Ukraine appoints new government in biggest wartime overhaul
Yulia Svyrydenko, 39, has been tasked by President Volodymyr Zelenskiy with boosting domestic weapons production and reviving Ukraine's loan-dependent economy.
In a speech to parliament, Zelenskiy said he expected his new government to increase the share of domestic weapons on Ukraine's battlefield to 50% from 40% within six months.
He also singled out deregulation and expanding economic co-operation with allies as other key aims of the biggest government reshuffle since Russia's February 2022 invasion.
Svyrydenko, an experienced technocrat who had served as first deputy prime minister since 2021, pledged to move "swiftly and decisively".
"War leaves no room for delay," she wrote on X.
"Our priorities for the first six months are clear: reliable supply for the army, expansion of domestic weapons production, and boosting the technological strength of our defense forces."
Svyrydenko is also well known to the Trump administration, having negotiated a deal giving the U.S. preferential access to Ukraine's mineral wealth. It was considered crucial to bolstering relations between Kyiv and Washington.
Addressing lawmakers on Thursday, Zelenskiy said further deals with the U.S. would be forthcoming but did not offer any specific details.
Parliament also appointed former prime minister Denys Shmyhal, Ukraine's longest-serving head of government, as defence minister and Svitlana Hrynchuk as energy minister.
Former Svyrydenko deputies Oleksiy Sobolev and Taras Kachka will serve as minister of economy, environment and agriculture and deputy prime minister for European integration, respectively.
"This team is time-tested," Shmyhal wrote on Thursday. "Ahead are new tasks, challenges and a high level of responsibility."
Svyrydenko takes over the government as Russian forces press a grinding offensive across the sprawling, more than 1,000-km (621 mile) front line and intensify air strikes on Ukrainian cities.
Ukraine is betting on a budding defence industry, fuelled in part by foreign investment, to fend off Russia's bigger and better-armed war machine.
With state revenues going to defence, Kyiv will also need to find money to finance its ballooning budget deficit as foreign aid diminishes. Officials have said they could face a shortfall of about $19 billion next year.
Svyrydenko said her government would launch a full audit of public finances to achieve "real savings", as well as accelerate large-scale privatisations and help entrepreneurs.
Some opposition lawmakers voiced scepticism about the new government's ability to remain independent of Zelenskiy's administration, which wields significant wartime powers under Ukraine's constitution.
"They will be told by the president's office what they should really do," wrote Yaroslav Zheleznyak of the Holos party.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BreakingNews.ie
23 minutes ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Dublin City Council agrees to raise Local Property Tax
Dublin city councillors voted to increase the property tax levy of 15 per cent at a council meeting on Friday evening. The vote was expected to pass and will result in three of Dublin's four local authority areas having increased property tax from next year. Advertisement The council said the increase will provide almost €16.5 million in additional funding for the city, with almost a third going toward maintaining the city's housing stock. Since the Local Property Tax was first introduced, councillors have had the ability to increase or decrease the base rate of the tax by 15%. As the coalition government was being formed last year, Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil, Labour and the Green Party agreed to vote to raise the tax by 15 per cent for the next three years. Several councillors opposed to the move believe the property tax hike is unfair on householders and that the extra funding could be raised by collecting unpaid vacant and derelict site levies and development contributions. Advertisement Dublin North Inner City councillor and a former Mayor, Christy Burke, voted against the property tax rate increase. 'It's an unjust tax on families given the rise in household goods such as food, heating, gas, petrol and school uniforms. The list is endless. It's an unnecessary burden when families are so desperately struggling,' added Cllr Burke. 'The council seems to forget that the north inner city has some of the most at need families and individuals living there.' The council's Chief Executive, Richard Shakespeare, in a circular to councillors ahead of tonight's meeting, urged them to no longer apply the 15 per cent discount on property tax, explaining that removing the discount would give the council €16.4m in additional funding. The Government has already announced that properties are to be revalued for Local Property Tax on November 1st this year.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
What a mess Crystal Palace's European saga is - and the blame lies with UEFA, writes MIKE KEEGAN
The law is an ass – and with every passing day its enforcement appears to resemble a donkey derby. UEFA first introduced rules on multi-club ownership in 1998. The aim was to prevent collusion. How is that working out? In recent times Red Bull Leipzig and Red Bull Salzburg have competed in the Champions League, as have Girona and Manchester City, who both come under the City Football Group. Why? Because their owners, well aware of the steps needed, ticked the relevant boxes in time. Indeed, when it looked like Nottingham Forest and Olympiakos may both qualify for the Champions League – and potentially breach the rules – Evangelos Marinakis did what everyone else in that position does and placed his shares in Forest into a blind trust. What Palace are guilty of is not colluding with Lyon, who are owned by former major shareholder John Textor, but of failing to play along with the game. Unsurprisingly, they are now in war mode at Selhurst Park ahead of an appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. The shovels are out and it would appear that the digging is unearthing all manner of dirt. As Mail Sport has revealed, Palace are expected to demand that UEFA hands over what they believe are bombshell emails and texts that exist between the governing body and Nottingham Forest. UEFA introduced multi-club ownership rules to prevent collusion, but that has hardly worked They are firmly of the view that the documents prove that Forest were given extra time beyond the March 1 deadline to comply with the rules. As it turned out, Marinakis was removed as a person of significant control of NF Football Investments, the vehicle that owns the club, on April 30. Should Palace succeed with their demand, they believe the documents would represent the smoking gun they need to present to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) as it would clearly indicate double standards. Furthermore, UEFA's case stands and falls on the March 1 deadline, which was brought forward for this season. Confirmation of an extension for one and not another would at the very least raise serious questions. When Mail Sport asked chairman Steve Parish for his observations following Palace's crunch hearing at UEFA HQ, he declined to comment. However, earlier this week, he took a swipe at the 'beneficiaries'. 'If there wasn't someone who wanted to get in as a consequence, then there wouldn't be a problem,' he told The Rest is Football podcast. 'People have to look at themselves in terms of what they do. Some people say it's fine, some say it's not. I don't have control of that. I have control of the arguments we put forward to UEFA.' But Forest are looking out for, rather than at, themselves, which ironically is the sole thing every Premier League club has in common. At the City Ground they were aware of the initial deadline and of the issue and reacted accordingly, albeit even if they did need additional time. As things transpired, Forest did not qualify for the Champions League and so there may be an element of the red herring. It is impossible not to feel sympathy for Palace and their fans. The enemy here, however, lies at the side of Lake Geneva, rather than the River Trent.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Trump administration to destroy nearly $10m in contraceptives
The Trump administration has decided to destroy $9.7m worth of contraceptives rather than send them abroad to women in need. A state department spokesperson confirmed that the decision had been made – a move that will cost US taxpayers $167,000. The contraceptives are primarily long-acting, such as IUDs and birth control implants, and were almost certainly intended for women in Africa, according to two senior congressional aides, one of whom visited a warehouse in Belgium that housed the contraceptives. It is not clear to the aides whether the destruction has already been carried out, but said they had been told that it was set to occur by the end of July. 'It is unacceptable that the State Department would move forward with the destruction of more than $9m in taxpayer-funded family planning commodities purchased to support women in crisis settings, including war zones and refugee camps,' Jeanne Shaheen, a Democratic senator from New Hampshire, said in a statement. Shaheen and Brian Schatz, a Democratic senator from Hawaii, have introduced legislation to stop the destruction. 'This is a waste of US taxpayer dollars and an abdication of US global leadership in preventing unintended pregnancies, unsafe abortions and maternal deaths,' added Shaheen, who in June sent a letter to secretary of state Marco Rubio about the matter. The department decided to destroy the contraceptives because it could not sell them to any 'eligible buyers', in part because of US laws and rules that prohibit sending US aid to organizations that provide abortion services, counsel people about the procedure or advocate for the right to it overseas, according to the state department spokesperson. Most of the contraceptives have less than 70% of their shelf life left before they expire, the spokesperson said, and rebranding and selling the contraceptives could cost several million dollars. However, the aide who visited the warehouse said that the earliest expiration date they saw on the contraceptives was 2027, and that two-thirds of the contraceptives did not have any USAID labels that would need to be rebranded. The eradication of the contraceptives is part of the Trump administration's months-long demolition of the Agency for International Development (USAID), the largest funding agency for humanitarian and development aid in the world. After the unofficial 'department of government efficiency' (Doge) erased 83% of USAID's programs, Rubio announced in June that USAID's entire international workforce would be abolished and its foreign assistance programs would be moved to the State Department. The agency will be replaced by an organization called America First. In total, the funding cuts to USAID could lead to more than 14m additional deaths by 2030, according to a recent study published in the journal the Lancet. A third of those deaths could be children. 'If you have an unintended pregnancy and you end up having to seek unsafe abortion, it's quite likely that you will die,' said Sarah Shaw, the associate director of advocacy at MSI Reproductive Choices, a global family planning organization that works in nearly 40 countries. 'If you're not given the means to space or limit your births, you're putting your life at risk or your child's life at risk.' MSI tried to purchase the contraceptives from the US government, Shaw said. But the government would only accept full price – which Shaw said the agency could not afford, given that MSI would also have to shoulder the expense of transportingthe contraceptives and the fact that they are inching closer to their expiration date, which could affect MSI's ability to distribute them. The state department spokesperson did not specifically respond to a request for comment on Shaw's allegation, but MSI does provide abortions as part of its global work, which may have led the department to rule it out as an 'eligible buyer'. In an internal survey, MSI programs in 10 countries reported that, within the next month, they expect to be out of stock or be on the brink of being out of stock of at least one contraceptive method. The countries include Burkina Faso, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Mali, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Tanzania, Timor-Leste, Senegal, Kenya and Sierra Leone. Shaw expects the stock to be incinerated. 'The fact that the contraceptives are going to be burned when there's so much need – it's just egregious,' she said. 'It's disgusting.' The Department of State spokesperson did not respond to a request for information on the planned method of destruction. The destruction of the contraceptives is, to Shaw, emblematic of the overall destruction of a system that once provided worldwide help to women and families. USAID funding is threaded through so much of the global supply chain of family planning aid that, without its money, the chain has come apart. In Mali, Shaw said, USAID helped pay for the gas used by the vehicles that transport contraceptives from a warehouse. Without the gas money, the vehicles were stuck – and so were the contraceptives. 'I've worked in this sector for over 20 years and I've never seen anything on this scale,' Shaw said. 'The speed at which they've managed to dismantle excellent work and really great progress – I mean, it's just vanished in weeks.' Other kinds of assistance are also reportedly being wasted. This week, the Atlantic reported that almost 500 metric tons of emergency food were expiring and would be incinerated, rather than being used to feed about 1.5 million children in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Meanwhile, almost 800,000 Mpox vaccines that were supposed to be sent to Africa are now unusable because they are too close to their expiration date, according to Politico. The cuts to foreign aid are slated to deepen. Early Friday morning, Congress passed a bill to claw back roughly $8bn that had been earmarked for foreign assistance. 'It's not just about an empty shelf,' Shaw said. 'It's about unfulfilled potential. It's about a girl having to drop out of school. It's about someone having to seek an unsafe abortion and risking their lives. That's what it's really about.'
