But instead of showcasing her singing, it shows a man approaching her repeatedly, coming closer and closer. He reaches out and touches her - wiping something wet on her arm.

"At first I thought it was coffee," she says. "But when I watched the video back - you can hear him saying 'that's my pee'. My jaw dropped. I was horrified."

It's hard to believe what she's showing me, but she says this kind of behaviour is "unfortunately standard for a woman doing this kind of work".

She has many more videos - of men touching her without her consent, or demanding hugs or kisses for the money they've given.

"I've gotten a lot better at dealing with it," she says. "When I was 21, 22, when I first started doing this, I would go home in tears.

"It's just so degrading. It makes you feel objectified. Like - is that all you think of me?"

Sarah Everard's murder in 2021 caused outrage across the country. There was an outpouring of anger as women shared their stories of feeling unsafe, threatened and sexualised on the streets.

At the time there were promises - assurances to women that things would have to change. But four years on, many women here in Merseyside say they have the same feelings they did then.

"Men are honestly shocked when we tell them 'we don't feel safe'," says Kate Chadwick, from the Wirral charity Tomorrow's Women. "Pretty much every woman has had some kind of experience."

I meet her at a regular lunch club they host - at their building where men are not allowed inside. It's intended as a safe space for their members, who they are helping through everything from domestic violence to sexual assault. There's a medical clinic here, beauty treatment rooms, a computer lab - all staffed by women.

Kate shows me the pocket rape alarm they give out to the women who come here. She hopes they never have to use it, but "it makes them feel safer just having it".

"As a woman, in the winter it's a hard time just to exist," Kate says. "Women don't feel safe coming out of their homes. Routines will change. They don't want to walk in certain places.

"One of our members gets two buses home because it's safer than waiting at a dark bus stop to just get the one."

They are about to launch a photography exhibition around stalking and harassment. For this, they gave their members a camera and asked them to submit photos that show their experience being a woman.

There are several photos of dimly lit streets, bus stops with no one else there. One photo is a fist holding a key through the knuckles - an image most women will recognise.

Another picture is of an outfit laid out on the floor - a T-shirt, denim skirt and tights. It's titled What Were They Wearing?

"This can often be the first question in a sexual assault case," Kate says. "It really doesn't matter what the woman was wearing."

"It's definitely not getting better," she says. "In 2024, violence against women and girls was declared a national emergency. The statistics you read every day are shocking."

Later that evening, back in Liverpool, we meet Girls on the Go - a running club started with the express purpose of allowing women to exercise safely in the winter. It's 5.15pm when we meet for the run, and already dark.

The women running here list a collection of similar experiences. They have been catcalled, yelled at from cars, even chased while out running alone.

Run leader Madeline Cole tells me that, as a women-only club, they have had to modify their warm-ups because "as soon as you bend over to touch your toes, or go into a squat, the shouting starts".

Founder Steph Barney says she started the club because it is still "intimidating running alone as woman".

"Far too many women experience harassment and catcalling - we wanted to create a group where women would feel safer doing it together" she says. "Even in the summer you get sexualised just for wearing shorts. You have to restrict what you do. None of my male friends have ever had to worry about that."

I ask if anything would help them feel safer when out on their runs. "Better street lighting is a really obvious one," she says. "And one of the issues is that it's still not taken seriously by society. When you're catcalled, it feels embarrassing to say 'this is scary'.

"If it was taken more seriously - more women would speak out. And more could be done."

Read more UK news:
OBR chief resigns after budget leak investigation
King officially strips Andrew of two more titles

The Angiolini Inquiry - which was established to investigate the circumstances surrounding Sarah Everard's murder - is due to publish its latest report later today.

It is examining whether there a risk of it happening again, police culture, and broader concerns surrounding women's safety in public spaces.

During a speech at the Guildhall in London, the prime minister said "wild promises" made to the British people ahead of the referendum have been unfulfilled.

"How it was sold and delivered was simply wrong," he added. "We are still dealing with the consequences today."

Sir Keir argued it would be "utterly reckless" to consider Brexit as a template for future foreign policy - and attacked politicians who have a "corrosive, inward-looking attitude".

He singled out Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage, who have both called for the UK to leave the European Convention on Human Rights - and Zack Polanski, who wants to leave NATO.

Such attitudes "offer grievance rather than hope", the PM said - accusing them of having "a declinist vision of a lesser Britain, not a Great Britain".

Although Sir Keir opposed Brexit when in Opposition, he stressed that the vote to leave "was a fair, democratic expression, and I will always respect that".

He told the Lady Mayor's Banquet that Labour has made "a decisive move to face outward again and build our power, both hard and soft, which had been so damaged and neglected".

'Protecting our security is non-negotiable'

Elsewhere in the speech, the prime minister warned the UK needs a policy towards China that recognises the national security threat it poses.

He said: "For years we have blown hot and cold. We had the 'Golden Age', which then flipped to an 'Ice Age'. We reject that binary choice.

"So our response will not be driven by fear, nor softened by illusion. It will be grounded in strength, clarity and sober realism."

China has been a major issue in Westminster of late following accusations of spying in parliament, and controversy over the new "super embassy" that Beijing wants to build in central London.

However, Sir Keir defended plans to visit China in the new year - and said an absence of engagement with the world's second-biggest economy would be "staggering" and a "dereliction of duty".

He described it as "a nation of immense scale, ambition, and ingenuity" and a "defining force in technology, trade and global governance".

'Huge' opportunities for businesses

Setting out his own approach, Sir Keir explained: "This is not a question of balancing economic and security considerations. We don't trade off security in one area, for a bit more economic access somewhere else.

"Protecting our security is non-negotiable - our first duty. But by taking tough steps to keep us secure, we enable ourselves to cooperate in other areas."

The PM added that he wants to give businesses "the confidence, clarity, and support" to win opportunities in China.

"In areas like financial and professional services, creative industries, pharmaceuticals, luxury goods and more - Great British success stories - the export opportunities are huge, and we will back you to seize them," he said.

'Starmer continues to kowtow to China'

Sky News understands the prime minister is set to approve plans for a controversial Chinese "super embassy" in central London.

A final decision on the planning application for the former Royal Mint site near the Tower of London is due on 10 December after repeated delays.

Concerns were previously raised after Beijing's planning application featured blacked-out areas.

Since he was elected last year, Sir Keir has been active on the world stage, trumpeting deals with the US, India, and the EU and leading the "coalition of the willing" in support of Ukraine.

But he has also faced criticism from his opponents, who accuse him of spending too much time out of the UK attending international summits rather than focusing on domestic issues.

Read more:
MI5 spying warning aims to send signal to China
'Many options' on table for Venezuela

Responding to the prime minister's speech, shadow foreign secretary Dame Priti Patel said: "From China's continued flouting of economic rules to transnational repression of Hong Kongers in Britain, Starmer's 'reset' with Beijing is a naive one-way street, which puts Britain at risk while Beijing gets everything it wants.

"Starmer continues to kowtow to China and is captivated by half-baked promises of trade.

"Coming just days after the latest Chinese plot to interfere in our democracy was exposed, his love letter to the Chinese Communist Party is a desperate ploy to generate economic growth following his budget of lies and is completely ill-judged.

"While China poses a clear threat to Britain, China continues to back Iran and Russia, and plots to undermine our institutions. Keir Starmer has become Beijing's useful idiot in Britain."

Age UK spoke to more than 2,600 people and found 11% will eat dinner alone on 25 December, while 5% will not see or speak to anyone the whole day.

Applied to the overall population, the findings suggest 1.5 million people will eat alone at Christmas, according to the charity.

Dame Joanna said the "silence can be deafening" for those left isolated and called it "a crisis hidden in plain sight".

The actor and campaigner is now joining other luminaries including Dame Judi Dench, Brian Cox and Miriam Margolyes to back Age UK's campaign against loneliness.

The charity says its volunteers made more than 70,000 minutes' worth of calls to people during Christmas week last year and is urging people to donate.

'A tragedy we don't talk about enough'

Age UK said it also supports coffee mornings and festive lunches to give lonely people the chance to enjoy in-person interaction.

Dame Judi said: "For so many older people, Christmas can be a time of silence - days without conversation or company."

Succession star Brian Cox called the issue "a tragedy we don't talk about enough".

He said: "Far too many older people are left spending the season in silence, when it should be a time of warmth, connection and joy."

Margolyes, of Harry Potter fame, added: "Growing older shouldn't mean disappearing into the background, we need to be seen, heard and celebrated.

"That's what Age UK is striving for - they're changing how we perceive age."

Read more:
What counts as a white Christmas?
CCTV shows festive thief

The charity's chief executive, Paul Farmer, said: "Your donation could bring comfort, friendship, and care to an older person facing loneliness this winter.

"From friendly, weekly calls to local lunch clubs, we're here to make sure no one spends winter alone. But we can't do it without you."

The Independent Office for Police Misconduct (IOPC) has been investigating South Yorkshire Police since 2012.

It is the largest independent investigation into alleged police misconduct and criminality ever carried out in England and Wales.

Hillsborough remains to this day the worst disaster in British sporting history.

How did we get here?

A crush on the terraces during the FA Cup semi-final at the stadium in Sheffield resulted in the death of 97 Liverpool fans - men, women, and children aged from 10 to 67.

Even as fans lay dying, police were claiming that Liverpool supporters, arriving in large numbers late, drunk and without tickets, caused the disaster. But after decades of campaigning, that narrative was debunked.

In April 2016, new inquests - held after the original verdicts of accidental death were quashed in 2012 - determined that those who died had been unlawfully killed.

The IOPC told victims' families in March that no officers would face misconduct proceedings because legislation in place at the time did not require police to have a duty of candour.

Dozens of allegations of misconduct against officers had been upheld, it said, but none would face disciplinary proceedings because they had all left the police service.

What has this probe looked at?

The IOPC investigation focused on amendments made in accounts of officers who were present at Hillsborough and allegations that misleading information was passed by the police to the media, MPs, parliament, and the inquiries set up immediately after the disaster.

It has also been looking into the role of West Midlands Police, which led the investigation into the disaster, and allegations that family members and campaigners were subject to surveillance by the police.

The IOPC has already confirmed that its investigation "aligned" with the findings of the Hillsborough Independent Panel investigation and the 2016 inquests.

It said: "We found no evidence to support police accounts to the media, the Taylor Inquiry and both sets of inquests, which suggested that the behaviour of supporters caused or in any way contributed to the disaster."

Read more from Sky News:
PM emotional talking about Hillsborough
Long-awaited Hillsborough Law introduced
Officer cleared of gross negligence manslaughter

In September, the government introduced the so-called Hillsborough Law to the House of Commons.

The legislation will include a duty of candour, forcing public officials to act with honesty and integrity at all times or face criminal sanctions.

It's a good question, and we'll come to it in a second, but let's begin with an even bigger one: is the prime minister continuing to mislead the public over the budget?

The details are a bit complex but ultimately this all comes back to a rather simple question: why did the government raise taxes in last week's budget?

To judge from the prime minister's responses at a news conference on Monday morning, you might have judged that the answer is: "because we had to".

"There was an OBR productivity review," he explained to one journalist. "The result of that was there was £16bn less than we might otherwise have had. That's a difficult starting point for any budget."

Time and time again throughout the news conference, he repeated the same point: the OBR had revised its forecasts for the UK economy and the upshot of that was that the government had a £16bn hole in its accounts. Keep that figure in your head for a bit, because it's not without significance.

But for the time being, let's take a step back and recall that budgets are mostly about the difference between two numbers: revenues and expenditure; tax and spending. This government has set itself a fiscal rule - that it needs, within a few years, to ensure that, after netting out investment, the tax bar needs to be higher than the spending bar.

At the time of the last budget, taxes were indeed higher than current spending, once the economic cycle is taken account of or, to put it in economists' language, there was a surplus in the cyclically adjusted current budget. The chancellor had met her fiscal rule, by £9.9bn.

Read more:
Main budget announcements - at a glance
Enter your salary to see how the budget affects you

This, it's worth saying, is not a very large margin by which to meet your fiscal rule. A typical budget can see revisions and changes that would swamp that in one fell swoop. And part of the explanation for why there has been so much speculation about tax rises over the summer is that the chancellor left herself so little "headroom" against the rule. And since everyone could see debt interest costs were going up, it seemed quite plausible that the government would have to raise taxes.

No news like bad news

Then, over the summer, the OBR, whose job it is to make the official government forecasts, and to mark its fiscal homework, told the government it was also doing something else: reviewing the state of Britain's productivity. This set alarm bells ringing in Downing Street - and understandably. The weaker productivity growth is, the less income we're all earning, and the less income we're earning, the less tax revenues there are going into the exchequer.

The early signs were that the productivity review would knock tens of billions of pounds off the chancellor's "headroom" - that it could, in one fell swoop, wipe off that £9.9bn and send it into the red.

That is why stories began to brew through the summer that the chancellor was considering raising taxes. The Treasury was preparing itself for some grisly news. But here's the interesting thing: when the bad news (that productivity review) did eventually arrive, it was far less grisly than expected.

True: the one-off productivity "hit" to the public finances was £16bn. But - and this is crucial - that was offset by a lot of other, much better news (at least from the exchequer's perspective). Higher wage inflation meant higher expected tax revenues, not to mention a host of other impacts. All told, when everything was totted up, the hit to the public finances wasn't £16bn but somewhere between £5bn and £6bn.

The real reason taxes went up

Why is that number significant? Because it's short of the chancellor's existing £9.9bn headroom. Or, to put it another way, the OBR's forecasting exercise was not enough to force her to raise taxes.

The decision to raise taxes, in other words, came down to something else. It came down to the fact that the government U-turned on a number of its welfare reforms over the summer. It came down to the fact that they wanted to axe the two-child benefits cap. And, on top of this, it came down to the fact that they wanted to raise their "headroom" against the fiscal rules from £9.9bn to over £20bn.

These are all perfectly logical reasons to raise tax - though some will disagree on their wisdom. But here's the key thing: they are the chancellor and prime minister's decisions. They are not knee-jerk responses to someone else's bad news.

Yet when the prime minister explained his budget decisions, he focused mostly on that OBR report. In fact, worse, he selectively quoted the £16bn number from the productivity review without acknowledging that it was only one part of the story. That seems pretty misleading to me.