The car, a black Suzuki Swift, struck a number of people in Friar Gate at about 9.30pm on Saturday, Derbyshire Police said.

"We can confirm that seven people were injured when a car was driven into pedestrians in a city centre street," Derbyshire Police said in a statement on Facebook.

"The seven suffered a range of serious but not life-threatening injuries and we can confirm that contrary to online speculation, no one died in the incident."

A man in his 30s, who is originally from India, was found a short time after the incident, said police. He was arrested on suspicion of attempted murder, causing serious injury through dangerous driving, inflicting grievous bodily harm with intent, and dangerous driving.

He remains in police custody.

East Midlands Ambulance Service said: "We received a call at 9.31pm yesterday, Saturday 28 March to Friar Gate, Derby. The caller reported a medical emergency.

"We sent a number of resources including three paramedics in three ambulance cars, seven ambulances and our Hazardous Area Response Team. We transported seven patients between Royal Derby Hospital and Queen's Medical Centre."

One person who arrived at the scene shortly after the incident told the Derby Telegraph there were "people on the floor".

"It was such a frightening experience. We came around the corner and there was just people everywhere," they said.

"We didn't realise what had happened and then we slowly realised that it was something bad."

Read more from Sky News:
'Half a million' join London rally against far right
The debt trap: Student loan crisis explained

Derbyshire Police said: "Our investigation is in its early stages but we want to hear from anyone who saw a black Suzuki Swift being driven in Derby around the time of the incident.

"Friar Gate is completely closed from the junction with Curzon Street/Cheapside up to Ford Street. The road will be closed for a considerable time so please avoid the area completely."

The force added: "Although we know this will be alarming, we would like to reassure people that we do not believe there is an ongoing risk to the public."

Baggy Shanker, the MP for Derby South, said his thoughts were with "everyone who has been affected and with their loved ones".

"He added: Thank you to the emergency services for their response. Derbyshire Police have confirmed a man has been arrested and that they do not believe there is an ongoing risk to the public."

Fast forward two years and the Conservatives are locked in a battle for supremacy with Reform UK which largely defeated them in last May's local elections and has been securing defections from Tory councillors, former MPs, and even some current MPs.

It's led some to suggest the two parties should unite to take on Labour rather than have a split right risk another left victory. If that happened, it would not be the first time Reform's leader, Nigel Farage, decided not to stand candidates in Conservative seats - his then-Brexit Party did so in 2019 - a year when the Tories enjoyed a comfortable victory.

But now, modelling by Sky News and exclusive polling with Ipsos suggest that hopes that an electoral pact might offer a path back to power for the right are misplaced. In fact, Reform and the Tories could risk losing as many votes as they gain.

Nationally, the latest voting intention polls from YouGov show that Reform is leading with around 23% of the vote while the Conservatives are taking 17%.

Simply adding these figures together might suggest that the two parties would dominate in the polls if they joined forces.

But the answer is not so straightforward, Sky News research reveals.

The polling suggests the British public has limited appetite for electoral pacts on either end of the political spectrum.

Ipsos surveyed 2,518 adults in Britain between 20 and 24 February about various possible electoral pacts and a Conservative-Reform alliance performed worst of all - with almost half of all Britons surveyed against the idea and just 18% in favour.

A pact was defined as the parties not standing candidates against each other in their target seats.

More Conservative supporters say they would oppose a pact (39%) than support it (31%), with total net support at -8% among this group.

Current Reform supporters are slightly more supportive of an alliance (38%), though a high number also say they would oppose it (30%). On average, the pact sees just +2% net support among the current Conservative and Reform base.

"The surface appeal of a pact doesn't survive scrutiny," says Rob Ford, professor of politics at Manchester University.

"Though the Conservatives and Reform both draw from the same side of the political spectrum, the two parties are now quite distinct demographically and attitudinally."

This is reflected by the polling, which suggests voters on the right don't see the parties as interchangeable.

Half of Reform supporters (50%) say they dislike the Conservatives, while just a third (31%) like Kemi Badenoch's party.

Current Conservative supporters appear to be even more anti-Reform, with 57% saying they dislike Farage's party, and just 24% saying they like it.

Sky News elections analyst Professor Will Jennings, of the University of Southampton, explains: "As a growing number of voters have defected from the Conservatives to Reform, those who remain tend to be loyalists who are not fans of Nigel Farage, while those who have switched sides tend to hold their former party in low regard."

This means that a Reform-Conservative pact - far from simply combining both parties' vote shares - could instead frustrate supporters and even risk losing as many votes as it gains.

A liberal-left response

The problem for the parties is not only that a pact isn't popular among their own supporters. A right-wing alliance could generate a new challenge - a stronger alliance on the left.

"A pact between the Conservatives and Reform could set off an arms race - a united right might beat a split left, but a pact on the right could encourage a similar response from the left," said Professor Ford.

Ipsos polling suggests an alliance between Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Green Party is relatively more popular among Britons overall, with a net opposition of -15% compared to -30% for a Reform-Conservative pact.

On average, current supporters of the three major left-wing parties were much more open to joining forces than voters on the right - with a net support of +23% (an average of 45% support and 22% opposition) across Labour, Lib Dem and Green voters- notably higher than support for an equivalent pact on the right.

If a pact between the Conservatives and Reform triggered coordination between parties on the left, polling suggests that the Labour-Lib Dem-Green alliance may emerge stronger.

Who is winning the battle for the right?

So, if the parties on the right have better prospects competing apart, which is stronger in constituencies across the country?

Professors Jennings and Ford have developed a Reform Voting Index (RVI) to gauge which of the two right-wing parties currently holds the advantage in each constituency across Britain.

It combines latest polling on Reform with demographic information like age, education and EU referendum vote, to estimate whether constituencies lean more towards Farage's party or the Conservatives.

With their popularity rising sharply since the last election, our index suggests that Reform is ahead in the "battle for the right" for now, with a clear lead in three times as many seats as the Conservatives in Sky's Index.

Reform is ahead in 316 seats across Britain, compared to just 93 constituencies where the Conservatives are the leading right-wing party.

A further 223 seats are considered too close to call, meaning a divided right-wing vote currently looks likely.

Reform is clearly leading over the Conservatives in most of Scotland and Wales, where devolved elections will be held in May.

It is also ahead of the Tories in London - with all but three constituencies leaning towards Reform over the Conservatives. However, in most cases this is a fight for second place at best, as most London seats were won by Labour in the last general election.

It's a different story in the South of England where the index suggests that the Conservatives are still strongest in dozens of seats, which might, in part, be down to their demographic profile.

The biggest battleground though appears to be the East of England, where both James Cleverly and Badenoch are MPs. Here, it is too close to call in most constituencies.

Perhaps most alarmingly for the Tory leader, the Reform Voting Index suggests that less than half (58) of the 121 seats won by the Conservative Party in 2024 remain solidly Tory. Many (59) are too close between the two parties, and four lean more towards Reform.

Silver linings for the Conservatives

But our Ipsos polling suggests there's still opportunity for the Conservatives to recover.

It is no secret that much of Reform's post-election surge in the polls has been driven by voters gained from the Tories since 2024.

This has created a cohort of "inbetweeners", people who now support Reform but voted Conservative in the last general election.

As a result, current Reform supporters appear to have somewhat different views than the core Reform base who voted for Farage's party in 2024, Ipsos polling finds.

For example, Reform's current supporters are slightly more likely to say they are open to voting for the Conservatives in the next election (24%) than 2024 Reform voters (20%).

Badenoch is also more popular among the current Reform cohort - with an average "like" rating of 4.5 out of 10 - than Farage is among current Conservative supporters (3.5), suggesting it may be easier for Badenoch to win back lost voters than for Farage to make further gains from the Conservatives.

Long road to the next election

Despite that, it is clear from the polls, and Sky's Reform Voting Index, that Reform is currently the stronger party on the right.

Our Index analysis is a snapshot focused only on the right and doesn't account for crucial factors like Labour's collapse in support or the rise of the Green Party.

Both those factors and the polls could shift significantly in the three years before the next general election must be held.

Indeed, over the past three years, Reform has tripled its support in the polls (from 8% to 24%).

But for the moment, our polling and analysis suggest that a pact between Reform and the Conservatives may not decisively resolve the "battle for the right".

And, while Reform lead the Tories for now, there is plenty of room for change before voters cast their ballots to choose the next Parliament.

---------------

Methodology

Sky's Reform Voting Index was developed with election experts Professor Will Jennings and Professor Rob Ford. In order to estimate how strongly constituencies may lean towards Reform, the following demographics are used in a model of the 2024 Reform vote in parliamentary constituencies in Great Britain: estimated share of people who voted to Leave the EU in 2016, the share of 2016 Leave vote squared, share of the constituency population belonging to an ethnic minority group, and share with no academic qualifications. This model was selected after testing a wider range of demographic variables.

The index combines these with Reform's current polling (the latest poll by YouGov) to estimate the party's support at a constituency level. The index does not account for changes in other parties' polling since the last general election, but does incorporate information about which parties Reform is currently securing its gains in the polls from.

All other polling data presented in this article is by Ipsos exclusive for Sky News, online survey of 2,518 adults between 20 and 24 February 2026, across Great Britain.

For a companion analysis on the "battle for the right", read this piece from Sky's political editor Beth Rigby here.

Spurred on by Australia's ban, campaigners and MPs have brought the idea of a teenage ban into the UK's mainstream, and now the government is consulting the public on what it thinks should happen.

Among adults, it's a popular idea; a YouGov poll found that nearly three-quarters of UK adults want to ban under-16s from social media.

It's easy to understand why; we've reported on countless horror stories of parents finding their children dead in bedrooms after being exposed to harmful content. We've covered sextortion, child sexual abuse, blackmail and more, all happening on social media platforms.

It's reached the point where people impacted by these nightmare circumstances have had enough; if these companies can't be trusted to look after our children, they say, we need to take them off the platforms.

But this isn't a cut-and-dried case. There are a lot of people worried about the impact of social media on children who argue a ban isn't the right idea.

Take Professor Sander van der Linden, a Cambridge psychology researcher who has studied the impact of social media for years.

He said there is "zero empirical evidence" to support a ban, and recently wrote a piece in the science journal Nature arguing against it.

"Blindly instituting wholesale bans for teens takes the 'evidence' out of evidence-based policy," he argued.

But he isn't saying that things should just stay the same.

In fact, he wants children as young as four to begin digital literacy education to protect them in the future and, crucially, wants social media companies to be held more responsible for building safe platforms in the first place

That's what I was repeatedly told when researching the case against a social media ban.

Girl Guides, protesters, the chief executive of the NSPCC - they all believed that social media companies should be forced to change their platforms rather than young people being forced to come off them.

"These issues don't [just] affect teenagers," 15-year-old Imogen said. She's a Girl Guiding advocate, one of three speaking to me after a Girl Guiding poll suggested just 15% of teenagers support a ban.

"Someone in their 30s isn't going to want to see the violent content that teenagers are seeing, so it's not solving the issue."

"If we put a ban [in place], then that's just saying we're the problem," said 16-year-old Freya. "It's our fault when actually it's their algorithms, it's the way that they've made their platforms."

One protester, Hannah from Mad Youth Organise, told us her group wants companies to pay a 4% "misery tax" to fund mental health services and mitigate the damage they say the companies have caused.

But the other argument against a ban isn't about changing how the companies work, it's about the impact on young people themselves.

Prof van der Linden said the impact of social media varies between different groups of young people. Those with pre-existing mental health issues are more likely to be harmed by algorithms than those without.

People who use social media to compare themselves negatively to others or "doomscroll" are more likely to suffer consequences than those who don't.

In fact, using social media to connect with others or engage in social issues could have a positive impact on mental health.

He says it's more nuanced than arguments against alcohol or tobacco, where the impacts are only negative.

Read more from Sky News:
Elon Musk misled investors during Twitter takeover, jury finds
US suffers hottest March day ever recorded

And for certain groups, social media has become a lifeline.

LGBT+ teenagers, for example, face higher levels of loneliness, bullying and isolation, and when community can be hard to find in person, they now often turn to social media, according to Simon Blake, chief executive of Stonewall UK.

"It's a place that they meet other people, it's a place that they see people like them that they can aspire to, to see others and to ask questions and to get support in a world where they may not be able to get it from other places," he said.

There's concern from organisations like Stonewall and the NSPCC that young people will simply migrate to other, less regulated platforms where they could see even more harmful content.

"You can't block the whole internet," pointed out Kashuf, a 19-year-old Girl Guiding advocate.

No matter where the UK lands in the government's consultation, campaigners on both sides agree something must change - the argument now is what that change should be.

The test likely indicates Kim's plans to expand and modernise an arsenal of missiles capable of reaching the US mainland.

The report on Sunday from Korean Central News Agency came days after a speech at North Korea's parliament in which Kim pledged to irreversibly cement his country's status as a nuclear power.

Iran war latest: US 'preparing ground invasion'

He accused the US of global "state terrorism and aggression," apparently referencing the war in the Middle East.

Kim observed the ground jet test of the newly upgraded engine using a composite carbon fibre material, KCNA reported.

The engine's maximum thrust is 2,500 kilotons, up from around 1,971 kilotons reported in a similar solid fuel engine test in September, according to the agency.

A push to increase engine power is likely connected with efforts to place multiple warheads on a single missile to increase chances of defeating US defences, observers say.

KCNA did not report exactly where or when the test took place.

Read more from Sky News:
Can NASA's return to the moon bring the world together
Caster Semenya shapes up for new battle with the IOC

The test is part of the nation's five-year military escalation programme.

Objectives include upgrading "strategic strike means," KCNA reported.

The reference is understood to mean nuclear-capable, intercontinental ballistic missiles targeting the continental US.

Kim said the engine test had "great significance in putting the country's strategic military muscle on the highest level," KCNA reported.

In recent years, North Korea has test-fired a variety of ICBMs demonstrating the potential range to strike the US mainland, including missiles with solid propellants that make detection ahead of liftoff more difficult.

The country's older liquid-fuel missiles must be fuelled before liftoffs and are not long-lasting.

Some foreign experts say North Korea still faces technological hurdles before it has a functioning ICBM, such as ensuring warheads survive atmospheric reentry.

But others dispute that assessment given the number of years the nation has spent on its nuclear and missile programmes.

North Korea has made a big push to expand its nuclear arsenal since Kim's high-stakes diplomacy with Donald Trump collapsed in 2019.

In a ruling Workers' Party congress in February, Kim left open the door for discussions with the US president but urged Washington to drop demands for the North's nuclear disarmament as a precondition for talks.

More than 3,200 events ‌were planned in all 50 states, and organisers hoped it would be the biggest single-day protest in US history.

There were rallies in cities including Washington DC, New York, Chicago and Los Angeles, as well as further afield in London and Paris, where people demonstrated against the Iran war.

Organisers expected nine million people would take part in America this time, after the first two rounds of rallies last June and October attracted five million and seven million respectively.

The rallies came as Donald Trump's approval rating fell to 36%, which is its lowest point since he returned to power, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll.

And a national NBC News poll earlier this month found that majorities of registered voters in the US disapproved of the president's handling of immigration, Iran, inflation and the cost of living.

The flagship rally on Saturday was in the state of Minnesota, where Renee Good and Alex Pretti were shot dead in January by federal agents in the city of Minneapolis as they monitored a crackdown on illegal immigration.

Around 100,000 were expected to attend as people stood on the Minnesota Capitol lawn and surrounding streets in St Paul, with Bruce Springsteen headlining the event.

The US singer performed his song Streets of Minneapolis which he wrote in response to the two fatal shootings.

Springsteen said that people pushing back against US Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE) had given the rest of the country hope.

"Your strength and your commitment told us that this was still America," he said.

"And this reactionary nightmare, and these invasions of American cities, will not stand."

But White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said the rallies were backed by "leftist funding networks" with little real public support.

The "only people who care about these Trump Derangement Therapy Sessions are the reporters who are paid to cover them", Ms Jackson said in a statement.

And Mike Marinella, a spokesperson for the National Republican Congressional Committee, criticised ‌Democratic politicians and candidates for supporting the rallies.

Meanwhile, vice president JD Vance was the Conservative Political Action Conference's choice this ‌year to be the next Republican nominee for US president, ahead of secretary of state Marco Rubio, according to a poll.

In Washington DC, hundreds of people marched past the Lincoln Memorial and into the National Mall, holding signs that read "Put down the crown, clown" and "Regime change begins at home".

Demonstrators also rang bells, played drums and chanted "No Kings".

In New York, thousands gathered in Manhattan, where actor Robert De Niro said "there have been other presidents who have tested the constitutional limits of their power, but none have ​been such an existential threat to our freedoms and security".

In San Diego, police said about 40,000 people marched in a "No Kings" event.

However, organisers said two-thirds of the rallies were expected to take place outside major city centres.

They included communities in conservative-leaning states like Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, Utah, South Dakota and Louisiana, as well as in suburban areas of Pennsylvania, Georgia and Arizona.

The first No Kings day of protest in June 2025 was organised amid Mr Trump's decision to hold a military parade in Washington on his birthday.

At the time, the president told reporters that "if there's any protester that wants to come out, they will be met with very big force".

Read more from Sky News:
Whale stranded again - just days after rescue
The AI delusion problem is bigger than we thought

Meanwhile in London, people protesting against the US-Israeli war in Iran held banners that said "Stop the far right" and "Stand up to Racism".

And in Paris, several hundred people, mostly Americans living in France, along with those from French labour unions and human rights organisations, gathered at the Bastille.

In Rome, thousands of people took part in a march against conservative Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni. They also protested at the Israeli and US attacks on Iran, calling for "a world free from wars".