Top players reject offer to have greater say in running of major tennis championships
The tennis pay row has escalated further with the world’s top 10 male and female players rejecting an offer from the grand slams to set up a player council that would give them a greater say in the running of the major championships,In correspondence sent to Wimbledon, the French Open and US Open last week, the players turned down the offer of a meeting with representatives of the three grand slams at the Indian Wells Masters in March and accused the tournament organisers of ignoring their concerns about pay and player welfare,“Before committing to another meeting, it would be more productive for the grand slams to provide substantive responses, individually or collectively, to the specific proposals the players have put forward regarding prize money at a fair share of grand slam revenues, and player health, welfare, and benefits contributions,” the letter states,The players have been lobbying for a greater share of the money made by those organising the grand slam championships since last year’s French Open when a delegation, including Carlos Alcaraz, Jannik Sinner, Aryna Sabalenka and Coco Gauff, urged executives from all four tournaments to increase their prize funds to 22% of revenue by 2030, which would be in line with ATP and WTA Tour events,Alcaraz will receive AUS$2.
8m (£1,43m) for completing the career grand slam by beating Novak Djokovic in Melbourne on Sunday as part of a record Australian Open prize fund of AUS$85m, the second highest of the majors after the US Open,Despite being a significant increase it remains about 16% of the tournament’s income,At Wimbledon last year, the total prize pot of £50m was 12,3% of the Championships’ £406.
5m revenue.Three of the grand slams, minus the Australian Open, wrote to the players in December offering a meeting on setting up a grand slam player council, but ignored their demands on pay and welfare.In a further indication of the in-fighting, Tennis Australia is not involved in the dispute, as it has aligned with the Professional Tennis Players’ Association, which is suing the other three grand slam governing bodies in New York’s district court over alleged restrictive practices.After a series of meetings in the locker room in Melbourne, a representative of the players wrote to Wimbledon, the French Open and US Open last week making clear that any discussions on governance and the creation of a player council had to be accompanied by meaningful talks on pay.“While the players recognise that governance structures can play an important role, they are concerned that prioritising council formation over the core economic issues risks becoming a process discussion that delays rather than advances meaningful progress,” the letter read.
A number of the leading female players are understood to have become more disillusioned with the governance of tennis as a result of events at the Australian Open.There is widespread unhappiness at the decision to install extra TV cameras in warm-up and cool-down areas without any consultation, which led to a video of Gauff smashing her racket in what was previously a private space going viral last week after her quarter-final defeat by Elina Svitolina.Many players are also understood to have been aggrieved by Sunday’s announcement from Craig Tiley, the tournament director, that the Australian Open is exploring moving to best-of-five-set matches for women from the quarter-final stage, a radical move that has not been discussed with the players.
Can Peter Mandelson be stripped of his peerage over Epstein links?
Keir Starmer has said he wants Peter Mandelson out of the House of Lords, after the peer was found to have deeper links with the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, including emails which suggested Epstein had sent thousands of pounds to Lord Mandelson’s husband.Others appeared to show confidential market-sensitive information from inside No 10 was shared with Epstein while Mandelson was business secretary.But removing Mandelson’s peerage is exceptionally complex – and there are many different routes it could take.No. He has said he “believes that Peter Mandelson should not be a member of the House of Lords or use the title”
Mandelson should no longer be a peer, says Starmer
Keir Starmer has demanded Peter Mandelson resign from the House of Lords and urged the upper chamber to modernise its disciplinary procedures to allow peers to be stripped of their titles.The cabinet secretary, the UK’s most senior civil servant, will also investigate Mandelson’s actions as business secretary when Labour was last in power, after emails to Jeffrey Epstein about highly sensitive government policy emerged.The documents released on Friday by the US Department of Justice also appear to show Mandelson, as business secretary in 2009, forwarded a confidential UK government document outlining £20bn in asset sales and outlining Labour’s tax policy plans. He also told the disgraced financier that he was “trying hard” to change government policy on bankers’ bonuses at his request.Downing Street said Mandelson should testify before the US Congress inquiry into the Epstein files if he was called, after a further huge tranche of documents was released over the weekend
How the depth of Peter Mandelson’s links to Jeffrey Epstein came to light
Peter Mandelson has resigned from the Labour party over his links to the convicted child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Here’s how the depth of their relationship – both before and after Epstein’s conviction for sexual crimes – has come to light.The files show evidence Mandelson advised Epstein on how the investment bank JPMorgan might lobby the government – of which he was a part – on plans for a tax on bankers’ bonuses.Among the documents is a chain of emails between Epstein and Mandelson, in which the former asks if the new tax might only apply to the cash portion of bonuses. “Trying hard to amend,” Mandelson wrote back on 15 December 2009
Mandelson resigns from Labour to prevent ‘further embarrassment’ over Epstein links
Peter Mandelson has said he has resigned his membership of the Labour party to avoid causing it “further embarrassment” after more revelations about his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein.The peer, who was sacked as US ambassador last year because of his links to Epstein, featured in documents released by the US Department of Justice on Friday related to the convicted sex offender.Mandelson said he had written on Sunday evening to Hollie Ridley, the general secretary of the Labour party, to say he was resigning his party membership.His letter said: “I have been further linked this weekend to the understandable furore surrounding Jeffrey Epstein and I feel regretful and sorry about this.“Allegations which I believe to be false that he made financial payments to me 20 years ago, and of which I have no record or recollection, need investigating by me
UK should consider resuming talks on EU defence pact, Starmer says
The UK should consider re-entering talks for a defence pact with the EU, Keir Starmer has said, arguing that Europe needs to “step up and do more” to defend itself in uncertain times.The prime minister signalled that he wanted to work more collaboratively with other European countries to increase defence spending and build up military capability, and doing so through the EU’s scheme is one option available.Talks for the UK to join the EU’s €150bn (£130bn) security action for Europe (Safe) defence fund collapsed in November 2025 amid claims the bloc had set too high a price on entry, with France blamed for the breakdown.However, there is understood to be greater appetite on all sides for a deal on the UK to join a future round of Safe, especially since Donald Trump’s threats to take over Greenland and criticism of Nato.Asked on his trip to China whether there was a case for the UK going back into a second-round Safe defence pact if the price was right, Starmer said: “Europe, including the UK, needs to do more on security and defence … that’s an argument I’ve been making for many months now
Lord Wallace of Tankerness obituary
Jim Wallace, Lord Wallace of Tankerness, who has died aged 71 following complications after surgery, was an influential Liberal figure who achieved the extremely rare distinction in politics of being disliked by almost nobody. Mild-mannered, pragmatic, sociable, with liberal values underpinned by a strong Christian faith, he was ever present in Scottish politics over four decades, during which his party re-emerged from the Celtic fringes to become part of Scottish and UK governments.Wallace’s influence extended well beyond Scotland. As Liberal chief whip at Westminster after the 1987 general election, he was widely credited with minimising opposition to full-scale merger with the SDP to form the newly branded Liberal Democrats.Tavish Scott, who later succeeded him as a leader of the Scottish Lib Dems, recalled: “That merger would not have happened had not Jim deployed his diplomacy, intellectual prowess and endless patience to what were at the time fraught negotiations
‘Deadly postcode lottery’ restricting new cancer treatments in England, doctors say
NHS patients put at risk by ‘sham investigations’, says ex-CEO of hospital
We have allowed poverty to become normalised in our country | Letters
‘Coffee is just the excuse’: the deaf-run cafe where hearing people sign to order
‘Menopause gold rush’? Boom in hi-tech products as stigma starts to recede
Paying kidney donors won’t solve the problem | Letters