François Bayrou, the French prime minister, is set to lose a confidence vote on his stewardship, in the latest twist in a period of chaos inside the National Assembly.

Bayrou, 74, is the fourth prime minister in two years under President Emmanuel Macron, whose second term is office has been overshadowed by political instability.

Bayrou's minority government called for €44bn (£38bn) of budget cuts to tackle France's mounting public debt and is now is heading for collapse.

The BBC looks at what led to this political crisis and what could happen next.

How did we get here?

French President Emmanuel Macron took a gamble in June 2024.

Faced with a bruising loss for his party in the European Parliament vote, he called a snap parliamentary election which he hoped would achieve "a clear majority in serenity and harmony".

Instead, it resulted in a hung, divided parliament that has made it difficult for any prime minister to garner the necessary support to pass bills and the yearly budget.

Macron appointed Michel Barnier last September but within three months the man who negotiated Brexit for the EU was out - the shortest period since France's post-war Fifth Republic began.

Bayrou is set to suffer the same fate, just under nine months since he came to office last December.

Meanwhile some parties – chiefly on the far right and the far left – continue to clamour for an early presidential election.

Macron has always said he will not stand down before his term ends in 2027.

Instead, he will likely have to choose between appointing a fifth prime minister in less than two years - who again risks working on borrowed time - or calling snap elections for parliament, which could result in an even more hostile National Assembly.

There are few good options for the president as the effects of his June 2024 gamble continue to reverberate.

Bayrou's key issue is France's debt crisis, and what he says is the need to slash government spending to head off a catastrophe for future generations.

Why is France in debt crisis?

Simply put, France's government has for decades spent more money than it has generated. As a result, it has to borrow to cover its budget.

The French government says, in early 2025, public debt stood at €3,345 billion, or 114% of GDP.

That is the third highest public debt in the eurozone after Greece and Italy, and equivalent to almost €50,000 per French citizen.

Last year's budget deficit was 5.8% of GDP and this year's is not expected to be 5.4%. So public debt will continue to grow as borrowing covers the shortfall.

France - like many developed nations - is facing the demographic headache of an ageing population - fewer workers being taxed and more people drawing the state pension.

Bayrou is among those French politicians who want to slash the deficit by redefining generous social programmes - such as state pensions.

In his speech to parliament on Monday, Bayrou spoke of a country on "life support" and addicted to spending.

Two years ago France raised the pension age from 62 to 64 for those born in 1968 or afterwards, and Bayrou has warned that the sense that French workers can stop working during their early 60s is now out of date.

However there is much opposition to further cuts. The government of Bayrou's predecessor collapsed in a confidence vote on the issue last December.

Politicians on the left have called for tax rises, rather than budget cuts.

Bayrou has said his piece - what happens next?

If as expected Bayrou loses the vote in the National Assembly early this evening, then France is probably heading for another period of doubt, drift and speculation.

It is possible President Emmanuel Macron will act quickly to appoint a new prime minister – it's certainly in the country's interest that he do so.

But practicalities – and precedent – both suggest this could turn out to be a drawn-out process.

Macron has to find a name sufficiently unobjectionable to at least some of the parliamentary opposition that they won't automatically bring him or her down.

The first two PMs in this benighted parliament – Barnier and Bayrou – took weeks to find. The third won't be any easier.

In the meantime Bayrou would presumably stay on as caretaker head of government.

There is pressure from some quarters – notably Marine Le Pen's National Rally – for a new dissolution of the Assembly and parliamentary elections. But there are also strong voices saying it would be a waste of time, because a new vote would be unlikely to change much.

Beyond that there are also voices – from the far left this time – calling for Macron's resignation as president. But don't watch this space. Knowing the character of the man, it is most unlikely to happen.

Who could replace Bayrou?

If Bayrou falls, pressure will be strong on Macron to name a successor from the left. The last two were from the right and centre, and a left alliance came out numerically top in the 2024 election.

Olivier Faure, the leader of the Socialist Party, would be one possibility. The 57-year-old has a group of 66 deputies in the National Assembly.

Two other possibilities from the left are former PM Bernard Cazeneuve, and the veteran ex-minister Pierre Moscovici, currently head of the Cour des Comptes, the official accounting office.

If Macron decides to stick with the centre and right, his first choice would probably be Sebastien Lecornu, 39, the current defence minister who is a member of Macron's Renaissance party and said to be close to the president.

Another conservative whose name has been mentioned is the current minister of labour and health, Catherine Vautrin.

Two other possibilities from inside government are Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau, who now leads the Republicans, and Justice Minister Gérald Darmanin.

But with all eyes on the 2027 presidential election, would these heavyweights want the electoral kiss-of-death which is to be Macron's next PM?

London Underground services are continuing to face disruption on Monday, after workers walked out on Sunday in rolling action over pay and conditions.

Members of the Rail, Maritime And Transport union (RMT) are staging the walkout until Thursday.

There is little or no service on all of the Tube as different parts of RMT membership walk out on different days.

The Elizabeth line and the Overground are operating but will be much busier than usual.

You can find out more on which lines are affected on TfL's website.

Listen to the best of BBC Radio London on Sounds and follow BBC London on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to hello.bbclondon@bbc.co.uk

Prince William and Catherine have paid tribute to the late Queen Elizabeth II on the anniversary of her death, as Prince Harry laid a wreath on his return to the UK.

The Prince and Princess of Wales visited a Women's Institute event in Sunningdale, Berkshire, to meet members of an organisation with a long association with the late Queen.

Elsewhere, Prince Harry - who has arrived back in the UK for the first time in five months - privately laid a wreath and paid his respects to the late Queen in Windsor, where she is buried.

The prince has flown from California and will appear at the WellChild charity awards later on Monday, the first in several planned engagements this week.

Queen Elizabeth, Britain's longest reigning monarch, who died at the age of 96, had been president of the Women's Institute branch in Sunningdale.

Prince William was wearing a dark jacket and tie, at a time of royal mourning for the Duchess of Kent, who died last Thursday.

This is also the anniversary of the accession to the throne of King Charles, who is spending the day in Balmoral in Scotland, where the late Queen died.

There has been speculation about whether Prince Harry will meet his father during his UK visit, with the two not having met face to face since February 2024, soon after King Charles had been diagnosed with cancer.

Prince Harry's wife Meghan and their children have remained at their home in California.

Sign up here to get the latest royal stories and analysis every week with our Royal Watch newsletter. Those outside the UK can sign up here.

Hamas says it has received "some ideas" from the US through mediators on how to reach a Gaza ceasefire agreement.

The Palestinian armed group said it was discussing how to develop the ideas, noting that it was ready to release its 48 remaining hostages in Gaza in return for a "clear" declaration ending the war.

A Palestinian official told the BBC the US plan would see the hostages freed in the first 48 hours of a 60-day truce in exchange for Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails and good-faith negotiations on a permanent ceasefire.

It came after US President Donald Trump gave Hamas what he called a "last warning" to agree a deal. He said Israel had accepted his terms, without giving details.

Israel's Foreign Minister, Gideon Saar, said it was ready to agree a deal ending the war that would include the release of all the hostages - only 20 of whom are believed to be alive - and the disarmament of Hamas.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meanwhile warned the approximately one million Palestinians living in famine-stricken Gaza City to evacuate immediately, as the Israeli military stepped up an offensive to conquer it.

"In the last two days we brought down 50 terrorist high-rises, and this is only the beginning of the ground operation in Gaza City," he said in a video. "I say to the residents of Gaza City: you have been warned, get out of there."

Hospitals said Israeli attacks killed at least 40 people across Gaza on Monday, including 25 in Gaza City and elsewhere in the north.

The Israeli military said four soldiers were killed in combat in northern Gaza.

On Sunday evening, Hamas put out a statement saying it had "received through the mediators some ideas from the American side aimed at reaching a ceasefire agreement" and that it welcomed the initiative.

"The movement is in constant contact with the intermediaries to develop these ideas into a comprehensive agreement that meets the needs of our people," it added.

Hamas said it was ready to immediately negotiate the release of all those who were taken hostage during the group's attack on Israel on 7 October 2023 in exchange for "a clear declaration to end the war, a full withdrawal from Gaza, and the formation of a committee of Palestinian independents to manage Gaza".

Earlier in the day, US President Donald Trump had written on Truth Social: "Everyone wants the Hostages HOME. Everyone wants this War to end! The Israelis have accepted my Terms. It is time for Hamas to accept as well."

"I have warned Hamas about the consequences of not accepting. This is my last warning, there will not be another one!"

A senior Palestinian official familiar with the ceasefire efforts told the BBC that under the US proposal, all of the hostages would be released within the first 48 hours of a 60-day truce in exchange for Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails, including those serving life sentences and other lengthy terms, and detainees from Gaza.

According to the official, the proposal also includes a personal guarantee from the US president that both sides would hold good-faith negotiations on an end to the war.

During the first two weeks of the truce, the negotiations would cover key issues, including Hamas's disarmament, the formation of an independent governing body or administrative committee in Gaza, and arrangements for Israeli troop withdrawals, the official said. Humanitarian aid would also flow openly into Gaza.

The framework appeared to be aimed at creating a pathway to a broader settlement while addressing immediate humanitarian and security concerns.

Israeli media quoted political sources as saying that Israel was "seriously considering" the US plan, but also that Hamas was likely to have difficulty accepting it.

On Monday, Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar told a news conference in Budapest: "President Trump said it clearly yesterday, Israel said yes to his proposal. We are ready to accept a full deal that would end the war based on the cabinet's decision.

"Two things must happen. One, the return of our hostages… [Two], Hamas must lay down its arms."

Defence Minister Israel Katz at the same time warned Hamas: "Release the hostages and put down your weapons - or Gaza will be destroyed and you will be annihilated."

The Israeli military has been intensifying its air and ground attacks on Gaza City, and on Monday a fourth high-rise building was destroyed in an air strike in as many days.

Video footage verified by the BBC showed the al-Roya 2 building collapsing after being hit by two projectiles.

Before the strike, the Israeli military ordered dozens of displaced families who had been sheltering inside the building to evacuate along those who had been living in tents pitched in the surrounding area.

The military said Hamas fighters responsible for installing "intelligence gathering means and explosive devices" had been operating near the building and "used it throughout the war to plan and advance terror attacks against [Israeli] forces".

"We don't know what to do and where to go. The bombing is insane," Janine Zoarob, a displaced woman who was living in one of the tents, told Reuters news agency. "I am afraid for my children, I am afraid for myself, and I am afraid for those around me."

On Saturday, Israel directed displaced people to head to a newly designated "humanitarian area" in southern Gaza for their "safety". The zone is less than 43 sq km (17 sq miles), which is equivalent to around 12% of the territory.

The military has said there is essential humanitarian infrastructure there. However, the UN has said the tent camps there are already overcrowded and unsafe, and that hospitals are operating several times above capacity.

UN humanitarian chief Tom Fletcher has also warned the window is closing fast to prevent the famine in Gaza City - which was confirmed last month by global food security experts - from spreading to the central city of Deir al-Balah and southern city of Khan Younis by the end of this month.

He called for humanitarian aid to be allowed in unimpeded and at scale, as well as the protection of civilians, a ceasefire and the release of the hostages.

The Israeli military launched a campaign in Gaza in response to the Hamas-led attack on 7 October 2023, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 others were taken hostage.

At least 64,522 people have been killed in Israeli attacks in Gaza since then, according to the territory's Hamas-run health ministry.

The ministry also says 393 people, have so far died during the war as a result of malnutrition and starvation, including six over the past 24 hours.

US President Donald Trump's administration has asked the Supreme Court to let it withhold more than $4bn (£3bn) in foreign aid.

The administration is seeking an emergency order as it tries to claw back funds for foreign assistance programmes that have already been allocated by Congress.

A lower court last week said the Trump administration had a statutory obligation to spend the money, and an appeals court declined last Friday to freeze that ruling.

The president attempted to use a rarely used legislative tool to withdraw the funds. Since returning to the White House, Trump has cancelled billions of dollars in foreign aid that he says does not align with his objectives.

Solicitor General D John Sauer said in Monday's filing that the lower court's injunction "raises a grave and urgent threat to the separation of powers".

"The President can hardly speak with one voice in foreign affairs or in dealings with Congress when the district court is forcing the Executive Branch to advocate against its own objectives," Sauer wrote.

The Supreme Court could rule at any time.

Last week, Judge Amir Ali ruled the US government had to spend the allocated money unless Congress voted to approve the Trump administration's request.

On 28 August, Trump notified the House of Representatives that the administration would not spend billions in foreign aid allocated by Congress earlier this year.

Those funds include some $3bn for the US Agency for International Development (USAID), as well as money for the state department, international peacekeeping and for democracy-promotion in other countries.

Trump, a Republican, has largely dismantled USAID, the main foreign aid agency, because he said its spending was wasteful.

To revoke the foreign aid money, he said he was using a so-called pocket recission through the Impoundment Control Act, which gives a US president the power to request the cancellation of funds approved by Congress.

Such notice so late in the fiscal year means the money may go unspent because Congress does not have enough time to act on the request.

A group of nonprofits and businesses that receive money for foreign assistance projects filed a legal challenge to the move.

It is reported to be the first time in nearly half a century that the president has moved to unilaterally claw back funding in this way.

The Trump administration has already said it plans to spend another $6.5bn in funds appropriated for foreign aid, following lawsuits from aid groups.

This is not the first time the tussle over foreign aid funding has ended up at the Supreme Court.

In March, the justices rejected a bid from the president to keep $2bn in foreign aid frozen while the case moved forward. It was a 5-4 ruling.

The US Supreme Court has ruled sweeping immigration raids in Los Angeles can continue for now, lifting a federal judge's order that had barred agents from making stops without "reasonable suspicion".

The Monday ruling is a win for President Donald Trump, who has vowed to conduct record-level deportations of migrants in the country illegally.

The 6-3 decision of the conservative-majority court allows agents to stops suspects based solely on their race, language or job, while a legal challenge to the recent immigration sweeps in LA works its way through the courts.

The liberal justices dissented, saying the decision puts constitutional freedoms at risk.

Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in Monday's decision that the lower court's restraining order went too far in restricting how Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents could carry out stops or questioning of suspected unlawful migrants.

"To be clear, apparent ethnicity alone cannot furnish reasonable suspicion," he wrote. "However, it can be a 'relevant factor' when considered along with other salient factors."

• Trump's mass deportation drive collides with city of immigrants
• Farm workers fearing deportation stay in California's shadows

The Supreme Court's three liberal justices issued a strong dissent penned by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who wrote that "countless people in the Los Angeles area have been grabbed, thrown to the ground, and handcuffed simply because of their looks, their accents, and the fact they make a living by doing manual labour."

"Today, the Court needlessly subjects countless more to these exact same indignities," she wrote.

The Supreme Court's decision has been criticised by Los Angeles mayor Karen Bass, a Democrat.

"Today's ruling is not only dangerous - it's un-American and threatens the fabric of personal freedom in the United States of America," she said in a statement.

The decision lifts an order by US District Judge Maame E Frimpong in Los Angeles, who had said that there is a "mountain of evidence" showing the raids were violating the US Constitution.

The order halted the raids, with Judge Frimpon saying the Trump administration cannot rely on factors like "apparent race or ethnicity" or "speaking Spanish" alone to stop or question individuals.

The judge also barred immigration enforcement agents from conducting stops based solely on someone's presence "at a particular location" like a bus stop, agricultural site or car wash, or based solely on the type of work an individual does.

The temporary restraining order was issued in a legal challenge by immigration advocacy groups, who argued that immigration officers in Los Angeles were conducting "roving patrols" indiscriminately, and were denying individuals access to lawyers.

Judge Frimpong said this may violate the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures by the government.

The Supreme Court, however, said that the administration's actions have a good chance of ultimately being considered constitutional by the federal courts. While its decision only pertained to Judge Frimpong's temporary restraining order, the justices also showed how the court would approach the lawsuit should it have to consider an appeal down the road.

Lawyers for the Department of Homeland Security have argued that immigration officers are targeting people based on their legal status in the US, not skin colour, race or ethnicity.

They have also said that Judge Frimpong's order wrongly restricted ICE operations.

The Trump administration began sweeping immigration raids in Los Angeles in June, stopping and arresting people at Home Depot and other workplaces, and were met with immediate protests and civil unrest..

Trump then deployed nearly 2,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines in response, without authorisation from the state of California.

A federal judge has since ruled that the National Guard deployment was illegal. The White House responded that "a rogue judge is trying to usurp" the president's authority "to protect American cities from violence and destruction."

The US Supreme Court's decision to let the raids continue comes as the Trump administration looks to ramp up law enforcement in other cities, including Washington DC.

In August, Trump ordered National Guard troops to the American capital to address what he says is high crime in the city, and is also using federal officers to bolster the district's law enforcement.

He is now signalling that this week he will decide if he will also send federal law enforcement and the National Guard to Chicago.

At least 13 people have been killed and dozens are injured in Nepal after demonstrations against a government social media ban led to clashes between protesters and security forces.

Thousands heeded a call by demonstrators describing themselves as Generation Z to gather near the parliament building in Kathmandu over the decision to ban platforms including Facebook, X and YouTube.

Nepal's Minister for Communication Prithvi Subba told the BBC police had had to use force - which included water cannons, batons and firing rubber bullets.

The government has said social media platforms need to be regulated to tackle fake news, hate speech and online fraud.

But popular platforms such as Instagram have millions of users in Nepal, who rely on them for entertainment, news and business.

Demonstrators carried placards with slogans including "enough is enough" and "end to corruption".

Some said they were protesting against what they called the authoritarian attitude of the government.

As the rally moved into a restricted area close to parliament, some protesters climbed over the wall.

"Tear gas and water cannons were used after the protesters breached into the restricted area," police spokesman Shekhar Khanal told the AFP news agency.

A Kathmandu district office spokesperson said a curfew was imposed around areas including the parliament building after protesters attempted to enter.

Last week authorities ordered the blocking of 26 social media platforms for not complying with a deadline to register with Nepal's ministry of communication and information technology.

Since Friday, users have experienced difficulty in accessing the platforms, though some are using VPNs to get around the ban. So far, two platforms have been reactivated after registering with the ministry following the ban.

Nepal's government has argued it is not banning social media but trying to bring them in line with Nepali law.

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 on a smartphone or tablet via the BBC News App. You can also follow @BBCBreaking on X to get the latest alerts.

US President Donald Trump's administration has asked the Supreme Court to let it withhold more than $4bn (£3bn) in foreign aid.

The administration is seeking an emergency order as it tries to claw back funds for foreign assistance programmes that have already been allocated by Congress.

A lower court last week said the Trump administration had a statutory obligation to spend the money, and an appeals court declined last Friday to freeze that ruling.

The president attempted to use a rarely used legislative tool to withdraw the funds. Since returning to the White House, Trump has cancelled billions of dollars in foreign aid that he says does not align with his objectives.

Solicitor General D John Sauer said in Monday's filing that the lower court's injunction "raises a grave and urgent threat to the separation of powers".

"The President can hardly speak with one voice in foreign affairs or in dealings with Congress when the district court is forcing the Executive Branch to advocate against its own objectives," Sauer wrote.

The Supreme Court could rule at any time.

Last week, Judge Amir Ali ruled the US government had to spend the allocated money unless Congress voted to approve the Trump administration's request.

On 28 August, Trump notified the House of Representatives that the administration would not spend billions in foreign aid allocated by Congress earlier this year.

Those funds include some $3bn for the US Agency for International Development (USAID), as well as money for the state department, international peacekeeping and for democracy-promotion in other countries.

Trump, a Republican, has largely dismantled USAID, the main foreign aid agency, because he said its spending was wasteful.

To revoke the foreign aid money, he said he was using a so-called pocket recission through the Impoundment Control Act, which gives a US president the power to request the cancellation of funds approved by Congress.

Such notice so late in the fiscal year means the money may go unspent because Congress does not have enough time to act on the request.

A group of nonprofits and businesses that receive money for foreign assistance projects filed a legal challenge to the move.

It is reported to be the first time in nearly half a century that the president has moved to unilaterally claw back funding in this way.

The Trump administration has already said it plans to spend another $6.5bn in funds appropriated for foreign aid, following lawsuits from aid groups.

This is not the first time the tussle over foreign aid funding has ended up at the Supreme Court.

In March, the justices rejected a bid from the president to keep $2bn in foreign aid frozen while the case moved forward. It was a 5-4 ruling.

The third British victim killed in the Lisbon funicular crash has been named by police.

David Young, 82, from Holyhead on Anglesey, was among 16 people who died last Wednesday when the Glória funicular derailed and crashed into a building in Portugal's capital.

His family described him as a "lifelong transport enthusiast", saying it was a comfort that "his final moments were in pursuit of the hobby which gave him so much happiness".

Over the weekend Cheshire Police confirmed the other British victims were Kayleigh Smith, 36, and her partner Will Nelson, 44.

Known to most as Dave, he was raised in Auchterarder, Perthshire, but moved to Holyhead in 1980 where he had a "long career as a customs officer".

"In retirement he enjoyed visiting heritage railways and tramways around the world," they said," his family said.

Llinos Medi, MP for Ynys Môn, sent her condolences to Mr Young's family and "to those who have been affected".

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said he was "deeply saddened" by the incident.

"His thoughts are with their families and those affected by this terrible incident," a spokesperson said.

"We stand united with Portugal during this difficult time."

The city's funicular railways - Glória, Lavra, Bica and Graça - are a popular tourist attraction and known for their yellow tram-like vehicles.

Officials said a cable along the railway's route snapped, but the rest of the mechanism was functioning properly.

The brakeman tried to apply emergency brakes but failed to prevent the derailment,

The cause of the crash remains unknown.

Nationals of Portugal, South Korea, Switzerland, Canada, France, Britain, Ukraine and the US are among the dead, according to police.

François Bayrou, the French prime minister, is set to lose a confidence vote on his stewardship, in the latest twist in a period of chaos inside the National Assembly.

Bayrou, 74, is the fourth prime minister in two years under President Emmanuel Macron, whose second term is office has been overshadowed by political instability.

Bayrou's minority government called for €44bn (£38bn) of budget cuts to tackle France's mounting public debt and is now is heading for collapse.

The BBC looks at what led to this political crisis and what could happen next.

How did we get here?

French President Emmanuel Macron took a gamble in June 2024.

Faced with a bruising loss for his party in the European Parliament vote, he called a snap parliamentary election which he hoped would achieve "a clear majority in serenity and harmony".

Instead, it resulted in a hung, divided parliament that has made it difficult for any prime minister to garner the necessary support to pass bills and the yearly budget.

Macron appointed Michel Barnier last September but within three months the man who negotiated Brexit for the EU was out - the shortest period since France's post-war Fifth Republic began.

Bayrou is set to suffer the same fate, just under nine months since he came to office last December.

Meanwhile some parties – chiefly on the far right and the far left – continue to clamour for an early presidential election.

Macron has always said he will not stand down before his term ends in 2027.

Instead, he will likely have to choose between appointing a fifth prime minister in less than two years - who again risks working on borrowed time - or calling snap elections for parliament, which could result in an even more hostile National Assembly.

There are few good options for the president as the effects of his June 2024 gamble continue to reverberate.

Bayrou's key issue is France's debt crisis, and what he says is the need to slash government spending to head off a catastrophe for future generations.

Why is France in debt crisis?

Simply put, France's government has for decades spent more money than it has generated. As a result, it has to borrow to cover its budget.

The French government says, in early 2025, public debt stood at €3,345 billion, or 114% of GDP.

That is the third highest public debt in the eurozone after Greece and Italy, and equivalent to almost €50,000 per French citizen.

Last year's budget deficit was 5.8% of GDP and this year's is not expected to be 5.4%. So public debt will continue to grow as borrowing covers the shortfall.

France - like many developed nations - is facing the demographic headache of an ageing population - fewer workers being taxed and more people drawing the state pension.

Bayrou is among those French politicians who want to slash the deficit by redefining generous social programmes - such as state pensions.

In his speech to parliament on Monday, Bayrou spoke of a country on "life support" and addicted to spending.

Two years ago France raised the pension age from 62 to 64 for those born in 1968 or afterwards, and Bayrou has warned that the sense that French workers can stop working during their early 60s is now out of date.

However there is much opposition to further cuts. The government of Bayrou's predecessor collapsed in a confidence vote on the issue last December.

Politicians on the left have called for tax rises, rather than budget cuts.

Bayrou has said his piece - what happens next?

If as expected Bayrou loses the vote in the National Assembly early this evening, then France is probably heading for another period of doubt, drift and speculation.

It is possible President Emmanuel Macron will act quickly to appoint a new prime minister – it's certainly in the country's interest that he do so.

But practicalities – and precedent – both suggest this could turn out to be a drawn-out process.

Macron has to find a name sufficiently unobjectionable to at least some of the parliamentary opposition that they won't automatically bring him or her down.

The first two PMs in this benighted parliament – Barnier and Bayrou – took weeks to find. The third won't be any easier.

In the meantime Bayrou would presumably stay on as caretaker head of government.

There is pressure from some quarters – notably Marine Le Pen's National Rally – for a new dissolution of the Assembly and parliamentary elections. But there are also strong voices saying it would be a waste of time, because a new vote would be unlikely to change much.

Beyond that there are also voices – from the far left this time – calling for Macron's resignation as president. But don't watch this space. Knowing the character of the man, it is most unlikely to happen.

Who could replace Bayrou?

If Bayrou falls, pressure will be strong on Macron to name a successor from the left. The last two were from the right and centre, and a left alliance came out numerically top in the 2024 election.

Olivier Faure, the leader of the Socialist Party, would be one possibility. The 57-year-old has a group of 66 deputies in the National Assembly.

Two other possibilities from the left are former PM Bernard Cazeneuve, and the veteran ex-minister Pierre Moscovici, currently head of the Cour des Comptes, the official accounting office.

If Macron decides to stick with the centre and right, his first choice would probably be Sebastien Lecornu, 39, the current defence minister who is a member of Macron's Renaissance party and said to be close to the president.

Another conservative whose name has been mentioned is the current minister of labour and health, Catherine Vautrin.

Two other possibilities from inside government are Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau, who now leads the Republicans, and Justice Minister Gérald Darmanin.

But with all eyes on the 2027 presidential election, would these heavyweights want the electoral kiss-of-death which is to be Macron's next PM?

On 11 September 2021, Tom Phillips and his three children went missing for the first time.

His Toyota Hilux was found parked below a tide line at a beach near his parents' home in Marokopa on New Zealand's North Island. Police launched a massive search operation by land, sea and air.

Less than three weeks later, the family returned home, with the father claiming they had been on a camping trip.

Then, on 12 December that year, they vanished again. Aside from a few chance sightings and grainy frames of CCTV footage, the bushman and his three children had not been seen since.

That was, until the early hours of Monday morning, when police responding to a report of an attempted burglary entered into a shoot-out that resulted in Mr Phillips' death, ending a four-year manhunt.

Many questions about his disappearance remain, including why he took his children and disappeared into New Zealand's harsh wilderness, and whether he was able to evade capture for so long by having help.

When Mr Phillips returned home for the first time in 2021, he was charged with wasting police resources. The search effort over the harsh, unforgiving landscape of the western Waitomo region had cost New Zealand authorities hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Police did not launch a fresh search the second time he and his three children - Ember, Maverick, and Jayda, aged five, seven and eight, respectively, at the time - went missing.

When he failed to appear at a court appearance on 12 January 2022, police issued a warrant for his arrest.

Mr Phillips returned to his family home alone at night to collect supplies on 9 February that year.

He was then not seen for more than a year.

Police have said in the past they believed Mr Phillips took his children - now aged nine, 10 and 12 - over a custody dispute with their mother, though he never offered any explanation as to why he had done this.

Mr Phillips was known to be a bushman who had some survival training. Locals in Marokopa have said he was someone who wanted to be off the grid and had not been on any social media platforms.

Police believed he and his children had survived out in the dense wilderness surrounding Marokopa.

But it seems Mr Phillips and his children could not survive in the bush on their wits alone.

There was a string of sightings around Kawhia between August and November 2023, including multiple alleged robberies, as well as at a hardware store and on quad bikes.

CCTV footage captured around that time appeared to show Mr Phillips and one of his children - both wearing camouflage and masks over their faces - attempting to break into a store in Piopio, south-west of Marokopa, police said.

When Mr Phillips was shot on Monday, police said they found multiple firearms and other loot on his quad bike.

Police have previously said they believed Mr Phillips was being aided in his evasion by others.

When he was suspected of a bank robbery in Te Kuiti, a small town in the Waitomo region, police said there was an accomplice.

Fewer than 100 people live in the tight-knit community of Marokopa. While there was no suggestion that his family had assisted him, given the custody dispute, there have been questions about whether someone who knew him was helping him remain hidden or knew of his whereabouts.

In June 2024, police issued an NZ$80,000 (£37,200) reward for information that might lead to the location of Mr Phillips and his three children. The deadline expired without any breakthroughs.

They were next seen that October. A group of teenage pig hunters who had been trekking through the bush around Marokopa spotted them and filmed the brief encounter on their phones.

In the grainy footage, Mr Phillips could be seen leading his children through the rugged terrain, all wearing camouflaged clothing, raincoats and large backpacks.

New Zealand media reported that the teenagers had briefly spoken to one of their children to ask if anyone knew they were there. The child had replied "only you" and kept walking, the father of one of the teenagers told New Zealand's 1News.

The sighting prompted an unsuccessful three-day search involving police and army helicopters. Police said last month that they felt an aggressive search was the wrong approach, as they said Mr Phillips was armed and considered dangerous.

He was not seen again until late August this year, when he and one of his children were captured on CCTV allegedly breaking into a store in Piopio, making off with grocery items.

It was Piopio he returned to on Monday morning. It was at about 02:30 local time (14:30 GMT on Sunday) that police were called to a report of an attempted burglary at a rural farm supply shop there, which police believe Mr Phillips had unsuccessfully targeted before.

A quad bike carrying two people was seen heading towards Marokopa. Police laid spikes along the road and, when these stopped the quad bike, officers said they were met with gunfire.

Police said the first officer to reach the scene was shot in the head and he remains in a serious condition. A second officer returned fire and Mr Phillips died at the scene, police said.

The child who was with him was unharmed and provided police with information that led them to the other two children, who were at a remote campsite in the bush between Marokopa and Te Kuiti in near-freezing conditions, police said.

The children - whose wellbeing had been the top concern in New Zealand throughout their disappearance - are now being cared for by the authorities.

On 11 September 2021, Tom Phillips and his three children went missing for the first time.

His Toyota Hilux was found parked below a tide line at a beach near his parents' home in Marokopa on New Zealand's North Island. Police launched a massive search operation by land, sea and air.

Less than three weeks later, the family returned home, with the father claiming they had been on a camping trip.

Then, on 12 December that year, they vanished again. Aside from a few chance sightings and grainy frames of CCTV footage, the bushman and his three children had not been seen since.

That was, until the early hours of Monday morning, when police responding to a report of an attempted burglary entered into a shoot-out that resulted in Mr Phillips' death, ending a four-year manhunt.

Many questions about his disappearance remain, including why he took his children and disappeared into New Zealand's harsh wilderness, and whether he was able to evade capture for so long by having help.

When Mr Phillips returned home for the first time in 2021, he was charged with wasting police resources. The search effort over the harsh, unforgiving landscape of the western Waitomo region had cost New Zealand authorities hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Police did not launch a fresh search the second time he and his three children - Ember, Maverick, and Jayda, aged five, seven and eight, respectively, at the time - went missing.

When he failed to appear at a court appearance on 12 January 2022, police issued a warrant for his arrest.

Mr Phillips returned to his family home alone at night to collect supplies on 9 February that year.

He was then not seen for more than a year.

Police have said in the past they believed Mr Phillips took his children - now aged nine, 10 and 12 - over a custody dispute with their mother, though he never offered any explanation as to why he had done this.

Mr Phillips was known to be a bushman who had some survival training. Locals in Marokopa have said he was someone who wanted to be off the grid and had not been on any social media platforms.

Police believed he and his children had survived out in the dense wilderness surrounding Marokopa.

But it seems Mr Phillips and his children could not survive in the bush on their wits alone.

There was a string of sightings around Kawhia between August and November 2023, including multiple alleged robberies, as well as at a hardware store and on quad bikes.

CCTV footage captured around that time appeared to show Mr Phillips and one of his children - both wearing camouflage and masks over their faces - attempting to break into a store in Piopio, south-west of Marokopa, police said.

When Mr Phillips was shot on Monday, police said they found multiple firearms and other loot on his quad bike.

Police have previously said they believed Mr Phillips was being aided in his evasion by others.

When he was suspected of a bank robbery in Te Kuiti, a small town in the Waitomo region, police said there was an accomplice.

Fewer than 100 people live in the tight-knit community of Marokopa. While there was no suggestion that his family had assisted him, given the custody dispute, there have been questions about whether someone who knew him was helping him remain hidden or knew of his whereabouts.

In June 2024, police issued an NZ$80,000 (£37,200) reward for information that might lead to the location of Mr Phillips and his three children. The deadline expired without any breakthroughs.

They were next seen that October. A group of teenage pig hunters who had been trekking through the bush around Marokopa spotted them and filmed the brief encounter on their phones.

In the grainy footage, Mr Phillips could be seen leading his children through the rugged terrain, all wearing camouflaged clothing, raincoats and large backpacks.

New Zealand media reported that the teenagers had briefly spoken to one of their children to ask if anyone knew they were there. The child had replied "only you" and kept walking, the father of one of the teenagers told New Zealand's 1News.

The sighting prompted an unsuccessful three-day search involving police and army helicopters. Police said last month that they felt an aggressive search was the wrong approach, as they said Mr Phillips was armed and considered dangerous.

He was not seen again until late August this year, when he and one of his children were captured on CCTV allegedly breaking into a store in Piopio, making off with grocery items.

It was Piopio he returned to on Monday morning. It was at about 02:30 local time (14:30 GMT on Sunday) that police were called to a report of an attempted burglary at a rural farm supply shop there, which police believe Mr Phillips had unsuccessfully targeted before.

A quad bike carrying two people was seen heading towards Marokopa. Police laid spikes along the road and, when these stopped the quad bike, officers said they were met with gunfire.

Police said the first officer to reach the scene was shot in the head and he remains in a serious condition. A second officer returned fire and Mr Phillips died at the scene, police said.

The child who was with him was unharmed and provided police with information that led them to the other two children, who were at a remote campsite in the bush between Marokopa and Te Kuiti in near-freezing conditions, police said.

The children - whose wellbeing had been the top concern in New Zealand throughout their disappearance - are now being cared for by the authorities.

Food critic Grace Dent and chef Anna Haugh are the new hosts of MasterChef, after Gregg Wallace and John Torode were sacked.

Dent has appeared regularly as a guest on MasterChef, while Haugh has been a judge on the spin-off Professionals series.

Wallace and Torode had hosted the show for 20 years, but were axed in July after a report upheld claims against them.

The BBC decided to broadcast this year's amateurs series of MasterChef - with both Wallace and Torode in it - for the sake of the chefs who had taken part in it.

Author and podcaster Dent was a contestant on MasterChef: Battle Of The Critics in 2023.

Last year, it was announced that she would host the next series of Celebrity MasterChef alongside Torode, after Wallace temporarily stepped back from presenting the show following allegations against him.

The BBC has not yet announced what it plans to do with the completed celebrity series.

Dublin-born chef Anna Haugh is the founder of Myrtle restaurant in London, and is also a familiar face on TV screens.

She replaced Wallace in the final episodes of the current MasterChef amateurs series, as that's when the allegations against him first emerged during filming in November.

The BBC has also confirmed that chef and television presenter Matt Tebbutt will replace Wallace as a judge on the next series of MasterChef: The Professionals.

The Saturday Kitchen host will join Marcus Wareing and Monica Galetti on the programme.

The controversy over MasterChef started last year, when BBC News first revealed claims of inappropriate sexual comments against Wallace.

The show's production company ordered an immediate inquiry into the allegations. This summer, the report upheld more than 40 claims against Wallace including one of unwelcome physical contact and three of being in a state of undress.

A claim that Torode had used a severely offensive racist term was also substantiated.

Wallace has insisted he was cleared of the "most serious" allegations, while Torode says he has "no recollection" of the incident.

Speed and surface mastery put Alcaraz on a pedestal already

Serve supremacy takes game to new level

How could Alcaraz improve from here?

In a corner of a cavernous 1890s factory in southern Massachusetts, 15 people are bent over sewing machines, churning out specialty, hospital-grade neonatal gear.

They are all that remain of what was once a much bigger manufacturing operation, most of which the Teixeira family shut down in 1990, reinventing their business as a largely warehousing and distribution business.

Since US President Donald Trump started rolling out sweeping tariffs, the Teixeiras have been fielding more inquiries from companies newly interested in their US-based sewing services.

But they have turned down those offers, deterred by the difficulty of hiring in the midst of an immigration crackdown and doubts that the demand will be sustained.

It's just one of the many indications that achieving the manufacturing revival promised by the president is likely to be far more difficult than the White House has claimed.

"It's just not going to happen," said Frank Teixeira, who joined the family business in the 1970s and oversaw its dismantling and reinvention as Accurate Services Inc.

"Tariffs are a bad policy and eventually are going to come home to haunt us."

Trump campaigned for the presidency on the promise of a better economy, engineered in part by tariffs that he said would lower costs and usher in a new golden age.

The message proved to resonate with voters, helping the campaign make unexpected inroads in working-class areas long considered Democratic strongholds.

That includes the Teixeiras' base of Fall River, a former textile manufacturing hub, where Trump's win marked the first in the city by a Republican presidential candidate in roughly a century.

But his plans were widely panned by experts, who warned that the tariffs, which are a tax on imports, would instead raise prices for American businesses and consumers and slow growth - with particular risks for manufacturers, who often rely on imported supplies.

Now nine months into the president's term as the tariffs take hold, the gulf between Trump's rhetoric, which boasts of investments pouring into the country, and the reality on the ground in places like Fall River, is starting to show.

Employment growth in the US has slowed precipitously this year, including in manufacturing. After expanding after the pandemic, payrolls at manufacturing firms have shrunk this year, shedding 12,000 jobs last month alone.

Business surveys indicate that activity in the sector is in contraction.

Last month, 71% of manufacturers questioned by the Dallas branch of the Federal Reserve said the tariffs - which range from 10% to 50% on most imports - had already had a negative impact on their business, raising the cost of resources and hurting profits.

At Matouk, a maker of high-end bedding up the road from the Teixeiras', boss George Matouk said that between April and August tariffs had already added more than $100,000 (£74,000) a month in costs, as they hit supplies like cotton fabric from India and Portugal and down from Liechtenstein.

Founded by his grandfather in 1929, the company has grown to employ about 300 people in recent years - a point of pride for Mr Matouk, who faced naysayers when he returned as the third generation to join the family business after graduating from Columbia Business School in the late 1990s.

But the sudden tariff expense has forced the firm to cut investments on things such as new equipment and spending on discretionary items like marketing.

Despite the made-in-America distinction of many of his products, Mr Matouk said he expected no benefits from the tariffs because higher costs were pushing him to raise prices, a move likely to weigh on sales.

"Because the materials are subject to tariffs just like everything else, the benefits are not there," he said.

Mr Matouk called the current challenges faced by his firm "demoralising in a new way", since they have been inflicted deliberately, by government policy.

"We've done all of the things we were supposed to do in order to invest in the industrial base of the United States when no one else was willing to do it and it's just really frustrating that now we're being penalised," he said.

Studies on the impact of the more limited tariffs imposed by Trump during his first term on manufacturers in the US have found that small job gains in protected industries, like steel, were more than offset by losses at other firms that were dependent on parts.

But Mike van der Sleesen, who runs motorcycle jacket business Vanson Leathers, said he thought the changes this year had been so disruptive that it was premature to make predictions.

Mr van der Sleesen, who voted for Trump last year, is no fan of the president's tariffs, which have driven up his costs some 15% this year.

However, he shared the president's concerns that foreign companies could easily access the US market, while US firms looking to sell abroad encounter hurdles in the form of tariffs and other taxes.

"It's been a very uneven and unfair trade path for a company like Vanson," said Mr van der Sleesen, whose business was founded in 1974 and employed more than 160 people as recently as 2000, before the wallop of China's entry into the global order shrunk the workforce to about 50.

"We shouldn't charge them and they shouldn't charge us in my view but that's never going to happen," he said.

For now, demand for his jackets, which can sell for thousands of dollars, has held up. He said his suppliers in the US were reporting an uptick in activity.

"We haven't heard overtime in the textile world for 20 years!" he said. "It's hard to be confident that you can predict what it's going to shake out to be because the changes have been so dramatic."

On the streets of Fall River, many Trump supporters said they remained willing to give the president time to put his strategy to the test.

"We should be able to manufacture," said Tom Teixeira.

The 72-year-old retired transit worker voted for Trump in 2016, 2020 and 2024, won over in part by his message on the economy.

"I know how it was and it can improve but it's not going to improve overnight," said Mr Teixeira, who is not related to the Teixeira manufacturers, adding that he had yet to notice any major price increases this year.

"A year from now, if things aren't cheaper, we'll see."