logo
Couple reunited with dog stolen more than seven years ago in ‘dream come true'

Couple reunited with dog stolen more than seven years ago in ‘dream come true'

Yahoo08-02-2025

A couple who never gave up hope after their dog was stolen more than seven years ago has said it is a 'dream come true' after the RSPCA reunited them.
Rita and Philip Potter from Norfolk said they 'never gave up hope on her being found one day' after their beloved pet Daisy the Labrador was stolen from their garden in November 2017.
The theft sparked social media appeals and a petition urging the government to do more to tackle pet theft.
Daisy, now 13-years-old, was discovered more than 200 miles away by Kim Walters, an RSPCA inspector who carried out routine investigations in Weston-super-Mare, Somerset on February 2 and found the Labrador with untreated mammary masses.
The inspector took Daisy to a vet and checked her microchip where she found contact details for Mr and Mrs Potter.
The couple struggled to hold back tears after Daisy was returned to her former home in Old Buckenham on Thursday.
Mrs Potter, 80, said she and her husband are 'so, so grateful' for the RSCPA reuniting them with Daisy, adding their pet will now be given 'lots of love and attention'.
'We kept a photograph on the mantlepiece and would look at it every day thinking of her and where she might be. So it is an absolute dream come true that the RSPCA found her and have returned her to us – where she belongs – we are so, so grateful,' she said.
'We know she is elderly now and has health issues but whatever time she has left she will now be surrounded by lots of love and attention.
'The whole family was so excited to hear the news that my grandchildren went to buy her toys and treats – she also now has not just one – but two comfy beds.'
Daisy's theft was widely reported after witnesses claim they saw her being bundled into a truck near their home by suspected backyard breeders, who make profit from breeding animals that are often in unsafe conditions.
The couple reported the incident to the police, but the number plate could not be traced.
Mr and Mrs Potter were part of several social media and press appeals to locate Daisy, which earned support from actor Tom Hardy after he reshared their post.
The couple also campaigned for the government to do more to tackle pet theft and set up a petition which attracted more than 100,000 signatures.
In 2024, the Government passed the Pet Abduction Act law which could see perpetrators face a maximum five year prison sentence, a fine, or both.
Ms Walters, the inspector who found Daisy, said she was 'a bit choked' after reuniting the dog with her owners and urged anyone with information about the theft to contact the RSPCA or the police.
'I was a bit choked from listening to them and clearly how much they loved her, so it was great telling them that we could get her back home soon once we had made sure she was fit enough to travel and we had arrangements in place for the four hour journey to take place, ' she said.
Andy Cook, behavioural welfare adviser at the Brent Knoll Animal Centre, the RSPCA branch in North Somerset where Daisy was cared for, said: 'It seems Daisy has been used for backyard breeding and she has a number of mammary masses, she has slight hip dysplasia and her coat was quite dirty when she came to us as though she had not been groomed for many years.
'She is quite elderly for a Labrador at the age of 13 and we think she is deaf, but she is adorable.
'She really is the sweetest girl and will wag her tail whenever she sees you but since she was stolen it is clear she has had a hard life.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Why Starmer's homelessness reform could see Britain overrun by rough sleepers
Why Starmer's homelessness reform could see Britain overrun by rough sleepers

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Why Starmer's homelessness reform could see Britain overrun by rough sleepers

The 'tent city' on Park Lane, in the central reservation near Hyde Park Corner, comprises 23 tents, tables, office chairs, shopping trolleys and washing lines. A neatly stacked pile of bin bags lies to one side while Lime bikes have been discarded around the settlement. A handful of large white signs are stacked up, reading: 'I'm hungry, God bless.' Those living here suggest there is little difference between their circumstances and those of the thousands of rough sleepers across the country, who will be decriminalised under plans announced by Sir Keir Starmer this week. To tourists, residents and those working in the surrounding Mayfair streets, however, the scene might more aptly be described as illegal camping. 'It's not good at all, but we don't have a permanent place where we can wait for approval from City Hall [for housing],' says Mihai, 54, from Romania, the only inhabitant prepared to speak to The Telegraph, who refuses to give his surname. 'Would you like to live here?' He says he has lived at the site for two years, has indefinite leave to remain in the UK and works as a cleaner. He has also camped at Marble Arch and in Hyde Park. There were more people in the camp previously, he says, but they have gradually been found housing. A mile to the east, at Tottenham Court Road, Mel, 60, who also refuses to give his surname, lives in another encampment with his nephews Danny, 27, and Liam, 22, and their dogs, Cain and Sierra. Mel was born in west London and says he used to have three full-time jobs – in sales and advertising, as an estate agent and as a supervisor at a bowling alley – but has been living on the street for six years since he was kicked out of his council house over a dispute with a neighbour. 'It's not a choice for me living on the street,' he says. 'If it was, I wouldn't have been here for nearly seven years now.' He adds that Romanian migrants are more comfortable living this way. 'People from other places have a tent mentality,' he says. 'What bugs me is we're a first-world country, and these people don't have the understanding that when you come to a better country, you have to make yourself better. You can't just stand on the corner drinking beer and whistling at women. It's easy for them because they grew up in desolate countries.' The situation in central London encapsulates the complexity of legislating around homelessness. On Tuesday, the Government announced plans to decriminalise rough sleeping, continuing a Tory proposal from 2022 to repeal the 1824 Vagrancy Act. The Bill was originally brought in to deal with rising homelessness after the Napoleonic Wars and has long been considered out of date, with references to 'vagabonds' and 'rogues'. 'We are drawing a line under nearly two centuries of injustice towards some of the most vulnerable in society, who deserve dignity and support,' said Angela Rayner, the Deputy Prime Minister. 'No one should ever be criminalised simply for sleeping rough and, by scrapping this cruel and outdated law, we are making sure that can never happen again.' To ensure the police still have authority to combat antisocial behaviour, the Government promised to create new offences, including facilitating begging for gain and trespassing with the intention of committing a crime, both of which were previously included under the 1824 Act. Experts warn legislation against begging may yet rub up against the European Convention on Human Rights; in 2021, the court ruled that Switzerland had violated human rights when it fined a woman who had been begging. Homelessness is a global issue, of course, and there is a huge range of government responses to it. While Britain is moving to decriminalise rough sleeping, America has gone in the other direction. Last year, the US Supreme Court ruled that punishing rough sleepers was not a 'cruel and unusual punishment,', as prohibited by the Eighth Amendment. Homelessness has become a pressing problem in several American cities, most notoriously San Francisco. An estimated 771,000 Americans were homeless last year, more than any year on record. Since the ruling, at least 163 municipalities have passed rules banning camping. There are signs that policy is working. Last year, the California governor, Gavin Newsom, promised 'no more excuses' for the state with the highest 'unsheltered' rate in the country. Since encampments began to be cleared after the Supreme Court ruling, California's rate has stabilised. While, nationwide, homelessness increased by 18 per cent, in California it rose by just 3 per cent. In Fresno, California, members of the public can now report camps via an app. Rough sleepers could face fines of up to $1,000 or a year in prison, or they can ask to be taken to a shelter to discuss treatment or housing. When asked about whether the new rules were simply moving homeless people out of sight, Jerry Dyer, the city's Republican mayor and its former police chief, recently told The Economist: 'I'm sure there are people that have now chosen places that are less visible publicly, which is not a bad thing.' Some fear that the relaxing of rules in the UK will lead to the proliferation of rough sleeping seen in California prior to last year's Supreme Court ruling, in which Park Lane-style encampments spread across the country. 'San Francisco is the worst example but loads of these Left-wing-run cities in America have taken an approach of non-enforcement of laws around rough sleeping and petty crime,' says Fred de Fossard, the strategy director of the Prosperity Institute and a former Tory special adviser at the Cabinet Office, highlighting the absurdity of the UK taking such an approach when the United States is tacking in the opposite direction. 'Repealing the Vagrancy Act paves the way for [American levels of rough sleeping] here. This, in turn, will lead to a clamp-down in the future that will be 'more authoritarian than people are comfortable with and it will be entirely avoidable because we have taken a misguided, short-termist approach to these laws. This will fortify these encampments and make it harder for police to get rid of genuine criminals.' Certainly, those in charge of clearing encampments such as the one at Park Lane may wish police had similar powers to their US counterparts. The problem has been rumbling on for years. Last month, a court granted Transport for London (TfL), which owns the land, a possession order to remove the camp on Park Lane. A TfL spokesman said: 'We had to take enforcement action to regain possession of the site on two occasions last year; however, a number of people have returned with tents and other belongings.' David Spencer, the head of crime and justice at Policy Exchange, a think tank, and a former Met Police officer, says the situation at Park Lane encapsulates the difficulties facing those trying to disperse groups of rough sleepers, and the risks of removing their powers. 'Aggressive begging, rough sleeping and associated antisocial behaviour are things residents bring up all the time with the police,' he says. 'The reality is that they are issues which the police and local authorities are not able or willing to get to grips with. The police would never look at arrest and prosecution in the first instance, but what the Government is doing is removing the backstop, taking away almost any power the police has to deal with it. 'What we risk is a constant slide towards the degradation of our public realm, with government, police, authorities seeming to take a more permissive attitude to things like graffiti, begging, rough sleeping, fare dodging, which come up all the time with law-abiding people going about their lives,' he adds. 'People are sympathetic to those who find themselves in these situations, but we risk taking away the backstop that lets authorities do something about it. If we look at Park Lane, things have really got out of control. While some rough sleepers in central London beg, others manage to work, often in marginal gig-economy employment as delivery drivers or kitchen porters. Others choose to leave offered accommodation altogether. In June 2023, dozens of asylum seekers camped outside the accommodation they were offered in Pimlico, having balked at the prospect of sleeping four to a room. Signs by their camp read: 'This is a prison, not a hotel.' The Home Office stated that the accommodation was offered on a 'no-choice basis' and met 'all legal and contractual requirements.' In May 2024, Sadiq Khan pledged to end rough sleeping by 2030, and secured £17 million in central funding to do so. But if dealing with homeless people who want to find accommodation is difficult enough, what to do about those who – like the asylum seekers in Pimlico – prefer to sleep outside? Rough sleeping is only the most visible form of homelessness, which can also include living in temporary accommodation, sofa-surfing – sometimes called 'hidden homelessness' – and statutory homelessness, where a tenant has been served an eviction notice. The nature of rough sleeping can be difficult to quantify. According to the Ministry of Housing, which collates estimates from local authorities, there are around 2,000 rough sleepers in London, a figure that has more than doubled since the pandemic. Its data show that in that period, rough sleeping has risen across the country, in some areas by many multiples, including 1050 per cent in Charnwood, Leicestershire. Other sources put the figures much higher. According to the homelessness charity St Mungo's, there were 4,427 people recorded rough sleeping in London in the first quarter of 2025, an increase of 8 per cent on the same period last year. 'More people are becoming homeless and people are staying homeless for longer,' says Sean Palmer, the executive director of strategy and transformation at St Mungo's. 'It's getting more difficult to move people off of the streets, because there's not a supply of social housing, there's a block at the end of the system.' Rough sleeping has already been in effect decriminalised, with only five people sentenced for 'sleeping out' in England and Wales since 2017. Begging prosecutions have also fallen: the 160 sentences handed down for begging in 2024 was the lowest annual total on record, less than a fifth of the series high in 2018. But Palmer says the law can still have a deterrent effect on people seeking help: 'The Act as it is now isn't good for our clients, people suffering from homelessness and people rough sleeping. Sometimes it encourages them to hide more because they don't want to be criminalised and are less likely to receive the help and support they need to resolve their homelessness.' He says Mungo's clients come from a wide range of situations. 'It could be problems with the housing market, problems with money. A lot of people are bouncing around insecure accommodation and eventually they run out of goodwill and end up on the streets. Often our clients have backgrounds in the care system, sometimes in the military. Often people are leaving a government institution – they might be discharged from hospital, or be being moved on from the asylum system, or they might have left prison. 'I can't see how criminalising someone is helpful. We see the numbers of people coming out of the criminal justice system into homelessness. Feeding them back into the criminal justice system for being homeless, or feeding people who are homeless for other reasons back into the justice system, seems entirely counterproductive.' Proposed new offences target aggressive beggars and gangs, rather than individuals. The cautionary example of the US, however, shows what can happen when authorities have insufficient powers to disperse rough sleepers. The knottier issue at the heart of legislation is that many people don't think camping ought to be illegal and have great sympathy for those who find themselves homeless, even if they object to the sight of tent cities in some of London's most prestigious areas. The legal fudges reflect this Nimbyism. It also means that as a political issue, rough sleeping will not be moving along any time soon. Additional reporting by Ollie Corfe Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

Company linked to Baroness Mone must pay back £121m for ‘faulty' PPE, court told
Company linked to Baroness Mone must pay back £121m for ‘faulty' PPE, court told

Yahoo

time10 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Company linked to Baroness Mone must pay back £121m for ‘faulty' PPE, court told

A company linked to Tory peer Michelle Mone should pay back more than £121 million for breaching a Government contract for 25 million surgical gowns during the coronavirus pandemic, the High Court has heard. The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) is suing PPE Medpro for allegedly breaching a deal for the gowns, with lawyers for the Government telling the court they were 'faulty' because they were not sterile. The company, a consortium led by Baroness Mone's husband, businessman Doug Barrowman, was awarded Government contracts by the former Conservative administration to supply PPE during the pandemic, after she recommended it to ministers. Both have denied wrongdoing. The Government is seeking to recover the costs of the contract, as well as the costs of transporting and storing the items, which amount to an additional £8,648,691. PPE Medpro said it 'categorically denies' breaching the contract, and its lawyers claimed the company has been 'singled out for unfair treatment'. Opening the trial on Wednesday, Paul Stanley KC, for the DHSC, said: 'This case is simply about whether 25 million surgical gowns provided by PPE Medpro were faulty. 'It is, in short, a technical case about detailed legal and industry standards that apply to sterile gowns.' Mr Stanley said in written submissions the 'initial contact with Medpro came through Baroness Mone', with discussions about the contract then going through one of the company's directors, Anthony Page. Baroness Mone remained 'active throughout' the negotiations, Mr Stanley said, with the peer stating Mr Barrowman had 'years of experience in manufacturing, procurement and management of supply chains'. But he told the court Baroness Mone's communications were 'not part of this case', which was 'simply about compliance'. He said: 'The department does not allege anything improper happened, and we are not concerned with any profits made by anybody.' In court documents from May this year, the DHSC said the gowns were delivered to the UK in 72 lots between August and October 2020, with £121,999,219.20 paid to PPE Medpro between July and August that year. The department rejected the gowns in December 2020 and told the company it would have to repay the money, but this has not happened and the gowns remain in storage, unable to be used. In written submissions for trial, Mr Stanley said 99.9999% of the gowns should have been sterile under the terms of the contract, equating to one in a million being unusable. The DHSC claims the contract also specified PPE Medpro had to sterilise the gowns using a 'validated process', attested by CE marking, which indicates a product has met certain medical standards. He said 'none of those things happened', with no validated sterilisation process being followed, and the gowns supplied with invalid CE marking. He continued that 140 gowns were later tested for sterility, with 103 failing. He said: 'Whatever was done to sterilise the gowns had not achieved its purpose, because more than one in a million of them was contaminated when delivered. 'On that basis, DHSC was entitled to reject the gowns, or is entitled to damages, which amount to the full price and storage costs.' In his written submissions, Charles Samek KC, for PPE Medpro, said the 'only plausible reason' for the gowns becoming contaminated was due to 'the transport and storage conditions or events to which the gowns were subject', after they had been delivered to the DHSC. He added the testing did not happen until several months after the gowns were rejected, and the samples selected were not 'representative of the whole population', meaning 'no proper conclusions may be drawn'. He said the DHSC's claim was 'contrived and opportunistic' and PPE Medpro had been 'made the 'fall guy' for a catalogue of failures and errors' by the department. He said: 'It has perhaps been singled out because of the high profiles of those said to be associated with PPE Medpro, and/or because it is perceived to be a supplier with financial resources behind it. 'In reality, an archetypal case of 'buyer's remorse', where DHSC simply seeks to get out of a bargain it wished it never entered into, left, as it is, with over £8 billion of purchased and unused PPE as a result of an untrammelled and uncontrolled buying spree with taxpayers' money.' He also said there was a 'delicious irony' that Baroness Mone was mentioned in the DHSC's written submissions, when she had 'zero relevance to the contractual issues in this case'. Neither Baroness Mone nor Mr Barrowman is due to give evidence in the trial, and Baroness Mone did not attend the first day of the hearing on Wednesday. A PPE Medpro spokesperson said the company 'categorically denies breaching its obligations' and will 'robustly defend' the claim. The trial before Mrs Justice Cockerill is due to last five weeks, with a judgment expected in writing at a later date.

Why a blank cheque won't solve Britain's policing woes
Why a blank cheque won't solve Britain's policing woes

Yahoo

time18 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Why a blank cheque won't solve Britain's policing woes

When it emerged last week that Sir Mark Rowley, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, had written to the Prime Minister warning that 'stark choices' lay ahead without significant investment in policing it all sounded rather familiar. The week before, Rowley, along with five other police chiefs, had penned a newspaper article saying that Government pledges on knife crime, violence against women and girls, and neighbourhood policing would be at risk without additional funding. That itself was an echo of similar statements the Met Commissioner and others had made over the previous six months. Clearly then, ahead of Wednesday's spending review, money is very much on police minds. Few would argue that forces across England and Wales haven't continued to struggle financially since the 'austerity years' of 2010 to 2019, when the jobs of 20,000 officers and 23,500 civilian staff were cut and hundreds of police stations closed. But the police can't pin all their woes on a lack of cash. Inefficiency is baked into the structure of the service, which was designed half a century ago, while forces haven't adapted quickly enough to seize on the potential offered up by new technology such as artificial intelligence. And although there may not be as many officers as chiefs would like, the number has returned to pre-austerity levels, with a near-record headcount of 148,886 last September. Meanwhile, public confidence in policing has been hit by a succession of self-made scandals, from the rape and murder of Sarah Everard by a serving Met officer, to police 'selfies' taken at a murder scene. Less than half of people questioned last year as part of the Office for National Statistics' authoritative Crime Survey said police were doing a good job, down from 63 per cent ten years ago. In fact, it's the lowest figure in two decades. At the same time, an increasingly common complaint is that officers aren't there when people need them. A staggering 54 per cent said they never see police patrols – double the figure recorded 15 years ago. 'I hear law-abiding citizens saying, 'What's the point of calling the police?'' says Andy Trotter, former chief constable of British Transport Police. 'What police chiefs were saying about not being able to tackle crime without extra funding – most people were saying 'What's new?' It has gone on for years. 'Imagine how many solvable crimes aren't being solved,' he adds. Trotter says police officers are 'overwhelmed' by the demands on their time and have had to 'prioritise' which crimes to focus on. That has meant offences such as shoplifting, phone theft and car crime are all too often neglected. The proportion of shoplifting cases resulting in a suspect being charged has fallen to 18 per cent from 28 per cent, in 2016, when a new system of calculating detection rates was introduced. Crimes classed as 'theft from the person', where phones, handbags and wallets are snatched, have meanwhile seen prosecution levels plummet to less than one per cent, and just one in fifty car thefts result in a charge or summons. 'Confidence in policing comes from nicking people – it's something about the everyday laying on of police hands. And it reassures the public – people want to see some action,' says Trotter, who served as an officer for 45 years in three forces, including the Met. 'I used to say, 'Get your hands on them, get cuffs on them, get them in the van'. As a cop in the West End, it would take 30 minutes to process someone. But now, with centralised custody suites and the paperwork involved, you're out of action for hours, so there's a real reluctance in marginal cases to make an arrest and leave colleagues behind,' he says. The arrest figures provide clear evidence to support Trotter's claim. In the year to the end of March 2024, there were 720,506 arrests across England and Wales, with the number of police officers at the time standing at 142,072. That works out as 5.1 arrests per officer – more than half the arrest rate, 10.5, in 2009, before policing budgets were cut. The drop in arrest levels may also be partly a result of the changing crime caseload, with a larger number of offences which are more complex to investigate, such as sexual violence and online fraud. In just over a decade, the number of sexual offences recorded by police has more than doubled to 205,000 last year, while police logged nearly 1.3 million offences of fraud and computer misuse, representing one in five of all crimes. There are growing concerns too that officers have become embroiled in petty squabbles on social media at the expense of more pressing public concerns. The arrest of a couple by Hertfordshire Police, following a bitter row with a local school, highlighted the way in which it appeared police had become deflected from their core mission. 'It's breathtaking that it could be thought to be worthwhile to send six police officers to a couple who were sending WhatsApp messages about a school – they'd be much better off catching prolific burglars and serial sex abusers,' says Sir Tom Winsor, who served for ten years as head of the policing watchdog, HM Inspectorate of Constabulary, Fire and Rescue Services. Central to concerns about the effective deployment of police officers is the recording of non-hate crime incidents (NCHIs). Analysis by The Telegraph shows that almost 100,000 NCHIs were logged by forces over the last decade, with last year's figure still around 75 per cent of the total in 2021 – when police were urged to scale back on their use. NCHIs are not criminal offences, but incidents perceived by the complainant to be motivated by hostility or prejudice, based on their 'protected characteristics', which includes their race or religion. They are defended by police as a means of gathering intelligence and monitoring community tensions, in order to forestall criminal behaviour. But should officers spend their valuable hours noting social media posts that are merely insulting or offensive? Winsor is doubtful. 'It's the online version of the 'broken windows' theory – nip it in the bud and it won't get worse,' says the 67-year-old lawyer. 'But there is a degree of proportionality that is necessary because you can't do everything.' Police officers could certainly do a lot more if forces made the most of advances in technology, to free them from mundane jobs, such as redacting sensitive documents, typing up crime reports and transferring information onto separate databases. Winsor recalls a visit to Lancashire Police in his early days as Chief Inspector of Constabulary. 'An officer told me that in order to find out what the force knew about a person, an address, a vehicle or a weapon he had to interrogate 12 different systems. Things are better now but probably not as good as the public would expect,' he says. In 2023, a productivity review led by two former chief constables identified 26 ways of freeing-up 38 million hours of police time. That would equate to 20,000 extra police officers. The recommendations included cutting red tape, reducing sickness absence and using computer technology for clerical tasks. A second report from the productivity panel, in 2024, said a further 23 million hours could be saved – including through the expansion of AI. 'Modern technology is the golden key to police efficiency and effectiveness,' says Winsor. Yet, progress on technology has been painfully slow – and not helped by a failure to manage large-scale projects, such as ESN (Emergency Services Network), an upgrade on the ageing emergency services communications network Airwave, which is a decade behind schedule and £3.1 billion over budget. 'You have to lay much of it at the door of the Home Office,' says Trotter. 'The replacement of Airwave has gone on for years – it's an area that has not been a success, it's wasted a lot of money and is still not resolved. It needs an inquiry,' he adds. There are glaring inefficiencies in other areas, too. Across England and Wales, each of the 43 forces, no matter how large or small, has its own leadership team, civilian support set-up and administrative functions, such as payroll, legal affairs and human resources. Pooling some of that work would make financial sense, says Winsor. 'The back office stuff could and should be done either regionally or nationally, in the way it's done in the NHS or the military,' he says. In 2022, a report from the independent think-tank, the Police Foundation, estimated that forces in England and Wales could save 'hundreds of millions' of pounds annually by combining support teams – as well as purchasing police uniform, equipment, vehicles, forensic services and computers centrally, rather than negotiating individual contracts with suppliers, as many constabularies do. But it seems the introduction of police and crime commissioners, a decade earlier, cemented a 'localist' approach, hindering prospects for developing a more cohesive and less fragmented system of policing, with the economies of scale that would result. 'The police and crime commissioner model has some strengths but it can hold things back, because in my time there were far too many who could not see beyond their force boundaries – and crime doesn't stop at force boundaries,' says Winsor, who left the watchdog three years ago. The author of the Police Foundation report, its former director Rick Muir, is now working as a Home Office adviser, developing plans for a white paper, based around the establishment of a new National Centre of Policing. It is long overdue. Rowley and other police leaders support the case for a reorganisation. Although their immediate concern is whether they'll have enough resources over the next three years, they are aware that it is not just about the money – radical structural reform is needed to put forces on a long-term sustainable financial footing and ensure the public get the police service they deserve. As Peter Kyle, the Science and Technology Secretary, put it at the weekend, the police must 'do their bit' and 'embrace change'. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store