During his press conference, Magyar also repeated his warning to senior Orbán-era appointees, including the country’s president (picked by parliament) and key judicial leaders, that they should resign from their posts by 31 May or face removal by the new parliamentary majority.
A US-based anti-Islam influencer who had been authorised to attend a far-right rally in London has been blocked from entering the UK by the home secretary. Valentina Gomez, a self-styled Maga influencer, was given permission last week to enter via a UK electronic travel authorisation (ETA). She was due to speak at the Unite the Kingdom rally on 16 May organised by Tommy Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon. The Guardian understands that Shabana Mahmood has intervened to withdraw the authorisation on the grounds that Gomez’s presence “would not be conducive to the public good”. The government gave the same reason when refusing permission for the rapper Kanye West, now known as Ye, to travel to the UK earlier this month. His ETA was withdrawn after concerns over a string of antisemitic, racist and pro-Nazi comments. West subsequenly apologised for his comments and blamed them on his bipolar disorder. Gomez, 26, attended the first Unite the Kingdom rally in September alongside Yaxley-Lennon, and warned from the stage that “rapist Muslims” were “taking over” the UK. “England, they took your guns, they took your swords, and they raped your women. You have nothing else to lose, but there’s still hope. You are still the majority. So you either fight for this nation or you let all of these rapist Muslims and corrupt politicians take over,” she said. She also addressed police officers, telling them: “I need you to stop following orders because you know you are being told to look the other way while your country is being raped into submission.” An estimated more than 100,000 people attended the event, thought to be the largest far-right rally of its type in British history. In addition to a range of extremist speakers who appeared on stage, the event was addressed remotely by Elon Musk, whom Downing Street condemned for using “dangerous and inflammatory” language. Mahmood has the power to cancel a person’s permission to enter or stay in the UK. A source close to the home secretary said: “While we recognise the democratic right that people must be free to peacefully express their views, this does not include promoting hatred and extremist views.” Mahmood had faced pressure to ban Gomez from entering the UK. The crossbench peer Shaista Gohir wrote on X two days ago: “The @ukhomeoffice should show consistent standards and deny UK entry to Valentina Gomez.” After Gomez posted about her ETA approval, the Muslim Council of Britain wrote: “The decision highlights a clear double standards in how freedom of speech is applied and can potentially lead to less safety and security on the streets of Britain. “Others have been denied entry to the UK for rhetoric directed at different faith groups. This inconsistency raises serious concerns about whose speech is deemed unacceptable and who is permitted.” Gomez, a Christian who was born in Colombia, gained notoriety through a series of anti-Islam stunts. In August last year, she burned a copy of the Qur’an and vowed to rid Texas of the religion if she were elected to Congress. In a video posted to social media while unsuccessfully standing for a Republican nomination to Congress, she said her goal was to “end Islam in Texas”. She asked Muslims to leave the state, saying: “Muslims can fuck off to any of the 57 Muslim nations.” The TV celebrity Sharon Osbourne has faced a backlash after claiming this week that she would be attending the far-right rally. On an Instagram post about the planned march, Osbourne’s official account left a comment saying: “See you at the march.” The homeless charity Centrepoint has said it will cut its ties with Osbourne as a result.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said that there have been no abnormalities observed at Japan’s nuclear facilities as of 8.16am GMT following a 7.7 magnitude earthquake earlier in the day.
Israeli strikes killed at least two Palestinians in separate incidents in the Gaza Strip on Monday, health officials said, and fighters from Hamas clashed with gunmen from an Israeli-backed militia, witnesses have told Reuters news agency. Medics said one man was killed in an Israeli airstrike in the Bureij camp in the central area of the territory, while another strike killed one person and wounded others in Gaza City. The two deaths were the latest violence to overshadow the ceasefire deal signed in October after two years of full-blown war between Israel and Hamas. Progress on moving forward with parts the deal, which include the disarmament of Hamas and Israeli army pullouts, has stalled. The Israeli military didn’t immediately comment on either incident. The Guardian has not independently verified this report.
The US government has called on the defense contractor V2X to evacuate its employees from Kuwait and Iraq, warning the company that they could be targeted by Iran-backed militias, four sources said. The intervention follows reporting by the Guardian that V2X employees were stationed at US military bases in Kuwait, and at Martyr Brigadier General Ali Flaih airbase and Erbil in Iraq. Employees claimed having inadequate protections, receiving limited communications from the company about evacuation plans and being pressured to remain in the Middle East. In Iraq, workers say they are targets of Iran-allied attacks, and one employee was killed in a night-time drone attack in March. On 9 April, representatives of the US Department of State held a meeting with members of V2X leadership during which concerns were raised about local militia launching an attack on the Martyr Brigadier General Ali Flaih airbase, two sources said. The company has a Logistics Civil Augmentation Program contract to provide base operating support and security services in Iraq in a $252m deal. “The US government had a meeting with the company today questioning why Americans are still on base, asking if the articles in the Guardian are true,” said one source, speaking on the condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals from the company. “V2X told the government that they had to keep them there to ‘please the client’, and the company was told, ‘You know they’ll kill them. It’s just too dangerous.’” The government officials at the meeting asked if the company had contacted US Central Command (Centcom) – the combatant command of the US Department of Defense responsible for military operations – for help evacuating its staff, the source said. The government representatives also ordered an airplane to be returned to base in case of an emergency evacuation, said a second source. The state department did not respond to a request for comment. At the Martyr Brigadier General Ali Flaih airbase, also known as the Balad airbase, employees interviewed say there are no plans to evacuate them. Should they try to leave, V2X management has said it will be regarded as a “voluntary evacuation” and they will lose their jobs, because the security situation is not dire enough, according to sources and messages seen by the Guardian. Efforts to keep workers in Iraq are due to the company’s fears that the Iraqi government will end the contract, sources allege. However, workers interviewed said they hear and see drone activity and gunfire most days and nights, which is affecting their mental health and ability to sleep. “The overall regional threat environment, particularly for US personnel, facilities and energy infrastructure, remains assessed as VERY HIGH, with minimal warning time for escalation,” an email sent to employees on 14 April said. The email added that Iranian-aligned proxy groups retain the capability and intent to conduct attacks against US-associated targets within Iraq. “As such, the current lull in activity should be viewed as temporary and potentially situational rather than indicative of reduced threat,” it said. Earlier this month, there was an incident where one of the base’s own defense weapons was fired into the camp by an Iraqi soldier, hitting and damaging a fortified wall surrounding living quarters. “Senior leadership visited the base to investigate, the problem was identified and the soldier disciplined, with actions taken to prevent a recurrence,” the email said. In a separate email, workers were also warned about the risks of unexploded ordnance on the base. Since the start of the US-Israel conflict with Iran, employees have raised concerns with V2X leadership that the bunkers on the base do not provide adequate protection against an attack. In an email from V2X management seen by the Guardian, the company acknowledged requests from employees that their bunkers be sandbagged and reinforced, and said it was “looking at this to be accomplished”. “I’m starting to feel like I won’t make it out of here,” said a second source. “Everyone is anxious and scared.” The Guardian has approached V2X for comment. The company did not respond by the time of publication, and it has not offered statements in response to the previous three articles. Separately, in Erbil in northern Iraq, V2X has maintained a presence under an active contract, with several hundred employees, primarily American, Indian and Kenyan nationals. After the outbreak of conflict, most personnel were housed in a local hotel, which lacked security measures and allowed unrestricted access to the public, heightening fears among V2X employees that they could be targeted by Iran-aligned militant groups operating in the region. Several senior members of V2X management, including the task order manager and site manager, departed Erbil and evacuated in late March, further intensifying concerns among those who remained. On 14 April, V2X evacuated about 100 of these employees from Iraq, upon instructions from the US government to reduce its headcount in Erbil, after the Guardian’s reports about the situation, two sources said. “Soon after the article came out and after airspace resumed, they sent out 104 employees by charter plane to their homes,” said a third source. “But not everybody got to leave. The company said the military still requires us for assistance with missions.” The workers who were evacuated “were excited like little school kids”, a fourth source said.
Cheryle Dreaver first heard her mother discus what she had endured as a child in a Winnipeg courtroom in 2008. Ivy Dreaver was one of tens of thousands of Indigenous people in Canada invited by the federal government to testify about their experiences of sexual, physical and mental abuse in the country’s residential school system. “At that time … I didn’t know those things had happened to her until that very day,” said Dreaver. “I was in shock … there was a lot of abuse.” About 38,000 former students came forward to detail the mistreatment they were subjected to in what was later described as a policy of “cultural genocide”. Those hearings culminated in the largest class-action lawsuit in Canadian history and marked an important moment in the country’s reckoning over its colonial legacy. But two decades later, all documents stemming from the hearings – including first-hand accounts of widespread, systemic harm and even the deaths of Indigenous children – are scheduled to be destroyed. The deadline next year was set nearly a decade ago, but First Nation communities, academics and advocates say the federal government has made minimal efforts to inform survivors their files face destruction. “The responsibility of reaching out to these survivors … is something the federal government should be taking on,” said Heather George, the executive director of the Woodland Cultural Centre, an Indigenous-owned education facility in southern Ontario that has worked to raise awareness about the looming date of 19 September 2027. “It’s a consistent pattern that we’ve seen with the federal government in terms of stepping back from their obligations,” she said. Canada’s supreme court ruled in 2017 that the testimonies must be expunged after 10 years, arguing that claimants expected confidentiality when they agreed to testify. Survivors and their families now have until 19 September 2027 to request the preservation of their documents. Only former students can request the files themselves, which means if a survivor has since died, their documents are guaranteed to be destroyed. Between the late 19th century and the 1990s, more than 150,000 Indigenous children were forced to attend Christian residential schools that sought to “eliminate” First Nations people as a distinct group. Incarcerated children were subject to routine physical mistreatment, starvation and neglect, along with rampant sexual abuse, according to survivors and evidence gathered by a governmental truth and reconciliation commission. After a cascade of lawsuits from former students, the federal government established a settlement in 2006 for those who came forward with their claims. Ivy attended the Prince Albert school in Saskatchewan from grades one to six in the 1960s. In her testimony, she described being viciously beaten if she spoke her native language, Cree. She was humiliated in front of other children if she wet the bed and she described how a priest sexually abused her at age eight, isolating her under the guise of giving her piano lessons. Dreaver only realised her mother’s evidence to the court was due to be destroyed last year, and rushed to keep the files safe. Kimberly Murray, the former executive director of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, said the agency fought for the records to be retained. “There were ways for us to protect those records and the confidentiality of those records without destroying them,” she said. But the supreme court ruling was final. Now a law professor at Queen’s University in Ontario, Murray said destroying files that could contain evidence of genocide is against international law. But when survivors testified, they were not asked what they would like to do with their records, nor was the government planning to use their evidence to further investigate crimes committed at the schools, said Murray. “It wasn’t their mandate,” she said. “They were a compensation scheme.” Connie Walker, a journalist from Okanese First Nation in Saskatchewan, said the impending document destruction underscores how difficult it is to access information on crimes at residential schools and how much more still needs to be uncovered. In her investigation of her father’s time at St Michael’s residential school in Saskatchewan, Walker says she found more than 220 allegations of sexual abuse against 16 priests, 13 nuns and 15 staff members over a 65-year period. “It was shocking – the scale of abuse at a single school that was not notorious,” she said. Walker is now attempting to build a new national archive to compile as much testimony as possible. With approximately 18 months until the destruction date, the federal government has said “materials are being prepared to help raise awareness of the upcoming 19 September 2027 deadline”. But a spokesperson for Canada’s Ministry for Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs said the government cannot ignore the “final orders” of the supreme court. As an adult, Ivy Dreaver worked hard to treat her children well – in defiance of what she had lived through at residential school, her daughter said. “My mom was always gentle to us. She’s very soft spoken; she hardly ever yelled at us because of the shame she experienced,” said Cheryle. Ivy, now 68, is the central matriarch of their family, said Cheryle. She wants her story to be shared to encourage others to retain their files. “It’s really important to have [the files] … There’s people that want to know. I want to be able to go back and tell my children and my grandchildren about my mom,” she said.
The US military has attacked and seized an Iranian-flagged container ship that attempted to get past an American blockade near the strait of Hormuz, the first such interception since the blockade of Iranian ports began last week. Iran’s joint military command said Tehran would respond soon and called the US seizure an act of piracy that violated the ceasefire that has been in place since 8 April. The news threw into question Donald Trump’s earlier announcement that US negotiators would head to Pakistan on Monday for another round of talks with Iran. That had raised hopes of extending a fragile ceasefire set to expire by Wednesday, but Iran has not confirmed it will attend. In a post on X, US Central Command said US marines departed the USS Tripoli assault ship by helicopter and rappelled on to Touska on Sunday. The post included a video of the marines onboard the helicopter Trump had earlier posted on X that the ship had tried to get past the US blockade “and it did not go well for them”. The US president said a US navy guided missile destroyer warned the Touska to stop in the Gulf of Oman but the vessel did not. “[Our] Navy ship stopped them right in their tracks by blowing a hole in the engine room,” Trump said, adding that US marines now had custody of the vessel. He said the ship was under US treasury sanctions because of “prior history of illegal activity”. The ship is on the treasury department’s list of sanctioned vessels. A spokesperson for Iran military’s central command centre, Khatam al-Anbiya, cited by the Isna news agency, said: “We warn that the armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran will soon respond and retaliate against this armed piracy and the US military.” Iranian state media also reported that Tehran had – for now – rejected new peace talks, citing the ongoing blockade, threatening rhetoric, and Washington’s shifting positions and “excessive demands”. Video posted on social media by the US defence department showed the interception of the ship by US forces. The video includes audio of the container ship’s crew being warned that they will be fired on if they refuse to stop. “Vacate your engine room,” a US sailor can be heard saying. “We’re prepared to subject you to disabling fire.” The video then shows the USS Spruance firing on the Touska. The cargo ship was stopped near Iran’s border with Pakistan. Touska had previously left Port Klang, a major port in Malaysia, when the vessel then attempted to move past the US blockade, according to tracking information from TankerTrackers.com. The escalating standoff threatens to deepen the energy crisis roiling the global economy and push the two countries toward renewed fighting, in a conflict that has killed at least 3,000 people in Iran, nearly 2,300 in Lebanon, 23 civilians and 15 soldiers in Israel, and more than a dozen in Gulf Arab states. Thirteen US service members have also been killed.
Good morning. Today the prime minister will face parliament in the wake of the Guardian’s exclusive revelation that during the process of appointing Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the US, the former New Labour “prince of darkness” failed UK security vetting – something Keir Starmer says he was not told about. On Friday, Starmer said he was “absolutely furious” and described the situation as “totally unacceptable”. But the episode has once again raised questions about his political judgment, with opposition parties – and some of his own MPs – calling for his resignation. The story has ramifications beyond the immediate fallout for Starmer. For today’s newsletter I spoke to the Guardian’s head of investigations, Paul Lewis, about what the story tell us about how power operates inside government – and who is really in charge. First, the headlines. Five big stories Iran | Tehran is not planning to take part in new talks with the US in Islamabad, Iranian state media reported, as its military accused America of violating a fragile ceasefire by attacking a cargo ship. US news | At least eight children were killed and two adults wounded in a mass shooting in Shreveport, Louisiana. Police said the suspect, who died after a police pursuit, killed seven of his own children and wounded their mother, as well as killing another child. UK politics | Keir Starmer will deliver a high-stakes statement to MPs on Monday setting out how Peter Mandelson was able to take up his role as UK ambassador without the Foreign Office revealing it had overruled the decision to fail his vetting. Protest | Seven people from an activist group calling for higher taxes on the super-rich have been arrested by police on suspicion of conspiracy to steal after a plot to steal from high-end stores was uncovered. Crime | A woman has been arrested on suspicion of attempted murder after a car hit pedestrians in central London in the early hours of yesterday morning. A woman in her 30s was in hospital in a critical condition and a man in his 50s suffered life-changing injuries. In depth: ‘It needed to be in the public domain’ Peter Mandelson was appointed the UK’s ambassador to Washington in February 2025. He was sacked in September 2025 after documents released in the US revealed the extent of his ties with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, which the Foreign Office said were “materially different from that known at the time of his appointment”. But “who knew what, and when” about his relationship with Epstein has never been satisfactorily explained despite the release of documents to parliament about the appointment process. Then it appeared there might be another dimension – that Mandelson had failed security vetting but had been given the role anyway. “The moment we got a sense this story might be true,” Paul tells me, “my colleagues Henry Dyer, Pippa Crerar and I worked relentlessly to stand it up.” If, after his appointment as US ambassador, Peter Mandelson failed his UK security vetting – and then that decision was overruled by officials at the Foreign Office – unbeknownst, allegedly, to the prime minister or other members of the cabinet, Paul knew it needed to be in the public domain. Once it was, he predicted there would be very significant ramifications: for Keir Starmer, for Olly Robbins, and for the wider intelligence and security establishment – all of which is just starting to pan out. *** What actually happened? After Labour’s July 2024 election victory, Mandelson quickly re-emerged as an influential figure around the new government, advising ministers and building ties in No 10 before being announced as the next US ambassador. It now appears that in January 2025 he failed developed vetting clearance – a rare outcome – only for the decision to be internally overruled by the Foreign Office, allowing him to take up the post. On 2 September last year, the closeness of Mandelson’s relationship to Epstein was laid bare in the first tranche of files released in the US. On 10 September Starmer said in parliament he had “confidence in him”, and on 11 September a Downing Street spokesperson told the media that Foreign Office vetting had been done “normal way”. Later that day Starmer fired Mandelson. In February, Starmer said that Mandelson had passed vetting, with Morgan McSweeney then resigning as Starmer’s chief of staff, saying he took full responsibility for advising Starmer to appoint Mandelson. In March, document released to parliament stated that national security adviser, Jonathan Powell, had doubts about Mandelson’s appointment, describing it as “weirdly rushed”, but crucially the documents do not disclose that Mandelson failed security vetting. *** Why does it matter beyond Starmer? “If you believe Downing Street, no politician was told – not David Lammy as foreign secretary, and not the prime minister. That’s extraordinary.” Paul is not alone in thinking this is extraordinary. Others have gone further. Veteran Labour MP Jon Trickett said: “It simply doesn’t sound credible,” and Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch described the idea as “completely preposterous” and said there was “deliberate dishonesty”. Paul tells me that as much as this is clearly a very significant political story, what really fascinates him is “the wider question of where power resides in the British state”. “It’s a massive Westminster story,” he says. “About Starmer’s candour in parliament and in public, his judgment in appointing Mandelson, and the resignation of the Foreign Office permanent secretary, Olly Robbins. “But what this episode seems to reveal is the really significant, and potentially unchecked, power of senior civil servants and officials.” According to multiple sources, Mandelson was initially denied clearance in late January 2025, but Starmer had by then announced he would be making Mandelson the UK’s chief diplomat in Washington, potentially posing a dilemma for officials at the Foreign Office. Paul points out it very much reminds him of the television sitcom Yes, Minister with its wily senior Whitehall mandarins manoeuvring politicians, running the show behind the scenes by seemingly pressing ahead with a plan without consulting ministers about an important change of circumstances. As revealed on Friday, Starmer was apparently left in the dark about sensitive information relating to Mandelson’s security vetting by two other top civil servants besides Robbins, including the recently appointed cabinet secretary, Antonia Romeo – who has known since March. *** Who is really making the decisions? Mandelson’s role would have been one of the most sensitive in government. “Think about the implications,” Paul says. “The UK’s most senior diplomat in Washington, dealing with intelligence from GCHQ and the NSA, handling top-secret material, was allowed into that role despite failing a vetting process that even relatively junior civil servants have to pass. “That’s a hugely consequential decision, apparently taken without ministers being informed.” A second strand of the story raises even more profound constitutional questions. In February, parliament passed a “humble address” requiring the government to release all papers relating to Mandelson’s appointment. While sensitive material can be withheld from publication, it must still be shared with the intelligence and security committee. But the Guardian found that “officials were considering not even disclosing those vetting documents to that committee. In other words, potentially resisting a direct parliamentary order.” That, Paul says, raises a fundamental question: “Who ultimately holds power: parliament, or the national security establishment?” *** What happens next? “These kinds of journalistic investigations are difficult,” Paul says. “They involve national security, they’re complex, and they deal with material that is, by nature, highly secret. “And this was a story where it became clear quite early on that there were people in government who really did not want it to come out.” It is exactly this kind of difficult, vitally important journalism that the Guardian can only carry out because of the unique way we are funded by you, our readers. What happens politically now is not clear. Starmer’s leadership has looked fragile for some time, and Labour is braced for a difficult set of elections in May. But that alone may not be enough to trigger a move against him. The three most frequently mentioned potential successors – Wes Streeting, Angela Rayner and Andy Burnham – each face obstacles. Streeting has drawn criticism over perceived manoeuvring, Rayner remains under scrutiny over her tax matters and a perception she is not up to big international issues, and Burnham is still outside parliament. Starmer may take heart from some backbench MPs going in to bat for him. Southport’s Patrick Hurley called it a “fuss over nothing”, saying: “By an order of magnitude, the bigger problem for us is the shock from the Iran war, the ongoing challenge on prices of consumer goods, and the very long shadow of Liz Truss’s mini-budget. Everything else is a sideshow.” The Guardian has learned that Adrian Fulford, who led the Southport inquiry, is expected to review Mandelson’s vetting process and the wider system. The recently departed Foreign Office permanent secretary, Robbins, has been invited to give evidence to the Commons foreign affairs select committee on Tuesday, and Pippa Crerar has written that he is “understood to be extremely angry at what he believes to be his unfair treatment by the prime minister”. And before that, Starmer faces the House of Commons today. The Mandelson affair has already claimed multiple senior figures. Whether it ultimately claims the prime minister remains to be seen. What else we’ve been reading London Zoo celebrates its 200th anniversary this year, and the Guardian’s photographer David Levene has been given a behind-the-scenes access to its veterinary team. Patrick Elena Saavedra Buckley relays her experience of taking part in a mission to live on Mars with the caveat that it is taking place at a purpose-built camp in Utah. Martin I was gripped by this essay by American writer Siri Hustvedt about the death of her husband, Paul Auster. Patrick They used to warn us about the dangers of the internet, but increasingly people are finding it is their parents being radicalised by social media. Simon Usborne investigates. Martin Another birthday. This time, Michael Rosen is turning 80. The much-loved children’s author reflects on the death of his son, antisemitism and surviving Covid. Patrick Sport Football | Manchester City took one step close to an unlikely comeback in the Premier League title race thanks to a winner from Erling Haaland, pictured above, against Arsenal at the Etihad. The 2-1 win puts them three points behind with a game in hand. Tennis | Emma Raducanu has withdrawn from the Madrid Open due to a viral illness. She has been out of action since March. Snooker | Mark Allen revealed how a burger and a few drinks fuelled his surge into the second round of the World Snooker Championship after he defeated Zhang Anda 10-6 at the Crucible. The front pages “Commons showdown for Starmer over Mandelson vetting scandal” – that’s the lead story in the Guardian at the start of the week. “Mandelson had top level of security clearance” reports the Times while the Telegraph says “Starmer knew about Mandelson red flags”. The i paper runs with “Starmer faces showdown in Commons – and fights for his future”. “Day Starmer has to stand up and take the blame” is the Mail’s verdict. The Mirror has a puff piece by comparison – “Heroes of the deep” – as it joins the PM on a tour of a British nuclear sub. The Express’s preferred angle of attack is a Tory claim that “Crime costs UK taxpayers £90m a day under Labour”. The Metro’s splash is “Britain boots out grieving jet crash dad”. Top story in the Financial Times is “Iran war will squeeze US voters long after conflict ends, economists warn”. Today in Focus Stonewall’s new chair on trans rights, JK Rowling and the future of the LGBTQ+ movement An exclusive interview with Kezia Dugdale on the charity’s mistakes and the future of the LGBTQ+ movement. With reporting by Libby Brooks Cartoon of the day | Tom Gauld The Upside A bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all bad Amanda Barry’s father, George, died when she was nine. She discovered his Antarctic journals and photos in her mother’s loft, sparking a lifelong desire in her to visit Port Lockroy, where he had served as base leader in 1948. After a career in PR, she returned to study environmental science and worked on building experience in museums and as a guide. In her 60s, she was selected as museum manager for the UK Antarctic Heritage Trust. Amanda reached the tiny island and stood where her father once stood. The experience offered her the closest sense of reunion she believes she will ever have. “The first time I walked in, I saw his picture on the wall,” she says. “I cried, of course. It was such a magical thing.” Sign up here for a weekly roundup of The Upside, sent to you every Sunday Bored at work? And finally, the Guardian’s puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day. Until tomorrow. Quick crossword Cryptic crossword Wordiply