Rwanda has confirmed it is in early discussions with the Trump administration about potentially receiving immigrants deported from the USA. Foreign minister Olivier Nduhungirehe stated the talks are ongoing but not finalised. The move follows US efforts to find foreign partners for deportations as part of Trump’s expansive immigration enforcement strategy, which includes invoking the 1798 Alien Enemies Act - granting the president wartime authority to deport noncitizens without due process. In April, the USA deported an Iraqi man accused of IS ties to Rwanda. Reports also suggest that migrants with criminal records might be sent to Rwanda or Libya. In 2022 Rwanda had agreed to accept asylum-seekers from the UK, but Keir Starmer’s government scrapped the deal due to legal and human rights concerns. A spokesperson for UNHCR has said: ‘People fleeing war, conflict and persecution deserve compassion and empathy. They should not be traded like commodities and transferred abroad for processing.’
Donald Trump’s administration has launched a voluntary ‘self-deportation’ initiative offering $1,000 to illegal immigrants who choose to leave the USA. Homeland security secretary Kristi Noem described it as a safer, more cost-effective alternative to forced removal. In addition to the cash incentive, the government will cover travel costs and provide return assistance via an app called CBP Home. Participants would be ‘deprioritised’ for detention and only receive the payout after their return is verified. The Department of Homeland Security highlighted the fiscal rationale: removing someone through standard procedures costs over $17,000. Trump, who made mass deportation central to his platform, argues this strategy fulfils his promises more economically. Critics, however, question its effectiveness and ethics. During his campaign, he repeatedly said that he planned to carry out ‘the largest deportation operation’ in American history, but so far the numbers have not matched his promises.
Amid public concern over his mental health, Justin Bieber has shared deeply personal reflections on Instagram about how God’s grace has transformed his life. The 31-year-old artist opened up about his past struggles with anxiety, fear of failure, and a relentless need to earn love and acceptance - feelings that left him restless and insecure. Bieber credited God’s grace with liberating him from those burdens, saying it shifted his identity from striving to belonging, from fear to trust. He described experiencing God’s love as being fully accepted, without shame or accusation. Emphasising that this love cannot be earned but only received, Bieber encouraged others to stay rooted in God’s internal work rather than external expectations. He warned against confusing pressure with the voice of Jesus, who leads gently, never with force. Fans and peers, including Bear Grylls, praised his openness. Bieber acknowledged past flaws and the pull of fame but expressed a desire to grow, serve, and advocate for love, truth, and equality.
Actress leaves New Age for Jesus
01 May 2025
Actress Kimberly Elise, best known for The Manchurian Candidate, has opened up about her renewed Christian faith after years of spiritual searching and disillusionment. Though baptised at 16, Elise lacked discipleship and drifted from faith as she pursued a Hollywood career. In 2019, she realised her choices were leading her astray, especially as she immersed herself in New Age practices, which she now calls ‘a bottomless pit’ of deception. Feeling lost, she cried out to God in desperation. Two weeks later, a Christian woman affirmed God’s love and began praying with her, setting Elise on a transformative journey. Compelled to read the Bible, Elise found clarity in the Gospel of Matthew and recognised her sin, pride, and need for forgiveness. Her encounter with God reshaped her life, leading to deep repentance and a new sense of spiritual purpose. Today, Elise speaks publicly about her journey, warning others of counterfeit spirituality and testifying to the life-changing power of knowing Jesus personally.
The 1 May local elections in England are set to reflect deep public disillusionment with the traditional two-party system, according to a recent poll for Channel 4. Of those surveyed, 41% said ‘none of the above’ when asked who they trusted most to govern effectively: Nigel Farage scored 23%, and Keir Starmer only 19%. With over 1,600 council seats across 23 councils up for grabs, experts predict that a record number of councils may end up with no single party in control. Support is highly fragmented: Reform leads with 26%, followed closely by the Conservatives at 25%, Labour at 18%, the Liberal Democrats at 17%, Greens at 8%, and others at 6%. Reform’s surge reflects voter priorities such as immigration, while traditional parties are seen as out of touch. Voters are driven by national concerns - cost of living, healthcare, and governance - more than local issues. Both Labour and the Conservatives must urgently reconnect with a public tired of political stagnation and broken promises.
A scathing new report from the Climate Change Committee (CCC) warns that government efforts to protect people and infrastructure from the impacts of climate change are dangerously inadequate. The report found that of 46 key adaptation measures, none are rated ‘good’, and progress has been glacial or even regressive. Despite climate threats already affecting homes, farmland, railways, schools, and hospitals, adaptation remains a low priority. Forecasts show that by 2050, over half of England’s best farmland and critical infrastructure will be at flood risk, while heat-related deaths could exceed 10,000 annually. Businesses, farmers, and scientists are calling for urgent action, stressing that ignoring adaptation now will bring national security risks and economic costs. The Government may claim that it is prioritising climate resilience, but budget cuts - including to flood defences - cast doubt. Experts, pointing to successful models abroad, are urging clearer targets, better planning, and private sector engagement to prevent worsening climate disasters.
Britain set for a new trade partnership with EU
01 May 2025
Britain and the EU are set to formalise a new strategic partnership to strengthen trade ties and present a united front against Donald Trump's global tariff agenda. A leaked draft declaration, dated 25 April, affirms a mutual commitment to ‘free and open trade’ and to maintaining global economic stability. The agreement will be signed at a UK-EU summit on 19 May, marking a key moment in post-Brexit relations. Meanwhile, the Government is engaged in separate negotiations with the USA, aiming to soften the impact of existing tariffs - currently 10% on UK goods and 20% on EU exports. US press secretary Karoline Leavitt said that talks are ‘moving in a very positive way’. Rachel Reeves met with US treasury secretary Scott Besent last week, emphasising that both UK-EU and UK-US trade relationships are vital. Despite Trump reportedly viewing the 10% UK tariff as a minimum, British officials remain optimistic about securing a mutually beneficial deal.
Over ten thousand asylum-seekers have crossed the English Channel in small boats so far in 2025 - an increase of 40% compared to the same period in 2024. The rise has intensified political debate over border security and asylum reform. Labour, now in government, has pledged to dismantle people-smuggling networks, treating smugglers like terrorists under a new proposed bill. Measures include a new criminal offence of endangering the lives of others at sea, and imposing travel bans and communication restrictions on suspects. The Home Office says 5,400 migrant attempts have been thwarted this year, and over 24,000 individuals without legal status were removed between July 2024 and March 2025. Opposition parties blame both Labour and the previous Conservative government for policy failures. Reform UK calls for strict deportations, while the Green Party wants to see legal safe routes for asylum-seekers. As the crisis escalates, public frustration grows, with leaders divided over whether deterrence or compassion should define immigration policy.