© Philip Cheung for The New York Times
© Angelina Katsanis for The New York Times
© Graham Dickie/The New York Times
The past weeks have put serious pressure on Tim Davie's leadership. Today, I saw that up close.
For a usually very slick performer, he looked shaken. I wanted to know if he had considered resigning in the face of the recent controversies. He said he had not, but admitted it had been "a very, very tough time".
Earlier Davie had launched the BBC's annual report on Zoom, with journalists remotely asking questions in the Q&A box and no cameras allowed into the room for us to record and use his answers.
We were considering making clear to our audiences that - on such an important day for the BBC - nobody from the top of the corporation was being put in front of a camera to be interviewed on a range of issues, which were both of public interest and specifically relevant to licence fee payers.
Hours later, Mr Davie agreed to a face-to-face interview, which took place just after it was announced that the BBC and Banijay UK were not renewing John Torode's contract as MasterChef presenter.
I usually interview the director general at times of crisis for the BBC. That's the way these things work. To be fair to him, he always makes it clear that my job is to ask him questions without fear or favour. He knows part of his job is to be held to account.
But it's been a very bumpy time, even by BBC standards. The Gaza documentary with a child narrator who later turned out to be the son of a Hamas official, another film about doctors in Gaza pulled before transmission, issues around the BBC livestreaming the punk duo Bob Vylan's set at Glastonbury and the growing controversy surrounding MasterChef - all land at his door.
His leadership has been called into question, not least recently by the culture secretary. She called it a "series of catastrophic failures".
It was obvious today it had been taking its toll. As director general, he's insistent and wholehearted in his defence of the BBC and his role leading that. But as a man, you can sense the last weeks have been testing.
His interview style is to look straight at the person doing the interview. He usually measures his words carefully, although today, on a couple of points he was a little less fluent. Some of his answers - for example when he was talking about he and his team making "clear, strong decisions" in the face of challenges - sounded a bit rehearsed.
However, an unexpected by-product of him sounding less confident was that he also managed to sound, at times, more human. The last week has clearly left him frustrated and for once, he let that show. There was no hiding it when he said rather plainly: "I felt pressure".
It brings to mind the recent public debate about Rachel Reeves and her tears in the Commons. Whatever we think of the decisions made by those in public service, what impact does it have on them as people when they are under such intense scrutiny. Should that even matter?
But they don't call him Teflon Tim for nothing - and he survives, for the moment. Even if he is wounded.
The BBC today was signalling it is getting a grip on bad behaviour in the workplace. It's something Samir Shah, chairman of the BBC, promised after the Huw Edwards scandal.
Now Gregg Wallace is gone, John Torode is gone. Three staff members have been asked to "step back" from their roles after Glastonbury. And we've now learnt that several people have been sacked in light of the BBC's culture review.
The clear messaging: Teflon Tim and his team are getting tough.
EPAIt has been more than three years since a British official inadvertently leaked a dataset containing the names and contact details of thousands of people who were attempting to flee possible Taliban revenge attacks.
In April 2024, the government began relocating some of them to the UK - but we are only learning this now because extraordinary lengths were gone to in order to prevent the breach and subsequent response coming to light.
As the full picture is finally disclosed to the public, these are the questions still facing Britain's security establishment.
It has happened before and it will doubtless happen again.
Think Wikileaks, Snowden and all the countless cyber-hacks and ransomware suffered by companies on an almost daily basis.
Data leaks are not new but sometimes – and it is quite possible that this is one of those times – they can be life-threatening.
The revelations that have come to light will have sent a chill down the spine of hundreds, possibly thousands, of Afghans who fear retribution by the Taliban.
For those already spirited out to Britain, it means they can probably never go back home as long as the Taliban are in power.
For the 600 former Afghan government soldiers and their estimated 1,800 dependants still in Afghanistan, the news will mean they are unlikely to breathe easily until the UK delivers on its promise to get them safely out.
It's important to bear in mind that all this was not the result of some deliberate, sophisticated cyber attack by a state-backed hacking group.
It evolved from an unintentional mistake made by just one individual working for the Ministry of Defence.
UK forces were deployed to Afghanistan, alongside US and Nato allies, over a period of almost 20 years, from October 2001 to August 2021.
During this time they worked closely with their Afghan government allies, relying heavily on their local knowledge and expertise.
The most sensitive area was in Special Forces (SF), for whom the Taliban reserved a particular hatred.
When Kabul and the rest of Afghanistan fell to the Taliban in the summer of 202, there was a realisation that those now-former Afghan SF soldiers and their families were a priority for relocation to safety.
But thousands more Afghans also risked their lives to work with the British over those two decades.
Many did it out of patriotism, believing they were working to secure a better Afghanistan.
Some did it for the money, some did it because they trusted Britain to safeguard their lives and their personal details.
A data breach like this now threatens to undermine any future promises by a British official who says: "Trust us, your data is safe with us."
When this "unauthorised data breach" was finally discovered, a full 18 months after it occurred, the UK government obtained what is known as a super-injunction, preventing its publication by the media.
A super-injunction is so draconian that it means you cannot even report the fact that you cannot report it.
That measure has only just been lifted now, following an independent review.
There is a logical case to be made that this measure was necessary to protect the lives of those affected by the data breach.
However, questions are now being raised about whether the injunction - applied for by the previous, Conservative government - might also have been for political purposes.
The High Court judge who lifted the super-injunction, Mr Justice Chamberlain, said that it had "had the effect of completely shutting down the ordinary mechanisms of accountability which operate in a democracy".
Getty ImagesThe chancellor has told the financial industry it must change the "negative" narrative around savers investing money in stocks and shares in order to help grow the economy.
In a speech, Rachel Reeves said: "For too long, we have presented investment in too negative a light, quick to warn people of the risks without giving proper weight to the benefits."
The government is working with the financial regulator to provide support for would-be investors.
It comes as Reeves stepped back from cutting the tax-free limit on cash Individual Savings Accounts (Isas) after a backlash from lenders - she is keen to shift some of the £300bn in these accounts to being invested in the UK and its companies.
At the annual Mansion House dinner in the City of London, Reeves told business leaders: "Our tangled system of financial advice and guidance has meant that people cannot get the right support to make decisions for themselves."
She said the government is consulting with the Financial Conduct Authority "to introduce a brand-new type of targeted support for consumers ahead of the new financial year".
The government is under pressure to ignite growth after figures revealed the UK economy shrank in May following a contraction in April.
Meanwhile, U-turns on welfare benefits and the winter fuel allowance have stoked speculation there could be tax rises in the Budget later this year.
Reeves said the new measures would help "boost retail investment so that more savers can reap the benefits of UK economic success".
But the value of investments in assets such as shares can go down as well as up, and savers have tended to be cautious over the risks involved, although the spending power of savings can be eroded by rising prices.
The government has in the past encouraged the public to buy shares in UK companies, including in 2013 when Royal Mail was floated on the London Stock Exchange.
But perhaps the most famous example was in 1986, when the state-owned British Gas was privatised and Margaret Thatcher's government launched the "tell Sid" campaign. TV adverts featured characters urged each other to "tell Sid" about the chance to buy shares in British Gas.
In reference to her recent travails - including a tearful appearance in the House of Commons - Reeves said that during a visit to a school, a girl had asked her what job she would do if she could have any job in the world.
"Given the events of the last few weeks, I suspect many of you would sympathise if I had said "anything but chancellor"," she joked with the audience. "But I didn't."
In her speech, Reeves said she would "continue to consider further changes to ISAs, engaging widely over the coming months".
She also provided more details about changes to the UK's financial services sector including reforming regulation.
"In too many areas, regulation still acts as a boot on the neck of businesses," she said. "Choking off the enterprise and innovation that is the lifeblood of growth."
She said regulators in other sectors "must take up the call I make this evening not to bend to the temptation of excessive caution but to boldly regulate for growth in the service of prosperity across our country".
lead image
© Kaylee Greenlee for The New York Times
© Angelina Katsanis for The New York Times
© Karam Al-Masri/Reuters
© Tim Gruber for The New York Times
© Ioulex for The New York Times
© Kenny Holston/The New York Times
© Desiree Rios for The New York Times
AFP/GettyUS President Donald Trump said he has settled on another tariff deal - this time with Indonesia.
Trump said he had agreed to lower tariffs he had threatened on goods entering the US from Indonesia country to 19%, in exchange for what he called "full access" for American firms.
Terms of the deal were not immediately confirmed by the southeast Asian country, which boasts a small but growing trade relationship with the US.
The pact is the latest to emerge after the White House unveiled a barrage of tariffs this spring, kicking off a flurry of trade talks over the duties.
After suspending his most aggressive tariff plans from earlier this year, Trump this month renewed his threats, sending warning letters to dozens of countries that he intended to start charging high tariffs from 1 August.
His targets included all of America's biggest trade partners, including the European Union, Canada, Mexico, Japan and South Korea.
Indonesia also received a letter from Trump last week outlining plans for a 32% tariff on its goods, reportedly bewildering officials who had thought a deal was close.
Trump said on Tuesday he had reduced that rate after a phone call with the president of Indonesia.
He said as part of the deal, Indonesia had agreed to lower its trade tariffs for products from the US.
"They are going to pay 19% and we are going to pay nothing ... we will have full access into Indonesia," he said in remarks to reporters.
The country has also agreed to purchase $15bn worth in US energy, $4.5bn in American agricultural products and 50 Boeing jets, he later wrote on social media.
Those figures are lower than those outlined in a trade deal Reuters had reported earlier this month was expected to be signed.
As well as Indonesia, the administration has announced agreements with just the UK, China and Vietnam. In all three of those cases, the deals left high US tariffs in place while key issues and terms went unconfirmed or unresolved.
Everett Eissenstat, a partner at Squire Patton Boggs whose served as an economic adviser during the first Trump administration, said he expected the White House to unveil more deals in the coming weeks, while noting that many countries appeared to have lowered their expectations of what they hope to achieve.
He pointed to recent comments on Tuesday by Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, which raised the possibility that the country might accept tariffs at levels once considered unthinkable.
"The tone is changing a lot," he said.
Getty ImagesSeverance, The Penguin, and The White Lotus lead the nominations for this year's Emmy TV awards.
Britt Lower, Quinta Brunson, Harrison Ford and Jeremy Allen White are among the stars competing for the top prizes for acting.
The Studio, The Bear, Abbott Elementary and Shrinking are among the contenders in the comedy categories.
The best TV shows and actors of the past year will be honoured at the awards ceremony in Los Angeles on 14 September.
Here is the full list of nominees announced on Tuesday.
The most nominated shows
27 - Severance
24 - The Penguin
23 - The White Lotus
23 - The Studio
16 - The Last of Us
14 - Andor
14 - Hacks
Getty ImagesOutstanding drama series
Outstanding comedy series
Outstanding limited or anthology series
Outstanding lead actor in a drama series
Outstanding lead actress in a drama series
Outstanding lead actor in a comedy series
Outstanding lead actress in a comedy series
Outstanding lead actor in a limited or anthology series or movie
Outstanding lead actress in a limited or anthology series or movie
Getty ImagesOutstanding supporting actor in a drama series
Outstanding supporting actress in a drama series
Outstanding supporting actor in a comedy series
Outstanding supporting actress in a comedy series
Getty ImagesOutstanding supporting actor in a limited or anthology series or movie
Outstanding supporting actress in a limited or anthology series or movie
Outstanding reality competition programme
Outstanding talk series
Getty Images
Getty ImagesFrance's Prime Minister François Bayrou has proposed cutting two public holidays as part of a 2026 budget proposal to slash overall spending while also increasing defence expenses.
Bayrou suggested axing Easter Monday and 8 May, a day that commemorates the Allied victory at the end of World War Two in Europe.
He said the various bank holidays had turned the month of May into a gruyère - a Swiss cheese full of holes - although he added he was open to other suggestions.
Bayrou runs the risk of having his budget voted down in parliament in the autumn, which could eventually cause his government to collapse.
But on Tuesday he stressed that France - the eurozone's second economy - was "in mortal danger" of being crushed by debt.
Standing in front of a lectern emblazoned with the words "The moment of truth", Bayrou spoke for over an hour outlining a series of daring measures that he said should bring the annual budget deficit under control.
These include a freeze on public spending for next year, ending tax breaks for the wealthy and a reduction in the number of civil servants.
The budget also needs to factor in President Emmanuel Macron's call for France's defence spending to rise by €3.5bn (£3bn) next year and then by a further €3bn in 2027.
But the proposal to cut the two May public holidays was the most eye-catching suggestion. Bayrou said Easter Monday had "no religious significance", and the whole nation had to work and produce more.
His idea made headlines immediately - and drew condemnation from several sides.
The far-right National Rally (RN) party damned it as an attack on French history and on French workers, while Green party leader Marine Tondelier lamented that the day that commemorated victory against Nazism would no longer be a holiday.
Pressed by reporters after his speech, Bayrou said his proposal was "basic arithmetic".
"If we want to stay on course, we need to find more than €40bn," Bayrou argued, referring to the €43.8bn France needs to slash from its budget to rein in debt, which he said grows by €5,000 every second.
The French government aims to bring the deficit down from 5.8% last year to below 4.6% next year and to under 3% by 2029, Bayrou said.
The embattled centrist prime minister has only been in the job since December, following on from the short-lived premiership of Michel Barnier.
Barnier's government used executive powers to push his own bill that sought to rein in France's deficit through an even harsher budget than Bayrou's.
The move proved unacceptable to the National Rally and left-wing parties, which all voted against Barnier, causing the government to collapse through a no-confidence vote for the first time since 1962.
The same factions are now threatening to do it again when Bayrou's budget is put to a vote in the autumn.
Jean-Luc Mélenchon of the radical left France Unbowed (LFI) said that the PM had to be ousted, while RN leader Marine Le Pen accused Bayrou of preferring to "attack the French, workers and pensioners, instead of slashing wastage", and vowed to bring him down "if he doesn't revise his plans".
But Bayrou said his government "wanted to change things" to restore public finances and would do so "despite the risk" of a no-confidence vote.
Since last summer's surprise snap election the French parliament has been deeply divided into three blocs that have resisted working together. Another election may well result in a similar deadlock.
If Bayrou's government collapses President Macron will have to choose a successor or appoint an unelected technocrat government - neither of which would be palatable to MPs.
His own popularity is under 25% and there has been a clamour for him to step down sooner than the end of his second term in 2027 - something he has consistently resisted.
Getty ImagesPresident Donald Trump was "merely asking a question" when he asked the Ukrainian president whether the country could strike Moscow, the White House says.
Citing anonymous sources, the Financial Times reported that Trump on 4 July had privately encouraged Ukraine to escalate strikes on Russia if the US provided long-range weapons.
But Trump was "merely asking a question, not encouraging further killing. He's working tirelessly to stop the killing and end this war", White House told the BBC in a statement.
On Monday, Trump announced he would send weapons to Ukraine and warned of more tariffs on Russia if the country did not come to a ceasefire deal with Ukraine in 50 days.
The president said the US would impose 100% secondary tariffs targeting Russia's remaining trade partners if a peace deal with Ukraine was not reached in that timeline.
Among the weapons involved in the latest deal, Trump said "everything" including defensive Patriot missiles, though the exact details are not yet known.
Trump told the BBC on Monday that he was "disappointed" in Russian President Vladimir Putin. "But I'm not done with him," he added.
Trump also said he was "working at" getting Putin to put an end to killing in Ukraine.
"We'll have a great conversation. I'll say: 'That's good, I'll think we're close to getting it done,' and then he'll knock down a building in Kyiv."
In recent weeks, Russia has escalated its drone and missile attacks in Ukraine, killing more than 230 civilians in June, according to the United Nations - the largest number killed in a month during the three years of war.
Trump's question to Ukrainian President Vlodomyr Zelensky about whether the country could strike Moscow came a day after a "bad" call between the US president and Putin, according to the Financial Times.
"Volodymyr, can you hit Moscow? . . . Can you hit St Petersburg too?" Trump asked on a separate call with Zelensky after, the outlet reported.
Ukraine has Ukraine struck several targets deep inside Russia this year with missiles provided by the US and the UK.
Since returning to the White House in January, Trump has pledged to end Russia's war in Ukraine.
But the promise has proven more complicated than expected, and Trump has grown increasingly frustrated with the Russian leader and the lack of progress in ending the conflict.
Two rounds of ceasefire talks between Russia and Ukraine took place earlier this year but no other meetings have been scheduled.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Tuesday that Trump's pledge to raise tariffs and send weapons to Ukraine was seen "not as a signal for peace but as a signal to continue the war".
© Kenny Holston/The New York Times
© John Raoux/Associated Press
© Eduardo Munoz/Reuters
© Tim Gruber for The New York Times
Getty ImagesSeverance, The Penguin, and The White Lotus lead the nominations for this year's Emmy TV awards.
Britt Lower, Quinta Brunson, Harrison Ford and Jeremy Allen White are among the stars competing for the top prizes for acting.
The Studio, The Bear, Abbott Elementary and Shrinking are among the contenders in the comedy categories.
The best TV shows and actors of the past year will be honoured at the awards ceremony in Los Angeles on 14 September.
Here is the full list of nominees announced on Tuesday.
The most nominated shows
27 - Severance
24 - The Penguin
23 - The White Lotus
23 - The Studio
16 - The Last of Us
14 - Andor
14 - Hacks
Getty ImagesOutstanding drama series
Outstanding comedy series
Outstanding limited or anthology series
Outstanding lead actor in a drama series
Outstanding lead actress in a drama series
Outstanding lead actor in a comedy series
Outstanding lead actress in a comedy series
Outstanding lead actor in a limited or anthology series or movie
Outstanding lead actress in a limited or anthology series or movie
Getty ImagesOutstanding supporting actor in a drama series
Outstanding supporting actress in a drama series
Outstanding supporting actor in a comedy series
Outstanding supporting actress in a comedy series
Getty ImagesOutstanding supporting actor in a limited or anthology series or movie
Outstanding supporting actress in a limited or anthology series or movie
Outstanding reality competition programme
Outstanding talk series
Getty Images
© Eric Lee/The New York Times
President Donald Trump wants lawmakers in Texas to redraw the state’s congressional district map to give Republicans five more House seats, he told reporters Tuesday.
“There could be some other states we’re going to get another three, or four or five in addition. Texas would be the biggest one.” he said. “Just a simple redrawing we pick up five seats.”
The White House and Department of Justice pushed for the redistricting, POLITICO reported Friday, and Gov. Greg Abbott asked state leaders to do it during a summer special session. The move is seen as an opportunity for Republicans to prevent Democrats from flipping the house back in 2026, but some see it as a dangerous risk.
Democrats currently control 12 of Texas’s 38 congressional districts. A 13th district anchored by downtown Houston is currently vacant but was controlled by Democrats until the death of Rep. Sylvester Turner last March.
Putting more Republican voters in Democratic districts would make those races more competitive, but it also removes those voters from their current Republican districts, diluting the GOP advantage. Those shifts could create the potential for Democrats to win more seats in Texas than they otherwise might.
“They are playing a little bit of roulette with these maps,” said Rep. Julie Johnson (D-Texas). “In a wave election like what we have a potential opportunity for in ‘26, I think it makes these Republicans very vulnerable.”
Trump’s allusion to “other states” likely includes Ohio, which is required by law to draw new congressional maps this year and could give Republicans up to three more seats. It is unclear which other states he sees as opportunities for midterm pickups.
Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) said while members of Congress have "no voice" in creating new district maps, it might be of interest to conduct a new census before new lines were drawn. The Constitution requires a decennial census that is the basis for congressional apportionment. It typically takes years to both plan and execute a census.
"The numbers are kind of different than they were in 2020," he said.
Nicholas Wu contributed to this report.
© Michael Gonzalez/Getty Images
© Aaron Blum for The New York Times
Login