Nothing has been more important to the Labour Party under Sir Keir Starmer than economic credibility.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has set out clear fiscal rules, such as getting debt falling as a share of national income by the end of this parliament, and she has made sticking to these rules a crucial test of the government's credibility.

That's what makes the recent rise in government borrowing costs potentially so dangerous for Reeves, the Treasury and - arguably - Sir Keir Starmer's entire political project.

If the government has to spend a lot more money paying interest on debt, then it is less likely to meet its rules.

On current trends, 26 March is set to become a critical date.

That is when the independent Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) will deliver its latest forecasts, including an assessment of whether the government is on course to meet its fiscal rules or not.

Suppose the OBR says the government is not on course. It's important to stress this may not happen - but it is something that senior government figures are growing more jittery about by the minute.

Reeves would have a decision to make.

She has previously committed only to make significant tax and spend announcements once a year at the autumn Budget.

A Treasury spokesperson said last night that "meeting the fiscal rules is non-negotiable".

That would suggest she would have to break her commitment and announce, or at least pave the way for, measures to bring the government in line with its rules.

What could that mean?

In principle, it could mean either tax rises or spending restraint.

In practice, given the significant increase in employers' National Insurance rates in October, it would mean spending restraint - Darren Jones, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, practically said as much in the Commons today.

To be clear, spending restraint would not necessarily mean spending cuts, just much lower spending increases than would otherwise happen.

This is where economics could collide with politics fast.

It's all very well for the Treasury to take measures to soothe the bond markets, where government debt is traded.

But just because a strategy is the most economically viable available, that doesn't mean it is politically viable in a Labour Party made up of MPs who have spent the past 14 years decrying Conservative austerity.

Many Labour MPs, among them cabinet ministers, believe there is little fat left to trim from the state.

They were already anxious about a tough multi-year spending review, expected to conclude around June, before borrowing costs rose.

There is almost a risk of a paradox: that any acts of spending restraint visible and significant enough to calm the markets might, by definition, be too visible and too significant to fly politically among Labour MPs - especially after the controversy of the cut to the winter fuel payment for pensioners.

Labour figures argue that successive Conservative governments dealt with similar problems by piling the most painful spending measures towards the end of five-year forecast periods - hoping that by the year at which those "pencilled-in" measures were reached, circumstances would have changed.

But some also voice a fear that - precisely because of the Conservatives having done this - repeating the trick would be given short shrift by the markets: the fiscal sins of previous governments being visited on this new one.

Unlike recent Conservative debates on economic policy, the Labour Party has one big asset.

In 2022, when Liz Truss decided to go big, with a radical tax-cutting agenda, the Conservative Party had no consensus on how to approach the economy.

The 2022 leadership election in which Truss defeated Rishi Sunak was essentially a clash of economic ideas.

She won that argument with Tory members, having lost it among the party's MPs - and then lost it unambiguously with the public and the markets within 49 days.

The Labour Party, give or take some sotto voce debates about tax for the wealthiest and welfare for the poorest, does broadly have an economic consensus, especially when it comes to what the Conservatives did wrong.

But what if these shared beliefs in how best to run the economy turn out to be products of the low interest rate era?

And how do you maintain that consensus if the markets disagree?

This is a political worst case scenario for Reeves.

Asking influential Labour figures about the markets this morning was to be told that lines go down as well as up, that the markets can move the other way in rapid time.

But all acknowledge that it is a bad sign when the value of the currency goes down at the same time as the cost of borrowing goes up.

And all are watching anxiously to see how things develop.

As one government source said to me: "It's definitely not tin hat time yet."

Government borrowing costs have been steadily rising in recent months, and have now hit their highest levels for several years.

Why is this happening and how does it affect ordinary people?

What's happening in the bond markets?

A bond is a bit like an IOU that can be traded in the financial markets.

Governments generally spend more than they raise in tax so they borrow money to fill the gap, usually by selling bonds to investors.

As well as eventually paying back the value of the bond, governments pay interest at regular intervals so investors receive a stream of future payments.

UK government bonds - known as "gilts" - are normally considered very safe, with little risk the money will not be repaid. They are mainly bought by financial institutions, such as pension funds.

Interest rates - known as the yield - on government bonds have been going up since around August.

The yield on a 10-year bond has surged to its highest level since 2008, while the yield on a 30-year bond is at its highest since 1998, meaning it costs the government more to borrow over the long term.

The pound has also fallen in value against the dollar over the last few days. On Tuesday it was worth $1.25 but is currently trading at $1.23.

Why are bond yields rising?

Yields are not just rising in the UK. Borrowing costs have also been going up in the US, Japan, Germany and France, for instance.

There is a great deal of uncertainty around what will happen when President-elect Donald Trump returns to the White House later this month. He has pledged to bring in tariffs on goods entering the US and to cut taxes.

Investors worry that this will lead to inflation being more persistent than previously thought and therefore interest rates will not come down as quickly as they had expected.

But in the UK there are also concerns about the economy underperforming.

Inflation is at its highest for eight months - hitting 2.6% in November - above the Bank of England's 2% target - while the economy has shrunk for two months in a row.

Analysts say it is these wider concerns about the strength of the economy that is driving down the pound, which typically rises when borrowing costs increase.

How does it affect me?

The Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has pledged that all day-to-day spending should be funded from taxes, not from borrowing.

But if she needs more money to pay back higher borrowing costs, that uses up more tax revenue, leaving less money to spend on other things.

Economists have warned that this could mean spending cuts which would affect public services, and tax rises that could hit people's pay or businesses' ability to grow and hire more people.

The government has committed to having only one fiscal event a year, where it can raise taxes, and this is not expected until the autumn.

So if higher borrowing costs persist, we may be more likely to see cuts to spending before that.

Some people may be wondering about the impact of higher gilt yields on the mortgage market, particularly after what happened after Liz Truss's mini-Budget in September 2022.

Although yields are higher now than they were then, they have been creeping up slowly over a period of months, whereas in 2022 they shot up over a couple of days. That speedy rise led to lenders quickly pulling deals while they tried to work out what interest rate to charge.

Analysts and brokers say the current unease in the markets is having some effect on the pricing of mortgages. Many were expecting to see some falls in rates at the start of the year but instead lenders are holding off from cuts to see what happens.

What happens next?

The Treasury has said there is no need for an emergency intervention in the financial markets.

It has said it will not make any spending or tax announcements ahead of the official borrowing forecast from its independent watchdog, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), due on 26 March.

If the OBR says the chancellor is still on track to meet her self-imposed fiscal rules then that might settle the markets.

However, if the OBR were to say because of slower growth and higher-than-expected interest rates, the chancellor were likely to break her fiscal rules then that would potentially be a problem for Reeves.

Flu cases are skyrocketing, causing huge problems for hospitals, NHS England bosses are warning.

Last week the number of patients in hospital in England with the virus topped 5,400 a day on average – around 1,000 higher than a week before.

NHS England's Prof Julian Redhead said cases were going up at a "concerning rate" with hospitals "bursting with patients".

He said this was causing delays in A&E and for ambulances as staff struggled to cope with the demands being placed on them.

It comes as around 20 NHS trusts have been forced to declare critical incidents because of the pressures they are facing.

Prof Redhead, NHS England's national director for emergency care, said the "skyrocketing" flu cases came on top of continued pressure being caused by other viruses, including Covid and the vomiting bug Norovirus.

He apologised for the problems being seen, saying staff were frustrated with the quality of care being provided under such pressures.

"I'm really proud of the way my colleagues have responded to the pressure...but nobody wants to see delays in the ambulances going out and the delays in patients getting to beds that they need. No one will be proud of that system which is occurring."

The number of patients with flu is more than three times higher than they were this time last year – and are now on par with what was seen in early 2023 – one of the worst flu seasons for many years.

Along with the bad weather and flooding, it has meant the NHS has had a "brutal" start to the new year, according to Saffron Cordery, of NHS Providers, which represents health managers.

And she added: "We're not out of the woods yet. Things are likely to get worse before they get better.

"Stresses and strains on emergency services are a huge concern with many patients facing long waits for ambulances and in A&Es."

'Like Victorian workhouse'

Liz Shearer is just one of many people who have shared their experiences with the BBC of the care being provided.

Her elderly mother spent more than 30 hours in a corridor on a hospital trolley last week because there were no bays available. She was taken to hospital after collapsing at her care home.

"I've never experienced anything like that in my life. It was like a Victorian workhouse. The nurses were saying how bad it is, and they were saying they just had to crack on with it."

Yvonne Wolstenholme spent 13 hours in A&E after she was sent there by her GP because she was struggling to breathe.

"It was absolutely heaving," she said. "Staff are snowed under, they really are rushing around like headless chickens and it's not because of a lack of skill, it's the lack of time to see individual patients.

"While I was there, there were at least eight ambulance crews waiting to hand over patients and obviously they are not out on the streets if they are there waiting."

Official figures released on Thursday showed just how much the emergency care system was struggling.

• The average ambulance response time for immediately life-threatening category one calls, such as cardiac arrests, was 8 mins 40 seconds in December. The target is 7 minutes
• For category two calls, which includes heart attacks and strokes, it was 47 mins 26 seconds. The target is 18 minutes
• Just 71% of patients visiting A&E were seen and treated or admitted within the target time of four hours

But there was more positive news on routine treatment, with the hospital waiting list falling to 7.48 million at the end of November – down from 7.54 million the month before and below the record-high of 7.77 million in September 2023.

Similar pressures are being experienced in other parts of the UK with Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all missing their key targets.

The Royal College of Emergency Medicine in Scotland said this week hosptials there were "gridlocked" and in the middle of their own winter crisis.

Dr Tim Cooksley, of of the Society for Acute Medicine, said the NHS was experiencing an "appalling" winter crisis.

"The reality for patients and staff is corridors full of patients experiencing degrading care, being treated in the backs of ambulances because there is simply no space in hospital and the immense physical and emotional harm that inevitably results.

"The fundamental issue is that there is a continued lack of capacity throughout the year - a tough flu season must not be used as a political excuse for the current situation."

A judge has thrown out a man's attempt to sue a council to recover from a rubbish tip a Bitcoin hard drive which he says is now worth about £600m.

James Howells had argued that his former partner had mistakenly dumped the hard drive containing a Bitcoin wallet in 2013, and he wanted to access the site and recover the cryptocurrency.

But Newport council asked a High Court judge to strike out Mr Howells' legal action to access the landfill or get £495m in compensation.

Judge Keyser KC said there were no "reasonable grounds" for bringing the claim and "no realistic prospect" of succeeding at a full trial.

During the hearing in December the court heard how Mr Howells had been an early adopter of Bitcoin and had successfully mined the cryptocurrency.

As the value of his missing digital wallet soared, Mr Howells organised a team of experts to attempt to locate, recover and access the hard drive.

He had repeatedly asked permission from the council for access to the site, and had offered it a share of the missing Bitcoin if it was successfully recovered.

Mr Howells successfully "mined" the Bitcoin in 2009 for almost nothing, and says he forgot about it altogether when he threw it out.

The value of the cryptocurrency rose by more than 80% in 2024, and Mr Howells believes his 8,000 bitcoins to now be worth more than £600m.

But James Goudie KC, for the council, argued that existing laws meant the hard drive had become its property when it entered the landfill site. It also said that its environmental permits would forbid any attempt to excavate the site to search for the hard drive.

The offer to donate 10% of the Bitcoin to the local community was encouraging the council to "play fast and loose" by "signing up for a share of the action," said Mr Goudie.

In a written judgement the judge said: "I also consider that the claim would have no realistic prospect of succeeding if it went to trial and that there is no other compelling reason why it should be disposed of at trial."

The landfill holds more than 1.4m tonnes of waste, but Mr Howells said he had narrowed the hard drive's location to an area consisting of 100,000 tonnes.

Mr Howells has speculated that, by next year, the Bitcoin on his hard drive could be worth £1bn.

He told BBC Wales outside the court hearing in Cardiff last December that he believed in his case and was willing to take it all the way to Supreme Court.

A mandatory evacuation order has been issued in the Hollywood Hills following the spread of the wildfires raging across Los Angeles.

The Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD) said there was an "immediate threat to life" in the area and that it was being legally closed to the public.

At least five fires are currently active across Los Angeles, with five people confirmed to have been killed.

More than 130,000 people have already had to evacuate, and the homes of a number of celebrities - including Paris Hilton and Billy Crystal - have been destroyed.

The first fire began on Tuesday in the Pacific Palisades neighbourhood, near Malibu, with others subsequently breaking out across the north of the city.

As of 20:15 local time (04:00 GMT), four fires in the areas of the Palisades, Pasadena, Sylmar, and the Hollywood Hills covered more than 27,000 acres (42 sq miles; 109 sq km) and were 0% contained, according to the LAFD.

One fire in the Acton area had been partially contained, while two others had been completely contained.

The fire in the Hollywood Hills - a residential neighbourhood overlooking the historic Hollywood area of the city - began at around 18:00 local time on Wednesday.

Less than two hours later, much of the heart of Hollywood was blanketed with thick smoke, and the tops of the palm trees that line its streets were barely visible.

People used sweatshirts to cover their faces to help them breathe, while others - clearly surprised by the fire - wore only pyjamas. Many carried bags and suitcases, talking on their phones as they made plans for where to go.

Many of the roads near the fire - including Hollywood Boulevard, home to the Hollywood Walk of Fame - were gridlocked with traffic. Some people even drove on the wrong side of the road as they tried to get out of the area.

Resident Anna Waldman told the BBC she had set out to walk her dog but smelled smoke almost instantly when she went outside.

She went back inside and, looking out her back windows, saw fire, and watched as it moved quickly thought the Hollywood Hills, coming to within a block of her home.

She packed what she could: food, clothes, blankets, food for her three small dogs.

"I can't believe this," she said in exhaustion, pulling down her face mask.

Makayla Jackson, 26, and her two-year-old son, Ramari, had been evacuated from a homeless shelter that was in danger of burning, and now stood on the street waiting for a ride to a high school where help was being offered to people.

"They just told us to get out and go," she said.

Firefighters tackling the blazes have experienced water shortages and have had to resort to taking water from swimming pools and ponds.

Officials said three separate one-million-gallon tanks were full before the fires began, but that the elevation of the fires meant water couldn't move quickly enough to hydrants in the affeted areas.

The city also doesn't typically see fires of this magnitude - the Palisades blaze is already the most destructive in its history - and its systems are designed for urban use, not fighting wildfires.

Nothing has been more important to the Labour Party under Sir Keir Starmer than economic credibility.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has set out clear fiscal rules, such as getting debt falling as a share of national income by the end of this parliament, and she has made sticking to these rules a crucial test of the government's credibility.

That's what makes the recent rise in government borrowing costs potentially so dangerous for Reeves, the Treasury and - arguably - Sir Keir Starmer's entire political project.

If the government has to spend a lot more money paying interest on debt, then it is less likely to meet its rules.

On current trends, 26 March is set to become a critical date.

That is when the independent Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) will deliver its latest forecasts, including an assessment of whether the government is on course to meet its fiscal rules or not.

Suppose the OBR says the government is not on course. It's important to stress this may not happen - but it is something that senior government figures are growing more jittery about by the minute.

Reeves would have a decision to make.

She has previously committed only to make significant tax and spend announcements once a year at the autumn Budget.

A Treasury spokesperson said last night that "meeting the fiscal rules is non-negotiable".

That would suggest she would have to break her commitment and announce, or at least pave the way for, measures to bring the government in line with its rules.

What could that mean?

In principle, it could mean either tax rises or spending restraint.

In practice, given the significant increase in employers' National Insurance rates in October, it would mean spending restraint - Darren Jones, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, practically said as much in the Commons today.

To be clear, spending restraint would not necessarily mean spending cuts, just much lower spending increases than would otherwise happen.

This is where economics could collide with politics fast.

It's all very well for the Treasury to take measures to soothe the bond markets, where government debt is traded.

But just because a strategy is the most economically viable available, that doesn't mean it is politically viable in a Labour Party made up of MPs who have spent the past 14 years decrying Conservative austerity.

Many Labour MPs, among them cabinet ministers, believe there is little fat left to trim from the state.

They were already anxious about a tough multi-year spending review, expected to conclude around June, before borrowing costs rose.

There is almost a risk of a paradox: that any acts of spending restraint visible and significant enough to calm the markets might, by definition, be too visible and too significant to fly politically among Labour MPs - especially after the controversy of the cut to the winter fuel payment for pensioners.

Labour figures argue that successive Conservative governments dealt with similar problems by piling the most painful spending measures towards the end of five-year forecast periods - hoping that by the year at which those "pencilled-in" measures were reached, circumstances would have changed.

But some also voice a fear that - precisely because of the Conservatives having done this - repeating the trick would be given short shrift by the markets: the fiscal sins of previous governments being visited on this new one.

Unlike recent Conservative debates on economic policy, the Labour Party has one big asset.

In 2022, when Liz Truss decided to go big, with a radical tax-cutting agenda, the Conservative Party had no consensus on how to approach the economy.

The 2022 leadership election in which Truss defeated Rishi Sunak was essentially a clash of economic ideas.

She won that argument with Tory members, having lost it among the party's MPs - and then lost it unambiguously with the public and the markets within 49 days.

The Labour Party, give or take some sotto voce debates about tax for the wealthiest and welfare for the poorest, does broadly have an economic consensus, especially when it comes to what the Conservatives did wrong.

But what if these shared beliefs in how best to run the economy turn out to be products of the low interest rate era?

And how do you maintain that consensus if the markets disagree?

This is a political worst case scenario for Reeves.

Asking influential Labour figures about the markets this morning was to be told that lines go down as well as up, that the markets can move the other way in rapid time.

But all acknowledge that it is a bad sign when the value of the currency goes down at the same time as the cost of borrowing goes up.

And all are watching anxiously to see how things develop.

As one government source said to me: "It's definitely not tin hat time yet."

Lily Allen has said she is taking a break from her podcast for "a few weeks" because her mental health is "spiralling" and she is not "in a good place".

Speaking on the latest episode of Miss Me?, the pop star-turned-actor said she had been going through a "tough period".

It comes amid reports of a split from her husband, Stranger Things star David Harbour.

Allen, who co-hosts the show with her friend, presenter Miquita Oliver, said she was currently "unable to concentrate on anything except the pain I'm going through".

"I'm finding it hard to be interested in anything. I'm really not in a good place," she said on Thursday's episode.

"I know I've been talking about it for months, but I've been spiralling and spiralling and spiralling, and it's got out of control. I've tried.

"I came to the Miss Me? Christmas lunch and had a panic attack and had to go home," the 39-year-old added. "And I went to see something at the theatre the other night with my friends... and I had to leave at half-time.

"I just can't concentrate on anything except the pain that I'm going through. And It's really hard."

The singer, who now lives in the US, went on to say she was "going away next week", adding: "You're not going to hear me for a few weeks, listeners."

But despite "rumours" that she was going into drug rehab, she said that was not the case and she had not relapsed.

She didn't say where she's going, but said she is "not allowed my phone".

'Source of joy'

Allen also said her two daughters - whom she shares with her ex-husband Sam Cooper and recently went on safari with - had been a great help of late.

"It's really tough - they are always there and you have to be present and there for them," she said.

"And that's OK. When things in life are going well and swimmingly and you're coping, it's really nice to have the kids around - they're a joy to be around, in fact one of the main sources of joy in one's life.

"But when things are not going so well and life is tough - as it is for many people for all manner of reasons - having to hold things together is really hard."

Co-host Oliver told listeners she would "drive this ship" in Allen's absence and "wait for the captain to return".

The BBC Sounds podcast, which launched last year, sees childhood friends Allen former Popworld host Oliver indulge in twice weekly "transatlantic catch-ups, discussing the highs and lows of their lives and the biggest cultural moments of the week".

Allen made her West End theatre debut in 2:22 - A Ghost Story in 2021, and is due to return to the stage in Hedda, a new version of Henrik Ibsen's Hedda Gabler, at Bath Theatre Royal's Ustinov Studio in July.

She is also reportedly filming a screen adaptation of Virginia Woolf's comic novel Night and Day.

The Brit Award winner mentioned in a previous episode that she was hoping to go back into the studio to record more music later this year.

Elon Musk's online attacks on former Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown over grooming gangs draw on a baseless claim about a Home Office memo supposedly issued 17 years ago, research by BBC Verify has established.

A wave of social media posts - including some amplified by Mr Musk - allege that a 2008 Home Office document advised police not to intervene in child grooming cases because victims had "made an informed choice about their sexual behaviour".

But BBC Verify has carried out extensive searches of Home Office circulars issued across that period and found no evidence that any document containing this advice exists.

Brown - who was prime minister in 2008 - has called the allegations "a complete fabrication" and the Home Office says there "has never been any truth" to them.

'Informed choice'

Social media posts referencing a memo and using either the phrase "informed choice" or a variation like "lifestyle choice" have circulated for several years with some gaining traction.

But that intensified dramatically since the start of the year, with posts repeating the claim generating tens of millions of views in the past week after Mr Musk amplified several of them on his social media platform, X.

In one post, which has received over 25 million views, Mr Musk alleged that "Gordon Brown sold those little girls for votes" while reposting another user, June Slater, using words that were apparently a variation of the memo claim.

The original unfounded claim about a Home Office circular to police seems to stem from an interview Nazir Afzal - the former Crown Prosecution Service chief prosecutor for north-west England - gave to the BBC on 19 October 2018. He now admits that he had not seen any such circular himself, despite apparently stating its existence as fact.

Speaking to BBC Radio 4's PM programme, he told presenter Carolyn Quinn at the time:

"You may not know this, but back in 2008 the Home Office sent a circular to all police forces in the country saying 'as far as these young girls who are being exploited in their towns and cities we believe they have made an informed choice about their sexual behaviour and therefore it's not for you police officers to get involved in".

Although the programme is no longer available to listen to on the BBC's website, a version has been uploaded to YouTube. BBC Verify has also accessed the programme through the BBC's in-house archives to confirm the audio is genuine.

The first post referencing Mr Afzal's claim appears to have been made one month after his interview, BBC Verify has found. But the first post to gain considerable traction was in July 2019.

Since then posts with versions of the claim have circulated occasionally on X and other platforms, with some posts from larger accounts in 2024 getting more attention, before intensifying massively in recent days.

Misinterpreted instructions

Speaking to BBC Verify, Mr Afzal clarified his position admitting that he has never seen any circular with the form of words that he used in his 2018 interview.

Instead he now says he was referring to police officers who had told him some officers had misinterpreted instructions in a circular sent by the Home Office.

Mr Afzal pointed us to Home Office circular 017/2008 which is about the police's powers under the 1989 Children's Act.

However, the words "informed choice" do not appear anywhere in the text, nor is the circular about child grooming gangs.

It does contain, however, a section on how to judge significant harm to a child. "It is important always to take account of the child's reactions, and his or her perceptions, according to the child's age and understanding," it reads.

It seems difficult to understand how any police officer could misconstrue this section in the way Mr Afzal described in his 2018 interview

He told BBC Verify he was "paraphrasing what I thought that meant to them", when he gave his Radio 4 interview.

Asked how officers could have interpreted circular 17/2008 in this way, Mr Afzal said:

"You're right, it doesn't stack up. It doesn't give an excuse or explanation, but I can't give you any other circular."

BBC Verify also asked Mr Afzal if he could put us in touch with any of the officers that may have misinterpreted the circular in way he described, but he was unable to do this.

Mr Afzal's claim was not a one off. One year before his 2018 interview, Mr Afzal wrote an article for the International Business Times where he also stated the claim as fact:

"The term "child prostitute" was used extensively to describe them and it should be noted both that the Home Office in a circular to police in 2008 used that term and spoke of girls making an "informed choice" to engage in this behaviour. Parliament only finally removed the term from all laws a couple of years ago."

Despite interest in the claim going back several years we have been unable to identify any individual who is able to provide evidence of any circular to this effect.

Home Office memos contain no reference to term

The purpose of the circulars - or memos - is to provide police forces with guidance, policy updates and administrative instructions.

The Home Office says all memos and circulars to police forces are published online in the National Archives. They are also kept in the library of the College of Policing website.

BBC Verify searched all the circulars for 2008 and could find no reference to "informed choice" or "child prostitute" or any phrase similar to the one cited in the social media posts.

Of the 32 circulars listed on the National Archives website for 2008, only one - 017/2008 - falls under the category "child abuse". We have also searched circulars for 2007, 2009 and 2010 and found no references to "informed choice". We also searched for other phrases in Mr Afzal's original statements and variations from later social media posts - for example "get involved", "sexual behaviour" and "lifestyle choice" - and found no occurrences.

• Victims want action, child abuse inquiry chair says
• What is Starmer's record on prosecuting grooming gangs?
• Starmer attacks those 'spreading lies' on grooming gangs

There have been several Freedom of Information requests regarding a supposed memo or circular with the "informed choice" phrase, but no police force has found any trace of such a communication.

We were able to find a circular from 2009 that links to a webpage that further links to a document on child sexual exploitation released by the Department for Children, Schools and Families that mentions the phrase "informed choice". It is not an instruction to police and the context it appears in is emphasising situations where local agencies might need to report sexual activity in order to protect children "unable to make an informed choice".

There were circulars in 2007 and 2010 that contained the phrase "child prostitute". The first was in connection with some technical changes to offences like "controlling a child prostitute". The second again dealt with technical changes but this circular on prostitution also said: "In short, any steps taken, whether relating to criminal proceedings or not, should be designed to protect the child from continuing sexual exploitation and abuse."

The term "child prostitute" was taken out of the law in 2015 as it could imply that children could consent to abuse.

Circulars and memos are received by senior individuals in each police force, former Chief Constable of Norfolk Constabulary Simon Bailey told BBC Verify.

"They would've gone to crime registrars and the head of the crime and they would've cascaded the guidance," he said.

If there was any doubt about how to interpret the guidance a force would have gone back to the Home Office to seek clarity, Mr Bailey added.

"And even going back 17 years, I cannot believe the Home Office would've sent out a circular of that nature."

'Never been any truth'

In a statement to BBC Verify, the Home Office said it had never instructed police not to go after grooming gangs:

"There has never been any truth in the existence of a Home Office circular telling police forces that grooming gangs should not be prosecuted, or that their victims were making a choice, and it is now clear that the specific circular which was being referred to does absolutely no such thing."

Jacqui Smith - now Baroness Smith - was the Labour Home Secretary in 2008. She told BBC Verify: "It is categorically wrong that the Home Office or I instructed police forces not to prosecute grooming gangs or not to protect young girls."

A spokesperson for Gordon Brown said: "There is no basis for such allegations at all. They are a complete fabrication. There is no foundation whatsoever for alleging that Mr Brown sent, approved or was in anyway involved with issuing a circular or statement to the police because it did not happen."

'Got lost in translation'

BBC Verify has attempted to speak to those who repeated the claim on X and had their posts amplified by Mr Musk.

In one post, Mr Musk alleged that "Gordon Brown committed an unforgivable crime against the British people" and shared a video clip from campaigner Maggie Oliver appearing on GB News.

In the clip, Ms Oliver alleged: "Gordon Brown sent out a circular to all the police forces in the UK saying 'do not prosecute these rape gangs, these children are making a lifestyle choice'."

Ms Oliver said that she based her claim on what Mr Afzal said:

"My knowledge of this comes from what Nazir Afzal said publicly in 2018 in his BBC interview."

BBC Verify also reached out to June Slater, whose post was also amplified by Mr Musk. She told us she had not seen the memo, but her claim was also based on what Mr Afzal and Ms Oliver had previously said:

"I thought he was a reliable source as is Maggie Oliver."

Asked if he regretted the misinformation that had stemmed from his statements, Mr Afzal told BBC Verify:

"I regret that people have interpreted what I interpreted and that it's sort of got lost in translation."

BBC Verify also contacted the Police Federation, the National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC) and the College of Policing about the alleged circular.

The NPCC referred us to the Home Office's statement while the College of Policing said it was not aware of any circular.

'Allegations ignored'

While there is no evidence for the existence of the circular, the performance of the police and other institutions in protecting victims and investigating abuse has been heavily criticised during this period.

Prof Alexis Jay - who carried out the independent inquiry into child abuse - said some victims would never recover from their experiences.

"We heard time and time again how allegations of abuse were ignored, victims were blamed and institutions prioritised their reputations over the protection of children."

Additional reporting by Ned Davies and Lucy Gilder.

What do you want BBC Verify to investigate?

Threads and Instagram users will no longer be able to opt out of being shown political content from people they do not follow, parent company Meta has announced.

The head of the platforms Adam Mosseri said it followed Meta boss Mark Zuckerberg's reorienting the company towards "free expression" - a move that saw it ditch fact checkers on Tuesday.

Mr Mosseri said Meta would begin recommending political content in a "responsible and personalised way" from this week in the US, and globally from next week.

It represents a U-turn on his previous stance on news and political content on Threads, which he said in 2023 the platform would not "do anything to encourage".

"Any incremental engagement or revenue they might drive is not at all worth the scrutiny, negativity (let's be honest), or integrity risks that come along with them," he wrote in a Threads post at the time.

But on Wednesday, he said it had "proven impractical to draw a red line around what is and is not political content" - and users have asked to be shown more, not less, of this content than in years prior.

A setting that currently allows Threads and Instagram users to toggle political content recommendations on or off will be changed to provide three options for how much they are shown - less, standard and more.

This will opt users in to seeing a "standard" amount by default.

Mixed response

Mr Mosseri said Instagram - which Meta acquired for $1bn in 2012 - was founded upon the values of creativity and "giving anybody a voice".

"My hope is that this focus on free speech is going to help us do even a bit better along that path," he said in an Instagram video.

There has been considerable criticism of the changes Meta has already announced, with concerns expressed about the impact on minority groups.

The company has also been accused of pandering to the incoming Trump administration, which has previously been very critical of Meta and Mr Zuckerberg.

Some users have also reacted to these latest changes on Threads and Instagram with dismay.

"Well, time to delete the Threads app. It was nice while it lasted," said one Threads user responding to Mr Mosseri's posts.

On Instagram - where Mr Mosseri said accounts focused on politics now "don't have to worry about becoming non-recommendable" to other users - some users praised the move as "a good step towards the freedom on the platform".

Many have also, however, expressed concern about the effect that increasing content recommendations about social issues and politics could have on amplifying misinformation and hate speech.

Mick Lynch, head of the country's largest railway union, has announced his retirement.

He became general secretary of the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers in 2021, and under his leadership the union staged a series of strikes over pay in 2022 and 2023, culminating in a deal with the new Labour government this summer.

Feted by supporters for his straight-talking style, he was attacked by critics for his £84,000 salary and for the disruption caused by the union's industrial action.

In a statement, Mr Lynch did not give a reason for standing down but said it had "been a privilege to serve this union for over 30 years in all capacities", adding it was now "time for change".

Mr Lynch will stay in his role until May, when RMT members elect a new general secretary.

He said there was a need for a strong union for rail workers, but that a strong organisation needed "renewal and change".

He said he was proud of serving the union, adding: "This union has been through a lot of struggles in recent years, and I believe that it has only made it stronger despite all the odds."

At 16, he left school and trained to be an electrician, before finding work in construction.

As industrial action ebbed and flowed in the 1980s, Mr Lynch became involved in a breakaway union and was secretly blacklisted by constructions companies, leaving him struggling to find work for years.

When the blacklist was exposed decades later, Mr Lynch was compensated with a cheque for £35,000, a copy of which hangs framed on his office wall.

He went on to found the Electrical and Plumbing Industries Union (EPIU) in 1988, before joining the RMT.

He took charge of the RMT at a time of deep internal divisions.

Mr Lynch's predecessor as general secretary, Mick Cash, retired in 2020 after six years in the job, blaming a "campaign of harassment" by elements of the membership.

Mr Lynch was appointed acting general secretary, but soon stood down himself, accusing senior union members of "bullying" and creating "an intolerable, toxic atmosphere".

He then returned and won election to the role permanently in May 2021.

Firefighters in Los Angeles are battling a number of blazes in city suburbs, as tens of thousands of residents are forced to flee.

The rapidly changing situation is compounded by Santa Ana winds and extremely dry conditions. Currently authorities say there is no possibility of bringing the fires under control.

The Palisades fire, which is closest to the coast and also the largest, has ripped through picturesque suburbs which are home to many Hollywood stars. More than 1,000 buildings have already been destroyed.

Here's how the fires have spread and are affecting the Los Angeles area.

An overview of the current fires

Four major fires are currently being tackled.

The Palisades fire was first reported at 10:30 (18:30 GMT) on Tuesday, and grew in just 20 minutes from a blaze of 20 acres to more than 200 acres, then more than tenfold in a matter of a few more hours. At least 30,000 people have so far been ordered to leave their homes.

The Eaton fire grew to cover 1,000 acres within the first six hours of breaking out. It started in Altadena in the hills above Pasadena at around 18:30 local time on Tuesday.

The Hurst fire is located just north of San Fernando. It began burning on Tuesday at around 22:10 local time, growing to 500 acres, according to local officials. It has triggered evacuation orders in neighbouring Santa Clarita.

The latest of the four fires is the Woodley fire, currently 75 acres in size. It broke out at approximately 06:15 local time on Wednesday.

• Follow latest updates on the LA wildfires
• Watch: Smoke billows as thousands evacuate in LA
• 'Run for your lives!' residents abandon cars to flee fire on foot
• Timelapse shows rapid spread of Palisades wildfire
• Watch: Inside a neighbourhood totally lost in inferno
• Pacific Palisades: The celebrity LA area ravaged by wildfire

How did the Palisades fire spread?

The Palisades fire has so far burnt through more than 2,900 acres. The map above shows how rapidly the blaze spread, intensifying in a matter of hours. At just after 14:00 on Tuesday it covered 772 acres and within four hours it had expanded approximately to its current size.

Thousands of people have been forced to evacuate, as more than 1,400 firefighters try to tackle the blaze.

How does the Palisade fire compare in size with New York and London?

To give an idea of the size of the Palisades fire, we have superimposed it on to maps of New York and London.

As you can see, it is comparable in size with the central area of UK's capital, or with large areas of lower Manhattan and Brooklyn.

How the fires look from space

Another indication of the scale of the Palisades fire comes from Nasa's Earth Observatory.

The images captured on Tuesday show a huge plume of smoke emanating from California and drifting out to sea.

Effects of the Eaton fire

The Palisade fire is not the only one to have a devastating effect on neighbourhoods of Los Angeles.

The above images show the Jewish Temple in Pasadena before and during the Eaton fire.

The Jewish Temple and Centre's website says it has been in use since 1941 and has a congregation of more than 400 familes.

A wildfire that started in the Pacific Palisades area of Los Angeles on Tuesday morning has spread across the west of the city at an alarming rate throughout Tuesday and overnight.

High winds and very dry conditions further fuelled the flames, causing the blaze to rip through neighbourhoods at alarming speeds. The fires reportedly spread from a size of 10 acres to nearly 3,000 in a matter of hours.

Firefighters have been battling the flames throughout the night, as residents were forced to flee amid evacuation orders affecting tens of thousands of people.

Photographers have captured dramatic scenes across the west of the city as firefighters work to control the fires.

The BBC's Regan Morris reported on fires raging out of control, leaving those without power and phone signal unable to receive updates on the latest evacuation alerts.

Meanwhile, CBS reporter Jonathan Vigliotti said firefighters were no longer "trying to save" houses in the Palisades, "they're trying to prevent these flames from jumping to other neighbourhoods".