Strip away the dense terminology and political vocabulary in City Bridge Foundation’s new 12-page mission statement, and it could easily be mistaken for a Green Party pamphlet or a climate campaign blog.

The document celebrates “cross-cutting strategic ambitions” centred on Equity, Diversity and Inclusion, alongside Climate Action. It repeatedly invokes the language of climate, racial, social and economic “justice”.

Yet the statement comes from a 700-year-old City of London charity with a clear and practical responsibility: looking after the capital’s non-rail bridges across the Thames. Its portfolio includes Tower Bridge, one of Britain’s most recognisable landmarks. Thanks to investments worth around £1.5 billion, that work is carried out without cost to taxpayers.

The latest policy document, titled Standing With Londoners, suggests that the current board has priorities beyond helping people travel across the river. The word “Thames” appears only once, while far more attention is given to the ambition of becoming a “social-justice funder” for “all Londoners”.

Critics would argue that serving the public means using this substantial financial reserve to focus more closely on the foundation’s original purpose, rather than directing large sums towards selected charities and left-leaning campaign organisations.

One London Conservative MP described the foundation’s approach as “woke nonsense” last night.

The foundation has awarded major grants to organisations including Spectra CIC, which received £1 million to help “build capacity in the trans and sex-worker sector”, and Race On The Agenda, given £1.5 million to “combat racial injustice”. Those projects may support particular communities, but critics ask why a charity created to maintain bridges is not using more of its wealth to repair and preserve them.

London’s bridge problems have already made the capital an international punchline. In 2020, The New York Times mocked Britain’s inability to carry out basic repairs after Hammersmith Bridge became a symbol of infrastructure failure. The Victorian landmark, also seen in the most recent James Bond film, was described as evidence that “London’s bridges really are falling down”.

Six years later, the bridge remains closed to traffic. Elsewhere, Albert Bridge has endured a year-long closure, while Waterloo Bridge is reportedly facing serious concerns of its own. That raises an obvious question: could the richly funded City Bridge Foundation help?

Its answer is no. The foundation says its core responsibility is maintaining the five bridges under its direct care. Its additional role is to provide grants to charities supporting communities across Greater London. But that wider remit was created by the organisation itself in 1995, when it sought permission from the Charity Commission to amend its governing rules. If those rules could be changed once, critics argue, there is nothing preventing another application.

That leads to more fundamental questions about ownership and accountability. Who does the money belong to, and who authorised these priorities? The funds ultimately derive from Londoners and their predecessors, who paid tolls to cross the river. Over hundreds of years, those proceeds have been transformed into a vast investment portfolio.

The foundation has a single overarching trustee: the City of London Corporation. The corporation appoints the board, which in turn selects the committee responsible for deciding how the money is distributed.

For decades, the political Left has portrayed the City of London as the ultimate stronghold of wealthy, pinstriped capitalism.

But a different philosophy now appears to have taken root in the Square Mile. Has the City itself gone woke? That is the question critics are asking after a City-linked charity with centuries of experience protecting routes across the Thames awarded £1.2 million to an organisation alleged to have links to Hamas, a proscribed terrorist group.

The story begins with medieval monks and merchants who established what was then known as Bridge House Estates in the 12th century. Its purpose was straightforward: to create and maintain a way across the river.

They built a stone London Bridge to replace its wooden predecessor and funded the project by charging travellers a toll.

Careful investment of that income eventually enabled them to construct Blackfriars Bridge and Tower Bridge. The organisation now also oversees Southwark Bridge and the Millennium Bridge, once nicknamed the “Wobbly Bridge”. After almost eight centuries of accumulation, the City’s leaders made a major decision in 1995.

They concluded that the organisation could move beyond the routine business of civil engineering and begin using some of its surplus wealth to support charitable causes.

Since when, as the rebranded City Bridge Foundation, they have quietly given away £840 million to hundreds of charities, some very deserving, some less so, some overtly political and some with no obvious connection to the City.

Last week, The Times revealed that two cheques amounting to a whopping £1.2 million had been handed to an organisation called the Muslim Charities Forum. Its treasurer just happens to be chief executive of another foundation, Al-Khair, which is alleged to have connections to Hamas. The Charity Commission has opened a statutory inquiry into Al-Khair after one of its associates was arrested in the UK and charged by the US with allegedly providing ‘material support’ to Hamas.

No one is suggesting the City Bridge Foundation had any idea of a possible Hamas link. However, it all adds to the impression of an organisation with more money than it knows what to do with.

As well as appointing its own poet in residence, for example, it pays each one of its 29 staff more than £60,000 a year.

The revelation about the Muslim Charities Forum surfaced in detailed research undertaken by Looking For Growth, a pro-business campaign group.

CHECK THIS OUT: Potential Threat: Iran's Capability to Use EMPs and Possession of Dirty Bombs – NewsFinale

One of its priorities for London is to break the bureaucratic logjam that has closed Hammersmith Bridge because two councils and the Mayor of London cannot work out a way of reopening it. The knock-on effect across west London’s other bridges and the impact on business has been severe.

Looking For Growth took a deep dive into the City Bridge Foundation and its finances. It was astonished to find that the charity was not simply just giving handouts to conventional charities – from Age UK to Mencap – but big sums to lobbying groups and activists.

‘Hammersmith Bridge has been shut since 2019, but the City Bridge Foundation’s rules stop them from being able to step in and fix it,’ says Dr Lawrence Newport, chief executive of Looking For Growth.

‘Instead of using its money to fund social justice causes – including a group campaigning against a new river crossing – the City of London Corporation must change the Foundation’s rules to get it back to its original purpose.’

Within the City Bridge Foundation there is dismay that this low-profile, ancient body is suddenly under attack for its philanthropy. Speaking to some of those on the inside, I find incredulity that they should be expected to fund bridges other than their own.

One senior figure, not unreasonably, asks why a well-run charity, which has been carefully managing its funds for centuries, should pay out hundreds of millions because the halfwits running 21st century local authorities have been so inept.

We can all sympathise with that argument. Yet this is a charity that has paid out £840 million to do plenty of other things that are the responsibility of the state – whether fighting racial injustice or looking after elderly people.

Furthermore, Looking For Growth points out that the charity has been paying millions to organisations with clear political agendas. Why is a body in charge of bridges giving £5 million to the Esme Fairbairn Foundation to ‘tackle the causes of deep-rooted structural injustices facing people in towns and cities across the UK’?

Established 65 years ago, the Esme Fairbairn Foundation has a long track record of good deeds, but also support for controversial single-issue causes such as pro- immigration outfit Right To Remain or the Media Standards Trust, precursor to the anti-Press group Hacked Off.

With more than £800 million of its own in the bank, does Esme Fairbairn really need another £5 million, which might otherwise be spent on bridge-building?

The foundation also commissioned a deep-dive into its connections with the slave trade. It would, no doubt, have cheerfully handed millions to the reparations crowd were it not for the frustrating discovery that it had next to nothing to do with slavery. That’s the problem with a charity that predates slavery, I suppose.

The City Bridge Foundation might cling to rules of its own making and insist it can only maintain ancient City bridges. But it circumvented those rules to take on the Millennium Bridge in 2003. And, if it is happy to spread its largesse far beyond the Square Mile, why can’t it help bridges beyond the City, too?

In response to questions from The Mail on Sunday, a spokesman for City Bridge Foundation said: ‘Our first responsibility is the maintenance of five Thames bridges at no cost to the taxpayer. Only funds not required for the bridges are available for our charitable work supporting Londoners.’

As for the possible Hamas connection: ‘Our grant was specifically made to Muslim Charities Forum for its work in London.

‘Every grant application is subject to robust checks and ongoing monitoring.’

There remains zero enthusiasm for helping any other Thames crossings. ‘Our five bridges are open, safe and in good condition. London’s other bridges are the responsibility of other organisations, which we work with through other industry groups.’

Pressure for change is not going to go away, though.

‘Our bridges have been left to wrack and ruin, making it more difficult to get around and leaving Londoners more divided,’ says Tory MP and Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp.

‘We are being sold down the river by this Left-wing pressure group masquerading as a charity,’ the MP for Croydon South adds.

‘They should spend less time and money on divisive campaigning and more time building bridges.’

He urged a clean sweep of the board ‘so this charity can return to its purpose of improving London’s infrastructure – like Hammersmith Bridge – instead of wasting money on woke nonsense that actually undermines our society.’

That view is echoed by urban analysts, such as Ike Ijeh, head of housing, architecture and urban space at the leading think-tank Policy Exchange. ‘At a time when London’s bridges are increasingly in need of urgent repair, the City Bridge Foundation should be reminded that its vast revenues are not its inheritance but Londoners’,’ he said.

‘And it is high time that inheritance was used to the strategic benefit of the majority of Londoners and not to line the coffers of the social justice identity complex that all too often divides London.’

Ultimately, here is a classic case for students of what academics call ‘groupthink’.

Just look again at the foundation’s website. The board and the funding committee are full of professionals keen to trumpet their City credentials and charity experience. However, out of the 15 people responsible for an organisation that builds and mends bridges, I count just two engineers.

Additional reporting by Nicholas Pyke

Snezana Wood reportedly contacted a friend last year to ask how she could leave her eight-year marriage to The Bachelor star Sam Wood, according to a new report.

Speaking to the Herald Sun, a friend of the mother-of-four claimed Snezana had been facing difficulties privately, despite the couple’s polished public image.

“Everyone has known what’s gone on. It was an open secret in Brighton. Snezana wanted to find a way out,” the friend alleged.

The claims have emerged as Sam, 46, prepares to return to the Supreme Court on November 4 to seek bail again after spending three weeks in custody.

A second friend also alleged that Snezana had no access to her own finances or the couple’s shared bank accounts during the marriage.

Those claims come against the backdrop of the couple’s substantial property and business dealings in recent years.

Sam reportedly sold his online fitness company to a Melbourne billionaire for $71 million, while the couple’s Elsternwick property is said to have fetched $6 million when it was sold in May.

He later bought a $2.7 million home in Mount Martha. Meanwhile, the family’s Brighton residence has been listed for $7.15 million.

A former partner of Sam has also spoken about what she described as unpredictable conduct during their relationship.

She alleged that, after one disagreement, he threw her clothing onto the front lawn of her home.

“If things didn’t go his way, he became increasingly erratic. He was always tight with money … looking for ways to save a buck. He even tried to get Snezana’s engagement ring for free,” she claimed.

Snezana has recently been seen without her wedding ring and has not appeared on social media in recent days. Her daughter Eve, who had also maintained an active online presence, has likewise been absent from the platforms.

Since the allegations surfaced, Sam has reportedly lost more than 15,000 Instagram followers, while Snezana and Eve have attracted thousands of new followers.

Sam remains in custody and has since been transferred to another prison.

The personal trainer was arrested and charged with domestic violence offences earlier this month following an alleged incident at the couple’s $3,000-a-night holiday home in Noosa.

Bail was denied when he appeared before Maroochydore Magistrates’ Court over the allegations involving Snezana, who is understood to support the prosecution proceeding with the charges.

Prosecutors allege that during the incident, which was reportedly witnessed by Snezana’s 21-year-old daughter Eve, Sam pushed his wife into a wardrobe, grabbed her by the throat, threw her against a wall and struck her head on the floor. Eve then called triple-0.

When he faced court in Queensland, police prosecutor Sergeant Jeanette Grigoris noted he had previously choked Snezana in a similar incident.

Sergeant Grigoris said Sam had not been charged over that alleged attack, but told the court his behaviour had been ‘escalating’.

It is alleged that a row broke out in Noosa ahead of the couple returning to Melbourne, and Snezana was pushed into a wardrobe before Eve intervened.

The court heard Eve told Sam to stop shouting, prompting him to approach her ‘aggressively’ before Snezana tried to get between them. 

He is then alleged to have put his hands around Snezana’s throat and forced her to the floor, where he pinned her down and banged her head, leaving her unable to breathe.

She told police, ‘This was it… my life was going to end’, and said she thought Sam was ‘going to kill her’, the court heard. 

Snezana had also told police Sam was ‘volatile and prone to angry outbursts’, and said she had to ‘walk on eggshells around him’.

Mr Cuskelly said his client suffered from severe depression and might rely on self-defence if the case went to trial.

Meanwhile, fans are urging Snezana to take over as the face and name of 28 by Sam Wood.

Sam founded the fitness business 10 years ago, before selling its parent company, Australian Life Tech, to myDNA for a reported $71 million in 2022. He remained involved with the brand under its new ownership.

The online fitness and nutrition program was designed around 28-minute workouts, meal plans and lifestyle support.

DBG Health, which owns myDNA, has quickly distanced itself from Sam, terminating its commercial arrangements with the former Bachelor star shortly after his arrest on these charges.

Snezana first captured Australia’s attention when she won Sam’s heart on The Bachelor in 2015.

Their romance became one of the franchise’s most celebrated success stories, with the couple marrying in 2018 and welcoming three daughters together.

He is a freak. Perhaps he is gay. Maybe he is even a vegan. Was he genuinely recovering from flu, or had he entered a mental health facility in another state?

Texas Republicans have raised all of those questions — and many more — about Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico.

Their campaign has saturated the state with advertising, spending an eye-watering $175 million along the way. The attacks have been relentless, and any one of the insinuations — despite every claim being entirely false — might have been enough to derail Mr Talarico. The vegan accusation, in particular, seemed designed to strike a nerve: Texans love beef and are famously suspicious of vegetables as a food group.

So why is he still leading in the polls? Why does the Democratic candidate in rural, heavily pro-Trump Kansas also appear to be performing strongly? In Iowa, where Trump won by 13 points two years ago — the largest margin recorded by any presidential candidate since 1972 — the Senate contest is now rated a close race.

The list goes on. What a reversal. I was in Washington, DC, during the exhilarating early days of Trump’s second presidency, when he appeared unstoppable. He was amusing, disciplined and seemingly incapable of sleep, dismissing officials in the middle of the night and signing executive orders with a Sharpie before tossing it into an adoring crowd.

Even Democratic friends in the capital seemed oddly relieved. Their own party, they felt, might finally receive a much-needed shock. And if Trump could stop illegal immigration, bring inflation down and take on what they saw as woke universities, perhaps his presidency would not be entirely negative.

Racial minorities, groups often championed by white Democrats, also appeared receptive to Trump. Latinos, in particular, backed him in record numbers.

But, as Texans might put it, he turned out to be all hat and no cattle. It is true that he has effectively closed the border, but that achievement was followed by an unpopular and sometimes violent crackdown on immigrants living blamelessly inside the United States. He has failed to bring down inflation and, amid the war with Iran, his record on fuel prices has been especially disastrous.

Latino voters have cooled toward Trump. So have many rural Americans, including former supporters who rely on diesel trucks. In communities built around big vehicles and hard work, the cost of diesel and gasoline is more than an inconvenience. It shapes how families feel about their lives.

Raise fuel prices high enough and a voter might even support a candidate accused of being a vegan.

Donald Trump has endured extraordinary political crises, including the prospect of imprisonment. Yet this may be the greatest challenge of his career.

Early voting is already under way, with election day scheduled for a week on Tuesday. The prospect that Trump could lose control of both chambers of Congress is now looming.

But there is a warning for Democrats. During the 2022 midterms, I told some surprised BBC interviewers that the result — far better for Joe Biden’s Democrats than expected — could ultimately prove disastrous for the party.

A strong showing might persuade the ageing president to seek a second term. I was right about that. I still believe that had the Democrats performed poorly, they would have replaced him with a much stronger candidate and might have defeated Trump in 2024.

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: Deal Reached for New York Skyscraper Taller Than Empire State Building

Once again, victory could quickly turn into defeat. Imagine the Democrats winning both houses of Congress. Not only would moderate candidate James Talarico prevail in Texas, but Abdul El-Sayed could also win in Michigan. El-Sayed is a firebrand left-wing campaigner in the mould of New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani. Unlike Mamdani, however, he would become a national party figure rather than remaining primarily associated with one city. That would do little to help Democrats shed their reputation for being obsessively woke.

To be clear, El-Sayed is a capable politician with particularly strong support among younger voters. But he and those around him would be tempted to out-Trump Trump, seeking to destroy him with the same intensity he has used against his political opponents.

They would pursue another impeachment attempt. That would mean congressional hearings, prolonged investigations and time spent tracking down evidence of alleged wrongdoing. In the

Senate, however, two-thirds of members would have to vote to convict and remove him from office — a threshold the effort would almost certainly fail to reach.

That will not stop them raking over wrongdoing that many Americans might want to put behind them. It would become a sore when the country is looking for balm. And the Democrats would become a party of past grievances rather than forward-looking optimism.

And then El-Sayed and his friends would press for a radical presidential candidate in the 2028 campaign and all that new-found support the party has in places like Kansas and Iowa might fade rather fast.

Better perhaps to lose this time round or maybe take the lower House of Representatives but not the Senate. Better to face disappointment now, forcing the party to have a serious conversation about its appeal to all of America. Left leaning, even socialist in places. But centrist too, and with a candidate who can knit it all together. Just as Bill Clinton did in the 1990s and Barack Obama in this century.

Talking of presidential candidates: that process of selection (yes, it’s crazy) starts within hours of the results. Here it gets complicated and highly unpredictable. The Democrats might, as I suggest, live to regret winning big in 2026 if that is what happens.

But not just because such a victory persuades their own party to adopt positions that are electorally unviable. It might also persuade the Republicans to double down on Trumpism. Or to claim that it has never been properly tried!

In those circumstances it seems at least possible that this is the moment fringe people on the Right outside the party come out against him and try to seize the wheel.

This might not be pretty. How about a presidential run from Tucker Carlson, the Right-wing influencer who clashed recently with the former Conservative cabinet minister Jacob Rees- Mogg, who accused Carlson of getting dangerously close to defending Adolf Hitler.

There are others too who might be willing to shake up the Republicans and thrust aside their ageing president – who’ll be something of a lame duck if Congress blocks or delays his domestic agenda – and the obvious candidates to replace him in 2028, the Vice-President JD Vance and the Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Of course, all of this suggests that we have an actual result. But if it is close it is entirely possible the President tries to overturn it and we are in for weeks of dangerous and divisive squabbling.

All American elections matter because America matters. This one might just matter a little bit more than normal.

Four people have been injured in a drive-by shooting outside a Queensland venue preparing to host a boxing event.

Police said officers were called after reports that shots had been fired from a vehicle outside a licensed premises in Loganholme, south of Brisbane, at about 8.15pm.

The vehicle involved was seen leaving the area, police said.

A 19-year-old woman from Jimboomba was in a critical and unstable condition, police told the Daily Mail.

Two men, aged 38 and 37, were seriously injured but in stable condition. A third man, aged 27, was also reported to be stable.

Police said there was not believed to be any continuing threat to the wider public.

Fitzys Loganholme, on Bryants Road, had been scheduled to host the Logan City Titles Fight Night on Saturday.

According to The Courier-Mail, one victim was shot in the head, while two others suffered gunshot wounds to the abdomen and another was shot in the arm.

The vehicle reportedly connected to the shooting was discovered burning at Waterfront West shortly after the incident.

Tyler Florance, 18, told The Courier-Mail that he heard three or four gunshots while cleaning his car across the road.

He said the sound was followed by extensive screaming.

MORE STORY: James Bond Screen Tests Continue as Mystery Actor Leaves Studios

Florance said he was shocked that an incident of that nature had occurred so close to his home.

Speaking on Nine’s Today show, Logan City Mayor Jon Raven said the shooting had frightened residents and sent a shockwave through the community.

Raven expressed his sympathy for the victims, event staff and attendees, describing the boxing night as a family-friendly occasion attended by many children. He said the experience could affect them for the rest of their lives.

The Logan City Titles Fight Night reportedly featured amateur and professional bouts involving men, women and teenagers.

In an Instagram post, Logan City Titles said it was heartbroken by what had happened.

‘Logan City Titles was a family event, an event for our community, showcasing local talent, hard work and everyone’s skills in the ring,’ the post read.

‘These types of incidents have no place in the boxing community and any part of the broader community.

‘As a team we are working through it and dealing with the emotions that come with this. Right now our thoughts go out to the victims and all that were affected.

‘We are praying for full recoveries.’

One woman posted on a Loganholme community Facebook page she was out having dinner with colleagues and had to hide in a kitchen as the incident unfolded.

‘Scared babies, screaming girls, people coming in covered in blood. [Absolutely] terrifying,’ she wrote.

Police were urging anyone with information about the incident to contact them.

More to come