Keir Starmer and his Iraqi counterpart, Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, signed a trade agreement when they met in No 10 today. They also agreed “the principles of a specific returns agreement … to ensure those who have no right to be in the UK can be returned swiftly”, No 10 said.

As PA Media reports, protesters could be heard shouting outside the gates of Downing Street as Starmer welcomed Sudani outside No 10. One could be heard to shout: “Are you gambling with our lives?”

And protesters chased Sudani’s car down Whitehall as it left. One of them could be seen to throw a projectile at one of the vehicles in his convoy, though the missile appeared to miss.

Farman Haji, a member of the group called the Dakok Organisation for Rights and Freedom, which organised the protest, told PA that Iraqi lives would be “in danger back home” if they were returned. He added:

We want to save a thousand, thousand lives in UK … Iraqi people, to not send them back home. That is what we here today for.

Dakok is a registered charity in the UK which is intended to serve members of the Kurdish community living in Britain.

Opposition MSs have called for the Welsh first minister to back an inquiry into grooming gangs, in a tense exchange in the Senedd, PA Media reports. PA says:

Darren Millar, the leader of the Welsh Conservatives, repeatedly asked Eluned Morgan if she will support a national or Wales-wide inquiry.

The debate was heated, with Morgan accused of dodging the question, while Millar was told to “tone it down” by the Llywydd – the Senedd’s presiding officer.

Speaking during first minister’s questions on Tuesday, Millar said: “We know that people up and down Wales are talking about this issue. They need assurances that both the Welsh and the UK governments, along with the police and social services, are doing all that they can to prevent young girls in Wales from becoming victims of grooming gangs.

“They want to know that justice will be served against the perpetrators of these crimes, but they can only have those assurances if we know the full extent of the problems that we have here in Wales and the actions which are being taken by everybody to address them.”

Morgan refused to say whether she supports a new inquiry and was accused of not answering the question by Mr Millar.

She said: “I think it is important when we’re discussing sensitive issues like this that we think first of the victims, and many have endured dreadful abuse. It’s really important we stand with them and by them when we seek justice.

“It’s really disappointing that this issue has been politicised to a point where people working for humanitarian organisations and children in school feel threatened, and I really hope we can tone down the rhetoric on this issue.”

Kemi Badenoch has said Keir Starmer “dithered and delayed” to try to keep Tulip Siddiq in office and that this showed “weak leadership”. She has posted this reaction to the resignation on social media.

It was clear at the weekend that the anti-corruption minister’s position was completely untenable. Yet Keir Starmer dithered and delayed to protect his close friend.

Even now, as Bangladesh files a criminal case against Tulip Siddiq, he expresses ‘sadness’ at her inevitable resignation.

Weak leadership from a weak Prime Minister.

And here is Keir Starmer’s reply to Tulip Siddiq. He says he appreciates her decision to “end ongoing distraction” and says that “the door remains open” for her going forward – implying she could return to government at some point.

No 10 has announced a mini-reshuffle following the resignation of Tulip Siddiq.

Emma Reynolds will replace her as economic secretary to the Treasury. Reynolds was pensions minister at the Department for Work and Pensions, but also combined being a DWP minister with being a junior Treasury minister.

And her job will go to Torsten Bell, the former chief executive of the Resolution Foundation thinktank and former head of policy for Ed Miliband who became an MP at the election. He had been a parliamentary private secretary to Pat McFadden, the Cabinet Office minister.

And her is the letter to the PM about Tulip Siddiq from Sir Laurie Magnus, the PM’s ethics adviser (or independent adviser on ministerial standards, to use the more formal title.).

Referring to the controversy about the fact that Siddiq has benefited from a series of properties paid for by people linked to her aunt, Sheikh Hasina, who was prime minister of Bangladesh but who was deposed last year and is now facing charges of corruption and crimes against humanity, Magnus says:

Ms Siddiq acknowledges that, over an extended period, she was unaware of the origins of her ownership of her flat in Kings Cross, despite having signed a land registry transfer form relating to the gift at the time. Ms Siddiq remained under the impression that her parents had given the flat to her, having purchased it from the previous owner. Ms Siddiq recognises that, as a result of this, the public were inadvertently misled about the identity of the donor of this gift in her replies to queries in 2022. This was an unfortunate misunderstanding which led to Ms Siddiq’s public correction of the origins of her ownership after she became a minister.

Magnus says that, although he does not think she has broken the ministerial code, he thinks it is “regrettable” that she was not more alert to the “reputational risks” of her family links with the former government of Bangladesh which has been accused of corruption.

Given the nature of Ms Siddiq’s ministerial responsibilities, which include the promotion of the UK financial services sector and the inherent probity of its regulatory framework as a core component of the UK economy and its growth, it is regrettable that she was not more alert to the potential reputational risks - both to her and the government - arising from her close family’s association with Bangladesh. I would not advise that this shortcoming should be taken as a breach of the ministerial code, but you will want to consider her ongoing responsibilities in the light of this.

Tulip Siddiq, the Treasury minister, has resigned.

She says Laurie Magnus, the PM’s ethics adviser, has said she has not broken the ministerial code. But she is going because if she were to stay she would be a “distraction” to the government.

Here is the letter she has sent to the PM.

Labour claims renters could be spared having to pay up to £8,000 in upfront rent to secure a property as a result of new government amendments to the renters’ rights bill.

MPs are debating the final Commons stages of the bill this afternoon, and the government is beefing it up to include provisions that ban landlords from demanding excessive upfront payments when letting out property.

Addressing MPs, Matthew Pennycook, the housing minister, said the changes would “prevent unscrupulous landlords from using rent in advance to either set tenants against each other in de facto bidding wars, or exclude altogether certain types of renters who are otherwise perfectly able to afford the monthly rent on a property”.

He said:

Tenants find and view a property that as advertised matches their budget only to find that on application, they’re suddenly asked to pay several months’ rent upfront to secure it. Tenants in such circumstances almost always confront an impossible choice.

Do they find a way to make a large rent in advance payment, thereby potentially stretching their finances to breaking point? Or do they walk away and potentially risk homelessness if they are unable to find an alternative?

In a briefing note explaining why this could save some renters having to pay up to £8,000 upfront, Labour said:

Currently, there is no limit to how many months’ rent landlords can require tenants to pay upfront to secure a property. This loophole, coupled with high demand for rental properties, has resulted in some landlords asking tenants to pay extortionate sums of money upfront – in the form of several months’ rent – before securing a tenancy.

Deposit protection scheme data shows that, between May and December last year, one in eight surveyed landlords had asked for between four and six months’ rent upfront at one of their properties. Labour analysis of Rightmove and HomeLet data shows that for the average rental property this is the equivalent of between £5,500 and £8,400, excluding security deposits.

Russell Findlay, the Scottish Conservative leader, has refused to rule out his party doing a deal with Reform UK if Nigel Farage’s party wins seats in next year’s Holyrood election.

A series of opinion polls suggest Reform UK is eating away at the Scottish Tory vote, echoing its surge in England and Wales, and is polling as high as 15% against 13% for the Conservatives.

Those numbers suggest that under Holyrood’s proportional electoral system, Reform UK could win seats, very likely at Scottish Tory expense. The Tories are currently the second largest party but could then end up third behind Scottish Labour next year.

Findlay was asked by a Herald reporter whether he would consider working with Reform UK to block the Scottish National party from resuming power – a scenario the current polls show could only happen if Labour took part.

Findlay claimed that was a hypothetical, but noticeably did not deny it might happen. He said:

In terms of the hypothetical of how things may look in May 2026, I can’t really answer that. My job entirely is to return as many Scottish Conservative MSPs to Holyrood as possible […] it’s far too soon to start talking about what things might look like.

Quizzed several times about how he combated Reform UK, Russell, a former crime reporter with less than four years’ experience as an MSP, said the Tories could only neutralise them.

By doing our job and doing it well and being loud and proud and out there. We cannot account for the activities of others, and my job is to have the trust of people, to rebuild that trust and show people that we get it.

Asked by the Times about another Tory MSP’s view that Reform represented a “dark energy”, Findlay said so much was unknown about them in Scotland.

One thing that I think we all see is that this party plays by different rules, and there’s different standards applied to it. We don’t know what they represent, specifically in Scotland, we don’t know any of their people … some of them believe in breaking up the United Kingdom, which is at odds with our supporters position.

So it’ll be curious to see how they evolve.

The Green party has also sent a letter to Rachel Reeves. It’s from Carla Denyer, the party’s co-leader, and she says she is alarmed by suggestions the government might impose further cuts in response to the rise in borrowing costs. This would put “untenable presure on public services already stretched to breaking point”.

She says the government should introduce a wealth tax instead. Citing research by the group Patriotic Millionaires (super-rich people willing to pay more tax), Denyer says a 2% wealth tax on assets over £10m could raise up to £24bn a year.

I’ve written to @RachelReevesMP about the financial struggles facing councils across the country & the impossible choices they’re having to make. Public services have been cut to the bone & we’re all feeling the impact. We need to see a wealth tax, not further cuts.

Rachel Reeves criticised Mel Stride in the Commons earlier for not having any questions in his response to her statement on her visit to China. (See 1.21pm.)

But it turns out one member of the shadow cabinet does have lots of questions for Reeves about the trip. Pritel Patel, the shadow foreign secretary, has just posed an open letter on social media with 13 questions, many of which would have been challenging for Reeves if someone had raised them in the Commons.

Patel accuses Reeves of a “failure to take the robust approach needed towards China”.

Although the letter is crafted as criticism of Reeves, it could also be read as a rebuke to Stride (who beat Patel in the first round of the Tory leadership contest, pushing her into last place). It is hard to read this and conclude that Patel was impressed by Stride’s performance in the Commons this afternoon.

Dave Doogan (SNP) asked Reeves what she would do when she failed to meet her fiscal rules: “increase borrowing, raise taxes or cut spending – not over five years, this year?”

Reeves replied:

I’ve been really clear. We will meet our fiscal rules that I set out in the budget, and we will do that at all times.

Faisal Islam, the BBC’s economics editor, thinks the best line from the statement is Rachel Reeves comment about the need for the government to go “further and faster” in its drive to kickstart growth. (See 1.31pm.)

“Further and faster” appears to be the key line from the Chancellor on the Government’s plans for growth - which would point to a fleshing out of infrastructure, trade and industrial strategies in short order

Luke Evans (Con) asked what Reeves was doing to do show the financial markets “she really does understand how to deliver growth in the UK”.

Reeves replied:

I do not believe that it is reasonable to suggest that the reason why bond yields in the United States, in Germany and France have risen is because of decisions now by this of government.

Reeves said Evans should “just get real”.

Stephen Flynn, the SNP leader at Westminster, asked if Reeves would rule out future spending cuts – unlike Keir Starmer, who refused to do this yesterday.

Reeves said she would not write her budgets for the next five years now. She went on:

But I am absolutely committed to meeting the fiscal rules that I set out in the budget in October, because we know what happens when governments lose control of the public finances, and that is they crash the economy.

Reeves started her response to Stride:

The shadow chancellor simply is simply not serious.

She said, after 14 years in opposition, she knew that a shadow minister was meant to ask questions in these circumstances. Stride did not, she pointed out.

And she said that Stride had no proposals of his own.

We heard a lot from [Stride] about what he wouldn’t do, but we have heard absolutely nothing about what he would do. You can now see what happens when the leader of the opposition tells the shadow cabinet they shouldn’t have any policies, because as far as I can tell, the Conservative party’s economic strategy is to say that the UK should not engage with the second largest economy in the world, or indeed within our nearest neighbours and our biggest trading partners in the European Union.

She said Liz Truss’s mini-budget crashed the economy – and joked about the risk of Truss sending a cease and desist letter.

From her meetings with business leaders, she said she was “under no illusion about the scale that we face after 14 years of stagnant economic growth, higher debt and economic uncertainty”.

And she said “global economic uncertainty” had had an impact last week.

But leadership is not about ducking these challenges, it is about rising to them. The economic headwinds that we face are a reminder that we should, indeed we must, go further and faster in our plan to kickstart economic growth.

Mel Stride, the shadow chancellor, started by saying it was good to see Reeves in the Commons – referring to her not being present on Thursday for an urgent question on borrowing costs.

He went on:

I know that the chancellor has been away, so let me update her on the mess that she left behind.

The pound has hit a 14-month low. Government borrowing costs are at a 27-year high. Growth has been killed, stone dead. Inflation is rising, impacting millions. Interest rates are staying higher for longer, and business confidence has fallen through the floor.

The party opposite talked down the economy. They crippled businesses with colossal taxes, breaking all their promises. This is a crisis made in Downing Street. It should hardly surprised the chancellor that international markets are uneasy. The UK’s long term borrowing costs have risen to their highest in almost 30 years.

Stride again criticised Reeves for missing the UQ last Thursday. At that point she had not left the country, so she could have attended, he said.

He then accused her of “scampering halfway around the world with a begging bowl”.

And he said the deals she agreed in China were only worth £120m a year.

The rise in our borrowing costs due to her disastrous budget has added around £12bn pounds to our annual spending on debt. Interest alone – literally 100 times what she says she has brought back from Beijing, That is money that cannot now go on the public’s priorities £12bn is enough to pay for 300,000 nurses, to cover Labour’s pernicious winter fuel payments come for eight and a half years.

Stride went on:

We have seen it all before, socialist governments, socialist governments that think they can tax and spend their way to prosperity, labor governments that simply do not understand that if you tax the living daylights out of business, you will get stagnation.

And he ended by claiming that Reeves’ story was like a Shakespearean tragedy, implying Reeves should be sacked.

To go or not to go. That is now a question. The prime minister will be damned if he does, but he will surely be damned if he does not. The British people deserve better.

UPDATE: Stride said:

We have seen it all before. Socialist governments, that think they can tax and spend their way to prosperity, Labour governments that simply do not understand that if you tax the living daylights out of business, you will get stagnation.

They do not understand, because there is barely a shred of business experience on the frontbench opposite.

This whole sorry tale is nothing short of a Shakespearean tragedy, playing out before our eyes. This is the Hamlet of our time. They promised the electorate much, while pouring the poison into their ear.

At the end, you can feel the end, the chancellor flailing, estranged, it seems, from those closest to her, those about her falling, the drums beating ever closer.

To go or not to go? That is now a question. The prime minister will be damned if he does, but he will surely be damned if he does not. The British people deserve better.

Rachel Reeves is making her statement to the Commons now.

She is flanked by Darren Jones, the chief secretary to the Treasury, and Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary.

She says she focused on improving market accesss for UK firms to China.

At the Downing Street lobby briefing the PM’s spokesperson was asked about Kemi Badenoch’s decision to say that some of those involved in grooming gang crimes were from a “peasant background”. Keir Starmer would not say that, the spokesperson said.

It’s not language he’s used, or indeed, I’d envisage him using.

Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves both spoke about the state of the economy at cabinet this morning, according to No 10. Here is an extract from the Downing Street cabinet readout.

The prime minister then moved on to the economy, reiterating that growth must continue to be embedded and prioritised across all policy-making, with a relentless focus on clearing any barriers or blockages, and that this was underpinned by this government’s approach to deliver economic stability and deal with the inheritance left by the last government.

The chancellor then provided an update on the global and UK economy, and her visit to China which secured new benefits for the UK – for example moving in line with the United States on banking licences where their approach to engage with China had seen tangible benefits to US companies. She reiterated that the government would continue to take an approach that was relentless in supporting growth and cracking down on waste and inefficiency.

Starmer also spoke to cabinet colleagues about relations with Donald Trump’s administration, which will take office next week. He said the UK wanted a relationship “based on pragmatism led by the national interest”.

The prime minister spoke of his determination to pursue a partnership with the US for the 21st century, which would protect security, advance our economic growth and leverage the opportunity of new technologies. He outlined engagement with the US transition team to date and said the government’s approach would be based on pragmatism led by the national interest.

Stephen Doughty, a Foreign Office minister, has told MPs that the future of Greenland is a matter for the people who live there. And he said that he made this clear in a meeting with Greenland’s foreign minister.

But he did not explicitly criticise Donald Trump for threatening to use military force to seize the island for the US.

Speaking during Foreign Office questions, Doughty said:

Greenland is part of the Kingdom of Denmark and the future of their constitutional arrangements is a matter for the people and government of Greenland and indeed the Kingdom of Denmark. It would be wrong to speculate on any policy decisions the incoming administration of President-elect Trump may make.

Those are messages I delivered in a meeting with the Greenlandic foreign minister yesterday, but there are rightly important concerns about security in the Arctic, which is why I was proud to be one of the first British ministers in 10 years to attend the Arctic Circle Assembly and meet partners to discuss these issues just a few months ago.

Doughty was responding to a question from the Lib Dem MP Richard Foord who said that “Nato is stronger when all of its members stand against territorial acquisition” and that the government should remind Trump of this when he pronounces on how he would like to expand the United States’s sphere of influence”.

David Lammy, the foreign secretary, is currently taking questions in the Commons. When he finishes at 12.30pm, a justice minister will respond to an urgent question from Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, about the use of drones to deliver weapons into prisons.

After that, at around 1.15pm, Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, will give a statement to MPs about the '“UK-China economic and financial dialogue”.

The Departmen for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs’ food chief has told farmers they should be making products such as crisps or flavoured gins on their farms rather than outsourcing their production.

Farmers have been furiously protesting against the government after it introduced an inheritance tax on their assets, which they argue would cause their families to have to sell up because the value of their land dwarfs the meagre returns made from selling food. Research has found that farmers get less than 1p for every loaf of bread or block of cheese sold in the supermarket, and farmers tend to make a 0.5%-1% annual return, with an average £30,000 income.

Labour last week announced a plan for farming which they say will make farms more profitable and therefore less in need of specialised tax schemes.

Emily Miles, director general of food at Defra, was telling the Efra committee this morning how this could work, suggesting farmers could both grow the botanicals to flavour gin on farm while making their own specialised alcoholic beverages.

She said:

If the objective in terms of diversifying farm income is to bring parts of the supply chain on to farm, so you’re not just producing the primary product, so potentially doing some processing or marketing as well.

If you’re producing potatoes, you’re then able to turn it into crisps, or you could be producing flavoured gin or whatever.

Miles added farmers could be working on “turning potatoes in a field into a crisp business”.

Asked by committee chair Alistair Carmichael whether such schemes would benefit the poorest upland farmers, she said “it varies by farm, doesn’t it, about what the opportunities could be” and suggested planning changes could allow “the assets on the farm to be used in a different way”.

Schools, the NHS and local councils will be banned from making ransomware payments under government proposals to tackle hackers, Dan Milmo reports.

The Home Office has details of its plan in a news release.

In interviews this morning, Dan Jarvis, the security minister, said the public sector had paid out “significant” sums in recent years to hackers. Asked how much, he told Times Radio: “Millions of pounds have been paid. It’s a huge problem internationally.”

Asked how much the NHS had paid, Jarvis replied:

The truth of the matter is we don’t know the precise figures, because there isn’t a mandatory reporting regime.

Asked if that meant that a trust could have paid out thousands of pounds to criminals to get its computers back without the Government knowing about it, he said: “

In theory, that is the case, and that’s why we’re looking to change the law to bring in a mandatory reporting regime so we’ve got much more visibility of these kind of activities.

But fundamentally, this is about putting measures in place that will ensure that we are much less vulnerable to these attacks in the future.

Commenting on Kemi Badenoch’s latest comments about grooming gangs (see 9.39am), Diane Abbott, the Labour MP and former shadow home secretary, has accused her of “gross opportunism”.

Gross opportunism by Kemi Badenoch. Claiming concern about grooming gangs now. But as shadow Minister for Women she never mentioned the issue in Parliament once.

You might think that Kemi Badenoch’s latest comments on the grooming gangs scandal (see 9.39am) sound a bit more Lee Anderson than Rishi Sunak, David Cameron or any other mainstream Conservative party leader. You would be right.

One explanation (often the best explanation in politics) is that Badenoch is just saying what she thinks.

But the Conservative party is spooked by the rise of Reform UK and new polling out today shows that it should be. YouGov has resumed polling for the Times for the first time since the general election and it shows Reform UK ahead of the Tories by three points. Labour has a one point lead over Reform.

The poll suggests Labour is losing voters in all directions. “Labour has lost 7% of its 2024 voters to the Lib Dems, 6% to the Greens, 5% to Reform UK and 4% to the Tories, while a further 17% say they don’t know who they would vote for currently,” YouGov says.

But the Conservatives are not picking up votes from Reform in significant numbers, the polling suggests. In fact, the traffic seems to be going largely the other way, YouGov says:

While Badenoch may have hoped that her positioning would bring Reform UK defectors back into the fold, our results show that just 4% of those who voted for Reform UK at the 2024 general election now plan to vote for the Conservatives – while at the same time the Tories have lost 15% of their 2024 voters to Farage’s party.

The poll also suggests Reform has a huge lead over the Tories with voters under the age of 25.

Kemi Badenoch has said “peasants” from “sub-communities” from some countries are the ones in grooming and rape gangs, saying a national inquiry would seek to identify those in authority who did not act. Jessica Elgot has the story.

Good morning. Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, is back from her trip to China and, according to Politico, she will make a statement in the Commons. This will allow her to address the criticism she has been facing about the rise in government borrowing costs, and what this means for her spending plans. Reading some of the Tory papers this morning you would think she is on the point of being sacked. This is more partisan wishful-thinking than objective truth-telling, but Reeves is is definitely in some difficulty, because she promised growth and events are not going as planned.

As Pippa Crerar and Jessica Elgot report, with the rise in borrowing costs putting the government at risk of breaking its fiscal rules, the Treasury is looking at potential cuts to balance the books.

Yesterday all the flak coming at Reeves was coming from the right. But the Labour left have not entirely disappeared, and this morning John McDonnell, shadow chancellor under Jeremy Corbyn, was on the Today programme saying further cuts would be “suicidal”.

McDonnell, who is technically an independent MP at the moment because he had the whip withdrawn last year after voting with the SNP and against the government to get rid of the two-child benefit cap, told Today:

There is obviously a problem. There’s turbulence in the international markets, and we’ve just got to see those through.

And the way you do that is – you don’t turn to cuts, certainly, because not only will that … be politically suicidal, that would undermine the political support upon which Labour got elected.

But in addition to that, you would be taking demand out of the economy, and you would be looking at turning a crisis into a recession.

So I think you just have to see through the turbulence sets in the markets.

McDonnell said that, although market opinion mattered, the views of voters were more important.

There are two groups of people who make judgments on an incoming government. One is the international markets, the money markets, of course.

But actually the most important people are the electorate and I think what has to happen here is the electorate have to be protected.

Otherwise, I’m afraid, we’re looking at a level of disillusionment which then turns people towards, unfortunately, Reform. And I think that would be a disaster for the country. So it is important now to look at what the electoral response would be to another round of cuts.

McDonnell said he thought Labour’s problems went back to its failure to have an “open debate” about the state of the economy before the election. He said it was a mistake to rule out putting up income tax or corporation tax. Asked what Reeves should be doing now, he said Reeves should accept the need for a wealth tax.

You should tax the grotesque inequality that we have within our society – 16 million living in poverty, and yet at the same time, we’ve now created in our society 165 billionaires. And on the last calculation I saw, in the two years from 2020 to 2022, they made an additional £150bn of wealth. I think you have to look at redistribution.

McDonnell said this would be in line with the principles Keir Starmer set out when he talked about the need for those with the broadest shoulders to bear the biggest burden.

We can be fairly sure that Reeves will not be adopting this advice when she speaks to the Commons later.

Here is the agenda for the day.

9.30am: Keir Starmer chairs cabinet.

11am: Russell Findlay, the Scottish Conservative leader, gives a speech.

11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.

11.30am: David Lammy, the foreign secretary, takes questions in the Commons.

Morning: Starmer holds a meeting with the Iraqi PM, Mohammed Shia al-Sudani.

12.30pm: Lucy Powell, the leader of the Commmons, gives evidence to the Commons standards committee about the rules for MPs having second jobs.

After 12.30pm: Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, is expected to make a Commons statement about her visit to China.

Afternoon: MPs debate the final stages of the renters’ rights act before it goes to the Lords.

If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.

If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary.

I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.