The private UK island with its own beach could be yours for £5.5m
The private island of Shuna, located in the Scottish Inner Hebrides, has been put up for sale with an asking price of £5.5 million.
Spanning 1,110 acres, the island features sandy beaches, a ruined castle, six holiday homes, and a working farm with a flock of 220 Beulah sheep.
Sotheby's International Realty is marketing the island as an ideal location for a boutique hospitality venture or a wellness destination, offering complete seclusion.
Shuna boasts a rich history, with archaeological sites dating back 9,000 years, including Stone Age burial mounds and Iron Age ritual hoards.
The Gully family has owned and managed the island for the past 80 years, with Edward Gully having stewarded it since 1945.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
27 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Starmer's gamble has failed. Now Reeves will crucify the middle class
Don't believe the denials, the hubristic promises to fight on, the chest-thumping from deep down in the Number Ten bunker. It's all over for Sir Keir Starmer, a hollow husk of a Prime Minister stripped of his last vestiges of authority and credibility. His final, doomed showdown with his MPs over his plan to trim incapacity benefits will only expose his impotence and lack of strategic nous. His premiership, not even a year old, is already on borrowed time. He will have to surrender again, or suffer total humiliation. He is now beholden to Labour MPs, and survives only on their say-so. There are, for the first time, whispers that he could be ousted as early as after the May local elections. I'm not so sure: I suspect that Rachel Reeves, his beleaguered Chancellor, is likely to be sacrificed first. She has certainly failed disastrously. She convinced herself that her supposed technocratic brilliance and moral superiority meant she could manage Britain's broken economy and welfare state more competently than the Tories. She sought to combine a few cuts with a massive increase in overall expenditure in a crude attempt at 'triangulation'. She lied about Tory 'black holes' and repeatedly broke the spirit of her party's election promises, jacking up National Insurance. Her staggering arrogance has caught up with her. The deficit is too high, and gilt yields have surged. She hasn't fixed housebuilding or anything else. Her tax rises have vandalised the economy. Britain will lose 16,500 millionaires this year, on top of 10,800 last year, according to Henley and Partners. We are now home to just 156 billionaires, down from 165 in 2024. The rich are taking jobs, spending and tax receipts with them. The number of children in private schools is down 11,000; Labour expected its hateful VAT raid to force just 3,000 children to move to state schools. The irony is that Labour MPs still see Reeves as too Right-wing, even though she is the most Left-wing Chancellor since Denis Healey. Her Personal Independence Payments reforms would save £4.5 billion a year by 2029-2030; working-age health and disability spending would still increase by £15.4 billion between 2024-25 and 2029-30. These are not cuts, merely slightly slower spending growth, and yet even this has proved too much. Labour isn't in the mood for nuance, for being sensible. They want to revolutionise Britain, and damn the consequences. Starmer can't pass the buck. The activists who backed him for Labour leader liked his 2020 personal manifesto. He wasn't Jeremy Corbyn, for sure, but neither was he another Tony Blair. He promised to maintain Labour's 'radical values' and hailed 'the moral case for socialism'. His foreign policy proposals explains his choice of Lord Hermer as our worst ever Attorney General. Starmer demanded 'no more illegal wars. Introduce a Prevention of Military Intervention Act and put human rights at the heart of foreign policy. Review all UK arms sales.' His other ideas have yet to be implemented. He called for an 'increase [in] income tax for the top 5 per cent of earners', the dismantling of Universal Credit and an 'end [to] the Tories' cruel sanctions regime'; the abolition of tuition fees; massive labour market regulations and powers to the trade unions; a defence of 'free movement'; the lionisation of the 'green deal'; the nationalisation of utilities; and the end of NHS outsourcing. This is what Labour thought they would get when he became Leader, and they are determined Starmer should deliver at least some of this agenda as PM. They accepted he had to pretend to be somebody he wasn't at the election, to fool centrist voters, but will no longer tolerate any deviation from what they believe was the plan all along. Britain is becoming ever more polarised. Some 25 per cent of the public believe taxes on top incomes are too high, close to the highest support for that enlightened position of the past 35 years; 24 per cent think the level is about right, the British Social Attitudes Survey notes. But 44 per cent think they are too low, up from 27 per cent in 2006. The Right is becoming sounder, but the Left is becoming ever more extreme, which is bad for Labour. Whatever it does is never good enough. Today's average activist is a graduate with quasi-communist economic ideas who wants to rejoin the EU, implement woke radicalism, believes in open borders, hates Israel and is soft on crime. They are not happy that Starmer is buying F-35A jets able to carry nuclear warheads. They do not support spending 5 per cent of GDP on defence (including 'resilience' expenditure), as agreed with Nato. They are shocked that Palestine Action is being categorised as a terrorist group. They are ideologically and sociologically similar to the young, prosperous, uber-credentialed New Yorkers who picked the woeful 'democratic socialist' and 'anti-Zionist' Zohran Mamdani in the Democratic Mayoral Primary. The coup de grâce for Starmer will come if a new Left-wing party is launched. If it were led by Jeremy Corbyn, such a venture would attract 10 per cent of the electorate, a poll for the New Statesman suggests, cutting Labour's share to 20 per cent. In alliance with the Greens, a Corbynite party – absorbing the pro-Gaza independents – could poll 15 per cent, overtaking the Lib Dems, and doing to Labour what Reform did to the Tories. To buy time, Starmer will need to concede to the Left on everything. He will start defaming Israel again. He will push through his Employment Rights Bill. He will task Reeves with one final mission: raise even more taxes at a kamikaze Autumn Budget to pay for defence commitments, the U-turns and to splash out even more on Labour's client groups. She will surely freeze tax thresholds, dragging millions more into higher bands. She may impose the first increase in petrol duty since 2010-11. She will slap more taxes on gambling. Such 'soft' measures won't be sufficient. She may also target pension tax relief, or increase inheritance tax, or raid Isas, or revalue council tax, or mull nationwide road pricing, or even consider the nuclear option, a wealth tax. It will be tantamount to declaring total war on the aspirational, on anybody who wants to work, save and improve their lives. The Left will lap it all up, but Britain will never recover.
The Independent
32 minutes ago
- The Independent
‘Disconnect' between Government and businesses over post-Brexit trade
There is a disconnect between the Government and businesses operating under the terms of the Windsor Framework, a House of Lords committee has heard. Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn said 'goods are flowing' and they listen to stakeholders, adding they have an obligation to make the framework work. 'The goods are flowing from GB to Northern Ireland, from Northern Ireland to GB, which is of course what we want, and the economy in Northern Ireland is doing OK,' he added. However, former UUP leader Lord Empey said they have received different reports on operating under the post-Brexit trading deal. Nick Thomas-Symonds, Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office, also appeared at the House of Lords Northern Ireland Scrutiny Committee which has been holding evidence sessions examining the operation of the Windsor Framework. He told peers that he has seen in person the arrangements at Belfast Port, and listened to Northern Ireland businesses, describing the region's voice on the issue as being 'heard loud and clear'. The Windsor Framework was agreed between the UK and the EU in 2023, amending the Northern Ireland Protocol. It governs post-Brexit trading arrangements in the region. The DUP later reached the Safeguarding The Union deal with the previous UK government to further reduce some checks and paperwork on goods moving from the rest of the UK into Northern Ireland, leading to the restoration of the powersharing Executive at Stormont last year. However, many unionists remain opposed to the framework, stating it creates a new regulatory border within the United Kingdom and because Northern Ireland continues to follow some EU laws relating to goods. Mr Benn conceded there are 'quite a lot' of bodies relating to the framework, referencing the East-West Council, Intertrade UK and the independent monitoring panel which is set to issue its first six monthly report in the autumn. 'They are all bodies set up to deal with different aspects… there are quite a lot of bodies, they are intended to give reassurance to people that someone independent is looking at how the whole thing is working, then people can read the reports and make a judgment,' he said. Lord Empey contended there 'is a disconnect' with what the ministers were saying, and what the committee has heard from others. 'We received a report yesterday from the FSB (Federation of Small Businesses) of widespread trade friction, low strategic confidence, dual market access under-utilised, government support gaps, operational disruption and costs,' he said. 'We understand you have been confronted with a situation you didn't make but our job in doing a report is to try and make things better, even though the problem might be fundamentally insoluble in principle in the long term. 'I would just urge you to recognise the fact that however hard you're trying, out there is a gap.' Mr Thomas-Symonds responded by saying he was 'not suggesting a counsel of perfection to this committee'. 'I'm coming out to set out the measures the Government is taking to try to raise awareness, try to ensure that businesses of all sizes are aware of where they can go for information and assistance,' he said. 'But where there are issues, it is certainly not a brick wall being built or an inability to listen. Where there are issues that are being raised and there are problems, my instinct is always to try and find a practical solution to address them.'
The Guardian
35 minutes ago
- The Guardian
It's also a ‘new era' for share prices in the defence sector
It's a miracle. Babcock International, the defence contractor with a specialism in kitting out the UK's nuclear submarines, has emerged from the depths. After about half a decade in which the story was mostly about cost overruns, acquisition indigestion, accounting woes, pension deficits and too much debt, Babcock is suddenly back in the FTSE 100 index and is a hot stock. The share price has more than doubled this year. Of course it's not really a miracle because the performance is easily explained. A fix-the-basics strategy started in 2020 under ex-Cobham boss David Lockwood and has worked. The last of the badly performing major contracts – to build first-of-a-kind Type 31 frigates for the Royal Navy – is no longer spitting out provisions. Meanwhile, the group has kept its promises to the City on cashflow et cetera and was able on Wednesday to lift its medium-term target for operating margins by a percentage point to 9%. The pension position is vastly improved, dividends are back and there's enough cash for a £200m buyback. Yet that progress alone would not have pushed the shares so high so soon. The other part of the tale, of course, is 'the new era for defence' as Lockwood put it, meaning the coming Nato splurge in spending. Babcock's full-year numbers happened to land on the day that Nato allies formally declared a commitment to invest of 5% of GDP annually on defence and security by 2035. 'Public market investors appear convinced this pivot in govt spending will happen. European defence stocks are trading like crypto/memes,' tweeted Simon French, the chief economist at Panmure Liberum. You can see what it means. If the share prices of Babcock, Rolls-Royce (up 56% this year) and BAE Systems (58%) are soaring, try Germany's largest arms company, Rheinmetall – 158% higher since January. It's true the Nato commitment is enormous. Analysts at Berenberg calculate the core defence spending element (ie not the whole) adds up to $600bn a year, of which $350bn would come from non-US allies, assuming the US and countries in Europe's north and east spend 3.5% of GDP, while countries in Europe's south and west only manage 2% and others do 3%. In Babcock's case, it is the second largest contractor to the Ministry of Defence so can hardly fail to benefit from the natural home bias in defence spending. The UK has already committed £6bn to upgrade nuclear submarine production and the list of what Babcock does elsewhere is long – from maintenance work with long-term contracts for all three armed forces, to technical trading and more. Meanwhile, on its civil nuclear construction side, the breezes are also strong, assuming Sizewell C and small modular reactors happen. This is specialist stuff; the world is not awash with competitors. Whether the 'new era' for defence really arrives as scheduled, and to the last percentage point, is open to question. Share prices in the sector may also be ahead of events. Defence companies, traditionally viewed as dull income stocks even when the contracts are free of hiccups, are now typically trading on 25-times earnings. That will take some getting used to. But it's hard to argue with the general direction. If even three-quarters of these spending commitments are fulfilled, a fundamental change is happening.
