![\"Fiona](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/1763493730_120_Fiona_Harvey_old_image.png\")
Fiona Harvey<\/p>\nFirst draft text revives shift away from fossil fuelsFiona Harvey<\/p>\n
When is a cover text not a cover text? When it\u2019s a mutir\u00e3o decision! The first draft of a potential outcome from the Cop30<\/a> has landed, put up on the UN web site on Tuesday morning, and it\u2019s fascinating.<\/p>\n This will not be the only text from Cop30<\/a> \u2013 there are also texts on all of the other decisions that will be made at this Cop, in various stages of draft or not draft yet \u2013 but the mutir\u00e3o decision takes in the \u201cbig four\u201d issues that were too difficult to be included in the official agenda.<\/p>\n It also \u2013 surprisingly \u2013 includes lines referring to the \u201ctransition away from fossil fuels\u201d among the options for an outcome. Discussion of this issue \u2013 which was agreed as the key resolution from Cop28 in 2023<\/a> \u2013 was effectively shut down last year in Baku<\/a>, and in Belem has taken place only on the sidelines up to now.<\/p>\n The draft text is an elaboration of the \u201cnote\u201d sent by Brazilian Cop president Andre Correa do Lago on Sunday night, formalised into the shape of something that could be gavelled through as a decision. In a letter on Monday night, do Lago suggested that the gavelling could be done after a meeting of ministers on Wednesday.<\/p>\n That would be astonishingly fast, and is frankly not likely. The discussions on the big four issues \u2013 finance; transparency; trade; and a response to the fact that current national climate plans (NDCs) are too weak to keep the 1.5C heating limit<\/a> \u2013 have been going on since before the start of this conference last Monday, and the text shows \u2013 in its many options \u2013 that nations are still far from resolving them.<\/p>\n The draft mutir\u00e3o text includes text that would allow for an annual review of countries\u2019 NDCs, with a view to strengthening them to meet the 1.5C (2.7F) goal. That sounds a bit like the idea agreed at Glasgow\u2019s Cop26 in 2021, for a faster \u201cratchet\u201d to the Paris agreement<\/a> \u2013 in the agreement, countries must return every five years with strengthened NDCs; at Glasgow, countries were invited to ratchet up their targets on a more frequent basis, but this was voluntary, and almost no countries availed themselves of the opportunity.<\/p>\n Countries are also invited \u2013 and here is a nod to China, which it is frequently noted tends to under-promise on its emissions targets and then over-deliver<\/a> \u2013 to \u201caim to overachieve NDC targets\u201d. China has been adamant at this Cop that there should not be a discussion of NDCs. Under the letter of the Paris agreement, such a review only needs to take place in three years\u2019 time, under the second \u201cglobal stocktake\u201d \u2013 a mechanism for the assessment of NDCs every five years. But campaigners and many countries believe that waiting three years to be told that the NDCs are inadequate would waste yet more valuable time, and effectively nail shut the coffin of the 1.5C target.<\/p>\n Another option in the mutir\u00e3o text is for a \u201cGlobal Implementation Accelerator\u201d, a new idea which would also be voluntary, and would \u201caccelerate implementation, enhance international cooperation, and support countries in implementing their nationally determined contributions [NDCs]\u201d. A third option is for a \u201cBelem Roadmap to 1.5\u201d which would set out what needs to be done to put the world on track to meet the Paris goals.<\/p>\n Mention of the \u201ctransition away from fossil fuels\u201d <\/a>falls under two options in the text, one the above first option of a response to the inadequacy of the NDCs, where it is accompanied by the other resolutions made at Cop28 of tripling global renewable energy and doubling energy efficiency by 2030, and the other an option for a \u201chigh-level ministerial round table on different national circumstances, pathways and approaches with a view to supporting countries to developed just, orderly and equitable transition roadmaps, including to progressively overcome their dependency on fossil fuels and towards halting and reversing deforestation\u201d.<\/p>\n Finance is mentioned 26 times in the text, reflecting its centrality to all developing countries meeting in Belem. Developed countries are urged to set out their plans to provide financial assistance more clearly, in some of the five options on finance that are listed, including a ministerial round table on delivering the $1.3 trillion a year in climate finance promised to poor countries at last year\u2019s Cop in Baku<\/a>. Another is for a \u201cBelem Global De-Risking and Project Preparation and Development Facility (\u201cBelem Facility for Implementation\u201d) to catalyze climate finance and implementation in developing country Parties by translating nationally determined contributions and national adaptation plans into project pipelines\u201d.<\/p>\n That a text has been produced in which the transition away from fossil fuels makes it this far is itself a minor miracle. This could yet be watered down or rejected. But it is now looking likelier that some form of response to the 1.5C target and the NDCs \u2013 which could involve a strong financial element, as developing countries rightly insist that they cannot meet targets without more financial assistance than has yet been forthcoming \u2013 could be included in the Cop30 outcome.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Key events<\/p>\n Show key events only<\/p>\n Please turn on JavaScript to use this feature<\/p>\n Who will host next year\u2019s Cop? The tussle between Australia and Turkey continues with little clarity for delegates eager to beat the queues and book hotels before prices soar.<\/p>\n Last night, Anthony Albanese, the Australian prime minister, said Australia would not stand in the way of Turkey hosting next year\u2019s Cop31 climate summit to avoid the hosting rights defaulting to Germany \u2013 which could be seen as a sign of disunity holding back climate action.<\/p>\n But a government spokesperson later clarified his comments, noting that Turkey had not been chosen as host and that Australia had the overwhelming support of countries.<\/p>\n \u201cTurkey shouldn\u2019t block us, just as we wouldn\u2019t block them if the situation were reversed,\u201d the spokesperson said.<\/p>\n \u201cBut of course we will continue to negotiate with Turkey in good faith for an outcome in the best interests of the Pacific and our national interest.\u201d<\/p>\n Share<\/a> My colleague Nina Lakhani with responses to the crackdowns on indigenous protests this week:<\/p>\n A group of UN experts has issued a statement expressing \u201cdeep concern\u201d about the UN climate chief\u2019s request to beef up state security forces at the Cop30<\/a> venue – in response to peaceful protests by Indigenous protesters last week.<\/p>\n In a strongly worded letter, five special rapporteurs reminded the UNFCCC and Brazilian Cop30 hosts of their duty under international law to protect all human rights, including the rights to freedom of expression, assembly and association, and the right to participate in multilateral spaces like the UN climate summit.<\/p>\n \u201cThe protection of Indigenous Peoples\u2019 human rights is essential, as they are facing widespread violations not only because of the continued expansion of fossil fuels in their territories, but also just transition projects, mining and carbon credits that do not respect their rights or harm biodiversity, water, food and health. Indigenous Peoples seek to be heard and ask that solutions affecting them are co-developed with them. Critically, these solutions also benefit everyone\u2019s human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, including a safe climate.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cAccording to information received, for now none of the protesters has been harmed or criminalized. We hope that there will be no attempts to press charges or legal reprisals for participation in these mobilizations. Both the host state and the UNFCCC Secretariat must ensure the respect of international standards protecting the right to protest.<\/p>\n \u201cWe express deep concern about requests to increase security, which have been met by a visible increase in armed security presence at COP30. First, this is not warranted by the circumstances of the protests that happened at COP30. And, second, this securitization contributes to creating a chilling effect and feeling of insecurity for all participants. Third, it represents a form of stigmatization<\/a> of environmental human rights defenders, and Indigenous Peoples in particular. Rather, their actions should be understood in the context of global trends of increasing and increasingly vicious attacks to defenders and their support organizations, as well as illegitimate limitations to the resources and support systems they can rely upon and generally shrinking of civic space.\u201d<\/p>\n The statement is signed by the UN special rapporteurs on human rights and climate change (Elisa Morgera), the rights of Indigenous Peoples (Albert K. Barume), clean, healthy and sustainable environment (Astrid Puentes Ria\u00f1); freedom of peaceful assembly and association (Gina Romero), and human rights defenders (Mary Lawlor).<\/p>\n The UNFCCC secretariat is expected to issue a response soon.<\/p>\n The experts also point to the paradox of excluding civil society while fossil fuel industry p<\/a>articipants continue to be given access, reiterating their call made on the opening day of Cop<\/a>30 \u201cto curb the presence of fossil fuel lobbyists and ensure transparency, public participation, and meaningful dialogue with civil society.\u201d<\/p>\n They are calling for greater openness within the negotiating rooms, and in the letter slammed the new UNFCCC rule increasing access for observers yet only allowing them to speak only at the end of each meeting.<\/p>\n \u201cChanging dominating practices of closed-door negotiations and ineffective inclusion of civil society, other observers and scientists in the climate negotiations is overdue.\u201d<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n The call to establish a global phaseout of fossil fuels is supported by scores of countries but still remains as a key issue of contention at Cop30. <\/a>Building on the resolution to \u201ctransition away\u201d from fossil fuels made two years ago in Dubai has proved to be a challenge \u2013 but one many ministers see as a vital part of an agreement this year.<\/p>\n The press conference offered not only urgent calls to action but a visual display of how widespread support for a phaseout.<\/p>\n \u2018Let\u2019s do a global Mutir\u00e3o to free ourselves from fossil fuels,\u201d Carsten Schneider, Minister of the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety of Germany said. We want an outcome of this COP which addresses the transition away from fossil fuels in a just and inclusive way.\u201d Schneider called on the COP30 Presidency to include this in the text, adding, \u201cthis is what we need to close the gap to 1.5 degrees\u201d.<\/p>\n Irene Velez Torres, Minister of Environment and Sustainable Development, Colombia, spoke about her country\u2019s phaseout as producers, with no new oil exploration contracts nor oil mining grants issued. \u201cColombia is the first government in the Amazon to take the decision of establishing the \u2018 Amazon free of mining and hydrocarbons\u2019,\u201d she said. \u201cWe have led a declaration to announce an outcome, \u2018una hoja de ruta\u2019, to phase out fossil fuels. Together with our colleagues from Brazil<\/a> we said this \u2018mapa do camino\u2019 is essential.\u201d<\/p>\n Share<\/a>Ministers join together for the Mutir\u00e3o call for a fossil fuel roadmap<\/p>\n So many ministers gathered today, to join the Mutir\u00e3o call for a fossil fuel roadmap, that there were challenges fitting them all behind a podium. During a press conference to unite in support of a just, orderly, and equitable transition away from fossil fuels representatives from around the world spoke about the urgent need for a plan for a phase out.<\/p>\n \u201cToday we bring today many diverse interests who all support the call for a roadmap,\u201d Tina Stege, of the Marshall Islands said, flanked by dozens standing behind her. \u201cThe best chance of landing an agreement at this COP is in the Mutir\u00e3o package,\u201d she said. \u201cThe current reference in the text is weak and is presented as an option – it must be strengthened and it must be adopted. That is why you see all these countries here today.\u201d<\/p>\n Ministers cram onto the stage to join the Mutir\u00e3o call for a fossil fuel roadmap Photograph: UNFFC<\/p>\n The group included representatives from Sierra Leone and Kenya. The German representative said nearly all of Europe was behind it. Marcele Oliveira, a youth champion, took the mic to loud applause.<\/p>\n \u201cWe need to do this now,\u201d she said. \u201cThis is the most important mobilization around climate justice for our generation \u2013 so let\u2019s make this happen.\u201d<\/p>\n The UK\u2019s Secretary of State for Energy Ed Miliband, a stalwart of Cop conferences, was also at the podium, speaking in support of the roadmap. \u201cThis is an issue that must not be ignored, cannot be ignored, and we are saying very very clearly must be at the heart of Cop.\u201d<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Updated at\u00a013.37 EST<\/p>\n \u2018Trump is such a nasty man. An obvious malignant narcissist.\u2019<\/p>\n Kim Stanley Robinson on the future present<\/p>\n The year is 2025. Against a backdrop of deadly climate disasters, mass extinctions, horrifying pandemics and narcissistic billionaires, the United Nation Cop30<\/a> climate conference decides to take a radical step to tackle the world\u2019s problems: the creation of a powerful new organisation charged with defending all living creatures, both now and in the future.<\/p>\n This is the outline of The Ministry of the Future, a novel that was classed as science fiction when it was published five years ago. Today, it has proved so eerily prescient and inspiring that it reads more like a much-need action plan to shift humanity off the path to dystopia.<\/p>\n While there is no prospect of a global super ministry being created in the real Cop30, the author Kim Stanley Robinson, who is visiting Bel\u00e9m, said the best hope for life on Earth remained international negotiations, even if the process of haggling over conference texts can often seem agonisingly slow and technical.<\/p>\n He quoted a line from his book: \u201cIf you give up on words and sentences, you end up in a world of gangsters and thieves.\u201d<\/p>\n Back in 2019, when he wrote the novel, he had yet to visit a climate conference. It was not until two years later at COP26 in Glasgow that he immersed himself in the process. It has given him new insights and reason for sympathy for those wrestling with the multilateral network.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s more than any one person can take in. It\u2019s easy to feel overwhelmed. And then you have to realize you\u2019re just one node in a network, that the network is always going to be bigger than any node, and you just hold on to your part and not try to take it all on,\u201d he told The Guardian. \u201cIn fact, I say this to all of you, pace yourselves for the long haul. You\u2019re going to be in this work for the rest of your lives, and it\u2019s easy to burn out, and sometimes by caring too much.\u201d<\/p>\n The description of a starkly opposite response to biological collapse is among the most chilling sections of the novel: \u201cSome who feel the end is near work to hasten it or worsen it. Their position seems to be that if they\u2019re going to die, then the world must die with them. This is clearly a manifestation of narcissism,\u201d he writes. \u201cNarcissism is generally regarded as a result of a stunted imagination and a form of fear. For the narcissist, the other is too fearful to register. And thus, the individual death of the narcissist represents the end of everything real.<\/p>\n As a result, death for the narcissist becomes even more fearful and disastrous than it is for people who accept the reality of the other and the continuance of the world beyond their individual end. Even the night sky frightens the narcissist as presenting impossible to deny evidence of a world exterior to the self. Narcissists therefore tend to stay indoors, live in ideas and demand compliance and assent from everyone they come in contact with who are all regarded as servants or ghosts. And as death approaches, they do their best to destroy as much of the world as they can. Narcissism is a form of cowardice.\u201d<\/p>\n In comments later he makes the reference explicit: \u201cI read that because Trump is such a nasty man. An obvious malignant narcissist. He\u2019s like a living example of how bad it can get. And I\u2019m astonished at how terrible his judgment is. On each one of these big questions, he\u2019s emphatically on the wrong side. And climate\u2019s one of them, and it\u2019s quite bad for the world.<\/p>\n But how can somebody have judgment that terrible? It boggles the mind. And I think narcissism, not that psychology is much of a help, but if you wanted to try to explain him and you were doing rational actor theory, he doesn\u2019t believe in the existence of anybody else. And so he\u2019s rational only within that irrational understanding. He\u2019s locked in his own mind.\u201d<\/p>\n Robinson is a leftist who believes in communal action and the benefit of having a global commons. He said he was delighted when Lula won back power in Brazil<\/a> as it showed the far right could be defeated.<\/p>\n The Ministry of the Future, which starts with a gut-wrenchingly horrendous depiction of climate disaster, ends on a more hopeful, even utopian note. Following that arc in the real world is a whole lot tougher. Robinson acknowledges politicians are reluctant to cede any of the interests of the present to the future. But he remains a firm believer in the strong ethical argument that is at the heart of the book: that what is good for the biosphere is what is good. And remains a strong supporter of the idea that nature has rights.<\/p>\n The paradigm shift, he said, came when he learned that around half the DNA in a human body is not human. \u201cOnce you know that you yourself are an ecology, a forest – and you can get grossly sick if some of your fellow citizens happen to revolt in your gut or somewhere else – it explains a lot. And then what you have to admit is the rest of the planet is your extended body. And you are like a jellyfish in the ocean. And so the world is just pouring into you and pouring out of you,\u201d he said. \u201cThen the rest of the world\u2019s health is your health. And you can\u2019t say, I\u2019m going to cut down this forest unless you\u2019re going to say, I\u2019m going to cut off my right leg. And in that sense of identification, the rights of nature just becomes a matter of \u2018best take care of your limbs.\u2019<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Updated at\u00a012.22 EST<\/p>\n Reactions to the first round of draft text are starting to roll in with an unsurprising mix of disappointment and hope.<\/p>\n \u201cThe draft text may contain the right ingredients, but it\u2019s been assembled in a way that leaves a bitter aftertaste,\u201d Andreas Sieber, Associate Director of Policy and Campaigns for 350.org said in a statement that emphasized the need for credible fossil fuel phase-out. \u201cThe COP30 Presidency must heed the many Parties, including President Lula, calling for a clear transition pathway and put it where it belongs: at the centre of the 1.5\u00b0C response, balanced with adequate finance,\u201d Sieber added. \u201cWithout this, the overall effort will fall short.\u201d<\/p>\n Romain Ioualalen, Global Policy lead at Oil Change International, called the options presented on fossil fuels \u201cwildly unacceptable\u201d.<\/p>\n \u201cWhat we need is a clear collective direction of travel on how countries intend to phase out fossil fuels based on equity, and how rich Global North countries will provide finance and support to the countries that need it,\u201d Ioualalen said. \u201cMinisters must fix this mess and deliver the progress that we need to make the fair and funded transition away from fossil fuels they promised in Dubai a reality.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cOptions presented on fossil fuels in this new text are wildly unacceptable and a blatant dereliction of duty while the world burns. We don\u2019t need a COP decision to convene a workshop or ministerial round table on fossil fuels.<\/p>\n Kaysie Brown, E3G Associate Director, had a different take, calling the draft \u201ca credible package capable of delivering meaningful COP30 outcomes and propelling the Paris Agreement into its age of implementation\u201d.<\/p>\n Li Shuo, a climate analyst at the Asia Society Policy Institute, championed how quickly some initial framework had come together: \u201cIt represents a steady progression from the previous iteration and is likely one of the earliest releases of such a clean text in recent COP history.\u201d<\/p>\n There\u2019s still a ways to go.<\/p>\n As my colleague Fiona pointed out, nations are still far from resolving discussions on the big four issues \u2013 finance; transparency; trade; and a response to the fact that current national climate plans (NDCs) are too weak to keep the 1.5C heating limit<\/a>.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Updated at\u00a012.19 EST<\/p>\n Gabrielle Canon here, taking over from from my colleague Ajit to bring you the rest of day 8 as the sprint to bag a deal continues to unfold in Bel\u00e9m.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n The lack of money that rich polluters have provided for adaptation to climate breakdown has frustrated delegates and observers from poorer countries that are struggling with violent weather \u2013 while negotiators are divided on how to measure adaptation progress. Writing in Climate Home News yesterday, Mohamed Adow, director of nonprofit Power Shift Africa, argues that the much-awaited Cop30<\/a> Global Goal on Adaptation must be paired with predictable grants.<\/p>\n The UN\u2019s latest adaptation gap report<\/a> could not be clearer. Needs are skyrocketing. Finance is collapsing. And yet the global community continues to debate how to measure progress, rather than how to enable it. They act as if weighing a cow will make it fatter, rather than giving it any food.<\/p>\n This contradiction exposes the heart of the climate crisis: adaptation is not merely a technical challenge; it is a political and moral one. Every finance gap is a justice gap. Behind every unmet target are farmers who cannot plant, families who cannot rebuild, and communities forced into displacement because \u201cresilience\u201d was promised but never delivered.<\/p>\n Adaptation is the difference between dignity and despair. It determines whether societies can endure rising temperatures, intensifying floods, or prolonged droughts \u2014 or whether they are pushed beyond the limits of survival.<\/p>\n Yet, as negotiators haggle over the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) and its indicators, the foundations needed to achieve these goals are crumbling. How do we talk about climate-resilient development when the means to achieve it are drying up? How do we measure resilience while draining the very resources that make resilience possible?<\/p>\n Read the full story here<\/a>.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Updated at\u00a011.15 EST<\/p>\n Dharna Noor<\/p>\n Take a minute to wrap your head around the latest piece of climate summit jargon. My colleague Dharna Noor has written a helpful explainer on Bam, a proposal for states to drive action on a just transition towards a low-carbon economy. A few key points follow below.<\/p>\n What is a just transition?<\/p>\n The concept of the just transition originated from the US labour movement, specifically from energy and chemical workers who said employees of polluting sectors should be supported and compensated as they move into more environmentally friendly jobs.<\/p>\n It has since been taken up by civil society organisations and expanded to include all people affected by sectors that are shifting as climate policies are enacted. That includes workers in the booming transition minerals sector, as well as people living near mineral extraction sites. It also encompasses people affected by attempts to clean up the agriculture sector.<\/p>\n When did the just transition become a consideration in Cop negotiations?<\/p>\n The preamble to the 2015 Paris agreement mentioned the framework, when parties agreed to \u201ctaking into account the imperatives of a just transition of the workforce and the creation of decent work and quality jobs in accordance with nationally defined development priorities\u201d. It acknowledged that without planning, the shift to a low-carbon economy could leave workers and communities behind. But preamble text does not lead to implementation.<\/p>\n During the 2018 climate talks in Katowice, the just transition concept entered the sphere of negotiations when a committee of experts<\/a> convened by Cop officials considered it. Three years later, at Cop27 in Egypt, parties created the \u201cjust transition work programme\u201d, which was intended to help countries design fair pathways and mitigate unintended harms of climate action.<\/p>\n The following year in Dubai, officials fleshed out the programme some more, including by agreeing to hold regular dialogues for parties focused on the just transition. But none of those agreements included requirements for parties. Bam supporters say they have a plan to fix that.<\/p>\n What would the Bam do?<\/p>\n Bam proponents say a new mechanism is needed to require countries to take concrete steps toward a just transition. Right now, global just transition efforts are fragmented and inconsistent.<\/p>\n \u201cNo one is even tracking progress on this,\u201d said Teresa Anderson, the global climate justice lead at the NGO ActionAid. \u201cBam would fix that.\u201d<\/p>\n Bam would also require countries to coordinate their work supporting a just transition, ensuring everyone knows what is happening globally and who it is affecting. It also aims to develop ways for countries to share best practices on a just transition and to support the implementation of such policies, especially in low-income countries with limited state capacity.<\/p>\n And though it would not mandate any new spending on climate finance, it would prioritise non-debt-inducing finance and ensure technology is shared with developing countries \u2013 values that states agreed to uphold in the Paris agreement.<\/p>\n Share<\/a> The Guardian environment team is not known for its good news content, but a crucial vote in Ecuador on Sunday delivered a win for the climate, biodiversity and democracy.<\/p>\n Supporters of the Citizen Revolution Movement celebrate the victory of the \u2018No\u2019 vote in the referendum in Quito, Ecuador. Photograph: Jos\u00e9 J\u00e1come\/EPA<\/p>\n Ecuadorians overwhelmingly voted down four proposals that included rewriting the constitution that recognises the rights of nature \u2013 a unique protection that has empowered Indigenous peoples and other civil society groups to defend the Amazon, Galapagos islands, Andean highlands, and other vital ecosystems. Ecuador, which straddles the equator, is among the most biodiverse places on the planet, with the Amazon rainforest covering almost half of the country\u2019s land area.<\/p>\n President Daniel Noboa, the 37-year-old right wing leader, banana magnate and close ally of Donald Trump, has proposed a $47bn oil expansion plan in the Amazon and building housing and hotel complexes on the Gal\u00e1pagos Islands, a Unesco world heritage site and biosphere reserve. Sunday\u2019s vote was a clear rebuke of Naboa\u2019s authoritarian tilt, with voters also rejecting the return of foreign military bases to the country, and against proposals to curtail party funding and reduce the number of parliamentarians.<\/p>\n Voting in Ecuador is compulsory. Over 80% of eligible voters took part in the referendum, according to the National Electoral Council (CNE).<\/p>\n In the run up to Sunday\u2019s vote, Indigenous and environmental leaders told the Guardian that<\/a> they were facing a wave of state intimidation tactics including having bank accounts frozen. In September, an Indigenous land defender, Efra\u00edn Fueres, was shot and killed by the army during a protest against the high cost of living, a lack of medicine in hospitals, the deterioration of schools and growing social insecurity.<\/p>\n![\"Nina](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Nina_Lakhani.png\")
Nina Lakhani<\/p>\n![\"Jonathan](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/1763493731_7_Jonathan_Watts.jpg\")
Jonathan Watts<\/p>\nNina Lakhani<\/p>\n