Connect with us

Published

on

The boss of the world’s deadliest motorsport event says riders have to accept risks, while insisting the Isle of Man TT is doing more than ever to improve safety.

This year’s two-week motorcycling festival began on Monday with new safety measures after six competitors died last year – equalling a tragic record.

But any talk of banning the event is dismissed on the island despite 266 fatalities now on the mountain course in the 116-year history of the races.

Clerk of the course Gary Thompson
Image:
Clerk of the course Gary Thompson

“We try to manage risk much better than was done in the past,” clerk of the course Gary Thompson told Sky News.

“The riders sign on, they know that risk. And, almost for them, that’s the challenge. For us, we manage that risk without taking away that challenge.”

The risks don’t bring great financial rewards compared to other sports. Riders compete for the thrill on a circuit winding through towns and villages on narrow roads past houses.

Padding on lamp posts offers minimal protection. But to manage the hazards, there is now GPS tracking of every competitor and a digital red flag system.

More on Isle Of Man

It is a celebratory fortnight for the local economy. The TT races can attract 40,000 visitors – around half the population of this British Crown Dependency in the Irish Sea.

Pic: Isle of Man TT races
Image:
Pic: Isle of Man TT races

‘A lot of people think we’re idiots’

And Peter Hickman – who has won nine TT races – told Sky News: “I’m not forced to be here. I want to be here. It’s an obvious risk.”

Risks helped him set the course record in 2018 and he will continue to take them – undeterred by the fact only one year in the last 85 has seen no deaths in races.

“A lot of people think we’re just crazy or idiots,” Hickman said as he prepared for the first day of racing. “You take your brain out and put your helmet on.”

Peter Hickman
Image:
Peter Hickman

“It’s very, very much the opposite effect. So you’ve really got to use your brain.

“And you’ve got to take the risk when you want to take the risk – or if it’s necessary.

“So, for example, I hold the outright lap record here and I’m constantly getting asked, ‘Are you going to break that record?’ And my answer always is ‘only if I have to’.

“And by that I mean, I win the race at the slowest possible pace. Because the slower I win the race, the less risk to me.”

Pic: Isle of Man TT races
Image:
Pic: Isle of Man TT races

And the challenge of winning at the world’s oldest motorcycle event remains exhilarating for the 36-year-old.

“Life is short as it is,” he said. “I would rather go away doing something like this.”

The hope of organisers is that everyone leaves alive.

Read more:
Dad and son among racers who died in 2022 event
Rider defends Isle of Man TT
Organisers wrongly identified competitor who was killed

Even as we’re interviewing the Isle of Man TT medical chief at a hospital, a helicopter lands with a rider injured on the first morning of the competition. His condition was unknown.

Dr Gareth Davies
Image:
Dr Gareth Davies

Complex network of medical staff on hand

Dr Gareth Davies said: “We have a system whereby there are trackside medics that will be at the rider’s side within a matter of seconds.

“And then we have three different helicopters to support the racing, three response cars, and then about five or six different ambulances. So there’s quite a complex network of medical staff there.”

How can medics contemplate a sporting event that is so perilous?

Dr Davies said: “In our daily working lives, we see people going to work that are killed, just travelling on a push bike or an accident on the way to work.

“We see people who may be undertaking climbing or other sporting activities. So it’s not alien to see people injured.

“From our point of view. I think we very much see the racing as a huge challenge, a huge sort of celebration of the human spirit, and we’re here to support them.”

Additional reporting by Tyrone Francis, sports producer

Continue Reading

UK

Image of Queen Elizabeth II was ‘digitally enhanced at source’, Getty picture agency says

Published

on

By

Image of Queen Elizabeth II was 'digitally enhanced at source', Getty picture agency says

A photograph of the late Queen, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, was “digitally enhanced at source”, according to Getty Images.

The picture agency says it has added an editor’s note to the image, which was shared by Kensington Palace in April 2023 on what would have been the late Queen’s 97th birthday.

The palace shared the picture on 21 April last year, saying it was taken by the Princess of Wales at Balmoral in the summer of 2022.

In a statement, Getty said: “Getty Images can confirm that in accordance with its editorial policy it has placed an editor’s note on a handout image stating the image has been digitally enhanced at source.”

The decision follows picture agencies issuing a “kill notice” for a photo released on Mother’s Day by the Princess of Wales. She later admitted to editing the image.

This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly.

Please refresh the page for the fullest version.

You can receive Breaking News alerts on a smartphone or tablet via the Sky News App. You can also follow @SkyNews on X or subscribe to our YouTube channel to keep up with the latest news.

Continue Reading

UK

New football regulator announced to vet prospective owners and prevent breakaway competitions

Published

on

By

New football regulator announced to vet prospective owners and prevent breakaway competitions

The government has announced its plan for an Independent Football Regulator (IFR) for the professional men’s game.

The IFR came about following a review by Tory MP Tracey Crouch, which itself was launched after the attempt by clubs to form the European Super League.

But the Premier League has responded by saying they “remain concerned” about the legislation, which they claim could unintentionally “weaken the competitiveness and appeal of English football“.

Among the measures contained in the IFR – which will be subject to parliamentary scrutiny – are:

• New “stronger tests” for new owners and directors to “stop clubs falling into the wrong hands”. They face being blocked and even struck off from future attempts;

• “Backstop powers” to sort out the financial distribution between the Premier League and English Football League, if they cannot come to an agreement themselves;

• All clubs from National League One to the Premier League will be need to be licensed to compete in competitions, following “a number of issues in recent years including financial mismanagement, breakaway plans for the European Super League, and changes to club names, badges and colours against the wishes of fans”;

More on European Super League

• New requirements to protect from “breakaway competitions” and “stadium relocations”;

• An obligation to consult fans on “key off-field decisions” will also be a requirement of the licence. This could include decisions on cub heritage and strategic direction.

Read more:
Minister urges clubs to seal football ‘New Deal’ ahead of legislation
Premier League shelves New Deal vote amid club stalemate

Politics Hub with Sophy Ridge
Politics Hub with Sophy Ridge

Sky News Monday to Thursday at 7pm.
Watch live on Sky channel 501, Freeview 233, Virgin 602, the Sky News website and app or YouTube.

Tap here for more

As well as statutory regulation of football clubs, the government has also announced that the IFR will produce a periodical report, called “State of the Game”, which will analyse the financial state of football.

The government says the IFR will not be “overly-interventionist”, and will instead take an “advocacy first” approach – although these will be backed by a “broad suite of powers to investigate suspected non-compliance, compel information, and enforce if necessary”.

It is also pledged that the bill will have “no input in on-field decisions and will act in a way that minimises any impact on sporting competitions”.

A “shadow regulator” will be set up to run while the IFR is created, with a location, chair and board make-up all still up in the air.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said: “Football has long been one of our greatest sources of national pride. Up and down the country, it brings people together in celebration or commiseration.

“But for too long some clubs have been abused by unscrupulous owners who get away with financial mismanagement, which at worst can lead to complete collapse – as we saw in the upsetting cases of Bury and Macclesfield Town.

“This bill is a historic moment for football fans – it will make sure their voices are front and centre, prevent a breakaway league, protect the financial sustainability of clubs, and protect the heritage of our clubs big and small.”

Ms Crouch said that “football fans can begin to breathe a sigh of relief in the knowledge that the next steps towards protecting the long term sustainability of the pyramid have now been taken”.

In response to the announcement, a spokesperson for the Premier League said it would study the bill once it is published.

“We agree it is vital that football clubs are sustainable, remain at the heart of their communities and that fans are fundamental to the game,” it added.

“The government has consistently stated that it wishes to support the Premier League’s continued global success which generates funding to help sustain the entire football pyramid.

👉 Listen above then tap here to follow Politics at Jack at Sam’s wherever you get your podcasts 👈

“With our clubs, we have advocated for a proportionate regime that enables us to build on our position as the most widely watched league in the world.

“Mindful that the future growth of the Premier League is not guaranteed, we remain concerned about any unintended consequences of legislation that could weaken the competitiveness and appeal of English football.”

Continue Reading

UK

Rwanda bill amendments rejected by Commons as parliamentary ping pong begins

Published

on

By

Rwanda bill amendments rejected by Commons as parliamentary ping pong begins

The House of Commons has rejected the House of Lords’ first attempt to amend the Safety of Rwanda Bill – with the legislation sent back to the upper chamber.

A total of 10 amendments were put before MPs, but Conservatives voted each of them down.

Among the changes proposed by peers was scrapping the government’s plan to force judges to consider Rwanda as a safe country.

Politics latest: Sunak may face confidence vote ‘by accident’

Politics Hub with Sophy Ridge
Politics Hub with Sophy Ridge

Sky News Monday to Thursday at 7pm.
Watch live on Sky channel 501, Freeview 233, Virgin 602, the Sky News website and app or YouTube.

Tap here for more

They also want to allow politicians and judges to consider evidence of whether Rwanda is safe – something which is prevented by the proposed law.

Another change suggested would prevent those who had served with or for the British armed forces from being sent to Rwanda if they arrived illegally in the UK.

The Commons debated the amendments for around four hours before voting began, with both Rishi Sunak and Sir Keir Starmer both in attendance when divisions began.

More on Rishi Sunak

How MPs voted on the amendments

  • Amendment one: Seeks to ensure bill is fully compliant with rule of law – Rejected 328 to 250;
  • Amendment two: Removes claim that Rwanda is
  • Amendment three: Provides mechanism for parliament to be informed about treaty – Rejected 324 to 253;
  • Amendment four: Allows presumption Rwanda is safe to be rebutted with credible evidence – Rejected 321 to 252;
  • Amendment five: Allows courts to consider appeals based on the safety of Rwanda – Rejected 322 to 249;
  • Amendment six: Restores ability of courts and tribunals to consider if Rwanda is safe – Rejected 324 to 251;
  • Amendment seven: Courts can consider review claims regarding removals of children – Rejected 320 to 250;
  • Amendment eight: Parliament must be given a timeline for removals – Rejected 318 to 255;
  • Amendment nine: Seeks to protect victims of modern slavery from being deported – Rejected 320 to 251;
  • Amendment ten: Exempts armed forces personnel, their dependants and families from removal – Rejected 312 to 255.

MPs on opposition benches spoke in support of the amendments proposed by the upper chamber.

Labour’s shadow Home Office minister, Stephen Kinnock, said: “They each serve to make this shambolic mess of a Bill marginally less absurd, and as I will come to in a second, they would serve only to put in statute what ministers have actually promised from that despatch box.”

There was also opposition from the SNP’s Joanna Cherry, who said: “Based on the evidence I have read, and the evidence the Joint Committee on Human Rights has heard so far, based on what I heard and saw on the ground in Kigali, I remain of the view that Rwanda is still not a safe country for asylum seekers.”

Read more:
Four Rwandans granted refuge in UK over fears of persecution
Rwanda plan a leadership issue as much as a policy one | Beth Rigby

The Green Party’s Caroline Lucas called the bill an “extraordinary and profound attack” on constitutional democracy.

And the Conservative former minister Sir Jeremy Wright said he was “troubled” by the “absolutist, if not eternalist, nature of the wording of the bill”.

Tory former minister Sir Robert Buckland said he was minded to support some of the amendments, and indeed voted in favour of the second and fourth.

But there was support for the government from its backbenches during the debate.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Which countries send asylum seekers abroad?

Sir Bill Cash said one of the amendments threatened parliamentary sovereignty and was “one of the most serious and dangerous clauses that I have seen in recent statutory history”.

And Richard Graham said the amendments were “not relevant” to what the government was trying to do.

The Lords are set to consider the bill with its removed amendments on Wednesday.

Home Office minister Michael Tomlinson emphasised the government’s belief that Rwanda is safe, following the agreement of a new treaty.

This sought to address concerns raised by the Supreme Court when they ruled previous legislation incompatible with human rights laws.

👉 Listen above then tap here to follow Politics at Jack at Sam’s wherever you get your podcasts 👈

Mr Tomlinson said: “It is the treaty, the bill and the published evidence pack which together demonstrate that Rwanda is safe for relocated individuals and that the government’s approach is tough but fair and lawful.

“The government is clear that we’ve assessed Rwanda to be safe and we’ve published evidence to substantiate that point.”

Continue Reading

Trending