LONDON (BN24) — The United Kingdom has imposed new restrictions on foreign recruitment, banning more than 100 job categories from being filled by overseas workers. This policy shift is part of the government’s ongoing efforts to reduce net migration and prioritize employment opportunities for British citizens.
The Home Office made the announcement in a statement on X (formerly Twitter) on Saturday, revealing that the changes would reshape the country’s visa system to better align with domestic workforce needs. The new policy comes under the leadership of Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, who took office on July 5, 2024, after Labour’s decisive victory, replacing former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.
The move to restrict foreign recruitment affects various sectors, including hospitality, logistics, healthcare support, public services, and the creative industries. Thousands of foreign workers who have relied on these positions for legal employment in the UK could be impacted, raising concerns over potential gaps in critical industries.
Critics have expressed concern that this measure could exacerbate existing labour shortages in essential areas such as healthcare and social care, where foreign workers have historically played a vital role in maintaining staffing levels.
Despite the policy announcement, the Home Office has yet to release the full and updated list of the 100 occupations now off-limits to foreign applicants. However, reports from PUNCH Online indicate that several key industries will be hit hard by the restrictions, potentially stoking fears of worker shortages in already struggling sectors.
While the government insists that the move is necessary to prioritize British workers and curb immigration, the shift is likely to face continued scrutiny, especially as industries reliant on foreign labor warn of the risks to their operations.
LONDON (BN24) — Chelsea clinched a hard-earned 2-0 victory over Fulham at Stamford Bridge on Saturday, with late goals from Joao Pedro and Enzo Fernandez lifting the Blues to their first home win of the season.
The match started at a frantic pace, and Fulham looked dangerous early on. The visitors thought they had taken the lead in the 20th minute when Joshua King finished off a fast counterattack, but the goal was ruled out after a VAR review spotted a foul in the buildup.
Despite the early scare, Chelsea began to find their rhythm, and in the dying moments of the first half, they grabbed the breakthrough. A series of set-pieces culminated in a corner from Fernandez, which was expertly met by Pedro, whose precise header sent the home crowd into a frenzy. The goal was Pedro’s fifth in his last six games, a timely strike that gave Chelsea a 1-0 lead just before the break.
The second half saw Chelsea assert more dominance, with the Blues controlling possession and steadily pushing for a second goal. The crucial moment came when a cross from Trevoh Chalobah struck Fulham’s Ryan Sessegnon on the arm inside the penalty area. After a VAR review, referee Robert Jones awarded Chelsea a penalty, which Fernandez confidently slotted home to double their advantage and effectively seal the win.
Chelsea’s victory was not without its drama. Early in the first half, striker Liam Delap was forced off with a hamstring injury, making way for Tyrique George. Despite the reshuffle, the Blues maintained composure, and their dominance in possession helped them keep the pressure on Fulham.
Fulham continued to threaten, with Rodrigo Muniz and Alex Iwobi testing Chelsea goalkeeper Robert Sanchez, but the Blues’ defense stood firm, with key interventions from Pedro ensuring that the visitors couldn’t find a way through.
Chelsea also made key substitutions, with Jamie Gittens and Andrey Santos coming on in the second half to inject fresh energy into the team and maintain control of the match.
As the final whistle blew, Chelsea secured all three points, moving to seven points from their opening three games. The victory gave fans plenty of reason to be optimistic about the season ahead, and it was the Blues’ first home win of the campaign.
Looking ahead, Chelsea will now send several players off for international duty, while the remainder of the squad prepares for their upcoming clash with Brentford.
MANCHESTER (BN24) — Manchester United secured their first Premier League win of the season on Saturday, edging Burnley 3-2 at Old Trafford in a match that saw a controversial late penalty spark heated protests from the visitors.
United took the lead in the 27th minute when Burnley’s Josh Cullen inadvertently turned the ball into his own net, gifting the hosts an early advantage. However, Burnley responded with a well-taken goal early in the second half, as Lyle Foster equalized, much to the relief of the traveling supporters.
The match quickly became a seesaw battle, with United regaining the lead shortly after Burnley’s equalizer. Bryan Mbeumo fired a powerful strike past Burnley goalkeeper James Trafford to make it 2-1 in favor of the Red Devils.
But Burnley fought back once again in the 67th minute when Jaidon Anthony capitalized on a defensive lapse to score the equalizer, making it 2-2 and putting, added pressure on Ruben Amorim side, who were desperate for a win after a poor start to the season.
The decisive moment came late in the game when United were awarded a penalty following what appeared to be minimal contact inside the box. Despite strong protests from Burnley’s players and bench, referee Michael Oliver upheld the decision, much to the fury of the visiting team. Bruno Fernandes, United’s captain, calmly stepped up and converted the spot-kick to put the hosts 3-2 ahead.
The win was a massive relief for Manchester United, who had failed to win any of their opening Premier League fixtures this season despite a significant summer spending spree. Their struggles were further compounded by a shocking early exit from the Carabao Cup, where they were eliminated by fourth-division side Grimsby Town, prompting widespread criticism of their form. Saturday’s victory finally handed United their first three points of the campaign, easing some of the early pressure on Ruben Amorim and his squad. As they look to rebuild momentum, the controversial nature of the win will likely continue to dominate discussions, but the three points were crucial for a team in need of a confidence boost.
SANAA, Yemen (BN24) — Yemen’s Houthi rebel movement has confirmed that its self-proclaimed Prime Minister, Ahmed Ghaleb Nasser al-Rahawi, was killed in an Israeli airstrike on Thursday. The Iran-backed group also reported the deaths of several other senior officials when the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) targeted the capital, Sanaa, as part of its ongoing military campaign.
The IDF confirmed an airstrike in the Sanaa region, describing the attack as targeting a “military site” linked to the Houthis, but offered no further details about the casualties.
The Houthis, who have controlled much of north-western Yemen since 2014 after ousting the internationally recognized government, claimed that Rahawi, alongside other Houthi ministers, died in the strike. While the names of the other victims have not been fully disclosed, Saudi Arabian news outlet al-Hadath reported that the foreign minister, justice minister, and ministers for youth and sports, social affairs, and labor were among those killed.
The office of Houthi President Mahdi al-Mashat confirmed that several other senior ministers sustained “moderate and serious injuries.” The Houthis also announced that Muhammad Ahmed Miftah, the movement’s deputy prime minister, would take over Rahawi’s role.
Rahawi had held his position as prime minister since August 2024, though he was seen more as a figurehead, with decision-making power largely concentrated within the inner circles of the Houthi leadership. Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, the movement’s top leader, as well as the group’s defense minister and chief of staff, were not reported as casualties in the airstrike.
The IDF has yet to comment on the specific developments or casualties from Thursday’s attack.
The Houthis have been active in the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict, frequently launching missiles at Israel and targeting commercial ships in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. They have cited solidarity with the Palestinian cause as the motivation for these actions. In response, Israel has carried out airstrikes on Houthi-held areas in Yemen, aiming to disrupt Houthi operations and prevent further attacks.
The ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, and its regional ramifications, have led to increasing tensions, with Yemen’s Houthi group playing a significant role in escalating hostilities across the region.
Lviv, Ukraine (BN24) — Andriy Parubiy, the former speaker of the Ukrainian parliament and a key leader in the Euromaidan protests, was shot dead in the western city of Lviv on Saturday, officials confirmed.
Unverified video footage of the incident shows a man, dressed as a courier, approaching Parubiy from behind and firing several shots before fleeing the scene. Authorities have launched an extensive manhunt for the gunman.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky condemned the attack as a “terrible murder” and offered condolences to Parubiy’s family. “All necessary forces and means are being deployed,” Zelensky said in a statement, adding that a special operation, codenamed Siren, has been initiated to track down the suspect.
Prosecutors reported that the assailant fired multiple shots at Parubiy, 54, who died on the spot. Lviv police chief Oleksandr Shliakhovskyi said the gunman fired about eight rounds, though the type of firearm used has yet to be identified. Shliakhovskyi described the attack as “very carefully planned.”
Lviv’s chief prosecutor, Mykola Meret, stated that investigators are considering all possible motives, including potential Russian involvement. Seven shell casings were found at the scene, and sources said the attacker appeared to be posing as a courier for the delivery company Glovo, carrying a yellow bag and riding an e-bike at the time of the attack.
A spokeswoman for Glovo expressed “deep shock” over the crime and vowed the company would fully cooperate with investigators.
Parubiy was a pivotal figure in the 2014 Euromaidan protests, which led to the ouster of pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych. Parubiy helped organize and lead the protestors’ self-defense units in Kyiv, which protected the protest camp from violent crackdowns by Ukrainian riot police.
After Yanukovych’s removal, Parubiy held multiple key roles in Ukraine’s government, including Secretary of the National Security and Defence Council. He played an instrumental role during Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the war in eastern Ukraine, and he later joined Ukraine’s Territorial Defence Forces following Russia’s 2022 invasion.
Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha called Parubiy “a patriot and statesman,” emphasizing his immense contribution to Ukraine’s fight for independence. Former President Petro Poroshenko condemned the killing, calling it “a shot fired at the heart of Ukraine.”
The investigation into Parubiy’s murder is ongoing, with authorities vowing to bring those responsible to justice.
ESSEX, England (BN24) — Police arrested three men during renewed protests outside The Bell Hotel in Epping on Friday after the Court of Appeal overturned a temporary injunction that had barred asylum seekers from being housed there.
Essex Police confirmed the arrests were linked to separate offences, including violent disorder, assaulting a police officer and drink-driving. Two officers sustained injuries, though none were serious.
Assistant Chief Constable Glen Pavelin stressed that while most demonstrators had acted peacefully, police would not tolerate violence. “The right to protest does not include a right to commit crime,” he said.
The legal ruling ensures that 138 asylum seekers currently housed at The Bell Hotel will not be forced to leave by September 12. Lord Justice Bean, explaining the Court of Appeal decision, said the earlier High Court injunction obtained by Epping Forest District Council was “seriously flawed in principle.”
The council has not ruled out escalating the case to the Supreme Court in its ongoing effort to block the use of the hotel. In the meantime, Essex Police issued a dispersal order around the property until Saturday morning to maintain order.
The hotel has been at the center of heated protests since July, with demonstrations intensifying after an asylum seeker living there was arrested and charged with sexual assault on a 14-year-old girl. The accused, Hadush Kebatu of Ethiopia, has denied the allegations and is currently on trial.
Police said that Friday’s arrests bring the total number linked to unrest outside the hotel to 28. Protesters again gathered outside the property waving banners, union jack and England flags, reflecting the deep divisions in the town.
Local reactions were mixed. Some residents, like Laura Fraye, said the judgment would stir “a lot of upset,” while others, including her mother, Bonny Pitson, sympathized with the protesters’ concerns despite not joining them.
By contrast, Kerry Gilroy, who runs the Facebook group Epping for Everyone, welcomed the ruling. She argued that protests had spread “vitriolic statements and untruths” about asylum seekers. “For the people in the hotel it gives consistency, but it’s made me very nervous because I think there will be trouble,” she said.
Conservative councillor Holly Whitbread described the appeal decision as “deeply disappointing” and a “betrayal for many,” while reiterating the council’s commitment to pursuing every legal route available.
A full High Court hearing on whether to impose a permanent injunction on the use of The Bell Hotel is scheduled for mid-October. In the meantime, the Labour government has reiterated its commitment to phasing out asylum hotels “in an orderly way,” while acknowledging ongoing strain on the system.
Moscow (BN24) – Russian President Vladimir Putin sharply criticized Western sanctions on Saturday, describing them as discriminatory measures that have battered Russia’s economy, as he prepared for a high-profile visit to China.
In a written interview with China’s official Xinhua news agency, published ahead of his trip, Putin said Russia and China jointly opposed what he called “unfair restrictions” in global trade. His remarks come as Moscow’s economy struggles under the weight of trade curbs and the mounting costs of its war in Ukraine.
Putin will spend four days in China beginning Sunday in what the Kremlin has described as an “unprecedented” visit. He will first attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit in Tianjin before traveling to Beijing for bilateral talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping. The Russian leader is also expected to attend a major military parade in Beijing marking Japan’s formal surrender at the end of World War II.
The visit underscores the deepening partnership between Moscow and Beijing. In recent years, the two countries have expanded economic and strategic ties, declaring a “no limits” relationship in 2022. Putin noted that bilateral trade reached a record $245 billion in 2024, fueled by China’s purchases of Russian oil and exports of goods ranging from cars to electronics.
“Economic cooperation, trade and industrial collaboration between our countries are advancing across multiple areas,” Putin said, adding that transactions between the two nations were now conducted almost entirely in rubles and yuan. He highlighted energy exports, along with agriculture, including pork and beef shipments to China, as growing sectors in bilateral trade.
Western nations have imposed sweeping sanctions on Russia since its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, curbing access to international markets and isolating Moscow from the global financial system. U.S. President Donald Trump has warned of further “massive” sanctions depending on progress in peace efforts, though negotiations have stalled.
Putin did not address accusations from the European Union that China is aiding Russia’s war effort, claims Beijing denies. Instead, he emphasized the mutual benefits of cooperation with Xi, with whom he has met more than 40 times over the past decade.
Wanted by the International Criminal Court over alleged war crimes, including the deportation of Ukrainian children, Putin last visited China in 2024. His return highlights how central Beijing has become to Moscow’s economic survival and geopolitical ambitions amid its confrontation with the West.
Washington (BN24) – President Donald Trump has moved to block $4.9 billion in foreign aid approved by Congress, invoking a rarely used budget maneuver last attempted nearly half a century ago.
Republican presidential nominee and former U.S. President Donald Trump speaks as he participates in a town hall presented by Spanish-language network Univision, in Doral, Florida, U.S., October 16, 2024. REUTERS/Marco Bello
In a letter sent Thursday to House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., Trump said he would employ a “pocket rescission,” a tactic that prevents funds from being spent if Congress cannot act within a 45-day window at the close of the fiscal year. The fiscal year ends Sept. 30, leaving no time for lawmakers to respond before the money lapses.
The letter, released Friday by the White House Office of Management and Budget, specified that the cuts would come from the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which has long been a target of Trump’s efforts to curtail foreign aid.
If standardized, the maneuver could allow Trump to bypass Congress on federal spending decisions, challenging the balance of power and raising the risk of disruption to the government’s funding process in October. Critics warn it could set a precedent for the White House to exert unilateral authority over congressional appropriations.
The last known use of a pocket rescission came in 1977 under President Jimmy Carter, though Trump officials argue the law permits the practice even with questions about its original intent. Under the 1974 Impoundment Control Act, the president can propose rescinding funds, but Congress must approve within 45 days. By timing the proposal near the fiscal year’s end, the White House contends the funds expire automatically.
The package Trump is targeting includes $3.2 billion in development grants, $520 million for the United Nations, $838 million for international peacekeeping, and $322 million to promote democratic institutions abroad. Earlier this year, the administration also announced plans to shut down most of USAID’s foreign assistance programs, shifting what remains to the State Department. Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed Friday that the agency is “in close out mode,” praising White House budget director Russ Vought for leading the transition.
The move sparked immediate backlash from both parties in the Senate. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said the Constitution clearly grants Congress control of federal spending and warned that bypassing lawmakers would violate the law. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., accused Trump of attempting to “circumvent Congress altogether,” warning that the maneuver could derail negotiations to avert a government shutdown at the end of September.
Legal experts also raised alarms. Eloise Pasachoff, a Georgetown University law professor who specializes in federal spending, has written that the Impoundment Control Act requires Congress to act on rescission requests, leaving no authority for the White House to block spending unilaterally.
The Trump administration has made deep cuts to foreign aid a central policy goal, arguing that programs have strayed from U.S. interests. In July, Congress approved $9 billion in rescissions backed by Trump, which slashed funds for public broadcasting and international assistance.
While the foreign aid cuts would provide modest savings compared to the federal deficit, they could damage U.S. credibility abroad by halting support for humanitarian relief and democracy programs. Millions of people worldwide depend on aid that now hangs in limbo as Trump tests the limits of presidential power.
SAN FRANCISCO (BN24) – A federal appeals court on Friday blocked the Trump administration from ending legal protections for about 600,000 Venezuelans who have been permitted to live and work in the United States under the temporary protected status program.
The ruling from a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in California upheld a lower court decision that preserved the program while legal challenges continued. The judges found that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed in arguing that the administration had no authority to overturn a prior extension of protections, since the statute governing temporary protected status does not permit such revocation.
“In enacting the TPS statute, Congress designed a system of temporary status that was predictable, dependable, and insulated from electoral politics,” the panel wrote.
The ruling adds another chapter to the legal battle that has left hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans in limbo. Approximately 350,000 saw their protections expire in April, while another 250,000 face expiration on Sept. 10. It remains unclear how Friday’s decision will affect those groups, as the Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
U.S. District Judge Edward Chen of San Francisco had earlier ruled that plaintiffs were likely to prevail in their claim that the Trump administration both exceeded its authority and acted with racial animus in attempting to terminate protections. Chen ordered a freeze on the terminations in March, but the Supreme Court later overturned his injunction without explanation, a common outcome in emergency appeals.
The temporary protected status program, created under the Immigration Act of 1990, allows the secretary of Homeland Security to grant legal status to migrants from countries facing armed conflict, natural disasters or other “extraordinary and temporary conditions” that make safe return impossible.
In defending the decision to end protections, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said conditions in Venezuela, as well as in Haiti, had improved and that it was no longer in the national interest to continue what she described as a temporary measure.
But Venezuela remains engulfed in a deep humanitarian crisis. Millions have fled the country amid political turmoil, economic collapse, rampant hunger, and years of hyperinflation and corruption. Critics argue that ending protections now would expose Venezuelans in the United States to grave risks if forced to return.
The appeals court’s ruling keeps the status quo for now, while setting up another likely battle before the Supreme Court as the Trump administration pushes to dismantle one of the central humanitarian relief programs in U.S. immigration policy.
NEW YORK (BN24) — The United States announced it will deny or revoke visas for Palestinian officials planning to attend the upcoming United Nations General Assembly in New York, a rare move that challenges long-standing diplomatic norms and draws sharp criticism from international observers and Palestinian leaders.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Friday accused Palestinian leaders of undermining the Middle East peace process by pushing for unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state and failing to condemn terrorism. “Before the PLO and PA can be considered partners for peace, they must consistently repudiate terrorism — including the October 7 massacre — and end incitement in education, as required by U.S. law and as promised by the PLO,” Rubio said, referring to the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority.
The decision breaks from Washington’s typical obligation as host of the United Nations to facilitate diplomatic access for officials of all countries and permanent observers. The UN Headquarters Agreement, signed in 1947, stipulates that the U.S. should not impede access to the UN, regardless of bilateral relations. It remains unclear whether the visa restrictions violate this agreement.
Palestinian officials reacted sharply, calling the U.S. move a violation of international law. President Mahmoud Abbas’s office described the decision as a direct contradiction to the UN Headquarters Agreement and urged Washington to reverse course. “The State of Palestine is an observer member of the United Nations,” the office said, stressing its right to participate in official proceedings.
UN spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric said the world body would open discussions with the U.S. State Department, expressing hope that all delegations would be allowed to attend. “It is important that all member states and permanent observers be represented, especially in light of the upcoming two-state solution meeting hosted by France and Saudi Arabia,” Dujarric noted.
The move comes amid renewed international momentum toward recognizing a Palestinian state. France is leading diplomatic efforts at the General Assembly session next month, with backing from the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia. To date, 147 of the UN’s 193 member states have extended recognition to Palestine, though the state lacks defined borders and faces ongoing territorial disputes.
Israel, supported by the Biden administration, remains firmly opposed to such recognition, citing security concerns and what it sees as premature concessions to groups it considers terrorist organizations. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has long rejected the two-state framework, arguing that recognizing Palestinian statehood rewards violence. “Recognition would legitimize Hamas’s monstrous terrorism,” Netanyahu has said.
The October 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack on southern Israel, which killed roughly 1,200 people and resulted in over 250 hostages, prompted an ongoing Israeli military campaign in Gaza. According to the Hamas-run health ministry, more than 63,000 people have been killed in Gaza since the conflict began.
The PLO, which has held UN observer status since 1974, is the internationally recognized representative of the Palestinian people and continues to pursue legal and diplomatic measures in international forums. Rubio condemned those efforts as attempts to circumvent negotiations, citing them as additional justification for the visa ban.
While Palestinian diplomats stationed at the UN mission in New York are expected to retain access under the terms of the UN agreement, it is unclear how the restriction will affect higher-level delegation members from Ramallah.
The controversy intensifies global scrutiny of the United States’ role in the Middle East peace process and its obligations as host nation to the United Nations, just as world leaders prepare to gather in New York for the high-level summit next month.
