Not from politicians. From ordinary Cubans - people living through an unceasing crisis shaped by a failing economic experiment, an ageing but entrenched communist system and the pressure of a hostile superpower. I met people who told me this is the hardest period they have lived through in decades. Harder, some said, than the Special Period that followed the collapse of the Soviet Union. They spoke of endless blackouts, empty shelves, collapsing salaries and young people leaving because they no longer believe their future lies here. And yet, they refused to surrender. That resilience is remarkable because the scale of the crisis is impossible to ignore. Havana remains one of the world's most captivating cities, but today it feels like a city stuck between its past and an uncertain future. Revolutionary Square, where Fidel Castro once addressed hundreds of thousands of Cubans for hours on end, is almost silent. The giant steel portraits of Che Guevara and Camilo Cienfuegos still dominate the skyline, but the conversations taking place beneath them are no longer about revolution. They are about survival. Across the capital, the signs are everywhere. Petrol stations without fuel. Rubbish piling up in neighbourhood after neighbourhood. Hospital wards struggling with shortages of medicines and basic supplies. Streets that once bustled now feel quieter, as wave after wave of Cubans have left in search of opportunities elsewhere. Then there are the blackouts. One woman told me she no longer sets an alarm. The electricity decides when she wakes. If it comes at three in the morning, that is when the washing gets done, the food gets cooked, the phones get charged and the water gets pumped before the lights disappear again. In Cuba today, many families no longer organise their lives around the clock. They organise them around the electricity. Dialogue, not submission The government says the US blockade is responsible for the country's economic collapse. There is no doubt decades of sanctions have inflicted enormous damage, made worse by the Trump administration's latest campaign of maximum pressure. Fuel has become harder to secure. Trade has become more difficult. Every new restriction is felt. But as I travelled across Havana, I also heard another argument. Many Cubans told me the blockade could no longer explain everything. They spoke about an economy that has struggled to reform itself, bureaucracy, salaries that no longer cover the basics and a generation that increasingly sees its future somewhere else. When I sat down with President Miguel Diaz-Canel, I put those arguments to him directly. I asked whether decades of economic mismanagement had left Cuba dangerously exposed. Whether corruption and an unwillingness to embrace deeper reform had compounded the suffering I had witnessed. Whether, after more than six decades of communist rule, he could still argue the system was delivering for ordinary Cubans. And whether the time had finally come to open the economy. He pushed back on every point. The man who succeeded Raul Castro after six decades of rule by the Castro brothers was unwilling to accept that the system had failed. Cuba, he insisted, would not bow to external pressure. The blockade remained the overwhelming cause of the country's crisis. It wanted dialogue, not submission. It would negotiate, but it would never capitulate. Read more:Raul Castro charged with murder in the USIf Cuba collapses, US will have to deal with the fallout Unwavering determination Meanwhile, President Donald Trump continues to raise the stakes - sanctioning Diaz-Canel, indicting Raul Castro and insisting the US could one day "take" Cuba. For the people I met, however, the debate over who bears the greater responsibility means little because they have to deal with the harsh realities of the escalating tensions between the US and Cuba. An American pressure campaign that has a stranglehold over the island. And a system that many Cubans themselves believe is no longer capable of delivering the life they were promised. Perhaps nowhere is that more visible than in the country's exodus. Hundreds of thousands have left in recent years, many of them young, taking with them skills, ambition and hope. Those who remain often do so because they cannot leave - or because they still believe this country is worth staying for. What I found was not a nation that had given up. I found a nation exhausted, proud and deeply uncertain. Above all, I found people determined to hold on - to their dignity, to their sovereignty and to the hope that somehow there is still a way forward.

West Coast Railways' Jacobite train service runs through the Highlands from Fort William to Mallaig and passes over the renowned Glenfinnan Viaduct. The viaduct - on the West Highland Line - had a starring role in a number of the boy wizard movies based on JK Rowling's books, and attracts thousands of excited Potterheads from around the world hoping to catch a glimpse of the "Hogwarts Express". According to the National Trust for Scotland, Glenfinnan welcomes 600,000 visitors annually. As the Jacobite's latest season gets underway, Network Rail Scotland is urging visitors to put safety first. Neil Cook, route crime manager, said: "The Jacobite steam train's journey over Glenfinnan Viaduct is a magical sight but it's not worth risking your life for. "Too often, we receive reports of dangerous behaviour, with people climbing fences, standing on the railway, or walking along the track to try to get closer. "Trains can come from either direction, are quieter than people expect, and can't stop quickly. "The Glenfinnan Viaduct Trail offers dedicated viewing spots and most importantly, keep people a safe distance from the railway. "We insist everyone visiting uses those areas and helps keep themselves and others out of harm's way." Read more from Sky News:Queen meets JK RowlingWonka star's voice recreated by AI Trespassing on the railway is a criminal offence and applies to the tracks, the viaduct and surrounding railway land. Anyone caught can be removed, issued a fine and prosecuted in court. Chief Superintendent Lorna McEwan, from British Transport Police, said: "Stepping on the tracks is never worth the risk - it's illegal and puts lives in immediate danger. "Every trespass incident not only risks serious injury or worse but also causes major disruption for passengers and freight across the network. "We work closely with our partners at Network Rail to detect and deter trespass, as well as taking enforcement action for anyone who disregards the rules and places themselves or others in danger. "Please follow the advice - stay off the tracks, follow the guidance, and enjoy the view safely."

Officers from Avon and Somerset Police's rape and serious sexual offence team have been working on the investigation into Norris, who is the MP for North East Somerset and Hanham. Politics Hub: Starmer accused of leaving defence plan 'mess' to Burnham He faces allegations of rape against three women, sexual assault against a fourth woman, as well as voyeurism and upskirting against a number of women. All offences are alleged to have occurred from 2000 and into the 2020s. "As a result of our enquiries, a file has been submitted to the Crown Prosecution Service to consider a charging decision," said a spokesperson for Avon and Somerset Police. "We've updated the victims about this significant development, and we'll continue to make sure they have access to any help or support they need. "We'd respectfully ask people do not speculate on the circumstances so the investigation can continue unhindered." Norris was re-elected as an MP in the 2024 general election, when he was still serving as the mayor of the West of England. He unseated the former Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg to win the North East Somerset and Hanham seat. He was suspended by the Labour Party after his arrest in April 2025 and has not attended Parliament since he was released on police bail. He has always denied the allegations, saying in a previous statement: "I vigorously and entirely deny the serious allegations made against me. They are untrue. I am challenging them through my legal representatives." A Labour Party spokesperson said: "Dan Norris was immediately suspended by the Labour Party upon being informed of his initial arrest. The allegations against him are appalling and any person found guilty of such abhorrent crimes must face the full force of the law. We cannot comment further while legal proceedings are ongoing."

The deal makes midfielder Anderson, 23, the most expensive British player ever, surpassing the £115m Real Madrid committed to paying for Jude Bellingham when they signed him from Borussia Dortmund in the summer of 2023. Only Liverpool's £125m spend on Alexander Isak and £116.5m outlay on Florian Wirtz last summer were more expensive incoming transfers in Premier League history. Anderson was given clearance by the England national team to complete his Manchester City medical on Sunday, in between World Cup games. He has started in all four matches for the Three Lions so far. Analysis: Why Elliot Anderson is worth £116mTransfer Centre LIVE! | Latest Man City news and gossipGot Sky? Watch now on the Sky Sports app📱Not got Sky? Get instant access with no contract📺 City said in a statement: "Manchester City and Nottingham Forest have reached an agreement for the transfer of Elliot Anderson. "Anderson, 23, is currently competing at the FIFA World Cup with England and has completed a medical in Kansas. The formalities of the move will be finalised upon his return to England. "In the meantime, everyone at Manchester City wishes Elliot and the England squad the very best of luck in their World Cup campaign and we look forward to welcoming him to Manchester in due course." Anderson featured in every Premier League game for Forest last season, making 37 starts, scoring four goals and recording four assists. He ranked among the top five in the league for tackles and passes, underlining his all-round ability. Anderson is the first signing under new Man City boss Enzo Maresca, who was confirmed as Pep Guardiola's replacement earlier this week. Why Man City see Anderson as an ideal fit Sky Sports News' Ben Ransom: "Elliot Anderson will 100 per cent fit into Enzo Maresca's system. He would have fit into Pep Guardiola's and fit into any manager's system because he's so versatile. He can play as a single pivot. As we've seen at the World Cup, he can play alongside someone like Declan Rice. "He can break the lines, press, win duels - he is an all-action midfielder. He can even score goals, as we saw against Man City last season. That versatility makes him a really important signing for Man City, particularly when you consider Bernardo Silva's exit this summer. "There's still some speculation about Rodri's future. He said he'll sort it after the World Cup. He's got one year left on his contract as he goes into next season. "There's no guarantee Rodri is going to sign an extension at this point, but Anderson is clearly a player who can play alongside or in place of Rodri - he's that talented. City fans will be really excited about reinvigorating that midfield when you look at some of the other players in that position. "They haven't proved the ability to replace Rodri, whereas Anderson has a lot of his footballing future ahead of him and his stats have proved how good he is in a number of roles in the middle of the pitch." Better than Rice and Rodri? Why Anderson is worth over £100m The only thing that might divide opinion on Anderson this summer is his hefty price tag. The 23-year-old's profile as the perfect all-round midfielder is surely undisputed. So, how does he stack up against other midfielders in the same price bracket? In short, Manchester City have signed the cream of the crop. Beyond the eye test, which will tell you how efficiently he moves up and down the pitch and how composed he is in possession, his off-the-ball work is exemplary. Better than Declan Rice. More efficient, even, than present-day Rodri... Read Laura Hunter's full feature here.

Cameron Ross, 39, carried out his serious sexual assaults in Stornoway on the Isle of Lewis in 2012 and 2014. He then abused his third victim in Inverness between 2019 and 2022. His crimes included rape, domestic abuse, attempting to pervert the course of justice and threatening or abusive behaviour. Ross was suspended from Police Scotland when the allegations first came to light in June 2022 and resigned last month following his conviction in May after a trial at the High Court in Edinburgh. Judge Alison Stirling said custody was the only appropriate disposal due to the "serious nature" of the offending. The judge told the court on Thursday that Ross continues to deny any wrongdoing and has the support of his family and partner, adding: "I note from the criminal justice social work report that you do not accept your convictions and that you intend to appeal." The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) said prosecutors were able to show how Ross "engaged in a pattern of sexual and physical abuse against women". During the trial, jurors heard how Ross raped the first woman after they met at a party between August and October 2012. The woman told the court how Ross "pinned her down" on a bed before carrying out the attack, testifying: "I didn't say anything. I froze." She said the incident had left her traumatised. A second woman told of how Ross sat on her and restrained her before raping her in June 2014. He went on to subject a third woman to a course of abusive behaviour between October 2019 and June 2022. In evidence, the court was told Ross repeatedly pushed and pulled her, seized her by the body and hair, threw her to the ground and twisted her arm behind her back. He additionally brandished a knife at her. Ross also shouted, swore and threatened to kill the victim, punched her in the face, sat on top of her and forced fingers into her mouth, gripped her throat and pressed down on the back of her neck, restricting her breathing. Ross was also convicted of behaving in a threatening and abusive manner on 5 June 2022 at an address in Inverness, where he shouted, swore and acted aggressively. He later attempted to pervert the course of justice on that date by trying to speak to a woman who was providing a witness statement to a police officer. The judge said Ross was promoted to sergeant within the force as a dog handler and "earned a good salary". Chief Superintendent Helen Harrison, head of professional standards at Police Scotland, said: "Ross was a serving officer at the time of these offences and when the report was received in June 2022, we immediately suspended him. "He has since resigned from the service. If he had remained, we would have progressed gross misconduct proceedings and he would have been dismissed as his actions and behaviour will not be tolerated in Police Scotland. "I want to thank those who came forward and recognise how difficult that can be when the perpetrator is a police officer." Ross was convicted of five charges. As well as the 10-year jail term, he has also been placed on the sex offenders register indefinitely. Faye Cook, procurator fiscal for high court sexual offences at COPFS, said: "Cameron Ross carried out deliberate and repeated acts of abuse against women over the course of a decade. "This was sustained offending, which caused significant harm. "As a police officer, he was in a position of trust. Instead of upholding the law, he chose to break it in a serious and persistent way. "I would urge anyone affected by similar offending to come forward and report it. "The Crown is committed to prosecuting those responsible for sexual and domestic abuse, regardless of who they are."

Posts on Willis's Facebook page and the band's official page confirmed his death, with his wife saying she made the announcement with "profound sadness". The post on his page said: "Victor passed away on Tuesday June 30, 2026 as a result of a short, but aggressive illness. The family request privacy at this time of great loss." His death came the day before his 75th birthday. Village People rose to fame in the 1970s, becoming known for their camp, feelgood songs and flamboyant, fancy-dress-style costumes which were symbolic of American masculinity at the time - including a construction worker, a cowboy and a biker. Willis was known for styling himself as a policeman, a naval officer and an athlete during their performances. Their hits included Macho Man, Go West - later covered by the Pet Shop Boys - and In The Navy, but it was the unstoppable disco anthem YMCA that earned them platinum sales and number ones around the world. In the UK, it spent 16 weeks in the Top 40 between 1978 and 1979, including three weeks at the top of the chart. Thanks to its earworm catchiness and accompanying dance routine, it has remained a regular at weddings and parties ever since. In 2020, the song was inducted into both the Grammy Hall of Fame and the US Library of Congress National Recording Registry, which aims to "ensure the survival, conservation and increased public availability of America's audio heritage". It was adopted as an anthem by the gay community, despite the singer saying several times the intention was to offer a more universal message, and that it was about his own experiences growing up - although other members of the group interpreted it differently. "I wanted to write a song that could fit anyone's lifestyle," Willis said in one interview The singer left the group in 1979, with several performers taking over on lead vocals over the years. After his depature, the band featured in the 1980 US comedy film Can't Stop The Music, a pseudo-biography of their story. Almost 40 years later, in 2017, Willis rejoined and "revamped" the band, they say in their website biography. 'Music without politics' Donald Trump began using the song in his 2020 re-election campaign, which he lost to former US president Joe Biden, and the group initially issued a cease and desist letter. However, Mr Trump used the song again in his successful 2024 election campaign, which concluded with a line-up of the band performing at events around his 2025 inauguration. In a statement on his own Facebook page at the time, Willis explained why the band had decided to accept the invitation. "We know this won't make some of you happy to hear, however we believe that music is to be performed without regard to politics," he wrote."Our song YMCA is a global anthem that hopefully helps bring the country together after a tumultuous and divided campaign where our preferred candidate lost. Therefore, we believe it's now time to bring the country together with music." Read more from Sky News:How much did Trump make from crypto last year?Govt bid to clear drugs, weapons and gangs from prisons The performances took place despite one former Village People member, Jim Newman, writing on Instagram to say the original band "would never ever" perform at a Trump rally. Willis was still performing with the band earlier this year, sharing a post on Facebook in May after completing the first leg of a European tour. The band were due to play further shows across Europe and the US, as well as a YMCA Convention in Ontario, Canada, throughout July, according to their website.

But, behind the scenes, the PM-in-waiting will be hearing loud and clear that reform can't be put off forever - including from his own inner circle. Two of his economic advisers have previously spoken against the triple lock, warning that it is unsustainable. We've spoken to experts about the options available to the man who will likely be prime minister in a matter of weeks... Find personal finance tips and news in the Money blog Why are experts worried it's unsustainable? Under the triple lock, the state pension rises each year by whichever is highest out of wage growth, inflation or 2.5%. When the triple lock was introduced in 2012, estimates suggested it would cost around £5.2bn a year by 2029-30 and see the state pension rise by an average of 0.2 percentage points above earnings growth. But inflation has been significantly more volatile than expected - and this has triggered some significant annual uplifts. While inflation has eased in the last couple of years, earnings growth has shot up - resulting in another boost for pensioners, but another dent to the public purse. The government's financial watchdog, the Office for Budget Responsibility, has forecast the government to spend £15.5bn more a year on the state pension than if it were increased in line with earnings alone by 2030 - around three times higher than initial expectations. In the 2025-26 tax year, state pension payments totalled around £146.1bn - for context, we spent around £62.2bn on defence in 2024-25. The Department for Work and Pensions expects state pension spending to hit £169bn by 2030. And, considering the population is living longer and giving birth to fewer children to grow into pension-funding taxpayers, rising government spending on the state pension is likely to continue well beyond 2030. Burnham advisers don't like triple lock In July 2025, then OBR chair Richard Hughes said "uncertainty around the operation of the triple lock" is an "important source of fiscal risk". He added at the time: "When you project trends in both pension spending and health and other age-related spending forward, the UK public finances are in an unsustainable position in the long run. "The UK cannot afford the array of promises that are displayed to the public if you leave those unchanged based on a reasonable assumption about growth rates in the economy and in tax revenues." And what is Hughes doing now? He is one of the two economic advisers to Andy Burnham we mentioned at the start of this piece. The other is Lord O'Neill - the economist, co-president of the Northern Powerhouse Partnership and a former Goldman Sachs Asset Management chairman. Last year, he was widely reported as calling the triple lock "bonkers" and suggested the state pension should be means tested. Thinktanks from across the political spectrum have also warned it is not sustainable. One of those is the Resolution Foundation, a thinktank once led by the current pensions minister Torsten Bell, that falls on the centre-left of the political spectrum. The Foundation has said: "It is impossible to justify why our generosity to the older population should be a function of economic volatility. "As well as being unfair, it is also not fiscally sustainable for the state pension to rise forever by more than the earnings of a typical worker." What do voters think? Despite the criticism from experts, scrapping the policy, or even changing it, is not popular with the voting public - which might explain why no prime minister wants to touch it. A YouGov poll from April found that 37% of people opposed making any changes to the triple lock policy, while only 26% supported changes. Unsurprisingly, older people were more likely to oppose any reforms to the policy, while younger people were more likely to support changes. A separate study of 2,000 people by financial advice firm AJ Bell found just 6% of Britons wanted the triple lock to be scrapped, while 38% thought it should be made permanent. Again, it found a significant generational divide with more than two-thirds of baby boomers (aged 60+) wanting to see the triple lock stay, versus just 14% of Gen Z (18-29-year-olds) and 22% of millennials (30 to 45-year-olds). Could it be scrapped? And does Burnham have other options? Tom Selby, director of public policy at AJ Bell, thinks any path towards the triple lock being "retired" eventually requires a clear explanation of the trade-offs to voters. "Assuming the Treasury does not want spending as a share of GDP on state pensions to continue ballooning - squeezing the ability to spend elsewhere or reduce the tax burden on the working population - there are two main levers available to control costs: the amount people receive from the state in retirement and the age at which they receive it," Selby said. Considering the government's fiscal position, changes will have to be made to the state pension at some point. So if scrapping the triple lock isn't a plausible solution, then what other changes could Burnham make to reduce costs? Researchers at the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) have proposed replacing the triple lock with a "living standards lock". Under their proposal, the state pension would continue to be uprated in line with inflation each year to protect its real value, with additional earnings-linked increases only in years when real earnings are growing and have reached a new high. Another lever that could be pulled is the state pension age, which is undergoing statutory review. The state pension age is 66 for both men and women, but the age is rising: for those born on or after 6 April 1960, it is gradually increasing towards 68. Pensions expert Charlene Young from AJ Bell told Money: "Raising the state pension age without meaningful improvements in healthy life expectancy risks pushing more people into working-age benefits later in life. "In that scenario, the government could simply end up shifting costs from one part of the welfare system to another, rather than delivering substantial savings overall." Should we copy German and Swedish models? Germany has already proposed raising its retirement age to 70 by the early 2090s, and scrapping the option of retiring early at 63 after making 45 years of contribution payments. The proposal from the country's pension commission is one of many sweeping reforms being suggested to future-proof the German pension system for an ageing population. It also suggested setting up a fund modelled on the Swedish pension system, with mandatory contributions by workers and employers ‌that would be invested in financial assets as a complement to the current pay-as-you-go system. The idea is that this would help to fund the government's rising pension costs. Sweden made it mandatory for 2.5% of Swedes' pensionable income to be invested into funds of their choice or defaulted into a government-run fund 100% invested in equities until you turn 55. When the "premium pension" was first introduced in 2000, it was criticised for being too complicated, but the default fund used has delivered an average return of about 7.4% a year. Nouran Moustafa, owner of financial advice firm Roxton Wealth, told the Money blog: "A UK long-term state investment fund deserves serious consideration. "Run independently and transparently, it could invest national wealth in global markets and create another source of pension funding. It is not magic, but neither is pretending tax receipts will stretch forever." AJ Bell's Young added that a German-style sovereign wealth fund would represent a "more radical approach" - and certainly isn't a "silver bullet". "While investing in capital markets to help fund future pension costs has its attractions, building assets at a scale capable of making a material difference would take decades and could still require higher contributions from today's workers and taxpayers, who are already funding current pensions," she said. "Germany's own plans suggest the projected contribution from the fund would remain relatively small compared with the overall cost of state pensions, indicating this is unlikely to be a silver bullet." Is Australian means testing the answer? Another option could be to means test the state pension. This system is already in place in Australia, where the amount retirees receive is based on their income and the value of their assets. For some of the wealthiest, this means they do not get any state pension payments. The system has been criticised for quickly becoming difficult to navigate, with various benefits and schemes potentially affecting entitlement or whether a person qualifies at all. Jamie Jenkins, director of policy at Royal London, told us: "Some countries, such as Australia, means test their state pension, but they also have much more generous provision through workplace pension saving, so it isn't easily comparable." Antonia Medlicott, managing director at personal finance and investment platform Investing Insiders, said this could be something that Burnham considers, but warned it could be unpopular. "He has publicly committed to keeping the triple lock, but he may consider means testing the state pension, limiting the amount wealthier people receive, or excluding them from it altogether; after all, he has spoken about taxing the wealthiest more, whether that's through pay or assets. "However, this would cause uproar in many areas of society." Read more:Why are there two different state pensions?Why millions of Britons are off work long-term sickThe pension trick most people don't know about A taxation fix? Other options could include charging income tax on state pensions. The full state pension is already likely to rise above the personal allowance next year, with it currently sitting at £12,547.60 a year - just £22.40 under the tax threshold. We could see more pensioners dragged into this tax bracket over the next five years as the government has already announced that thresholds will be frozen until April 2031. At the moment, pensioners will not have to pay small amounts of tax due from 2027-28, if the new or basic state pension exceeds that allowance. But could Burnham change that? Medlicott said: "Rumours suggest the state pension will be automatically taxed when it surpasses the personal allowance, which will cause anger, but could be the sweet spot he needs to find a solution that repairs public finances without taking away too many benefits from pensioners. "Burnham may also consider protecting the triple lock and still controlling the cost to the treasury by freezing allowances for pensioners." Jenkins added: "There is already some recognition that this is an odd way to proceed, paying the state pension on one hand, and taking tax on the other." Targeting tax relief There is also the option of targeting pension tax relief - a government top-up that refunds the income tax you would pay on earnings that are put into a pension. The Pension Commission, an independent body reviewing the state of retirement in the UK, recently called pension tax relief "regressive". Moustafa said this would be the worst option. "That punishes people doing exactly what the government says it wants: saving for retirement. Reform should reward work, saving and long-term thinking, not make private provision less attractive," she said. Young added: "Reducing pension tax relief could raise revenue in the short term, but it may also discourage retirement saving at a time when millions of people are already projected to fall short of the income they will need in retirement. "Ultimately, that risks increasing future reliance on means tested state support, shifting costs back to the public purse through a different route." Focus on private pensions Another option could be to place greater emphasis on private pension provision to help reduce reliance on the state pension. Young pointed out that recent proposed changes to salary sacrifice arrangements from 2029 are expected to reduce National Insurance savings for employers, potentially weakening incentives to support workplace pension saving, and something could be done to change that. "Pensions are designed to support long-term saving, but repeated speculation around tax-free cash, pension tax relief and wider pension tax reforms can undermine trust in the system," she said. "As we saw ahead of recent budgets, uncertainty prompted many savers to make rushed, and in some cases irreversible, decisions to access pension benefits for fear of losing valuable tax advantages. If policymakers want people to commit money to pensions for decades, they need confidence that the rules will remain broadly stable." Read more:Is it time to get on the 'savings laddering' trend?Why now is the time to ditch and switch your savings accountHow to set your baby up to be a millionaire One certain long-term problem Away from all this uncertainty is one grim certainty - we as a nation are not saving enough for our retirement. The Pension Commission has been quietly assessing the state of retirement saving in the UK and the key challenges facing the current system. While it will publish its complete findings next spring, its interim report showed that 15 million people are currently undersaving for their retirement. "The Pensions Commission sets out clearly the scale of the challenge: not enough people are saving for retirement, and many of those that are aren't saving enough," said pensions minister Torsten Bell. "The commission warns that without action, millions more people could be at risk of becoming reliant on state support in retirement." While we don't have its recommendations yet, the commission has said it expects working longer and over-50s returning to some form of work to be part of the solution. "Working longer - and in particular reducing labour market inactivity among people in their fifties - is a necessary part of achieving adequate incomes in retirement," the commission has said. But with the UK having a lower life expectancy than some countries with a younger retirement age, like Japan, we can't see the prospect of working longer being a popular solution either. We could find out what Burnham will do - and whether he actually chooses to tackle the issue at all - in the next few weeks.

But according to new rankings in which historic fees are adjusted to the purchasing power of clubs today, the midfielder is in fact only the 31st-most expensive addition of the Premier League era. Most comparisons of this type adjust historic prices according to inflation, but the changing price of a pint of milk in the supermarket doesn't reflect the 3,500 per cent increase in Premier League revenues which has transformed the spending capacity of clubs in the transfer market over the last three decades. In order to more accurately show what past transfers would be worth today factoring those revenue increases, football finance expert Kieran Maguire and professor Jason Laws have created a new index which throws up some fascinating results. Transfer Centre LIVE! | Man City news & transfersGot Sky? Watch Man City games LIVE on your phone📱No Sky? Get Sky Sports or stream with no contract on NOW📺Choose the Sky Sports push notifications you want! 🔔 So, if Anderson drops 28 places in the Laws-Maguire Index, which players occupy the top spots? Isak, the player with the highest transfer fee in Premier League history at £125m, only ranks 14th in the adjusted list, with record scorer Alan Shearer topping the pile. The £15m fee paid by Newcastle to sign him from Blackburn Rovers sounds modest by today's standards but it was paid in 1996, when football revenues were a fraction of today's. According to the Laws-Maguire Index, it adjusts to an eye-watering £237m. Two Manchester United signings from the early noughties sit second and third. They paid £33m for Rio Ferdinand and £28m for Juan Sebastian Veron in 2003 and 2001, figures which adjust to £179m and £199m respectively today. Stan Collymore's £9m move from Nottingham Forest to Liverpool in 1995, which adjusts to £179m today, puts him fourth, while Fernando Torres is fifth. His £50m transfer from Liverpool to Chelsea would be worth £177m today, according to the Index. Dennis Bergkamp, Andy Cole, Andriy Shevchenko, Dwight Yorke and Paul Pogba are next on the list, meaning half of the players in the top 10 are Manchester United signings. Ferdinand features twice in the top 15, with his £18m transfer from West Ham to Leeds in 2001, two years before his move to Old Trafford, calculated to be worth £140m today. Along with Isak, the only other current Premier League players in the top 20 are Jack Grealish, Moises Caicedo and Enzo Fernandez. So, while transfer fees keep increasing, the Laws-Maguire Index suggests spending relative to resources was actually more extravagant in the Premier League's earlier years.