Quangos tasked with deciding farmers' futures allowing staff to work from other side of the world
They are the bureaucrats charged with protecting Britain's natural environment and those who toil away on it.
Yet while hard-pressed farmers face an uncertain time thanks to Labour's inheritance tax plans, staff at three rural-focused quangos have been logging in to work from the other side of the world.
An investigation by the Daily Mail has discovered taxpayer-funded staff at Natural England, NatureScot and the Rural Payments Agency have worked from Asia, North America and even Australia.
Bosses at the three bodies – which employ about 6,000 staff and receive hundreds of millions of pounds of Government cash a year – have allowed employees to work abroad more than 300 times in the last three years, according to figures obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.
Staff were allowed to spend at least 1,174 days working abroad, although the total figure is expected to be much higher given NatureScot refused to provide the full information.
Natural England, which added £100million to the bill for HS2, building a bat tunnel because the creatures are protected, was involved in 150 approvals, totalling nearly 1,000 days.
This included 20 separate foreign stints each lasting at least ten days – the equivalent to two working weeks – with one staff member logging in for 15 days from Egypt.
One employee at the York-based organisation was allowed to work from Australia for seven days, while Natural England also allowed eight staff to spend at least ten days working from Slovenia.
Another was permitted to spend ten days in France, Belgium and Germany and someone spent nine days in Japan.
The largest period of working away for a member of Natural England staff was a 28-day stint in Ireland.
That was a drop in the ocean compared with the time a member of staff with the Rural Payments Agency, the body repeatedly castigated for the failure to pay farmers the subsidies they were owed on time.
The body has a number of UK regional offices. Its data showed a geospatial services team member, who is listed as a senior executive officer, spent from August 5 last year to January 3 this year in Germany, accounting for 66 working days.
Another spent 14 days in Sweden. NatureScot, based in Inverness, would only reveal there were 137 approvals granted in the last three years.
This included nine trips to the US, two to Canada and India, and a stint in Chile.
Alex Burghart, shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, said: 'One wonders how much work will get done on the beach.'
A Tory spokesman said: 'Those making peoples' lives a misery should at least live with the consequences rather than swan off to far-flung corners of the globe.'
A Natural England spokesman said: 'As the Government's adviser on the natural environment, we provide practical advice, grounded in science, on how best to protect and restore our natural world.
'On occasion, staff are required to work abroad for business reasons, including attending international conferences such as COP16.'
An RPA spokesman said: 'Staff are required to travel overseas for official government business – helping the RPA in its role to deliver a range of services to farming and rural businesses.'
This year, the Mail revealed a senior executive at crisis-hit Windsor council was working from Kyrgyzstan.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
The week that showed why voters are so angry with Britain's politicians
If you were to try and sum up the British state this week, you would be spoiled for choice. After a few days in which failure after failure came to light – from the damning review into the official response to grooming gangs to the slow-motion crash of the High Speed 2 project to the ability of pro-Palestine activists to damage RAF planes on an airfield unhindered – you might charitably opt for 'incompetent'. A better phrase would be 'head in the sand'. The failures in these cases, as with the inability of the Westminster system to respond to public demands on migration, rein in the out-of-control spending of the benefits system or perform its most fundamental function of providing security from criminals, all have different underlying causes. But at the core of each is a strange lassitude, a body politic that no longer responds to crises that seem startlingly obvious to voters, remaining instead locked in a spiral of internal obsessions, agonising over the idea that to confront gangs might trigger episodes of racism and continuing with projects that long ago failed any sane cost-benefit analysis. The result is a state that is less 'managed decline' than 'unmanaged collapse', with no obvious pressure valve in sight prior to the next election. One way or another, something will happen to force the British state to pull its head from the sand. The question is whether it happens in time to prevent an explosion. Or not. A week of failures In recent years it became popular to discuss the 'volatility' of the British electorate. People who had previously voted loyally for one party were suddenly up for grabs; votes swung wildly between parties, giving first one, then the other a crushing majority or unexpected defeat at the ballot box. It's true that one way of reading this pattern is to simply say that voters are less loyal to an ideal than they were in the past. Another interpretation, however, would be to view these as attempts by voters to find some way – any way – of shocking Westminster out of its default pathway. If there were any doubt remaining, the failures laid bare over the last week illustrate just how badly a course correction is needed. First, we had Baroness Casey's review into the grooming gangs scandal. This made for tough reading. It laid out how police officers had responded to children pleading for their help: 'sometimes turning a blind eye but often actively enabling abuse', and accused some of being 'incompetent at best' and 'corrupt at worst'. It showed how officials had attempted to dismiss the issue of ethnicity out of hand, uncomfortable with the implications for Britain's multicultural success story, terrified of 'community tensions'. It all but accused the Home Office of fabricating data to maintain there was no particular problem with men from Pakistani backgrounds. Worse still, in doing so it told us very little we didn't already know. We knew that officials were tacitly or actively complicit in what unfolded. We knew that they had effectively deemed it better for society if children were raped and government covered it up, than to risk 'tensions' by intervening. We knew that they had arrested parents who had tried to save their children. News reports and official reviews had laid this story bare for over a decade. Yet even with the failures visible to all, Westminster has proved utterly unwilling to look closely at the extent of offending across Britain, to learn the lessons necessary to fight ongoing abuse, and to deliver justice to those who were wronged. It was more important to protect what was left of the narrative of a diverse nation united than to look honestly at the consequences of previous waves of migration. This is still going on. Casey's review highlighted that 'a significant proportion' of the live police cases she examined involved foreign nationals and asylum seekers. Examining the extent of criminal activity by these groups is hard, given that the Government refuses regularly to publish data on the subject. But data from Freedom of Information requests has shown that a quarter of all sex assaults on women successfully prosecuted in Britain are carried out by foreign nationals, with another 8 per cent by offenders of 'unknown' nationalities. One response to this would be to publish this evidence, alongside data on fiscal contributions and benefits withdrawals, and use it to inform policy on migration. Yet for a political class that sees immigration less as a tool to reshape the country for the better and more as a necessity, the economic and cultural lifeblood of the nation, these are figures to be hidden away. Indeed, for those who see it as an axiomatic good with no need for supporting evidence, there is a moral imperative to crush opposition to it. Virtue comes not in addressing associated problems – the province of populists – but in being blind to them. High speed to nowhere And this scandal is only one manifestation of a deeper disease: Britain appears to be effectively incapable of changing course, locked into assumptions and decisions made decades ago. The unravelling of the High Speed 2 project is another prime example from the last week. The economic case for the project collapsed almost as soon as it was published. A project linking London, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds, originally set to cost £53 billion in today's money, grew out of all control, with costs spiralling past £120 billion before the sheer scale of the failure triggered the Conservative government's decision to slash the project down to a far less ambitious link between London and Birmingham. Even this, however, is set to cost £67 billion. A project that has been slashed in scope has still somehow risen in price. In the process, the cost-benefit ratio has crumbled. We can attribute some mistakes to naivety at the outset; beliefs about greater efficiencies, or the correct way to allocate risk between the government and contractors. But over the course of the project, even as costs rose, the value of the line somehow kept pace – until suddenly it didn't. The project is now delayed again, with inquiries underway into how the cost of infrastructure has grown so rapidly and the Cabinet Office facing accusations of ignoring concerns over fraud and financial mismanagement. The grooming of children and failed infrastructure projects are about as far away as it is possible to be in policy terms. The manner of the failures, though, is instructive: signals that something is going awry are getting scrambled, incentives for individuals to act are lacking. No-one capable is across the details and willing to speak out about failures. A failed state The list of policy failures in Britain is long. Some symptoms are directly visible in the state's activities. Take the sheer size of NHS waiting lists in a system that translated a 27 per cent cash increase in the budget from 2019 to 2022 into an absolute reduction in the number of people it treated. A 16 per cent rise in the number of full-time equivalent junior doctors alongside an 11 per cent increase in the number of nurses, has led to productivity levels 8 per cent below the 2019 baseline. We could also talk about the spiralling levels of debt, and the fiscal plans that have caused the Office for Budget Responsibility to warn that we are on an unsustainable course, or the benefits system which appears utterly unable to distinguish between the disabled and the workshy. Into this category, also, goes the shoplifting epidemic, the release of prisoners to make room in overcrowded jails, the inability of the state to combat actual crime paired with its obsession with policing speech in case stray thoughts ignite the riots politicians fear are permanently just around the corner. Other signs of failure are in the private sector, in inflation-adjusted wages that are still below their 2008 peak, in housing that remains stubbornly out of reach of those without substantial assistance from the bank of mum and dad. People in Western countries know what failed states look like. They look like Somalia, or South Sudan. The government's grip disintegrates, power fragments and society fragments with it. Basic services collapse and with it the safety of the population. But as the American economist Mancur Olson has pointed out, developed states have a different failure mode. They become too stable, insulated from political upheaval, bound up by interest groups that use their grasp on the institutions to strangle anything which might disrupt their position. Britain's failure mode looks a lot more like the second than the first. We might not be matching the fall of Rome for debauchery, but we are certainly doing our best with a particular form of decadent self-indulgence: from social capital to physical capital, our leaders are eating the seed-corn, running the country down without replacing what they take out. 'There's a bunch of obvious, relatively surface phenomena, like the NHS, or the stupid boats, that are the visible manifestations of things not working,' says Dominic Cummings, the former adviser to Boris Johnson, in an interview with The Telegraph that you can read in full on Sunday. 'But I think what's happening at a deeper level is we are living through the same cycle that you see repeatedly in history play out, which is that over a few generations, the institutions and ideas of the elites start to come out of whack with reality. 'The ideas don't match, the institutions can't cope. And what you see repeatedly is this cycle of elite blindness, the institutions crumbling – and then suddenly crisis kicks in and then institutions collapse.' The Blob For a useful short-hand, we can borrow the description of these elites which is often attributed to Cummings: 'the Blob' – an emergent phenomenon with no governing intelligence and no clear leaders, instead resulting from people from the same classes, with the same beliefs and the same incentives, taking the same decisions across public life. Where do the civil servants on the prestigious Fast Stream (a program to accelerate the careers of graduates coming into Whitehall) come from? From families who overwhelmingly had university-educated parents working in 'higher managerial, administrative and professional occupations', arriving in government after education at Oxbridge or other Russell Group universities where the consensus is stifling: one in five academics feel unable to teach controversial views. Given that one in five academics vote for Right-wing parties, and three quarters for the Left, it's not terribly hard to work out which views might count as controversial in this milieu. We might equally ask where Cabinet ministers, senior judges – and, yes, newspaper columnists – come from. The resulting gaps between the political classes and the public can be vast. Shortly after the 2019 election, one study concluded that Conservative MPs were not only more socially liberal than Conservative voters, but of the median for all voters, adopting positions not that far away from Labour's base. The result is that even when signals of voter discontent do cut through the noise surrounding Westminster, they are sometimes simply ignored. In 2010, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2019 the party or cause offering reductions in migration won. The electorate's reward for this was Boris Johnson's systematic dismantling of our borders, a quadrupling in net migration over its 2019 level to 906,000 per year. There's nothing wrong with having some merit in your meritocracy, but when people are drawn from the same backgrounds, they will tend to think in the same ways. In the political system, this manifests as a blindness to the idea that the values of politicians can drift from those held by voters, an unwillingness to deliver what the population want; self-centred governance by an establishment class propped up by its hold on the traditional party duopoly and the major institutional organs of British life. One manifestation of this group's beliefs is a form of pathological compassion driven by insulation from its effects: an unwillingness to jail prisoners, turn away illegal migrants or crack down on benefits cheats because to do so would be cruel. The end result of this 'kindness' is often to kill the system that provided for those who were genuinely in need. In toxic combination with these beliefs is a political structure that works actively to evade accountability, with decision-makers rarely facing serious consequences for their failures; so long as they follow process, scrutiny is generally evaded. The crisis of competence Alongside the problem of willingness is the problem of ability. Public fury with politicians is not helped at all by their willingness to make grandiose claims that they fail to live up to. In the words of political strategist James Frayne, 'politicians of all parties have created a toxic climate by assuring voters they can solve practically any problem regardless of size and complexity, while permanently under-delivering'. This has 'fuelled immense public cynicism because voters assume failure derives from incompetence and corruption – always moral corruption, sometimes even financial corruption. This cynicism has become one of the most defining and corrosive aspects of modern electoral politics. Voters increasingly think the worst of politicians and what drives them. They are prone to think they're mostly interested in lining their own pockets or clinging on to power.' 'On HS2, people will be asking whether politicians found themselves under the influence of big businesses, rather than delivering jobs for the North. On the grooming gangs, others will be asking whether politicians sacrificed vulnerable kids to make sure they didn't lose friends and votes. Such feelings absolutely aren't levelled at any party in particular. While Labour will get more short-term anger on grooming gangs, that's only because they were forthright in suggesting calls for proper investigations were politically-motivated. There is a widespread sense that all politicians are the same.' This leaves open a fundamental question: is there a fundamental limit on the British state's ability to deliver things that it seemed able to do just two decades ago? Or, is the disconnect between reality and the signals reaching politicians (through the ideological predisposition of their civil servants) so great that many MPs and ministers are no longer capable of reaching sane evaluations? Reforming the state In Nigel Farage's view, 'everything the British state touches collapses, regardless of colour'. With his party surging in the polls – the beneficiary of two decades of failed red and blue governance – he has every right to pin the blame for these failures on the selection into government of a certain cadre of establishment true believer. 'There are two types of people in politics; those who want to be something, and those who want to do something', Farage says. 'And the be-something's have dominated for decades: Oxbridge kids who want to be PM, cabinet minister, MP – not driven by thoughts about how to make the country better.' The resulting consensus is stifling. 'Everyone wants to be nice. If you're nice, you're liked and socially acceptable. And anyone with a different opinion is unacceptable'. But this doesn't work when the state is failing: 'When Starmer u-turns on rhetoric, don't believe it will lead to reality because it won't. He's saying it to fend off Reform. He has no intention of acting on it.' Competence, too comes in for a blast. 'As a result, we get cabinets full of people lacking in real life experience. They haven't run businesses. They haven't achieved anything. It's mediocrity – we're governed by people who are unqualified to be a middle manager in an Asda in Birmingham'. For Farage, there is only one way left out. 'This country needs political surgery through every single sector of public life. We need a very gentle, British, political revolution. I'm the moderate. If I don't succeed, watch what comes after me.' The canonisation of Saint Luigi The appearance of a new piece of graffiti under a paint-spattered archway in east London would normally draw no more attention than the tagged scrawl it overwrote. In February, however, a new painting briefly drew attention from segments of the world's press. The artwork shows Luigi Mangione, in his green hoodie, framed by the yellow painted bricks of the arch – a halo against a black background. In December 2024, Mangione was arrested on suspicion of the murder of Brian Thompson, the chief executive of UnitedHealthcare who was gunned down in the street. And almost overnight, he became a cult hero for an extraordinary number of disaffected Americans, who described him as 'Saint Luigi' – a description that images of Mangione bearing a red sacred heart, right hand raised in blessing, make almost literal. Whatever else we might think about Mangione, on this specific and narrow point, it is probably not a good signal of the health of society when its elite class is widely despised. In Britain, this has thankfully achieved expression primarily through political means, although last year's Southport riots were a warning sign about what might come if failures continue. King's College Professor David Betz made headlines with his prediction that Britain could fall into civil war without a change of course. Yet his concerns are shared by some of those on the ground. In the words of one former police officer, in the aftermath of recent public disorder police forces set about working out what to do in response, handling 'resourcing, moving people around the country, calling in the Armed Forces if needed. What they've never really thought about is what they would do if officers decided the risk was too great, and simply didn't come to work. Policing might be able to fill gaps by cancelling days off and extending shifts, but that tempo can't be maintained for long.' More ominously still, 'they've never really considered what would happen in a conflict where officers identified with one side enough to join it. Police officers are vetted, but not with that in mind. And police equipment already goes missing at rather an alarming rate. It's not unlikely that if serious violence started officers might start disappearing to defend their homes and families with their issued weapons – including firearms – if they lose faith in the state's ability to do so.' One more roll for the ballot box Adam Smith's remark that there is 'a great deal of ruin in a nation' was not meant to be an invitation to politicians to attempt to quantify the exact degree. Regrettably, generations of British leaders seem to have acted as if things will probably be fine whether they succeed or fail. The last year of British politics has given every indication of a system under intolerable strain. With the establishment facade beginning to crack, Westminster has a short window in which to change course voluntarily. If that passes, revolution – whether in the form of Prime Minister Nigel Farage, or something more dramatic – could be the result.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Meera Sodha's recipe for spring greens and cheddar picnic focaccia
Last month, while on a book tour in New York, I ate a sandwich that moved me to utter profanities. It was unusual behaviour from me, and more so because the sandwich in question was packed with an excessive amount of spring greens, but then, that is the genius of Brooks Headley, chef/owner of Superiority Burger: like Midas, he has an ability to turn the ordinary into gold. Here, I've tried to recreate it by cooking down a kilo of spring greens until they are melting, soft, collapsed and buttery, before tossing them with sharp cheddar. It's pure picnic gold. You don't have to have this on a picnic, but it really does work well, plus you can make the greens in advance and refrigerate them, provided you give them time to come up to room temperature afterwards. Buy the best focaccia you can find, or make your own – I make a 20cm x 30cm one like this (minus the garlic). Prep 10 minCook 30 minServes 6 1kg baby spring greens 80g unsalted dairy butter 4 tbsp extra-virgin olive oil 1 tsp fine sea salt 100g mature cheddar, grated – I like TicklerFocaccia, to serve (homemade or bought in) Wash the greens, shake off the excess water, then cut off the ends and compost them or save for soup – as a general guide, I cut away any stalks that are thicker than the base of my little finger. Shred the leaves into 3cm- to 4cm-wide strips. Put half the butter and half the oil in each of two large, deep frying pans and put them on a medium heat. When the butter has melted and started to foam, distribute the leaves and salt between the two pans and cook, stirring occasionally, for 25-30 minutes, until the greens have given up all hope of freshness and turned forest-black, glossy and soft. Tip all the leaves into one of the pans, toss through the grated cheese, then take off the heat. Slice open the focaccia horizontally, then evenly pile the greens on the bottom half. Slap the lid on top and compress. If you like a bit of theatre, tightly wrap the focaccia in foil, pop it in a bread tin and pack with a large bread knife; once on location, turn out and slice with panache. Or, more sensibly, slice into portions before you leave and wrap individually.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Minnesota shooting suspect claims Tim Walz ordered political killing spree in wild letter to the FBI
Vance Boelter wrote a letter to the FBI wildly speculating that Tim Walz wanted to kill Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar so that he could steal her job. Boelter is accused of fatally shooting former Democratic House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark, in their home early Saturday in the northern Minneapolis suburbs. Before that, authorities say, he also shot and wounded another Democrat, Sen. John Hoffman, and his wife, Yvette, who lived a few miles away. He surrendered Sunday night after what authorities have called the largest search in Minnesota history. In addition to the discovery of Boelter's hit list targeting several liberal politicians and celebrities, he also address a letter to the FBI that was described as 'rambling' and 'conspiratorial.' The letter was found in a Buick that Boelter left behind near his home and allegedly contains a confession to the Hortman murders and the attempted killing of the Hoffmans. The one and a half page letter is incoherent and difficult to read, two people who were familiar with told the Minnesota Star-Tribune. Boelter allegedly claims that the military had trained him to kill in secret and Walz asked him to kill Klobuchar, among several others, so that he could replace her in the Senate. Klobuchar's current term in the Senate runs until 2030 and Walz has never stated any intention to run for anything since his failed bid for the vice presidency on Kamala Harris' losing ticket. The junior Senator from Minnesota, fellow Democrat Tina Smith, was also named in the letter. A spokesperson for the Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty would only say that 'we have seen no evidence that the allegations regarding Governor Walz are based in fact.' 'Governor Walz is grateful to law enforcement who apprehended the shooter, and he's grateful to the prosecutors who will ensure justice is swiftly served,' spokesperson Teddy Tschann said. Tschann would only say of the later that 'this tragedy continues to be deeply disturbing for all Minnesotans.' Klobuchar, who herself ran for president in 2020, said in a statement: 'Boelter is a very dangerous man and I am deeply grateful that law enforcement got him behind bars before he killed other people.' Later Friday, it was revealed that Boelter is a doomsday prepper Boelter could face something that is a rarity for Minnesota but could become more common under the Trump administration: the death penalty. Minnesota abolished capital punishment in 1911, and the state's last execution was a botched hanging in 1906. But federal prosecutors announced charges against Vance Boelter on Monday that can carry the death penalty. Two of the six federal counts can carry the death penalty, something federal prosecutors have not sought in a Minnesota-based case since the Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment in 1976. 'Will we seek the death penalty? It´s too early to tell. That is one of the options,' Acting U.S. Attorney Joseph Thompson said Monday at a news conference where he revealed new details of what he described as a meticulously planned attack. They included allegations that Boelter also stopped at the homes of two other lawmakers that night and had dozens of other Democrats as potential targets, including officials in other states . Boelter´s federal defenders have declined to comment on the case, and he has not entered a plea. The federal intervention in Boelter's case appeared to irritate Moriarty, the county's former chief public defender, who was elected on a police reform and racial justice platform in 2022 after the police killing of George Floyd . At a news conference Monday to announce the state charges, Moriarty gave only vague answers in response to questions about the interplay between the federal and state investigations. But she acknowledged 'there's a tension' and said federal officials 'can speak for themselves.' Moriarty said she intends to press forward in state court regardless and to seek an indictment for first-degree murder for the killings of the Hortmans, which would carry a mandatory sentence of life without parole. Thompson told reporters that the federal case 'does not nullify the state charges. They remain in place. ... My expectation based on prior cases is the federal case, the federal charges, will be litigated first, but the state charges won´t necessarily go anywhere.' On Wednesday, Moriarty said in an interview with The Associated Press that she told federal prosecutors that she wants her office to try Boelter first. But she said she came away with the impression that the U.S. Attorney´s Office intends to exercise its legal authority to go first. Moriarty said she wants the first chance 'because this horrific crime happened in our community' and the lawmakers represented parts of Hennepin County. And she pointed out that her office tries murder cases all the time, and that it is the largest prosecutors' office in the state. 'We have all the resources and experience to handle these cases because that´s what we do,' she said. 'We feel that we owe it to the community to prosecute this case, and we would like to go first.' Moriarty opposes the death penalty and hopes that the federal prosecutors decide not to seek it against Boelter, noting that she hopes to try him for first-degree murder, which would mean life without parole if he is convicted. 'I certainly hope they respect the fact that Minnesota hasn´t had a death penalty for decades, and that´s because of our values here,' Moriarty said. After his federal court appearance, Boelter was taken to the Sherburne County Jail in suburban Elk River, where federal prisoners are often held. His next federal court appearance is June 27. He does not have any further appearances scheduled in state court. Meanwhile, Boelter's wife has remained in hiding - as the accused assassin's defiant family were tight-lipped concerning her whereabouts, telling a reporter to 'piss off.' Shaken mom-of-five Jenny, 51, rang pals only to say she was in a 'safe' location but wouldn't reveal where she was. She fled the family's bucolic farmhouse home in Green Isle, Minnesota, last Saturday morning after Boelter hinted that he had done something monstrous in a 6.18am text. 'Dad went to war last night,' wrote of her 57-year-old husband. 'There's gonna be some people coming to the house armed and trigger happy and I don't want you guys around.' As news broke that Boelter had allegedly gunned down two lawmakers and their spouses in Minneapolis, Jenny was pulled over driving through Onamia, 90 miles north. She had their youngest children in the car along with their passports, $10,000 in cash and two handguns, according to federal court filings. Jenny, president of the couple's private security firm, consented to a voluntary search of her electronic devices but wasn't arrested in the 10am traffic stop. There's nothing in her husband's charging documents to suggest she had advance knowledge of his alleged plot to slaughter dozens of Democrat lawmakers and pro-abortion activists. Jenny has not commented publicly since Boelter was captured Sunday evening and charged with multiple counts of murder and stalking. Her brother Jason Doskocil, 54, had a blunt message for when we asked about her whereabouts. 'I'm sorry, we are not going to talk to nobody - so piss off,' he replied. Boelter was captured Sunday evening following the biggest ever manhunt in the state of Minnesota. He had first dressed as a cop and donned a terrifying latex mask to shoot State Senator John Hoffman and his wife Yvette shortly before 2am Saturday. The pair were left in critical condition but are expected to survive the shooting on the doorstep of their Champlin, Minnesota home. Boelter then headed to a second lawmaker's residence in Brooklyn Park, pumping multiple bullets into former State House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark, killing both. The lunatic had drawn up a chilling assassination list of 45 targets including Democrat lawmakers, abortion providers and pro-choice activists, it's alleged. But his murder spree was halted in its tracks when police intercepted him leaving the Hortman's' home and engaged him in a firefight. The gunman fled on foot, leaving behind three AK-47 assault rifles and a 9mm handgun, triggering a massive hunt spanning multiple states and law enforcement agencies. The search narrowed Sunday night to woodland and swampy farmland one mile away from the Boelter residence. Officers first found an abandoned Buick that he had bought off a stranger he met in the street in a madcap scheme to escape. When the fugitive was spotted on a trail cam cops set up a square-mile perimeter deploying drones, dogs and helicopters to flush him out. Neighbor Wendy Thomas eventually spotted Boelter ducking down beside a culvert and flagged SWAT teams who took the alleged shooter alive.
