Connect with us

Published

on

Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has called on Rishi Sunak to apologise for the “lethal chaos” in the NHS.

He made the demand during Prime Minister’s Questions, saying Mr Sunak should “stop blaming others and take some responsibility”.

But the PM said Labour should get behind his anti-strike legislation to ensure minimum service levels when public sector workers take industrial action.

Increasing pay ‘the worst thing that we could do’ for inflation, says minister – follow latest politics live

Sir Keir pushed Mr Sunak on delays in the ambulance service, listing average waiting times around England for people with chest pains of over two hours – the government target is 18 minutes.

“For the person suffering from chest pains, the clock started ticking straight away,” he said. “Every minute counts.”

The Labour leader added: “These are our constituents waiting for ambulances I’m talking about.

“So, for one week, will he stop blaming others, take some responsibility and just admit under his watch the NHS is in crisis, isn’t it?”

The PM said the government was “rapidly implementing measures to improve the delivery of ambulance times”.

He added: “Because of the extra funding we are putting in to relieve pressure in urgent and emergency care departments, because of the investment we are putting in in ambulance call handling, we will improve ambulance times as we are recovering from the pandemic and, indeed, the pressures of this winter.”

But Mr Sunak linked the delays to the broader issue of industrial action in the sector – less than an hour before ambulance workers announced a further six strikes across February and March.

“If he cares about ensuring that patients get access to life-saving emergency care when they need it, why won’t he support our minimum safety legislation?”

Ambulance workers on the picket line outside London Ambulance Service NHS Trust control room in Waterloo, London, as members of Unison and GMB unions take strike action over pay and conditions that will affect non-life threatening calls. Picture date: Wednesday January 11, 2023.
Image:
Ambulance workers have already taken part in industrial action in December and January.

Sir Keir accused him of “deflecting” from the questions, adding: “Just like last week, he won’t say when he is going to deliver the basic minimum service levels people need.

“Over the 40 minutes or so these sessions tend to last, 700 people will call an ambulance. Two will be reporting a heart attack, four will be reporting a stroke, but instead of the rapid help they need, many will wait and wait and wait.

“So if he won’t answer any questions, will he at least apologise for the lethal chaos under his watch?”

But the PM said the government would deliver on waiting times “as soon as we can pass” the anti-strike bill, adding: “We are delivering on the people’s priorities. As we have seen this week, the honourable gentleman will just say anything if the politics suits him.”

The bill was also raised by Labour MP Navendu Mishra, who said Mr Sunak had “showed his card” with the policy, adding: “He has literally gone from clapping nurses to sacking them.”

Meanwhile another Labour MP, Dawn Butler, described how when she had breast cancer both ambulance workers and nurses – who are staging a walkout across 55 trusts in England today – gave her “phenomenal” care.

“Unison and the GMB [unions] are on strike because no one is negotiating with them,” she said. “I have spoken to the general secretary of the Royal College of Nursing and she is adamant she wants to end the disputes. She just needs a meeting with the prime minister.

“Will the prime minister show leadership and meet with the RCN, just a simple yes or no.”

Mr Sunak said the government wrote to all the unions to invite them for “frank, open, honest, two-way dialogue” with the relevant secretaries of state.

He added: “I am pleased that those meetings are happening in a range of sectors and I hope that we can find a constructive way through this.”

Continue Reading

World

Ukrainian diplomat involved in 90s nuclear deal with Russia warns Trump about ‘very big mistake’ with Putin

Published

on

By

Ukrainian diplomat involved in 90s nuclear deal with Russia warns Trump about 'very big mistake' with Putin

Ukrainians have given a lukewarm reaction to this week’s White House summit.

There is bafflement and unease here after US President Donald Trump switched sides to support his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, dropping calls for a ceasefire and proposing that Ukraine surrender territory.

While allies are talking up the prospects of progress, people here remain unconvinced.

Ukraine war latest – Trump rules out using US troops

Boris Yeltsin (2L) and Bill Clinton (C) sign the 1994 Budapest Memorandum
Image:
Boris Yeltsin (2L) and Bill Clinton (C) sign the 1994 Budapest Memorandum

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

What security guarantees could work?

The Trump administration’s contradictory statements on possible security guarantees are causing concern here.

MP Lesia Vasylenko told Sky News it is not at all clear what the allies have in mind.

“Who is going to be there backing Ukraine in case Russia decides to revisit their imperialistic plans and strategies and in case they want to restart this war of aggression?”

For many Ukrainians, there is a troubling sense of deja vu.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Ukrainian drone strikes Russian fuel train

In the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, Ukraine agreed to give up not land but its nuclear arsenal, inherited from the Soviet Union, in return for security assurances from Russia and other powers.

They know how that ended up to their enormous cost. Putin reneged on Russia’s side of the bargain, with his invasion of Crimea in 2014 and once again with his full-scale attack three and a half years ago.

We met veteran Ukrainian diplomat Yuri Kostenko, who helped lead those negotiations in the 90s.

Veteran Ukrainian diplomat Yuri Kostenko helped lead the Budapest Memorandum negotiations
Image:
Veteran Ukrainian diplomat Yuri Kostenko helped lead the Budapest Memorandum negotiations

He said there is a danger the world makes the same mistake and trusts Vladimir Putin when he says he wants to stop the killing, something Mr Trump said he now believes.

👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈        

“It’s not true, it’s not true, Russia never, never, it’s my practices in more than 30 years, Russia never stop their aggression plans to occupy all Ukraine and I think that Mr Trump, if he really believes Mr Putin, it will be a very big mistake, Mr Trump, a very big mistake.”

Before the Alaska summit, allies agreed the best path to peace was forcing Mr Putin to stop his invasion, hitting him where it hurts with severe sanctions on his oil trade.

But Mr Trump has given up calls for a ceasefire and withdrawn threats to impose those tougher sanctions.

Instead, he has led allies down a different and more uncertain path.

Read more on Sky News:
Putin wasn’t there, but influenced summit
Peace further away, not closer
Five takeaways from White House talks

Ukrainians we met on the streets of Kyiv said they would love to believe in progress more than anything, but are not encouraged by what they are hearing.

While the diplomacy moves on in an unclear direction, events on the ground and in the skies above Ukraine are depressingly predictable.

Russia is continuing hundreds of drone attacks every night, and its forces are advancing on the front.

If Vladimir Putin really wants this war to end, he’s showing no sign of it, while Ukrainians fear Donald Trump is taking allies down a blind alley of fruitless diplomacy.

Continue Reading

World

Putin wasn’t at the White House, but his influence was – the moments which reveal his hold over Trump

Published

on

By

Putin wasn't at the White House, but his influence was - the moments which reveal his hold over Trump

Vladimir Putin wasn’t at the White House but his influence clearly was. At times, it dominated the room.

There were three key moments that revealed the Russian president‘s current hold over Donald Trump.

The first was in the Oval Office. Sitting alongside Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the US president told reporters: “I don’t think you need a ceasefire.”

Ukraine talks latest: Zelenskyy ‘ready to meet’ Putin after Trump summit

Vladimir Putin shaking hands with Donald Trump when they met last week. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Vladimir Putin shaking hands with Donald Trump when they met last week. Pic: Reuters

It was a stunning illustration of Mr Trump’s about-face in his approach to peace. For the past six months, a ceasefire has been his priority, but after meeting Mr Putin in Alaska, suddenly it’s not.

Confirmation that he now views the war through Moscow’s eyes.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Trump applauds Putin and shares ride in ‘The Beast’ last week

The second was the format itself, with Mr Trump reverting to his favoured ask-what-you-like open-ended Q&A.

In Alaska, Mr Putin wasn’t made to take any questions – most likely, because he didn’t want to. But here, Mr Zelenskyy didn’t have a choice. He was subjected to a barrage of them to see if he’d learnt his lesson from last time.

It was a further demonstration of the special status Mr Trump seems to afford to Mr Putin.

👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈

The third was their phone call. Initially, President Trump said he’d speak to the Kremlin leader after his meeting with European leaders. But it turned out to be during it.

A face-to-face meeting with seven leaders was interrupted for a phone call with one – as if Mr Trump had to check first with Mr Putin, before continuing his discussions.

We still don’t know the full details of the peace proposal that’s being drawn up, but all this strongly suggests that it’s one sketched out by Russia. The White House is providing the paper, but the Kremlin is holding the pen.

Read more:
Four key takeaways from the White House Ukraine summit
Trump has taken peace talks a distance not seen since the war began

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Trump, Zelenskyy and the suit: What happened?

For Moscow, the aim now is to keep Mr Trump on their path to peace, which is settlement first, ceasefire later.

It believes that’s the best way of securing its goals, because it has more leverage so long as the fighting continues.

👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈      

But Mr Putin will be wary that Mr Trump is pliable and can easily change his mind, depending on the last person he spoke to.

So to ensure that his sympathies aren’t swayed, and its red lines remain intact, Russia will be straining to keep its voice heard.

On Monday, for example, the Russian foreign ministry was quick to condemn recent comments from the UK government that it would be ready to send troops to help enforce any ceasefire.

It described the idea as “provocative” and “predatory”.

Moscow is trying to drown out European concerns by portraying itself as the party that wants peace the most, and Kyiv (and Europe) as the obstacle.

But while Mr Zelenskyy has agreed to a trilateral meeting, the Kremlin has not. After the phone call between Mr Putin and Mr Trump, it said the leaders discussed “raising the level of representatives” in the talks between Russia and Ukraine. No confirmation to what level.

Continue Reading

World

Trump is playing both sides – but has taken peace talks a distance not seen since the war began

Published

on

By

Trump is playing both sides - but has taken peace talks a distance not seen since the war began

Talks between Donald Trump, Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders have taken place at the White House, aimed at finding an end to the war in Ukraine.

On the agenda were US security guarantees, whether a ceasefire is required, and a potential summit between the Ukrainian president and Vladimir Putin.

Zelenskyy ready to meet Putin – follow latest

Here’s what three of our correspondents made of it all.

For Trump

For Mr Trump, the challenge to remain seen as the deal-broker is to maintain “forward momentum, through devilish detail,” Sky News’ US correspondent James Matthews says.

The US president called the Washington summit a “very good early step”, but that’s all it was, Matthews says.

Despite cordiality with Mr Zelenskyy and promising talk of a US role in security guarantees for Ukraine and discussions for meetings to come. Matthews says the obstacles remain.

“Trump has taken peace discussions to a distance not travelled since the start of the war, but it is a road navigated by a president playing both sides who have changed his mind on key priorities.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Zelenskyy, Trump and the suit

For Putin

As for Russia, Sky News’ Moscow correspondent Ivor Bennett says the aim is to keep Trump on its preferred path towards peace – a deal first, a ceasefire later.

“Moscow believes that’s the best way of securing all of its goals,” Bennett says.

But Ukraine and Europe want things the other way round, and Moscow “will be wary that Trump can be easily persuaded by the last person he spoke to”.

And so, Russia will be “trying to keep themselves heard” and “cast Kyiv as the problem, as they won’t agree to a peace deal on the Kremlin’s terms”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

What’s Putin’s next move? Sky’s Ivor Bennett explains

For the UK and Europe

Sky News’ deputy political editor Sam Coates says, for Sir Keir Starmer and Europe, the biggest success of the Washington summit was the US promise of security guarantees for Ukraine.

He adds that the “hard work starts now to actually try to figure out what these guarantees amount to”.

Sir Keir said if Vladimir Putin breaches a future peace deal, there would have to be consequences, but Coates said potentially “insoluble” issues stand in the way.

“At what point do those breaches invoke a military response, whether US guarantees would be enough to encourage European involvement in Ukraine, and whether or not you could see the UK and Europe going to war with Russia to protect Ukraine?”

Coates says “there may never be an answer that satisfies everyone involved”.

Continue Reading

Trending