The Tampa Bay Rays optioned Taj Bradley to Triple-A Durham following a poor start for the inconsistent right-hander Wednesday night.

Handed a 4-0 lead against the Chicago White Sox, Bradley gave up four runs in the second and didn’t get through the inning as Chicago went on to an 11-9 victory in Tampa, Florida. He allowed four runs, four hits and three walks in the frame.

Bradley, once a top pitching prospect, didn’t factor into the decision and his record on the season remained 6-6, while his ERA moved to 4.61. The 24-year-old has struggled with consistency; he entered Wednesday’s start having allowed just one run in his previous two starts but had surrendered at least five runs in four of his six starts before that.

“Tough decision certainly, but felt like it’s best for him to get down there right now,” Rays manager Kevin Cash told reporters after the game. “It’s probably a better environment (in Triple A) for him to work, rather than compete every single pitch.

“But know that Taj Bradley is massive to our success, and we need to get him back to the form we know he’s capable of.”

Cash said Bradley handled the news “like a pro” and will work to regain command of his secondary pitches such as his changeup and slider at Durham.

“I just talked to him and said there’s been a lot of good and there has been some not-so good,” Cash said. “Inconsistencies are tough to do at this level at any time of the season, but certainly with where we’re at right now.”

The Rays have scuffled over the last month and sit at 53-50, good for fourth place in the AL East.

Bradley has been mentioned as a potential trade target ahead of the July 31 deadline. The Rays have room to move at least one starting pitcher, and teams have identified the righty — who doesn’t reach free agency until after the 2029 season — as the likeliest of those with team control to go.

Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.

Welfare versus warfare: for decades, it’s a question to which successive prime ministers have responded with one answer.

After the end of the Cold War, leaders across the West banked the so-called “peace dividend” that came with the end of this conflict between Washington and Moscow.

Instead of funding their armies, they invested in the welfare state and public services instead.

But now the tussle over this question is something that the current prime minister is grappling with, and it is shaping up to be one of the biggest challenges for Sir Keir Starmer since he got the job last year.

As Clement Attlee became the Labour prime minister credited with creating the welfare state after the end of the Second World War, so it now falls on the shoulders of the current Labour leader to create the warfare state as Europe rearms.

Be it Donald Tusk, the Polish prime minister, arguing last year that Europe had moved from the post-war era to the pre-war era; or European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen calling on the EU to urgently rearm Ukraine so it is a “steel porcupine” against Russian invaders; there is a consensus that the UK and Europe are on – to quote Sir Keir – a “war footing” and must spend more on defence.

To that end the prime minister has committed to increase UK defence spending to 2.5% of GDP by 2027, raiding the overseas development aid budget to do so, and has also committed, alongside other NATO allies, to spend 5% of GDP on defence by 2035.

That is a huge leap in funding and a profound shift from what have been the priorities for government spending – the NHS, welfare and education – in recent decades.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies’ Carl Emmerson said the increase, in today’s terms, would be like adding approximately £30bn to the 2027 target of spending around £75bn on core defence.

Sir Keir has been clear-eyed about the decision, arguing that the first duty of any prime minister is to keep his people safe.

But the pledge has raised the obvious questions about how those choices are funded, and whether other public services will face cuts at a time when the UK’s economic growth is sluggish and public finances are under pressure.

This, then, is one of his biggest challenges: can he make sure Britain looks after itself in a fragile world, while also sticking to his promises to deliver for the country?

It is on this that the prime minister has come unstuck over the summer, as he was forced to back down over proposed welfare cuts to the tune of £5bn at the end of this term, in the face of a huge backbench rebellion. Many of his MPs want warfare and welfare.

“There’s been a real collision in recent weeks between those two policy worlds,” explains Jim Murphy, who served both as a welfare minister under Tony Blair and shadow defence secretary under Ed Miliband.

“In welfare, how do you provide for the people who genuinely need support and who, without the state’s support, couldn’t survive? What’s the interplay between that and the unconditional strategic need to invest more in defence?

“For the government, they either get economic growth or they have a series of eye-watering choices in which there can be no compromise with the defence of the state and everything else faces very serious financial pressures.”

He added: “No Labour politician comes into politics to cut welfare, schools or other budgets. But on the basis that defence is non-negotiable, everything else, unfortunately, may face those cuts.”

While the PM sees this clearly, ask around the cabinet table and ministers will admit that the tough choices society will need to take if they genuinely want to respond to the growing threat from Russia, compounded by the unpredictability of Donald Trump, is yet to fully sink in.

There are generations of British citizens that have only ever lived in peace, that do not, like I do, remember the Cold War or The Troubles.

There are also millions of Britons struggling with the cost of living and and public satisfaction with key public services is at historic lows. That is why Labour campaigned in the election on the promise of change, to raise living standards and cut NHS waiting lists.

Ask the public, and 49% of people recognise defence spending needs to increase. But 53% don’t want it to come from other areas of public spending, while 55% are opposed to paying more tax to fund that defence increase.

There is also significant political resistance from the Labour Party.

Sir Keir’s attempts to make savings in the welfare budget have been roundly rejected by his MPs. Instead, his backbenchers are talking about more tax rises to fund public services, or even a broader rethink of Rachel Reeves’s fiscal rules.

Anneliese Dodds, who quit as development minister over cuts to the overseas aid budget, wrote in her resignation letter that she had “expected [cabinet] would collectively discuss our fiscal rules and approach to taxation, as other nations are doing”, as part of a wider discussion about the changing threats.

In an interview for our Electoral Dysfunction podcast, which will be released later this summer, she expanded on this idea.

She said: “I think it’s really important to take a step back and think about what’s going to be necessary, looking 10, 20 years ahead. It looks like the world is not going to become safer, unfortunately, during that period. It’s really important that we increase defence spending.

“I think that does mean we’ve got to really carefully consider those issues about our fiscal rules and about taxation. That isn’t easy… nonetheless, I think we will have to face up to some really big issues.

“Now is the time when we need to look at what other countries are doing. We need to consider whether we have the right system in place.”

For the Labour MP, that means potentially reassessing the fiscal rules and how the fiscal watchdog assesses government spending to perhaps give the government more leeway. She also believes that the government should look again at tax rises.

She added: “We do, I believe, need to think about taxation.

“Now again, there’s no magic wand. There will be implications from any change that would be made. As I said before, we are quite highly taxing working people now, but I think there are ways in which we can look at taxation, not without implications.

“But in a world of difficult trade-offs, we’ve got to take the least worst trade-off for the long term. And that’s what I think is gonna be really important.”

Those trade-offs are going to be discussed more and more into the autumn, ahead of what is looking like an extremely difficult budget for the PM and Ms Reeves.

Not only is the chancellor now dealing with a £5bn shortfall in her accounts from the welfare reform reversal, but she is also dealing with higher-than-expected borrowing costs, fuelled by surging debt costs.

Plus, government borrowing was £3.5bn more than forecast last month, with June’s borrowing coming in at £20.7bn – the second-highest figure since records began in 1993.

Some economists are now predicting that the chancellor will have to raise taxes or cut spending by around £20bn in the budget to fill the growing black hole.

Jeremy Hunt, former Conservative chancellor and now backbencher, tells me he was “massively disappointed” that Labour blinked on welfare reform.

He said: “First of all, it’s terrible for people who are currently trapped on welfare, but secondly, because the risk is that the consequence of that, is that we get trapped in a doom loop of very higher taxes and lower growth.”

‘This group of politicians have everything harder ‘

Mr Murphy says he has sympathy for the predicament of this Labour government and the task they face.

He explained: “We were fortunate [back in the early 2000s] in that the economy was still relatively okay, and we were able to reform welfare and do really difficult reforms. This is another world.

“This group of politicians have everything harder than we had. They’ve got an economy that has been contracting, public services post-COVID in trouble, a restless public, a digital media, an American president who is at best unreliable, a Russian president.

“Back then [in the 2000s] it was inconceivable that we would fight a war with Russia. On every measure, this group of politicians have everything harder than we ever had.”

Over the summer and into the autumn, the drumbeat of tax rises will only get louder, particularly amongst a parliamentary party seemingly unwilling to back spending cuts.

But that just delays a problem unresolved, which is how a government begins to spend billions more on defence whilst also trying to maintain a welfare state and rebuild public services.

This is why the government is pinning so much hope onto economic growth as it’s escape route out of its intractable problem. Because without real economic growth to help pay for public services, the government will have to make a choice – and warfare will win out.

What is still very unclear is how Sir Keir manages to take his party and the people with him.

The chief of the World Health Organization (WHO) has said Gaza is suffering “man-made mass starvation” because of an Israeli blockade on aid to the enclave.

Director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said at a news conference that the population of Gaza is “facing yet another killer on top of bombs and bullets – starvation”.

The WHO said a “deadly surge” in malnutrition has caused the deaths of at least 21 children in 2025, but stressed this figure is likely to be the tip of the iceberg.

Centres for treating malnutrition are full of patients but do not have sufficient supplies for emergency feeding, it added.

In July alone, 5,100 children have so far been admitted to malnutrition programmes, said Dr Rik Peeperkorn, the WHO’s representative for the occupied Palestinian territories. Some 800 of those children were severely emaciated, he said.

Mr Ghebreyesus said: “I don’t know what you would call it other than mass starvation, and it’s man-made, and that’s very clear.”

“This is because of [the] blockade,” he continued, adding that 95% of households in Gaza are also facing severe water shortages.

He said the UN and its humanitarian partners were unable to deliver any food for nearly 80 days between March and May, while an aid blockade was in place, and that the resumption of deliveries has been insufficient.

There is no famine in Gaza, says Israel

An Israeli government spokesperson told Sky News the food shortages have “been engineered by Hamas”, before stating: “There is no famine in Gaza.”

Speaking on the News Hour with Mark Austin, David Mencer continued: “There is a famine of the truth and Israel will not stop telling it.”

He said aid is “flowing” into the enclave but Hamas “loots the trucks [and] deliberately endangers its own people”. The fighters deny stealing food.

Mr Mencer said Israel has allowed more than 4,400 aid trucks to enter Gaza since it lifted the blockade in May, adding that more than 700 are waiting to be picked up and distributed by the United Nations.

That is an average of around 70 trucks a day, which is the lowest rate of the war and far below the 500-600 trucks a day the UN says is needed.

“The problem is not Israel,” he said. “The problem is Hamas.”

Supplies in Gaza ‘totally depleted’

The comments came after more than 100 aid and rights groups warned of mass starvation in Gaza on Wednesday morning – saying supplies have become “totally depleted”.

Large amounts of food, clean water and medical supplies are sitting untouched just outside Gaza, but the groups blamed Israel for its “restrictions”, which they say is creating “chaos, starvation, and death”.

The situation has become so bad, aid agencies warned they were seeing even their own colleagues “waste away before their eyes”.

Israel, which controls all supplies entering Gaza, has denied it is responsible for shortages of food and other supplies.

In a statement signed by 111 organisations, the groups said: “As the Israeli government’s siege starves the people of Gaza, aid workers are now joining the same food lines, risking being shot just to feed their families.

“With supplies now totally depleted, humanitarian organisations are witnessing their own colleagues and partners waste away before their eyes.

“The government of Israel’s restrictions, delays, and fragmentation under its total siege have created chaos, starvation, and death.”

The groups called for governments to demand the lifting of all restrictions and for the restoration of a “principled, UN-led humanitarian response”.

The Norwegian Refugee Council, which backed the statement and is one of the largest independent aid organisations in Gaza, said it has no more supplies to distribute and some of its staff are starving – and accused Israel of paralysing its work.

“Our last tent, our last food parcel, our last relief items have been distributed. There is nothing left,” Jan Egeland, the secretary general of the council, told the Reuters news agency.

United Nations secretary-general Antonio Guterres said “starvation is knocking on every door” in the Palestinian territory, describing the situation as a “horror show”.

Officials in the Hamas-run strip said at least 101 people are known to have died of malnutrition during the conflict in Gaza, including 80 children, most of them in recent weeks.

Some food stocks in Gaza have run out since Israel cut off all supplies in March and then lifted the blockade in May with new measures it said were needed to prevent aid from being diverted to militant groups.

Israel’s Foreign Ministry has accused the organisations of “echoing Hamas propaganda”.

Read more:
Gaza food situation ‘worst it’s ever been’, says charity
Hundreds of thousands ‘catastrophically food insecure’

The UK and several other countries have condemned the current aid delivery model, which is backed by the Israeli and American governments.

It has reportedly resulted in Israeli troops firing on Palestinian civilians in search of food on multiple occasions.

More than 800 people have reportedly been killed in recent weeks trying to reach food, mostly in shootings by Israeli soldiers posted near distribution centres.