The scale of the destruction left by Hurricane Melissa as it tore across Jamaica is now being revealed by the first photos taken by satellites.

The eye of the storm made landfall on the southwest coast of the island, 75 miles from the capital Kingston, on Tuesday.

Before and after images from Vantor’s satellites show the impact of the 185mph winds on the town of Black River, the capital of St Elizabeth Parish.

Use the sliders below to see the same areas of Jamaica before and after the hurricane struck.

There is widespread damage. Some houses and businesses are without roofs, and others have been destroyed altogether.

The covered food market is in ruins. So is St John Anglican church, one of the oldest in Jamaica – only its bell tower still stands.

Houses that lined the shore would have born the brunt of the storm surge.

Further along the coast is the fishing village of White House.

Streets have been reduced to piles of rubble. Trees have been stripped of their leaves by the wind.

The west of Jamaica is the country’s bread basket, important for growing food.

But fields are underwater, flooded by up to a metre of rain that fell as the vast storm system passed over.

Many crops will have been destroyed and the government has appealed for vegetable seeds so farmers can quickly plant crops again.

Read more:
What we know about Hurricane Melissa
UK charters flights to transport Britons out of Jamaica

On the northwest coast is the resort of Montego Bay.

The container terminal and oil storage tanks in the port have been inundated by the storm surge and are surrounded by water.

It’s estimated that 400,000 people in Jamaica have been affected by the hurricane.

And the cost of the devastation is immense.

Estimates by hazard analysts Enki Research put the bill at £5.8bn. That’s more than a third of Jamaica’s GDP – a measure of its economic wealth.

It will take months and international support to put Jamaica back on its feet.

Rachel Reeves was never going to resign over her failure to apply for a permit to rent out her house in south London.

She is unlikely even to face a fine from Southwark council – the mea culpa from the estate agent will have absolved her of much of the political guilt.

The episode is a distraction from the far bigger challenge she faces ahead of next month’s budget – and the £30-40 billion black hole.

But that doesn’t mean this squall should be ignored entirely – for it tells us two important things.

The first is it reminds us of of one of Ms Reeves‘ traits that is at odds with the vibe she likes to present to the country: that she is not always as across the detail or on top of things as she would like to make out.

The chancellor first said she was not advised to get a permit by a letting agent, so did not do so. Then, 24 hours later, she said that she was told by the letting agency it would take care of a permit, and did not realise it had not.

But is that quite good enough, particularly for someone who campaigned to strengthen exactly this law and who ended up deriving financial benefit for not doing so, to quite evidently not be across the detail?

In the aftermath of Angela Rayner’s resignation for a failure to comply with property law, might it not have been worthwhile for one to double-check the paperwork of one’s second home?

Then there have been other incidents in Ms Reeves’ life outside of being chancellor that jar with the image of a super-efficient stateswoman.

Ahead of the election, Ms Reeves was forced to hold her hands up and acknowledge making mistakes in her new book about female economists after she faced allegations of plagiarism.

She admitted that some sentences in her book, The Women Who Made Modern Economics, were “not properly referenced in the bibliography”.

She also had to update her LinkedIn after it emerged she was not an “economist” when she worked in financial services at a bank.

For a chancellor who faces making momentous decisions that will affect everybody in this country, lack of attention to detail is not a characteristic she would want extensively dwelt on. The bigger story this tells about her will sting.

The second thing it tells us is just how central she is to the Starmer project.

Number 10 moved to protect her within hours – publishing an exchange of letters late into Wednesday night that relied just on the account of Ms Reeves and apparently without corroborating evidence.

The government machine went out of its way in the fastest possible timeframe to try and shut the matter down – a courtesy not extended to Angela Rayner or Louise Haigh.

This is because Sir Keir knows a Reeves departure risks exposing himself – weeks before a budget that could determine this prime minister’s fate.

Read more from Sky News:
Investigation into Reeves not needed, Starmer says
Sky News gets rare access inside Reform UK meeting

It also risks an adverse reaction in the bond markets, which fear higher-borrowing alternative candidates in the Treasury.

Neither outcome is one this government feels like it could cope with at the moment.

Rachel Reeves is quite simply the most important figure in Sir Keir Starmer’s administration, and this is why she is protected at almost any reasonable cost.

While this is true now, it may not always be this way, however. Will Sir Keir feel the same after 26 November when he has to defend the tax-raising budget?

For Shelley Mclean, every night is a sleepless one, just to keep her 11-year-old daughter alive.

Missy was born with a rare genetic condition that affects her breathing, digestion and movement.

She spent the first nine months of her life in hospital before coming home with a breathing tube in her throat, a feeding tube in her stomach, and a line into her bowel.

At first, the family had some NHS-funded nighttime care to help keep Missy safe while she slept.

But when her local NHS body decided she no longer met the threshold, that support was taken away.

Now, Missy’s mother is responsible for her care.

“I’m her nurse, her physio, her carer,” says Shelley. “I don’t sleep properly because I’m scared she’ll stop breathing.

“They say we don’t meet the threshold – but I don’t know what more they need to see.”

Every night, Shelley prepares Missy’s medicines, checks her tubes, and monitors her breathing.

“This is an epilepsy medicine,” she says, holding up a syringe.

“If she’s not tolerating food orally, I put it down the tube.”

Despite her exhaustion, Shelley is grateful for the care that once saved her daughter’s life.

“I’m very grateful the NHS saved Missy – she wouldn’t be here without them. But they’re crippling the parents.”

The postcode lottery

Children like Missy who leave hospital but still need intensive support are meant to receive what’s called NHS continuing care – specialist help for those with the most complex, life-limiting or life-threatening needs.

But Sky News has seen new data which shows access to this care is deeply inconsistent across England, creating a postcode lottery that leaves many families struggling to survive without the help they require.

New figures obtained by Sky News reveal just how uneven continuing care has become.

NHS spending on children’s continuing care ranges from just 80p to £6 per head depending on where families live.

Out of almost 100,000 children in England with a life-limiting or life-threatening condition, only around 4% – roughly 4,400 – receive NHS continuing care funding.

And more than half of all disabled children referred for this kind of support are rejected.

Anna Bird, chief executive of charity Contact, says the system is leaving thousands of families on the brink.

“We’re not seeing the commitment to make sure those who need continuing care are getting it,” she told Sky News.

“Our research shows there’s a huge postcode lottery – families are running kind of little hospitals at home just to keep their children well and alive.

“They’re being let down by continuing care, and they’re not getting the support they need.”

In some areas, campaigners say local NHS bodies have cut back on support even for children with the most serious medical conditions.

Parents report being told their child no longer qualifies for help despite their needs remaining unchanged.

For Shelley, that decision means she rarely sleeps through the night.

“If I don’t go to her, she could be dead,” she says quietly. “She could have a fit and… you know, she could be dead.”

In a statement, NHS Cheshire and Merseyside said: “We understand Ms Mclean will be disappointed with the decision relating to her daughter’s funding.

“While we’re unable to comment on individual cases due to our commitment to patient confidentiality, all patients are reviewed jointly by health and care professionals to ensure they are receiving the most appropriate care for their needs.

“Patients who wish to discuss their funding decision are able to contact NHS Cheshire and Merseyside using the contact details included in their patient letters.”

But campaigners say that without national standards – and without the law forcing consistent assessments – those reviews will continue to vary wildly from one area to the next.

Read more from Sky News:
Seasonal affective disorder isn’t just ‘winter blues’
It’s not your imagination, these products are shrinking

The human cost

The result is that parents like Shelley find themselves trapped between two systems – the NHS and social care – neither of which can agree who is responsible.

“I’m not the type of person who wants to ask anyone for help,” she says. “But it’s brought me to my knees.”

For Shelley, that gap is more than bureaucratic. It’s personal, relentless, and exhausting.

“I would invite them to come and have a week in my position – to try to wake up every hour, on the hour, every night. Then they might understand.”

Campaigners say no parent should have to shoulder that burden alone – and they want ministers to act.

They’re calling on the government to make continuing care a statutory entitlement, with consistent assessments, proper funding, and transparency about who gets help and who doesn’t.

Until then, families like Shelley’s will continue to do the work of the NHS from their own homes – unpaid, unsupported, and exhausted.

The Department for Health and Social Care said: “Our thoughts go out to Shelley and Missy – everyone should have access to high-quality, compassionate care.

“As part of our 10-Year Health Plan, the government is shifting more healthcare out of hospitals and into the community, to ensure patients and their families can get the care they need, where and when they need it.

“Integrated Care Boards are responsible for meeting the needs of local people – including Children and Young People’s Continuing Care and ensuring the care requirements of people like Missy and Shelley are met.

“This government has set out best practice, and provided guidance around assessments, decision-making and agreeing care packages for Children and Young People’s Continuing Care.”