The Sunday Telegraph welcomes moves by the government to make it easier to dismiss civil servants if they are not performing well.

The paper’s opinion column points out that the civil service’s headcount has been allowed to swell “beyond reason”.

But it argues that the measures need to go a lot further.

The Telegraph thinks ministers should possess the same powers over their departments as chief executives have over their companies – “dismissing the incompetent and ensuring that their orders are carried out”.

The lead in the Sunday Times is: “Pro-Palestine activists target defence firms.” It suggests that members of the group Palestine Action have carried out attacks on what it describes as the UK’s “most strategically important defence contractors” including BAE Systems and Lockheed Martin.

It states that activists have ram-raided factories, cut internet cables and smashed up workshops and offices. Palestine Action is quoted saying: “The primary goal of our campaign is to rid Britain of Israeli weapons factories.”

“Britons among hardest hit by Covid five years on” is the headline for the Observer.

It explains that – as events are held to mark the anniversary of the start of the pandemic – there is evidence that the UK is struggling more than other nations to recover.

The paper has analysed international data, and concludes that Britain is facing “larger drops in life expectancy, more people too sick to work, huge levels of homelessness and soaring mental health problems among young people”.

There is anger on the front of the Sunday Express about the reported £6.6bn cost of asylum seeker and refugee support schemes in the UK.

The paper is horrified that some of the money has apparently been spent on activities including trips to the zoo, tennis lessons and even a visit to the Emirates football stadium in London.

The Home Office is quoted saying it has introduced “new controls” to minimise unnecessary spending.

The Sunday Mirror leads on plans by ministers to crack down on “thugs who terrorise communities”.

It says Labour’s “war on yobs” will involve a new law to be voted on by MPs this week.

This could give police, councils and other public bodies the power to ban persistent offenders from areas where they have “caused misery”.

Breaching an order could result in up to two years in jail. The paper’s leader calls it “the first step towards safe and secure neighbourhoods in which everyone can thrive”.

“Sex cells” is the headline for the Sunday People – with the cells in question being in jails. It reports that the number of female prison staff who have been sacked for having sex with inmates has “trebled in recent years”.

According to the paper, government figures indicate that forty women have been fired in such cases in the past four years.

And finally, the Mail on Sunday tries to quell fears which it says have been expressed by James Bond fans, about what Amazon’s takeover of the 007 franchise could mean for its central character. It says a source at the American company has confirmed that “certain things” are “sacrosanct”. We are told that the next Bond will be a man, and will be “British or from the Commonwealth”.

Labour ministers have yet to hold talks with key figures involved in unlocking the £2.5bn promised for Ukraine after Roman Abramovich’s sale of Chelsea football club.

Abramovich sold Chelsea in 2022, after he was sanctioned by the UK government over Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

The £2.5bn raised was meant to be used for humanitarian causes linked to the Ukraine war but it remains frozen in a UK bank account.

Labour ministers are coming under increasing pressure to meet Abramovich’s representatives or the members of the foundation that was set up to manage the funds.

The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) told the BBC its officials are in talks with Abramovich’s representatives.

But multiple sources said there have been no meetings between any Labour ministers and members of the foundation set up to oversee the funds since the general election last year.

Sources close to the foundation said there was a deadlock and a political decision by a minister is needed to negotiate and sign off an agreement that can break the impasse.

One source said: “For three years, the government has been saying it’s been working very hard to release the money. But they are not having meetings with the foundation. There has been no meeting with a minister since Labour took over, for example.”

The BBC understands the FCDO has acknowledged a request for a meeting between the foundation’s board and Foreign Secretary David Lammy.

Abramovich’s representatives did not wish to comment, but those with knowledge of the situation acknowledged little contact or progress had been made on releasing the funds under the four prime ministers to have held power since the sale of the club.

The issue has taken on new urgency after Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer announced that part of the UK’s overseas aid budget was being diverted to defence. In 2024/25, the UK is sending £282m in aid to Ukraine.

The £2.5bn – and the interest accrued on the funds – would make up for some of money taken from the aid budget, which was £15.3bn in 2023.

Alison Griffin, of charity Save the Children, said: “This money has been sitting gathering dust – and interest – when it could and should have been spent helping the children of Ukraine cope with the horrors of a full-scale war that has lasted over three years.”

The delay in releasing the funds centres on a disagreement between the UK government and Abramovich’s lawyers.

Abramovich was granted a special licence to sell Chelsea, providing he could prove he would not benefit from the sale.

At the time, Abramovich said proceeds from the sale would be donated via a foundation “for the benefit of all victims of the war in Ukraine”, and his position has not changed.

Abramovich – a Russian billionaire who made his fortune in oil and gas – cannot access the £2.5bn under UK sanctions but the money still legally belongs to him.

He is alleged to have strong ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin, something he has denied.

Sources said Abramovich’s lawyers have insisted on using the money for all victims of the war in Ukraine including those outside the country, but the UK government has pushed back and argued the funds should only be spent on humanitarian efforts inside the war-torn country.

Portugal has also had a say in the matter because Abramovich has Portuguese citizenship and has been sanctioned by the EU.

The Portuguese authorities issued an exemption to the EU sanctions to allow the Chelsea funds to be used for “exclusively for humanitarian purposes in Ukraine”.

“The EU and the UK have worked closely together to ensure that the proceeds of this sale be used for humanitarian purposes in Ukraine, via a charitable organisation, in line with the conditions laid out in the derogation,” said Olof Gill, a Commission spokesperson for financial services.

“The conditions under which the sale was authorised by the Portuguese authorities and which was accepted by the UK authorities must be respected and cannot be changed retroactively.

“The humanitarian needs in Ukraine remain extremely high.”

Members of the foundation, which is headed by Mike Penrose, the former boss of Unicef UK and Norwegian diplomat Jan Egeland, met former Foreign Secretary David Cameron and his deputy Andrew Mitchell in the spring last year.

Those with knowledge of the situation said the outcome of the meeting left a positive impression that the stalemate could be ended by allowing some of the funds to be used on humanitarian causes outside Ukraine.

The BBC understands the former foreign secretary believed a workable solution was in progress and a statement of intent about how the funds would be used was being drawn up by the foundation.

Lord Cameron had spoken to the European Commission about the proposal and had sought buy-in from Downing Street to sign off the agreement.

But there was no resolution to the dispute before last year’s general election and there have been no meetings with any ministers since Labour took office.

The foundation has a plan ready to roll out immediately once the funds have been unlocked.

There have been talks about programmes to help orphans of Ukrainian soldiers and cover health, housing and education needs for those fleeing the war.

A report by a House of Lords committee last year said the government’s failure to release the funds to support Ukraine was “incomprehensible”.

This week, The Guardian reported ministers were preparing to take Abramovich to court to free up the money.

Meanwhile, western countries are using the interest on frozen Russian assets to help Ukraine and there is talk of seizing them.

An FCDO spokesperson said: “This government is working hard to ensure the proceeds from the sale of Chelsea FC reach humanitarian causes in Ukraine as quickly as possible.

“The proceeds are currently frozen in a UK bank account while a new independent foundation is established to manage and distribute the money.

“UK officials continue to hold discussions with Mr Abramovich’s representatives, experts and international partners, and we will double down on our efforts to reach a resolution.”

All his adult life, Colonel Soren Knudsen stepped forward when his country called. And when its allies did.

He fought alongside US troops, notably in Afghanistan, and for a time was Denmark’s most senior officer there. He counted 58 rocket attacks during his duty.

“I was awarded a Bronze Star Medal by the United States and they gave me the Stars and Stripes. They have been hanging on my wall in our house ever since and I have proudly shown them to everybody.”

Then something changed.

“After JD Vance’s statement on Greenland, the president’s disrespect for internationally acknowledged borders, I took those that Stars and Stripes down and the medal has been put away,” Soren says, his voice breaking a little.

This week before Congress, the US president doubled down on his desire to seize the world’s biggest island: Greenland, an autonomous territory of the Kingdom of Denmark.

“My first feeling was that it hurts, and the second is that I’m offended,” Col Knudsen laments.

I meet him in the first weeks of his retirement outside Denmark’s 18th Century royal residence, Amalienborg Palace in the heart of Copenhagen.

Abruptly, pipers strike up and soldiers stream by.

Today’s Changing of the Guard comes at a time when the Trump administration has not just tweaked but defenestrated most assumptions around US-European security that have held fast for 80 years.

“It’s about values and when those values are axed by what we thought was an ally, it gets very tough to watch.” Soren says with his American wife Gina at his side.

“Denmark freely and without question joined those efforts where my husband served,” she says.

“So it comes as a shock to hear threats from a country that I also love and to feel that alliance is being trampled on. This feels personal, not like some abstract foreign policy tactic.”

Soren has not given up all hope though.

“It’s my hope and my prayer that I will one day be able to put [the flag] back on the wall”, he confides.

There’s no sign his prayers will be answered soon.

Greenland, an autonomous territory of the Kingdom of Denmark, goes to the polls next week with all the main parties backing independence at some point in the future.

A takeover by Donald Trump – potentially by force – is not on the ballot paper.

Not far from the royal palace stands Denmark’s memorial to its soldiers lost in recent battle.

Carved on the stone-covered walls are the names of those killed alongside their Western allies.

The section honouring the fallen in the US-led invasion of Afghanistan is particularly sizeable.

Denmark lost 44 soldiers in Afghanistan, which as a proportion of its less than six million population, was more than any other ally apart from the US. In Iraq, eight Danish soldiers died.

This is why the president’s words sting so much.

One man very well placed to consider what Trump’s ambitions for Greenland actually amount to is Anders Fogh Rasmussen.

“President Trump’s declaration of intention to maybe take Greenland by force is very similar to President Putin’s rhetoric when it comes to Ukraine,” he tells the BBC.

The former prime minister of Denmark and ex-secretary general of the Nato alliance argues this is the moment Denmark and the rest of Europe must step up to better protect itself if the US is not willing to.

“Since my childhood, I have admired the United States and their role as the world’s policeman. And I think we need a policeman to ensure international law and order but if the United States does not want to execute that role, then Europe must be able to defend itself, to stand on its own feet.”

Fogh Rasmussen doesn’t though believe the policeman is about to turn felon.

“I would like to stress I don’t think at the end of the day that the Americans will take Greenland by force.”

President Trump first talked about a Greenland takeover in his first term of office before returning to the theme at the start of this year.

But now, after blindsiding supposed allies with his latest moves on Ukraine, tariffs, as well as the Middle East, Denmark is urgently trying the assess the true threat.

For many younger Danes, control of Greenland is plain wrong – an unfathomable colonial hangover.

It doesn’t mean they want it handed straight over the US instead.

“We do have connections to Greenland,” says music student Molly. “Denmark and Greenland are quite separated I would say but I still have friends from there so this does affect me quite personally.”

“I find it really scary,” says 18-year-old music student Luukas.

“Everything he sees, he goes after. And the thing with the oil and money, he doesn’t care about the climate, he doesn’t care about anyone or anything.”

His friend Clara chips in that Trump is now so powerful he can “affect their day-to-day life” from thousands of miles away, in what is an era of unprecedented jeopardy.

In light of President Trump’s suspension of military aid for Ukraine and his deep reluctance to fund Europe’s security, Denmark has been at the heart of the drive to boost defence spending across the continent.

The country has just announced it will allocate more than 3% of its GDP to defence spending in 2025 and 2026 to protect against future aggression from Russia or elsewhere.

Meanwhile, security analyst Hans Tino Hansen stands in front of a huge screen in what he calls his “ops room”, at his Copenhagen headquarters.

“This map is where we update on a daily basis our threat picture based on alerts and incidents all over the world,” says Hans, who has been running Risk Intelligence for the past 25 years.

As part of Denmark’s increased defence spending, it’s bolstering its strength in the “High North” with an extra two billion euros announced in January and three new Arctic naval vessels and investment in long-range drones.

Hans believes Arctic security can be tightened further, not by an American takeover – but with new deals that restore US influence.

“If you make more agreements, both on defence and security, but also economic ones and on raw materials, then we are more or less going back to where we were in the 50s and 60s.”

But the story stretches further back than the mid-20th Century.

“If you look at this globe, Greenland is the most centrally located place on Earth,” says world-renowned geologist Prof Minik Rosing, gesticulating in his wood-panelled office.

The serenity of his room reflects the temperament of a man who grew up in a settlement of just “seven or eight people” in the Nuuk fjord of the island.

But a key reason his homeland is now coming under increasing scrutiny from outsiders is the rich mineral deposits beneath the Arctic ice.

We’ve seen how Ukraine’s natural resources have caught President Trump’s eye in much the same way.

“All these minerals that they talk about like rare metals, rare earth elements – they are actually not rare. What is rare is the use of them,” he reasons.

Prof Rosing says the vastness of Greenland and the lack of infrastructure are just two elements why the island may not be the cashpoint some Americans are hoping for.

“They are a minuscule part of the mining industry and the economy of extracting them is very uncertain, whereas the investment to start extracting is very high. The risk of the investment is too high relative to the potential gain.”

The current Greenlandic government says there will be a vote on independence at some point following next week’s election.

Although surely unintentional, President Trump’s designs on the island have shone a light on a desire found among the Inuit to finally break free from 300 years of Danish control.

But Prof Rosing believes, despite all the latent mineral wealth, his fellow Greenlanders are in no hurry to forego the annual block grant of the equivalent of £480m (€570m) it receives from Copenhagen.

This accounts for easily more than half of the island’s public budget.

“People talk about health services, schools, the next outboard engine they want on their boat and what is the price of gas and all of these things that normal people do,” he says.

“It’s not like they stand up with a big knife, wave it in the air and shout independence, independence.”

In terms of Trump’s apparent obsession with taking Greenland, Fogh Rasmussen fears there may be a troubling conclusion to be drawn.

One that would render the Danes unable to do business with a man whose view on territorial integrity is so wildly incompatible from theirs.

“I understand very well the American strategic interest in the minerals, but when it comes to mining in Greenland, they have shown no interest,” he says.

“That leaves me with the concern that maybe it’s not about security, maybe it’s not about minerals, maybe it is just a question of expanding the territory of the United States.

“And that’s actually a point where we are not able to accommodate President Trump.”

Additional reporting by Kostas Kallergis