights and other legislation to block government policy, not only on immigration but also in environmental and equality legislation. Lord Wolfson, a former justice minister, made his comments in a debate on Rishi Sunak's illegal migration bill which included new powers for ministers to ignore ECtHR injunctions, one of which blocked the first deportation flight to Rwanda. His past comments on ECHR membership have raised eyebrows among Tories. One commented: 'He is a brilliant lawyer but you wonder if Kemi should have chosen someone who was a bit more open-minded.' In the Lords debate, Lord Wolfson said: 'I support our membership of the European Convention on Human Rights. I do not always agree with the decisions of the court – I do not always agree with the decisions of our domestic courts either – but that is a separate matter. I support us being in the convention.' He also said that the UK ought to abide by international law obligations. 'I would expect Parliament not to legislate contrary to a treaty obligation unless there were absolutely compelling reasons to do so and, in those circumstances, to make that very clear. Otherwise, we should always be legislating consistently with our international law obligations,' he told the Lords. 'The debate has moved on' It is understood Lord Wolfson believes the debate has moved on since 2023. The Telegraph understands that irrespective of his views, his role as head of the review is to provide dispassionate advice on the impact of the ECHR on government policy, the legal consequences of leaving and how it could be done. It will be for the leadership to then decide whether to leave or not. A Tory source said: 'He is conducting a review of the legal impact of membership of the ECHR on government policy and providing to the leader and shadow cabinet a legal analysis of what being a member of the ECHR means and what would be the effect of leaving the ECHR in a legal sense. 'The political question of whether we should stay or leave is not for him or the commission. That's a question for the leader and shadow cabinet. They are the clients in this context, and he is their lawyer. They have asked him a series of questions that he is going to answer with his legal hat on. They can decide what they then do.' Interviewed earlier this week about what the Tories' position was on the ECHR, Lord Wolfson told Joshua Rozenberg's podcast A Lawyer Talks: 'I can only say watch this space. But it's no secret to say that within the Conservative Party, there will be people who take different views on this issue. 'Within the Labour Party, there are people who take very different positions on this issue.' However, he indicated that ministers should not comply with treaty obligations if that would mean ignoring laws made by Parliament. He said ministers would always seek to comply with international law if they were able to do so. But he added: 'A minister has to abide by an act of Parliament and it would be constitutionally improper, I would suggest, for the minister to say, 'I'm going to ignore what an act of Parliament says in order to comply with a treaty obligation'.' Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, told The Telegraph: 'The man leading this review into Britain's membership of the ECHR does not actually want to leave it. 'This tells us everything we need to know about how serious the Conservatives are about deporting illegal migrants and stopping the boats. 'They haven't changed one bit since their time in office.'
