Politics latest: Should 'headphone dodgers' be fined? (2025)

Thank you for joining us for live coverage of today's events in British politics. With just a week to go until the local elections, there has been no shortage of news.

Catch up on all you need to know about the day using the key points above, or by scrolling down.

And if you missed tonight's edition of Politics Hub With Sophy Ridge - fear not, for you can watch it full below.

Just over a week from now, voters will be heading to the polls for a round of local elections.

On 1 May, there are 1,600 council seats up for grabs across England, as well as six mayoral elections.

What's at stake

Reform are hoping to make significant gains, while Labour will be hoping to avoid being punished for tough decisions at the national level.

Meanwhile, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch will be looking to prove her own party's potential for a return to government after a bumpy time in opposition so far.

Labour are also expecting a tight-run race with Reform in the by-election in Runcorn and Helsby, triggered by the resignation of Mike Amesbury following his conviction for assaulting a constituent.

How to stay up to date

Join Sky News live on the night for our Vote 2025 special coverage, looking at the results as they come in, as well as bringing you all the best analysis and reaction as soon as the polls close.

There will be continuous coverage on the Sky News app - including here in the Politics Hub.

Our special coverage will include:

• An overnight special from midnight on 1 May into 2 May as results come in, with presenter Jonathan Samuels and deputy political editor Sam Coates;
  
• An election special programme throughout the day on 2 May, with a special edition of the Politics Hub With Sophy Ridge showing from 7pm-9pm that evening. Economics and data editor Ed Conway and political correspondent Tamara Cohen will join Ridge during the day's coverage, with political editor Beth Rigby travelling across the country;
• Alongside that, we'll be running two podcast specials on Electoral Dysfunction, available on Saturday 3 May, and Politics At Sam And Anne's, available on Friday 2 May.

Sir Keir Starmer has stated that it is "for Ukraine to decide" the terms of any peace deal with Russia, in what appears to be an implicit rebuke of Donald Trump.

Speaking on board the HMS Prince of Wales, which is heading out on its second major deployment, the prime minister also piled praise on Volodymyr Zelenskyy after the US president accused him of "prolonging the killing".

"We are at an intense stage in the negotiations," Starmer told The Telegraph newspaper.

"In the end, I'm always mindful of the fact that it is Ukraine that must decide on those issues - it's not for other people to decide on behalf of Ukraine. It is for Ukraine to decide. And Russia must come to the table for that unconditional ceasefire."

The PM also pushed back on claims from the White House that Ukraine is responsible for starting the war, saying: "Russia is the aggressor. Never forget that Zelenskyy was offered safe passage out of his country in the first week of the conflict.

"At that point, everybody thought that Russia would succeed very quickly in its intent of taking over Ukraine. And he stayed to fight and to lead his country, which he's done with huge courage and resilience for over three years, as has his whole country."

The US has reportedly mooted recognising Crimea as part of Russia, but asked by the newspaper if that is something he would accept, Starmer said: "That's not for me to say. That is part of the discussions."

What exactly will the UK look like in a little over a week?

It's seven days exactly until millions of people will go to the polls to vote in the local elections.

Can Reform UK turn votes into seats - and from there into power? How far do the Tories have to fall? How unpopular is Labour now that it's in government?

Our deputy political editor Sam Coatesexamines those questions below...

Labour is calling for an investigation to be launched into whether Robert Jenrick has breached parliamentary rules while campaigning in the local election.

It's the second day of bad headlines for Jenrick, who can't seem to put a foot right. Or, perhaps, the ambitious and vocal Conservative frontbencher is enjoying his name being splashed around, regardless of the content.

In either case, the latest criticism of the shadow Justice Secretary is over his decision to write formal letters offering support to an unknown number of Conservative council candidates across the UK on what looks like parliamentary paper.

There is a ban on MPs using parliamentary portcullis stationary for explicit political campaigning, and Labour are now calling this a "clear breach" of the rules.

The letter, that looks remarkably similar to official House of Commons paperwork, reads:"Now that statement of nominations has been published, I wanted to congratulate you on being nominated as a Conservative Candidate."

He then offers each of the recipients a political campaign visit and offers to help their local association in "any other way".

Lucy Powell, leader of the House of Commons, called it "blatant manoeuvring" and called for the Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch to sack him.

Watch: The PM questioned Badenoch on Jenrick's loyalty yesterday

It's the second day in a row that Labour has called for Jenrick to be fired - though Badenoch backed her colleague yesterday.

A Labour spokesperson said: “Robert Jenrick is openly campaigning for the leadership of the Conservative Party and we know what he wants to do as leader – stitch up a grubby backroom deal with Nigel Farage’s party."

For context, we've already put those claims to Reform UK's leader, who said "it's not happening" and insisted "we're not going to do a deal" with what he termed a "failed brand".

The Labour spokeserson added: "The nightmare of a Farage-Jenrick ticket would lead to an assault on workers’ rights, with patients at risk of having to pay to see their GP.

"All while fighting over the bones of the Tory Party."

There has been no indication yet whether parliamentary authorities will launch an investigation into Jenrick's letters.

Rachel Reeves is in Washington DC attending the IMF spring meetings, and she is speaking right now at a panel event on "growth and resilience in an uncertain world".

She said the US "have a point" about "substantial imbalances in the global economy", and suggested both Donald Trump and Labour's election victories last year showed the current system doesn't work for everyone.

"Jobs have been hollowed out in certain sectors of the economy," she said.

But in an implicit criticism of the US president, Reeves added: "There are very real problems that need to be addressed. My issue is the way in which we address them.

"And I am in favour of the use of multilateral institutions and dialogue to resolve differences, rather than blunt instruments, which is what I think tariffs are."

'Cool heads'

She went on to say that "no one wants a trade war" and the UK "made aconscious decision in the UK not to retaliate and escalate, because we think ratcheting up benefits no one".

"We're approaching the dialogue with the US with cool heads, and a pragmatic sort of realism about what we want to achieve."

Reeves added that the UK government is also pursuing trade agreements with the EU, Gulf countries, and India.

"This is Robert Generic, this is Robert the Remainer, this is Robert the I don't stand particularly for anything at all."

Fair to say Nigel Farage doesn't seem like a great fan of Robert Jenrick.

Reform's leader was asked by our deputy political editor Sam Coates today about a leaked recording in which the Tory shadow justice secretary spoke about wanting to unite the right.

He batted away that idea, and suggested the former minister's current positioning seemed "far removed from everything he's ever stood for".

Jenrick's been seen as one of the more right-wing Tory MPs of recent years, having previously been a David Cameron loyalist who backed Remain - and it seems Farage holds that against him.

Maybe he should go on I'm A Celeb.

Beth Rigby is used to running around Westminster.

She's been quite adept at sprinting from one political event to another.

But now Sky News' political editor and host of the Electoral Dysfunction podcast has decided to up her game - and run the London Marathon.

She writes: "I used to say I was never going to attempt to run a marathon: too hard, too long, too much training.

"It is honestly something I never thought I would do. I took up running in my 30s, somewhere between quitting smoking and having my children.

"I am not a natural long-distance runner. I am neither long nor lean. At school, I was better in a sprint than cross-country.

"But struggling to breathe as you try to run a couple of kilometres is a great motivator not to pick up a Marlboro light again. So, I persevered and in 2017 ran my first half-marathon.

"But then last summer, my dearest friend Laura died from ovarian cancer after a two-year illness. She was just 48 years old, our birthdays just six days apart.

"So this is how I went from never ever running a marathon to attempting the world's biggest race this week, and I am not doing it alone: when I told my friend Esme Wren about it, she signed up too, so we've been on the journey together.

Speaking to Politics Hub With Sophy Ridge, former national security adviser Lord Peter Ricketts says Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron are taking the right approach with their "coalition of the willing" in case Donald Trump walks away from Ukraine peace talks.

If Russia accepts a deal put forward by Trump, but Ukraine rejects it, Ricketts says Europe will have to "pick up the pieces".

But replacing American military equipment can't be done overnight, he warns, and Europe will have to build its defence industry "over time" to "take more of the strain".

Peacekeeping force could lead to 'war with Russia'

Asked what Starmer should do now, Ricketts says he should "go on doing what he's been doing rather skilfully", which is getting the Europeans on the same page about taking "more responsibility for our own security".

But he still "absolutely" has concerns about a potential European peacekeeping force in Ukraine, pointing to "the risk of a ceasefire breaking down", and then "we're at war with Russia".

Training and providing support staff, as well as continuing to provide weapons, would be preferable in his view.

We're in a critical period when it comes to the conflict in Ukraine.

America says a deal is close, but it's Volodymyr Zelenskyy who is "prolonging the killing field" - and while all that's going on, Russia launched its worst missile attack on Kyiv in nine months overnight.

I can't work out whether Donald Trump is trying to bounce Ukraine and Russia into a deal - or if he's preparing the ground to walk away and blame everyone but himself.

But one thing is completely, unarguably clear. The British government is saying things that cannot be reconciled with the US position on Ukraine.

Watch: How Russia's 'massive' strikes unfolded

UK silence on differences with Trump is unsustainable

Yes, the US president did condemn the Russian strikes on Kyiv. But he started his presidency saying that he believes Putin wants peace, and frankly, not much has shifted since that.

Contrast that with Keir Starmer, who has been clear that Russia started the war.

Until now, No 10 has been keen to gloss over any differences with America - they don't want to get on the wrong side of the Trump administration, they need to keep them at the table.

But that's frankly becoming unsustainable.Because now we are getting to the red lines necessary for any peace deal - and it's increasingly clear the US and UK are drawing them in entirely different places.

Two leaders on completely different planets

A UK defence minister has been talking about whether Ukraine could concede Crimea to Russia as part of a deal - and it's a hard no from him.

And Trump said on Truth Social yesterday: "If [Zelenskyy] wants Crimea, why didn't they fight for it eleven years ago when it was handed over to Russia without a shot being fired?

"The situation for Ukraine is dire - He can have peace, or he can fight for another three years before losing the whole country."

Let's get real.This is not a different nuance here. This is not a different emphasis.

This is two leaders on two difference planets when it comes to Ukraine. And it's hard to see any peace deal that both of them could back.