He is a politician who keeps his emotions buttoned up - in public, at least. But he was clearly brimming with anger as he called US President Donald Trump out for his "insulting and frankly appalling" remarks over non-US troops that served in Afghanistan. Trump latest - prince joins condemnation Sir Keir had been in Chequers overnight after hosting his Danish counterpart for bilateral talks over Greenland and NATO, coming back to Downing Street on Friday morning amid growing national fury over Mr Trump's disgraceful slur about NATO troops. The prime minister, in his strongest rebuke yet to Mr Trump, was highly critical of his claim that NATO troops in Afghanistan "stayed a little off the front lines". For the record, 1,160 non-US coalition soldiers were killed in Afghanistan, and thousands more were wounded, some suffering life-changing injuries. A total of 457 British troops died in combat alongside US forces. That Mr Trump casually belittled those sacrifices has provoked an outpouring of anger and universal condemnation. It is an insult not just to our forces, but to a relationship forged from common language, and exceptionally close cultural, political, military and economic ties over decades. In making such offensive remarks, on the heels of threats over sanctions and invasions of a Nato ally, the so-called special relationship is fast becoming a toxic one. For a prime minister, whose first job is the security of this nation and people, a fellow leader insulting his armed forces is a low blow, and I'm told that Mr Starmer wanted to make his position very clear and to speak up for the UK's armed forces. Up until now, he has only ever condemned Mr Trump's comments or actions as wrong. His comments on Friday were a clear step change as he strongly criticised Mr Trump personally and suggested the US president should apologise. As for the fallout, Downing Street's approach will be to try to continue along as it was, sticking to Britain's principles and values and co-operating with the US on defence, security and intelligence. But there is no doubt that this past week has broken the spell. Mr Trump's increasingly erratic and outlandish behaviour has left Sir Keir with no other option than to shift away from an approach of 'Trump containment' to calling him out. In other circumstances, a prime minister who has made a great play of Trump management only to see relations sour so badly could be in the firing line. Read more on Sky News:'Draft dodger's words a gut punch'Davos was 'hijacked' by one man Where he has cover is in the universal condemnation of Mr Trump from all political leaders If anything, Sir Keir will come under more pressure to increase his hostility towards our increasingly toxic partner, the US. Allies of his were at pains to stress this is not the beginning of the end of the special relationship, but it is equally true that the events of the past week have made that bond feel far less stable. Sir Keir was already looking to deepen and tighten ties with Europe. After the behaviour of the Trump White House this week, he perhaps wants to turbocharge it.

The party has published a timetable, with the whole selection process being completed next Saturday, suggesting Labour could be planning a dash to the polls as early as next month. As the prime minister's popularity has plunged in opinion polls, allies have urged Mr Burnham - Labour's king of the north - to return to the Commons, potentially to seize Sir Keir Starmer's crown. Today he received a top endorsement when former deputy prime minister Angela Rayner said Mr Burnham should be allowed to stand in the forthcoming by-election. But in an announcement at 5pm on Friday, the party's ruling national executive declared that he has only until 5pm on Saturday to seek permission to stand as a by-election candidate. That means he only has hours to make up his mind on a decision that will make or break his political career: whether to stand in the looming Gorton and Denton by-election, or wait for another opportunity. As well as the 24-hour ultimatum facing Mr Burnham, the rest of the timetable for the by-election is brutally short. Applications opened at 5pm on Friday and will close at midnight on Sunday night. A longlist of candidates, probably six, will be drawn up on Monday by a selection panel, shortlisting interviews will be held on Tuesday and hustings and selection will take place next Saturday. If Mr Burnham does apply and is selected, the constituency in Greater Manchester, where Mr Burnham has been mayor since 2017, is set to host the most high-profile box-office by-election in decades. Read more from Sky News:Trump should apologise over Nato claims, PM suggestsFormer Tory councillor admits drugging and raping ex-wifeCelebrities attend Valentino funeral The by-election has been triggered by the resignation on health grounds of former minister Andrew Gwynne, who was revealed last year to have sent racist and sexist WhatsApp messages. But although Labour is defending a majority of 13,413, and won more than 50% of the vote at the general election, Mr Burnham faces several hurdles and a "stop Burnham" campaign by allies of the prime minister. At Labour's conference last autumn, Mr Burnham faced a backlash from Starmer loyalists after criticising the government and claiming that he had been urged by Labour MPs to stand for leader. As well as a rule stating that elected mayors must seek the permission of the national executive before seeking nomination as a parliamentary candidate, Mr Burnham would have to quit as mayor. That would trigger a costly election for his successor, which Labour could lose, given the unpopularity of Sir Keir's government and the current surge in support for Reform UK and the Green Party. Also, if the national executive bows to pressure from a "stop Burnham" campaign, it could thwart Mr Burnham by imposing a women-only or black, Asian and minority ethnic-only shortlist. Another risk is that even if he is Labour's by-election candidate, he could lose. That would almost certainly mean the end of his political career, since there would be no second chance to challenge Sir Keir. In a by-election last year in Runcorn and Helsby, Reform UK, second in Gorton and Denton in 2024, overturned a Labour majority of 14,696 and won by a wafer-thin majority of just six votes. If he stands in Gordon and Denton, Mr Burnham could also be opposed by George Galloway, who defeated Labour in a 2024 by-election in Rochdale, and Zack Polanski, the Green Party leader.

It comes after the MP, who defected from the Conservatives to Reform UK last week, claimed Tory chief whip Rebecca Harris contacted him in 2024 to say there was "a special place in hell" for him. He alleged Ms Harris "messaged me with a litany of insults" after he wrote an article for the Mail on Sunday, in which he called for the UK's foreign aid budget to be halved to fund an increase in defence spending. When quizzed about the allegation, Mrs Badenoch said Mr Jenrick was "lying" about the exchange and said it was her party's policy to spend more money on the British military and "take it away from aid". Mrs Badenoch told GB News earlier on Friday: "He's lying. And I think it's a real shame he's being allowed to air these views. He's left the party – it's time for him to move on." But hours later, Mr Jenrick posted an image of messages purporting to be from Ms Harris, which he captioned with the words: "They still won't tell the truth." According to the purported texts, the chief whip told Mr Jenrick: "This is actual feedback / Leave the party and be a commentator... Go away... You're a bloodsucker. "You have a really special place in hell". She allegedly continued: "Running us down in public just to feel good on heaven knows what basis / if you aren't happy with the direction of travel fine – please use your party connections to deal with it but not in public – best announce you and Suella [Braverman] are stranding [sic] down now." "You've lost the plot," Ms Harris appears to add. Read more from Sky News:Trump should apologise over Nato claims, PM suggestsFormer Tory councillor admits drugging and raping ex-wifeCelebrities attend Valentino funeral A Conservative Party source responded to the post by accusing Mr Jenrick of "lying again and misrepresenting an exchange he had over two years ago". They added: "Those messages have absolutely nothing to do with cutting foreign aid. Instead, they show a government whip trying to reason with someone who was working with the 'Grid of Shit' plotters, and whose scheming helped contribute to a Labour landslide and the worst result for the Conservative Party in its history. "With his love of backstabbing and psychodrama, Jenrick will fit right in with Reform." The row is the latest twist in a heated war of words between Mr Jenrick and his former party following his defection. Despite the apparent reference to Ms Braverman in the text by Ms Harris, she remains a member of the Conservatives and has not left the party.

Veterans and their families, as well as MPs from all parties, have reacted with fury after the US president said NATO troops stayed "a little off the frontlines" in Afghanistan. In an interview with Fox News in Davos, Mr Trump repeated his criticism, saying he was not "sure" the military alliance would "be there if we ever needed them". He added: "We've never needed them. They'll say they sent some troops to Afghanistan... and they did, they stayed a little back, a little off the frontlines." On Friday afternoon, Sir Keir said: "I consider President Trump's remarks to be insulting and frankly, appalling. "And I'm not surprised they've caused such hurt to the loved ones of those who were killed or injured." He added that if he had said something like that, he would "certainly apologise". Earlier, Downing Street said Mr Trump was "wrong" to diminish the role of NATO and British troops in Afghanistan. The prime minister's official spokesman said UK forces had served alongside the US and NATO in "sustained combat operations". Pointing to the 457 British deaths in Afghanistan and the "many hundreds" more who were wounded, he added: "We are incredibly proud of our armed forces and their service and sacrifice will never be forgotten." America is the only NATO member to have invoked the collective security provisions of its Article 5 clause - that an attack against one member is an attack on all. Trump's remarks 'the ultimate insult' Diane Dernie, whose son Ben Parkinson suffered horrific injuries when his vehicle hit a mine in Afghanistan in 2006, said the US president's comments were "the ultimate insult". Mr Parkinson is widely viewed as the most severely injured British soldier to have survived the war. The blast left the former lance bombardier with both legs amputated, a twisted spine and brain damage. His mother said: "I can assure you, the Taliban didn't plant IEDs [improvised explosive devices] miles and miles back from the front line. "Come and look at us, the life that Ben leads - 19-and-a-half years on, still fighting for his care, still fighting for him to have a decent life, recovering from a recent operation. "To hear this man say: 'Oh, well, you just fannied about behind the front lines'... It's the ultimate insult." She said Sir Keir Starmer has "got to stand up for his own armed forces and he's got to absolutely refute what Donald Trump said". "Call him out," she added. 'We shed blood, sweat and tears' Defence minister Al Carns said: "I served five tours in Afghanistan, many alongside my American colleagues. We shed blood, sweat and tears together. Not everybody came home. "These are bonds, I think, forged in fire, protecting the US, our shared interests, but actually protecting democracy overall." The former commando, who served five tours in Afghanistan and was awarded the Military Cross for gallantry, said Mr Trump's comments were "ridiculous", adding: "Many courageous and honourable service personnel from many nations fought on the front line. Many fought way beyond it." Robert Dicketts, whose son Oliver Dicketts, 27, was killed while serving with the Parachute Regiment in Afghanistan in 2006, said: "When I read it, I thought, 'What a bloody cheek!'. "I think my thoughts about Donald Trump are probably unprintable. "To put it politely, Donald Trump's knowledge of history is lacking considerably." 'Heroes who gave their lives in service of our nation' The UK suffered the second-highest number of military deaths in the Afghanistan conflict. The US saw 2,461 deaths. America's allies suffered 1,160 deaths during the conflict - around a third of the total coalition deaths. Defence Secretary John Healey said: "NATO's Article 5 has only been triggered once. The UK and NATO allies answered the US call. And more than 450 British personnel lost their lives in Afghanistan. "Those British troops should be remembered for who they were: heroes who gave their lives in service of our nation." Trump is 'plainly wrong' Social care minister Stephen Kinnock also pointed to the fact that the only time NATO's Article 5 clause - a call for allies to come to a member's defence - had been activated "was to go to the aid of the United States after 9/11". "And many, many British soldiers and many soldiers from other European and NATO allies gave their lives in support of American missions, American-led missions in places like Afghanistan and Iraq," he said. "I am incredibly proud of our armed forces. They have put their lives on the line for our country. They are the definition of honour and valour and patriotism - and anybody who seeks to criticise what they have done and the sacrifices they make is plainly wrong," Mr Kinnock added. Ben McBean lost two limbs while serving with the Royal Marines in Afghanistan. The former commando said: "If someone's speaking the truth, you don't mind, but when it's completely rubbish, it offends you. I was on the frontline every day that I was there. "I have to live like this. I have to try and raise my family with these injuries. Things are difficult mentally, physically and emotionally, and to have someone who can't even fight sleep sit there and just say 'you guys were slightly further back', along with other nations, is offensive." 'We have always been there' Dame Emily Thornberry MP, chair of the Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee, said Mr Trump's comments were "an insult" to the families of those who died and "so much more than a mistake". Speaking on the BBC's Question Time, Dame Emily said: "How dare he say we weren't on the frontline, how dare he. "We have always been there whenever the Americans have wanted us; we have always been there." In a social media post, Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey MP said: "Trump avoided military service five times. "How dare he question their sacrifice. Farage and all the others still fawning over Trump should be ashamed." Josh Babarinde, Liberal Democrat MP for Eastbourne, wrote in a post on X: "[Donald Trump] can go f**k himself. "Anyone who mocks, demeans or minimises the sacrifices of British troops is no friend of our nation." "The US is a historic friend of the UK's - but not this guy," he said, referring to Mr Trump. Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch said the sacrifice of British and other NATO troops deserved respect, not denigration, adding his comments were "complete nonsense" which could weaken the NATO alliance. "I spoke to parents of young men who had lost their lives in Afghanistan, and I think it is a disgrace to denigrate their memory like that," she said. Mrs Badenoch said there was "too much careless talk from President Trump" and "we mustn't have these sort of throwaway comments that actually weaken the strong relationship between those countries in the alliance". 'I saw the sacrifices made by British soldiers' Tory MP Ben Obese-Jecty, who served in Afghanistan as a captain in the Royal Yorkshire Regiment, said it was "sad to see our nation's sacrifice, and that of our NATO partners, held so cheaply by the president of the United States". He said: "I saw first hand the sacrifices made by British soldiers I served alongside in Sangin, where we suffered horrific casualties, as did the US Marines the following year. "I don't believe US military personnel share the view of President Trump; his words do them a disservice as our closest military allies." Read more from Sky News:Trump promises Greenland 'deal' will be 'amazing' for USIs president's peace board a new UN or a gang of friends? Former UK ambassador to Afghanistan Sir Nicholas Kay told Sky News the US president was "wrong" and he "clearly does not value and appreciate NATO in the same way he ought to". "The president is wrong. He is not known for his respect for other people, and he is not known for his accuracy with facts, and I'm afraid this is another example," he said. Last year, US vice president JD Vance hit back at claims of "disrespecting" British troops who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, after suggesting a potential peacekeeping force in Ukraine would be "20,000 troops from some random country that hasn't fought a war in 30 or 40 years". At the time, only the UK and France had pledged troops to a potential peacekeeping force.

Should social media be banned for under-16s? After a dramatic vote in the House of Lords, Beth, Harriet, and Ruth dig into what a ban would really mean and what impact it would have on young people, and they hear from some of them. And on the world stage, Donald Trump's threats over Greenland and tariffs have rattled allies and forced an uncomfortable reckoning about the strength of the transatlantic relationship. With Davos dominated by power plays and a hard-hitting speech from Canada's Mark Carney, the trio asks whether the rules-based world order is already breaking, and where that leaves Britain. You can WhatsApp the podcast at 07934 200 444 or email electoraldysfunction@sky.uk. Remember, you can also watch Beth, Harriet, and Ruth on YouTube.