Connect with us

Published

on

The Department for Levelling Up is having to ask the Treasury to sign off on big projects, a minister has confirmed.

The Financial Times had reported the Treasury had banned capital spending by Michael Gove’s department amid doubts regarding its ability to deliver its flagship policy to reduce regional economic divides.

The agenda was a key part of the Conservative Party’s election-winning manifesto in 2019.

Capital spending is the money used to buy, upgrade or maintain physical things like buildings and equipment.

Answering a question on the matter in the Commons, Levelling Up minister Lee Rowley emphasised the change would not have an impact on the department’s agenda or ambitions.

PM rejects call for death penalty return – politics latest

‘No change’ to budget or objectives, minister insists

“It is absolutely the case that processes change and they also may apply at times in different ways,” Mr Rowley told MPs.

“We are working within a new delegation approach with Treasury which involves sign off with Treasury on capital spend.

“We will always work closely with Treasury, we value their value-for-money focus, they value our mission and they share our mission to level up the country as a whole, and we will continue to do that.”

He added: “There has been no change to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities budget whether capital or revenue, no change to our policy objective, no dilution of our ambition and there are no implications for the government’s policy agenda.”

‘Absurd’ if Gove can’t ‘sign off on a park bench’

Shadow levelling up secretary Lisa Nandy said “rogue” spending commitments made by Mr Gove to sort out poor social housing conditions may have led to the decision by the Treasury.

Referring to the Financial Times report, she told MPs: “If this report is true, we are in the absurd situation of having a secretary of state for levelling up who doesn’t even have the authority to sign off on a park bench.”

The report said Treasury chief secretary, John Glen, has stepped in to prevent the department from signing off spending on any new capital projects because of concerns about whether the department is delivering value for money.

Ms Nandy asked Mr Rowley: “Is it true that this decision by the Treasury was prompted by unauthorised spending commitments made by the secretary of state at the Convention for the North to spend money on improving appalling housing standards after the desperate death of a two-year-old boy in Rochdale?”

“I understand the secretary of state is in Rochdale today. How can he possibly tell housing associations to sort themselves out if he can’t sort out his own department?”

Read more from Sky News:
Labour demands report on Levelling Up progress

She added: “We deserve to know whether the chancellor of the exchequer believes that a secretary of state who is finally, belatedly, spending money on housing standards is a secretary of state who has gone rogue because that would be a very serious thing indeed.”

Responding to the Financial Times report, a Treasury spokesperson denied Mr Gove’s speech at the Convention for the North prompted the spending ban.

A government spokesperson said: “The government’s central mission is to level up every part of the United Kingdom by spreading opportunity, empowering local leaders and improving public services.

“DLUHC will continue to deliver its existing programme of capital projects as planned.”

Continue Reading

World

Trump peace plan: We could all pay if Europe doesn’t step up and guarantee Ukraine’s security

Published

on

By

Trump peace plan: We could all pay if Europe doesn't step up and guarantee Ukraine's security

The Donald Trump peace plan is nothing of the sort. It takes Russian demands and presents them as peace proposals, in what is effectively for Ukraine a surrender ultimatum.

If accepted, it would reward armed aggression. The principle, sacrosanct since the Second World War, for obvious and very good reasons, that even de facto borders cannot be changed by force, will have been trampled on at the behest of the leader of the free world.

The Kremlin will have imposed terms via negotiators on a country it has violated, and whose people its troops have butchered, massacred and raped. It is without doubt the biggest crisis in Trans-Atlantic relations since the war began, if not since the inception of NATO.

The question now is: are Europe’s leaders up to meeting the daunting challenges that will follow. On past form, we cannot be sure.

Vladimir Putin, President of Russia. Pic: Sputnik/Gavriil Grigorov via Reuters
Image:
Vladimir Putin, President of Russia. Pic: Sputnik/Gavriil Grigorov via Reuters

The plan proposes the following:

• Land seized by Vladimir Putin’s unwarranted and unprovoked invasion would be ceded by Kyiv.

• Territory his forces have fought but failed to take with colossal loss of life will be thrown into the bargain for good measure.

Ukraine will be barred from NATO, from having long-range weapons, from hosting foreign troops, from allowing foreign diplomatic planes to land, and its military neutered, reduced in size by more than half.

Donald Trump meeting Vladimir Putin in Alaska in August, File pic: Reuters
Image:
Donald Trump meeting Vladimir Putin in Alaska in August, File pic: Reuters

And most worryingly for Western leaders, the plan proposes NATO and Russia negotiate with America acting as mediator.

Lest we forget, America is meant to be the strongest partner in NATO, not an outside arbitrator. In one clause, Mr Trump’s lack of commitment to the Western alliance is laid bare in chilling clarity.

And even for all that, the plan will not bring peace. Mr Putin has made it abundantly clear he wants all of Ukraine.

He has a proven track record of retiring, rallying his forces, then returning for more. Reward a bully as they say, and he will only come back for more. Why wouldn’t he, if he is handed the fortress cities of Donetsk and a clear run over open tank country to Kyiv in a few years?

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

US draft Russia peace plan

Since the beginning of Trump’s presidency, Europe has tried to keep the maverick president onside when his true sympathies have repeatedly reverted to Moscow.

It has been a demeaning and sycophantic spectacle, NATO’s secretary general stooping even to calling the US president ‘Daddy’. And it hasn’t worked. It may have made matters worse.

A choir sing in front of an apartment building destroyed in a Russian missile strike in Ternopil, Ukraine. Pic: Reuters
Image:
A choir sing in front of an apartment building destroyed in a Russian missile strike in Ternopil, Ukraine. Pic: Reuters

The parade of world leaders trooping through Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, lavishing praise on his Gaza ceasefire plan, only encouraged him to believe he is capable of solving the world’s most complex conflicts with the minimum of effort.

The Gaza plan is mired in deepening difficulty, and it never came near addressing the underlying causes of the war.

Read more:
Ukraine war latest: Putin welcomes peace plan
Trump’s 28-point Ukraine peace plan in full

Most importantly, principles the West has held inviolable for eight decades cannot be torn up for the sake of a quick and uncertain peace.

With a partner as unreliable, the challenge to Europe cannot be clearer.

In the words of one former Baltic foreign minister: “There is a glaringly obvious message for Europe in the 28-point plan: This is the end of the end.

“We have been told repeatedly and unambiguously that Ukraine’s security, and therefore Europe’s security, will be Europe’s responsibility. And now it is. Entirely.”

If Europe does not step up to the plate and guarantee Ukraine’s security in the face of this American betrayal, we could all pay the consequences.

Continue Reading

World

Ukraine and Europe cannot reject Trump’s plan – they will play for time and hope he can still be persuaded to desert the Kremlin

Published

on

By

Ukraine and Europe cannot reject Trump's plan - they will play for time and hope he can still be persuaded to desert the Kremlin

“Terrible”, “weird”, “peculiar” and “baffling” – some of the adjectives being levelled by observers at the Donald Trump administration’s peace plan for Ukraine.

The 28-point proposal was cooked up between Trump negotiator Steve Witkoff and Kremlin official Kirill Dmitriev without European and Ukrainian involvement.

It effectively dresses up Russian demands as a peace proposal. Demands first made by Russia at the high watermark of its invasion in 2022, before defeats forced it to retreat from much of Ukraine.

Ukraine war latest: Kyiv receives US peace plan

(l-r) Kirill Dmitriev and special envoy Steve Witkoff in St Petersburg in April 2025. Pic: Kremlin Pool Photo/AP
Image:
(l-r) Kirill Dmitriev and special envoy Steve Witkoff in St Petersburg in April 2025. Pic: Kremlin Pool Photo/AP

Its proposals are non-starters for Ukrainians.

It would hand over the rest of Donbas, territory they have spent almost four years and lost tens of thousands of men defending.

Analysts estimate at the current rate of advance, it would take Russia four more years to take the land it is proposing simply to give them instead.

It proposes more than halving the size of the Ukrainian military and depriving them of some of their most effective long-range weapons.

And it would bar any foreign forces acting as peacekeepers in Ukraine after any peace deal is done.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Is Moscow back in Washington’s good books?

The plan comes at an excruciating time for the Ukrainians.

They are being pounded with devastating drone attacks, killing dozens in the last few nights alone.

They are on the verge of losing a key stronghold city, Pokrovsk.

And Volodymyr Zelenskyy is embroiled in the gravest political crisis since the war began, with key officials facing damaging corruption allegations.

Read more from Sky News:
Witkoff’s ‘secret’ plan to end war
Navy could react to laser incident

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Ukrainian support for peace plan ‘very much in doubt’

The suspicion is Mr Witkoff and Mr Dmitriev conspired together to choose this moment to put even more pressure on the Ukrainian president.

Perversely, though, it may help him.

There has been universal condemnation and outrage in Kyiv at the Witkoff-Dmitriev plan. Rivals have little choice but to rally around the wartime Ukrainian leader as he faces such unreasonable demands.

The genesis of this plan is unclear.

Was it born from Donald Trump’s overinflated belief in his peacemaking abilities? His overrated Gaza ceasefire plan attracted lavish praise from world leaders, but now seems mired in deepening difficulty.

The fear is Mr Trump’s team are finding ways to allow him to walk away from this conflict altogether, blaming Ukrainian intransigence for the failure of his diplomacy.

Mr Trump has already ended financial support for Ukraine, acting as an arms dealer instead, selling weapons to Europe to pass on to the invaded democracy.

If he were to take away military intelligence support too, Ukraine would be blind to the kind of attacks that in recent days have killed scores of civilians.

Europe and Ukraine cannot reject the plan entirely and risk alienating Mr Trump.

They will play for time and hope against all the evidence he can still be persuaded to desert the Kremlin and put pressure on Vladimir Putin to end the war, rather than force Ukraine to surrender instead.

Continue Reading

World

The Ashes live: Australia set 205 to win first Test after England bowled out for 164

Published

on

By

Continue Reading

Trending