Connect with us

Published

on

Captain Sir Tom Moore’s daughter has admitted keeping £800,000 from the three books he wrote before he died – despite the prologue of one of them saying the money would go to the charity in his name.

Hannah Ingram-Moore has also told TalkTV her father had wanted the family to keep the profits from the books in Club Nook Ltd – a firm separate to the Captain Tom Foundation charity.

In extracts of the interview with Piers Morgan published in The Sun, Ms Ingram-Moore is reported to have said: “These were father’s books, and it was honestly such a joy for him to write them, but they were his books.

“He had an agent and they worked on that deal, and his wishes were that that money would sit in Club Nook, and in the end . . . ”

Morgan interjects with: “For you to keep?”

She replies: “Yes… specifically.”

Sir Tom, who died in February 2021, became a national figure after raising £38.9m for the NHS, including gift aid, by walking 100 laps of his garden before his 100th birthday at the height of the country’s first national COVID lockdown in April 2020.

More from UK

Thousands of buyers of his three books, including the autobiography Tomorrow Will Be A Good Day, were reportedly unaware that the profits were going to the family.

Ms Ingram-Moore was joined by her husband Colin and their children Benji, 19, and Georgia, 14 during the interview – with the family insisting there was no suggestion anyone who bought the books thought the money was going to charity.

However, the prologue of the autobiography reads: “Astonishingly at my age, with the offer to write this memoir I have also been given the chance to raise even more money for the charitable foundation now established in my name.”

Handout photo of Second World War veteran Captain Tom Moore with his daughter Hannah, as they wave to a Battle of Britain Memorial Flight flypast of a Spitfire and a Hurricane passing over his home as he celebrates his 100th birthday.

Ms Ingram-Moore was also asked by Morgan about when she was paid £18,000 for attending the Virgin Media O2 Captain Tom Foundation Connector Awards in 2021.

This was despite the fact she was already paid as the chief executive of the charity.

The money was paid to her family firm the Maytrix Group, with Ms Ingram-Moore keeping £16,000 and donating £2,000 to the Captain Tom Foundation.

Holding back tears, she told TalkTV: “I think it’s all very easy to look back and think I should have made different ­decisions, but I hadn’t planned on being the CEO.”

The family also spoke of their “regret” over the spa and pool complex at their £1.2m home.

Ms Ingram-Moore reportedly told planners they wanted an office for the charity set up in Sir Tom’s name but built the complex instead.

Plans for the site said it would be used partly “in connection with The Captain Tom Foundation and its charitable objectives”.

However, a subsequent retrospective application a year ago for a larger building containing a spa pool was refused by the planning authority.

A view of the home of Hannah Ingram-Moore, the daughter of the late Captain Sir Tom Moore, at Marston Moretaine, Bedfordshire. The Captain Tom Foundation has stopped taking money from donors after planning chiefs ordered that an unauthorised building in the home of the daughter of the late charity fundraiser be demolished. Picture date: Wednesday July 5, 2023. PA Photo. Central Bedfordshire Council said a retrospective planning application had been refused and an enforcement notice issued requiring the demolition of the "now-unauthorised building" containing a spa pool. On Tuesday, the foundation put out a statement saying it would not seek donations, and was closing all payment channels, while the Charity Commission carried out an inquiry. See PA story SOCIAL CaptainTom. Photo credit should read: Joe Giddens/PA Wire
Image:
Ms Ingram-Moore’s home where she built the unauthorised spa

The Captain Tom Foundation stopped taking donations when the planning dispute came to light.

Ms Ingram-Moore said: “We have to accept that we made a decision, and it was probably the wrong one.”

In the interview, which airs at 8pm on Thursday night, Morgan also asked Ms Ingram-Moore about the annual salary of £85,000 pro-rata on a rolling three month basis that she received to head the foundation.

She replied: “Yes, and look, absolutely in hindsight, the two things should have been separated, but that’s not how it landed, and it was done with love and with trying to ensure that the community and the Captain Tom Foundation benefited, and yes I got paid.”

The Maytrix Group is also reported to have accepted up to £100,000 in furlough money and £47,500 in COVID loans despite making huge profits in the pandemic.

Continue Reading

UK

Tech firms face fines up to £60,000 for failing to remove knife crime content

Published

on

By

Tech firms face fines up to £60,000 for failing to remove knife crime content

Social media companies will be fined up to £60,000 each time a post relating to knife crime is not removed from their sites in a bid to stop children viewing “sickening” content.

The new sanction expands on previously announced plans to fine individual tech executives up to £10,000 if their platforms fail to remove material advertising or glorifying knives following 48 hours of a police warning.

It means tech platforms and their executives could collectively face up to £70,000 in penalties for every post relating to knife crime they fail to remove, with the new laws applying to online search engines as well as social media platforms and marketplaces.

Crime and policing minister Dame Diana Johnson said the content that young people scroll through every day online “is sickening” adding: “That is why we are now going further than ever to hold to account the tech companies who are not doing enough to safeguard young people from content which incites violence, particularly in young boys.”

The sanctions for tech platforms will be introduced via an amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill.

It is separate to the Online Safety Bill, which aims to protect children from online harm, which some campaigners and parents have criticised for not going far enough.

The Home Office said today’s announcement follows “significant consultation” with the Coalition to Tackle Knife Crime, launched by Sir Keir Starmer in September as part of his bid to half knife offences in a decade.

More on Knife Crime

Patrick Green, chief executive of The Ben Kinsella Trust, a knife prevention charity which is part of the coalition, welcomed the measure, telling Sky News social media companies have “proved themselves to be incapable of self-regulation”.

“There’s been a real reluctance of social media companies to take action sufficiently quickly. It’s shameful, we shouldn’t need legislation,” he said.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Why are young men carrying knives?


The Ben Kinsella Trust is named after teenager Ben Kinsella who was fatally stabbed in 2008 on the way home from the pub after celebrating his GCSEs.

Months earlier, Ben had written to then prime minister Gordon Brown to urge his government to tackle knife crime.

Knife crime rates soar

However, the problem has soared since then.

In the year to March 2024, there were 53 teenage victims aged 13-19 in England and Wales, according to the Office for National Statistics. That is a 140% increase on the 22 teenage victims a decade earlier.

Image:
Ben Kinsella was just 16 when he was fatally stabbed in June 2008

Overall, police recorded 54,587 knife-related offences in 2024, up 2% on the previous year and more than double the 26,000 offences recorded in 2014.

Mr Green told Sky News that while knife crime has been happening “long before social media took hold”, online content glamorising the possession of a knife is hindering efforts to reduce it.

“There will be pictures of these knives [on social media] with ‘follow me’ luring young people onto places where these knives are sold. It’s never been easier for a child to buy a knife.”

‘One part of a larger problem’

However, while welcoming today’s announcement he said social media was “one part of a larger problem”, adding that “provisions of youth services have been decimated” and “much more needs to be done”.

The government’s plan to halve knife crime in a decade includes banning zombie-style knives and ninja swords, with a nationwide surrender scheme launching in July, and stronger laws for online retailers selling knives.

Ministers also want to increase prison sentences for selling weapons to under-18s and introduce a new offence for possessing a weapon with intent for violence, with a prison sentence of up to four years.

Read more:
Young people in Birmingham drill recording studio on reality of knife crime
What are the UK’s knife crime laws – and how could they be tightened?

Ben Obese-Jecty. Pic: Parliament
Image:
Ben Obese-Jecty. Pic: Parliament

Government ‘can’t police the internet’

Last month, Conservative MP Ben Obese-Jecty suggested violent videos viewed online should be used as evidence to prosecute under the new law. He was speaking during a debate he secured on knife crime, in which he criticised a wider culture which “valorises” criminality and gangs in music and the media.

On the measures announced today, the Huntingdon MP told Sky News that while “any measures to help reduce instances of knife crime are hugely welcome”, he was doubtful that the sanctions could be effectively enforced.

“The sheer scale of content on social media that glorifies or incites violence is staggering, let alone content returned by search engines,” he said.

“The government can’t possibly hope to realistically police the internet.

“The government must tackle the culture that promotes and encourages the use of knives and ensure that there are robust consequences to doing so, not simply pretend they will have online content removed.”

Continue Reading

UK

Public failed by water regulators and government – as bills rise, spending watchdog says

Published

on

By

Public failed by water regulators and government - as bills rise, spending watchdog says

Water regulators and the government have failed to provide a trusted and resilient industry at the same time as bills rise, the state spending watchdog has said.

Public trust in the water sector has reached a record low, according to a report from the National Audit Office (NAO) on the privatised industry.

Not since monitoring began in 2011 has consumer trust been at such a level, it said.

At the same time, households face double-digit bill hikes over the next five years.

The last time bills rose at this rate was just before the global financial crash, between 2004-05 and 2005-06.

Regulation failure

All three water regulators – Ofwat, the Environment Agency and Drinking Water Inspectorate – and the government department for environment, food and rural affairs (Defra) have played a role in the failure, the NAO said, adding they do not know enough about the condition or age of water infrastructure and the level of funding needed to maintain it.

More on Environment

Since the utilities were privatised in 1989, the average rate of replacement for water assets is 125 years, the watchdog said. If the current pace is maintained, it will take 700 years to replace the existing water mains.

A resident collects water at bottle station at Asda, Totton.
Pic: PA
Image:
The NAO said the government and regulators have failed to drive sufficient investment into the sector. File pic: PA

Water firms have grappled with leaky pipes and record sewage outflows into UK waterways in recent years, with enforcement action under way against all wastewater companies.

Despite there being three regulators tasked with water, there is no one responsible for proactively inspecting wastewater to prevent environmental harm, the report found.

Instead, regulation is reactive, fining firms when harm has already occurred.

Financial penalties and rewards, however, have not worked as water company performance hasn’t been “consistent or significantly improved” in recent years, the report said.

‘Gaps, inconsistencies, tension’

The NAO called for this to change and for a body to be tasked with the whole process and assets. At present, the Drinking Water Inspectorate monitors water coming into a house, but there is no entity looking at water leaving a property.

Similarly no body is tasked with cybersecurity for wastewater businesses.

As well as there being gaps, “inconsistent” watchdog responsibilities cause “tension” and overlap, the report found.

The Environment Agency has no obligation to balance customer affordability with its duty to the environment when it assesses plans, the NAO said.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Thames Water boss can ‘save’ company

Company and investment criticism

Regulators have also been blamed for failing to drive enough funding into the water sector.

From having spoken to investors through numerous meetings, the NAO learnt that confidence had declined, which has made it more expensive to invest in companies providing water.

Even investors found Ofwat’s five-yearly price review process “complex and difficult”, the report said.

Financial resilience of the industry has “weakened” with Ofwat having signalled concerns about the financial resilience of 10 of the 16 major water companies.

Most notably, the UK’s largest provider, Thames Water, faced an uncertain future and potential nationalisation before securing an emergency £3bn loan, adding to its already massive £16bn debt pile.

Read more from Sky News:
Hundreds of jobs at risk as The Original Factory Shop launches survival plan
Government to decide on ‘postcode pricing’ plan for electricity bills by summer

Water businesses have been overspending, with only some extra spending linked to high inflation in recent years, leading to rising bills, the NAO said.

Over the next 25 years, companies plan to spend £290bn on infrastructure and investment, while Ofwat estimates a further £52bn will be needed to deliver up to 30 water supply projects, including nine reservoirs.

A "Danger" sign is seen on the River Thames, on the day data revealed sewage spills into England's rivers and seas by water companies more than doubled last year, in Hambledon, Britain, March 27, 2024. REUTERS/Dylan Martinez
Image:
The NAO said regulators do not have a good understanding of the condition of infrastructure assets

What else is going on?

From today, a new government law comes into effect which could see water bosses who cover up illegal sewage spills imprisoned for up to two years.

Such measures are necessary, Defra said, as some water companies have obstructed investigations and failed to hand over evidence on illegal sewage discharges, preventing crackdowns.

Meanwhile, the Independent Water Commission (IWC), led by former Bank of England deputy governor Sir Jon Cunliffe, is carrying out the largest review of the industry since privatisation.

What the regulators and government say?

In response to the report, Ofwat said: “The NAO’s report is an important contribution to the debate about the future of the water industry.

“We agree with the NAO’s recommendations for Ofwat and we continue to progress our work in these areas, and to contribute to the IWC’s wider review of the regulatory framework. We also look forward to the IWC’s recommendations and to working with government and other regulators to better deliver for customers and the environment.”

An Environment Agency spokesperson said: “We have worked closely with the National Audit Office in producing this report and welcome its substantial contribution to the debate on the future of water regulation.

“We recognise the significant challenges facing the water industry. That is why we will be working with Defra and other water regulators to implement the report’s recommendations and update our frameworks to reflect its findings.”

A Defra spokesperson said: “The government has taken urgent action to fix the water industry – but change will not happen overnight.

“We have put water companies under tough special measures through our landmark Water Act, with new powers to ban the payment of bonuses to polluting water bosses and bring tougher criminal charges against them if they break the law.”

Water UK, which represents the water firms, has been contacted for comment.

Continue Reading

UK

‘Consensus has got to be rebuilt’: Harriet Harman reacts to gender ruling on Electoral Dysfunction podcast

Published

on

By

'Consensus has got to be rebuilt': Harriet Harman reacts to gender ruling on Electoral Dysfunction podcast

The Supreme Court ruling on the definition of a woman has “clarified” the 2010 Equality Act, Harriet Harman has said – as she urged people to feel “confident they can use their common sense”.

The Labour peer and former minister put forward the Equality Bill, now the Equality Act 2010, which protects people from discrimination in the workplace and in wider society.

The legislation had become the centre of controversy in the debate about transgender rights as it was not clear whether the term “sex” referred to biological sex or “certificated” sex as legally defined by the 2004 Gender Recognition Act (GRA).

Politics latest: PM joins troops aboard flagship aircraft carrier

Last week, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the definition of a “woman” and “sex” in the Equality Act 2010 refers to “a biological woman and biological sex”.

It means that some single-sex service providers will be able to exclude trans women if they deem it proportionate and necessary.

But speaking to Beth Rigby on Sky News’ Electoral Dysfunction podcast, Baroness Harman said the providers of single-sex spaces were always able to do this under the Act.

More on Transgender

She said: “What we’ve got to do now, is with the Supreme Court having clarified what we said all along in the 2010 act, that consensus has got to be rebuilt.

“I strongly believe that most people don’t like to see trans people discriminated against and persecuted, and they want to just live and let live and let people get on and live the best lives they can.

“And most people understand that if you’re dealing with women who’ve been traumatised by male violence, it might be that actually a trans woman there prevents them feeling they can be comfortable in a refuge or in a counselling session.”

During the podcast, Baroness Harman, Beth Rigby and Baroness Davidson were played audio sent in from Ellie, a 25-year-old trans woman from Glasgow.

She said she was “devastated” by last week’s ruling.

“I’m scared and I am angry,” she said.

“I don’t think there’s clarity yet as to what this ruling actually means for my community in law.

Read more:
JK Rowling calls for Sir Keir Starmer over Supreme Court ruling
Supreme Court decision has immediate real-world consequences

“The GRA has now been rendered practically meaningless, and the UK government could respond by saying ‘yep, fair enough, let’s get them updated so that we can make sure that trans people are respected and protected in society for who they are’, but instead, they’ve pounced on us – with government ministers even suggesting that trans women can’t use women’s spaces like toilets.

“I mean, where am I supposed to go?

“It’s clearly not safe for so many trans women like me to use the men’s toilets, not to mention completely dehumanising.

“It’s not appropriate for a male police officer to get to pat down my chest, and it’s also clearly completely unworkable.”

She added: “This whole thing is being done under the guise of making some women feel safer, while actually making so many of us, whether trans or not, materially less safe, and I don’t even think we’d be having this conversation if the media and some politicians hadn’t spent the past five years demonising us.

“It just feels so, so cowardly and cruel.”

Continue Reading

Trending