There is plenty of bemusement, irritation and anger in some quarters of the Conservative Party as to why Nadhim Zahawi is still in post.
Revelations that the party chairman reportedly paid nearly £5m to HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) to settle a tax dispute, and pay a penalty over around £27m of wealth on which he did not initially pay tax is, for some MPs, a closed case rather than something that needs further investigation.
As one minister pointed out to me on Wednesday, what really mattered here was not the conflict of interest of Mr Zahawi being the chancellor while he was in dispute with the HMRC or what the PM knew when.
What matters here is the naked optics of a cabinet minister receiving around £27m that he didn’t initially pay tax on when people were struggling to make ends meet.
So while the prime minister on Wednesday spoke of following “due process” in determining whether the cabinet minister had broken the ministerial code, the public is more likely to have decided Mr Zahawi had not followed due process of paying his taxes – as they have to do every year – and drawn their own conclusions.
For his part, Mr Zahawi is clear that it was a “careless” error, the tax he owed was paid and the matter settled.
Many MPs have concluded the party chairman is going to have to stand down over this affair anyway, and the investigation into the matter by the PM’s independent ethics advisor is only drawing out the pain.
“Many people in the party think that the situation is unsustainable and will only end one way,” is how one senior party figure put it to me on Wednesday.
Advertisement
“The point here is that the public sees a minister with £27m who didn’t pay his tax.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:22
Rishi Sunak answers Zahawi question at PMQs
There are myriad explanations as to why Mr Sunak hasn’t sacked Mr Zahawi.
His team argues that the prime minister promised to do things properly and “there is a process to follow”.
He is also in a bit of a bind given that he neither sacked nor suspended Deputy Prime Minister Dominic Raab over the eight bullying allegations he is now under investigation over, so it would have been hard to treat Mr Zahawi differently.
There is also chatter that he doesn’t have the authority just to sack the party chairman without a fight or backlash, and instead has to do it following a procedure.
Image: Nadhim Zahawi arrives at the Conservative Party head office
‘Job too big’ for Sunak
Sir Keir used it to reiterate his “weak prime minister” attack line on Wednesday and then went further to suggest that the combination of internal scandals and the problems in the NHS is evidence that the “job is too big” for Mr Sunak.
For a prime minister who has styled himself as a competent technocrat getting on with delivering, this is a very uncomfortable jibe that he will not want to stick.
It also calls into question the prime minister himself, both over his promise to lead a government of integrity and his own tax affairs.
Sir Keir was at it again on Wednesday, goading the prime minister over last year’s revelations that his wife Akshata Murty had in the past avoided tax in the UK by claiming non-dom status.
“We all know why [the PM’s] reluctant to ask his chairman about family affairs and tax avoidance,” remarked Sir Keir to the clear discomfort of the man sitting opposite him in the chamber.
Image: Sir Keir Starmer has used the Zahawi row to say Mr Sunak is incompetent
Conflict over tax affairs
One former senior minister told me they think it’s difficult for the PM to sack someone over tax affairs when his family had its own tax scandal last year and thinks Number 10 is keeping Mr Zahawi in place as a “human shield” to avoid the attention shifting to the PM’s tax affairs.
But the questions are now being directed to Mr Sunak’s door after he was forced to confirm publicly that he had never paid a penalty to the taxman over his own tax affairs.
For the PM’s part, he might well believe the inquiry by his independent ethics advisor is the right way to handle the situation. But his approach means he is also having to field the political blows and burn through his own political capital over a scandal that many in his party think will end with Mr Zahawi having to resign anyway.
“When this sort of thing happens, there’s only one outcome and it’s just a matter of when,” one former cabinet minister told me this week.
A PM then prolonging the pain for him, his chairman and his party, as his reputation for integrity and competence takes another hit.
Turkey has urged the US to take action after accusing Israel of violating the Gaza ceasefire deal.
The country’s president Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Washington and its allies should consider sanctions and halting arms sales to put pressure on Israel to abide by the agreement.
Turkey, a NATO member, joined ceasefire negotiations as a mediator, and increased its role following a meeting between Mr Erdogan and Donald Trump at the White House last month.
“The Hamas side is abiding by the ceasefire. In fact, it is openly stating its commitment to this. Israel, meanwhile, is continuing to violate the ceasefire,” Mr Erdogan told reporters.
“The international community, namely the United States, must do more to ensure Israel’s full compliance to the ceasefire and agreement,” he said.
Mr Erdogan was also asked about comments from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who hinted that he would be opposed to any peacekeeping role for Turkish security forces in the Gaza Strip.
The Turkish president said talks on the issue were still underway, adding: “As this is a multi-faceted issue, there are comprehensive negotiations. We are ready to provide Gaza any form of support on this issue.”
Israel has accused Hamas of breaching the truce and previously said its recent military action in Gaza was designed to uphold the agreement.
Relations between former allies Israel and Turkey hit new lows during the Gaza war, with Ankara accusing Mr Netanyahu’s government of committing genocide, an allegation Israel has repeatedly denied.
Image: A rally in support of Palestinians in Istanbul. Pic: Reuters
Speaking during a visit to Israel on Friday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that a planned international security force for Gaza would have to be made up of “countries that Israel’s comfortable with,” but declined to comment specifically on Turkey’s involvement.
Around 200 US troops are working alongside the Israeli military and delegations from other countries, planning the stabilisation and reconstruction of Gaza.
The US is seeking support from other allies, namely Gulf Arab nations, to build an international security force to be deployed to Gaza and train a Palestinian security force.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:15
Rubio warns against West Bank annexation
Mr Rubio said many nations had expressed interest, but decisions had yet to be made about the rules of engagement. He added that countries need to know what they were signing up for.
“Under what authority are they going to be operating? Who’s going to be in charge? What is their job?” said Mr Rubio.
The secretary of state also reiterated his earlier warning to Israel not to annex the occupied West Bank, land that Palestinians want for part of an independent state.
A bill applying Israeli law to the West Bank won preliminary approval from Israel’s parliament on Wednesday.
Image: US Secretary of State Marco Rubio speaks with US military personnel in Israel. Pic: Reuters
“We don’t think it’s going to happen”, Mr Rubio said, adding that annexation “would also threaten this whole process”.
“If [annexation] were to happen, a lot of the countries that are involved in working on this probably aren’t going to want to be involved in this anymore. It’s a threat to the peace process and everybody knows it”, he added.
The US has announced it is sending an aircraft carrier to the waters off South America as it ramps up an operation to target alleged drug smuggling boats.
The Pentagon said in a statement that the USS Gerald R Ford would be deployed to the region to “bolster US capacity to detect, monitor, and disrupt illicit actors and activities that compromise the safety and prosperity of the United States homeland and our security in the Western Hemisphere”.
The vessel is the US Navy’s largest aircraft carrier. It is currently deployed in the Mediterranean alongside three destroyers, and the group are expected to take around one week to make the journey.
There are already eight US Navy ships in the central and South American region, along with a nuclear-powered submarine, adding up to about 6,000 sailors and marines, according to officials.
It came as the US secretary of war claimed that six “narco-terrorists” had been killed in a strike on an alleged drug smuggling boat in the Caribbean Sea overnight.
Image: A still from footage purporting to show the boat seconds before the airstrike, posted by US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth on X
Pete Hegseth said his military had bombed a vessel which he claimed was operated by Tren de Aragua – a Venezuelan gang designated a terror group by Washington in February.
Writing on X, he claimed that the boat was involved in “illicit narcotics smuggling” and was transiting along a “known narco-trafficking route” when it was struck during the night.
All six men on board the boat, which was in international waters, were killed and no US forces were harmed, he said.
Ten vessels have now been bombed in recent weeks, killing more than 40 people.
Mr Hegseth added: “If you are a narco-terrorist smuggling drugs in our hemisphere, we will treat you like we treat al Qaeda. Day or NIGHT, we will map your networks, track your people, hunt you down, and kill you.”
While he did not provide any evidence that the vessel was carrying drugs, he did share a 20-second video that appeared to show a boat being hit by a projectile before exploding.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:32
Footage of a previous US strike on a suspected drugs boat earlier this week
Speaking during a White House press conference last week, Donald Trump argued that the campaign would help tackle the US’s opioid crisis.
“Every boat that we knock out, we save 25,000 American lives. So every time you see a boat, and you feel badly you say, ‘Wow, that’s rough’. It is rough, but if you lose three people and save 25,000 people,” he said.
On Thursday, appearing at a press conference with Mr Hegseth, Mr Trump said that it was necessary to kill the alleged smugglers, because if they were arrested they would only return to transport drugs “again and again and again”.
“They don’t fear that, they have no fear,” he told reporters.
The attacks at sea would soon be followed by operations on land against drug smuggling cartels, Mr Trump claimed.
X
This content is provided by X, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable X cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to X cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow X cookies for this session only.
“We’re going to kill them,” he added. “They’re going to be, like, dead.”
Some Democratic politicians have expressed concerns that the strikes risk dragging the US into a war with Venezuela because of their proximity to the South American country’s coast.
Others have condemned the attacks as extrajudicial killings that would not stand up in a court of law.
Jim Himes, a member of the House of Representatives, told CBS News earlier this month: “They are illegal killings because the notion that the United States – and this is what the administration says is their justification – is involved in an armed conflict with any drug dealers, any Venezuelan drug dealers, is ludicrous.”
He claimed that Congress had been told “nothing” about who was on the boats and how they were identified as a threat.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:02
What happened at ‘coalition of the willing’ meeting?
European allies were quick to follow that lead. And some countries that have been trading Russian oil appear spooked enough to start backing away from doing so.
But analysts are warning against overstating the impact of all this.
Alexander Kolyandr, senior fellow at the Centre for European Policy Analysis, told Sky News that sanctions won’t be enough on their own.
“There should be an understanding that sanctions alone would not force Putin to stop the war,” he said.
“So Ukraine should get more arms, Ukraine should get more support, and Ukraine should get more guarantees.”
Image: The aftermath of a Russian airstrike in Kharkiv, Ukraine. Pic: Reuters
There appears to have been progress on sending more long-range weapons to Ukraine.
It needs them to neutralise the threat of drones launched from miles behind Russia‘s border.
And possibly towards unfreezing Russia assets to use the proceeds to help fund the Ukrainian war effort, though some nations still oppose the idea.
But this week has seen an unusual level of alignment between the allies on both sides of the Atlantic. That will last as long as Trump does not change his mind.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:49
Sanctions are ‘unfriendly act’
The US president wants to broker an end to the war.
Putin will not be serious about negotiating for peace as long as he thinks he has a chance of victory.
“Putin and the Kremlin are pretty much sure that they are winning the war,” Mr Kolyandr told Sky News, “and that if they keep on pushing, Ukraine might collapse.
“And that’s why I don’t think that President Putin is ready to agree to any kind of compromise which would be acceptable for Ukraine or its European allies.”
It may take a lot more than sanctions on a handful of oil companies to persuade Putin it is not in his interest to continue this war.