In a watering down of one of the key measures in the Employment Rights Bill, the qualifying period for unfair dismissal will now be six months - down from 24 months currently.

Labour wanted to bring in protections from day one in the job but faced opposition from some businesses.

Responding to criticism, Peter Kyle, the business secretary, said "compromise is strength" and an "art" that had been lost in recent years, hailing the move as a "great success" for the economy, workers and employers.

The changes also mean there will be no statutory probation period and workers will still get sick pay from day one in the job and paternity leave from April next year.

Ministers said reducing the qualifying period for unfair dismissal was a "workable package" that will "benefit millions of working people who will gain new rights and offer business and employers much-needed clarity".

Businesses have largely welcomed the change, but unions gave a more hostile response.

Sharon Graham, the general secretary of Unite, said the bill was now a "shell of its former self".

"With fire and rehire and zero-hours contracts not being banned, the bill is already unrecognisable," she said.

"These constant row backs will only damage workers' confidence that the protections promised will be worth the wait. Labour needs to keep its promises."

The TUC urged the House of Lords to allow the rest of the legislation to pass.

Paul Nowak, the TUC general secretary, said: "The Employment Rights Bill is essential to better quality, more secure jobs for millions of workers across the economy.

"The absolute priority now is to get these rights - like day one sick pay - on the statute book so that working people can start benefitting from them from next April.

"Following the government's announcement, it is now vital that peers respect Labour's manifesto mandate and that this bill secures royal assent as quickly as possible."

The Employment Rights Bill was a cornerstone of Labour's 2024 election manifesto, and also contains measures that would ban zero-hours contracts.

The legislation has been caught in parliamentary ping pong with the House of Lords.

Last month, some peers objected to the provisions around unfair dismissal, suggesting that offering workers that right from day one in the job would deter businesses from hiring.

They also opposed Labour's move to force employers to offer guaranteed hours to employees from day one, arguing that not all workers objected to having zero hours.

The Resolution Foundation said the change in the unfair dismissal period was a "sensible move that will speed up the delivery of improvements to working conditions and reduce the risk of firms being put off hiring".

It said the change "strikes the right balance between strengthening worker protections and encouraging businesses to hire."

Read more:
Budget 2025: The key points at a glance
Starmer insists Labour 'kept to our manifesto'

Nye Cominetti, principal economist at the Resolution Foundation, said: "The UK currently has one of the longest qualifying periods for protection, which needs to come down. But scrapping it entirely would have meant lurching from one extreme to the other and putting firms off hiring new workers.

"This sensible move to a six-month qualifying period will bring the UK into line with other countries, deliver tangible improvements to working conditions, and help the Government move forward with other key aspects of the Employment Rights Bill."

The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) added: "Businesses will be relieved that the government has agreed to a key amendment to the Employment Rights Bill, which can pave the way to its initial acceptance.

"This agreement keeps a qualifying period that is simple, meaningful and understood within existing legislation.

"It is crucial for businesses confidence to hire and to support employment, at the same time as protecting workers."

But Andrew Griffith, the shadow business and trade secretary, said: "Rachel Reeves's benefits street budget contained little good news for businesses already struggling under the weight of last year's jobs tax.

"Inflation and unemployment are set to be higher for longer, wage costs are going up and business rate reliefs are being cut.

"It's hard to see anything in this budget which will boost confidence or stop the exodus of young people and wealth creators leaving."

This is when the nerds and boffins of Britain's fiscal thinktanks assemble to deliver their snap verdict on the chancellor's decisions.

The moment is more important than ever when, as was certainly the case this time, the budget is a big one.

So what did the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) and the Resolution Foundation make of this year's budget?

Well, as you'd probably expect, they both fell short of distilling it into a single soundbite, but in broad terms, they both sounded somewhat positive.

Money latest: Budget blow to holidays

Yes, there were plenty of big provisos. The head of the IFS, Helen Miller, said Labour have broken their manifesto pledge not to raise National Insurance.

The Resolution Foundation argued that if only the chancellor had raised the basic rate of income tax instead of freezing personal allowances, it would have made the tax rise considerably fairer and more progressive.

And that's before one gets into the criticism of some of the other bits and pieces from the red book - the structure of the EV tax, for instance (why doesn't it try to penalise congestion?), or of the mansion tax (why not just overhaul council tax altogether?).

But for the most part, these closely-followed institutions seemed pretty supportive of this year's budget - more so, certainly, than they were last year.

Primarily, that's because while the last budget left only a very thin bit of headroom against Rachel Reeves's fiscal rules, this one was far more cautious, doubling that fiscal insurance policy to just over £21bn.

Yet that headroom is dependent on a couple of important factors. First, that the government will hold to its promises to keep spending growth constrained towards the end of the decade. Second, that it will be able to raise all the tax revenues it's promising in that year.

That, in turn, gets to a deeper issue with the budget. Most of the tough stuff has been put off to the final year of the forecast - namely 2029.

That year, the government will face a squeeze at the very same moment that Britons are all asked to pay more in taxes.

And, critically, that's the very year Labour is due to face a general election. Does it really plan to fight an election off the back of a contracting economy?

Consider, too, that for all the government's promises to get living standards growing this parliament, they are currently only forecast to rise at the slowest rate since the 1950s - save for the pandemic and energy price shock period. The economic backdrop, in other words, is hardly rosy.

Still, for the time being, the chancellor has managed to put together a budget that has bolstered her position both in her party and in her job.

Markets remain relatively sanguine - much more so than after Rachel Reeves's first budget last year - with bond yields lower today than before the event (albeit a little higher than yesterday).

Read more:
Budget takes UK into uncharted territory to allow spending spree
Main budget announcements at a glance
Reeves reveals £26bn of tax rises
Cash ISA limit slashed - but some are exempt

However, this was a complex budget. And, as with all bits of complex engineering, there remains a distinct possibility of large chunks of the budget failing to work.

But since so much of it isn't due to kick in for a few years, it may take quite a while before we find out which bits work and which, if any, don't.

He worked with "the US government, including the CIA, as a member of a partner force in Kandahar" during the US's war with the Taliban, CIA director John Ratcliffe has said.

The suspect, who has been pictured for the first time, was wounded in an exchange of gunfire before he was arrested.

He was identified by the Department of Homeland Security as Rahmanullah Lakanwal, 29.

Attorney general Pam Bondi said the US government plans to bring terrorism charges against the gunman and seek a sentence of life in prison "at a minimum".

"A lone gunman opened fire without provocation, ambush style, armed with a .357 Smith & Wesson revolver," she told reporters.

US attorney for Washington DC Jeanine Pirro identified the two wounded Guard members as Sarah Beckstrom, 20, and Andrew Wolfe, 24.

Ms Pirro said the suspect ambushed them while they were patrolling near the White House. He is alleged to have shot one guardsman who fell and then shot again before firing multiple times at the second guardsman with the Magnum handgun.

Numerous electronic devices seized from suspect's home

The suspect "drove his vehicle cross-country from the state of Washington with the intended target of coming to our nation's capital," Ms Pirro said.

The FBI searched multiple properties in Washington state and San Diego on Thursday in what officials said was a terrorism probe into the DC shooting.

Investigators seized numerous electronic devices from the suspect's house in Washington state, including cellphones, laptops and iPads, FBI director Kash Patel told a news conference.

According to the Department of Homeland Security, Lakanwal entered the US in 2021 under Operation Allies Welcome, a Biden-era programme to resettle Afghans who assisted the US during the war and feared reprisals from the Taliban after the withdrawal.

An unnamed relative of the suspect has said that Lakanwal served in the Afghan army for 10 years alongside US special forces troops and was stationed in Kandahar for part of that time.

👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈

The relative also said Lakanwal was working for online retail giant Amazon the last time they spoke several months ago, according to Sky's US partner NBC News.

A Trump administration official who spoke on condition of anonymity said that Lakanwal applied for asylum in December 2024 and was approved on 23 April of this year.

Lakanwal had no known criminal history, the official said.

US President Donald Trump, who was at his resort in Florida at the time of the attack, released a prerecorded video statement late on Wednesday calling the shooting "an act of evil, an act of hatred and an act of terror".

He said his administration would "re-examine" all Afghans who arrived in the US during the presidency of his predecessor, Joe Biden.

The US Citizenship and Immigration Services agency has said it has halted processing of all immigration requests relating to Afghan nationals indefinitely, "pending further review of security and vetting protocols".

In the wake of Wednesday's shooting, defence secretary Pete Hegseth said the president requested an additional 500 National Guard troops to bolster the more than 2,000 already deployed in the nation's capital.

In August, Trump ordered the National Guard to the city to combat rising crime, a move that drew objections from District of Columbia officials who argued in court that it violated local authority.

The smoke catches in your throat and the emotion catches you off guard.

Seven of the eight tower blocks that make up this complex have been all but blackened. And through the shells that used to be windows you can only imagine the horror and the panic that must have played out inside, the screams that went unanswered.

More than 30 hours after the blaze began here there was still a sense that it is far from under control. At various points during the day the flames sprung up from different windows, as if the fire has found fresh tinder.

Debris falls from the buildings periodically, ash still floats in the air.

There is no doubt the community here is reeling. Along the surrounding streets hundreds came out to look on in horror, mostly in a stunned sort of silence.

Occasionally the air was pierced with the terrible cries of relatives, who had received the news they were dreading.

But much of the grief was quiet and held close, an arm around the shoulders or a quiet embrace.

Among the survivors is the Lam family, three generations of which had been living in the building for 40 years. They have lost their home and haven't heard from their neighbours.

"The alarm was all off because of the renovation of the outside. So there is no alarm to let all the people know. Many old people, elderly people, they were all having an afternoon sleep. So nobody knew," Ms Lam, whose father survived the fire, said.

"Once they know the fire has already burned down everything and they cannot escape, they were all trapped in the house. This is a disaster actually."

Another survivor said: "I feel sadness and hopeless and don't know what [I'm] going to do. I don't know. Cannot describe. So sad."

Hong Kong is one of the world's most densely populated cities, fire in places like this has a significantly more deadly potential.

And it also means many are displaced. Over 4,500 lived in this complex alone and are in need of emergency shelter.

The government has offered temporary accommodation to many, but the community is filling the gaps.

Armies of volunteers handed out food, water, blankets and clothes, including to those who had opted to sleep on the floor of a nearby shopping area.

One man, who wanted to sleep on the floor close to his home, said he doesn't feel supported by the government.

There is a thin line between grief and anger, and there's a feeling it's narrowing here.

Many fingers have pointed towards the construction company running extensive renovations in the complex.

A netted mesh, bamboo scaffolding and polystyrene that may have been used as part of the works have all been cited as potentially speeding the spread.

Three construction bosses have already been arrested.

But there is a sense that distrust of the authorities more broadly runs deep.

"It is very serious and people are starting to feel furious about the construction company and the construction materials," one woman said.

"There are so many layers of anger among the people. People feel that every party should take responsibility."

Read more:
At least 83 dead as police make arrests over fire
Almost 280 people missing as blaze engulfs flats

Everyone we spoke to wanted to wear a mask to avoid being targeted, with volunteers actively encouraging the masks, and many hinted that the system shoulders its share of responsibility for what happened.

This fire is already the worst disaster in the modern history of Hong Kong; many of the victims are elderly and many will struggle to rebuild.

There will many days of pain to come, but many days of questions too.

Hewa Margai, 45, of Carshalton Road, Mitcham, London, was sentenced to eight years and six months in prison at Kingston Crown Court after being found guilty of eight counts of holding a person in slavery or servitude.

The victims, including a 15-year-old boy, are Romanian nationals who were trafficked to the UK between November and December 2020 under false promises of accommodation, fair pay, food and legitimate employment.

But after they arrived, they were forced to work at Margai's car wash in Mitcham, housed in a small shed on-site, and routinely subjected to physical, mental and psychological abuse.

During the COVID lockdown, the victims were confined to the car wash premises without access to their travel documents.

The 15-year-old victim contacted the Metropolitan Police on 1 February 2021, saying he had been lured to the UK with the promise of a job at the car wash, but had his ID confiscated by the manager upon arrival.

When officers went to the car wash on the same day, they found two women in their 20s and five men aged in their teens, 20s and 30s, as well as the 15-year-old boy, who had been living in a shed on-site for months.

The victims spoke minimal English, but disclosed to officers via Google Translate that they had come to the UK via bus and had only worked for a few weeks before the car wash was closed due to the COVID lockdown.

After the business was closed, they said they had to pay rent to car wash owner Margai, who had confiscated their IDs.

One of the rescued women developed a severe infection, resulting in hospitalisation and multiple surgeries. This was a direct consequence of the neglect and conditions she endured during her captivity, according to police.

Margai was out of the country at the time of the raid and was arrested upon his return to the UK on 12 March 2021.

Read more from Sky News:
Man arrested over Manchester synagogue attack
Multiple dead and more missing in Hong Kong fire

Judge Mark Milliken-Smith KC said when sentencing Margai: "In my opinion, your desire for financial profit trumped any care for these young people, once they arrived.

"You instructed them to remain within the car wash premises … they had no choice, and you knew it."

The judge said when police arrived at the car wash, they found that "the room was cold and damp and smelt terribly of old food and body odour".

He added: "You intended them to live in this squalor, and you intended to profit from it," he added. "Without their [ID] cards, they were effectively your captives, and you knew it."

Detective Chief Inspector Mike Stubbins, from the Metropolitan Police's Central Specialist Crime unit, said: "The trauma and ordeal the victims endured cannot be underestimated.

"They have shown remarkable strength throughout the investigation and played an essential role in providing evidence to ensure Margai is held accountable and receives the appropriate punishment for his crimes."

DCI Stubbins added: "I would like to thank the investigation team, who worked tirelessly to identify the victims, ensure their safety and help repatriate them to Romania, where they could be reunited with their friends and family.

"By engaging directly with the victims, the first officers on the scene were able to gather vital information and promptly safeguard the group, resulting in an effective investigation."