article_text
stringlengths 294
32.8k
⌀ | topic
stringlengths 3
42
|
|---|---|
Manipur Violence: Supreme Court Sets Up Panel To Look Into Relief And Rehabilitation
It said besides the judicial panel that will oversee relief and rehabilitation efforts among other things, senior police officers will be asked to supervise the investigation in criminal cases to be probed by the state SITs.
As Manipur sank deeper in ethnic violence, the Supreme Court on Monday announced setting up of a committee of three former women high court judges to look into relief and rehabilitation of those affected.
A bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud said the committee will be headed by former Jammu and Kashmir High Court Chief Justice Gita Mittal and include Justices (Retd) Shalini P Joshi and Asha Menon.
The bench, also comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, said the effort of the apex court is to restore a sense of confidence and faith in the rule of law in the state.
It said besides the judicial panel that will oversee relief and rehabilitation efforts among other things, senior police officers will be asked to supervise the investigation in criminal cases to be probed by the state SITs.
The bench said a detailed order will be uploaded on the apex court website later in the evening.
During the hearing, Manipur DGP Rajiv Singh appeared before the bench to answer queries on the ethnic violence and the steps taken by the administration so far to check it, besides the segregation of cases for the purpose of effective investigation.
Attorney General R Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre and the state government, submitted a report, which the apex court had sought on Aug. 1, on issues including the segregation of cases.
"The government is handling the situation at a very mature level," the attorney general told the bench.
The government law officers said the state government proposed to set up Special Investigation Teams, headed by the superintendent of police at the district level, to probe sensitive cases. The CBI has been asked to investigate 11 cases.
On Aug. 1, the top court had said there was a complete breakdown of law and order and constitutional machinery in Manipur.
It had rapped the state police for a 'tardy' and 'lethargic' probe of incidents of ethnic violence, especially those targeting women, had summoned the DGP to answer its queries on Aug. 7.
The central government had urged the bench that instead of the two FIRs related to a video showing women being paraded naked by a mob, 11 out of 6,523 FIRs linked to violence against women and children may be transferred to the CBI and tried out of Manipur.
The bench is hearing around 10 petitions related to the spiralling violence, including those seeking court-monitored probe into cases, besides measures for relief and rehabilitation. | India Politics |
Israel has confirmed the identities of the 11 hostages that were released Monday evening, after 51 days of being held captive by Hamas in the Gaza Strip. The group includes nine children and two mothers.
The Cunio family
Sisters Sharon Aloni Cunio, 33, and Danielle Aloni, 44, along with Sharon’s husband David Cunio, 34, were taken hostage when Hamas terrorists invaded southern Israel and attacked Kibbutz Nir Oz on October 7.
Sharon and David’s three-year-old twin daughters, Emma and Yuli, and Danielle’s five-year-old daughter Emilia were also taken captive.
The family initially told their relatives that they were safe and that they had sealed themselves inside a safe room as rocket sirens sounded that morning, but they later told relatives that terrorists had entered their home.
Sharon sent a voice message telling them that their house was on fire. Their last communication was at 11:20 a.m.
Danielle and her daughter Emilia were released on Friday. David is still being held captive in Gaza.
The Engel family
Ronen Engel, 54, his wife Karina, 51, and their two daughters, Mika, 18, and Yuval, 10, had been missing since Hamas terrorists attacked Kibbutz Nir Oz on the morning of October 7.
The family hid in a safe room and their calls to relatives indicated they were aware of the horrific rampage taking place in their kibbutz.
While on a phone call with her sister, Paula, Karina suddenly mentioned the terrorists' presence and then the call cut out. That was their last communication.
A video from Gaza was posted to Ronen’s Facebook page later that day and the family’s phones were traced to Gaza.
Mika volunteers with special needs children and Yuval enjoys horseback riding. Both sisters share a love of animals.
Amit Shani
Amit Shani was the only member of his family taken hostage when terrorists attacked Kibbutz Be’eri on October 7.
As the terrorists burned homes and slaughtered residents, Amit’s mother Tal, 47, brought her children into their home’s safe room - Amit’s bedroom.
Dozens of gunmen from the Hamas terrorist organization broke down the door of the safe room and ordered the family to leave as their home filled with smoke. They marched the family down a road and Amit was ordered into a car.
Tal cried and begged the terrorists to leave her son and take her instead but Amit was taken to Gaza and held hostage for 51 days.
Amit loves running and surfing.
The Calderon family
Three members of the Calderon family had been missing from Kibbutz Nir Oz since October 7. Ofer, 53, and two of his children, Sahar, 16, and Erez, 12, were taken hostage when Hamas terrorists attacked the kibbutz, killing over 100 residents and taking around 80 hostages.
Gaya Calderon, 21, the older sister of Sahar and Erez, received a message from her family that they were trying to hide outside but later saw a video of Erez being taken away by terrorists.
Erez Calderon turned 12 in captivity on October 27.
The Yaakov family
Brothers Or Yaakov, 16, and Yagil Yaakov, 12, were sleeping alone at their home in Kibbutz Nir Oz when Hamas terrorists attacked on the morning of October 7.
The two boys hid a safe room and called their mother, whispering to her on the phone.
When the terrorists entered their home, Or tried to hold the door of the safe room closed but was overpowered.
On November 9, Yagil Yaakov was shown in a propaganda video posted by the Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist organization. | Middle East Politics |
The New South Wales treasurer, Matt Kean, says he “wholeheartedly” supports a push to outlaw gay conversion practices in the state, despite the premier, Dominic Perrottet, refusing to say whether he would support a ban.
As Sydney prepares to play host to the WorldPride festival beginning this week, the powerful crossbench MP Alex Greenwich has made a ban on the practice a condition of his support in the event of a hung parliament after the March state election.
Kean said on Wednesday that while he hadn’t seen the details of Greenwich’s bill to outlaw the practice, he said he supported “the concept”.
“I support the concept wholeheartedly,” he said. “What we’ve said is we’ll look at the bill but I support the concept to ban gay conversion therapy.”
The comments come after Perrottet on Tuesday refused to offer his personal view on whether he opposed the practice, saying only: “We need to deal with these issues in an understanding and tolerant and sensitive way.”
Perrottet said he had yet to consider the Greenwich bill and that it would be “a matter for our cabinet”.
Sign up for Guardian Australia’s free morning and afternoon email newsletters for your daily news roundup
But on Wednesday Kean was more forthright, referring to his outspoken opposition to Katherine Deves, the unsuccessful Liberal party candidate in the seat of Warringah during the federal election, who caused controversy because of her comments about transgender athletes.
“I think people know where I stand when it comes to standing up for vulnerable people,” he said. “We saw that in the transgender athletes debate.”
Despite Perrottet refusing to publicly back a ban, Kean is not the first NSW Coalition minister to come out in support of outlawing the practice.
Last week the multiculturalism minister, Mark Coure, wrote on social media that “I absolutely stand by” Greenwich on the issue.
“It is time this appalling practice is cast out of our society,” he said.
While some religious groups have warned of unintended consequences from a bill to ban gay conversion practices, Greenwich’s bill would allow churches to express a belief or religious principle as long as it is “not intended to change or suppress that person’s sexual orientation or gender identity”.
It would see a person found to have attempted to suppressed or change someone’s sexuality or gender identity face up to 10 years in prison or a significant fine, while complaints could be referred to the state’s Health Care Complaints Commission or police.
Victoria, Queensland and the Australian Capital Territory have all passed versions of a ban on the practice. Greenwich’s bill, which he has said he will introduce regardless of who wins the election, is based on the Victorian model which passed in 2021.
Labor has previously said it would ban gay conversion practices in NSW if elected next month.
“We should not have a situation where children are being told something is wrong with them and that they need to be fixed,” Labor’s leader, Chris Minns, said on Saturday.
Kean’s comments came while he was in the Liberal-held seat of Pittwater on Sydney’s northern beaches on Wednesday, where he announced the government would legislate to ban offshore drilling if re-elected in March.
The seat is held by the retiring minister Rob Stokes and the Coalition is facing a challenge from the teal independent Jacqui Scruby.
Kean, the NSW Coalition’s leading moderate voice, has been trying to protect seats under threat from the teals by pushing a series of progressive policies in the lead-up to the election, including an ambitious new emissions reduction target of 70% by 2035. | Australia Politics |
Leaders attend a working session pictured through a window glass during the G7 summit at Bavaria's Schloss Elmau castle, near Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany June 28, 2022. Brendan Smialowski/Pool via REUTERSRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comGARMISCH-PARTENKIRCHEN, Germany, June 28 (Reuters) - The Group of Seven countries aim to establish a "Climate Club" to coordinate actions on tackling climate change and achieving climate neutrality by 2050, the final communique at the end of a summit in Germany said on Tuesday.The club aims to advance "ambitious and transparent climate mitigation policies to reduce emissions intensities" of participating countries, the communique said.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by Matthias Williams and Alexander Ratz; editing by Philip BlenkinsopOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Global Organizations |
French President Emmanuel Macron speaks as he meets with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau during the G7 leaders summit at Bavaria's Schloss Elmau castle, near Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany June 27, 2022. REUTERS/Benoit Tessier/PoolRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comGARMISCH-PARTENKIRCHEN, Germany, June 27 (Reuters) - French President Emmanuel Macron said on Monday the president of the United Arab Emirates, Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan (MbZ), had told him two top OPEC oil producers, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, can barely increase oil production."I had a call with MbZ," Macron was heard telling U.S. President Joe Biden on the sidelines of the G7 summit."He told me two things. I'm at a maximum, maximum (production capacity). This is what he claims."Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com"And then he said (the) Saudis can increase by 150 (thousands barrels per day). Maybe a little bit more, but they don't have huge capacities before six months' time," Macron said.Brent oil prices jumped by over $2 per barrel to above $115 per barrel on the news amid tight global supplies and rising demand.Saudi Arabia and the UAE have been perceived as the only two countries in producer group the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and the world which still have some spare capacity and could help increase global deliveries.The West is seeking ways to reduce Russian oil imports to punish Moscow for the invasion of Ukraine.Saudi Arabia is currently producing 10.5 million bpd and has a nameplate capacity of 12.0 million-12.5 million bpd, which in theory shall allow it to raise production by 2 million.The UAE is producing some 3 million bpd, has capacity of 3.4 million and has been working on raising it to 4 million bpd.The news - as presented by Macron - would be bullish for oil markets if both OPEC heavyweights can barely raise output.Europe is looking for ways to replace as much as 2 million bpd of Russian crude and some 2 million bpd of refined products it had been importing from Moscow before the Ukraine invasion.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by Reuters TV; Writing by Dmitry Zhdannikov; Editing by Jon Boyle and Jan HarveyOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Europe Politics |
Alex Salmond's Alba Party is to draw up legislation for a referendum about Scottish independence.
The former first minister wants to hold a vote next year on the 10th anniversary of the 2014 ballot.
Scots would be asked whether Holyrood should have the power to trigger independence talks.
The proposals are to be set out in a members bill submitted by MSP Ash Regan, who recently defected to Alba from the SNP.
The UK government has repeatedly refused to give formal consent for another referendum, and won a Supreme Court case last year that found Holyrood could not legislate for a vote without that consent being in place.
Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat MSPs have all dismissed arguments for a second referendum, arguing the government should focus on other issues such as the cost of living crisis.
Alba argued it could get around the Supreme Court ruling with Ms Regan's bill seeking to force a referendum that would ask voters whether the Scottish Parliament's powers should be extended to allow it to legislate for and negotiate independence.
Alba would then seek to secure a mandate at an election with more than 50% of the votes for pro-independence parties.
The party's leader, Mr Salmond, is currently taking legal action against the Scottish government.
Ms Regan said: "Last year's ill-fated expedition to the Supreme Court has halted the opportunity to propose an independence referendum in the Scottish Parliament.
"However, there is nothing to stop our parliament proposing a referendum which we believe would be within competence."
She added: "That is what my proposed new draft bill does, and I intend to canvass public and parliamentary support for it now. It is time for the independence movement to offer our supporters the real prospect of progress."
After the consultation phase ends, the members' bill would have to gain the support of at least 18 MSPs before it could progress further.
To pass, it would then likely need the support from Ms Regan's former SNP colleagues and their government partners the Greens.
However, she told a a press conference in Edinburgh that there may be other "democrats" in the parliament who "perhaps don't favour independence, but they still think that it's democratically right for Scotland to have that choice over their own future".
Ms Regan told reporters it would be challenging to progress her members bill in less than a year to meet the aim of holding a referendum on 18 October 2024, but insisted it was a "sensible and credible approach".
'Democratic double whammy'
She said that parliament's non-government bills unit, which provides support to MSPs, was "at capacity" and that Alba would be drafting the bill itself.
The MSP, who was a candidate for the SNP leadership when Nicola Sturgeon quit earlier this year, said the strategy would be a "companion initiative" to gain more than 50% support for pro-independence parties at an election.
Mr Salmond explained the public would be asked in a referendum if they agreed Holyrood's power should be extended "to include the negotiation of and legislation for Scottish independence".
The former SNP leader said he would then seek an election result to give "instruction" to that, describing it as a "democratic double whammy".
He said the current plan is "exactly the sort of initiative" he would have opted for if then prime minister David Cameron had refused to allow a referendum in 2014.
Mr Salmond took the government to court in 2019 over its mishandling of harassment complaints against him. Last week, he lodged a Court of Session petition alleging misfeasance - the wrongful exercise of lawful authority - by civil servants. The former SNP leader was cleared of sexual assault charges in a separate criminal trial in 2020.
It was put to Mr Salmond that gaining support for the bill from the SNP could be made more difficult by his legal action against the SNP-led government. He replied: "I'm not suing the SNP, not yet anyway. I'm suing the Scottish government."
The former first minister added: "You don't have to agree with people or even likely to co-operate politically."
An SNP spokesperson said: "We consider member's bills as and when they come forward, but there are no shortcuts to independence.
"That' is why the SNP is focused on winning the argument and building the case amongst the people of Scotland, and support for independence continues to be around 50% or higher."
They added that the party agreed at its autumn conference that "page 1, line 1" of its manifesto at the next general election will read "vote SNP for Scotland to become an independent country".
It's just over a year since the Supreme Court put the brakes on Nicola Sturgeon's plans for an independence referendum.
Her successor Humza Yousaf has continued her strategy of pushing the issue through elections, but it's her predecessor who thinks he's found a way around the court's ruling.
Alex Salmond wants to hold a referendum essentially paving the way for a de-facto referendum - a vote which would give MSPs the power to declare independence following a future election.
Whether that happens or not, there are a number of advantages to this for Mr Salmond. It keeps the constitution at the forefront of the debate, it puts pressure on SNP MSPs to back him, and it keeps his Alba Party relevant.
On the flip side, it all still hinges on backing from Westminster. UK ministers would need to agree to come to the table, whether that's in response to this referendum or to a pro-election majority in an election.
And the biggest issue is that this plan - like Alba's Scotland United strategy - needs the support of the SNP to go anywhere. It needs votes from members of the governing parties to get through Holyrood.
And as long as Mr Salmond is chasing the government he used to lead through the courts, that seems distinctly unlikely. | United Kingdom Politics |
The stalled relationship between Australia and China continues to defrost under the Albanese Government with Foreign Minister Penny Wong set to meet counterpart Wang Yi for the first time in almost three years.Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has announced he will meet with his Australian counterpart Penny Wong in the first face-to-face gathering between foreign ministers in almost three years.The pair are expected to meet on Friday after the G20 Foreign Ministers' Meeting in Bali, with Mr Wang announcing he would chat to the representatives of several nations while in Indonesia.Australia and China's foreign ministers last met in September 2019 on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York, before the diplomatic relationship broke down in 2020 over former prime minister Scott Morrison's call for an inquiry into the origins of COVID-19.China fired back by imposing $20 billion worth of trade sanctions on Australian exports including wine, wheat, barley and beef and freezing bilateral talks.But the planned meeting between Mr Wang and Ms Wong is another sign the strained relationship could be repaired and follows Defence Minister Richard Marles meeting with his Chinese counterpart last month.Stream more on politics with Flash. 25+ news channels in 1 place. New to Flash? Try 1 month free. Offer ends 31 October, 2022.While in Bali Mr Wang has met with the foreign ministers of India, Indonesia, Argentina, Russia and the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.He is also planning on meeting with the foreign ministers of the United States, France, Germany, Spain, the Netherlands, Canada, Australia, Singapore and Saudi Arabia.The announcement comes after Ms Wong indicated that “Australian Ministers remain open to engage” and declared meetings between nations were “often very fluid” on the edges of multilateral discussions.“We are willing to engage and that willingness extends to any meeting in the margins of the G20,” she told reporters in Bali on Thursday.Since the election the Albanese Government has been working to repair relations in the Pacific and the strained Chinese relationship.Earlier in the week Trade Minister Don Farrell said the Albanese Government was looking to “repair the damage that was done by the previous government”.Mr Farrell was unable to sit down with China’s Trade Minister Wang Wentao during a meeting in June at the World Trade Organisation where Australia was hoping to defuse the trade sanctions.The South Australian Senator defended the snubbing which he said was not an “absolute rejection”.But he also said Australia would continue to pursue China at the WTO to resolve the $20 billion worth of “unfair and unreasonable” Chinese bans.“We put out the olive branch so far we haven’t been able to get that organised, but I’m hopeful we will be able to meet," he said.“It wasn’t an absolute rejection, it wasn’t saying ‘look we won’t meet’, they simply said ‘on this occasion we can’t meet’.”Ms Wong revealed on Thursday that Australia’s position on the trade sanctions remained unchanged, with her meeting with Mr Wang likely to be dominated by the topic.“I’ll simply say this… we believe and the Australian Government believes, and I think the Australian people believe, that the trade measures that China has instituted against Australia should be lifted, and that remains our position,” she said. | Australia Politics |
No matter how many times you ask the same question in a focus group, something similar comes back. Not identical every time, but the gist is there.
The exchange goes something like this:
Me: “Why are you planning to change your vote from Conservative in 2019 to Labour next time?”
Generic participant: “We need a change. Nothing can be as bad as this lot. They can’t seem to do anything to fix the country.”
And so it goes, time after time.
It doesn’t matter what policy area you interrogate: it’s the failure to actually achieve anything that is driving voters away from the government and towards Labour.
Normal people might not follow the minutiae – but they’re sick of the Tories
Normal people don’t look at Rishi Sunak’s reversals on HS2 and net zero and analyse the decisions for their policy wisdom. They are simply seen as two more examples of the Conservatives saying they are going to do something and then backtracking on it. It’s a broken government that breaks its promises to fix broken Britain.
This is now being reflected in the polls. Findings released earlier this week by Redfield and Wilton Strategies, a pollster, found that Keir Starmer has a lead over Sunak on all 17 categories of leadership including “knows how to get things done” and “will build a better economy”.
There are similar findings in a key area for the government, improving the cost and availability of childcare, which was a centrepiece of the Spring Budget.
On the eve of the autumn statement, findings from a YouGov poll this week will have made for bleak reading in Sunak’s No 10. The survey, which was carried out for the Early Education and Childcare Coalition, found that just 7% of British voters trust the Conservatives to reduce the cost of childcare – while 35% trust Labour. They are sceptical in the extreme that the government will deliver on their promises – and who can blame them?
But it’s hard to find enthusiasm for Starmer
This is despite the fact that it is – I’m sorry to say – hard to find a huge amount of enthusiasm in focus groups for Starmer. The accusation that he flip flops on policy is still something that comes up.
So too is a sense that he is an out-of-touch, overly ambitious lawyer. Despite concerted and repeated efforts to get his back story out there, it’s still widely believed that he is posh. That knighthood is proving to be something of an albatross.
But there is good news too. Attitudes in focus groups reflect the Redfield findings – voters do hope that the Labour team will be more reliable, trustworthy and motivated to “get stuff done”.
There is evidence of cut-through – but more needs to be done
Positively, this is evidently the way Starmer and his people are beginning to articulate their vision. Competence and commitment are two undervalued traits that stand in direct contrast to several years of Conservative chaos – and the public are beginning to appreciate them.
Starmer’s speech in Liverpool last month that talked about the need to rebuild the country and talked in reasonably long-term ways about a ‘decade of renewal’ pressed some of these sweet spots and went down well with the voters who were paying attention.
Labour will need to convince in the short campaign
As we get ever nearer to what electoral strategists call the “short campaign” (essentially the run into actual polling day), voters will start paying attention and will hear more and more of this.
What both the polling and focus groups tell us is that they desperately want stability from Westminster and a grown-up party running the country.
It is, I now feel confident, impossible for the Conservatives to reverse the perception of incompetence. It is excellent news that Labour and Starmer are offering the exact opposite: a competent government with a long-term plan that it intends to deliver. | United Kingdom Politics |
Russia’s aggression against Ukraine is high on the agenda as U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken meets with other foreign ministers from the Group of 20 largest economies, or G-20, later this week in Bali, Indonesia. Blinken departs Wednesday for a G-20 ministerial being held in Bali July 7-8, where he will also have pull-aside meetings with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Bali. “In addition to attending G20-related engagements, the secretary will hold a bilateral meeting with Indonesian Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi. Among other bilateral engagements, Secretary Blinken will also meet with the People’s Republic of China [PRC] State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi on the margins of the G20,” said the State Department in a Tuesday statement. Blinken will have two lengthy meetings with Wang, with the first session likely focusing on bilateral relations and second one on international issues, according to diplomatic sources. Blinken will head to Bangkok after the G-20 ministerial. Expanding health and climate cooperation, as well as efforts to relieve the humanitarian crisis in Myanmar after last year’s military coup, are among the agenda items, according to the State Department. While Ukraine is not a G-20 member, its foreign minister, Dymtro Kuleba, was invited to this week’s ministerial after Ukraine became a European Union candidate country. Kuleba said he has coordinated his country’s positions with the EU’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, ahead of the ministerial. “We both agree on the need for the seventh EU sanctions package on Russia and we are working on it,” said Kuleba in a tweet. U.S. officials have said Russia’s war on Ukraine has caused global economic instability and that Washington will not ease pressure on the Kremlin until Russia ends its military offensive. There is no formal meeting scheduled between Blinken and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in Bali. U.S.-China Blinken’s meeting with the Chinese foreign minister would be their first in-person meeting since the chief U.S. diplomat, in late May, unveiled the Biden administration’s strategy to outcompete the PRC. In his remarks, Blinken said the United States is not seeking to decouple from China and the relationship between the world’s two largest economies is not a zero-sum game. For months, senior State Department officials have said they have not seen China providing material support to Russia for its war against Ukraine, warning of “consequences” if the Beijing government does so. Last week, the U.S. Department of Commerce added five companies in China to a trade blacklist for allegedly supporting Russia’s military and defense industrial base. Some Republican U.S. lawmakers say the Biden administration’s actions are not enough. “The (Biden) administration’s feeble concept of ‘consequences’ will do little to deter the CCP’s (Chinese Communist Party’s) ongoing support for (Russian President Vladimir) Putin’s war crimes,” said House Foreign Affairs Committee lead Republican Michael McCaul on June 29. McCaul said there should be “significant sanctions on those offending companies.” G-20 division on Russia’s war in Ukraine Russia's participation at G-20 events has been a source of tension within the group that is composed of the Group of Seven leading industrialized economies, or G-7, and other large developing economies. Many members, especially the G-7, have forcefully condemned Russia’s invasion and supported serious economic sanctions. Members such as China and India have abstained on various United Nations resolutions and refrained from publicly condemning Russia. U.S. President Joe Biden has said that Russia should not remain a member of the G-20, but China, Brazil and South Africa have voiced their objections to removing Russia from the grouping. Those countries are also members of five large emerging economies known as BRICS and see themselves as an alternative to the U.S.-led world order.
Some G-20 members say divisions widened by Russia’s war in Ukraine should not overshadow this year’s theme of economic recovery after the coronavirus pandemic.
Indonesia, which holds the rotating presidency of the Group of 20, says it maintains an independent foreign policy and does not side with world powers. Indonesia’s reluctance to exclude Russian President Vladimir Putin from the G-20 summit reflects its wish not to be seen as choosing a side and to focus this year’s G-20 discussions on post-COVID-19 economic recovery. Last week, Indonesian President Joko Widodo became the first Asian leader to visit Ukraine and Russia, after which he said Putin had agreed to “provide security guarantee for food and fertilizer supplies from both Russia and Ukraine” amid increasing concerns over a global food crisis. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told German broadcaster ZDF recently that Putin’s possible presence at the G-20 summit in November should not be a reason for Western leaders to boycott the meeting or “paralyze the entire G-20.” “In my opinion, G-20 is too important, also for the developing countries, the emerging countries, that we should let this body be broken by Putin.” This week’s ministerial will not produce an official document or communique, according to G-20 co-sherpa Dian Triansyah Djani. U.S.-Thailand “In Bangkok, Thailand, Secretary Blinken will meet with Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha and Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Don Pramudwinai. He looks forward to discussing a range of issues, including building on the successes of Thailand’s APEC 2022 agenda during our 2023 APEC host year,” said the State Department. Thailand is a key U.S. security ally in Asia. The two countries signed a landmark information exchange agreement in June, following the first joint U.S.-Thailand Strategic and Defense Dialogue in May in which the two nations agreed to expand cooperation in cybersecurity and post-COVID-19 economic recovery. “In 2022, the U.S. remains Thailand’s leading security partner though China has emerged as a serious contender. Thailand seeks equilibrium in security cooperation between the two powers,” said Paul Chambers, an adviser for international affairs at the College of ASEAN Community Studies of Thailand-based Naresuan University. Chambers told VOA the Thai Air Force is seeking to buy eight F-35 aircraft from the U.S. but Washington is concerned that F-35s’ advanced technology might be compromised by Thailand’s close military ties with Beijing. The top diplomat’s visit to Bangkok was rescheduled from last December following positive COVID-19 test results involving members of Blinken’s flight crew and one traveling reporter. | Global Organizations |
Nothing has shocked me more in a long career in journalism than what I learned at the turn of the millennium about the abuse of girls in Rochdale, the horror of what had been done to them and the apparent indifference of Greater Manchester Police.I spoke to one girl who described being groomed by an Asian man she thought was her boyfriend. She was 13 at the time. She was passed around endless men, plied with vodka until she was sick and suffered rape after rape.She was not alone. We know this happened to scores of young girls. Now a new damning report lays bare the failures of both Oldham Council and Greater Manchester Police to investigate such crimes properly.It describes the case of a 12-year-old girl known as 'Sophie'. She went to the police station in Oldham to report being raped by an Asian man in October 2006.She was told to come back when she wasn't drunk. She was abducted from that police station and raped by two men, attacked by another, before being raped by five more men.The incompetence on the part of councils and police revealed in the report is staggering. In 2005 the police received an allegation that a council welfare officer, Shabir Ahmed, was involved in child sex abuse, yet they failed to tell Oldham Council and Shabir continued in his role with access to vulnerable adults and their children. He was not convicted until 2012. Jenni Murray (pictured) says nothing has shocked her more than what she learnt about the abuse of the girls in Rochdale Even more shocking on the part of the council was evidence that men convicted or accused of sexual offences were handed taxi licences. Why, when it was known taxis were used to pick up these poor girls?It's nearly 20 years since we began to uncover the shocking scale of the abuse and the appalling treatment of the victims in Rochdale and Oldham and there have been more than six reviews and reports into the matter.So what difference will this new one make? I put that question to my friend Maggie Oliver. Maggie is one of the kindest, most courageous and determined women I've ever known. As a Greater Manchester detective tasked with investigating the grooming and abuse of girls in Rochdale, she was appalled at the lack of support these girls were given.So in 2012 she quit and blew the whistle on the failures of the force to protect girls and arrest the perpetrators. She went on to set up The Maggie Oliver Foundation offering victims support, advice and legal help.So have Greater Manchester Police changed their working practices, as the chief constable claimed this week? Have incidents of grooming gangs picking up and abusing children ended? Are the police now treating these girls with respect? Are perpetrators being caught and imprisoned?What she told me was utterly depressing. From her work in The Maggie Oliver Foundation, she knows it's still going on and it makes her blood boil.Her foundation is inundated with survivors needing help who've been fobbed off by the police. Children, she says, are still being judged and told their abuse is their own fault. Jenni's good friend Maggie Oliver (pictured) who was a whistleblower about the Rochdale abuse told her that she knows things have not changed within the police and with grooming in ManchesterShe believes the problems are manifold. There are many good police officers but poor management and decision-making across the board — from Manchester, Yorkshire to the Met — often puts the wrong officers at the forefront of dealing with vulnerable victims, officers who lack the right skills to understand trauma or what abuse does to a person.Too often, girls make their complaint to young constables who haven't been trained to deal with their pain and fear. The victims feel they've been treated badly, shown no respect and are not important. As a result they often simply disengage from the police. She also believes the grooming gangs have become very sophisticated and know they are difficult to investigate.Then there's the race question. It's still predominantly men of Pakistani origin committing these crimes, says Maggie. We should be addressing this within those communities to find out why.What's needed, she insists, is a complete overhaul of the whole system. Root-and-branch changes from the top down.Young officers need proper training. The girls need to be believed and respected, not blamed for their abuse, judged, pushed away and dismissed.They are, she tells me, some of the most at-risk in our society, but too often, even when there is irrefutable evidence to prosecute offenders and safeguard children, the girls are being failed.This J-Lo ban is a shameful sign of the times Jennifer Lopez has always seemed a powerful female, so Jenni was not surprised that she planned to use the traditional symbol for the female sex during her Super Bowl show in 2020 to celebrate women's achievements Jenni asks why J-Lo did not tell the director she was going to wear the symbol anywayJennifer Lopez has always seemed a powerful female, so it was not surprising she planned to use the traditional symbol for the female sex during her Super Bowl show in 2020 to celebrate women's achievements.But, as she revealed in a recent documentary, the director disagreed, saying the symbol 'could be viewed by some people as exclusive'.What's most worrying is why J-Lo didn't tell him to get knotted and wear it anyway. Women can bring this war to an end Several attempts at peace talks have taken place without success in resolving the war in Ukraine. But one thing stands out in the pictures of these talks — there's not a single woman present. Women suffer in war, but rarely have a hand in resolution.Antonio Guterres, the UN Secretary- General, told the Security Council, 'the lack of female representation in negotiations from Ukraine to Afghanistan, Myanmar and Mali shows how enduring power imbalances and patriarchy are continuing to fail us.'He added that the women staying behind in Ukraine were 'at the forefront of healthcare and social support. Their perspectives are critical to understanding conflict dynamics, making their participation essential for resolving conflicts'.From the female fighters wielding rifles and those survivors of rape from Russian soldiers, we know how tough Ukrainian women can be.It's time their concerns were heard at the very top. How to be in Vogue at 74 Jenni says the Duchess of Cornwall somehow looks younger and more fabulous in her photoshoot for Vogue on the eve of her 75th birthdayHow does she do it? On the eve of her 75th birthday, the Duchess of Cornwall has been shot for Vogue and somehow looks younger and more fabulous.And she's so right about the dress. Apparently someone had suggested menopausal mauve? No. Royal blue for a future queen? Spot on.My Ukrainian guests are outside Lviv so Ustym can take his exams before returning to the UK. Zoriana texts in a panic. 'I'm so worried about all these things — universities in London, exam in English for entering the uni.' My response? 'We'll sort it out.' And we will! Simon Clarke, the deputy to the Chancellor Rishi Sunak, says we shouldn't be buying Christmas presents now to counteract spiralling inflation. We mustn't develop what he calls a 'panic buying mindset over rocketing prices'. Right, that's me off to the shops. | United Kingdom Politics |
A bout of COVID, getting a speeding fine and a young man behind me - unbeknown to me - baring his backside at the camera while I was broadcasting live.
These are just some of the perils I've encountered covering by-election counts in more than 20 years at Sky News.
Mid Bedfordshire, on Thursday, will be number 40. My colleague Tamara Cohen will be at Tamworth.
There have been dramas and shocks too, as well as jubilation for the winners and despair and tears for the losers. And some by-elections have been held in extremely sad and poignant circumstances.
I'm guilty of blunders and gaffes too. At one count, not long after she became an MP, I mistook Angela Rayner for Jess Phillips. Whoops! Fortunately, Labour's now deputy leader told me she was flattered.
COVID struck after the Hartlepool by-election in 2021 - "Red Wall COVID" indeed - and I copped a speeding fine leaving the Henley count in the by-election after Boris Johnson became London mayor in 2008.
The bare buttocks appeared on Sky News during a live broadcast in Eastleigh town centre after a by-election there in 2013, prompting frantic shouts of "Hand back! Hand back!" in my ear from the gallery. "Why?" I asked when I eventually did. Sheepishly, they told me!
The first by-election count I covered for Sky News was Brent East, a seat formerly held by Ken Livingstone. Red Ken's successor, Paul Daisley, had died and the Liberal Democrats' Sarah Teather snatched the seat from Labour in the by-election.
And here's a piece of parliamentary trivia I wasn't aware of at the time: the Tory candidate was Uma Fernandes. Who? Well, she's the mother of Suella Braverman, the home secretary, and was then a nurse and local councillor in Brent.
The biggest by-election shock was George Galloway's victory in Bradford West in 2012, a by-election - like Brent East in 2003 and, more recently, Uxbridge and South Ruislip - which Labour had rather complacently been confident of winning comfortably.
On the evening of the Bradford West count, I had dinner in a smart Asian restaurant in the city with Gerry Sutcliffe, then MP for Bradford South and a former Labour minister, who was in charge of Labour's campaign.
During the meal, a Labour well-wisher said to Gerry: "Your phone's not ringing, Gerry." Unperturbed, he replied: "No news is good news!" But it wasn't. It was very bad news. Labour paid the price for its complacency.
When we arrived at the count, everyone in the hall was predicting a Labour win. But gradually the mood changed. I texted George: "Labour getting jitters here, George! Say you're doing very well. What do you think?"
"Think I'm going to win, Jon," he replied instantly.
"Labour and Tory MPs think so too," I told him. "Keen to get you on TV." I called him and urged him to come to the count and claim victory.
And the man known as 'Gorgeous George', never one to be shy or turn down publicity, duly obliged. He'd turned a Labour majority of nearly 6,000 into a victory for his Respect Party by more than 10,000 votes, a swing of more than 50%.
Labour whips were so furious that he'd won that they refused to give him an office in Westminster and so he very publicly set up a makeshift office in the middle of Portcullis House where everyone could see him. Typical showman George.
Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts
Obviously, overnight counts, sometimes going on all night, call for stamina.
My formula is a late afternoon snooze in the hotel, a decent evening meal - a local speciality where possible, such as Barnsley chop at Barnsley Central, Lancashire hot pot at Heywood and Middleton and haggis at Rutherglen and Hamilton West last week - and then lots of bottled water and snacks, especially biscuits, through the night.
Sometimes, as in this week's twin by-elections of Mid-Beds and Tamworth, there's more than one count on the same night.
In 2006 I was at Blaenau Gwent, where Labour's Owen Smith - remember him? - lost to an independent Labour candidate.
Smith was a former BBC producer and special adviser. I called him "the very model of a modern Labour candidate", a description I've used many times. He later became MP for Pontypridd and fought Jeremy Corbyn for the Labour leadership in 2016, but was soundly beaten.
On the same night, Bob Neill was squeaking home by just 633 votes in the previously safe Tory seat of Bromley and Chislehurst. And here's another piece of parliamentary trivia: which two now-famous frontline politicians were candidates in that by-election?
The answer is Rachel Reeves, now Labour's shadow chancellor, and Nigel Farage, then a UKIP Member of the European Parliament, in one of his seven - yes, seven - unsuccessful attempts to get elected to parliament.
Successful by-election candidates who've gone on to become senior MPs include Chloe Smith in Norwich North in 2009, ex-soldier Dan Jarvis in Barnsley Central in 2011 - I'll never forget the military-style polish on his shoes - and Robert Jenrick in Newark in 2014.
Some MPs bring about their own downfall.
In 2016, Zac Goldsmith quit and fought a by-election in his Richmond Park constituency over plans for a third Heathrow Airport runway. He lost to Liberal Democrat Sarah Olney and I chased him round the room after the result in a vain attempt to interview him.
Some counts can be gruelling. Hartlepool, where I caught COVID but didn't realise until the following Monday, wasn't just another by-election that Labour expected to win, but was such a slow count that the result wasn't declared until after 7am, the latest declaration in my 20 years attending overnight counts.
The extreme sadness came at three by-election counts.
Tooting in 2016, after Sadiq Khan succeeded Boris Johnson as London mayor, came on the day Jo Cox was murdered in her Batley and Spen constituency. Old Bexley and Sidcup followed the death of popular cabinet minister James Brokenshire and Southend West was the result of the murder of Sir David Amess.
Counts these days are often in enormous sports halls or leisure centres. Some years ago, if the leisure centre had a bar, Nigel Farage and his drinking cronies would get more and more loud and boisterous in the bar as the count went on.
The most unusual count venue was for the Stretford and Urmston by-election last year, in a hospitality suite in the Sir Alex Ferguson stand at Manchester United's Old Trafford football ground.
In my 10pm live just after the polls closed, urging viewers to stay up late and watch our coverage I said something I'd always wanted to say on Sky News. Mimicking the Sky Sports commentating legend Martin Tyler, I declared: "And it's live!" The gallery loved it!
Read more:
When will the general election be? Factors Sunak will be weighing up
11 conference moments that made headlines
Some by-elections are fought on national issues, such as voters' anger at Boris Johnson's attempted cover-up of 'party-gate', while in others a local issue dominates and is decisive.
That happened in July in Uxbridge and South Ruislip, Boris Johnson's other former constituency. This time Labour hopes of victory were dashed in what became the ULEZ by-election.
When I arrived at the count I asked the returning officer what he thought. "At first, Labour thought they'd win this by-election comfortably," he said. "But they seriously under-estimated the unpopularity of ULEZ." How right he was.
In Rutherglen last week, the result was never in doubt. The only issue was how big would Labour's win be. It turned out to be a swing of more than 20% against the SNP and could turn out to be a defining moment in the battle for the next general election.
So do by-elections matter or are they just a bit of fun and an entertaining spectator sport?
When governing parties lose, they claim they don't and dismiss them as a protest vote. And that's certainly true to some extent.
But if Rutherglen is indeed a turning point and Labour makes a spectacular comeback in Scotland, winning 20, 30 or even 40 seats and putting Sir Keir Starmer firmly on the road to 10 Downing Street, it will be remembered for a very long time.
I can, however, remember every by-election I've covered, some important, some not so important. But on the night, overnight counts can be exciting, exhilarating, surprising and great live TV.
So stay up late on Thursday for another Sky News by-election special. | United Kingdom Politics |
First the crops failed. Repeated droughts meant the Keer family could no longer grow the fruit and vegetables that once provided them with an income. Then their animals died. The herd of 40 goats dwindled to six. None of their cows survived. When the river ran dry, leaving them without water, the family agreed they had no choice but to leave their home in the village of Bootis, south-west Somalia.The 65km journey to Bulo Garas camp, east of Baidoa in South West state’s Bay region, took four days. On the way, one of the donkeys pulling the family’s cart died. They hoped the camp would offer some relief from their situation.Earlier this year, the UN described Somalia as “staring at a potential catastrophe” after three consecutive failed rainy seasons. Now that a fourth rainy season has failed, the drought has worsened. This week the UN warned that only a massive and immediate injection of funding would avert famine in Somalia. Claire Sanford, deputy humanitarian director of Save the Children, said the crisis was the worst she has seen in her 23-year career. A camp for internally displaced people near Baidoa, Somalia Yet life at Bulo Garas camp, home to 630 families, is little different to the way it was in the village. The camp, which opened last month, has no water point – residents rely on people in Baidoa to give or sell them water – and food is scarce. New arrivals have to construct dwellings out of whatever they can find.As the eldest of the five children, Khadijo Abdi Keer, 20, feels responsible for looking after the family, but her disability makes it impossible for her to fetch food and water.“As the first-born child there is a lot of expectation on me to help the rest of my family,” says Keer, sitting in front of the small structure made from old clothes and twigs she now calls home, exhausted from the journey. “I am the one who is supposed to fetch water and find food, but as I cannot move or see I have to depend on others.“Last night we had nothing to eat,” she says. “We only have one meal a day of beans and tea.” Building a shelter with flexible twigs at the camp near Baidoa. The frame is made then covered in any material or fabric that can be found Keer says her father was too frail to travel with them and her mother “lacks the skills to earn a living in town”. “We have not yet found a proper place to live or a regular supply of food,” adds Keer.In 2011, the first famine of the 21st century was declared in Somalia. Nearly 260,000 people died, half of them children. But this drought is different, according to Abdinasir Abdi Aruush, South West state’s minister of humanitarian affairs and disaster management.“In 2011, the world was conscious of the situation here, which resulted in a swift humanitarian response which saved many lives,” he says. “This time around, nobody is interested because they are focusing on the war in Ukraine. People must stand up in solidarity with the starving in Somalia and other parts of the Horn of Africa. Our government must also come up with plans to prevent future disasters.” A health clinic in Baidoa, supported by Save the Children, provides primary healthcare and maternity services South West state has been hard hit by the drought. Once known as the breadbasket of Somalia, with a history of sorghum cultivation, the erosion of agriculture and political instability in the region have worsened the effects of climate crisis with devastating results.Many of those worst affected by the drought are children. About 120 malnourished children are now being treated at a care centre for the under-fives in Baidoa, run by Save the Children. Aniso Mohamed with her sick child Aniso Mohamed’s two-year-old daughter is one of those receiving help. Her body is swollen, and she suffers from diarrhoea and vomiting. She is being given medicine, milk and biscuits.But staying by her sick daughter’s side means Mohamed, 28, cannot care for her other five children.“I was a farmer until the drought forced us to flee to Baidoa,” she says. “Since arriving here I have been managing to put food on the table by working as a porter shuttling produce from shops and homes. But I had to put that on hold because I now spend every day in the centre. Their father does not work.” Women and babies being treated at the clinic serving Baidoa. Above, Garn with two-year-old Marian at the clinic, which provides treatment for malnutrition, measles vaccinations and care for pregnant women and new mothers Life is improving slowly for Idaja Hussein Hassan, a 40-year-old mother of five. She arrived in Baidoa three months ago after crops failed. When her 18-month-old son, Hussein Hilowle Mohamed, fell ill, she took him to Bardaale maternity and child welfare centre in the city, also run by Save the Children.“They vaccinated him, gave him medicine and helped me financially,” she says. “Thank God he is recovering now.”The centre has treated 396 malnourished children since the beginning of June. Sixty pregnant women, also suffering from malnutrition, have been admitted to the centre.“Our four midwives are working 24/7,” says Hafso Moalim, who runs the centre. “Sometimes we run out of supplies which means we cannot properly care for the vulnerable mothers and children.”The situation is only going to get worse. The UN says more than 18 million people are suffering from acute food insecurity across the Horn of Africa, seven million of them in Somalia, almost half the population. Every day there are more arrivals at Bulo Garas, as people like the Keers, at the centre of the crisis engulfing the country, abandon their homes in order to survive. Fathi Mohamed Ahmed is deputy chief editor of Bilan, Somalia’s first all-women media house The camp at Baidoa, in Somalia’s Bay region, one of the worst hit by the drought and resulting hunger crisis | Africa politics |
LONDON — Her term in office was famously shorter-lived than a salad vegetable. But that doesn’t mean Liz Truss is ready to admit she was wrong.
A year on from the pivotal event of her doomed premiership — the ill-fated “mini-budget which sent U.K. financial markets into a tailspin — one might expect the former British prime minister to mark the anniversary in silence … or perhaps in hiding.
Not Liz Truss. On Monday Truss will try to take ownership of the narrative with a high-profile speech in Westminster to mark the anniversary, defending her economic record and setting out a “vision” for faster growth.
Truss will insist her tax-cutting policies, had they been fully implemented, would have triggered significant investment into the U.K. and sparked long-term improvements to economic growth — and only had to be junked due to intense pressure from “the political and economic establishment.”
You may like
“I was effectively forced into a policy reversal under the threat of a U.K. meltdown,” she will say. “The policies I advocate simply aren’t fashionable on the London dinner party circuit.”
Monday’s anniversary-week speech is just the latest act of defiance from a former PM who has stubbornly refused to be sidelined by the collapse of her own political career.
This month Truss also announced she’s writing a book on foreign policy, and has launched her own Westminster think tank, the Growth Commission, to advocate her policy platform.
A fighter, not a quitter
If Truss appears strangely undeterred by her disastrous spell in Downing Street, it comes as little surprise to those who have followed her career over the last 13 years.
“She was able to rise to the top of the party because she has the skin of a rhino,” says James Heale, a journalist for Tory bible the Spectator, who co-authored her biography, Out of the Blue.
Indeed, Truss’ peculiar ability to shrug off setbacks can be traced to the earliest stages of her career.
She only ascended to high office after enduring a series of bitter and highly personal fights, from her battle to win a parliamentary seat in the late 2000s — against a local Tory faction in rural England which allies dubbed “the Turnip Taliban” — to her determination to relaunch herself after being demoted from the Cabinet in 2017.
“She’s very busy, very focused, very driven,” Kwasi Kwarteng, her friend and former Chancellor, told POLITICO’s Westminster Insider podcast this month. “She’s not been one to hang around and reflect. She charges ahead.”
David Jones, a long-serving Conservative MP who backed her for leader last year, added: “As she said at her last PMQs [Prime Minister’s Questions], she’s a fighter not a quitter. She will simply continue.”
Not all Truss’ fellow Conservatives regard this as a strength.
One former MP who worked alongside her in government described her as “really lacking in EQ [emotional intelligence], the way she goes about things.”
Underpinning Truss’ stubbornness is her commitment to an ideological project which she clearly sees as unfinished.
In the domestic arena, she still wants to push deregulation and tax cuts as a path to higher growth, and on foreign policy, she argues the West must take a far more muscular approach in dealing with China.
The last laugh?
Truss’ determination to intervene on these core issues will only be strengthened by her belief, shared by some in the Tory party, that she largely has been proven right — particularly in her analysis of the U.K.’s economic woes.
One ally of Truss remarked that “the first draft of history, as written last autumn, will be looked at as having been overly harsh.” They noted that her diagnosis of failures by the Bank of England and the pensions regulator have since gained wider traction.
“Clearly, she’s concerned about the lack of policies for growth,” added Jones. “I don’t think there’s any doubt at all that we do need to stimulate growth, and that’s something that needs to be grasped.”
Certainly, Truss’ intense focus on economic growth has become more fashionable since she left office. The issue is being trumpeted as a priority not only by some of Truss’ fellow Conservatives, but also by Labour leader Keir Starmer, who used a speech this summer to insist “growth, growth, growth” should be the focus of the nation.
Others in the party think she is claiming too much credit for a fairly unremarkable point, and that her frequent public interventions do the Tories more harm than good.
“If politics was just about having the right idea, then professors would be politicians,” said a second former colleague of Truss.
“Every time she says anything conspicuous, the public is reminded that Liz Truss was prime minister and that it wasn’t some sort of fever dream. We should be trying to push that further into the past.”
Never give in
The public seems to agree. In a survey by YouGov this month, 81 percent said she had done badly as prime minister, including 80 percent of Conservative voters.
Yet Truss shows no signs of letting up.
She is set to make an appearance at next month’s Conservative Party conference, where she has long been a popular figure among the libertarian grassroots. The presence of a controversial ex-PM is unlikely to boost the chances of a drama-free gathering in Manchester.
And she’s widely expected to play a role in the contest for control of the Conservative Party if they lose the next election. A government official said Truss has already been seeking to establish links with prospective Tory candidates, tapping up potential allies for the future.
The same Truss ally quoted above said the 48-year-old former leader has no intention of walking away from politics next year.
“She’s already been reselected (as a Tory MP) and very much hopes to be re-elected next year, and to play her part in debates inside the Conservative Party and in the Westminster sphere.”
Indeed, Truss recently told the Mail on Sunday she “will not rest” until Britain undergoes the radical economic change she wants to see. There is no reason to doubt that she means it.
Aggie Chambre contributed reporting. | United Kingdom Politics |
As he splashed into the pool of his Rwandan hotel for a pre-dawn swim yesterday, Boris Johnson knew it was going to be a difficult day.By the time he was towelling himself dry 20 minutes later it had already got worse.An early call from London had confirmed that by-elections in Wakefield, and in Tiverton and Honiton had both been lost, the latter on a massive swing to the Liberal Democrats that would send shivers through the ranks of southern Tory MPs.For a PM whose big selling point with colleagues has always been his incredible ability to win elections it was a serious blow. No 10 aides conceded the PM had been ‘blindsided’ by the attack from Mr Dowden, who 48 hours earlier had been helping him prepare for his weekly joust with Keir StarmerNow his previously loyal party chairman Oliver Dowden was calling to resign. His resignation letter was quietly damning. Mr Dowden did not directly mention Partygate, but said he shared the ‘distress and disappointment’ of Tory members at ‘recent events’.‘We cannot carry on with business as usual,’ he wrote. ‘Someone has to take responsibility.’A few minutes later Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, the treasurer of the 1922 Committee, was dialling in on a crackly phone line from the Cotswolds to tell BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that the party might have to ‘take steps to have a new prime minister’.No 10 aides conceded the PM had been ‘blindsided’ by the attack from Mr Dowden, who 48 hours earlier had been helping him prepare for his weekly joust with Keir Starmer at Prime Minister’s Questions.But if he was surprised he could not afford to dwell on it.Moments later he picked up the phone to Rishi Sunak, who is known to be close to Mr Dowden, to ensure he did not follow him out of the Cabinet.Further calls to Cabinet colleagues followed throughout the morning as preparations for a potentially tense meeting with Prince Charles at the Commonwealth summit were punctuated with efforts to shore up his own position 4,000 miles away in London.By mid-morning, the situation was stabilising.The Chancellor, after an apparent wobble, had issued a lukewarm tweet which failed to offer the PM direct support, but did at least confirm he wasn’t quitting.The PM is due to be out of the country for eight days, with the Commonwealth summit followed by a G7 event in Germany ahead of a Nato summit in Madrid. Some allies fear he is courting danger by remaining out of the country for so long at such a febrile time, but a Tory source said it would be an ‘abdication of responsibility’ to return to the UK earlySome allies fear he is courting danger by remaining out of the country for so long at such a febrile time, but a Tory source said it would be an ‘abdication of responsibility’ to return to the UK early.The source also laid the blame for the prime minister’s current woes on the media, saying that the ‘endless reportage and Kremlinology of Partygate is nonsense’.For his part, the PM used a TV clip to promise to ‘listen’ to voters’ concerns and to make the point that mid-term by-election defeats are nothing new.‘If governments crumbled in the face of by-elections we wouldn’t have had many post-war governments,’ he told reporters at a press conference in the Rwandan capital Kigali.It was a fair point – up to a point.Labour’s win in Wakefield, where the former Tory MP has been jailed for sexually assaulting a teenage boy, was not enough to put Keir Starmer on a clear path to No 10.While the Tory vote collapsed by more than 17 per cent, Labour’s picked up by just 8 per cent, suggesting there is still a lack of enthusiasm for Sir Keir’s lifeless brand of socialism in parts of Labour’s former Red Wall.Many Conservative supporters appear to have switched instead to independent candidate Akef Akbar, a former Tory councillor who quit the party in March branding the PM an ‘idiot’. In Tiverton, the Liberal Democrats engineered a monster swing by successfully persuading Labour supporters to vote tactically. Labour, which had come in second in 2019, lost its deposit.Allies of the PM were quick to point out that Margaret Thatcher came back from any number of terrible mid-term by-elections in the 1980s, with Dominic Raab correctly pointing out that ‘the choice at a general election is very different’.But, whether it was the result of an informal Lib/Lab pact or just greater tactical awareness, there are fears these results signal that a potentially serious anti-Conservative alliance is taking hold.Polling guru Sir John Curtice put it like this: ‘Many opposition voters are now seemingly willing to vote for whichever candidate seems best able to defeat Conservatives.‘If that continues, winning the next general election could begin to look a lot more difficult.’Mr Johnson also has to deal with the fact that internal opposition to his leadership continues to break out all over.Michael Howard yesterday became the most senior Brexiteer to join the calls for him to go.‘The party and more importantly the country would be better off under new leadership,’ the former Conservative leader said, before urging the Cabinet to rise up against him.But if Cabinet ministers were less than effusive about the PM’s continued leadership there was also little sign of a stampede against him.Indeed, some think their backbench colleagues have lost their minds and are in danger of wrecking the party’s remaining hope of clinging on to power. One Cabinet loyalist said: ‘I’m sticking with the PM because when you boil it down he’s still our best chance of winning the next election.‘With him we’ve got maybe a 30 per cent chance; with anyone else it’s more like 5 per cent.‘I think when more colleagues make that cold calculation things will stabilise – they’ve got to, or it’s all over.’But one former senior minister branded the Cabinet ‘spineless’, adding: ‘Do they really think we are going to win back seats like Wakefield, and if not, how are we going to win?’Some rebels have given up waiting for the Cabinet and are looking to change the leadership rules so that they can take another shot at the prime minister themselves.One southern Tory who faces a Lib Dem insurgency of his own said: ‘It’s clear the Cabinet are not going to act so we will have to knock the c*** out of him ourselves. If we don’t, we are finished.’Leading plotter Andrew Bridgen yesterday declared he will stand for election to the executive of the 1922 Committee on a platform of changing the rules.Tory whips are alive to the threat and are already mobilising support for more friendly candidates when the elections take place next month.But even if they succeed for now, the episode will keep the Government bogged down in debilitating internal battles at a time when it desperately needs to show the public it is acting on the cost of living.Mr Johnson talked the talk on tax cuts again yesterday, insisting the Government ‘believes in cutting taxes’ despite having repeatedly put them up.But even supportive MPs complain they have heard it all before.As one minister put it yesterday: ‘He is lucky in his enemies – Starmer is a dud and his opponents in the party are disorganised.‘He’s still got time to turn things around and I hope he does.‘But I’m not sure he knows how to do it any more.’ | United Kingdom Politics |
Schools at risk of falling down. Councils going bust. If ever there were any doubts that the Tories are on course to be booted out at the next election, then the events of the past few days have surely dispelled them. The government is a shambles and needs to be put out of its misery.
As with any party that has been in power a long time, past policy errors have started to become glaringly apparent. There are specific reasons why Birmingham council has run into problems, but it is far from alone. Councils are in financial difficulties – and have been forced into risky money-making schemes – because they have been starved of cash since 2010. In the years of austerity that have followed, repairing schools has not been a priority.
The Conservatives have also run out of luck. Even when there has been good news recently, such as the hefty upward revision to post-lockdown growth announced last week by the Office for National Statistics, it has been outweighed by the fallout from the latest policy screw-up. Rishi Sunak is heading for defeat, and the only real issue is whether he can keep that defeat to respectable proportions.
Labour’s approach is to play things ultra-safe and leave no flanks exposed. The latest example of this was the categorical announcement by Rachel Reeves that she has no plans to introduce a wealth tax. “We won’t be doing that. It’s a denial,” the shadow chancellor told the Sunday Telegraph last month.
As an election-winning strategy, this approach has its merits. At all costs, Labour wants to avoid a rerun of 1992, when the campaign was dominated by the proposal by the then shadow chancellor, John Smith, to introduce a new top rate of income tax. As today, the Tories were defending a rotten economic record, but managed to switch the focus to Labour’s alleged “tax bombshell”. It was classic project fear stuff, and it worked.
That’s not to say the Reeves approach is politically risk-free, because it isn’t. When the next election arrives, voters will want to hear more from Labour than how the Tories have mismanaged the economy for the past decade and more; they will want to know what the opposition plans to do to put things right. And, if the answer is that nothing much will change, Labour’s apparently commanding opinion poll lead could shrink.
But the drawbacks of Labour’s safety-first approach will really be exposed only if and when it wins power. That’s when the problems will start in earnest. In 1997, the last time Labour won an election as a party of opposition, the economy had been growing strongly for five years. Today it is flatlining. As in 1997, years of public sector neglect will need to be addressed. Pressures to spend more on an ageing population are bound to increase.
Reeves says Labour will speed up the economy’s growth rate and so generate the revenues for higher public spending without the need for higher taxes, but this is a triumph of hope over experience. Raising the pace at which the economy can sustainably expand will be a gruelling process that will take years to bear fruit, and it is fantasy to assume otherwise.
Sooner or later, Reeves will need to accept the inevitable. Taxes will need to be raised in order to do the things that Labour desires: repair schools, reduce NHS waiting lists and stop councils from going bust. As the Institute for Fiscal Studies put it in a recent report: “Without tax rises, UK public service and benefits provision will not simply tread water, it will deteriorate. Unless levels of tax increase substantially, a reduction in the scope of the public services that the British state provides is likely inevitable.”
That’s a sobering but realistic assessment. Although taxes as a share of national income are at their highest in 70 years, they will need to be even higher. The only real question is who is going to pay them – and taxing wealth more stringently is the obvious choice.
Incomes adjusted for inflation have barely risen since 2010, while asset values – house and share prices most notably – have soared. In large part that’s down to the impact of low interest rates and the money creation scheme known as quantitative easing, both of which have encouraged speculation. The richest 10% of households own almost half of the UK’s wealth, the bottom 50% just 9%. Britain’s tax system encourages investment in bricks and mortar rather than innovation, symbolised by the fact that there is no capital gains tax on the sale of main residences. Reforming the tax system so that it better serves employees rather than rentiers would help to boost the UK’s growth potential.
By ruling out a new wealth tax, Reeves appears to be denying herself a lucrative source of revenue, but things are not necessarily that bleak, according to Prof Richard Murphy, a tax expert. He says Labour is right to rule out a bespoke levy – something that he says would be difficult to collect, owing to the ability of the super-rich to employ the best financial advisers and lawyers – but it can more easily tax the wealthy through the current system. To take one example, the better-off get higher rates of tax relief on their pension contributions than those earning less. Restricting pension tax relief to 20% would raise up to £14.5bn a year, according to Murphy’s calculations.
There are other options, too. For example, national insurance is currently paid by workers, but not by landlords. Capital gains tax could also be raised. Financial services could lose their exemption from VAT. In total, Murphy has a list of 30 reforms that he says would raise £50bn a year for Reeves, enough to pay for both better public services and tax cuts for the less well-off.
Politically, a one-off wealth tax on plutocrats is an easier sell than telling someone earning £60,000 a year that the tax relief on their pension contributions is going to be cut. But while it is human nature to want somebody else to foot the bill for better public services, a degree of honesty is needed here. Taxes in the UK are high by historic standards, but not when compared to most other western European countries. If it is a fantasy to think that all will be well if the economy can grow a bit faster, then it is also a fantasy to assume that all will be well if the super-rich are stiffed for a one-off tax.
Labour needs to start telling it as it is. Significantly, perhaps, Reeves has ruled out a new wealth tax but has not said what her plans are for the taxes that already exist. That is wriggle room she will need to exploit.
Larry Elliott is a Guardian columnist | United Kingdom Politics |
Why can’t the North go Dutch?
Comparing the North of England with London obscures more than it reveals, argues Tom Forth. Only by judging it alongside other populous parts of northern Europe does the true scale of its problems become apparent – as well as potential solutions
Does North England have a strong economy and a bright future as part of a prosperous Britain, or is it a region that never recovered from deindustrialisation with few prospects for future success?
It’s a question that this Parliament was supposed to answer but has flunked, partly because those trying to do so were, in the main, trying from the wrong place. The unique advantages enjoyed by London, one of the world’s few truly global cities, make it a poor comparator for other regions in the United Kingdom. Time and again, policymakers have been misled by a misguided effort to see the issues of North England through the lens of the capital.
Culturally we share more than just beer, darts, football and fried food — but that’s a good start
This leads to some strange misunderstandings; for example, that North England is a place of stark inequality. In fact, within the region there is a remarkable uniformity. Then there’s the question of size. How many people in Whitehall, for instance, know that Manchester is more populous and more densely populated than Amsterdam?
That’s why if one really wants to understand the region, it’s far better to compare it not to London or Paris but to the next two most populous regions of northern Europe – the Netherlands and North-Rhine Westphalia in Germany.
Let’s start in the Netherlands
The core of the Dutch economy is the Randstad, an urban area of about seven and a half million people including the cities of Rotterdam, Amsterdam, The Hague and Utrecht.
North England has a similar urban core of eight million people centred on Manchester and reaching to Liverpool, Leeds and Sheffield.
Beyond the seven and a half million population urban core of the Netherlands live another nine and a half million Dutch.
Beyond the eight million population urban core of North England live another eight million Northerners.
North England and the Netherlands have about the same area of land at a similar latitude; Groningen is north of Chester. Culturally we share more than just beer, darts, football and fried food – but that’s a good start.
Similarities and differences
There is less similarity in our economies. The economy of the Netherlands is at least 60 per cent larger than the economy of North England. The incomes of people in North England are boosted by money transferred from the more prosperous South East, but Dutch households still have 20 per cent more money to spend.
Public sector spending on research and development in the Netherlands is twice as high as in North England. So is private sector spending.
Despite the challenges of building in a country that is mostly at or below sea level, the Netherlands has as much railway as North England, and twice as much of it is electrified. The much larger, faster, more efficient and more reliable Dutch trains carry over twice as many passengers per year. A new freight railway connects the country’s main port to the rest of Europe without disturbing passenger trains. A new high speed railway does the same for international and domestic travel, relieving congestion so that more local and regional trains can run.
With recent curtailments of both HS2 and Northern Powerhouse Rail, there is little hope of anything similar within a generation in North England.
How did we get here?
North England’s economy was stronger than the Netherlands’ for at least 100 years from the mid-1800s. In the mid-1960s the Netherlands caught up and overtook it. Since then, North England has fallen ever further behind, despite its similarities.
We can gain some insight into why this might have happened by looking at North-Rhine Westphalia. It has some key differences from the Netherlands that help us think about North England’s deficiencies and opportunities.
North-Rhine Westphalia does not contain a national capital. It has no significant oil and gas resources. It has substantially more manufacturing as a share of its economy. It has many fewer graduates. And yet North-Rhine Westphalia, just like the Netherlands, has excellent infrastructure and an economy about 60 per cent stronger than North England’s.
Why North England has fallen behind
My best theory for why North England has fallen behind makes for unpleasant reading. Bluntly, the Dutch people and the Dutch government are interested in the prosperity of the Netherlands more than the North English people and the UK government are interested in the prosperity of North England.
North England’s ambitions are set by, and in effect constrained by, a government in Westminster that doesn’t believe that North England can achieve as much as the Netherlands, and which invests with preference to the seat of government.
Differences in attitudes and ambitions lead to different actions. In both the Netherlands and North-Rhine Westphalia, governments are unashamed to invest in cities. There are trams, metros, underground railway stations and new railway lines, all of which have been cancelled or been beyond consideration in North England’s similar cities in recent decades. North England has less than a quarter as many tram and metro stations. Instead, our national government celebrates the cancellation of investments such as HS2 to fund subsidies for inefficient bus networks that contribute little to long-term prosperity.
How we can do better
The good news for North England is that its comparative deficiencies are so obvious. There is little reason why, with better government and a similar desire to build a better and more prosperous society, we could not achieve the same prosperity in North England as exists in the Netherlands or North-Rhine Westphalia. Just as those places caught up with our stronger economy in the 1960s after a century of trailing us, and in part by emulating us, so we could catch up today.
North English success will probably require slightly higher taxes to fund higher public spending, but this should pay dividends quite quickly.
Success will require greater freedom from a UK government that currently restrains ambitions for economic growth locally for short-term political reasons, but the foundations of this have been laid by city region devolution deals and metro mayors.
It will also require a desire locally to build the more and better homes, business premises and infrastructure that North England lacks and that form the foundation of its economic underperformance.
North England will stand its best chance of success if it positions itself in healthy competition with the rest of the UK
Success will need the UK government and Britain’s national institutions that surround it in London to challenge itself constantly and to stop preferencing investment and the creation of new ‘national’ organisations near to itself. There is a long list of organisations like the Crick Institute and ARIA that are placed by the UK government in London for no good reason. If that list continues to grow it will be to the further detriment of both the UK’s regional economies and the UK’s overall prosperity.
Success will require the recreation and funding of abolished regional development agencies, equivalents of which operate with success in the Netherlands and in North Rhine-Westphalia.
Most controversially, North England will stand its best chance of success if it positions itself in healthy competition with the rest of the UK. It must be willing, probably starting with its great cities, to take control of its own development, including by raising taxes.
There is nothing magic in the Netherlands or North-Rhine Westphalia that we could not emulate in North England. The question for those in North England is whether we want to do so. The question for those in and close to the UK government is whether you want to support us and to let us try.
PoliticsHome Newsletters
Get the inside track on what MPs and Peers are talking about. Sign up to The House's morning email for the latest insight and reaction from Parliamentarians, policy-makers and organisations. | United Kingdom Politics |
Is this the dawn? Have we reached the glimmer of a new beginning? Rishi Sunak’s about-turn on joining the European Union’s Horizon programme is a first note of sanity in the two and a half tortured years since Britain formally left the EU. Let it not be the last.
The story itself is miserable. Horizon is an £81bn continent-wide programme to give Europe’s scientific research community a critical mass to compare with that of the US or China. It acknowledges the obvious truth that advanced scientific research needs collaboration rather than competition. Britain’s universities had been leaders of the pack, and they were among Horizon’s principal beneficiaries. If anything made sense of a united Europe, it was Horizon.
Brexit was an act of sabotage. In a measure of infantile daftness, its adherents declared that here, as in all things, Britain could go it alone. Sunak’s own enslavement to the creed required him to agree, and he duly engineered a £14bn Pioneer programme with grants that were intended to replace Horizon. Many senior scientists in Britain protested the inadequacy. Sunak appeared unaware that research is as much about collaboration and scholastic exchange as it is about money.
What Sunak has not done is budge an inch on border movement. Ridiculous bureaucracy will still impede academic exchanges, conferences, student visits and simple research trips – as it stifles orchestra and theatre tours. We assume the ever xenophobic Home Office is behind the “hostile environment” that will still seek to deter scientists and indeed any academic from working in Britain. A solo researcher arriving for an extended period of work of study, per 2021 research commissioned by the Royal Society, can fork out between £3,000 and £5,000 for the privilege. As long as Brexit is administered in this way, repelling friends and associates who for decades have moved freely across the Channel, the EU will do Britain no favours.
Horizon suggests that Brexit is approaching a moment of truth. Fortress Britain is crumbling like soggy cement. Not a single statistic presents the UK’s decision to leave Europe as anything but a gross historical error. From economic growth to trade and productivity, from labour supply to immigration, every boon promised by the Brexit lobby was a lie. The Centre for European Reform estimated that at the end of 2021, the British economy was 5% smaller than it would have been had Britain not left. But the damage lay not so much in Brexit as in hard Brexit, in leaving the single market, an almost casual weapon in Boris Johnson’s leadership ambition.
Polls now show that a majority of Britons have seen this point. There is open regret about the 2016 referendum decision – which tells us all we need to know about plebiscite politics. But how to convert public opinion into a change of course is a different matter. That is now the urgency. The UK’s exclusion from one of the richest export markets in the world is hurting it, day after day.
Henry Kissinger advised that, in negotiating, the key is never to start with big rows, but with small agreements. Build up from them. The Horizon deal shows that where goodwill exists, progress can be made. The Windsor framework on Northern Ireland was likewise a small agreement. Deals are now being mooted on veterinary standards, on financial regulation and on limited labour movement. Each year, thousands more EU workers are admitted to assist the harvest. The hospitality industry needs similar help. While border controls on farm exports to the EU are still grotesque, food imports from the EU pass unimpeded through Dover. This is desperately unfair on British farmers and has to stop. Clearly a deal must be done.
Keir Starmer has been feeble on Brexit for blatantly electoral reasons. He has even felt obliged to pledge no return to a customs union or a single market – as if desperate to win votes on the Tory right. Since he is not stupid, this must be intended as a Johnsonian inexactitude.
Labour’s shadow foreign secretary, David Lammy, has been more constructive. He has promised to revise, “page by page”, Johnson’s Brexit deal. He has singled out for negotiation short-term travel, labour flexibility, border trade and regulatory standardisation. That covers most of the single market.
The real Brexit breakthrough must await some sign of atonement. Even its most ardent champion, Nigel Farage – who once supported remaining in the single market – has admitted it has failed. As yet, no senior Tory has shown the courage to agree. The party’s leading figures are, like Donald Trump supporters in America, mumbling their ongoing support and keeping their heads down for fear of offending their own right wing. They are praying for someone else to confess the error.
There must be a route back – irrespective of EU membership – to a sensible, pragmatic economic relationship between Britain and the rest of Europe. An offshore island cannot divorce itself forever from its adjacent mainland. If British politics cannot admit it made a terrible mistake, it can at least start to rectify it. Horizon has shown how. We must hope a hundred Horizons lie ahead.
Simon Jenkins is a Guardian columnist | United Kingdom Politics |
What is the government position on the European Convention on Human Rights? Earlier this morning cabinet minister Therese Coffey and junior minister Guy Opperman both gave interviews that seemed to play down the idea that the government would now move to pull out of the European Convention on Human Rights following the failed Rwanda deportation flight.The Convention, to which the UK is a signatory, is the basis on which the European Court of Human Rights judges cases brought before it.But as our deputy political editor Sam Coates points out in his latest update, the prime minister's spokesman has now insisted "all options are on the table" when it comes to the Convention.Sam says this suggests that contrary to the comments of ministers earlier, Number 10 is preparing to "lean in into the idea of yet another very big fight."Watch his analysis here: Government will do 'whatever it takes' to ensure Rwanda flights take off As well as hearing from Priti Patel in the Commons, the prime minister's official spokesman has been fielding questions from journalists at a regular Westminster briefing.He has said the government will do "whatever it takes" to make sure that deportation flights to Rwanda go ahead.The spokesman said ministers would be considering the ruling from the European Court of Human Rights but stressed that "all options are on the table".Asked if the government could withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights, the spokesman responded: "We are keeping all options on the table including any further legal reforms that may be necessary."We will look at all of the legislation and processes in this round."Asked if a flight could take off before legal proceedings in the UK are finished, he said: "That is my understanding." 'The home secretary has no one to blame but herself' Labour's shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper calls the immigration policy a "shambles and shameful, and the home secretary has no one but herself to blame". She says Priti Patel knew she was planning to send torture victims to Rwanda and did not have the proper screening processes in place.Ms Cooper asks: "Can she confirm that it was the Home Office itself that withdrew a whole series of these cases on Friday and yesterday because they knew there was a problem with these cases that even without the ECHR judgment, she was planning to send a plane with just seven people on board because she'd had to withdraw most of the cases at the last minute."She also asks the home secretary how much "she promised Rwanda for each of the people she was planning to end yesterday, and how many Rwandan refugees she promised to take in return.""If she was serious about tackling illegal migration she would be working night and day to get a better joint plan with France to crack down on the gangs going into the water in the first place," she continues. "But she isn't because her relationship with French ministers has totally broken down."Ms Cooper says Ms Patel spent half a million pounds chartering a plane "she never expected to fly", calling it "government by gimmick".SNP MP Stuart McDonald calls it an "unworkable, immoral and illegal policy that "does nothing to stop illegal people smugglers". He says "it's not the lawyers who caused this flight to be cancelled, or any courts" but "government illegality". Priti Patel says preparations for next Rwanda flights 'have begun' She says the flight was paused "following a decision by an out-of-hours judge" at the European Court of Human Rights.She says the European Court did not rule that the removal policy was unlawful.She tells the House of Commons: "These repeated legal barriers are very similar to those that we experience with all other removal flights."And we believe we are fully compliant with our domestic and international obligations and preparations for our future flights and next flights have already begun.""We are a generous and welcoming country, as has been shown time and time again. Over 20,000 people have used safe and legal routes to come to the UK since 2015," she says."Our capacity to help those in need is severely compromised by those who come here illegally."She says illegal immigration is "not fair on those who play by the rules", especially at the cost of £5m per day. Rwanda, she says, has "been vilified" and is "a safe and secure country with an outstanding track record of supporting refugees and asylum and seekers and we are proud that we are working together".She says she will not let the "usual suspects" or "mobs" prevent asylum seekers from being sent to the African country. Theresa May says case of missing journalist in Brazil must be be made a 'diplomatic priority' Former prime minister Theresa May used her question to ask Boris Johnson to make the case of missing British journalist Dom Phillips a "diplomatic priority." Mrs May said: "My constituent Dominique Davis is the niece of Dom Philips, the British journalist missing in Brazil, alongside the indigenous expert Bruno Pereira. "Will my Right Honourable friend ensure that the government makes his case a diplomatic priority and that it works to do everything it can to ensure that the Brazilian authorities put the resources necessary to uncover the truth, and find out what has happened to Dom and Bruno?" Mr Johnson responded: "Like everybody in this House we are deeply concerned about what may have happened to him. FCDO officials are working closely with the Brazilian authorities. The minister responsible has raised the issue repeatedly," he added. PM brushes away question about the critical comments made by new cost of living tsar Labour's Anna McMorrin has read out a criticism of the prime minister made by the government's newly appointed cost of living tsar.David Buttress, founder of Just Eat, was appointed yesterday - but in January he posted on Twitter: "Why is it that the worse people often rise to the highest office and stay there?"Ms McMorrin said: "If his own tsar doesn't have faith in him, tell me why those struggling should?"The prime minister brushed off the question, saying "this is a government that gets on and delivers on our promises to the people, in particular getting Brexit done."I read the other day that she wants to go back into the single market and the customs union, that's the real policy of the Labour Party, Mr Speaker." Sexual assault survivors having to 'choose between their mental health and justice' Labour's Sarah Champion brings up the case of a Rotherham survivor who reported her experience to the police and was told not to go for counselling as "it could be used against them in court".She asks the PM to stop the Attorney General from challenging the rules to it is even easy for defence teams to access victims counselling notes "having an immediate chilling effect". Survivors "shouldn't be forced to choose between their mental health and justice". The PM replies that he will "look at the evidence she has, but I think these are very tentative and very difficult issues, particularly as regards the defence cases".He says courts are starting to see a "gradual improvement" in the prosecution rate "and that is because governments across departments are working together to take account of victims' needs". "I agree that progress isn't everything that I would like, but we are seeing progress," he adds. Analysis: Rail strikes question another opportunity for PM to flip attack back on Labour By Amanda Akass, political correspondentThe loud heckling from the Conservative benches during Labour MP Liz Twist's question about the pain ahead for ordinary families hit by the "biggest rail strikes in a generation" highlights a real awkwardness in Labour's position on this issue. The Conservatives have been accusing Labour of backing the strikes after a number of senior party figures expressed their support for the rights of unions to take industrial action. Liz Twist is asking a specific question about why ministers haven't met with the union leaders in a bid to stop the strikes - a key Labour attack line. Sir Keir Starmer is accusing the prime minister of wanting the strikes to go ahead to stoke division. But it's a division which is politically very useful for the under-pressure prime minister to exploit. This question gives him a useful opportunity to flip the attack back onto the opposition with his aside "we all know how much money the Labour front bench take from the RMT" and repeating the demand he's already made several times this PMQs for Labour to "come out and condemn the RMT" - in an echo of his claim to Sir Keir that.It's an uncomfortable moment for Labour after a question from one of their own MPs. Lib Dem leader has by-election in his sights in question on rural fuel duty relief Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey seemed to have the upcoming by-election in Tiverton and Honiton in his sights when he asked his question."Millions of families across our country are suffering because of the cost of living emergency, and people in rural areas are especially bearing the brunt of record fuel price rises," Sir Ed said."The rural fuel duty relief scheme is supposed to help by taking money off the price of petrol with some rural counties are eligible - like Cumbria, like Shropshire, and like Devon.""I think the people of Devon will note because there are families and pensioners across rural counties who are missing out on this support. "So Mr Speaker, as petrol crisis soars, will the prime minister accept our idea to help people in rural counties and expand rural fuel duty relief?"Boris Johnson responded by saying fuel duty had already been cut for everyone across the country "by record sums."The prime minister then accused the Liberal Democrats of using the "blissful fact" that voters "don't know what their policies are" to "go around the country bamboozling the rural communities, not revealing they are in fact in favour of massive green taxes and not revealing they'd like to go straight away back into the common agricultural policy with all the bureaucracy and cost that entails. They don't say that on the doorstep Mr Speaker." Economy a key fault line in debate around Scottish independence By Amanda Akass, political correspondentThe prime minister is responding to Ian Blackford's calls for another Scottish independence referendum with an argument about the economy, arguing "there are other subjects in the national conversation right now" and pointing to the UK's "jobs-led recovery" out of COVID. Clearly the economic arguments for and against independence are a key fault line in the debate over Scotland's future and Boris Johnson is keen to make the point to Scottish voters that they would be worse off as an independent country. But while the Conservative MPs cheer loudly behind him, the country's economic strength is clearly wobbly ground which Mr Blackford is able to exploit in his response, pointing out that the UK has only the second worst growth forecast in the G20 after sanctioned Russia. Due to your consent preferences, you’re not able to view this. Open Privacy Options | United Kingdom Politics |
by Adam Perreira
The South And Central American countries of El Salvador, Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela, and Brazil are among the world’s leaders in showing interest in crypto. Four of these countries are considered emerging 3rd world countries, while Brazil is considered a new Super Power. Golden Inu crypto brand believes these countries will be influential in the crypto revolution and plans to launch a Decentralized Cryptocurrency Exchange [DEX] that will be marketed towards these LaTam audiences.
When will Golden Inu Exchange launch?
The new DEX will be named ‘Golden Inu Exchange.’ The most useful feature is expected to be the GIE’s utility of swapping Ethereum Blockchain and Binance-Chain cryptocurrencies $1-to-$1. The new venture aims to create the best crypto exchange for LatAm users of the two blockchains with lower transaction fees than traditional exchanges and faster transactions.
Though the lower fees is the most important for many, this exchange is also helping users retain their rights to financial privacy and independence. It is ‘decentralized’ [DEX] not centralized [CEX], which means users retain more control over their transactions & data.
The exchange will be launched later in 2023. This will happen after the closing of the Initial Coin Offering [ICO] for the second token required by the exchange, $Golden [erc20]
Crypto trades have already invested over US$6000 into the new ICO. The token is scheduled to be listed on its first public trading exchange for a price +25% more than the Initial Coin Offering [presale] price of today.
Previous $Golden ICO Netted Investors Big gains
The other token required for the new DEX, $Golden [bep20] is already listed on its first public exchange. The ICO investors received between +250% to +720% return on investments from the bep20 to date.
Some bag holders are still waiting for the launch of the DEX and a crypto marketplace, the Golden $Bazaar. Analysts predict those early bag holders could see returns as high as +10,000% before the year’s end if the new DEX has traction. Why? The $Golden token would become the medium for gas fees on hundreds of thousands of transactions daily on the “Golden Inu Exchange.”
Furthermore, every transaction in the Golden Inu Ecosystem adds to the liquidity pool and overall value of the $Golden token.
And while the Golden Inu Ecosystem has features for any crypto trader from across the world, the company has a glaring interest in Latin America. This is likely due to its emergence in the tech world and lion’s share of the world’s natural resources.
Cryptocurrency in South & Central America
If not familiar with the world economy, Brazil is one-fifth of the emerging new super power BRICS [Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa]. The country best known by tourists for its city of Rio De Janeiro, the movie ‘City of God,’ and the Amazon rainforest is also becoming noticed for web3 technology.
Crypto In Brazil
Brazil has the 7th most cryptocurrency holders in the world. Holders of various tokens can even buy groceries at supermarkets Shibta and Oasis with their crypto wallets . Even global company BurgerKing accepts Dogecoin for food purchases in the Land of the Parrots.
Becoming a powerhouse in the ranks of global economies, this digital currency acceptance alongside its great weather has made Brazil a choice home for expats and foreign investment.
Still, it has an extremely large demand for crypto exchanges due to volatility of local currency and avoidance of bank fees. Brazilians, Colombians, El Salvadorians, Mexicans, Venezuelans and more are moving hundreds of millions of dollars between family members and friends through exchanges.
Venezuela Needs More Crypto Exchanges Now
Though Venezuela is going through many shifts in regulatory mandates on Crypto mining and cryptocurrencies in general, it is expected to see a significant growth in trading through 2024.
Exchanges like CoinCoinX, who recently took a hiatus, are currently handling hundreds of thousands of users’ transactions by themselves. CCX even cites high costs of operations and ‘too much work,’ as one two reasons for the break. Golden Inu exchange would be a welcome solution to this LatAm crypto market that is far under-served.
El Salvador Moving Full Speed Into Crypto
In El Salvador the new decentralized crypto exchange “GIE” should be welcomed with open arms. The President and government has removed taxes related to technology innovation such as Golden Inu Exchange and made it mandatory for citizens to learn how to use crypto [essentially]. Both have helped create a demand for new crypto exchanges, as future generations of business will have to rely on.
Max Keiser, a crypto magnate, recently joined the El Salvadoran government to help guide this digital currency revolution. He says it could become the ‘Singapore’ of South America — in layman’s terms a major business hub of Latin America.
Will Crypto takeover Colombia by law?
Bogota, Colombia on the other hand is already a major business hub. The Golden Inu token crypto team already has a marketing campaign running, both physical and digital.
Colombia has the 3rd most ‘valuable’ fiat currency in the world as of April 2023. There’s a lot of natural resources and cash floating around in the country. The President, Petro Gustavo, and his political party think the South American country’s cash system could use a crypto overhaul to help stabilize it.
According to the Colombian President, virtual currency is valuable information and energy. Also, he believes the gateway to South America could use lands currently occupied by Cocaine producers and guerilla armies to generate greener crypto mining solutions. Above all, this would also be a huge new income stream for the Coffee capital.
As for the huge sums of cash floating in corrupt trades, Gustavo and his political cohorts think Crypto could help expose dirty money. The POTROC is currently investigating the idea of making all large purchases within Colombia to be required by law, to be done in crypto.
The goal of this potentially society changing mandate would be to force Colombians to expose expenditures and pay the appropriate taxes on income. Currently, many in the country prefer cash over bank accounts just to avoid government taxation. Many Colombian citizens feel the minimum wage for jobs in Colombia is not fair in comparison to taxes that keep rising.
A decentralized exchange like Golden Inu could be a great medium between the fears of the people and the ambition of the government, If the “GIE” was made popular in cities like Medellin, Bogota, Cartagena, Villaviciencio, Cali, Santa Marta, San Gil, and Barranquilla, over 3-million traders could join & utilize the new DEX.
Chilean crypto exchange Buda.com reports Colombians did over $40-million-dollars in trading volume on their exchange alone in 2021. In 2023, numbers on various exchanges show over one quarter billion dollars in crypto has been traded, a huge leap.
Selling Stablecoins To Latin Americans Is A New Business
Beyond this, there’s also a demand for stablecoins like USDT because of Latin America’s currencies being so volatile against the dollar. In fact, the demand is so high that there are groups on Facebook where people pay a fee just to have Tether ($USDT) sent to their crypto wallet. There they hold funds, hoping the dollar will increase in value allowing their money to grow in value against local currency.
The Golden Inu Exchange aims to change the lives of citizens in such countries by making decentralized trading a readily available option and in simplified formats. Just as the $Golden Dashboard app, it appears the Golden inu Exchange will be a ‘layman’s format,’ just this time it will be for buying and selling crypto.
Marketing in Latin American for the Golden Inu brand has already been started. Watch the official subreddit for the latest photo or video capturings of the brand popping up across South & Central America. | Latin America Politics |
The Falkland Islands are the Parthenon marbles of Britain’s diplomacy. They bring out the silliest antics in what passes for its “role on the world stage”.
The election of a new populist leader in Argentina made the reopening of the Falklands issue a near certainty, and so it has proved. The bizarre figure of Javier Milei may not be on the world stage for long, but he did pay British history the compliment of calling Thatcher “one of the great leaders in the history of humanity”. He duly suggested the time might have come, yet again, to reopen the issue of Falklands sovereignty, not militarily but by diplomacy.
Since the last British government to make such a proposal was that of a certain Margaret Thatcher, it might not seem unreasonable. Indeed, had it not been for the lunacy of the Argentine dictator General Galtieri, it was perfectly possible that a sale and 99-year leaseback agreement under UN auspices could have been reached in 1980. It had been negotiated since 1971 and Labour’s Ted Rowlands had sold such a deal to the islanders in 1977. Had Labour not lost in 1979, it was a probability.
At that time islander contact with the adjacent mainland was close – including shared schools. The Rowlands deal was taken up and again sold, rather tactlessly, to the islanders by Thatcher’s junior minister, Nick Ridley. Yet on his return, Ridley – and his proposal of a leasing arrangement – was attacked by all sides of parliament. This was a precipitating factor in the subsequent Argentine invasion.
Some version of joint sovereignty was later put forward by the Peruvians shortly before the British landings in 1982. It would have secured the position of the islanders on terms already negotiated. It would have saved hundreds of lives, and would not be costing British taxpayers some £60m a year to defend the islands, or roughly £2.4bn for 40 years. Nothing so illustrates the daftness of the lasting cult of British imperialism.
The Foreign Office seems to have unlimited sums for imperial gestures. Social care ministers can eat their hearts out. Carriers are sent to the South China Sea, destroyers to the Black Sea and a patrol boat to the Falklands. What on earth for? Quite apart from the hypocrisy of Jeremy Hunt claiming to be short of money, this schoolboy machismo makes Britain look ridiculous.
The Falklands appear to “belong” not to Britain but to their inhabitants, or so the defence secretary, Grant Shapps, implies in conceding them all decisions over their future at any cost. A previous Tory government accepted that this cost – then far less – was prohibitive and absurd. It decided that some tiny islands thousands of miles away off the coast of South America would be best advised to forge a relationship with their close neighbour. No sensible observer demurred.
The Rowlands, Ridley and Peruvian plans offered the islanders security. The UN and other Latin American countries were to share in guarantees. There was never a need for the expense of the present fortification. The sole reason for London’s refusal to return to negotiation is frankly that the Falklands were Britain’s last spark of military glory. That was 40 years ago. It cannot justify abandoning all common sense. | Latin America Politics |
Keir Starmer has praised Margaret Thatcher for effecting “meaningful change” in Britain in an article directly appealing to Conservative voters to switch to Labour.
Writing in the Sunday Telegraph, the Labour leader said Thatcher had “set loose our natural entrepreneurialism” during her time as prime minister.
“Across Britain, there are people who feel disillusioned, frustrated, angry, worried. Many of them have always voted Conservative but feel that their party has left them,” he said. “I understand that. I saw that with my own party and acted to fix it. But I also understand that many will still be uncertain about Labour. I ask them to take a look at us again.”
In the article, Starmer pointed to Labour prime ministers of the past – Tony Blair and Clement Attleee – as well as Thatcher, as examples of how politicians can effect meaningful change.
Starmer said it was “in this sense of public service” that he had overseen a dramatic change in the Labour party – cutting its ties with former leader Jeremy Corbyn and expelling him from the party.
“The course of shock therapy we gave our party had one purpose: to ensure that we were once again rooted in the priorities, the concerns and the dreams of ordinary British people. To put country before party,” he said.
Starmer claimed his party was “moving back towards voters” while “the Tory party has been steadily drifting away”.
His praise of Thatcher – a divisive figure in British politics – is likely to raise eyebrows on the left of the Labour party.
Elsewhere in the article, Starmer criticised the government’s handling of Brexit, arguing it had wasted economic opportunities made possible by the split from the EU.
“They have squandered economic opportunities and failed to realise the possibilities of Brexit. They will bequeath public finances more akin to a minefield than a solid foundation,” he wrote.
The Labour leader touted the party’s “iron-clad fiscal rules” in an effort to portray Labour as trustworthy on the economy.
“There will be many on my own side who will feel frustrated by the difficult choices we will have to make,” he added. “This is non-negotiable: every penny must be accounted for. The public finances must be fixed so we can get Britain growing and make people feel better off.”
On migration, Starmer said: “This is a government that was elected on a promise that immigration would ‘come down’ and the British people would ‘always be in control’. For immigration to then triple is more than just yet another failure – it is a betrayal of their promises.” | United Kingdom Politics |
Serious concerns are being raised that the upcoming Voice referendum is leading to a rise in racism and driving a surge in psychological harm to First Nations people.
Marjorie Anderson is the national manager of 13YARN, a crisis support line for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
She described feelings of sadness after seeing what she said was sensible and respectful discussion being hijacked and replaced by "personal attacks" which had resulted in a rise in racial abuse, especially online.
"Debate around the referendum has been appalling," Ms Anderson said.
"It's been really disrespectful.
"I don't know why people can't come out and just say 'these are the facts, make up your mind'."
Instead, she said speculation was leading to distress.
"There's always, you know, 'the world's going to end if the Yes gets through', and, 'if it doesn't get through the world's going to end'."
Ms Anderson said an increase in falsehoods, speculation, and racism were adding fuel to existing hardships and leaving people feeling vulnerable and overwhelmed.
The crisis support service provides 24-hour help to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in distress and has been co-designed with support from Lifeline and Aboriginal mental health professionals.
It was set up in March 2022 by the former Coalition government, with the expectation of fielding about 40 to 60 calls per day.
"We had 173 calls the other day," Ms Anderson said.
"So, it's well beyond what our modelling said that we were going to get."
Ms Anderson said the majority of calls were coming from people in Queensland, followed by Victoria, and then New South Wales.
She said the increase in demand was disturbing and showed people were hurting and in need of help, adding many of those calling just wanted to speak to someone who would listen.
The helpline has purposefully remained neutral in its stance on the referendum.
"We need to be there for anybody. We need help without judgement," Ms Anderson said.
Calls for more kindness
Rachel Fishlock is chief executive of Gayaa Dhuwi, the national peak body for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander wellbeing and suicide prevention.
She said she was concerned by what she was seeing, and feared the impact would be long-term.
"It's a lot for us to deal with on top of what we already deal with," she said.
"Whether we're expecting a "Yes" or a "No", there's still going to be a negative impact due to the racism and stress the referendum has caused."
Ms Fishlock likened it to the distress caused during the marriage equality debate.
Ms Anderson is also appealing for a more respectful debate and for people to check on one another.
"We all need to be taking care of each other in the community," she said.
"If you see someone being sad in the community, go up and say 'you right or what? How can I help you? Do you just want an ear'?"
The National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation has also raised concerns about the mental wellbeing of First Nations people in the lead-up to the referendum.
The health organisation has launched an online portal with links to several culturally safe support services.Loading... | Australia Politics |
President Joe Biden will travel to Saudi Arabia during a four-day visit to the Middle East next month, culminating months of delicate diplomacy as gasoline prices surged in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Biden will travel to Jeddah July 13-16 to meet with Saudi and other Gulf leaders, a long-speculated trip comes after the president vowed to make the kingdom a “pariah” after the brutal 2018 assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The president has pushed back on suggestions that he is seeking help over high gasoline prices. INFLATION AND ELECTION YEAR POLITICS OVERSHADOW BIDEN’S LATIN AMERICA SUMMIT Biden will discuss regional security but will also bring up human rights “behind closed doors,” a senior administration said. The president is expected to “see” the country’s de facto ruler, Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman, during the visit, the official added. Biden will begin the visit in Israel to meet with leaders and discuss increased cooperation with regional powers, and will also visit the West Bank to consult with the Palestinian Authority and reiterate his support for a two-state solution, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement. In Saudi Arabia, “a strategic partner” of the United States for nearly eighty years, Biden will attend a Summit of the Gulf Cooperation Council and discuss new infrastructure and climate initiatives, as well security threats from Iran, the White House said. “We have important interests interwoven with Saudi Arabia, and engagement is essential to protecting advancing those interests on behalf of the American people … and for advancing our strategy towards a more stable, more peaceful, and more integrated region,” the senior official told reporters on a call to announce the trip. “The president’s looking forward to it.” The prospect of a visit has been marred in controversy over Khashoggi's killing, with the Saudi journalist's widow urging Biden to sit down with her before the president travels to the region. A U.S. intelligence report released after Biden took office determined the the crown prince responsible for the former Washington Post columnist's murder. A White House statement said Biden would meet with King Salman bin Abdulaziz al-Saud, along with the leaders of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, all members of the Gulf Cooperation Council plus Egypt, Iraq, and Jordan. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER A statement by the Saudi Embassy said Biden and the crown prince will also “hold official talks.” “The Crown Prince and President Biden will hold official talks that will focus on various areas of bilateral cooperation and joint efforts to address regional and global challenges,” the statement said. | Middle East Politics |
The mother of the man accused of assassinating Shinzo Abe is a member of the Unification church, which the suspect has cited as a motive for his fatal shooting of the former Japanese prime minister last week.The church, whose members are colloquially known as Moonies, confirmed at a press conference on Monday that the mother of Tetsuya Yamagami, who was detained moments after he shot Abe from behind during an election campaign speech on Friday, attends meetings about once a month.Yamagami, 41, has told investigators he had initially intended to target the organisation’s leader, but that he had also intended to kill Abe, whom he claimed had promoted the church in Japan. He said his mother had made a “huge donation” to the church more than 20 years ago that had crippled the family’s finances.Tomihiro Tanaka, the president of the Japan branch of the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification – more commonly known as the Unification church – declined to comment on the donations, citing the police investigation into Abe’s death in the western city of Nara.Police have confirmed that Yamagami held a grudge against a specific organisation, but have not named it.Tanaka said neither Abe nor Yamagami were members of the church, which was founded in 1954 in South Korea by the Rev Sun Myung Moon, adding that the group would cooperate with the police investigation if asked.Abe, a conservative who became Japan’s longest-serving prime minister in 2019, delivered a congratulatory message via video link at a church event last year. Donald Trump is among other prominent figures to have addressed the group, known for its conservative views, in an attempt to secure its followers’ support.In a statement released on Saturday, the church expressed its “shock and grief” over Abe’s death, describing him as a “globally respected statesman of Japan and active in building peace in Asia”.Abe’s maternal grandfather, Nobusuke Kishi, who served as prime minister from 1957 to 1960, was reportedly involved in setting up a political group linked to the Unification church, which shared his anti-communist views. The Kyodo news agency, citing investigative sources, said Yamagami had developed a deep resentment towards Kishi that he directed towards Abe.A wake will be held for Abe on Monday evening at Zojoji, a large Buddhist temple in central Tokyo, followed by a private funeral on Tuesday at the same venue. Media reports said a public memorial and other ceremonies would be held at a later date, including in Abe’s constituency in Yamaguchi prefecture, in the south-west.The US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, described Abe as a “man of vision” during an unscheduled trip to Tokyo on Monday, as the country’s ruling party held muted celebrations following a resounding election victory.The Liberal Democratic party (LDP), which Abe led for almost a decade, and its junior coalition party, increased their majority in the upper house on Sunday.The LDP and Komeito won 76 of the 125 seats being contested in an election overshadowed by the first assassination of a Japanese leader in almost 90 years.The election in the less powerful chamber in Japan’s parliament had no bearing on the makeup of the government, but was seen as a referendum on prime minister Fumio Kishida’s first 10 months in office amid growing regional security concerns and the cost of living crisis.At 52%, turnout was slightly up from three years earlier – a trend some analysts attributed to Abe’s death – but the coalition’s victory had been expected before he was killed.Blinken, who had been in Bali attending a G20 meeting, said he had flown to Japan because “we’re friends, and when one friend is hurting, the other friend shows up”.Abe, he said, “did more than anyone to elevate the relationship between the United States and Japan to new heights”.“We will do everything we can to help our friends carry the burden of this loss,” he added, calling Abe “a man of vision with the ability to realise that vision”, after a meeting with Kishida.Remembering Shinzo Abe, Japan's longest-serving prime minister – video obituaryThe election result means that Kishida, an Abe protege, may yet pursue his mentor’s lifelong ambition of revising Japan’s “pacifist” constitution.While building public support for constitutional change will take time, Kishida is expected to use his party’s mandate to double defence spending in the coming years amid concerns over North Korea’s nuclear weapons programme and increased Chinese military activity in the East and South China seas.“He now has a green light for this, said Robert Ward, at the International Institute for Strategic Studies.Sign up to First Edition, our free daily newsletter – every weekday morning at 7am BSTKishida said Sunday’s vote had been a victory for democracy. “It is significant we were able to pull this election together at a time violence was shaking its foundations,” he said after a moment of silence was held at the LDP headquarters on Sunday night.Abe’s death at the hands of a gunman who was able to wander freely behind his target as he addressed a small group of voters has prompted criticism of his security arrangements.The head of police in the Nara region has admitted that there were “undeniable” flaws, and on Monday, the government’s top spokesperson, Hirokazu Matsuno, said he expected a full investigation into security lapses on the day of the attack. | Asia Politics |
The mayor of London has urged EU citizens to “choose London” over other European cities, promising to make the UK capital a better place to live and work despite Brexit.
Sadiq Khan told the Guardian he had redoubled his efforts to attract EU citizens since the UK left the bloc, notwithstanding new barriers such as visa requirements.
“That’s where I’ve got a big responsibility. I’ve got to make it more attractive for you to choose London [rather] than Frankfurt or Paris or Dublin,” he said.
“I’ve got to make sure that our nightlife, our museums, our galleries, our values, what we can offer, trumps the ease of going to another European city because of free movement.”
He cited recent high-profile sporting and cultural events, from the popular Abba Voyage show to Major League Baseball.
Pointing out that a million EU citizens live in London, Khan added: “We may have left the European Union as a country, but London is a European city, and I think it’s the capital of Europe.”
EU citizens can qualify for a UK work visa if an employer recruits them to a higher-income role – generally one earning more than £26,200 – but within the EU they can move around visa-free.
As well as creating practical obstacles, Khan acknowledged that the UK’s decision to exit the EU had changed the way the country was viewed across Europe, giving him a tougher task in promoting London as a destination.
“We’ve got to accept as Brits that us leaving the EU has sent shockwaves around the world, including in the EU, about how we’re perceived – fairly or unfairly,” he said.
Noting that there had been a sharp fall in school trips as children were no longer able travel without passports, falling EU student numbers at universities and fewer UK bands touring the continent, the Labour mayor also expressed concern that cultural links built up over decades were being eroded.
He said: “When you go into the European Commission and speak to politicians, or when you speak to chief executives in mainland Europe, a lot of them know London really well. They studied here, they travelled here, they did a foreign exchange here, and they fell in love with the city. And that means they want to invest here. That means they want to come on holiday here. That means they want to do business here.”
Khan fears that over time the decline in contacts like these could have a negative impact, not just on the economy but also on the UK’s values.
He said: “Our generation are tolerant, we’re respectful. There’s less xenophobia, less bigotry. And a lot of that is familiarity, because we’ve got to know that Italian food’s not too bad actually, it’s wonderful; we’ve got to listen to Spanish music; we’ve got to make friends with people who are French. And that’s what worries me in relation to those links.
“Whether it’s courtship, whether it’s friendship, whether it’s business partners – it makes it more difficult.”
Khan is proud of his close connections with European mayors, name-checking among others Anne Hidalgo in Paris, Beppe Sala in Milan and Roberto Gualtieri in Rome.
Among the issues he has discussed with these peers is air quality. Khan has vehemently defended the recent expansion of London’s ultra-low emission zone, a decision the Conservative government has sought to exploit, with the prime minister, Rishi Sunak, claiming to take the side of hard-pressed drivers in a “war on motorists”.
Khan’s administration is based in the angular new city hall building in Royal Docks, in the east of the capital, close to the vast Excel exhibition centre. Floor-to-ceiling windows give him a sweeping view of the rapidly developing area – which on a hot late summer day embraces water-skiers and sunbathers.
He is serving a second term, and faces a re-election battle in May 2024, in which, unlike general elections, EU citizens can vote.
Recent polling has suggested a close race between Khan and the Conservative candidate, Susan Hall.
The government recently changed the voting system for the poll, so that second preferences will no longer be taken into account – potentially damaging Khan, who might hope to pick up second-round support from LibDem or Green voters.
An unabashed opponent of Brexit, Khan has called on politicians in the UK to have a more open discussion about the consequences of Brexit and how to mitigate them, which he believes will have to involve closer alignment with EU rules and practices.
“What breaks my heart is, for the foreseeable future we can’t talk about rejoining the EU: referendums tend to be once in a generation, and I respect that. But even though we’ve got a bad hand, and it will never be as good as being inside the EU, we’ve got to try to make the best of it. And that means alignment and not divergence,” he said.
Despite criticising what he called an “omertà” in British politics about Brexit, he expressed some sympathy for the Labour leader Keir’s wariness about the issue.
“Keir, like me, is a passionate remainer, and he’s got to reassure those people around the country who aren’t quite sure whether we believe what we say when we say we respect the vote of the British public. I get that. I get the politics,” he said.
The risks for Labour of speaking out on Brexit were underlined last monthwhen the Tories gleefully seized on Starmer saying “we don’t want to diverge” from the EU. But Khan insisted politicians could not avoid the topic forever.
He said: “I don’t want to open up division and deadlock, and I don’t want to reopen old wounds, but we’ve got to talk about it.”
In terms of immediate measures – in particular to help alleviate skills shortages in the capital – Khan has backed a proposal by the hospitality sector for a reciprocal youth mobility scheme with the EU.
Such a scheme, already in place for a small number of countries including Australia and Canada, allows 18- to 35-year-olds to work in the UK for up to two years and vice versa.
Khan said: “You speak to any business in this city and they will tell you they have got skills shortages. You speak to some of the best restaurateurs in the world and some of the best chefs in the world, they can’t get staff for love nor money.” | United Kingdom Politics |
Boris Johnson has said he is not going to undergo any “psychological transformation” as pressure is piled on his leadership following the Conservatives’ double byelection defeat.The prime minister said he must “humbly and sincerely” accept any criticism he receives in his job, but argued every government gets “buffeted” by bad byelection results mid-term.His comments came amid claims of new attempts from backbench MPs seeking to unseat him after losing two byelections in Wakefield and in Tiverton and Honiton and the resignation of his party co-chair Oliver Dowden.Reports have claimed that some MPs are seeking to change 1922 Committee rules so they can hold another vote of confidence.Johnson, speaking from the Rwandan capital of Kigali to Radio 4’s Today programme, said his role is to look at exactly what happened and “think which criticisms really matter”.Put to him that Dowden had resigned saying business could not continue as usual, Johnson said: “If you’re saying you want me to undergo some sort of psychological transformation, I think that our listeners would know that is not going to happen.“What you can do, and what the government should do, and what I want to do, is to get on with changing and reforming and improving our systems and our economy.”Asked about his comments on Friday that he expects voters to beat him up, Johnson told Sky News: “Well, I was speaking metaphorically and what I mean is that when you’re the leader of a country, in good times and in bad, you have to think about the criticisms that you get.“And you have to recognise that inevitably when you’re the head of a government that’s taking the country through a big inflationary price caused by the increasing cost of energy, people are frustrated. People are filling up their cars, and cursing as they do so.“I understand that, we have to help them - and I understand people’s frustration.”MPs who want to remove the prime minister are seeking election to the 18 most senior posts on the 1922 Committee, which dictates how to conduct confidence votes in Tory party leaders, the Telegraph claimed.Johnson is protected from another leadership vote for a year, after winning a poll earlier this month – despite 41% of Tory MPs voting for his removal.Dowden’s resignation has led to concerns there could be others this weekend.As the scale of the twin defeats in Wakefield and Tiverton and Honiton sunk in – both with worse-than-expected swings against the Conservatives – a string of senior Tories added their voices to those calling for Johnson to go.The prime minister is not due to return to the UK until Thursday evening, after attending a G7 summit in Germany and a Nato meeting in Spain. | United Kingdom Politics |
A plane set to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda is on a Ministry of Defence runway in Wiltshire - as legal challenges continue ahead of tonight's scheduled flight.The Boeing 767-300 is at Boscombe Down in Amesbury.
It comes as a panel of three justices refused permission to the man to challenge the Court of Appeal's ruling on Monday, which upheld the earlier decision of a High Court judge not to grant an injunction to remove him from the flight.Giving brief reasons for the decision, the court's president, Lord Reed, said there had been an "assurance" that, if the government's policy of removing asylum seekers to Rwanda is found to be unlawful, steps would be taken to bring back any migrants flown to the east African nation in the interim. Prime Minister Boris Johnson said the programme "may take a while to get working properly, but that doesn't mean we're not going to keep going". He added: "Will it be necessary to change some laws to help us as we go along? It may very well be and all these options are under constant review."
Sky News understands that seven asylum seekers are due to be on the first flight from the UK to the east African country, due to take off this evening. More on Rwanda Rwanda deportations: Seven asylum seekers understood to be on tonight's flight as Liz Truss insists flights will go ahead Rwanda deportations: 'Why must I go?' - Channel migrants 'nervous and unhappy' ahead of flight Rwanda deportation plan: First flight taking asylum seekers to African country can go ahead, says Court of Appeal Another asylum seeker today lost his High Court bid to avoid being sent to Rwanda on the flight.The man, an Iraqi Kurd, had suffered PTSD in Turkey while travelling to the UK, and had brought a claim asking not to be removed due to his mental health and his relationship with his sister, who lives in the UK.His application was rejected by Mr Justice Swift, who said: "The Secretary of State was entitled to reach the decisions she did."It was the first of four appeals against removal orders to Rwanda being heard at the High Court today.Lawyers are discussing in court how claimants will be able to appeal the rulings if they have been deported.Truss challenges critics of Rwanda deportations to come up with an alternative - Politics news liveForeign Secretary Liz Truss told Sky News this morning she could not say exactly how many migrants would be on board the plane which is due to take off this evening.But she rejected claims from Church of England leaders that the policy to put asylum seekers on a one-way flight to east Africa "shames Britain". Image: The Hope Hostel accommodation in Kigali, Rwanda Two legal challenges to the first flight under the Rwanda scheme have now failed with reports putting the cost of the flight at £500,000.So far, 92 adults and 12 children have been brought ashore by Border Force officials this morning after attempting to cross the Channel. Asked where they had come from, they said Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan.Ms Truss said she could not put a figure on the cost of the flight but insisted: "It is value for money."She rejected criticism from the bishops, saying the Rwanda policy was "completely legal" and "completely moral" and challenged opponents to come up with an alternative to the scheme, which she claimed "is effective and does work".Meanwhile, Boris Johnson hit back at lawyers challenging the policy - which the government claims will deter migrants from paying people smugglers to take them on perilous Channel crossings rather than other routes.He told the Cabinet on Tuesday: "What the criminal gangs are doing and what those who effectively are abetting the work of the criminal gangs are doing is undermining people's confidence in the safe and legal system."'Unworkable and expensive'Labour's shadow culture secretary Lucy Powell told Sky News: "We think this policy is unworkable... it's incredibly expensive. It's going to cost possibly over a million pounds per unsuccessful or successful refugee going to Rwanda. And we do think it's unethical - and it's quite un-British actually."We've been known around the world as a safe haven for those genuinely fleeing persecution and war - it's been part of our make-up in this country for decades."The Archbishops of Canterbury and York - as well as 23 other bishops - have written a letter to The Times that claims no attempt has been made to "understand the predicament" of those affected. Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player 'We need legal and safe routes' After two legal challenges failed, a plane is scheduled to leave for the Rwandan capital of Kigali later, but it is unclear how many asylum seekers will be onboard.Their letter says: "Whether or not the first deportation flight leaves Britain today for Rwanda, this policy should shame us as a nation."The shame is our own, because our Christian heritage should inspire us to treat asylum seekers with compassion, fairness and justice, as we have for centuries."More legal challenges todayReligious leaders have called for "evil trafficking" to be combatted by the provision of safe routes for refugees trying to reach the UK, adding: "Deportations and the potential forced return of asylum seekers to their home countries are not the way."It comes days after the Prince of Wales reportedly described the Conservatives' policy as "appalling", and after Imam Qari Asim, the senior imam at the Makkah Mosque in Leeds, said it "challenges our human conscience and compels us to speak up for human dignity".Read more:What is it like to be a refugee in Rwanda?Asylum seeker says he would rather die than be sent to RwandaWhy are migrants being sent to Rwanda and how will it work?'We welcome court's decision'The government has said it is aiming to deter people from making dangerous Channel crossings from France in flimsy small boats run by smugglers. Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player Lawyers 'undermining' Rwanda policy Last year, more than 28,000 people crossed the Channel in small boats - more than three times the number seen in 2020.More than half were either Iranian or Iraqi, with people from Eritrea and Syria also making crossings, according to Home Office figures. | United Kingdom Politics |
Leaders of the G-7 announced new measures Monday to try and punish Russia for its invasion of Ukraine. The steps are designed to target Russia’s economy and military long term. But in the meantime, Russia’s total war in Ukraine marches violently on. Alina Polyakova, president of the Center for European Policy Analysis, joins Nick Schifrin to discuss. Nick Schifrin: Leaders of the seven largest industrial nations announced new measures today to try and punish Russia for its invasion of Ukraine. The steps are designed to target Russia's economy and military long term.But, in the meantime, Russia's total war in Ukraine marches violently on.Russia's battlefield of choice today, a shopping mall. Moscow continues to claim its targets are military. The Ukrainian officials said the only target of two Russian missiles today was full of more than 1,000 civilian shopping. President Zelenskyy warned the death toll could be So,– quote — "unimaginable."Eight hundred miles away, in the Bavarian Alps, G7 leaders spoke to Zelenskyy via video link. He told them it is not time to negotiate with Russia and urged them to send more weapons and impose more sanctions.Joe Biden, President of the United States: Putin has been counting on from the beginning that somehow NATO would — and the G7 would splinter. And — but we haven't and we're not going to, so.. Nick Schifrin: The seven leading industrial countries have so far provided Ukraine more than $2.8 billion in humanitarian assistance. Today, they promised to support the country — quote — "as long as it takes" and unveiled new steps, a ban on Russian gold, a price cap on Russian oil, sanctions on Russian defense companies, military units accused of war crimes, and officials operating in Ukraine, and higher U.S. tariffs on Russian goods, with proceeds used to reconstruct Ukraine.This week, the most advanced U.S. weapons sent to Ukraine arrived. In the dead of the night, Ukrainian soldiers fire the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, or HIMARS. Ukraine asked for 60. The Biden administration is sending eight with ammunition whose range is capped at 40 miles. A senior administration official told "PBS NewsHour" today the U.S. will also send advanced air defense weapons known as NASAMS.But those weapons haven't stopped Moscow's military. Last week, Russia destroyed and captured Severodonetsk, formally Ukraine's administrative center in Luhansk. And, today, it's — quote — "raining fire" down on the twin city of Lysychansk, from which Lyudmila fled. Lyudmila, Lysychansk Resident (through translator): What can I tell you? The walls and windows were shaking. You don't know where to hide. Nick Schifrin: For more on the latest round of sanctions from the G7 on Russia, we turn to Alina Polyakova, president of the Center for European Policy Analysis, a nonpartisan organization that seeks to promote U.S.-European relations and democratic values.Alina Polyakova, welcome back to the "NewsHour." Thank you very muchU.S. officials said today that a price cap on Russian oil was among the most important steps that they were going to take from the G7. How would that work? And could it actually reduce Russian income?Alina Polyakova, Director, Center for European Policy Analysis: Well, it's great to be back on the show, Nick, as always.On the cap on the oil, it's very unclear how that would be implemented in real terms. Russia has expanded significantly its exports to Asia, particularly India and China. It's been selling discounted energy, especially oil, to those countries that have been happily buying it up, it seems, as Europe starts to cut down on its energy imports from Russia.So imposing a cap, where you only have the G7 involved and not those other countries, seems like it's going to be very, very difficult. Nick Schifrin: The G7 is also prohibiting Russian gold. Is that something that could actually reduce Russian income? Alina Polyakova: I think the big picture to keep in mind here is that the sanctions are already having effects on the Russian economy.The Russian economy is going to be contracting. Russian inflation of the ruble is expected to hit about 20 percent. So, long term, these efforts from the G7 and others will leave the Russian economy incredibly weakened.But I think we're talking about a very different question here. We're talking about the question of whether these sanctions will have a short-term, immediate effect on Russia's military strategies and its ability to carry out the war on the ground in Ukraine.So far, unfortunately, the answer to that question has been no. Russia is still carrying out an incredibly brutal offensive in Ukraine. Sanctions have not affected his military capability so far. And that is the unfortunate reality that we face. The sanctions are having an effect, but it's much more of a long-term effect vs. a short term effect. Nick Schifrin: Perhaps the obvious question, then, is, are there steps that you believe the West should be taking to have more of a short-term impact that can actually change Vladimir Putin's behavior inside of Ukraine now? Alina Polyakova: Well, I think Mr. Putin believes that he has time on his side right now.He believes that he has the ability to carry out the war, much longer than the Western alliance will stay united in solidarity with Ukraine. So the meeting of the G7 was very, very important for that reason. It sent a very clear message of unity.But in the short term, we need to listen to what President Zelenskyy and the Ukrainians are asking for. Ukraine needs many, many more of those high-advanced MLRS systems that we're talking about… Nick Schifrin: The multiple-launch rocket systems. Alina Polyakova: … the HIMARS and others — exactly — and others as well, to be able to push back the Russian offensive.There is a clear concern from NATO officials and Ukrainians as well that the Russians might take a break, regroup, and then go back and relaunch their offensive, potentially going after Ukraine's capital, Kyiv, yet again. So we're in a very, very dangerous territory right now.And we — the best thing we can do is increase military and defense supplies to Ukraine immediately. Nick Schifrin: And, certainly, senior U.S. officials are worried that Russia has definitely not given up on the longer-term idea of capturing Kyiv.But back to the sanctions, I wonder, are average Russians suffering because of these sanctions? Alina Polyakova: Certainly, they are.I mean, we have seen many sanctions affecting average Russians in terms of their ability to travel, certainly, outside of Russia, their ability to purchase foreign goods and services. But, at the end of the day, the prominent elite, Mr. Putin among them, of course.They don't care about the living conditions of the Russian population. Living standards are declining. They're expected to decline further and further as these sanctions take hold and the medium and long term.But, unfortunately, the Kremlin elite care much more about their direct revenues, how much they're able to take to line their pockets. And all of that primarily comes from Russia's energy exports. So, until Russia is no longer able to export those energy sources, it no longer has a market for those energy exports, unfortunately, those revenues will keep flowing, and that is what is feeding the Russian war machine.And the Russian people are suffering as a result, but the Russian elite, those in power making these decisions don't particularly seem to care about the condition of the Russian people. Nick Schifrin: And, Alina Polyakova, I have got about 35 seconds left, so just ask you quickly about companies that I haven't asked you about.Since Russia invaded Ukraine, obviously, hundreds of Western companies have left the country. Is that something that people will notice in the Kremlin and the elite and could change their behavior? Alina Polyakova: I think, certainly, Russians have been noticing that there's no more McDonald's, for example, in Russia.But now we what we have seen happen is, McDonald's, for example, sold off all of its franchises to a Russian oligarch, who has now basically replaced McDonald's with a Russian brand. And that's what we're seeing the Russian government do, is kind of provide government-funded alternatives even to things like Instagram, when the Russian government banned McDonald's, other services the Russians are used to.So Russians are certainly noticing. Whether it's affecting them, whether they care, my — it seems to me that they, unfortunately, do not. To be clear, the poorer the Russian population is, the more they have to think about their daily needs, how am I going to support my kids, where's my pension going to come from and cover my prescription drugs, things of that nature, the more that benefits the Kremlin, which can carry out anything it wants in the foreign policy domain, while the Russian people have to make ends meet and don't worry so much about what's happening abroad. Nick Schifrin: Alina Polyakova, always a pleasure. Thank you very much. Alina Polyakova: Thank you. | Europe Politics |
A price cap on Russian oil, deferral of climate change commitments, a potential famine in Africa and the further supply of weapons to Ukraine are to crowd into a meeting of G7 world leaders over the next three days held against the backdrop of the biggest geopolitical crisis since 1945.The agenda reveals how the world has been turned upside down since leaders of the industrialised nations last met in Cornwall a year ago in a summit chaired by Britain, largely to focus on the threat posed by China.Before the summit in Germany, Boris Johnson issued a warning for the west not to show war fatigue, a point that will be echoed when the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, addresses the meeting by video link. He is expected to emphasise the difficulties his troops are facing in eastern Ukraine as well as the need for heavier long-range weapons.The overall message from the three-day G7 meeting will be that sanctions are slowly working in degrading the Russian war machine, and will be stepped up if damage to the wider world economy can be contained.A ban on new imports of Russian gold will be one new measure of solidarity with Ukraine, but the idea of a cap on Russian oil prices, backed by the US president, Joe Biden, has forced its way into the discussions as a visible means of slowing rampant inflation, one of the chief topics of conversation when the G7 leaders gathered for their first session over three days in the Bavarian Alps.Such a price mechanism would set an upper limit on imports of oil from Russia, which would be imposed unilaterally by each participating country and prevent Russia selling at a higher price. For European nations, it is also seen as a way potentially to dampen rampant inflation driven by energy prices.Some European countries have been wary that it could potentially require the painful reopening of the existing European Union agreement on oil sanctions against Russia. That would need the agreement of all 27 EU member states. The EU is due to phase out its dependence on Russian oil by the end of the year, with some exemptions, but that deal required laborious discussionIt is also unclear how key buyers of Russian crude such as China and India could be coaxed into complying with a price cap. One idea being floated by the US would be to make their access to shipping insurance for oil cargo dependent on not paying more than the agreed fixed cap for the oil onboard. The EU has agreed to ban insurance for the transportation of crude and petroleum products from Russia.Italy has for weeks been pressing to go further by introducing a cap on gas prices, an idea backed by Italian energy firms.But there is no guarantee that Vladimir Putin would not respond by cutting gas supplies further. Gazprom cut gas supplies by 60% last week, citing maintenance problems caused by the lack of supply of parts from Canada, an explanation G7 leaders do not regard as credible. The Nord Stream 1 pipeline is due to shut down altogether for regular two-week summer maintenance in July and there are fears Putin would be prepared to take the hit to Russian and Gazprom revenues if he believed it would cause an industrial meltdown across Europe.EU states are due to have replenished its reserves to 80% by November in preparation for a difficult winter, but there are also complex duties for national reserves to be distributed to countries suffering energy shortfalls.EU states are already allowing some coal plants to stay open longer than planned. The change in approach to fossil fuels including gas is reflected in the draft communique being less hardline about the need to end all future investments in fossil fuels, but the language is so couched that it also retains commitments toward a radical green energy transitionThis year’s chair of the G7, the German chancellor, Olaf Scholz, has invited as partner countries Senegal, currently chairing the African Union, Argentina, currently heading the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, as well as Indonesia and India, the current and next hosts of the G20 group of large industrial nations, as well as South Africa. The Indonesian president, Joko Widodo, announced he was joining a long list of mediators in the Ukraine conflict, saying he would travel to Moscow to propose a ceasefire.African leaders, faced by drought and rocketing wheat prices, will want to hear what is being done to speed the flow of grain out of Ukraine, but discussions about a safe route for grain convoys out of the Ukrainian-run Black Sea port of Odesa is proving difficult. The EU has insisted it is not imposing sanctions on Russian grain or fertiliser exports, and no block on Ukrainian exports would exist but for Russia’s action.Scholz said: “The summit must send not only the message that Nato and the G7 are more united than ever, but also that the democracies of the world stand together against Putin’s imperialism just as they do in the fight against hunger and poverty.”The summit is taking place at the castle resort of Schloss Elmau at the foot of Germany’s highest mountain, the Zugspitze – the same venue where the country last hosted the annual G7 meet-up in 2015. That meeting was chaired by Angela Merkel in the wake of the first Russian invasion of Ukraine and Merkel is now seen to have bequeathed her successor a legacy of overdependence on Russian energy. | Europe Politics |
The UK is providing technology to allow grain to be tested to make sure it has not been stolen by Russia from Ukrainian silos and sold abroad for profit.George Eustice, the environment and food secretary, says the government is giving £1.5m to fund the DNA analysis of wheat to find where it comes from.
He told Sky's Kay Burley: "Russia, it appears, are stealing some wheat from those stores and so what the UK government is doing is making available technology we've got to... test the provenance of wheat."We're working with other countries, including Australia, on this so that we can ensure that stolen Ukrainian wheat does not find a route to market."You can test the DNA of the grain and we've got samples of Ukrainian grain. We did a lot of work on this - remember the horsemeat scandal about a decade ago? "The UK is a world leader in being able to test the provenance - that's the precise region in which a crop was grown - through the testing of DNA. And that's what we've made available."
It comes after a Sky News investigation that tracked one ship that turned off its transponder as it approached Ukraine in the Black Sea, adding evidence that Russian forces are illegally expropriating Ukrainian resources. More on Russia Russia in first foreign debt default in over a century, bondholders claim Ukraine war: G7 leaders under pressure to stand together and not buckle in face of Putin's aggression Ukraine war: Kyiv attacked by Russia for first time in weeks as one killed and several injured in missile strikes Read more: The disappearing ships: Russia's great grain plunderThe US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has also said the US possesses "credible reports" that Russia is stealing Ukrainian grain and selling it internationally.He was speaking with reference to a New York Times story that said Washington had last month warned 14 countries, mostly in Africa, that Russia was trying to ship stolen Ukrainian grain to buyers overseas.The Sky News investigation showed a shipment of grain that was likely to have come from occupied Ukraine before being moved to a Turkish port. Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player Eustice: World must keep markets open Last week Ankara said it was looking into claims that Ukrainian grain had been stolen by Russia and transferred to countries including Turkey, but added investigations had not found any stolen shipments so far.Russia has denied allegations it has stolen Ukrainian grain.Mr Eustice did not explain exactly how and where the British technology would be used and where the money would be spent but the government said on Sunday Prime Minister Boris Johnson would ask other G7 countries to join these efforts.Sky News understands that the UK is already undertaking work to take geo-referenced timber samples around the world, including from Ukraine, and evidence has shown that a similar approach could be taken with grain samples.Before the scheme would be able to work, however, samples from Ukraine and neighbouring countries (Russia, Belarus, Moldova) would be required to build a geo-referenced grain data library and the samples must be gathered before this season's harvest which falls around August/September.Initial estimates show that spending around £1.5m over 12 months would be enough to build a database of sufficient size to identify whether illegally harvested grain was being imported into the UK but the government admits international cooperation would be necessary to source sufficient samples and hopes likeminded nations support the initiative.It also admits that it would need to be decided whether traders of host governments would be responsible for paying for the necessary tests as part of importing grain.Mr Eustice ruled out using the Royal Navy to escort Ukrainian grain ships through the Black Sea to help Kyiv export the 25 million tonnes of wheat in its silos. But, he said, the UK was doing what it can to help them get the grain to market.He said: "Although it's a small proportion of the overall total (of grain in worldwide storage), in the current context it's quite significant and unless we can get it out, there won't be stores for this year's harvest to go into."So we're looking at what we can do to help - to repair railways, to look at a land bridge so that we can get that wheat out across the land border. It's now very, very perilous to try to get ships into the Black Sea... because the area is mined and in fact Ukraine themselves have closed their ports for security reasons."There have been fears expressed that there will be growing calls from countries affected by a worldwide hike in food prices as a result of the Ukraine war for Russia and Kyiv to end their conflict, even if it means Ukraine loses territory.On Monday, it was reported that Indonesian President Joko Widodo, the chair of the Group of 20 (G20) nations, will urge Russia and Ukraine to rekindle peace talks, and seek ways to free up exports of grain to global markets when he visits Moscow and Kyiv in the coming days.Also on Monday, disruption in wheat supplies caused by the Ukraine war were said to have contributed to a decision by the World Food Programme to further reduce rations in Yemen, where millions face hunger. | United Kingdom Politics |
Emmanuel Macron wants to take his one-man global diplomacy to another level.
The French president wishes to become the first Western leader to be invited to a BRICS summit, Foreign Minister Catherine Colonna said late Monday.
“Having a dialogue is always positive, even when we don’t 100 percent agree on everything,” Colonna said at a press conference in Pretoria, where she had just met with her South African counterpart, Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor, according to French public broadcaster RFI.
“We’re thinking out loud — but it’s obviously a decision that only the relevant countries can take — about the possibility of continuing this dialogue, why not at the BRICS summit or in another format,” the French minister said.
You may like
South Africa will host the next summit of BRICS countries — Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, all of which remain close to Moscow despite the Kremlin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine — in Johannesburg on August 22-24.
The BRICS group of large emerging economies is the Global South’s answer to the G7 group of Western industrialized countries.
The five countries’ leaders usually take part in these summits. If he is given an invite, Macron — whose personal involvement in French foreign policy has reached new heights since the start of Russia’s war in Ukraine — would be the first Western leader to attend.
Speaking at the same press conference Monday, the South African minister said an invitation was not off the table, but that the final decision lies with President Cyril Ramaphosa, as the next meeting’s chair.
“If that were to happen, this would be an innovation within the current BRICS participation model, but it could amplify the BRICS forum’s global reach,” Pandor said.
The topic could be discussed by Ramaphosa and Macron later this week, as the two leaders will both be in Paris for the Summit for a New Global Financial Pact. | Global Organizations |
Jeremy Corbyn criticises Keir Starmer's pledge to campaign to keep north in UK
Keir Starmer's pledge to campaign on behalf of the union in a future border poll has been criticised by his predecessor.
Jeremy Corbyn told The Irish News that the Good Friday Agreement says the British and Irish governments should "stay out of the debate and be neutral" in a referendum.
The former Labour leader, who was suspended from the party in 2020, said the prospect of Irish unity was "far higher now than it's been at almost any time in my lifetime" and he argues that the Dublin government "needs to be proactive in terms of preparing the ground for unity"
He said Brexit had increased the likelihood of a united Ireland, along with the recognition of the unionist and nationalist traditions in the 1998 Agreement, and enhanced cross-border co-operation.
Speaking ahead of an appearance at Féile an Phobail, the independent MP for Islington said the Good Friday Agreement "gives us space for a referendum" and that a future Labour secretary of state should "spell out" the criteria under which it would happen.
Read more
- Jeremy Corbyn believes Irish reunification 'has majority support'
- Sir Keir Starmer asked to clarify Labour Party position on Union following MP's 'neutral' comments
"When there's sufficient support for the case to be put, let's put the case," he said.
Previous secretaries of state have consistently refused to state the criteria under which a border poll would take place.
In 2021, Keir Starmer, who is widely expected to be the next British prime minister, said that in the event of a referendum on Irish unity he would campaign for Northern Ireland to remain part of the UK because, he said: “I believe in the United Kingdom."
Mr Corbyn was critical of his successor's remarks.
"I don't know where he got that from, because I'm sure he's read the Good Friday Agreement – it calls on the prime minister to be neutral, to stay out of it," he said.
He said a referendum was "not going to be tomorrow but [would happen] in the foreseeable future".
"The Good Friday Agreement says the governments of Ireland and Britain have to stay out of the debate and be neutral in it all and I think it's very important that both governments feet held to the fire on that," he said.
"It's got to be the people of Ireland that make that decision for the future."
He said both governments should be preparing for potential constitutional change.
"I think governments should be proactive in promoting and understanding, looking at the economic issues; looking at the trade relation to the future; looking at investment for the future and problems that might crop up – governments should do that," he said. | United Kingdom Politics |
Russia-Africa Summit turns to be diplomatic fiasco: Boycott among African nations
The heads of the majority of African countries decided to boycott the Russia-Africa Summit. 38 out of 55 African nations did not send their leaders to the summit, according to The Moscow Times.
The Russia-Africa Summit, aimed at demonstrating new diplomatic ties with Russia, faces a boycott. 38 out of 55 African countries have not sent their leaders to the summit scheduled for July 27-28.
According to Yuri Ushakov, an aide to Russian dictator Putin, only 17 countries will be represented by their heads of state. Another 10 African nations have sent prime ministers, while almost half of the summit participants have delegated lower-level representatives.
"We won't raise any claims because, firstly, they might have other pre-planned events involving the participation of heads of state. And secondly, whoever could make it, did," stated Oleg Ozerov, the ambassador-at-large of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Despite the nuances, Ushakov revealed that Putin plans to personally meet with each African leader.
The dictator is scheduled to hold negotiations with the presidents of
- Egypt,
- Mozambique,
- Burundi,
- Zimbabwe,
- Uganda,
- Eritrea,
- the Central African Republic,
- Libya,
- Cameroon,
- Senegal,
- South Africa,
- Burkina Faso,
- Guinea-Bissau,
- Mali,
- Congo.
In the Kremlin's statement, it was announced that Putin will deliver a significant speech at the summit, discussing the formation of a "new world order" based on "multipolarity and equality" of all states.
Arrest warrant for Putin
In March of this year, the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Russian dictator Vladimir Putin. A warrant was also issued for Maria Lvova-Belova, the authorized representative for children's rights under the President of Russia.
As per the court's decision, Putin can be arrested in 123 countries worldwide that have ratified the Rome Statute or recognized the ICC's jurisdiction.
Ukrainian Prosecutor General Andrii Kostin asserted that the Hague order allows for Putin's arrest beyond Russia's borders and for extradition to court.
BRICS Summit
At the end of August, the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) summit will take place in South Africa. However, Putin's visit remained uncertain due to the ICC's issued arrest warrant.
According to South African legislation, the country must arrest Putin if he arrives. South Africa attempted to provide immunity for the dictator. | Africa politics |
Rishi Sunak has accused the Greek prime minister of "grandstanding" over the deepening row surrounding the Elgin Marbles.
During a fiery clash with Sir Keir Starmer at PMQS, Mr Sunak said he cancelled a meeting with Kyriakos Mitsotakis because it was "clear" the purpose of it "was not to discuss substantive issues for the future, but rather to grandstand and relitigate issues of the past".
He repeated his claim that Mr Mitsotakis broke "assurances" not to lobby for the return of the ancient Greek artefacts, on display and owned by the British Museum, while on his visit to the UK. Athens say no such assurances were given.
Sir Keir accused the prime minister of "losing his marbles" and said he managed to have a constructive meeting with Mr Mitsotakis while stating Labour's position on the sculptures.
"I discussed with the Greek Prime Minister the economy, security, immigration. I also told him we wouldn't change the law regarding the marbles. It's not that difficult."
Read More:
Elgin Marbles: What are they and how did they end up in the British Museum?
Mr Sunak responded that "no one will be surprised that he's backing an EU country over Britain" - comments Sir Keir said amounted to him arguing "that meeting the prime minister of Greece is somehow supporting the EU instead of discussing serious issues".
Sir Keir claimed Mr Sunak was arguing over a relic "of little interest to the public" to conceal his failure on immigration - after figures last week revealed net migration had reached an all time high.
The Labour leader blamed this on the government's "absurd" policy that those from overseas receive lower wages for the same jobs - something he has vowed to scrap if he wins the next election.
"Under this government, a bricklayer from overseas can be paid £2,500 less than somebody who is already here. A plasterer, £3,000 less. An engineer, £6,000 less. The list goes on, it's absurd."
Pointing to the pressure Mr Sunak is coming under from his own MPs to crack down on the issue, he claimed the Tories were in "open revolt" and said the prime minister "seems to be the only person on the Tory benches without his own personal immigration plan".
He said as well as immigration, NHS waiting lists and the tax burden is rising too.
In a thinly veiled reference to derogatory language used by James Cleverly he said: "It is ironic that he's suddenly taken such a keen interest in Greek culture. But he's clearly become the man with the reverse Midas touch.
"Everything he touches turns to... maybe the Home Secretary can help me out with this? ...Rubbish."
Mr Sunak's comments about the Greek PM come just hours after environment Secretary Steve Barclay sought to play down the row, insisting the UK and Greece had "good relations".
Following the exchange, a former cabinet minister told Sky's political editor Beth Rigby that Mr Sunak has "created a full diplomatic breakdown" and the Greek government are "furious".
Downing Street denied Mr Sunak was insulting the leader of a NATO ally, repeating that "assurances" the UK had sought were "not adhered to".
However the Greek labour minister, Adonis Georgiades, has told Sky News "this kind of agreement cannot ever happen with any Greek prime minister - and certainly with Kyriakos Mitsotakis".
Athens has long demanded the return of the historic works, also known as the Parthenon Sculptures. They were removed from Greece by Lord Elgin in the early 19th century when he was the British ambassador to the Ottoman Empire.
On Sunday, two days before the scheduled meeting with Mr Sunak, Mr Mitsotakis told the BBC he planned to raise the issue during talks and compared the situation to the Mona Lisa painting being cut in half (as some sculptures remain in Greece).
Greek sources said they were "baffled" the meeting was cancelled the next day given migration was high on the agenda. | United Kingdom Politics |
The United Nations recorded more than 10,000 civilian casualties in the war in Ukraine three and a half months after the Russian invasion began. The U.N.’s Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) announced Thursday that 4,481 have been killed and 5,565 have been injured, totaling 10,046 civilian casualties. Among the dead are almost 300 children and more than 450 children have been injured. “Most of the civilian casualties recorded were caused by the use of explosive weapons with a wide impact area, including shelling from heavy artillery and multiple launch rocket systems, and missile and air strikes,” the agency wrote. More than half of the casualties have come from the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, where Russia has been heavily focusing its attacks. The continuing war has caused a severe humanitarian crisis in the country with lack of food and water hitting many regions in Ukraine. Russia also been accused of various human rights abuses from targeting civilians, raping women and kidnapping Ukrainians and sending them to Russia. The U.N. agency has emphasized throughout the war the number of casualties could be “considerably higher” as tracking the dead and confirming information takes time in a warzone. | Europe Politics |
Thailand's Foreign Minister Don Pramudwinai places a flower on the jacket of U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken following remarks to the press after a Memorandum of Understanding signing ceremony at the Thai Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Bangkok, Thailand, July 10, 2022. Stefani Reynolds/Pool via REUTERSRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comBANGKOK, July 10 (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Sunday urged China and members of the Southeast Asian bloc ASEAN to put pressure on Myanmar's rulers to return to democracy and to hold it accountable to a peace deal agreed with the group."It is incumbent on China and in China's interest to see Burma move back to the path it was on," Blinken said, using the country's former name.Speaking at a news conference in Bangkok during a tour of Asia, Blinken called on members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to hold Myanmar's government accountable to "five-point consensus" peace agreement.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com"Regional support for the regime's adherence to the five point consensus developed by ASEAN is critical - that has not happened," Blinken said."The ASEAN countries need to hold the regime accountable for that ... continue to demand the cessation of violence and release of prisoners," he added.ASEAN's nine members and Myanmar junta chief Min Aung Hlaing in April last year signed an agreement that included immediate cessation of violence and dialogue among all parties."There has been no positive movement on that."Myanmar's military has increased pressure against ethnic minority armies since a coup last year and is encountering resistance on multiple fronts, including militia groups allied with the ousted government.Last week, Thailand scrambled fighters after Myanmar jet breached its airspace in the country's northwest. read more Myanmar shares a 2,400-km (1,500-mile) border with Thailand, its longest with any neighbour.The United States and Thailand on Sunday signed agreements to deepen the countries' already strong ties as Washington steps up its efforts to counter China's expanding influence in Asia.Blinken's visit comes a day after he met Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi in Indonesia on the sidelines of the G20 foreign minister's meeting. read more China's Wang has been engaged in intense diplomacy across Asia in recent weeks and met Thai Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha on Tuesday.Blinken last year postponed a trip to Thailand, the oldest U.S. ally in Asia, after halting a regional tour when a COVID-19 case was found in the press corps accompanying him.After meeting Blinken, Prayuth said the relationship between the two countries "continue to increase in momentum."The Biden administration has sought to shore up ties with a region that had become uncertain about U.S. commitment during a period of perceived neglect under Biden's predecessor, Donald Trump. At that time, China expanded its influence while pushing investment and trade integration.After Thailand, he will make a previously unscheduled stop in Tokyo to offer condolences to the Japanese people after the killing of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, the State Department said. read more Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by David Brunnstrom, Panu Wongcha-um and Chayut Setboonsarng; Editing by Edmund Klamann and Raissa KasolowskyOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Asia Politics |
Australia has overwhelmingly rejected a plan to give greater rights to Indigenous people in a referendum.
All six states voted no to a proposal to change the constitution to recognise Indigenous citizens and create an advisory body to the government.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said defeat was hard: "When you aim high, sometimes you fall short. We understand and respect that we have."
Opposition leader Peter Dutton said the result was "good for our country".
The referendum, dubbed "The Voice", was Australia's first in more than a quarter of a century. With almost 70% of the vote counted, the "No" vote led "Yes" 60% to 40%.
Its rejection followed a fraught and often ill-tempered campaign.
Supporters said that entrenching the Indigenous peoples into the constitution would unite Australia and usher in a new era.
No leaders said that the idea was divisive, would create special "classes" of citizens where some were more equal than others, and the new advisory body would slow government decision-making.
They were criticised over their appeal to undecided voters with a "Don't know? Vote no" message, and accused of running a campaign based on misinformation about the effects of the plan.
The result leaves Mr Albanese searching for a way forward with his vision for the country, and a resurgent opposition keen to capitalise on its victory.
Addressing the nation, the prime minister said he respected the vote and "the democratic process that has delivered it".
"This moment of disagreement does not define us, and it will not divide us, we are not Yes voters or No voters, we are all Australians. And it is as Australians together, that we must take our country beyond this debate, without forgetting why we had it in the first place.
"Too often in the life of our nation, the disadvantage confronting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people has been relegated to the margins, this referendum and my government has put it right at the centre."
Mr Dutton said after the result that Australia "did not need to have" such a vote. "What we've seen tonight is Australians in their millions reject the prime minister's divisive referendum."
Leading No advocate and Bundjalung man Warren Mundine said: "This is a referendum that we should have never had had because it was built on the lie that Aboriginal people do not have a voice."
For some in the Yes camp, the devastation was visible.
"Our Indigenous leadership put themselves out there for this... we have seen a disgusting No campaign that has been dishonest, that has lied to the Australian people," Yes advocate Thomas Mayo told the ABC.
"I'm not blaming the Australian people at all, but who I do blame are those who lied to them," the Kaurareg Aboriginal and Kalkalgal, Erubamle Torres Strait Islander man added.
'A roadmap for reconciliation'
The Voice to Parliament was proposed in the Uluru Statement from the Heart, a 2017 document crafted by Indigenous leaders that set out a roadmap for reconciliation with wider Australia.
Australia's Indigenous citizens - who make up 3.8% of the country's 26 million population - have inhabited the land for about 60,000 years but are not mentioned in the constitution. They are, by most socio-economic measures, the most disadvantaged people in the country.
The referendum marked the 45th time Australia has attempted to change its founding document - but only eight proposals have cleared. It was also the second time the issue of Indigenous recognition was put to a national vote - the last attempt was in 1999.
The Yes campaign said that the Voice could tackle "the entrenched inequality" their people still face. The No campaign saw it differently.
"Instead of being 'one', we will be divided - in spirit, and in law," Mr Dutton said at the start of the campaign.
Many of the nation's best constitutional minds have disputed those claims, arguing that the Voice would not have conferred special rights on anyone.
But the campaign's slogan "divisive Voice" which covered No banners and posters, ultimately resonated with voters.
A separate No movement, spearheaded by Aboriginal Senator Lidia Thorpe and the Indigenous-run Blak Sovereign movement, opposed the Voice for different reasons.
They called instead for a legally binding treaty between First Nations peoples and the Australian government to be prioritised.
"This is not our constitution, it was developed in 1901 by a bunch of old white fellas, and now we're asking people to put us in there - no thanks,'" Ms Thorpe said, reacting to Saturday's result.
As scenes of tears and silence at Yes events flooded the media, all sides of the debate called for a period of national unity and reflection while the dust settles.
But for Australian's first inhabitants, who showed strong support for the Voice in early polls, advocates fear the referendum could be seen as another rejection.
"There are so many people who aspired for our country to be seen differently tonight, and that is going to be deeply felt," assistant minister for Indigenous Australians Senator Malarndirri McCarthy said.
"We have had many disappointments over decades and centuries really, we are resilient people, and we will take stock," the Yanyuwa woman added.
Dean Parkin, the director of the Yes23 campaign group, attempted to allay claims from opponents that the objective had been to take rights from Australians.
"I want to speak very directly to those Australians who voted no with hardness in your hearts, please understand that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have never wanted to take anything from you," he said.
"We have never and will never mean you no harm.
"All we have wanted is to join with you, our Indigenous story, our Indigenous culture, not to take away or diminish what it is that you have, but to add to it, to strengthen it, to enrich it." | Australia Politics |
Putin intends to visit China: how the arrest warrant affects his travels
Russian dictator Vladimir Putin is planning to visit China in October this year, according to Russian propaganda Telegram channels.
According to media reports, Putin plans to visit China in October. The reason for his visit is that Russia is seeking to strengthen ties with one of its closest allies.
"It is known that we have received an invitation and intend to go to China when the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI, or B&R) forum takes place in October", said Putin's aide, Roy Ushakov.
As a reminder, in March 2023, Chinese President Xi Jinping paid a state visit to Moscow. During the visit, he said that relations between the two countries were entering a new era. At the same time, China and Russia are strategic allies, and Beijing refused to condemn Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Putin's arrest warrant
In March of this year, the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Russian dictator Vladimir Putin. The warrant was also issued in the name of Maria Alekseevna Lvova-Belova, the Russian Presidential Commissioner for Children's Rights.
According to the court's decision, Putin must be arrested in 123 countries that have ratified the Rome Statute or recognized the jurisdiction of the ICC.
Ukraine's Prosecutor General Andriy Kostin said that the Hague warrant allows Putin to be arrested outside Russia and brought to court.
BRICS summit
At the end of August, the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) summit will take place in South Africa. However, Putin's visit was still in doubt due to an arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court.
According to the law, South Africa must arrest Putin if he arrives. South Africa has been trying to secure immunity for the dictator. But later South Africa officially requests an arrest warrant for Putin. | Asia Politics |
Fat cat bosses of Britain's biggest energy firms including Shell and BP will face pressure from ministers about how they can help customers cope with rising bills at a crunch meeting at Downing Street today.Chancellor Nadhim Zahawi and Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng will press gas and electricity company executives for solutions to the predicted spike in bills over winter.The summit with utilities bosses comes after Cornwall Insight predicted bills are set to soar to around £3,582 in October, from £1,971 previously, before rising even further in the new year.Martin Lewis yesterday claimed rising energy prices were a 'cataclysmic' financial emergency 'that risks lives'. Energy executives are being asked to submit a breakdown of their expected profits and investment plans for the next three years. Ministers demanding they invest more of their 'extraordinary profits' in green technologies - with the threat of a new windfall tax if they fail to do so. There has been anger at Shell, BP and British Gas owner Centrica announcing bumper financial results as households struggle. Former prime minister Gordon Brown has suggested scrapping the price cap and negotiating lower rates with energy bosses.Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss continue to face questions about what they will do to help struggling families, while Labour has called for a 'loophole' in the oil and gas windfall tax to be closed to raise more support cash.Chancellor Nadhim Zahawi (left) and Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng (right) will press gas and electricity company executives for solutions to the predicted spike in bills over winter Where's Kier? On holiday... Labour is under pressure to explain why Sir Keir Starmer is on holiday after the party accused ministers of going missing at a time of crisis.Sir Keir has been away for the past week and yesterday one of his frontbench team faced questions about when he will return and set out his plans for tackling energy bills.Shadow education secretary Bridget Phillipson was asked on Sky News: 'Where is Keir Starmer?' She replied: 'I think like everyone Keir Starmer is entitled to a holiday.'On BBC Breakfast she was asked by presenter Sally Nugent: 'I'm just interested to know, where is Keir Starmer?'Miss Phillipson said: 'We will hear further very, very soon about additional measures.'Energy minister Greg Hands said in response to Labour adverts accusing the Government of going missing: 'Sir Keir is on holiday. I have no problem with that. But why, from the sun lounger, put out a press release attacking the PM for being on holiday?'Ahead today's meeting, the Chancellor told reporters: 'I think it's important we all get round the table, I will continue to do the work I need to do as Chancellor, but I also want to challenge them, to say are you making the investment?'How can you help your customers? What more can we do together? That's the reason for the meeting.'Speaking in Belfast yesterday, he added: 'What I want to do tomorrow is understand better how they're committed to that investment in gas, because whatever happens we need energy security and we've got a strong strategy that Kwasi and I will continue to push hard.'The other area I want to look at is some of the energy producers, if you look at the renewable energy producers, the amount that they get paid is linked to gas prices.'So, they haven't changed anything they're doing, they haven't had any increase in their input costs at all, but they're getting a much higher return because of the unusually high gas price because of Putin.'Mr Zahawi also said the Treasury has been preparing 'options' for the next prime minister on what further support could be given to people this winter.Education secretary James Cleverly added: 'The Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Business Secretary are actually calling in the leaders of those big energy companies to knock some heads together and basically hold them to account about what they're going to do with those profits.' Tory leadership candidate Mr Sunak has pledged 'hundreds of pounds more' energy bills support. He told the BBC that it would be his 'moral responsibility' to offer more help with bills if he were selected as prime minister, in particular to pensioners and those on benefits.EU prices are at near-record levels amid fears Russia could soon turn off the gas tap completely, with leaders already discussing energy rationing UK gas prices are soaring after Russia began throttling off supplies to Europe, causing a global shortage as EU leaders scramble for suppliesMs Truss appeared to back away from her previous position of providing no more 'handouts', telling GB News she would 'do everything I can to support working families' if made prime minister, while emphasising her preference for tax cuts.The Foreign Secretary said she would act 'as soon as possible' with an emergency budget and was 'determined to help people across this country through what will be a very difficult winter'.Asked if she would consider removing VAT from energy bills, saving families around £210, she said: 'There will be a budget on an urgent basis to deal with the issues we face. All of these issues need to be under consideration.'Miss Truss declined to go into detail about how much support she would hand out, but repeated her pledge to 'let people keep more of their own money' through lower taxes. Labour has called on the Government to close investment allowances in the energy profits windfall tax, which it has described as a 'loophole', in order to help households pay the bills.Shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves said: 'The Tories are handing oil and gas giants billions in tax breaks, just for them to pass it on to shareholders. The Government should be ashamed this loophole existed in the first place.'This isn't right at a time when people are worried sick about how they'll pay their bills.'There has been widespread anger at Shell, BP and British Gas owner Centrica announcing bumper financial results while households struggle with soaring bills.Mr Brown meanwhile told the Guardian that the Government should 'pause any further increase in the cap' on bills, and negotiate lower rates with each individual company after examining their balance sheets.He also suggested ministers should temporarily nationalise any providers that go bust. Energy bills has rocketed in recent months due to the rising price of natural gas, partly as a result of the war in Ukraine. Germany is, by a long way, the largest importer of Russian gas in the EU, but rising prices affect the UK too Russia has reduced flows through the Nord Stream 1 pipe which goes to Germany to just 20 per cent capacity, sparking panic 'Time and tide wait for no-one. Neither do crises. They don't take holidays, and don't politely hang fire – certainly not to suit the convenience of a departing PM and the whims of two potential successors,' the former Labour prime minister said.He added that Britain should spearhead the international response to the crisis with an emergency G20 meeting.Mr Brown said: 'British ministers – and no one has yet grasped this – should also be leading the way… in demanding coordinated international action with an emergency G20 early in September to address the fuel, food, inflation and debt emergencies.'These are global problems that can only be fully addressed by globally coordinated solutions.'Mr Brown, who previously called for the Tory leadership contenders to set aside their differences and work on an emergency plan with Boris Johnson, has been joined in his calls by a boss at one of the UK's biggest energy companies.Philippe Commaret, managing director of customers at EDF, said: 'We are asking Government and the two Conservative candidates to work with industry so we can find a viable solution for those customers most in need this winter.'Customers need to know now that help is coming. Delaying a decision will cause anxiety for millions of people, and discussions need to happen now.'Consumer champion Martin Lewis also made similar calls, telling broadcasters: 'I accept the point that Boris Johnson is running a zombie government and can't do much, but the two candidates – one of them will be our prime minister – they need to get together in the national interest to tell us the bare minimum of what they will do.' Liz Truss yesterday at a laid-back chat at Bedford Sports and Social Club in Greater Manchester. Both she and Rishi Sunak have come under pressure to produce a plan for tackling high energy bills Mr Sunak (pictured during a visit to a synagogue in north London yesterday) has pledged 'hundreds of pounds more' energy bills supportA Government spokesperson said: 'We are engaging with the electricity sector to drive forward reforms and to ensure the market delivers better results for people across the UK.'In the meantime, and as we announced in May, the Government continues to evaluate the extraordinary profits seen in certain parts of the electricity generation sector and the appropriate and proportionate steps to take.'Yesterday, consumer champion Mr Lewis warned the cost of living crunch was turning into a 'national crisis' on the scale of the Covid-19 pandemic and accused ministers of acting like 'zombies'.Mr Lewis – who sold his MoneySavingExpert.com website for £87million in 2012 – said: 'For every £100 direct debit you currently pay, in October you will be paying £181, and in January you will be paying £215, and that's on top of the rises we had in April.'That is a cataclysmic rise for households; millions of households will simply not be able to afford it.'He said a typical bill from January will be 45 per cent of the full new state pension, adding: 'What we're facing here is a financial emergency that risks lives.'I accept the point that Boris Johnson is running a zombie Government and can't do much, but the two candidates need to get together in the national interest to tell us the bare minimum of what they will do.'If they can't agree... what we need to hear now, because the mental health damage for millions of people who are panicked about this is manifest, is we need to hear accurate plans.'A survey released yesterday by Uswitch suggested households are already getting in mounting debt with energy suppliers, even before the energy price cap is lifted.It estimated that six million homes across the UK collectively owe around £1.3 billion to energy firms - three times higher than a year ago. | United Kingdom Politics |
Photo by Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images Getty Images The Wikipedia Foundation has appealed against a Moscow court decision ordering it to remove information about the Ukraine war from its site. The court fined Wikipedia five million rubles ($65,000) for refusing to remove information from a series of articles, arguing that they amounted to "unreliable socially significant materials, as well as other prohibited information", and risked provoking mass public disorder. "In accordance with the requirement of the General Prosecutor's Office of Russia, Roskomnadzor sent a notification to the administration of the Internet resource to immediately remove inaccurate information on the subject of a special military operation of the RF Armed Forces in Ukraine, aimed at misinforming Russian users," a statement from media and internet regulator Roskomnadzor reads. The articles concerned are Russian Invasions of Ukraine (2022), Black powder, Battle for Kyiv, War Crimes during the Russian Invasion of Ukraine, Shelling of Hospital in Mariupol, Bombing of the Mariupol Theater, and Massacre in Bucha. "This decision implies that well-sourced, verified knowledge on Wikipedia that is inconsistent with Russian government accounts constitutes disinformation," says Stephen LaPorte, associate general counsel at the Wikimedia Foundation. The demand to remove content was received on 1 March, and is based on a claim that Wikipedia operates inside Russian territory and therefore falls under Russian jurisdiction. This, says the Wikipedia Foundation, mischaracterizes the global nature of its model, which sees all of its language editions available to anyone, anywhere in the world. Wikipedia is also arguing that the articles concerned do not represent misinformation, and that their removal constitutes a violation of human rights. Russia has increasingly been demanding control over internet content in the country, most notably by banning Facebook and Instagram for "extremist" activities. According to a register maintained by VPN review site Top10VPN, 1,881 websites have been blocked in Russia since February 24 thanks to content relating to the invasion of Ukraine. These include Twitter, Google News, BBC News, NPR, Bild, AOL, Ukrayinska Pravda, Meduza.io, Interfax-Ukraine, Radio Liberty/Radio Free Europe sites, Voice of America, Bellingcat, Amnesty International, and Chess.com. The government says that claims of Russian war crimes are fake, and that its actions in Ukraine do not amount to war, but are instead a "special military operation". It will make a filing in response to Wikipedia's appeal in the next few weeks; the case isn't expected to go Wikipedia's way. "The government is targeting information that is vital to people’s lives in a time of crisis," says LaPorte. "We urge the court to reconsider in favor of everyone’s rights to knowledge access and free expression." | Human Rights |
It doesn’t matter how many times I hold my phone against the card reader at the till and wait for the contactless “ping!”. Every time, my eyes still widen, and I baulk at the checkout total for what always feels like a rather austere basket of goods, relative to the cash I’m handing over. Nearly two years into this cost of living squeeze, each realisation that we are not as rich as we were still feels painful.
With unavoidable expenses like food and energy at its centre, this crisis seems to be a shared cultural experience. Something you can bond over with others. That coffee was how much! Your big shop came to what!
But the truth is, we’re not all in this together.
Rising interest rates affect two groups more than any other: homeowners with a mortgage, and renters. This is the very reason central banks are hiking rates – increasing the cost of lending reduces the disposable income of people with mortgages, and pulls money out of the high-inflation economy – like taking away the fuel from a fire.
Renters are affected by the inflationary and interest rate squeeze too, as landlords increase rents in lockstep to account for their higher buy-to-let mortgage and service costs. A bitter and meagre luxury it may be, but renters at least may have the advantage of being able to move further from a city centre or share with more people to try to lower their housing costs, even if that means a longer commute or more communal mess. And in extremis, they might be able to move back home with their tail between their legs.
What about the young parents who scrimped and saved to purchase a small starter house with a price-to-earnings ratio more than five or six times their income? They have little choice but to pare their spending back to the bone to keep the house they committed to – not least with high fixed costs like childcare, for which the UK sits almost at the top of the OECD league table. And moving back home with a child of your own is humiliating, if you can even sell your house and there are enough rooms at the parental home to facilitate it.
Still, the patient needs to take the interest rate medicine. Without interest rate hikes, we run the risk of descending further into a dysfunctional 1970s economy with unpredictable prices, boom and bust economic cycles that push workers into precarious employment, and the “pound in your pocket” becoming worth less by the day. Avoiding the pain of interest rate hikes is not a realistic or credible answer.
But one lucky group in particular is cushioned from the Bank of England’s decision making: homeowners without a mortgage. In other words, baby boomers. According to Savills UK, 50-64 year olds now own 78 per cent of the UK’s private housing wealth. It doesn’t matter if interest rates are rising when you’ve already paid off your mortgage – you’re free! There’s no big reduction to your spending power.
Even better, the large savings pots of older generations are finally starting to see substantial interest for the first time in the best part of two decades. And while nurses, teachers and other public sector workers must suffer pay erosion, because restoring their pay to the level it sat at a decade ago is inflationary, baby boomers are perfectly entitled to the spoils of the triple lock pension (bar one blip since 2010). This particular pay rise is, apparently, not inflationary.
And while young homeownership has plummeted over recent decades, outright-ownership – without a mortgage – has risen. Since 2013-14 there have been more outright owners than mortgagors. This, combined with the much greater popularity of fixed rate mortgages, means the burden of interest rate hikes falls on a smaller number of people.
It might be excusable or reasonable, if it weren’t for the wholesale bloodletting of the young on just about every measure of government since 2010 – graduate tax rates of over 50 per cent, zero wage growth and astronomical childcare costs. All of which sits uncomfortably alongside inflation-protected pensions.
It has been completely and conveniently forgotten that monetary policy is not the only tool for combating inflation. Taking money out of an overheating, high-inflation economy can be done with fiscal policy too, with taxation. How about taxing unearned housing wealth? Or finally making some reforms to the planning system?
Just like during the pandemic, it is the young-to-middle aged who must carry the heaviest load for the good of the nation, not those with the greatest wealth. Somehow, I don’t see Rishi Sunak taking any hard decisions to share the unequally distributed burden with just about the only voters he has left – do you? | United Kingdom Politics |
Discover more from Politics with a lean
Liz Truss
Where did it all go wrong?
From supporting the legalisation of cannabis and being staunchly anti-royal, to perpetuating a failed war on drugs and clamoring to hand out feudal titles. Mary Elizabeth Truss’ story is one of profound crisis. A career of great contradiction and a floundering 50 day premiership, from an upbringing “to the left of Labour” to the head of what is rapidly becoming the flagship of far right politics in the UK, The Conservative Party. Let’s pick through the pieces of a career that was once destined for greatness.
The Rise of an Unconventional Conservative
Liz Truss's political journey has been anything but conventional. Born in Oxford in 1975, she grew up in a household with left-leaning political views. Her father was a self-employed teacher, and her mother worked for the London Underground. This upbringing was the foundation for a political career that would later lurch dangerously to the right.
After studying philosophy, politics, and economics (PPE) at Oxford University, Truss embarked on a career in economics, working for Shell and Cable & Wireless. Prior to this, though, She was already deeply involved in politics throughout college and university, the president of the Oxford University Liberal Democrats and a member of the national executive committee of Liberal Democrat Youth and Students (LDYS). In 1996 though, Truss had left the Liberal Democrats to join the Conservative party.
The Road to Notoriety
Truss quickly gained notoriety for her unorthodox and sometimes controversial views. She advocated for the legalisation of cannabis, a stance not often associated with the Conservative Party. Her libertarian-leaning positions set her apart from many of her colleagues.
One of her earliest and most notable battles was against what she termed the “cheese police.” In a speech at the Conservative Party Conference in 2012, she criticized regulations that governed the shape of traditional British cheeses. This unconventional stance earned her both admiration and ridicule in equal parts, though, it also brought her to the forefront of political discourse.
The Truss Doctrine: A Thatcherite Revival
As Truss climbed the political ladder, she solidified her reputation as a staunch free-market advocate, seemingly ignorant of the devastating impact those with similar ideology have had on the UK. Her economic doctrine, sometimes referred to as “Trussonomics,” called for deregulation, tax cuts, and a smaller state. Truss believed that reducing government intervention and freeing up the market would stimulate economic growth and individual prosperity. Worth noting here that there is no clear evidence that this would work, in fact, there is considerable evidence to the contrary.
During the leadership campaign that followed Boris Johnson's resignation in disgrace, Truss positioned herself as the standard-bearer for these Thatcherite principles. She promised to cut taxes, slash red tape, and champion free-market capitalism. Her campaign somehow struck a chord with a segment of the Conservative Party that yearned for a return to these ideals.
The Mini-Budget and Rapid Downfall
Upon assuming the role of Prime Minister in September 2022, Truss wasted no time in implementing her woeful vision. Her “mini-budget” she believed, was a bold and audacious move, slashing taxes and promising economic growth. However, it very quickly proved to be her downfall.
The plan, which included a controversial cut to the top income tax rate, a reduction in corporation tax, and various other tax breaks, received widespread criticism from across the political spectrum and beyond. The markets reacted negatively, with the pound falling to a 37-year low against the US dollar and the FTSE 100 index taking a hit. Compound this with the fact that the general population was already in the throes of a cost of living crisis, and it’s obvious that this was always going to be a disaster for Truss.
Amidst growing public backlash and plummeting approval ratings, Truss faced a rebellion from within her own party. On the 50th day of her premiership, she announced the reversal of several key policy measures, including the income tax cut for high earners. Following this, she followed her predecessor by resigning in disgrace, leaving much less ceremoniously than she came.
A Legacy of Failed Ideals
Liz Truss's brief tenure as Prime Minister exposed the fault lines in her political philosophy. Her commitment to radical economic liberalism clashed with the realities of governing a nation. The mini-budget, once hailed as a bold move by some, unravelled rapidly, and Truss was forced into a series of humiliating U-turns.
The episode served as a stark reminder that ideology alone cannot drive a successful government. Truss's vision, often criticized for its right-wing leanings, may have resonated with a certain faction of the Conservative Party, but it failed to withstand scrutiny and the harsh realities of economic governance. The belief that tax cuts alone could spur economic growth was proven, again, to be a fallacy.
A Cautionary Tale
Liz Truss's rise and fall serve as a cautionary tale in the world of politics. Her journey from unconventional backbencher to Prime Minister was marked by contradictions and ideological fervour, particularly in her right-wing approach to economics. However, her rapid downfall showcased the importance of pragmatism and adaptability in the realm of governance.
As the Conservative Party faces the aftermath of Truss's tumultuous premiership, it must grapple with the lessons learned. The pursuit of radical change must be tempered with an understanding of the complexities of governing a nation. Trussonomics, once touted by some as the path to prosperity but often criticized for its right-wing inclinations, has once again been relegated to the annals of failed economic experiments, no doubt to be picked up again in another decade as some other junior right-winger attempts to claim their cut of the ‘Thatcherite’ pie.
In the end, the story of Liz Truss serves as a stark reminder that politics is not a realm for ideological purity alone, but a dynamic arena where the ability to navigate challenges and respond to changing circumstances ultimately determines one's success or failure. She began her career in politics as a radical liberal, fighting for many things liberals across the UK are still fighting for today, but she ended up in a place almost opposite of those initial ideals. And it’s worth noting that whilst Truss is now regularly used by the government as a scape-goat for the many problems it finds itself in, not all should be attributed to her small time as the head of the party, and the prime minister of the United Kingdom. | United Kingdom Politics |
BRICS discusses expansion as Iran, Saudi Arabia formally ask to join
The BRICS group of nations plans to decide this year whether to admit new members and what criteria they would have to meet, with Iran and Saudi Arabia among those who’ve formally asked to join, according to South Africa’s ambassador to the bloc.
Enlarging the group that includes Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa would benefit Beijing, as the world’s second-biggest economy tries to build diplomatic clout to counter the dominance of developed nations in the United Nations, International Monetary Fund, World Bank and other institutions.
China initiated the conversation about expansion when it was chair last year, triggering concern among other members that their influence will be diluted, especially if Beijing’s close allies are admitted. China’s gross domestic product is more than twice the size of all four other BRICS members combined.
For the latest headlines, follow our Google News channel online or via the app.
The proposal to expand BRICS will be one of the economic bloc’s main focuses this year, said Ambassador Anil Sooklal. South Africa is the group’s current chair.
“There are over a dozen countries that have knocked on the door,” Sooklal said in an interview in Johannesburg last week. “We are quite advanced at looking at a further group of new members.”
Read more:
Iran launched 228 ballistic missiles since signing nuclear deal in 2015: Report
China says political trust with Russia has deepened after envoy’s visit
UFO, spy balloon rumors increase as officials remain silent | Global Organizations |
The final report of The Economy 2030 Inquiry
The UK has great strengths, but is a decade and a half into a period of
stagnation. The toxic combination of slow growth and high inequality
was straining the living standards of low- and middle-income Britain
well before the cost of living crisis struck. It is time to embark on a new
path.
Prosperity must be built on an understanding of Britain’s strengths, and a resolve to invest in our future rather than live off our past
This, the Final Report of The Economy 2030 Inquiry, sets out what such
a path – a serious attempt to end Britain’s relative decline – looks like. It
navigates, rather than ignores, the constraints and trade-offs involved,
and is hard-headed about what it takes to drive growth and ensure
fairness. Prosperity must be built on an understanding of Britain’s strengths, and
a resolve to invest in our future rather than live off our past.
Economic change must be steered towards securing a higher growth and lower inequality Britain
Good jobs must become a central objective – not a by-product – of our economic
strategy, while our tax and benefit systems must fairly share reward and
sacrifice. Economic change must be steered towards securing a higher
growth and lower inequality Britain, as we wrestle with major shifts
from Brexit to the net zero transition.
The Economy 2030 Inquiry is a collaboration between the Resolution
Foundation and the Centre for Economic Performance at the London
School of Economics, funded by the Nuffield Foundation. This Final
Report is underpinned by the Inquiry’s rigorous analysis, drawing on
70 reports, as well as extensive conversations with citizens and policy
makers across the country.
executive summary
The promise of shared prosperity is key to our social contract
Countries are bound together in a sense of shared endeavour by many things,
from a common history to the collective provision of security for our homes,
families and communities. But as traditional hierarchies have weakened and
advanced economies become more diverse, the role of the state in delivering
shared prosperity has become more central in underpinning social contracts.
Rising wages, higher employment and the security of the welfare state have
all helped deliver this in the past. Real wages nearly quadrupled, while state
spending on healthcare as a share of the economy almost trebled, between the
Second World War and the turn of the millennium.
But that progress, and the strength it gives to our society and democracy,
should not be taken for granted. There are periods when the social contract
comes under pressure; when a clear route to a better tomorrow is lacking,
the improvements people expect dry up and some groups are left wondering
whether the country works for them. Britain, as we outline in this final report of
the Economy 2030 Inquiry, is in this undesirable position today.
- Low growth: Real wages grew by 33 per cent a decade from 1970 to 2007, but have flatlined since, costing the average worker £10,700 per year in lost wage growth.
- High inequality: Income inequality in the UK is higher than any other large European country.
- The toxic combination: Low growth and high inequality means typical households in Britain are 9 per cent poorer than their French counterparts, while our low-income families are 27 per cent poorer.
- Stalled progress: 9 million young workers have never worked in an economy with sustained average wage rises, and millennials are half as likely to own a home, and twice as likely to rent privately, as their parents’ generation.
- Talent wasted: Almost a third of young people in the UK are not undertaking any education by age 18 – compared to just one in five in France and Germany.
- Gaping gaps: Income per person in the richest local authority – Kensington and Chelsea (£52,500) – was over four times that of the poorest – Nottingham (£11,700) – in 2019.
- Bad work: Half of shift workers in Britain receive less than a week’s notice of their working hours or schedules.
- Flaky firms: UK companies have invested 20 per cent less than those in the US, France and Germany since 2005, placing Britain in the bottom 10 per cent of OECD countries, and costing the economy 4 per cent of GDP.
- Taxes up: Having averaged 33 per cent of GDP in the first two decades of this century, the tax take is now on course to rise over 4 percentage points by 2027-28: equivalent to £4,200 per household.
- The wrong track: Six in ten Britons think the country is heading in the wrong direction, with far fewer – just one in six – thinking it is on the right ttrack.
- A services superpower: Britain must build on its strengths as the second biggest services exporter in the world, behind only the US, while protecting the place of its high value manufacturing in European supply chains.
- Our second cities are too big to fail: Our cities should be centres for Britain’s thriving high-value service industries. But instead, all England’s biggest cities outside London have productivity levels below the national average.
- Investing in our future, not living off our past: Public investment in the average OECD country is nearly 50 per cent higher than in the UK. Tackling this legacy, alongside the net zero transition, requires public investment to rise to 3 per cent of GDP.
- Pressure from above and below: British managers too rarely invest for the long-term. Pressure for change should come from more engaged owners – a smaller number of far larger pensions funds – and from workers on boards.
- Good work in every town: Despite the success of the minimum wage, a good work agenda cannot be a one-trick pony. Statutory Sick Pay can leave the ill on just £44 a week, while 900,000 workers miss out on paid holiday.
- Steering change: Hospitality represents a higher share of consumption in the UK than anywhere else in Europe, because it is relatively cheap. Better pay for low earners in hospitality, paid for by higher prices that most affect better off households, will create a more equal UK.
- Recoupling everyone to rising prosperity: Benefit levels have not kept pace with prices: cuts since 2010 have reduced the incomes of the poor by almost £3,000 a year. Shared prosperity means benefits rising with wages.
- Better, not just higher, taxes: A rising tax burden should not just fall on earnings, but should be shouldered by other sources of income and wealth. Wealth has risen from three to over seven times national income since the 1980s.
- Resilient public and private finances: Higher growth and higher taxes are needed to raise investment, rescue public services, and repair public finances. Higher investment should be funded by higher savings at home, not borrowing from abroad.
- Exploiting catch-up potential: If the UK matched the average income and inequality of Australia, Canada, France, Germany and the Netherlands, the typical household would be £8,300 better off.
TECHNICAL ANNEX
Download and read the report’s Technical Annex here.
For all research queries about this report, please contact Emily Fry or Greg Thwaites. For press queries, please contact the Resolution Foundation press office.
Emily Fry
Economist,
Resolution Foundation
Email Emily
Greg Thwaites
Research Director,
Resolution Foundation
Email Greg | United Kingdom Politics |
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles! The Biden administration says there are more than 20 million tons of grain stuck in silos near Ukrainian ports, courtesy of a Russian blockade. Serhiy Hrebtsov, a Ukrainian grain farmer, says it is cheaper for him to "throw it away" than find someone to buy his grain. Hrebtsov is among countless other farmers who are unable to sell their crops and earn a living. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy issued a stark warning to world leaders to do something or face "a severe food crisis and famine in many countries." In this photo provided by the Ukrainian Presidential Press Office, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy attend a news conference with Portuguese Prime Minister Antonio Costa after their meeting in Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday, May 21, 2022. ((Ukrainian Presidential Press Office via AP))According to the United Nations (UN), Ukraine accounted for 10% of global wheat exports in 2021. Ukraine’s agriculture ministry says grain exports are down more than 60% compared to last year.TOP RUSSIAN SECURITY OFFICIAL QUESTIONS WHETHER UKRAINE WILL 'EXIST ON THE MAP' IN 2 YEARSGlobal food prices are already increasing, and the UN warns of worldwide food shortages next year if Russia continues its siege. "The blockade by the Russian navy has created a global crisis that we cannot solve by ourselves. And NATO is closing its eyes to the problem," says the mayor of Ukrainian port city of Odesa, Gennadiy Trukhanov. A mine detection worker with the HALO Trust de-mining NGO explains how they search for anti-tank and anti personnel land mines in Lypivka, on the outskirts of Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, June 14, 2022. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko)U.S. officials say Russian invaders have also destroyed Ukrainian farming equipment and pilfered their grain. The United States warns that Moscow is trying to profit from the current situation by selling stolen wheat to other countries.The New York Times reports the U.S. State Department sent a cable to more than a dozen countries – largely in Africa – warning them that Russia could be trying to sell them stolen grain. The cable identified three Russian cargo ships that officials suspected were carrying stolen grain. WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 02: U.S. President Joe Biden departs the podium after delivering remarks on the recent mass shootings from the White House on June 2, 2022 in Washington, D.C. ((Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images))CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APPThe Biden administration says it’s working to blunt the impact of Russia's actions by "working closely with our European partners to get 20 million tons of grain locked in Ukraine out onto the market to help bring down food prices."Last month, Republican senators Joni Ernst of Iowa and Roger Marshall of Kansas warned that Russia is using food manipulation as a weapon in its deadly invasion of Ukraine.Ukraine, known as the "bread basket" of the world, is one of the largest producers of wheat, sunflower oil, honey and other commodities. According to the senators, about 400 million people, including in Africa and the Middle East, depend on Ukraine and Russia for food. NuNu Japaridze is a Director of Story Development based out of Washington, DC. | Europe Politics |
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov is surrounded by press members during a doorstep at the G20 Foreign Ministers' Meeting in Nusa Dua, Bali, Indonesia, July 8, 2022. REUTERS/David R. Brunnstrom/PoolRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comSummaryRussian foreign minister scolds G20 over UkraineRussia says sanctions are economic war by WestMoscow to turn to China and IndiaZelenskiy says Ukraine will not be brokenPutin warns of tragedy if Kyiv continuesKYIV, July 8 (Reuters) - Western officials on Friday tried to coax Russia into allowing Ukraine to ship its grain out to the world as the four-month-old war threatened to bring hunger to countries far away from the battlefields.Moscow, however, accused the West of waging economic warfare on Russia by attempting to isolate it with sanctions imposed over the Feb. 24 invasion.President Vladimir Putin warned that Russia's military operations in Ukraine had barely got started and the prospects for negotiation would grow dimmer the longer the conflict dragged on.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com"We have heard many times that the West wants to fight us to the last Ukrainian. This is a tragedy for the Ukrainian people, but it seems that everything is heading towards this," Putin said in a speech to parliament on Thursday.On the frontlines in Ukraine's eastern Donbas region, officials reported continued Russian shelling of towns and villages ahead of an anticipated new push to grasp more territory."NOT YOUR COUNTRY"At a meeting of G20 foreign ministers in Bali, Indonesia, some of the staunchest critics of the Russian invasion confronted the Kremlin's top diplomat Sergei Lavrov.High on their concerns was getting grain shipments from Ukraine out of blockaded Black Sea ports. Ukraine is a top exporter and aid agencies have warned that countries in Africa, the Middle East and elsewhere face devastating food shortages if supplies do not reach them.At a plenary session, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken urged Moscow to let Ukrainian grain out to the world, a Western official said."He addressed Russia directly, saying: 'To our Russian colleagues: Ukraine is not your country. Its grain is not your grain. Why are you blocking the ports? You should let the grain out,'" the official said.Earlier, Lavrov had berated the West, saying that instead of focusing on how to tackle global economic problems at the meeting, ministers had embarked on "frenzied criticism" of Russia over the Ukraine conflict.Indonesian Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi called on the G20 to "find a way forward" to address global challenges and said the repercussions of the war, including rising energy and food prices, would hit poor countries the hardest."It is our responsibility to end the war sooner than later and settle our differences at the negotiating table, not at the battlefield," Retno said at the opening of talks.However, Putin's comments in Moscow indicated that the prospects of that happening were dim right now.NO SORROWThe biggest conflict in Europe since World War Two has killed thousands, displaced millions and flattened Ukrainian cities.Russia says its "special military operation" is intended to degrade Ukraine's military and root out people it calls dangerous nationalists. Ukraine and its Western backers say Russia is engaged in an unjustified land grab.After failing to quickly take the capital Kyiv, Russia is now waging a war of attrition in Ukraine's industrial heartland of the Donbas, made up of the regions of Luhansk and Donetsk.On Sunday, Moscow declared it had "liberated" Luhansk and now plans to capture parts of neighbouring Donetsk it does not control.Luhansk governor Serhiy Gaidai said on Friday Russian forces were indiscriminately shelling villages, towns and cities."They hit houses, every building that seems to them a possible fortification. To move forward, do not count personal losses and do not feel sorry for the inhabitants of the area," he said.The situation was similar in settlements in Donetsk.Vadym Lyakh, the mayor of Sloviansk in Donetsk, said a woman was killed overnight when Russian shelling hit a residential building.Reuters could not independently verify the battlefield accounts.Britain's defence ministry said Russian forces were likely to be pausing to replenish before undertaking new offensive operations in Donetsk. The ministry said Russia's immediate tactical objective might be Siversk, a small industrial city in the north of Donetsk.Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, in his nightly video message, said the raising of the Ukrainian flag on Snake Island in the Black Sea on Thursday was a sign his country would not be broken.Russia abandoned Snake Island, about 140 km (85 miles) south of the port of Odesa, at the end of June - a victory for Ukraine that Kyiv hoped could loosen Moscow's blockade of Ukrainian ports."Let every Russian captain, aboard a ship or a plane, see the Ukrainian flag on Snake Island and let him know that our country will not be broken," Zelenskiy said.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by Reuters bureaux; Writing by Angus MacSwan; Editing by Frank Jack DanielOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Global Organizations |
China has laid broad claims over the Taiwan Strait, setting the stage for potential conflict with the self-governed island and the US, which says it will continue to sail warships through what it insists are international waters.Citing the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos) and Chinese laws, Wang Wenbin, a foreign ministry spokesman, declared that the strait, which ranges in width from 70 nautical miles to 220 nautical miles, belongs to China.The unprecedented claim was presented by the Chinese to US military officials during recent meetings but only made public yesterday and comes as the status of Taiwan has stoked tensions between Beijing and Washington.The US navy has frequently sent ships through the Taiwan Strait in what it calls | Asia Politics |
Tehran, Iran — The foreign ministers of Iran and Saudi Arabia have met in Tehran as the longtime rivals seek to end a diplomatic rift and restore ties after seven years of tensions.
Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian welcomed his Saudi counterpart, Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud, at the foreign ministry on Saturday.
Saudi Arabia’s top diplomat also met Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, who has just finished a tour of Latin America.
The two ministers hailed the re-establishment of diplomatic relations, which they said would be paramount to improving security across the region.
“The Islamic Republic of Iran has never equated security with militarism, and considers security to be a comprehensive concept, which includes political, economic, cultural, trade and social dimensions between all the countries of the region,” Amirabdollahian told a news conference.
He added that he discussed a wide range of issues with Prince Faisal, which included trade ties and joint investments, in addition to accommodating Saudi tourists and pilgrims who may be interested in visiting Iran.
Prince Faisal said that “mutual respect, non-interference in the two countries’ internal affairs and commitment to the United Nations Charter” will be at the centre of bilateral relations going forward, with an eye on securing the interests of both nations.
“I would also like to highlight the two countries’ discussions on cooperation on ensuring maritime security and reducing proliferation of weapons of mass destruction,” he said.
Al Jazeera’s Dorsa Jabbari said, “The two countries are serious about resuming diplomatic relations and they want to move forward despite not having any relationship for the past seven years.”
“The area of expansion is not only political but the economic aspect of the relationship with also be very significant. The Iranians are hoping to increase trade with Saudi Arabia to reach $1bn annually. It’s currently at about $15m,” Jabbari said, reporting from Tehran.
The economic incentive is significant, said Abdulaziz Alghashian, a Saudi foreign policy researcher with Lancaster University in the UK.
“I think what the Saudis would get out of this is that they want stability in the region in order to start to build upon the projects and economic vision the country has. I think they realise that these very lofty, ambitious economic projects cannot be obtained within an unstable region,” he told Al Jazeera.
“It’s not enough to just trust each other. Where I think the Saudi-Iranian relations are going are in a sphere where they are both incentivised to de-escalate any tensions should they arise in the future. And conflict is inevitable. But I think it’s the way they address these conflicts and the reasons to de-escalate and that’s where the economic issue [factors in].”
China-brokered deal
The Iranian and Saudi ministers last met in early June in South Africa on the sidelines of a meeting of BRICS, the economic bloc consisting of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.
But this is the first visit by a Saudi official to Iran since 2016, when Riyadh broke off ties after its diplomatic missions in Tehran and Mashhad were attacked following the execution of Shia religious leader Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr by Saudi Arabia.
Tehran and Riyadh agreed to reopen their embassies within two months as part of a China-brokered deal signed in Beijing on March 10, but while diplomatic relations have been restored, reopening the embassy buildings has proved more challenging.
Iran reopened its embassy in Riyadh on June 6, followed by its consulate general in Jeddah and its mission to the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) a day later.
Tehran has reportedly selected Alireza Enayati, a former envoy to Kuwait and a foreign ministry deputy for regional affairs, as its ambassador to the kingdom. But Enayati was absent at the reopening ceremony, and Iran has not confirmed that he has started work at the embassy in Riyadh.
The Iranian embassy was inaugurated by Alireza Bigdeli, a deputy foreign minister for consular affairs, who said, “We are witnessing the opening of a new chapter in bilateral and regional relations.”
Meanwhile, it is unclear when the Saudi embassy will be reopened. Amirabdollahian previously said Saudi Arabia has selected an ambassador to Tehran, but the kingdom has yet to publicly confirm his identity.
Unconfirmed reports indicate a Saudi team has been operating out of a luxury hotel in the Iranian capital for weeks as both sides work on officially reopening the embassy buildings.
The Saudi foreign minister’s visit to Tehran comes a week after US Secretary of State Antony Blinken travelled to Riyadh for high-level talks.
Shortly after, it was confirmed that Iraq has been able to repay a considerable $2.7bn of its debts to Iran incurred from importing natural gas.
The US had previously blocked the money based on the sanctions it unilaterally imposed on Iran after then-President Donald Trump’s 2018 withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal. Washington has said the funds can only be used “for humanitarian and other non-sanctionable transactions”.
Part of the money was allocated for the expenses of Iranian pilgrims attending the Hajj in Saudi Arabia, while 80 million euros ($87m) was reportedly sent to the Iranian mission at the Jeddah-based Islamic Development Bank.
Meanwhile, media reports indicate Iran and the US have been holding indirect talks in Oman aimed at reducing tensions, which could potentially lead to deals on Tehran’s nuclear programme, an exchange of prisoners and the release of frozen Iranian funds.
At the same time, the agreement between Iran and Saudi Arabia has begun decreasing tensions across the region, including in Yemen where the two had backed opposing sides in the devastating war.
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who was backed by Tehran, was welcomed back into the Arab League last month. Saudi Arabia, along with several other Arab states, had thrown their weight behind the opposition in Syria. | Middle East Politics |
The outlook for the global economy has “darkened significantly” in recent months, the head of the IMF has warned, and the world faces an increasing risk of recession in the next 12 months.The commodity price shock from the war in Ukraine had exacerbated the cost-of-living crisis for hundreds of millions of people, Kristalina Georgieva said on Wednesday, and it was “only getting worse”.Inflation was also higher than expected, she said in a blogpost that came on the same day as the latest figures showed that prices in the US rose at a 40-year high of 9.1% in June.Economists and investors now think the US Federal Reserve could hike interest rates by a historic 1% when its board meets in two weeks’ time.The Bank of Canada shocked markets on Wednesday by raising its base rate by a full percentage point. Its decision and the Fed expectation will heap pressure on other central banks to keep raising rates to bring inflation under control.With supply bottlenecks and repeated Covid lockdowns in China also crimping the world’s patchy pandemic recovery, Georgieva said the G20 finance ministers and central bankers gathering in Bali “face a global economic outlook that has darkened significantly”.“The outlook remains extremely uncertain. Think of how further disruption in the natural gas supply to Europe could plunge many economies into recession and trigger a global energy crisis,” she wrote. “This is just one of the factors that could worsen an already difficult situation.“It is going to be a tough 2022 – and possibly an even tougher 2023, with increased risk of recession.”The IMF would be downgrading its growth forecasts for global growth for both 2022 and 2023 later this month, she said, having warned in April that its forecast of 3.6% was likely to be revised downwards.The European Commission was expected to cut its eurozone GDP forecast for 2023 to 1.4% from 2.3% on Thursday, according to Bloomberg, citing a leaked draft from the EU executive in Brussels. Inflation in the single currency area is expected to average 7.6% this year before falling to 4% next year, the document said.The European Central Bank is under pressure to raise interest rates to combat inflation and protect the euro, which this week slumped to parity with the US dollar for the first time in two decades.Georgieva said raising rates to combat inflation was one of three key policies needed to combat the threat to the world economy along with reducing government debt and more global cooperation.But raising rates is a high-risk strategy for many countries amid increasing alarm in the UK, for example, that the Bank of England’s aggressive rate hikes will plunge the country into recession.EU countries also face the same dilemma at a time when it faces a potentially crippling energy crisis this coming winter if, as expected, Russia turns off the supply of natural gas over the bloc’s opposition to the Kremlin’s war against Ukraine. | Global Organizations |
Thailand's Foreign Minister Don Pramudwinai places a flower on the jacket of U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken following remarks to the press after a Memorandum of Understanding signing ceremony at the Thai Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Bangkok, Thailand, July 10, 2022. Stefani Reynolds/Pool via REUTERSRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comBANGKOK, July 10 (Reuters) - The United States and Thailand signed agreements on Sunday to deepen the countries' already strong ties as Washington steps up its efforts to counter China's expanding influence in Asia.U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Thai foreign minister Don Pramudwinai pledged to advance partnerships in climate change, law enforcement and security cooperation.Blinken's visit comes a day after he met Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi in Indonesia on the sidelines of the G20 foreign minister's meeting. read more Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comBlinken will also meet with Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha. China's Wang has been engaged in intense diplomacy across Asia in recent weeks and met Prayuth on Tuesday."We are taking the partnership between us fully into the 21st century," Blinken said, adding that Thailand is an important ally "in a region that is shaping the trajectory of the century".Bliken last year postponed a trip to Thailand, the oldest U.S. ally in Asia, after halting a regional tour when a COVID-19 case was found in the press corps accompanying him.The Biden administration has sought to shore up ties with a region that had become uncertain about U.S. commitment during a period of perceived neglect under Biden's predecessor, Donald Trump. At that time, China expanded its influence while pushing investment and trade integration."We have also laid the foundation for the next 190 years," the Thai foreign minister said, as the two countries prepare to mark 190 years of relations next year.Talks with Prayuth will include the crisis in Myanmar and expanding cooperation, the State Department said.Myanmar's military has increased pressure against ethnic minority armies since a coup last year and is encountering resistance on multiple fronts, including militia groups allied with the ousted government.Earlier on Sunday, Blinken met Myanmar youth leaders in the Thai capital, Bangkok.After Thailand, he will make a previously unscheduled stop in Tokyo to offer condolences to the Japanese people after the killing of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, the State Department said. read more Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by David Brunnstrom, Panu Wongcha-um and Chayut Setboonsarng; Editing by Edmund KlamannOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Asia Politics |
Jeremy Hunt oversaw the signing of a low-tax treaty with San Marino championed by a leading Tory donor, who with his companies has given more than £700,000 to the party and £30,000 to the chancellor.
Maurizio Bragagni, a prominent businessman and diplomat for San Marino, was present in No 11 Downing Street when a “double taxation” treaty between the UK and San Marino was signed in May.
After the event, Hunt posed for photographs outside No 11 with Bragagni and San Marino’s foreign secretary.
Whitehall sources said San Marino had for at least two years been lobbying the government through the Foreign Office to negotiate and sign such a treaty but that the Treasury and HM Revenue and Customs make the decision on which countries to prioritise.
A Treasury spokesperson said Hunt had no involvement in the negotiation of the treaty, which was done by HMRC officials, and that the original request for a deal was made by the Foreign Office in 2022 – six months before he became chancellor.
They said the process in the Treasury was led by Victoria Atkins, the financial secretary to the Treasury, who signed the document with Bragagni inside No 11.
When the tax treaty was signed, the consulate praised the work of the all-party parliamentary group (APPG) on San Marino, comprising MPs and peers, for its “continuous lobbying support” in relation to the UK government on the issue.
Hunt is a former member of the APPG on San Marino and visited the small landlocked state, surrounded by Italy, in 2021, declaring hospitality from San Marino for four members of his family and himself, flights, accommodation and food with a total value of £7,869 over three days.
Bragagni was present on the 2021 visit, during which Hunt was awarded an honour by San Marino known as the order of the Knights of St Agatha.
At the time, San Marino said it had recognised “Grand Officer” Jeremy Hunt for his “merits in promoting San Marino’s best interests in the UK, for his valuable support during the emergency situation created in the republic during the pandemic”.
Bragagni announced the treaty on his website, saying it had come about because of the “determined work of the consulate of San Marino in London” over a period of four years.
The Treasury’s explanatory note says it is designed to “eliminate the double taxation of income and gains arising in one country and paid to residents of the other country”. It also said there were “specific measures which combat discriminatory tax treatment and provide for assistance in international tax enforcement”, although the UK already had an agreement on provision of information to tax authorities with San Marino, signed in 2011.
One tax and accountancy expert, Richard Murphy, said he believed it could lead to the flow of potential taxation from the UK to San Marino, while another tax expert said they could not see what tax benefits it would bring and thought it appeared principally to be a piece of diplomatic theatre, possibly designed to show that San Marino was a global player.
Murphy said: “There will be no financial flows from San Marino to the UK of any consequence. Why are we allowing for the potential of flows from us to them? I think there could be the opportunity for someone to exploit this by ‘treaty shopping’, to set up the opportunity to create a financial services hub in San Marino that could be used for funds to flow out of the UK.
“For me, any such possible opportunity is naive at best and totally unnecessary, why do it? You have to question the political judgment of any politician who would want to do that, let alone claim publicity for it.”
Asked whether the deal could be perceived to be a potential conflict of interest for Hunt, a Treasury spokesperson said: “We reject these claims as negotiations on this agreement were conducted by HMRC officials and began in April 2022 – long before Jeremy Hunt became chancellor – following a request from the Foreign Office.
“The UK, under successive administrations, has signed over 130 double tax treaties, including with the United States, China, Japan, India, Germany and smaller countries. They are designed to prevent tax evasion in the UK and excessive foreign taxation and other forms of discrimination against UK business interests abroad.”
The UK has double taxation treaties with many states – including very small ones – but their operation can be controversial if it appears that one country is benefiting more than another.
Bragagni and the San Marino consulate did not respond to requests for comment. The Conservative donor has previously been criticised by Labour for comments made in Italian last year about “foreign Muslims” running urban areas and Labour having an “anti-Judeo-Christian identity, which allows Islamic groups to feel at home”, claiming the party’s success in London was partly because “Muslims vote Labour”.
At the time, Bragagni said: “I have never knowingly offended anyone. I apologise that my article originally written in Italian caused unnecessary controversy when translated.” | United Kingdom Politics |
Every civil servant watching the chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, give his barn-burning speech to the Conservative party conference knew that the words “we have the best civil servants in the world” would be swiftly followed by a tragicomic recipe for putting that right.
He didn’t disappoint, with a deadpan delivery of the announcement that the government was going to be “freezing the expansion of the civil service and putting in place a plan to reduce its numbers to pre-pandemic levels”. This crowd-pleaser was greeted with loud applause and cheers.
Which wasn’t a surprise. In their parallel universe, you wonder what other nonsense is going to seize emerging Tory opinion-leaders.
This isn’t Britannia Unchained; it’s Britannia Unhinged. Yet there is method in the madness. Like Boris Johnson and Liz Truss before him, in targeting the civil service, Rishi Sunak is pushing a tried and tested formula for distracting from more serious electoral threats, which this week include the toxic fallout from the cancellation of the HS2 leg to Manchester, the looming threat of more NHS strikes, and a Covid inquiry that is zeroing in on the quality of political decision-making at the heart of government.
This is no more serious an attempt to reform the civil service than the last cynical effort. It feels like yet another trial balloon designed to test the public’s acceptance of the continuing expansion of the culture wars that this government relies on for its survival.
Here is why the current wheeze won’t work.
First, as Dave Penman, leader of the FDA civil service union, said, Hunt’s claim that freezing numbers would save £1bn a year amounts to a 7-8% cut in the pay bill, with scant detail on where those cuts would be made. In Penman’s statement yesterday he characterised Hunt’s decision as “intellectually bereft”, “glaringly arbitrary” and “straight out of the Jacob Rees-Mogg playbook”, recognising that while the government is free to decide the size of the public sector, ministers need to “be honest with the public about the consequences”. There is no evidence to suggest that they are ready to do that, which is why Sunak ditched the Johnson administration’s 91,000 civil service job cut target.
Second, civil service reform is horribly complex, and has been attempted by every government since the Northcote-Trevelyan reforms of Victorian times. We still await the public sector productivity review from the chief secretary to the Treasury, John Glen, and the review of the civil service being masterminded by Conservative peer and former Cabinet Office minister Francis Maude.
It seems vastly unlikely that with a general election looming over them, this crop of ministers will be minded to even read all those plans and reports in full, never mind take the time needed to implement them. This government doesn’t really do detail.
Third, the current effort is already hopelessly corrupted by the culture wars spilling over the sides of this week’s party conference: Hunt’s announcement was launched with news of a review of “equality, diversity and inclusion spending in the civil service … to ensure it represents value for money”.
Nobody in their right mind takes this “review” at face value. As if the home secretary’s war on “woke” diversity training at the Home Office hadn’t already made it clear, the notion that diversity and inclusion are somehow responsible for sabotaging public sector productivity and efficiency probably tells you all you need to know about how seriously this lot are taking civil service reform. It’ll probably be quietly forgotten about by Christmas.
Of course, the chancellor is right to say that “new policies should not always mean new people”. But it’s worth remembering what drove the recent expansion of the civil service headcount, from less than 400,000 in 2016 (the smallest size it had been since the second world war, according to the Institute for Government) to 488,000 according to official figures for June 2023.
First, Brexit – which, even when only partially enacted, means permanently increasing the size of the civil service to take on functions previously carried out by European institutions on our behalf. Covid, too, has shown that having permanent capacity in place to deal with pandemics – a capacity, incidentally, dismantled by Johnson months before Covid hit – is probably a good idea.
Our tech bro PM also has the challenge of squaring reduced headcount with, among other things, a desire to get more science, engineering and digital talent into the government. It was only six months ago that he launched the government’s plan to “cement the UK’s place as a science and technology superpower by 2030”.
All of the above means that the civil service must deal with, yet again, the threat of job cuts as our bosses frantically figure out how to retrofit their existing workforce plans to meet the chancellor’s arbitrary target in a matter of months.
This is the name of the game, finding political cover and convenient culprits for cuts to public services. Don’t fall for it.
The author works for the UK civil service | United Kingdom Politics |
Australia’s foreign minister, Penny Wong, has signalled she is open to meeting her Chinese counterpart at a looming meeting of G20 foreign ministers, but she has warned any diplomatic thaw will require the removal of Beijing’s “coercive” trade sanctions against a variety of exports.Wong was asked during a visit to Singapore on Wednesday to disclose whether or not arrangements were now in place for a conversation at the G20 meeting in Indonesia later this week – and if so, what her message would be to China’s Wang Yi.Australia’s foreign minister told reporters she believed that both countries had an interest in “stabilising the relationship” and ministers in the Albanese government were “open to engagement, and that extends to the G20 also”.Wong said at a joint press conference with her Singaporean counterpart, Vivian Balakrishnan: “Obviously these arrangements are very fluid, but that stance of being open to engagement, that willingness to engage, remains our position, including at the G20.”Borrowing a locution from the Singaporean prime minister, Lee Hsien Loong, Wong characterised the relationship between Australia and China as “complex and consequential” and she said the new government in Canberra intended to remain “calm, considered and disciplined” in public pronouncements on the relationship.But she said any rapprochement would need to be predicated on “the importance of those coercive [trade] measures being removed” and respect for the international rules-based order, because “power and size ought not to resolve differences”.She intimated there were a spectrum of views in the Indo-Pacific and south-east Asia about China’s rise, but the principle of respecting sovereignty was “shared by many countries in the region even if they have different views on other issues”.“If you want to continue to have a region and a nation prosper, you want a certain degree of predictability around things like your trading arrangements,” Wong said.Australia’s new trade minister, Don Farrell, confirmed this week Wong was in talks to meet Wang Yi. Asked if the pair could meet soon, such as at the upcoming G20 meeting in Indonesia, Farrell told Guardian Australia: “I don’t exactly know, but it looks like the answer to that is yes. I think there are positive signs.”Australia has complained about China’s trade sanctions against a range of exports including meat, crayfish, timber and coal, and is currently pursuing trade disputes in the World Trade Organization over anti-dumping tariffs on Australian wine and barley. Sign up to receive an email with the top stories from Guardian Australia every morning Sign up to receive the top stories from Guardian Australia every morningWong in the past has vowed to take every opportunity to demand the Chinese government scrap “unjustified trade strikes” – a message she repeated in Singapore on Wednesday.But in Australia, Farrell struck a more conciliatory note. “So at the moment the plan is to proceed with those [disputes]. Obviously if the opportunity arises to have a different set of discussions, whereby we can nut out a compromise situation, then I’d be fully supportive of going down that track.”Wong will go to the G20 foreign ministers meeting after her program in Singapore.On Wednesday night she gave a broad-ranging address to the Institute of Strategic Studies outlining the new government’s view about regional engagement, and ahead of a possible meeting with her counterpart she challenged China to exert its influence with Russia to end the illegal invasion of Ukraine.Quick GuideHow to get the latest news from Guardian AustraliaShowPhotograph: Tim Robberts/Stone RFWong declared the region and the world were “now looking at Beijing’s actions in relation to Ukraine”.Australia’s foreign minister said China had an obligation as “a great power, a permanent member of the Security Council, and with its no limits partnership with Russia” to exert influence with Vladimir Putin. If China was prepared to do that, that “would do a great deal to build confidence in our own region”.Wong said the Albanese government’s foreign policy view was Australia must find its security “in Asia, not from Asia – and that means, above all, in south-east Asia”. She said Australia wanted “to continue to build alignment together and with others to help shape outcomes in ways that support our collective interests”.“Regardless of the character of leadership Beijing chooses to demonstrate, we all have our own choices to make, and our own agency to exercise,” Wong said on Wednesday night. “We are more than just supporting players in a grand drama of global geopolitics, on a stage dominated by great powers.“It is up to all of us to create the kind of region we aspire to – a stable, peaceful, prosperous and secure region,” she said. “It is up to all of us to work towards a strategic equilibrium in the region.”She also addressed the Aukus partnership, which remains an irritant in Australia’s relations with neighbours such as Indonesia and Malaysia.In late June, Malaysia’s foreign minister, Saifuddin Abdullah, said his country’s concerns about the Aukus nuclear submarine pact remained unchanged after meeting Wong in Kuala Lumpur.Wong said in a region where strategic equilibrium allowed countries to make their own sovereign choices, “including about their alignments and partnerships”, it should be unremarkable “that Australia would seek enhanced defence capability from our allies, in the form of nuclear-powered submarines”.With regional partners concerned the submarine tie-up between Australia, the US and the UK would fuel a regional arms race, Wong said Australia had no intention of acquiring nuclear weapons. And implicitly addressing concerns that Aukus was hatched in secret, Wong said Australia would “keep our key partners informed as we progress”. | Australia Politics |
China is taking an increasingly assertive role in world affairs, helping to broker a restoration of relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia, offering a 12-point peace plan for Ukraine, and strengthening its relationships with European and Latin American powers. Last week, China continued its diplomatic outreach by offering to hold talks between Israel and Palestine. “China doesn’t want the United States to be the preeminent power. It wants to live alongside the United States,” says economist Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University and president of the U.N. Sustainable Development Solutions Network. He has also served as adviser to three U.N. secretaries-general and currently serves as a sustainable development solutions advocate under Secretary-General António Guterres. His latest article is headlined “The Need for a New US Foreign Policy.”
Transcript
AMY GOODMAN: China is facing criticism in Europe after China’s ambassador to France questioned the sovereignty of former Soviet states under international law during a television interview. The Baltic countries Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia condemned the remarks and summoned Chinese envoys to explain Beijing’s official position. The Chinese Foreign Ministry walked back the ambassador’s comments, saying, quote, “China respects all countries’ sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity.”
The diplomatic spat comes as China is making headlines across the globe, though maybe not so much in the United States, for its diplomatic efforts. In late February, China released a 12-point peace plan to end the war in Ukraine. On March 10th, Iran and Saudi Arabia announced they would restore ties as part of an agreement brokered by China. Days later, in mid-March, Chinese President Xi Jinping hosted the Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva to talk about Ukraine, trade and moving away from the U.S. dollar. Xi Jinping then met with French President Emmanuel Macron in Beijing. During Macron’s visit, Xi spoke about the roles of China and France in world affairs.
PRESIDENT XI JINPING: [translated] The world today is undergoing profound historic changes. As permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and major countries with a tradition of independence, China and France, as promoters of the multipolarization of the world and the democratization of international relations, have the ability and responsibility to transcend difference and restraints; adhere to the comprehensive strategic cooperative partnerships between China and France with stability, reciprocity, development and progress; practice true multilateralism; and maintain world peace, stability and prosperity.
AMY GOODMAN: While in Beijing, the French president, Emmanuel Macron, suggested France and European nations should not become a vassal of the United States when it comes to Taiwan.
PRESIDENT EMMANUEL MACRON: [translated] France supports the single China policy and the search for a peaceful solution to the situation for that matter. It’s Europe’s position. It’s a position that has always been compatible with the role of an ally. But it’s precisely one stressing the importance of strategic autonomy. Ally doesn’t mean being a vassal. It’s not because we do things together that we can’t think alone, that we’re going to follow the people in — that are the toughest in a country that’s allied with us. When we look at the facts, France has lessons to be received from no one, be either in Ukraine, in Sahel or in Taiwan.
AMY GOODMAN: China has continued its diplomatic outreach by offering last week to hold talks between Israel and Palestine.
To look more at China’s recent diplomatic actions, we’re joined by Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University and president of the U.N. Sustainable Development Solutions Network. He has also served as adviser to three U.N. secretaries-general and currently serves as a sustainable development solutions advocate under Secretary-General António Guterres. His latest article published is headlined “The Need for a New US Foreign Policy.”
Professor Sachs, thanks so much for being with us. All of the diplomatic gestures of China — you know, the meeting with Macron in Beijing, with Lula in Beijing, brokering this deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia, now offering not only to negotiate between Ukraine and Russia, but Israel and Palestine — this hardly gets attention in the United States media. But around the world, the headlines are far more — there are far more headlines about this. Talk about the significance of this, and if you see a direct parallel between all the headway that China is making and increasing U.S. hostility towards China.
JEFFREY SACHS: Thanks, Amy. Very good to be with you.
And indeed, this is a crucial topic. And as President Xi Jinping said in that meeting with Macron, this is a — it is a historic watershed that the world is living through right now. What China is after, if we view it from China’s perspective, is what was also said: true multilateralism. And what that means, or true multipolarity, another term that they use, and that means they don’t want a U.S.-led world, they want a multipolar world. And the basis of that is that the United States is 4.1% of the world population, China is 17.5% of the world population. China’s economy is comparable to the U.S. economy, and indeed China is the lead trade partner for much of the world. So China is saying, “We’re there, too, alongside you. We want a multipolar world. We don’t want a U.S.-led world.”
And while the United States sometimes talks about a rule-based order, the fact of the matter is that the U.S. grand strategy, if we can use that term of the grand strategists of the U.S. state — see our grand strategy in the United States as being dominance. And I often refer to an article that I think is very clear, succinct and revealing by a former colleague of mine at Harvard University, Robert Blackwill, an esteemed ambassador of the United States, who wrote in 2015 — and I’ll quote from the article — “Since its founding, the United States has consistently pursued a grand strategy focused on acquiring and maintaining preeminent power over various rivals, first on the North American continent, then in the Western Hemisphere, and finally globally.”
Well, China doesn’t want the United States to be the preeminent power. It wants to live alongside the United States. Blackwill, writing in 2015, said China’s rise is a threat to U.S. preeminence. And he laid out a series of steps that the Biden administration actually is following almost step by step. What Blackwill laid out already back in 2015 is that the United States should create, quote, “new preferential trading arrangements among U.S. friends and allies to increase their mutual gains through instruments that consciously exclude China.” There should be “a technology-control regime” to block China’s strategic capabilities, a build-up of, quote, “power-political capacities of U.S. friends and allies on China’s periphery” and strengthened U.S. military forces along the Asian rimland despite any Chinese opposition. This has become the Biden foreign policy. China knows it. China really is pushing back.
But what’s very important and interesting to understand, and we’ve seen it clearly in the dynamics involving the Ukraine war, most of the world also does not want the U.S. as the global preeminent power. Most of the world wants a multipolar world, and is, therefore, not lined up behind the United States’ sanctions on Russia and so forth. And this was also the message of President Lula visiting China, saying to President Xi Jinping, “We, as Brazil, also want multipolarity, true multipolarity, and we want peace, for example, in the Russian-Ukraine war, that is based on not a U.S. perception of dominance — say, NATO enlargement — but rather a peace that reflects a multipolar world.”
This is real. It’s happening all over the world. And the fact of the matter is, the reason why this is a historic watershed is that the underlying economics and technological change have made it so. The U.S. is no longer the dominant world economy, and the G7, which is the U.S., Canada, Britain, France, Italy, Germany and Japan, is actually smaller than the BRICS countries in economic size, which is Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. So we really are, in fact, in a multipolar world, but in ideology, we’re in a conflict.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Jeffrey Sachs, I wanted to ask about that. You mentioned the BRICS. The BRICS bank, that is now in China — and President Lula has named Dilma Rousseff as the head of the BRICS bank — its importance in terms of this multipolarity in the world economies, the potential for even the creation of alternative major currencies to the dollar as a result of the BRICS alliance, the impact of that on world affairs?
JEFFREY SACHS: This is a big deal. And in fact, the United States is withdrawing — it doesn’t know it necessarily, our politicians don’t understand this, but our politicians are withdrawing from the world financial and monetary scene and opening up the space for a completely different kind of international finance.
I’ll give you an example. The U.S. was the creator of the World Bank. But now the U.S. Congress won’t put new money into the World Bank. And because of that, the World Bank is actually a quite small institution. It’s got a big name, but it’s a quite small institution in the financial scheme of things. The U.S. won’t put more money in. The Congress says, “No. Why should we waste our money internationally?” and so forth, and you get a lot of hubbub about that. So, China and the rest of the BRICS say, “OK, we’ll make our own development bank,” and they established the New Development Bank, or sometimes called the BRICS bank, based in Shanghai.
And that’s just one of the institutions that is really changing the scene. There’s the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, AIIB, based in Beijing, in fact. There is, as President Lula said, and it’s happening also in the context of the Ukraine war, a move away from the use of the dollar, which the United States has thought, “Well, that’s our ace in the hole. You know, that is our ultimate hold on things, because we can use sanctions, we can use our financial control, to keep other countries in line.” But other countries are saying, “Eh, not so much. We’ll trade in renminbi. We’ll trade in rubles. We’ll trade in rupees. We’ll trade in our own national currencies.” And they’re quickly setting up alternative institutions to do this.
The United States doubles down: “We will confiscate your reserves. We will, if you don’t follow.” And the other countries are saying, “You know, if you want to go through the U.N. and get really multilateral rules, we’re with you. But if you want to just impose the rules, we won’t follow along.” And so, we have this very funny expression called a “rule-based international order.” The United States government uses it every day. But what does it mean? Who writes the rules? And what most of the world wants, in fact, is rules written in a multipolar or multilateral setting, not rules written by the United States and a few friends and allies.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: I wanted to ask you — you’ve been an adviser to the United Nations for quite often. The issue of how much longer the permanent members of the Security Council can keep the number to five? Because, clearly, Brazil and other countries of the Global South have been saying the U.N. needs to be reformed, and countries from Latin America, specifically Brazil, and Africa should have representation on the U.N. Security Council, permanent members.
JEFFREY SACHS: Yes, you know, the P5, the permanent five, which is the United States, China, Russia, France and the United Kingdom, was the World War II victor group in 1945. They wrote into the rules of the U.N., incidentally, that they would be the permanent Security Council members and have a veto over any change in the U.N. Charter. So it’s really a group that gave itself power that the other 188 countries of the world look on and say, “What is this? We need change.”
I would say the country that is most amazed and frustrated by this, in fact, is India. India is now the most populous country in the world. The United States has 335 million, roughly, in the population; Britain, France, roughly 60 million; India, 1.4 billion — not on the Security Council, a nuclear power, a world superpower, the president of the G20 this year, really not happy about that. Brazil, the large — largest economy of South America, similarly not on the Security Council. So, this has been an issue for more than 20 years. The P5, in various ways, have blocked particular countries, but, added up, the P5 have said, “You know what? This is our club. We want to stay as the permanent five.”
But I think as we really face the reality of a — it’s not just a post-U.S.-dominated world, but actually a post-Western-dominated world, because it was the U.S. as the dominant power among the so-called West, which means the U.S., Britain, European Union, and honorary Western membership, Japan, let’s say. But we’re post-Western, as well as post-U.S. in dominance. And these international institutions need to change, or they won’t function in the 21st century. And if they don’t function, it’s actually a disaster for us. If they didn’t exist, we’d have to make them, because we need them to function, so we also need to renovate them.
AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to talk about China negotiating these various agreements. Let’s turn to Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva speaking before his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping.
PRESIDENT LUIZ INÁCIO LULA DA SILVA: [translated] What does Putin want? Putin can’t keep Ukraine’s territory. Maybe we don’t even discuss Crimea, but he will have to rethink what he has invaded. Also, Zelensky can’t have everything he wants to demand. NATO will not be able to set itself up at the border. So this is something we have to put on the table. … I think this war has dragged on for too long. Brazil has already criticized what it had to criticize. Brazil defends each nation’s territorial integrity, so we disagree with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
AMY GOODMAN: Because it looks like Ukraine is on the verge of a major counteroffensive against Russia, and, in order to do this, needs massive support from Western countries, meaning military weapons, can you talk about what China’s role is here, the peace plan it has put forward, but also these other deals that China is helping to negotiate, like the successful rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran, and then what they’re suggesting about Israel and Palestine?
JEFFREY SACHS: President Lula uttered, in a few words, the core of this issue, that our — most of our media dare not explain to the American people, and that is the expansion of NATO. This is a war fundamentally about the U.S. attempt to expand a U.S. military alliance to Ukraine and to Georgia. Georgia is a country in the Caucasus, also on the Black Sea. The U.S. strategy, going back decades, has been to surround Russia in the Black Sea, with Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey and Georgia, all NATO members, surrounding Russia and its naval fleet in the Black Sea, with a naval fleet that has been the Black Sea naval fleet of Russia since 1783. Russia has said, “This is our red line.” And it has said that for decades. And it said this clearly in 2007, before George W. Bush Jr. had the — I’ll call it the harebrained idea to announce in 2008, and force NATO to announce, that Ukraine will be a member of NATO.
And this is what President Lula was saying and what President Xi Jinping of China has been saying: We can’t have a war that is essentially a proxy war between Russia and the United States over the expansion of the U.S. military alliance right up to a 1,200-kilometer and more border with Russia, which Russia views — and I would say understandably views — as a fundamental national security threat to Russia. Keep some space. Keep some distance. That’s President Lula’s meaning. That’s what China means when it says in its peace plan, “We want a peace plan that respects the security interests of all parties.” What that is is code word for saying, “Make peace. End the war. But don’t expand NATO right up to the border.”
The American people have not heard an explanation of this all along. It’s shocking to me, because as a close observer of this for 30 years, this has been the casus belli. And yet our newspapers won’t even report the background to this. But this is why China, South Africa, India, Brazil are saying, “We want peace, but we don’t want NATO expansion as the meaning of so-called peace. We want the big superpowers to give each other some space and some distance, so that the world isn’t on a knife edge.” That’s exactly what President Lula was saying, and it’s exactly what the meaning of the Chinese peace initiative is, is to say, “Yes, absolutely make peace. Protect Ukraine’s sovereignty and its security. But no to NATO expansion.”
But the Biden administration won’t even discuss this issue. That has been the major failing and the reason why we have not been able to get to the negotiating table, in my opinion, even when Zelensky said in March 2022, “Maybe not NATO, maybe something else.” Russia and Ukraine were close to an agreement, and the United States intervened with Ukraine and said, “We don’t think that’s a good agreement,” because the U.S. neocons, so-called, have been pushing for NATO enlargement as the core of this issue.
But this goes back to the more general point for us, which is that what is at stake in Ukraine and over Taiwan and many other issues, from the point of view of China or Russia or other countries, including Brazil, now Saudi Arabia, Iran and others, is whether the U.S. does what it wants to do or whether the U.S. respects some limits based on what other countries say, “Well, this is what we think, so that we need true multipolarity, not U.S. dominance alone, rules written by all of us, not rules written just by the United States.”
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Jeff Sachs, we only have a few — about a minute left, but I was wondering if you could comment on the parallels between this expansion of NATO further and further east in Europe — this year marks the 200th anniversary of the Monroe Doctrine, of President Monroe declaring to all the European powers that the Western Hemisphere was off-limits to them coming, attempting to move their forces and their militaries into Latin America. And for these past 200 years, Latin America has essentially been the major sphere of influence of the United States. And yet, here we are, saying that Russia has no right to declare that its immediate — the countries on immediately its borders cannot welcome in NATO troops.
JEFFREY SACHS: Well, yes, a little empathy would go a long way, would have spared us, actually, a lot of wars. But for Americans, it would be useful to think: Suppose Mexico made a military alliance with China. Would the United States say, “Well, that’s Mexico’s right. What are we going to do about it?” Or might there be actually an invasion in short order or something like that? I would strongly advise to China and Mexico, don’t try it at home. Don’t experiment with this. But the United States government refuses that empathy, because — in other words, refuses to put itself in the position of the other side. That’s the fundamental arrogance of thinking that you determine the rules of the world. The problem with arrogance is not only the comeuppance from it, but you can’t — you stumble into terrible crises that you don’t even understand, because the United States has not been allowed — the public has not been allowed to even think from the perspective of the other side. So, the analogy is actually a very, very clear analogy. It is what China and Russia and others say all the time, is, “Why have those double standards? Why don’t we actually deal with each other with mutual respect, not with the rules that you write?”
AMY GOODMAN: We want to thank you, Jeffrey Sachs, for joining us, director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, president of the U.N. Sustainable Development Solutions Network. We’ll link to your new article, “The Need for a New US Foreign Policy.” Professor Sachs was speaking to us from Córdoba, Spain.
Next up, we look at the firing of Tucker Carlson at Fox News. Stay with us. | Asia Politics |
The UK will rejoin the European Union’s £85 billion Horizon science research programme, it has been confirmed this morning.
From today, British researchers are able to apply for grants and bid to take part in projects under the Horizon scheme.
The UK had been locked out of the Horizon programme after Brexit.
Horizon is a collaboration involving Europe’s leading research institutes and technology companies which sees EU member states contribute funds that are then allocated to individuals or organisations on merit.
The prime minister discussed the UK’s involvement with EU Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen yesterday after six months of negotiations.
The move has been welcomed by scientists, amid warnings that UK researchers have been missing out on collaboration with colleagues in the EU.
Prime minister Rishi Sunak said: “Innovation has long been the foundation for prosperity in the UK, from the breakthroughs improving healthcare to the technological advances growing our economy.
“With a wealth of expertise and experience to bring to the global stage, we have delivered a deal that enables UK scientists to confidently take part in the world’s largest research collaboration programme — Horizon Europe.
“We have worked with our EU partners to make sure that this is the right deal for the UK, unlocking unparalleled research opportunities, and also the right deal for British taxpayers”.
Speaking to Sky News this morning, science, innovation and technology secretary Michelle Donelan hailed this as “fantastic news” for the British taxpayer.
She said: “What we’re announcing today is a great deal – a deal that many said we wouldn’t be able to get.
“We didn’t just accept the deal on the table, we created a bespoke deal working with the EU. One that will enable our scientific community and businesses to have access to the world’s largest research collaboration programme, but also it gives us value for money for the taxpayer.
“For instance, we’re not paying for the years that we didn’t associate, there’s also a claw back mechanism so if there was a situation where we weren’t getting as much out of it as we were putting into it that could automatically kick in.
“The really good thing as well as we’ve managed to achieve in there that we have an over performance indicator. So it means if we over perform, we’re not penalised.”
Under the “bespoke scheme”, UK taxpayers will not pay for the time UK researchers have been excluded since 2021, with costs starting from January 2024.
According to No 10, UK researchers can apply for grants and bid to take part in projects with “certainty” that the UK will be participating as a fully associated member for the remaining life of the programme to 2027.
Both Rishi Sunak and EU Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen are encouraging UK scientists to apply with confidence from today and they agreed that the UK and EU will work together to boost participation.
Greg Clark, the Conservative chair of the commons science, innovation and technology committee, responded to the news by saying: “If the news of the UK returning to Horizon Europe is true, it will be a welcome boost for both UK and EU science.
“UK science always brings a lot to international collaborations. Everyone gains from excellent UK researchers working with others to advance knowledge.” | United Kingdom Politics |
At times like these, it’s worth reminding ourselves that the whole point of devolution was that it would empower local people.
But the signature policy of London’s devolved mayor – the expansion of the Ultra Low Emission Zone (Ulez) – has not only provoked extreme anxiety and anger among residents in London’s outer boroughs, and a feeling that Sadiq Khan has ridden roughshod over their objections. It has resulted in an unprecedented campaign of civil disobedience by local authorities refusing to facilitate the new scheme.
Indeed, the policy has not only been blamed for the failure of Labour to take Uxbridge in the recent by-election, but may also come to be seen as the beginning of the end for devolution itself. Let’s set aside the disastrous social and political divisions that devolution has wrought in Scotland. Can we honestly say that in England it has succeeded in advancing the last Labour government’s aims of bringing power back to communities? Or, indeed, of making politicians more accountable to the voters?
The thinking was straightforward, but also simplistic. Powerful, locally elected mayors would be democratic by virtue of their having been elected. Therefore everything that followed from that election, whatever policy the incumbent chose to pursue, would be democratic, too.
The Ulez debacle shows the clear limits of this idea. People will argue the pros and cons of the scheme. Those who object to it cite the cost to ordinary workers, the uncertain evidence used to justify it and, of course, the seeming inability of London’s mayor to view criticism of the project as anything other than a conspiracy theory. But it has also exposed huge flaws in the way that devolution works.
There is the serious democratic deficit Ulez has created. More than one million motorists living outside London may face the daily £12.50 charge if they enter the city. Many will work or shop regularly in London, but live outside its borders. Accordingly, they have no way of holding the mayor to account for a policy that may cost them and their families dear. What do the champions of devolution have to say to that?
Then there is the chaotic clash of wills between different local authorities, with nobody seemingly able or willing to resolve them. Most of the councils surrounding London, confident of their own democratic mandates, are point blank refusing to install cameras or warning signs for motorists heading into the city. In doing so, they are putting a question mark over the feasibility of the whole Ulez project.
These might be dismissed as minor concerns when set against the supposedly enormous benefits of devolution. Its supporters regularly raise the spectre of big, bad, unaccountable Westminster as a slum-dunk argument for the supremacy of devolved government.
But does anyone really think the SNP in Scotland or Khan in London have been significantly more responsive to the views of their voters than have the parties in Westminster? Have they been noticeably more willing to take responsibility for their failures? Or have they, instead, chosen to shift the blame for them onto the Government? In this case, the Government chose to rant and rave about Ulez expansion, but lacked the stomach to override Khan’s plan and prevent its imposition.
With the notable exception of the use of Section 35 powers to quash Nicola Sturgeon’s Gender Recognition Reform Bill, this follows a pattern of British ministers not wishing to rock the boat in Scotland and Wales, fearful of bringing down the ire of devolved politicians.
But when governments fail to rein in the excesses of the devolved authorities, they are letting power slip away, leading to a considerably less united Kingdom. Perhaps the most persuasive argument against an elected House of Lords is that it would create an unwelcome democratic rival to the Commons. Yet politicians seem to think nothing of setting up similar potential conflicts every time they vote to install a new metro mayor.
Britain right now does not have a strong international reputation for being particularly well run; in what way does the increasing number and powers of devolved mayoralties, and the consequent rise in policy clashes and court battles, help to restore it? It’s time to call a halt to the entire devolution experiment before it further damages our country. | United Kingdom Politics |
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has condemned Russian forces as "scumbag terrorists" after their "calculated" missile strike on a shopping centre in Ukraine.The leader said the attack in the central city of Kremenchuk was deliberate, not a mistake, and those culpable "should have no place on Earth".Earlier, he said more than 1,000 civilians had been inside the mall at the time of the strike."The mall is on fire, firefighters are trying to extinguish the fire, the number of victims is impossible to imagine," said the president, writing on the Telegram messaging app.He has since said: "Fortunately, as far as we know now, many people managed to get out [before the strike], they were assisted out [after the air raid siren]."But there were still people inside when it hit: employees and some visitors." Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player Ukrainian shopping centre in flames War 'turning in Russia's favour' as Putin to make first foreign trip since invasion - see live updates on Ukraine warDmytro Lunin, the governor of the Poltava region, insisted there was no military target nearby which Russia could have been aiming at. He said at least 13 people were killed and 40 injured by two missiles.The local mayor Vitaliy Meletskiy said the "very crowded" structure had no links to the armed forces.Video footage reportedly from inside the building moments after the attack showed scenes of panic as people ran through masses of debris to get out.One person shouted "is there anyone there?", while another called out for his mother, as smoke covered the area and shoppers appeared dazed.A rescue operation was under way and nine of the wounded were in a serious condition, said Kyrylo Tymoshenko, the deputy head of the Ukrainian presidential office.Kremenchuk, which is the site of Ukraine's biggest oil refinery, lies on the Dnipro river in the region of Poltava.Mr Zelenskyy stressed the shopping centre target presented "no threat to the Russian army" and had "no strategic value".He accused Russia of sabotaging "people's attempts to live a normal life, which make the occupiers so angry". "Russia continues to take out its impotence on ordinary civilians. It is useless to hope for decency and humanity on its part," the president said.G7 leaders, who are meeting in Germany, have described the attack as "abominable" and said in a statement: "Indiscriminate attacks on innocent civilians constitute a war crime. Russian President Putin and those responsible will be held to account."They added: "We will not rest until Russia ends its cruel and senseless war on Ukraine."Boris Johnson has condemned Mr Putin's "cruelty and barbarism" following the attack.Firefighters and soldiers pulled out mangled pieces of metal as they searched for survivors."We don't understand how many people could be remaining under the rubble," the regional rescue service chief said.There was no immediate comment from Russia, which denies deliberately targeting civilians.The industrial city had a population of 217,000 before Russia's invasion in February. Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player Russia takes city of Severodonetsk Read more:NATO to dramatically increase forces on high alert to over 300,000 from 40,000Overpowering stench of death as Kyiv mortuaries fill up with bodiesThe attack came as Russia launched an all-out assault on the last Ukrainian stronghold in the eastern Luhansk region, "pouring fire" on the city of Lysychansk from the ground and air, according to the local governor.Western leaders meeting at the G7 summit in Germany have pledged continued support for Kyiv, including more air defence systems, and further sanctions against Moscow. | Europe Politics |
Protesters shout slogans at an anti-government rally, amid the country's economic crisis, in Colombo, Sri Lanka, August 6, 2022. REUTERS/Kim Kyung-HoonRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comTOKYO, Aug 26 (Reuters) - Japan is seeking to organise a Sri Lanka creditors' conference, hoping it could help solve the South Asia nation's debt crisis, but uncertainties cloud the outlook for any talks, three people with knowledge of the planning said.Tokyo is open to hosting talks among all the creditor nations aimed at lifting Colombo from its worst debt crisis since independence, but it is not clear whether top creditor China would join and a lack of clarity remains about Sri Lanka's finances, one source told Reuters.Japan would be willing to chair such a meeting with China if that would speed up the process for addressing Sri Lanka's debt, estimated at $6.2 billion on a bilateral basis at the end of 2020, this source said.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comPresident Ranil Wickremesinghe told Reuters last week that Sri Lanka would ask Japan to invite the main creditor nations to talks on restructuring bilateral debts. He said he would discuss the issue with Prime Minister Fumio Kishida in Tokyo next month, when he is expected to attend the funeral of the assassinated former premier Shinzo Abe. read more Tokyo, the number two creditor, has a stake in rescuing Sri Lanka, not just to recoup its $3 billion in loans but also its diplomatic interest in checking China's growing presence in the region.S&P Global this month downgraded Sri Lanka's government bonds to default after it missed interest and principal payments. The island nation of 22 million people off India's southern tip, with debt at 114% of annual economic output, is in social and financial upheaval from the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on top of years of economic mismanagement.An International Monetary Fund (IMF) team met Wickremesinghe on Wednesday to discuss a bailout, including restructuring $29 billion in debt, as Colombo seeks a $3 billion IMF aid programme. read more The president met the same day with Japan's ambassador.Tokyo believes a new "platform" is needed to pull creditors together, the sources said."Sri Lanka is running out of time since it defaulted on its debt. The priority is for creditor nations to agree on an effective scheme," one source said."Japan is keen to move this forward. But it's not something Japan alone can raise its hand and push through," said the source, adding that the cooperation of other nations was crucial.Japan's Foreign Ministry declined to comment. Sri Lanka's central bank and Finance Ministry did not immediately respond to requests for comment. An IMF spokesperson declined to comment.NEW FRAMEWORK NEEDEDConcerns include rivalry and territorial tensions between big creditors China and India, while Sri Lanka would have to commit to reforming its finances and disclose more information about its debt, the sources said.Last month, shortly after Wickremesinghe took office when his predecessor fled the country, Chinese President Xi Jinping wrote to him that he was "ready to provide support and assistance to the best of my ability to President Wickremesinghe and the people of Sri Lanka in their efforts". read more But the sources said getting Beijing's cooperation on a debt restructuring was complicated by factors such as a large number of lenders and that China was baulking at taking a "haircut" on its loans and at reducing Colombo's debt burden.A Chinese foreign ministry spokesman told Reuters that Beijing was "willing to stand with relevant countries and international financial institutions and continue to play a positive role in helping Sri Lanka respond to its present difficulties, relieve its debt burden and realise sustainable development."Japan hopes to see a new debt restructuring framework resembling one set up by the Group of 20 big economies targeting low-income countries. Sri Lanka does not fall under this "common framework" because it is classified as a middle-income emerging country."It must be a platform where all creditor nations participate" to ensure they all shoulder a fair share in waiving debt, another source said. The third said, "Until these conditions are met, it would be difficult for any talks to succeed."The common framework, launched by the G20 and the Paris Club of rich creditor nations in 2020, provides debt relief mainly through extension in debt-payment deadlines and reduction in interest payments.Some people involved think an initial creditors' meeting could be held in September, but one source said it would "take a little while, possibly several months".Restructuring talks are only possible after the IMF scrutinises Sri Lanka's debt, the sources said.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by Tetsushi Kajimoto and Takaya Yamaguchi in Tokyo; Additional reporting by Yoshifumi Takemoto and Kentaro Sugiyama in Tokyo, Uditha Jayasinghe in Colombo, Eduardo Baptista in Beijing and David Lawder in Washington; Writing by Leika Kihara and Tetsushi Kajimoto; Editing by William MallardOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Asia Politics |
The Welsh government is to redefine women to include transgender females under planned new laws.
The proposal was revealed on Sunday in a leaked draft of its Gender Quotas Bill which proposes that half the candidates in any list to be members of the Senedd must be women.
For the purposes of the proposed legislation this includes transgender women, the report stated
The definition further stated that transgender meant “a person who is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning [their] sex to female by changing physiological or other attributes of sex”.
It also stated that a constituency returning officer could not challenge or make any inquiry in relation to a statement made by a candidate.
David TC Davies, the Welsh Secretary, told The Telegraph he had “grave concerns” about the report and was meeting members of various groups to discuss the proposals.
“One of my greatest fears is that the plan will have a detrimental impact on women’s rights across our country. Those rights have been hard fought for and I fear could now be undermined by the Labour-run Welsh Government’s ill-thought policy,” he said.
The plans echo those put forward by the Scottish Government to make it easier for people to legally change gender.
They were blocked by Alister Jack, the Scottish Secretary, who argued that the Bill watered down protections for single sex spaces and contravened UK-wide equality legislation.
Mark Drakeford, the First Minister of Wales, has long argued that he believes “transgender women are women”.
Last year he told the Senedd: “My starting point is the same as Penny Mordaunt’s - the UK minister responsible at the time - who said that the UK government’s starting point was that transgender women are women. That’s my starting point in this debate.
“It is a difficult area where people feel very strongly on different sides of an argument, and an argument that divides people who agree on most other things.
“In such a potentially divisive issue, the responsibility of elected representatives is not to stand on the certainties of their own convictions, but instead to work hard to look for opportunities for dialogue, to find ways of promoting understanding rather than conflict, and to demonstrate respect rather than to look for exclusion … to me, inclusivity is absolutely what we should be aiming for here.”
Bill ‘unfair’ to women
However, Cathay Larkman, Welsh co-ordinator of the Women’s Rights Network, said the move would undermine the Bill’s gender equality intent.
She said it was likely to see men self-identifying as women to greatly improve their chances of selection and muscling females out.
“Firstly, it undermines the rights of half of the population of Wales. Secondly, they are hijacking legislation that should benefit women and increase female participation in public life in order to embed a toxic and misogynist ideology,” she said.
“Thirdly, they don’t have the legal powers to push this through anyway and are making a calculated risk that no one will oppose them.
“We are putting the Welsh Government on notice. Women will organise to fight this attack on our rights. This is a first step towards full self-ID in law.
“It would introduce gender self-identification which has serious implications for women, and girls in particular, with regards to single sex spaces and services, including in changing rooms, sports, same-sex intimate care, hospital wards, rape crisis support and domestic violence centres.”
A Welsh Government spokesman said the leaked draft was not the latest version of the report and the wording of the Bill was not correct. She would not say whether that related to the section on transgender women.
“Our proposed model for quotas is designed to maximise the chances of achieving a Senedd comprised of at least 50 per cent women. Work is ongoing on the Bill,” she said. | United Kingdom Politics |
It was, according to Scotland’s foremost comic book creator, “madness”.
Mark Millar, the writer of Kick-Ass, Jupiter’s Legacy and Ultimate X-Men, was reacting to a new billboard advertisement from the UK government, which could be seen as suggesting the timeless mischief-maker Dennis the Menace was created in London.
“Dennis the Menace was created in 1951 by Edinburgh cartoonist for the Beano, published every week by Dundee’s DC Thomson,” Millar wrote on Tuesday morning on X, formerly Twitter. “He’s as Scottish as Sir Sean.”
Millar was not alone in expressing derision at the advert, part of the “Made in the UK, sold to the world” campaign run by the Department for Business and Trade.
It depicts Dennis and Gnasher alongside the headline “Created in London. Unleashed in more than 100 countries” and in smaller print clarifies that it is referring to the animated television series produced from DC Thomson’s Fleet Street office.
But this distinction did not lessen the ire of many Beano fans, who on X described the advert variously as “insulting”, “disrespectful” and “predictable”.
Chris Law, the Scottish National party MP for Dundee West, called the campaign “cultural appropriation” and “utter garbage”. “Perhaps before the UK government start appropriating local Dundee created characters in the Beano they ought to do a bit of basic research,” he said.
Chris Murray, the world’s first professor of comic studies at Dundee University, said the response was understandable in the wider context of a London-centric view of UK creativity. “The poster is about Beano Studios in Fleet Street, so in that sense it’s not inaccurate. On the surface it looks a claim is being made about the character of Dennis, who was created in Dundee and appears in the Beano, and has done since 1951, so I can understand the sensitivities.
“Dundee is an incredibly creative place, and has been an innovative centre for the production of comics and video games for decades, but people tend to think of London as the centre of the creative industries. If there’s a sensitivity, it’s the lack of acknowledgement that there are other creative centres around the UK.”
While the CGI Dennis is voiced by the actor Freddie Fox, with an English accent, Murray says the original comic version was not specifically Scottish, unlike characters such as the Broons and Oor Wullie.
He said: “The origin was definitely Scottish, but Dennis the comic character has been embraced across the UK and children feel an affinity with him no matter where they are. We can celebrate and acknowledge the international success of the animated series and Beano Studios, while also remembering the Scottish origins of this fantastic and beloved character.”
A government spokesperson said: “The Dennis and Gnasher animated series was created in London, based on the brilliant Beano cartoon that originated in Dundee. In this way it is the perfect representation of the ‘Made in the UK, sold to the world’ campaign, which seeks to highlight success stories from across our great union of nations.
“We work closely with businesses like Beano to tell their startup story, demonstrating the support the UK government provides to help companies grow and export around the world.” | United Kingdom Politics |
India and China are among several countries taking part in Russia’s weeklong joint military drills scheduled to get underway on Thursday in the east of the country, according to Russia’s state-owned news agency Tass. While India has previously taken part in multinational military drills in Russia — an Indian contingent was part of Zapad military exercises held in September 2021 — analysts say its participation in the “Vostok-2022” military exercises in the midst of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine reaffirms New Delhi’s friendly ties with Moscow despite a tightening strategic partnership with the United States. “India’s participation in exercises in Russia is not unusual, but this time, they are also making a political point,” said Manoj Joshi, distinguished fellow at the Observer Research Foundation in New Delhi. “New Delhi is emphasizing that it will adhere to the independent position that it has taken in the wake of the Ukraine crisis and continue to remain neutral between the U.S. and Russia.” India has refrained from condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and has not joined Western sanctions against Moscow. Its oil imports from Moscow have risen sharply this year as it takes advantage of deep discounts. India has defended its oil purchases as necessary for what it says is an energy deficient, developing country like India. “We have been very honest about our interests,” India’s Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar said earlier this month in Bangkok. “I have a country with a per capita income of $2,000. These aren’t people who can afford higher energy prices.”
Although India is currently purchasing weapons from other countries, including Israel and the United States, much of its existing weaponry is of Russian origin.
Analysts point out that India is unlikely to turn away from Russia anytime soon.
“India has an important relationship with Moscow with regard to defense and it has really no direct stake in the Ukraine crisis,” said Joshi. “If our national interest is served by maintaining ties with Russia, we will do so — that is India’s position.” For the time being, Washington appears to have accepted India’s position. Questioned about India’s participation in the Vostok military exercises earlier this month, State Department spokesman, Ned Price, said that the U.S. recognizes that reorienting a country’s foreign policy is a long-term challenge. “At the same time, we also recognize that there are countries around the world that have longstanding relationships, including security relationships, with countries like Russia, for example,” he told reporters at a press briefing. “Reorienting a country’s foreign policy or a country’s security establishment or defense procurement practices away from a country like Russia is not something that we can do overnight.” However, there are questions about how long India can continue to walk the middle ground between the United States and Russia amid the deepening tensions between the two countries. Analysts in Washington say that the U.S. appears to be taking a long view, with an eye toward trying to convince New Delhi that a long-term security partnership with Moscow is untenable. “Washington certainly worries about New Delhi’s enduring security partnership with Moscow,” said Michael Kugelman, deputy director of the Asia program at the Wilson Center. “In the coming months, we can expect Washington to make the case to New Delhi that eventually Russia, sanctioned and cash-strapped, will no longer have the capacity to keep manufacturing and exporting weaponry to India.” FILE - Soldiers stand next to anti-aircraft weapons on a beach near one of the venues of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) Summit, in Cavelossim in the western state of Goa, India, Oct. 14, 2016. India for its part has maintained a low profile about the Russian drills — there has been no official word on its participation but sources in the Defense Ministry have confirmed that a contingent from India will take part. India’s military partnership with the United States is growing rapidly amid mutual worries over China. In mid-October, India and the U.S. will hold a joint military exercise as part of an annual military exercise known as “Yudh Abhyas” or “War Practice.” The location of the exercises — which according to reports will be 100 kilometers from the disputed India China border — is significant. For New Delhi, striking a balance between Russia and its partners in the Quad grouping that consists of India, U.S., Japan and Australia is also challenging. According to a report in the Deccan Herald newspaper, India will not take part in naval drills in the Sea of Japan that are part of the military exercises. New Delhi has close ties with Tokyo, which along with the U.S. and Australia is an important partner in efforts to counter China’s expansionism in the Indo-Pacific.
The strengthening Russia-China relationship could also emerge as a concern for New Delhi as tensions between India and Beijing over their border disputes show no signs of abating. While Beijing has joined drills with Moscow earlier, its participation in the Vostok military exercises reflects growing defense ties between the two countries amid tensions with the West, analysts say. “It is the first time the PLA (People’s Liberation Army) has sent its Army, Navy and Air Force at the same time to a joint drill with Russia,” points out Bonnie S. Glaser, director with the Asia Program at the German Marshall Fund of the United States. “With the alignment between Moscow and Beijing growing closer, it can be expected that bilateral military ties will also likely increase.”
From Russia’s point of view, the participation of both India and China, who have tense bilateral ties with each other, underscores the country’s efforts to strengthen ties with both the large Asian economies.
Jagannath Panda, head of the Stockholm Center for South Asian and Indo-Pacific Affairs said Moscow is hoping to ensure “Eurasian unity” against the West, “owing to its traditional partnership with India and the ideological friendship with China.
“Such a role has served Moscow well amidst Ukraine, as both countries have refrained from condemning Russian actions,” Panda said. | India Politics |
Rishi Sunak is set to overturn the ban on building new onshore wind farms to stave off a rebellion from Tory MPs, The Telegraph can reveal.
Ministers are poised to unveil changes to planning rules that will free up councils to give the green light to proposed turbines where there is broad public support.
The move comes as MPs prepare to vote on the Government’s contentious Energy Bill on Tuesday after returning from their summer break.
A group of Tories is backing an amendment tabled by Sir Alok Sharma, the former Cop26 president, that would scrap the ban on new onshore wind.
It has attracted signatories from all wings of the party including Liz Truss, the former prime minister. Rebels are “confident” it is destined to pass.
Labour supports the proposal, which means only six more Tory backbenchers would need to vote in favour to overturn the Government’s majority.
The Telegraph understands ministers have been locked in talks with MPs for almost a week over a compromise deal to avoid a bruising Commons defeat.
Negotiations are set to continue on Monday as the final details are thrashed out, especially on how quickly the Government will be able to legally scrap the ban.
But plans are being drawn up for a minister to submit a written statement to the Commons this week committing to change the current planning rules.
Having secured the necessary guarantees, the rebels would then drop their amendment.
It would end the situation, which has been written into law since 2015, where an objection from just a single resident can prevent a wind farm from being built.
Government sources said the changes would allow councils to “more flexibly address the planning impacts of onshore wind projects as identified by local communities”.
One Tory MP who is supporting the amendment said No 10 had little choice but to act, given it was supported by “senior people from all wings of the party”.
Another added: “It’s great to see ministers listening to concerns and, providing local communities are happy, it will make net zero easier and cheaper too.”
The announcement will mark the second time that Mr Sunak has been forced to act on the issue after coming under pressure from his own MPs.
When he took office last October, he pledged to keep the ban in place – reversing the decision taken by Ms Truss just weeks earlier to end it.
But in the face of a sizeable rebellion from backbenchers, he performed an about-turn on that position in December and said the embargo would be lifted.
That in turn prompted a backlash from Tory MPs who oppose the construction of new onshore wind farms and wanted the moratorium to stay in force.
The Prime Minister promised them that rules would be drawn up to ensure local communities are fully consulted before any new project can be built.
Ministers also began to work on plans for people who live near new turbines to be compensated in the form of cheaper electricity.
But since then there has been little progress on the issue, prompting Tory MPs to force the issue again by tabling their amendment to the Energy Bill.
Sir Alok said: “The Government committed to change planning rules by the end of April 2023 to overturn the de facto ban on onshore wind but this has not happened to date.
“This amendment therefore seeks merely to deliver on the Government’s own promise and help to unlock investment in one of the cheapest forms of energy, and ultimately bring down household bills and improve the UK’s energy security.”
Under the current rules, councils can only approve new sites if they can show that local concerns over their construction have been “fully addressed”.
The effect of the wording is that a single objection can prevent a project from going ahead.
Ministers are set to loosen the requirements so they can be built “when it has been demonstrated that the planning impacts have been satisfactorily addressed”.
The new guidance will stress that developers must “act on concerns and suggestions” from residents and that councils can only approve them where “there is community support”.
Under the changes, local authorities will also be given more discretion to choose where new onshore wind projects can be built within their boundaries. | United Kingdom Politics |
A Cabinet shake-up made in California… but Rishi's looking long-term when he needs quick wins: JASON GROVES analyses Sunak's reshuffle
The origins of today’s reshuffle date back almost 20 years to when Rishi Sunak arrived to study at Stanford University in the heart of Silicon Valley.
The next few years would prove formative for the Fulbright Scholar and future prime minister, who turned up in California as the internet revolution was getting under way.
Not only did he meet his future wife, but his experience, first as a Stanford student and later as a private equity manager operating in the tech boom, was to take a powerful hold on his political and economic outlook.
As chancellor, during the leadership campaign and as Prime Minister he has spoken repeatedly of his ‘inspiring’ experience in California, his belief that innovation, science and technology can revolutionise Britain and his dream of building another Silicon Valley here in the UK.
It is certainly a bold vision, which few on the Conservative benches would quibble with in principle.
As chancellor, during the leadership campaign and as Prime Minister he has spoken repeatedly of his ‘inspiring’ experience in California. Pictured: Sunak hosts cabinet today
But it is also a long-term strategy at a time when the Tory party desperately needs some short-term wins to start turning round a daunting Labour lead in the polls.
One minister warned there was a real danger that the shake-up would backfire and encourage Whitehall to move even more slowly.
‘We have probably only got six months to get things done before we are into the election countdown and the system just refuses to play ball with anything,’ the source said.
‘I can’t really see that having a big Whitehall shake-up will do anything but reduce the very limited time available to make a difference.
‘You will have weeks now – probably months – of people arguing about where they should sit and who’s responsible for what.
‘Everything that was being worked on will have to be looked at again. Obviously the PM wants to get on with action in these areas, but it feels like a recipe for delay.’
The shake-up will split the sprawling Business Department into three, with former culture secretary Michelle Donelan taking up a role as Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology. Effectively her job is to create the new Silicon Valley.
Lucy Frazer, Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport speaks to Prime Minister Rishi Sunak as she arrives to attend cabinet in 10 Downing Street
Mr Sunak picked trade minister Greg Hands to replaceNadhim Zahawi as Tory chairman. Mr Hands is an experienced campaigner and trusted media performer
Grant Shapps will look after energy security and net zero, while trade secretary Kemi Badenoch will take on what is left of the former business department.
Lucy Frazer takes over at culture, media and sport, although the loss of the huge digital brief – with responsibility for broadband roll out and online safety – means the role returns to its ‘Ministry of Fun’ origins.
The plans did not impress former culture secretary Nadine Dorries, who tweeted: ‘Sad to break up DCMS, because it works. The department has tragically lacked profile of late despite being most effective in Whitehall.
‘Track record in tech, digital, gigabit roll out, telecoms, data speaks for itself. This along with maths to 18 – it’s like (Dominic) Cummings never left!’
Certainly, the former No 10 aide Cummings shared an obsession with science and technology. The fact that Mr Sunak appears to have sounded out Michael Gove to run the department will also fuel fears that Mr Cummings still has influence at some level – an idea vehemently denied by those close to the PM.
A bigger concern in Whitehall is whether the new set-up will work, and whether the PM had learned the lessons of recent history.
One senior civil servant said the PM had ‘done a Gordon Brown and recreated Dius’ – a reference to the late, unlamented, Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills, which was put out of its misery in 2009 after just two years.
‘It was, by a distance, the worst department I ever had to engage with,’ the official said. ‘No one knew what it was for and it quickly became a complete basket case.’
Mr Sunak, naturally, sees things differently, arguing that his new set-up will help improve energy security and drive growth.
No 10 acknowledged that the changes would not be a ‘silver bullet’.
Mr Sunak met his future wife Akshata Murthy at Stanford Univeristy
The PM said the creation of an energy department ‘means we can produce more energy here at home, giving us more independence and security, and it means we can transition to cleaner forms of energy as we hit our net-zero ambitions and create jobs in the process’.
The immediate trigger for today’s reshuffle was the sacking last month of Tory chairman Nadhim Zahawi over his tax affairs.
Mr Sunak picked trade minister Greg Hands to replace him. Mr Hands is an experienced campaigner and trusted media performer.
But his status as a leading Remainer, who was an acolyte of George Osborne, raised eyebrows among some Tory MPs.
‘What does a southern Remainer with a safe seat in Chelsea know about fighting a seat like mine?’ asked one Red Wall MP.
There is a school of thought that Mr Sunak boxed himself in too tightly in his choice of party chairman following the debacle of Mr Zahawi’s departure.
One Tory source said: ‘He wanted someone super-loyal, which ruled out people like Penny (Mordaunt) and Priti (Patel). They also had to have no skeletons in their closet after Zahawi. And they had to be reasonably competent.
‘The trouble is, by the time you’ve done the Venn diagram of people who are loyal, clean, competent and willing to do it, you haven’t got that many options left.
‘I’m not sure winning elections was given the priority it should have had, given that’s basically the job.’
However, Mr Sunak appeared to see the criticism coming. By mid-afternoon, No 10 announced that the outspoken MP for Ashfield Lee Anderson would be brought in as deputy chairman, providing some Brexity grit to supplement the new chairman’s smooth southern charm.
Mr Anderson, a former Labour councillor, is a no-nonsense figure whose baiting of the woke Left delights his fellow Red Wall MPs (while appalling some on the Left of the party).
Last month he ended up in a scuffle with notorious anti-Brexit campaigner Steve Bray after playfully stealing his hat. If he has been to California, it did not rub off. | United Kingdom Politics |
26 min agoRussian forces withdraw from Snake IslandFrom CNN's Olga Voitovych in Kyiv and Anna Chernova in DubaiRussian forces have left Snake Island in the Black Sea, the Ukrainian Armed Forces said Thursday, after they carried out what they said was a “successful” operation.On Monday, the Ukrainian military said it hit a second missile system on the island, as well as multiple Russian personnel in their efforts to keep them at bay.In a short post on Telegram the Operation Command South on Thursday, the Ukrainian Armed Forces said that “the enemy hastily evacuated the remnants of the garrison in two speedboats and probably left the island.”Andriy Yermak, Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine, said in a Telegram post that Ukraine's armed forces had "conducted a remarkable operation."Early on Thursday Ukrainian Armed Forces said the results of an overnight operation were being assessed, but were viewed as a “success” as Russian forces were forced to evacuate using speedboats.However, Russia gave a slightly different narrative of the events on the island.Lieutenant General of the Russian Armed Forces, and spokesperson of the Russian army, Igor Konashenkov said at a briefing that Russian forces left the island "as a gesture of goodwill."He added that “the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation finished fulfilling the assigned tasks in Snake Island and withdrew the garrison that had been operating there.”Konashenkov intimated that the removal of Russian troops should allow an easing for the passage of grain, “this solution will prevent Kyiv from speculating on an impending grocery crisis citing the inability to export grain due to total control of the northwestern part of the Black Sea by Russia.”A satellite image shows an overview of Snake Island, Ukraine, on May 12. (Maxar Technologies/Reuters)Some context: Snake Island is a small but strategic island in the Black Sea. It was the scene of one of the opening salvos of the war in Ukraine, with demands from a Russian warship calling for the Ukrainian defenders to surrender, who boldly replied with “Russian warship go f*** yourself.”This post has been updated.1 hr 9 min agoHuman Rights Watch demands probe into Kremenchuk bombing as “potential war crime”From Ingrid Formanek in Kyiv and Seb Shukla in LondonA Russian missile approaches a shopping mall in Kremenchuk, Ukraine, in this still image taken from handout CCTV footage released on June 28. (zelenskiy_official/Instagram/Reuters)The bombing of the mall in Kremenchuk, central Ukraine, “should be investigated as a potential war crime,” Human Rights Watch (HRW) said on Thursday.In a report published on Thursday, Yulia Gorbunova, a senior Ukraine researcher at HRW added that “if the Russian authorities don’t, the International Criminal Court and other investigative bodies should.”In a thorough report into the bombing, HRW spoke with 15 people to publish their report, including the injured, doctors, mall staff, other witnesses and local officials.Gorbunova added “the civilians of Kremenchuk who suffered such an intense loss from June 27 strike, deserve justice. There needs to be a thorough investigation, and those responsible should be held to account.”3 hr 13 min agoNervous Lithuanians are signing up for a border militiaFrom CNN's Nina dos Santos and Lindsay Isaac in Kybartai, LithuaniaHaving a neighbor like Russia at the end of the street means 59-year-old Vytas Grudzinskas doesn't get much rest. "I can see the soldiers best at night," he says, pointing to a patch of green behind his neighbor's garden."They have a shooting range they use over there behind that field. In the afternoon, you can hear the guns," he said.Grudzinskas has his own weapon, a machine gun, which he keeps locked in a cupboard, close at hand — although his guard dog, a Maltese terrier, might be less effective in battle.The small city of Kybartai where Grudzinska lives lies inside both NATO and the European Union but also along one of the world's hottest borders — the Suwalki corridor. This tract of land, about 60 miles wide, is sandwiched between Russia's heavily fortified, nuclear-armed, Baltic bolthole of Kaliningrad and its ally, Belarus. The pass — viewed by many analysts as a weak point within NATO — is caught in a pincer grip between Kremlin troops. The fear is that if Ukraine fell, Russia would advance through it next, possibly cutting off the Baltic states in days.The scars of Soviet occupation run deep in this part of Europe. Tens of thousands of Lithuanians were forcibly deported to gulags in Siberia and the far north by the Soviets in the 1940s and 1950s. Almost 30,000 Lithuanian prisoners perished in the forced labor camps."My father was sent to Sakhalin in Russia's far west for 15 years," said Grudzinskas. "He ate grass the first year to survive."So, when Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, Grudzinskas joined Lithuania's century-old volunteer militia — the Riflemen — and took up arms in his own backyard.Read the full story here.4 hr 3 min agoIt's 9 a.m. in Kyiv. Here's what you need to knowRussian President Vladimir Putin issued a fresh warning over Finland and Sweden's bids to join NATO, saying while Russia was not bothered if the two countries joined the bloc, it would "respond symmetrically" to any military or infrastructure build up.Here are the latest headlines. NATO enlargement: NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg called the formal invitation from the alliance to Sweden and Finland to join the defense bloc "a historic decision." The invitation sparks a seven-step accession process. Meanwhile, Putin warned Russia would respond in kind to any "threats." Eastern flank bolstered: NATO's leaders also unveiled a significant strengthening of forces along the bloc's eastern edge, with President Joe Biden announcing the US would bolster its force posture in several European countries. Latvia's Prime Minister called the decision a "very, very clear signal to Moscow." Putin denies mall attack: The Russian President denied Moscow was behind a strike on a shopping center in central Ukraine that killed at least 18 people with dozens missing and wounded. "The Russian army does not attack any civilian site," he claimed. Russia's Defense Ministry previously said it hit military targets but video from the city of Kremenchuk shows the mall obliterated by a missile.Mykolaiv missile attacks: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said 10 Russian missiles hit "civilian targets" in the southern city on Wednesday, killing at least five people. The assault "proves for absolutely everyone in the world that the pressure on Russia is not enough," Zelensky said in his nightly address."Constant shelling" of Lysychansk: Russian forces attempting to storm the eastern Ukrainian city — where some 15,000 people remain — are maintaining "constant shelling," the head of the Luhansk region military administration said. "Now the density of fire is so strong. So much that we can only put 30 people on a bus," the military chief said.Widodo meets with Zelensky and Putin: Indonesian President Joko Widodo traveled to Kyiv on Wednesday, where he met with Zelensky and extended a personal invitation to the G20 summit in Bali in November. He is expected to travel to Moscow on Thursday to meet Putin and said he hoped to "build dialogue, stop war and build peace."3 hr 19 min ago10 Russian missiles hit "civilian targets" in Mykolaiv, Zelensky saysFrom CNN's Mohammed TawfeeqRescuers work at a residential building hit by a Russian military strike in Mykolaiv, Ukraine, on June 29. (State Emergency Service of Ukraine/Reuters)Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said 10 Russian missiles hit "civilian targets" in the southern city of Mykolaiv on Wednesday, killing at least five people.The assault "proves for absolutely everyone in the world that the pressure on Russia is not enough," Zelensky said in his nightly address."There were also strikes at Ochakiv, Dnipro, the Russian shelling of the Kharkiv region, Sumy region, Donbas."Zelensky also said the situation in Lysychansk, Avdiivka, and communities in the Bakhmut direction "remains extremely brutal, very difficult.""We are doing everything we can to provide our military with modern artillery systems to respond properly to the occupiers," he said.Some context: Mykolaiv mayor Oleksandr Sienkevych on Wednesday said there were "only 18 days" since the start of the invasion that the southern Ukrainian city was not fired upon with missiles or cluster shells. More than 114 residents had died due to Russian attacks in that time, he said. It was not clear if that number included all casualties cited by Zelensky later that day. 6 hr 47 min agoRussian military will take "years" to recover, raising nuclear risk, says US intelligence chiefFrom CNN's Katie Bo LillisThe US intelligence community assesses that it will take “years” for the Russian military to recover from the damage it has sustained in carrying out its war in Ukraine, according to the director for national intelligence Avril Haines.“Their ground forces have now been degraded so much that we expect it will take years for them to recover in many ways,” she told a conference in Washington, DC on Wednesday.That could push Russia to become more reliant on "asymmetric tools" such as cyberattacks, efforts to try to control energy, or even nuclear weapons in order to project "power and influence," she said.Grim assessment: Haines said Russia is beginning to turn its focus to the Donetsk region. The intelligence community believes Russia will struggle to overtake the eastern province — as it is close to achieving in neighboring Luhansk — but that Russian President Vladimir Putin likely believes time is on Moscow's side because he thinks the West will eventually tire of supporting Ukraine. “The consensus is that the war in Ukraine will go on for an extended period of time,” Haines said, acknowledging the US assessment of the situation is “grim.”Three scenarios: Haines said the intelligence community sees three likely scenarios that could come into focus in the coming weeks and months.“The most likely is that the conflict remains a grinding struggle in which the Russians make incremental gains, but no breakthrough,” she said. Under that scenario, the Russian military will have secured Luhansk and much of Donetsk by the fall, as well as solidifying control of southern Ukraine.The other scenarios are that Russia could achieve a breakthrough and refocus on Kyiv or Odesa; or, finally, that Ukraine could stabilize the front line and begin to make smaller gains, likely in Kherson or elsewhere in southern Ukraine.8 hr 7 min agoNATO bolstering eastern flank sends "very clear signal to Moscow," Latvian Prime Minister saysFrom CNN's Jennifer Hansler and Kylie AtwoodLatvian Prime Minister Krišjānis Kariņš hailed the decisions made by NATO leaders in Madrid to bolster its presence on the alliance's eastern flank, calling it a "very, very clear signal to Moscow." In an interview with CNN Wednesday, the Baltic state leader noted that "in a sense, everything that we've been arguing for has been clearly heard," saying the change in posture is "a change from a tripwire defense to a forward defense.""Until now, many NATO leaders have repeated and repeated that NATO will be defending and will defend every inch of NATO territory," Kariņš told CNN. "Now ... there's action behind those words."Kariņš said he would like to see support for Ukraine move even more quickly, because "the faster we in NATO can provide weapons, munitions and training, the sooner the war will come to an end.""I think a diplomatic solution will be reached once Russia realizes it is losing or has lost the war and then Russia will come to the table," he said.Some context: Speaking at the NATO summit in Madrid on Wednesday, President Joe Biden said the United States would establish a permanent headquarters for the Fifth Army Corps in Poland and enhance rotational deployments to the Baltic states. Latvia is one of the Baltic states, and shares land borders with both Russia and Belarus.8 hr agoRussia not bothered by Sweden and Finland joining NATO, Putin saysFrom CNN's Masha AngelovaRussia’s President Vladimir Putin says Russia is not bothered if Sweden and Finland join NATO but warns they will respond in kind to any “threats.”“There is nothing that could bother us about Sweden and Finland joining NATO. If they want to join, please. Only we must clearly and precisely understand — while there was no threat before, in the case of military contingents and military infrastructure being deployed there, we will have to respond symmetrically and raise the same threats in those territories from where threats have arisen for us,” Putin said at a news conference following the Caspian Summit in Turkmenistan on Wednesday. Putin added, however, that the NATO expansion would bring "tensions." "Everything was good with us, but now there’ll be some tensions — that's obvious; it's impossible to be without," he said.NATO expansion: Sweden and Finland are set formally to end decades of neutrality and join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), in a historic breakthrough for the alliance that deals a blow to Russian President Vladimir Putin.The last major hurdle to the two nations' entry to the bloc was removed when Turkey dropped its opposition on Tuesday. That breakthrough came during a NATO summit in Madrid that has already become one of the most consequential meetings in the history of the military alliance.3 hr 10 min agoPutin denies Russia was behind deadly attack on shopping center in central UkraineFrom CNN's Arnaud Siad and Olena MankovskaAn aerial view of debris removal works at a destroyed shopping mall targeted by a Russian missile strike in Kremenchuk, Ukraine, on June 29. (Metin Aktas/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images)Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday denied that Russia was behind a strike on a shopping center in Kremenchuk, central Ukraine, that left at least 18 dead and dozens missing and wounded. "The Russian army does not attack any civilian site. We don’t have the need for this. We have every capability to detect specific locations; and thanks to our high-precision long-range weapons we are achieving our goals,” Putin said, at a news conference following a meeting of the "Caspian five" leaders — Russia, Azerbaijan, Iran, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan — in Ashgabat. More background: On its Telegram channel, the Russian Defense Ministry earlier said Russian "Aerospace Forces launched a strike with high-precision air-based weapons on hangars with weapons and ammunition received from the United States and European countries," hitting a plant of "road machines.""As a result of a high-precision strike, Western-made weapons and ammunition, concentrated in the storage area for further shipment to the Ukrainian group of troops in Donbas, were hit," the ministry said.The ministry blamed "the detonation of stored ammunition for Western weapons" for causing a fire in what it described as a "non-functioning" neighboring shopping mall.A view of the explosion at the Kremenchuk shopping mall, Ukraine, in this still image taken from handout CCTV footage released on June 28. (zelenskiy_official/Instagram/Reuters)Video from Kremenchuk shows that a shopping mall in the heart of the city was obliterated by one of the two missiles that were fired. Despite an air raid siren, dozens of people were still inside the mall when the missile struck.It's unclear what "road machine" plant the Russian Defense Ministry is referring to. | Europe Politics |
LONDON -- Before he hit America, Rupert Murdoch ripped through Britain’s media like a tornado.
His newspapers changed the political and cultural weather and swung elections. His satellite television channels upended the staid broadcasting scene.
Journalists and politicians in the U.K. both hailed and reviled the 92-year-old mogul after he announced Thursday that he was stepping down as leader of his companies Fox and News Corp., handing control to his son Lachlan.
For The Times of London, which he owns, Murdoch was “a trailblazer who changed the media.” Former Prime Minister Boris Johnson said the tycoon “did more than any press baron in the last 100 years to promote the cause of the global free media that is indispensable for democracy and progress.”
But to his critics, Murdoch was an unaccountable, malevolent presence in British life. Nathan Sparkes of Hacked Off, a press reform group that aims to curb tabloid wrongdoing, said Murdoch “presided over a company where widespread illegality occurred and was subsequently covered up.” Ex-Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn argued that Murdoch’s outlets had “poisoned global democracy and spread disinformation on a mass scale.”
U.K. Treasury chief Jeremy Hunt told LBC radio: “He is someone who, love him or loathe him, had a defining influence on all of our lives over the last half-century.”
The Australian upstart was all but unknown in Britain when he bought flagging Sunday newspaper the News of the World in 1969, acquiring daily paper The Sun soon after. A hands-on owner, he reinvigorated Britain’s stodgy, class-ridden newspaper scene with papers that embraced sports, celebrity, prize giveaways and sex — most infamously with The Sun’s topless “Page 3 girls.”
In a 1989 BBC interview, Murdoch put his success down to his antipodean roots, saying Australians came to the U.K. with “greater determination and greater energy,” unfettered by respect for “the rules of the ‘old world.’”
“We did things that people said couldn’t be done,” he said.
Populist, pomposity-puncturing and patriotic, Murdoch’s tabloids undeniably had flair. Critics deplored headlines like “Up yours, Delors,” directed at then-European Commission President Jacques Delors, and “Gotcha!” — the Sun’s reaction when a British submarine sank the Argentine cruiser Belgrano, killing more than 300 sailors, during the 1982 Falklands War.
The Sun’s coverage of the 1989 Hillsborough stadium disaster, in which 96 Liverpool soccer fans were killed, sparked outrage by making false allegations against the victims. More than three decades later, many Liverpudlians still refuse to read The Sun.
But politicians from both right and left courted and feared Murdoch, who added The Times and Sunday Times to his stable in 1981.
An arch-conservative who also hates the establishment, he was an enthusiastic supporter through the 1980s of Conservative leader Margaret Thatcher, who shared Murdoch’s enmity toward powerful trade unions. After Thatcher’s Conservative successor John Major unexpectedly triumphed in the 1992 election, the tabloid boasted: “It’s the Sun wot won it.”
Tony Blair’s success in securing Murdoch’s backing helped Blair’s Labour Party win a landslide victory in 1997. Like other politicians, Blair denied giving Murdoch anything in return for his support — though plenty of skeptics doubted that.
“There was no deal on issues to do with the media with Rupert Murdoch, or indeed with anybody else, either express or implied,” Blair told a 2012 inquiry into media ethics, sparked by revelations that rocked Murdoch’s U.K. empire.
In 2011 it emerged that employees of the News of the World had eavesdropped on the phones of celebrities, politicians, royals and even a teenage murder victim. Murdoch was forced to shut the newspaper, several executives were put on trial and former editor Andy Coulson went to prison.
Since then, Murdoch’s News Corp. has paid tens of millions in compensation to alleged victims, including many who say they were targeted by The Sun. Prince Harry is among celebrities currently suing The Sun over alleged hacking, which the paper has never admitted.
Murdoch has condemned the phone hacking and other media misdeeds but claims he was unaware of its scope and blamed a small number of rogue staff.
A newspaperman at heart, Murdoch sensed by the 1980s that the media was changing and that pay television would be a central plank of the future. He launched satellite broadcaster Sky Television from a London industrial estate in 1989 on what he admitted was a “wing and a prayer.”
Sky nearly collapsed early on but was salvaged when Murdoch secured the rights to show live Premier League soccer matches in 1992. Sports helped the company, later known as BSkyB, become a British broadcasting behemoth.
But the phone-hacking scandal forced Murdoch to drop a bid to take full control of Sky, in which he held a roughly 40% share. He sold his stake in the broadcaster to Comcast in 2018.
Murdoch still owns the Times, Sunday Times and Sun newspapers and struggling news channel Talk TV, but many industry-watchers suspect Lachlan Murdoch, who has much less interest in newspapers than his father, will eventually jettison the British papers.
For now, Rupert Murdoch remains a magnet for the powerful, and those who seek power, in Britain. The guest list for his summer party in June included Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, many members of his Cabinet and opposition Labour Party leader Keir Starmer.
___
Associated Press climate and environmental coverage receives funding from the Quadrivium foundation, founded by James and Kathryn Murdoch. More information about AP climate initiative can be found here. The AP is solely responsible for all content. | United Kingdom Politics |
KEY POINTSThe decision will enable the Russian president to avoid direct confrontation with the WestG20 host Indonesia is hoping to put food and energy security at the center of the discussionIts president has expressed frustration that geopolitical tensions may overshadow the prospects of the summitWhile the announcement that Russian President Vladimir Putin will not attend the G20 summit has ended months of speculation and may be seen as a major win by the U.S. and its allies, global friction due to the Ukraine war and Moscow's enduring relationships with some members is expected to make the final communiqué at the leaders' meet a tricky challenge.Putin will not attend the G20 summit to be held on the Indonesian island of Bali on November 15-16, according to the Russian embassy in Indonesia."I can confirm that (foreign minister) Sergei Lavrov will lead the Russian delegation to the G20. President Putin's program is still being worked out, he could participate virtually," said Yulia Tomskaya, the embassy's chief of protocol, told AFP.The Kremlin's decision will enable the Russian president to avoid a possible confrontation with the West and potential embarrassment over Moscow's war in Ukraine.While the news of Putin not attending the summit will come as a major win for the West, which has been seeking to isolate Russia for its invasion of Ukraine, the Jakarta Post on Thursday reported that the G20 will struggle to reach an agreement on a final communiqué at its leaders' summit. Officials are yet to reach a consensus on many points, including wording on the Ukraine war, a German official told the outlet Wednesday.This is evident from the lack of cohesion seen during various ministerial conferences and the fact that the forum is yet to announce a majority decision outlining the key issues to be discussed at the meeting.Indonesian President Joko Widodo, who is hosting the summit, has already expressed his frustration that geopolitical tensions may overshadow the prospects of the summit."The G20 is not meant to be a political forum," Widodo told the Financial Times on Monday. "It's meant to be about economics and development."Indonesia is hoping to put food and energy security at the center of next week's discussions — two issues that have become global concerns due to the Russian war in Ukraine. The G20 nations account for more than 80% of the world's gross domestic product (GDP) and 60% of the global population.While the G20 comprises the G7 group of developed, industrialized economies, it also includes 12 developing countries, including nations that are part of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa), along with the EU — which have 27 member-states.While none of the G20 governments sided with Russia to oppose a UN General Assembly resolution that condemned Moscow's annexation of four Ukrainian regions last month, three key members — China, India and South Africa — abstained from the voting. The three nations share a strong partnership with Russia and convincing them to toe the West line on Ukraine will prove to be a tricky challenge.On its part, even the host Indonesia has pledged to maintain neutrality, while emphasizing the opportunities for global cooperation offered by the G20.Rejecting the calls made by the West and Ukraine to exclude Russia from the summit, the Indonesian president had also invited his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky to the summit as a guest. While Ukraine is not a G20 member, Zelensky last week said he would not attend the event if Putin was present.© Copyright IBTimes 2022. All rights reserved. | Global Organizations |
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden will make his first trip to the Middle East next month with visits to Israel, the West Bank and Saudi Arabia, the White House announced Tuesday.The decision to pay a call on Saudi leaders during the July 13-16 trip comes after Biden as a Democratic presidential candidate branded the kingdom a “pariah” because of its human rights record and pledged to recalibrate the U.S.-Saudi relationship.Biden plans to meet with the Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the de facto ruler of the kingdom, according to a senior administration official who briefed reporters on the condition of anonymity. U.S. intelligence officials determined Prince Mohammed likely ordered the brutal 2018 killing of U.S.-based journalist Jamal Khashoggi. After Biden took office, his administration made clear the president would avoid direct engagement with the crown prince and instead focus his engagements with King Salman.Human rights advocates and some Democratic allies cautioned Biden about visiting the oil-rich kingdom, saying such a visit without first getting human rights commitments would send a message to Saudi leaders that there are no consequences for egregious rights violations. The Saudis have been accused of using of mass arrests, executions and violence to squelch dissent.But at a time of skyrocketing prices at the gas pump, growing worries about Iran’s nuclear program and perpetual concern that China is expanding its global footprint, Biden and his national security team have determined that freezing out the Saudis, particularly the crown prince, is simply not in the U.S. interest.The White House announced the trip after Saudi Arabia this month helped nudge OPEC+ to ramp up oil production by 648,000 barrels per day in July and August, and the kingdom agreed to extend a United Nations-mediated cease-fire in its seven-year war with Yemen. Biden called the Saudi cease-fire decision “courageous.” Prince Mohammed, who is commonly referred to by his initials, MBS, played a “critical role” in brokering an extension of the cease-fire, according to the administration official.White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre in a statement announcing the Middle East trip said King Salman invited Biden to visit the kingdom during a gathering in the port city of Jeddah of the six Gulf Cooperation Council nations — Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates — as well as Egypt, Iraq and Jordan. “While in Saudi Arabia, the President will also discuss a range of bilateral, regional, and global issues with his counterparts. These include support to the UN-mediated truce in Yemen, which has led to the most peaceful period there since war began seven years ago,” Jean-Pierre said. “He will also discuss means for expanding regional economic and security cooperation, including new and promising infrastructure and climate initiatives, as well as deterring threats from Iran, advancing human rights, and ensuring global energy and food security.” Biden’s first stop during the Middle East swing will be in Israel for a long-planned visit with Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett in Jerusalem. He will then meet with Palestinian Authority leaders, including Mahmoud Abbas, in the West Bank. Biden will cap the whirlwind trip with the visit to Jeddah for the meeting of GCC leaders and talks with King Salman, the crown prince and other Saudi officials. The trip to Israel comes at a fraught time for Bennett’s fragile coalition, as he tries to avert another election and the potential return to power of former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and as Iran’s nuclear program continues advancing. Biden’s time in Israel coincides with the Maccabiah Games, a sporting competition that brings together thousands of Jewish and Israeli athletes from around the globe. Biden, who visited Israel for the first time as a young senator nearly 50 years ago, is also expected to meet with athletes taking part in the games.Israeli officials in their engagement with the Biden administration have pressed their point of view that U.S. relations with Arab capitals, including Riyadh, are critical to Israel’s security and overall stability in the region. The visit could also provide an opportunity to kick off talks for what the administration sees as a longer-term project of normalizing Israeli-Saudi relations.Facing questions earlier this month about a potential visit to Saudi Arabia, Biden stressed that the relationship had multiple facets that impact U.S. and Middle East security.“Look, I’m not going to change my view on human rights,” Biden said. “But as president of the United States, my job is to bring peace if I can, peace if I can. And that’s what I’m going to try to do.” | Middle East Politics |
LONDON — Julian Assange's extradition to the United States was approved Friday by the British government, a potentially decisive step toward the WikiLeaks founder facing espionage charges. The U.K. Home Office said in a statement that the extradition order for Assange had been signed "following consideration by both the Magistrates Court and High Court."The spokesperson said Assange had a 14-day right to appeal the decision. It follows a British court ruling in April that Assange could be sent to the U.S.“In this case, the UK courts have not found that it would be oppressive, unjust or an abuse of process to extradite Mr Assange," they said. "Nor have they found that extradition would be incompatible with his human rights, including his right to a fair trial and to freedom of expression, and that whilst in the U.S. he will be treated appropriately, including in relation to his health.”A decision on whether to extradite Assange had been anticipated from British Home Secretary Priti Patel this month. The WikiLeaks founder is wanted in the U.S. to face trial on 18 charges, including breaking espionage laws, after WikiLeaks released thousands of secret U.S. files in 2010.Supporters of Julian Assange in front of the British Home Office in London, on May 17, 2022.Li Ying / Xinhua News Agency via Getty ImagesAssange, 50, has denied any wrongdoing in connection with the leak.The WikiLeaks founder has spent the past three years in London’s Belmarsh prison waiting to find out whether he will be extradited. His family and legal team have repeatedly warned of his deteriorating mental health, which they have said will be put at greater risk if he is extradited to the U.S.In December, Washington won an appeal over Assange's extradition in a British court, with the court ruling that a past decision against handing Assange over to the U.S. might have been different in light of fresh assurances that he would not be held under highly restrictive conditions if extradited.The decision came as his legal team and family warned that his life could be at risk if he were to be extradited to the U.S. due to his deteriorating mental health.Assange’s lawyers told the court that even though the U.S. had assured reasonable treatment of the WikiLeaks founder, there was still a risk that he could take his own life if extradited. They also urged the court to ignore the U.S.'s assurances that Assange would not be subjected to harsh detention conditions, known as Special Administrative Measures.In an interview with NBC News in December, Assange’s brother, Gabriel Shipton, said his family feared Assange would “not survive” extradition to the U.S.“We live in fear that ... Julian will not survive this,” Shipton said. “He’s been ... crushed and you can really see the toll it’s taken on him over the years.”Assange and WikiLeaks came under the international spotlight after releasing footage from a 2007 airstrike in Baghdad that had resulted in the deaths of two Reuters journalists and others.Released under the title "Collateral Murder," the video sparked widespread upset among Americans about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.WikiLeaks then gained further attention in 2010 after publishing a trove of classified defense documents on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, as well as on detainees at Guantanamo Bay, in an act U.S. officials said put lives at risk. The Obama administration did not immediately indict Assange. Instead, he was charged with violating the Espionage Act under former President Donald Trump.Chelsea Manning, a former Army member who had shared the intel with WikiLeaks, spent years behind bars after refusing to testify before a grand jury investigating Assange. She was released while the Obama administration was still in office.Chantal Da SilvaChantal Da Silva is a breaking news editor for NBC News Digital based in London. | United Kingdom Politics |
Protesters gathered outside an immigration detention centre and lay on the ground in an effort to halt tonight's first flight transporting UK asylum seekers to Rwanda The protest outside Colnbrook Detention Centre in Heathrow comes as a plane expected to take the first group of asylum seekers to Rwanda at 9.30pm tonight appeared at MoD Boscombe Down - with defiant ministers vowing the flight will go ahead even if there is only one person on board. Two asylum seekers are understood to still be at Colnbrook. The exits outside of the centre were blocked as campaigners binded themselves together with metal pipes.One activist said: 'No one should be on this flight. No one should be deported under such racist and discriminatory policies. This flight represents the very worst of government legislation regarding refugees,' The Guardian reports.The Boeing 767 aircraft was spotted earlier today at MoD Boscombe Down on the outskirts of Amesbury, Wiltshire. Ministers are vowing the flight will go ahead - even if there is just one passenger.The Boeing is operated by Spanish charter firm Privilege Style and was seen landing at the MoD testing site earlier today. The company has a permit to fly from Stansted to the Rwandan capital, Kigali, at 9.30pm tonight, according to Civil Aviation Authority records.The airline has not yet commented on the claims.The site is managed by QinetiQ, the private defence company created as part of the breakup of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) in 2001 by the UK Ministry of Defence.Activists say just seven of the original 130 people originally told they would be deported to Rwanda are expected to be on the aircraft. Protesters gathered outside Colnbrook Immigration Detention Centre in Heathrow and lay on the ground in an effort to halt tonight's first flight transporting UK asylum seekers to Rwanda A minibus with outriders leaves Colnbrook, Heathrow Immigration Removal Centre, Heathrow this afternoon on the day a flight to Rwanda is due to leave carrying seven asylum seekers to RwandaThree Iranians, one Vietnamese, one Albanian and one Iraqi Kurd are being held at Colnbrook detention centre by Heathrow and a second Iraqi Kurd at Brook House at Gatwick, the BBC reported.Four men who challenged their removal at the High Court in London had their cases dismissed today, while a fifth man lost a bid to bring an appeal at the Supreme Court.The result of the hearings means the flight is expected to be leaving the UK for the east African nation tonight with seven people on board. However, it is possible there may be urgent attempts to issue further challenges at the Court of Appeal this evening.Earlier today, the Supreme Court rejected an appeal bid by an Iraqi man due to be on the flight. A Boeing 767 plane reported to be the first to transport migrants to Rwanda is seen on the tarmac at MOD Boscombe Down base in Wiltshire Police are seen outside Boscombe Down Air Base, as the first flight relocating asylum seekers to Rwanda prepares to leave the UK Vans arrive at Colnbrook - Heathrow Immigration Removal Centre - this afternoon ahead of the first flight to RwandaA panel of three justices refused permission for the man to challenge a Court of Appeal ruling yesterday which upheld the earlier decision of a High Court judge not to grant an injunction stopping the flight. The court's president, Lord Reed, said there had been an 'assurance' that, if the policy is found to be unlawful in an upcoming judicial review, steps would be taken to bring back any migrants flown to Rwanda in the interim. This morning, Liz Truss said the first plane will take off today even if it is only carrying one migrant. The Supreme Court ruling means this condition will be met. It came as Boris Johnson vowed lawyers and Church of England critics would not deter the government from seeing the policy through. Opening Cabinet this morning, Mr Johnson said: 'What is happening with the attempt to undermine the Rwanda policy is that they are, I'm afraid, undermining everything that we're trying to do to support safe and legal routes for people to come to the UK and to oppose the illegal and dangerous routes,' he said. 'I think that what the criminal gangs are doing and what those who effectively are abetting the work of the criminal gangs are doing is undermining people's confidence in the safe and legal system, undermining people's general acceptance of immigration.'The Prime Minister added: 'We are not going to be in any way deterred or abashed by some of the criticism that is being directed upon this policy, some of it from slightly unexpected quarters. We are going to get on and deliver.' Challenges by four asylum seekers were rejected by the same judge earlier today. In the first case, the judge said a man's removal to Rwanda would not alter the quality or nature of his relationship with his UK-resident sister, after lawyers representing him argued that deportation would infringe his right to a family life. A barrister representing a second man told the judge that he had claimed asylum after receiving 'death threats from loan sharks' in Vietnam. Alex Grigg also alleged procedural failures, saying the man had been handed the letter informing him of his removal when no interpreter was present. However, the judge rejected this argument. The third man, who had travelled from Iran to the UK with his 21-year-old son, had asked the High Court to prevent his removal due to his mental health and right to a family life. However, refusing the application, Mr Justice Swift said: 'I accept the prejudice to the claimant will include distress due to being separated from his son.' The fourth man, a man, had his application to stop his removal rejected and he was also refused the right to appeal. Decisions on any other outstanding appeals could take place even if a migrant is already on the plane, ITV reported. In other developments in the unfolding Rwanda flight farce: Rwanda government spokeswoman Yolande Makolo defended the policy at a press conference in Kigali, saying: 'We were doing this for the right reasons ... We have the experience. We want it to be a welcoming place for people in precarious conditions and we're determined to make this work';UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss said she did not know how many people would be on the first flight but it was important to establish the 'principle' of the policy and others would go in future; The archbishops of Canterbury and York along with the other Anglican bishops in the House of Lords condemned the 'immoral' plan; Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby said: 'Deporting asylum seekers should shame us as a nation.'Ms Truss did not deny estimates that a charter flight could cost hundreds of thousands of pounds, instead saying she 'can't put a figure' on the expense but 'it is value for money';Tory MP Peter Bone made a combative speech in the Commons in which he complained about 'lefty lawyers' sabotaging the policy; A government source suggested the chances of the first flight going ahead were 'very, very slim' even despite the government winning a key court battle; More than 100 migrants arrived in Dover after crossing the Channel in small boats today, with this week set to be one of 2022's busiest yet for crossings; This Boeing 767 - seen landing at RAF Boscombe Down in Wiltshire today - is expected to be used in the first flight to Rwanda tonight. Spanish carrier Privilege Style has not yet commented on the claims The company has a permit to fly from Stansted to the Rwandan capital, Kigali, at 9.30pm tonight, according to Civil Aviation Authority records. The airline has not yet commented on the claims. Three Iranians, one Vietnamese, one Albanian and one Iraqi Kurd are being held at Colnbrook detention centre by Heathrow, where a coach was seen parked today Boris Johnson, opening Cabinet today, turned his fire on lawyers who he accused of 'abetting the work of criminal gangs' Mr Johnson - pictured today at Cabinet with Rishi Sunak in the background - insisted the Government would not be deterred by the attacks 'not least from lawyers' and told his Cabinet ministers that 'we are going to get on and deliver' the planPriti Patel's Rwanda plan received a boost last night after judges refused to block today's flight. The Home Secretary is seen today Today, Foreign Secretary Liz Truss insisted the first flight would take off but could not say how few people will be on it Detainees in Brook House Detention Centre, Gatwick this morning on the day a flight to Rwanda is due to leave There have been protests at government removal centres including Brook House Detention Centre (pictured) Three cases rejected by High Court judge today CASE 1 In the first case, the judge said a man's removal to Rwanda would not alter the quality or nature of his relationship with his UK-resident sister, after lawyers representing him argued that deportation would infringe his right to a family life. CASE 2 A barrister representing a second man told the judge that he had claimed asylum after receiving 'death threats from loan sharks' in Vietnam. Alex Grigg also alleged procedural failures, saying the man had been handed the letter informing him of his removal when no interpreter was present. However, the judge rejected this argument. CASE 3 The third man, who had travelled from Iran to the UK with his 21-year-old son, had asked the High Court to prevent his removal due to his mental health and right to a family life. However, refusing the application, Mr Justice Swift said: 'I accept the prejudice to the claimant will include distress due to being separated from his son.' CASE 4 In a hearing on Tuesday afternoon, Mr Justice Swift refused the application of a Kurdish man against his removal. The judge also refused him permission to appeal. Today ministers have turned their fire on lawyers who they blame for sabotaging their flagship migration policy. 'All the lawyers who have been fighting in the courts will now turn their collective might elsewhere and direct all their resources at the remaining individuals due to be on board,' a government source told The Times. 'They'll be exploiting every single loophole possible and using every trick in the book to get those last people removed from the flight.'[The chances of it going ahead as planned] are very, very slim.' Last night, Tory MP Peter Bone made a combative speech in the Commons in which he complained about 'lefty lawyers' sabotaging the policy. The MP Wellingborough told MPs: 'We hear that a number of people who were meant to be on the flight tomorrow have, miraculously, got some lefty lawyer to intervene and stop it. 'Can I suggest that instead of booking 50 people on each flight to Rwanda, book 250 people on it then when they stop half of them from travelling you still have a full flight - come on, get on and send them.' Judges yesterday refused to block the inaugural flight scheduled for today to the offshore processing centre.Tory MPs cheered in the Commons as the Court of Appeal backed a ruling in the Home Secretary's favour last week, giving the policy the green light.A separate High Court bid to block the flight also failed yesterday when the charity Asylum Aid was denied an injunction.The Home Secretary has now won three victories in cases brought against the Government by Left-wing groups. A processing tent erected next door to the Hope Hostel accommodation in Kigali, Rwanda where migrants from the UK are expected to be taken when they arrive Ms Patel has now won three victories in cases brought against the Government by Left-wing groups . Pictured: Human rights protesters demonstrate outside the Home Office in London Revealed: The piously lefty cabal who have fought to ground Rwanda flight By David Wilkes for the Daily Mail A collection of Left-wing groups have made legal challenges in a bid to block ministers' plan to send migrants to Rwanda. They are represented by lawyers who in many cases have links to the Labour Party and a lengthy record of bringing cases against the Government.MATRIX CHAMBERSBarristers from the trendy London human rights chambers – co-founded by Cherie Blair – represented the Public and Commercial Services (PCS) union, Care4Calais and Detention Action on Friday and yesterday.One was top QC Raza Husain, who last month retweeted a message by Labour MP Chris Bryant criticising Boris Johnson's response to Partygate that said: 'Downing Street under him has been a cesspit of arrogant, entitled narcissists.' Mrs Blair left the chambers in 2014.LEIGH DAYA separate challenge to the Rwanda policy by charity Asylum Aid, heard in court yesterday, was lodged by law firm Leigh Day, which was accused of being behind a 'witch-hunt' of British troops in Iraq.The firm and three of its solicitors – including senior partner Martyn Day – were cleared of a string of misconduct allegations following a disciplinary hearing in 2017. They had been charged by the Solicitors Regulatory Authority after the Ministry of Defence submitted a lengthy dossier of alleged wrongdoing, including claims they caused innocent troops years of torment.Leigh Day worked with Birmingham solicitor Phil Shiner to represent Iraqi clients in parallel legal actions. Mr Shiner was struck off as a solicitor for dishonesty over his handling of war-crime allegations against the Army.DOUGHTY STREETAsylum Aid's legal team also includes several barristers from Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer's former chambers, Doughty Street.They include leading human rights lawyer Helena Kennedy QC, who has been an active and outspoken Labour peer since entering the House of Lords as Baroness Kennedy after the general election in 1997. It is also where Amal Clooney, the lawyer wife of film star George, practises.Robert Latham, who retains an associate tenancy at Doughty Street, supported Sir Keir's leadership campaign with a donation of £100,000.DUNCAN LEWIS SOLICITORSActing for the PCS union, Care 4 Calais and Detention Action, Duncan Lewis has a long track record of bringing challenges against government immigration measures.In 2020, The Mail on Sunday revealed the firm had received £55 million in legal aid from the British taxpayer in just three years. The paper also told how the company's staff have travelled to Calais and offered support to refugees hoping to reach Britain.Owned by entrepreneur Amarpal Singh Gupta, who has been dubbed 'Britain's legal aid king', the firm has forged a close relationship with charities that work among refugee camps on the French coast. Staff have also reportedly boasted of mixing with senior Labour Party figures, including deputy leader Angela Rayner and foreign spokesman David Lammy.DETENTION ACTIONBella Sankey, director of campaign group Detention Action, is a former would-be Labour MP endorsed by Sir Keir. Like the Labour leader many years before, Miss Sankey previously worked at Liberty, the campaign group for civil liberties which has long been a recruiting ground for Labour politicians.PUBLIC AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES UNIONThe union's firebrand general secretary Mark Serwotka was kicked out of the Labour Party in 1992 for being a member of the Trotskyist group Socialist Organiser. In 2016, he rejoined Labour, saying his long-time friend Jeremy Corbyn's leadership offered a 'genuine break from the past'. In recent years, he has called for a General Strike to 'bring the Tories down'.CARE4CALAISThe charity was at the centre of a scandal in 2017 when it emerged its married founder Clare Moseley, a former accountant and then 46, had a year-long affair with Mohamed Bajjar, then 27. He had falsely claimed to be a Syrian refugee, but was in reality a Tunisian market-stall trader married to another British woman.The charity is currently embroiled in a Charity Commission inquiry over 'serious governance concerns'.ASYLUM AIDIts Cambridge-educated director Alison Pickup leads a team providing legal representation to asylum seekers and refugees. She was previously legal director of the Public Law Project – and before that had a practice at Doughty Street Chambers, where she specialised in immigration, asylum and migrants' rights in the context of unlawful detention, community care, asylum support and access to justice.Among her achievements, Doughty Street Chambers' website lists her as having been junior counsel in 'two of the leading challenges to the legal aid cuts'.One was the successful challenge to the proposed 'residence test' for legal aid, the other established that Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights – the right to respect for private and family life – may require legal aid to be provided in immigration cases. Just seven names remained of the 130 on the original passenger list last night after lawyers submitted a series of challenges.Further individual appeals by these seven, who include Iranians, Iraqis and Albanians, were expected in the hours before the flight.At least six further cases are due to be heard at the High Court today under the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights and other legal measures. But the Court of Appeal's decision means Miss Patel's scheme to hand Channel migrants and other 'irregular arrivals' a one-way ticket to the east African nation has avoided falling at the first hurdle.The Home Secretary insists the policy is necessary to avoid further drownings in the Channel. 'People will see this as a good result for the Home Office, but now the policy is not facing a blanket ban, well-resourced lawyers will try to get their clients pulled off the flight individually,' a government source said.'They will try every tactic and exploit every loophole, probably waiting until the very last minute.'The leadership of the Church of England yesterday condemned the Rwanda operation as an 'immoral policy that shames Britain'. In a letter to The Times, Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby and 24 other bishops said: 'Whether or not the first deportation flight leaves Britain today for Rwanda, this policy should shame us as a nation.'Lord Justice Singh, chairing a panel of three judges in the Court of Appeal yesterday, declined to 'interfere with the conclusions' made by a High Court judge on Friday.He said Mr Justice Swift 'did not err in principle' when he refused to grant an interim injunction that would have stopped the flight taking off.Lord Justice Singh was a leading human rights barrister and founded Matrix Chambers with Cherie Blair.The appeal was brought by the Public and Commercial Services union, which represents a majority of UK Border Force staff, and charities Care 4 Calais and Detention Action. They were refused permission to appeal to the Supreme Court, although the applicants may lodge a further bid directly.Raza Husain QC, for the applicants, told the court the Rwanda policy featured 'a serious interference with basic dignity' and the High Court had wrongly assessed the strength of their claim. He added that if migrants were to be sent to Rwanda and a judicial review – due in July – rules the policy unlawful the Home Office would be required to return them to the UK.Migrants could then have 'significant claims' for damages, the QC suggested.But Rory Dunlop QC, for the Home Office, said: 'The flight tomorrow is important. This is a policy which is intended to deter dangerous and unnecessary journeys, journeys from safe third countries by people who do not need to make that journey to be safe, they can claim in France or wherever it is.'This is a policy that – if it works – could save lives as well as disrupt the model of traffickers.'Meanwhile, Boris Johnson has implicitly rejected Prince Charles's reported criticisms of the Rwanda plan.Mr Johnson declined to comment directly on whether the prince was wrong to call it 'appalling', but added: 'This is about making sure that we break the business model of criminal gangs who are not only risking people's lives but undermining public confidence in legal migration.'Labour's shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said the scheme was 'shameful' and 'completely unworkable, deeply unethical and extortionately expensive'. It came as protestors were picturing scuffling with police last night after an emergency protest outside the Home Office in London.The demonstrations, which began at around 5.30pm and quickly swelled, included the former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn who was pictured speaking enthusiastically into a megaphone as a large crowd amassed.The scenes later turned chaotic after objectors were seen grappling with officers yesterday evening. The Met Police say no arrests were made.Charities had challenged an initial refusal to grant an injunction on Friday, with three Court of Appeal judges yesterday rejecting their appeal following an urgent hearing.The decision will not stop individual refugees from appealing their deportation, while a full judicial review of the policy is still due to take place in July.Yesterday afternoon, Lord Justice Singh, sitting with Lady Justice Simler and Lord Justice Stuart-Smith, said Mr Justice Swift had 'conducted the balancing exercise properly' and did not err in principle nor in the approach he took.He added: 'He weighed all the factors and reached a conclusion which he was reasonably entitled to reach on the material before him.'This court cannot therefore interfere with that conclusion.' The Court of Appeal's decision means Miss Patel's scheme to hand Channel migrants and other 'irregular arrivals' a one-way ticket to the east African nation has avoided falling at the first hurdle. Pictured: Border Force and the military escort migrant ashore at Dover Docks Migrants travelling to the UK on small boats will be put on jets and sent to Rwanda while their applications are processedRwandan officials say deported migrants will be able to 'come and go as they please' from accommodation and only need to follow 'basic housekeeping rules' - as they slam Church critics' 'misconceptions' about Africa Rwandan officials today said deported migrants would be able to 'come and go as they please' from their accomodation and only need to follow 'basic housekeeping rules', as they slammed critics' 'misconceptions' of Africa. Government spokeswoman Yolande Makolo hit back at the Church of England's claim the plan was 'immoral', saying: 'We don't think it's immoral to offer a home to people.'People may have their own opinions on what this problem is like, depending on where they come from, but from where we come from we're doing this for the right reasons.'We want to be a welcoming place and we'll do our best to make sure that migrants are taken care of, and that they're able to build a life here.' Rwanda government spokeswomen Yolande Makolo (centre) holds a press conference regarding the refugees arring from the UK in RwandaAsked for the Rwandan government's response to comments from migrants who said they would rather die than be sent to the country, Ms Makolo said some people have 'misconceptions' about what Africa is like which 'does not reflect the reality'.She added: 'We do not consider living in Rwanda a punishment ... we do our best to provide a conducive environment for Rwandans to develop and for anyone else who comes to live here with us.'Ms Makolo described the agreement, which has been opposed by the UN and rights groups, as an 'innovative programme'.'Rwanda is proud to partner with the UK for this innovative programme that's intended to address the global migration crisis, which is causing untold suffering to so many. We are also keen to address the global imbalance in opportunities that is a major driver of irregular migration.'Rwanda has a strong record of providing safety for those in danger. Tomorrow when the first flight lands here in Kigali, the new arrivals will be welcomed and will be looked after and supported to make new lives here. We will provide support with their asylum applications, including legal support and translation services. We will provide decent accommodation and look after all their essential needs.'We also want to make it clear that if people apply for asylum in Rwanda and their claim is rejected, they will still have a pathway to legal residency in Rwanda. We welcome people from everywhere .. The new arrivals will be free to come and go as they please.'Questioned about whether there will be curfews or any other restrictions placed on migrants once placed in accommodation, Ms Makolo said they are not detention facilities and there will be some basic house-keeping rules, but they will effectively be able to 'come and go as they please'. Ms Makolo described the agreement, which has been opposed by the UN and rights groups, as an 'innovative programme'If migrants choose to leave, 'we will support them to travel to their country of origin' or another country where they have a legal right to stay, she said, adding: 'We do hope that they'll choose to stay with us and follow in the footsteps of so many who have made Rwanda their home and have flourished here.'Rwanda has a record of caring for refugees and welcoming migrants and will be able to provide not just a safe haven these people are looking for, but the opportunity to build new lives here and develop alongside Rwandans.'Asked whether they were concerned about the outcry over the plan and the legal challenges in the UK, Ms Makolo told reporters: 'We were doing this for the right reasons ... We have the experience. We want it to be a welcoming place for people in precarious conditions and we're determined to make this work.'We understand that there might be opposition to this but we are asking them to give this programme a chance because it's a solution.'There are not many solutions, people are suffering, the asylum system is broken and being taken advantage of by criminal gangs that exploit people making false promises.'People are risking their lives in these dangerous crossings, so something has to give and we are happy to be working on this solution with our UK partners.'First Rwanda flight doesn't deter migrants as more than 100 more arrive in Dover after crossing the Channel in small boats with this week set to be one of 2022's busiest yet for crossingsBy Charlotte McLaughlin for MailOnline More than 100 migrants arrived in the UK yesterday before the first flight to bring asylum seekers to Rwanda is scheduled to leave. Judges decided that the plane to the African country could take off as official figures showed 138 people made the perilous journey across the English Channel in three boats.It brings the total number of new arrivals to 705 in June alone, with the total for the year so far reaching 10,269. The mostly male migrants could be seen being led along the gangway yesterday in Dover for processing by soldiers dressed in camouflage fatigues and high-vis vests and Border Force agents in Hazmat suits. A further 92 adults and 12 children including a heavily pregnant woman were also brought to shore by Border Force this morning after attempting to cross the Channel.When asked if they knew they could be sent to Rwanda, one migrant replied 'What? No' while others looked on in apparent confusion. Court of Appeal judges rejected a legal challenge attempting to block the first flight in the government's plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda amid pressure from human rights groups and opposition parties.Seven or eight people are reported to be leaving on the flight this evening, which is estimated to be costing the government £500,000. A group of people thought to be migrants are brought in to Dover, today, by Border Force, following a small boat incident in the Channel A man carries a child as migrants arrive at the Port of Dover A member of the military carries a child as migrants arrive at the Port of DoverMigrants including a heavily pregnant woman and babies have been brought into Dover on two ships this morning.The Dover RNLI lifeboat brought 10 to 20 migrants to shore while the Border Force ship Vigilant is brought around 60 people into Dover. Approximately 92 adults and 12 children have been brought to shore by Border Force this morning after attempting to cross the Channel.So far this morning migrants have been brought into the Port of Dover aboard the Dover RNLI lifeboat and the BF Vigilant.A further 50 people - mostly men in their late teens or 20s - have been brought to shore in Dover on the Border Force ship Hurricane in the third recue by a ship today. A soldier carries a baby in his hand while at least 12 children were rescued today A man is seen with a child while migrants are brought in to Dover by RNLI and the Border Force One man carried a toddler on his shoulders as he came ashore, and one woman was heavily pregnant.Asked where they came from refugees said Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Yesterday, Border Force cutter Hurricane took the first boat at around 3pm, while a second group of 50 people were escorted into the port on an RNLI lifeboat shortly before 8pm. Another RNLI lifeboat brought a further 40 migrants to shore after dark at approximately 10.30pm.Migrants on board one boat in the Calais Strait also got into difficulty and were rescued by the French on Monday. A soldier carries a child nearby a woman coming off the boat in Dover today Inflatable boats are towed into the marina after a group of people are brought in to Dover A soldier is seen with a man carrying a child while wearing a life vest as over 100 migrants arrived today Boat Notre Dame des Flandres was tasked with retrieving 43 migrants from the Channel, who were then dropped off at Gravelines where border police and the departmental fire and rescue service took care of them. Boris Johnson accused lawyers representing migrants of 'abetting the work of criminal gangs' today as he defended the plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda ahead of the expected first flight on Tuesday.The plans have been challenged in the courts and condemned by the Church of England's senior bishops and reportedly by the Prince of Wales, with the Prime Minister acknowledging that there had been criticism from 'some slightly unexpected quarters'. Migrants disembark at the Port of Dover, after being rescued while crossing the English Channel, today A woman is helped ashore following a small boat incident in the ChannelAn urgent interim injunction to stop the new scheme was brought about by migrant charity Asylum Aid but was rejected in the same court yesterday. Mr Johnson insisted the Government would not be deterred by the attacks 'not least from lawyers' and told his Cabinet ministers that 'we are going to get on and deliver' the plan.Natalie Elphicke, MP for Dover, said: 'The Channel Crossings put lives at risk in the hands of ruthless criminal gangs.'The action being taken by our Government to bring these dangerous crossings to an end is the compassionate, common sense and right thing to do.'It's disappointing to see the courts being misused by political activists who support uncontrolled immigration.'There is no need for anyone to get on a small boat. People are safe in France and many other places before France.'This week is predicted to be one of the busiest so far this year for small boat crossings as conditions at sea become calmer - with around 30 migrants already spotted floating in the Channel on a black dinghy.Despite Home Office warnings some people could be deported to Rwanda to be relocated, 705 people have been detained in June alone.The total number of migrants to make the treacherous journey across the 21-mile Dover Strait currently stands at 10,269 in 321 boats - more than double that of the same period in 2021 when just over 4,546 people had been detained.According to figures released by the Ministry of Defence (MoD), 28,526 made the crossing in 2021 - compared to 8,410 who arrived in 2020.Minister for Justice and Tackling Illegal Migration, Tom Pursglove MP, has said: 'The rise in dangerous Channel crossings is unacceptable.'Not only are they an overt abuse of our immigration laws but they also impact on the UK taxpayer, risk lives and our ability to help refugees come to the UK via safe and legal routes. Rightly, the British public has had enough.'Through our Nationality and Borders Bill, we're cracking down on people smugglers and fixing the broken system by making it a criminal offence to knowingly arrive in the UK illegally and introducing a maximum sentence of life imprisonment for those who facilitate illegal entry into our country.''This policy shames Britain': Entire Church of England leadership calls Government's plan to send failed asylum seekers to Rwanda 'immoral' as first flight is set to go ahead tomorrowBy Jacob Thorburn for MailOnlineSenior leaders a | United Kingdom Politics |
Russia turn sights on Lysychansk in battle for eastern UkraineRussian-backed separatists said they were pushing into Lysychansk, the last major city still held by Ukrainian troops in eastern Luhansk province, Reuters reported on Monday.Lysychansk’s twin city of Sievierodonetsk fell on Saturday in a victory for Moscow’s campaign to seize the eastern provinces of Luhansk and Donetsk on behalf of pro-Russian separatists.Tass news agency on Sunday quoted a separatist official as saying Moscow’s forces had entered Lysychansk from five directions and were isolating Ukrainian defenders. Reuters could not confirm the report.The General Staff of Ukraine’s Armed Forces said Russian forces were using artillery to try to cut off Lysychansk from the south but made no mention of separatists entering the city.Elena, an elderly woman from Lysychansk, was among dozens of evacuees who arrived in the Ukrainian-held town of Pokrovsk by bus from frontline areas.“Lysychansk, it was a horror, the last week. Yesterday we could not take it any more,” she said. “I already told my husband if I die, please bury me behind the house.”Zelenskiy to press G7 for more helpUkraine president Volodymyr Zelenskiy will urge world powers to step up their support for Ukraine when he addresses the G7 summit on Monday, as Kyiv reels from the first Russian strikes on the capital in weeks.US president Joe Biden and his counterparts from the Group of Seven wealthy democracies, meeting in the Bavarian Alps, have stressed their unity in the face of Russia’s aggression - even as the global fallout worsens.Zelenskiy is set to join the leaders of the United States, Germany, Britain, France, Italy, Japan and Canada via video link at 10:00 am (0800 GMT).In his daily address late Sunday, Zelenskiy renewed his calls for more weapons and air defence systems to be delivered to Ukraine and for fresh sanctions against Russia by G7 nations.“We need a powerful air defence - modern, fully effective. Which can ensure complete protection against these missiles. We talk about this every day with our partners. There are already some agreements. And partners need to move faster if they are really partners, not observers,” he said.“Delays in the transfer of weapons to our state, any restrictions are actually an invitation for Russia to strike again and again.”SummaryHello and welcome to today’s ongoing coverage of Russia’s war on Ukraine. It’s coming up to 8am in Kyiv and here’s a summary of the latest developments: Russia stepped up air strikes on Ukraine over the weekend, including on the capital of Kyiv, while the strategic eastern city of Sievierodonetsk fell to pro-Russian forces. There had been no major strikes on Kyiv since early June. The Ukraine president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, said a wounded seven-year-old girl was pulled from the rubble of a nine-storey apartment block in Kyiv. The girl’s father was killed in the strike, he said. “She was not threatened by anything in our country. She was completely safe, until Russia itself decided that everything was equally hostile to them now - women, children, kindergartens, houses, hospitals, railways,” Zelenskiy said in his nightly address. The US president, Joe Biden, said that “it’s more of their barbarism”, referring to the missile strikes on Kyiv, as leaders from the G7 countries gathered for a summit in Germany. The UK prime minister, Boris Johnson, will use Monday’s session at the G7 summit in Germany to call for urgent action to help get vital grain supplies out of Ukraine’s blockaded ports to support the country’s economy and alleviate shortages around the world, PA reports. Johnson will call for an international solution to the crisis, including finding overland routes for grain supplies to beat the Russian blockade, with £10m in materials and equipment to repair damaged rail infrastructure. Ukraine’s foreign minister, Dmytro Kuleba, said G7 countries should respond to the latest missile strikes by imposing further sanctions on Russia and providing more heavy weapons to Ukraine. Zelenskiy urged Belarusians to stand in solidarity with Ukraine. “Russian leadership wants to drag you into the Ukraine-Russian war because it doesn’t care about your lives. But you aren’t slaves and can decide your destiny yourself,” Zelenskiy said in a video address to Belarusians. The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, will visit two small former Soviet states in central Asia this week, Russian state television reported on Sunday, in what would be the Russian leader’s first known trip abroad since ordering the invasion of Ukraine. Putin will visit Tajikistan and Turkmenistan and then meet the Indonesian president, Joko Widodo, for talks in Moscow, the report on Rossiya 1 television station said. The UN Human Rights division in Ukraine said on Sunday that since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February, it has “received hundreds of allegations of torture and ill-treatment, including conflict-related sexual violence”. “People were kept tied and blindfolded for several days, beaten, subjected to mock executions, put in a closed metal box, forced to sing or shout glorifying slogans, provided with no or scarce food or water, and held in overcrowded rooms with no sanitation,” the UN human rights monitoring mission in Ukraine said. France has become the latest country to reconsider its energy options because of the war in Ukraine, announcing on Sunday it was looking into reopening a recently closed coal-fired power station. The energy transition ministry said it was considering reopening the station at Saint-Avold in eastern France this winter, “given the situation in Ukraine” and the effect it was having on energy markets. Ukrainian forces have attacked a drilling platform in the Black Sea owned by a Crimean oil and gas company, Russia’s Tass news agency cited local officials as saying on Sunday – the second strike in a week. The platform is operated by Chernomorneftegaz, which Russian-backed officials seized from Ukraine’s national gas operator Naftogaz as part of Moscow’s annexation of the peninsula in 2014. Canada deployed two warships to the Baltic Sea and north Atlantic on Sunday, joining a pair of frigates already in the region in attempts to reinforce Nato’s eastern flank in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The navy ships Kingston and Summerside would be on a four-month deployment as part of “deterrence measures in central and eastern Europe” launched in 2014 after Moscow annexed Crimea, the Canadian navy said in a statement. | Europe Politics |
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comSummaryBiden says Russia has failed to split G7Biden condemns 'barbarism' as missiles strike KyivGold ban targets 'Putin's war machine' - British PMOil import price cap discussed, German sourceSCHLOSS ELMAU, Germany, June 26 (Reuters) - U.S. President Joe Biden told allies "we have to stay together" against Russia on Sunday as G7 leaders gathered for a summit dominated by war in Ukraine and its impact on food and energy supplies and the global economy.At the start of the meeting in the Bavarian Alps, four of the Group of Seven rich nations moved to ban imports of Russian gold to tighten the sanctions squeeze on Moscow and cut off its means of financing the invasion of Ukraine.But it was not clear whether there was G7 consensus on the plan, with European Council President Charles Michel saying the issue would need to be handled carefully and discussed further. read more Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comBritain, the United States, Japan and Canada agreed the ban on new Russian gold imports, the British government said on Sunday.Britain said the ban was aimed at wealthy Russians who have been buying safe-haven bullion to reduce the financial impact of Western sanctions. Russian gold exports were worth $15.5 billion last year.The G7 leaders of Britain, France, the United States, Germany, Japan, Italy and Canada, were also having "really constructive" talks on a possible price cap on Russian oil, a German government source said.A French presidency official said Paris would push for a price cap on oil and gas and was open to discussing a U.S. proposal.The G7 leaders did agree on a pledge to raise $600 billion in private and public funds for developing countries to counter China's growing influence and soften the impact soaring food and energy prices.G7 host German Chancellor Olaf Scholz invited Senegal, Argentina, Indonesia, India and South Africa as partner nations at the summit. Many countries of the global south are concerned about the collateral damage from Western sanctions on Russia.Oxfam and other campaign groups said the pain from food price spikes for developing countries was "visceral".They want G7 leaders to tax excessive corporate profits to help those hit by the food crisis, cancel debts of the poorest nations and to support developing countries in their battle against the food crisis and climate change.An EU official said G7 countries would impress upon the partner countries that food price rises were the result of Russia's actions not Western sanctions.European Council President Charles Michel, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, U.S. President Joe Biden, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, French President Emmanuel Macron, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi attend a working dinner during the first day of the G7 leaders' summit at Bavaria's Schloss Elmau castle, near Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany, June 26, 2022. Stefan Rousseau/Pool via REUTERSOfficials from some G7 countries, including Germany and Britain, are pushing for temporary waivers on biofuels mandates to combat soaring food prices, according to sources familiar with the matter.But Germany expects the proposal to fail to secure G7 backing due to U.S. and Canadian resistance, a government official told Reuters on Sunday. read more UNITY TESTEDWestern countries rallied around Kyiv when Russia invaded Ukraine in February, but more than four months into the war, that unity is being tested as soaring inflation and energy shortages rebound on their own citizens.At the start of a bilateral meeting, Biden thanked Scholz for showing leadership on Ukraine and said Russian President Vladimir Putin had failed to break their unity."Putin has been counting on it from the beginning that somehow the NATO and the G7 would splinter. But we haven't and we're not going to," Biden said.The summit provides an opportunity for Scholz to demonstrate more assertive leadership on the Ukraine crisis.He vowed a revolution in German foreign and defence policy after Russia's invasion in February, but critics have since accused him of dragging his feet.As missiles struck the Ukrainian capital Kyiv on Sunday, hitting an apartment block and a kindergarten, Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba said the G7 must respond with more weapons and tougher sanctions on Russia. read more Biden called the strikes acts of "barbarism".The G7 leaders are also expected to discuss options for tackling rising energy prices and replacing Russian oil and gas imports, as well as further sanctions that do not exacerbate the cost-of-living crisis affecting their own populations.Soaring global energy and food prices are hitting economic growth in the wake of the conflict in Ukraine, with the United Nations warning of an "unprecedented global hunger crisis". read more Climate change is also set to be on the G7 agenda.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by Sarah Marsh, Andreas Rinke, Andrea Shalal, Philip Blenkinsop, John Irish, and William Schomberg; Editing by Raissa Kasolowsky; Writing by Sarah Marsh, Matthias Williams and Philip Blenkinsop; Editing by Peter Graff, David Goodman, David Clarke and Jane MerrimanOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Global Organizations |
Isn't it amazing that, when the Government shut the country down in a wild panic in 2020, the courts would not intervene? Yet the same courts can barely contain themselves when they are asked to dismantle any attempt to limit mass migration.
The basis for the Covid lunacy, which did the nation and its people permanent damage from which we shall never recover, was an obscure piece of public health law.
It was plainly not designed for this purpose, and was probably chosen because it did not require the Parliamentary scrutiny that proper emergency laws demand. More than one attempt was made to get the courts to rule on whether the whole thing was in fact legal. They refused even to hear the case. I repeat. They refused even to hear the case.
These were the same courts which had rushed to judgment over Alexander 'Boris' Johnson's attempts to get us out of the EU and against his decision to send Parliament home for a short while.
Personally, I thought the judges were legally right in the first case, and legally wrong over prorogation. But I don't care. I don't think it was any of their business either way, as I shall explain.
Yet the fact was that they stepped in swiftly and effectively in these issues – which greatly expanded their power and authority. But when the whole country was being closed down, causing immense damage to the economy, to public health and to our future prosperity and stability, they were just not interested. They will expand their own freedom. But they won't protect ours.
The legal profession and the courts in this country are a key part of the machinery of covert, slow-motion revolution. They take sides. They value some liberties and scorn others.
It is like this because, especially since judicial appointments were revolutionised in 2005, judges are increasingly radical and Left-wing. So of course are many lawyers – products of schools and universities long dominated by liberal thought.
Left-wing lawyers, especially those gathered round Derry Irvine, were a huge part of the Blair Revolution. This was a giant power grab, the biggest constitutional upheaval in this country since the days of Oliver Cromwell. But it was far more successful than Cromwell's, since it was done in committee rooms and by moving amendments, not by troops stamping around Westminster waving swords and shouting.
The makers of the 'Supreme Court', which last week once again belittled our Parliamentary Government, knew what they were about. Just before it began work in 2009, its future President, Lord Neuberger, spoke of the possibility of 'judges arrogating to themselves greater power than they have at the moment'. Lord 'Charlie' Falconer, whose years as Anthony Blair's flatmate wafted him to the highest judicial office in the land, did not hide his joy, and exulted in the change. He said he 'happily predicted' that the Supreme Court would be 'bolder in vindicating both the freedoms of individuals and, coupled with that, being willing to take on the executive'.
For 'bolder' read 'more aggressive', and of course more revolutionary. And the 'freedoms' he sought were the ones Blairites like above all, the vague and limitlessly stretchy 'human rights' which have made it so very hard to enforce old-fashioned common-sense law in recent years.
The process was simple and subtle. Lord Neuberger, after he had retired, explained to a little-noticed student gathering in Cambridge that Britain's Supreme Court lacked the huge powers of the US Supreme Court to give orders to Congress and the President. But he didn't quite mean it, for he added: 'We get round that, the judges get round that, by what Baldrick might call a 'cunning and subtle plan' of being able to 'interpret' statutes, and sometimes we interpret them quite, um, imaginatively'.
For a reticent and cautious Judge, that is quite a startling confession. It has never attracted the attention it deserved.
Meanwhile, the court increases daily in power and authority, making a nonsense of the ancient English idea that Parliament is supreme, or that actual public opinion may have a voice in government. It is the rule of the elite, and the liberal elite at that, and it does not care about you.
It reminds me of the cruelly funny semi-horror film How To Get Ahead In Advertising in which Richard E Grant plays an advertising man who suffers from a boil on his shoulder. This boil slowly develops into a second, rival head which eventually takes over his whole body, turning him into an utterly different (and much worse) person.
The 'Supreme Court' is already functioning as a rival head on our body politic. If it is not soon abolished (no other course will curb it) then it will truly become supreme, and Parliament will not dare do anything it will disapprove of.
That's enough marching, now
Look, I know that some of you taking part in these weekly marches through London do so because (like me, as it happens) you disapprove of the Israeli bombing of Gaza and think it should stop.
But – thanks to this country's laudable freedom of speech and assembly – you now know that you have been marching alongside quite a few racist Jew-haters and bigots, who couldn't care less about civilian casualties and would happily inflict them on defenceless Israelis if they had the power.
So perhaps you might think that is enough marching now.
Some of you will have seen the Channel 4 TV series Banged Up, in which I appeared in a simulated jail. The final two episodes were shown last week.
I do not complain about the various tricks played on me by the Left-wing makers. I expected them to do what they could to ridicule me. If I couldn't take a joke, I shouldn't have joined.
There were genuinely moving moments despite their decision to go for showbiz melodrama rather than serious thought. But I am genuinely angry about their decision to include (from long hours of recording) a short and unrepresentative clip of my cellmate, Tom Roberts, saying he was bored by the Bible. Tom actually asked me to read the Bible to him, and sometimes urged me to continue when I wanted to stop.
All the minor celebrities who took part in this programme were greatly moved by the experience of sharing our lives with former criminals we would normally have crossed the street to avoid. They'd been asked to behave as they would have done in real prison and put their hearts into it, but in several cases they also showed us great kindness and generosity which I shall not forget.
I learned much by talking through the night, often very personally indeed, with my two successive cellmates, Tom and Akhi Ayman (now a very serious Muslim), whose lives were so utterly unlike mine that we might have been from different galaxies. Akhi and I ended up praying alongside each other, I with Christian prayers and he with Muslim ones. But Channel 4 thought a former EastEnders actor taking part in a joke escape would make better TV, and who am I to disagree? | United Kingdom Politics |
Britain's ever-growing monkeypox outbreak has passed 500 cases, with another 52 patients sickened with the tropical virus.The UK Health Security Agency said it had detected another 52 cases as of yesterday, meaning Britain's ongoing monkeypox has breached 500 cases.England has recorded 504 cases, Scotland 13, Wales five and two in Northern Ireland. No further details were given but officials acknowledged that 'most cases' continue to be among gay and bisexual men. Health chiefs are scrambling to contain the tropical virus, which is usually only seen in Africa amid fears it could become endemic in Europe.Dozens of countries around the world, including the US, Spain and Portugal, have all been affected with around 1,800 confirmed global cases. The growing tally comes as Pride event organisers said monkeypox must not be used as an excuse to shut down LGBTQ+ celebrations. It also comes as the World Health Organization (WHO) promised to rename the rash inducing infection following calls for a new 'non-discriminatory and non-stigmatising' term. Pride events ‘can spread public health messages about monkeypox’ Global Pride events are an opportunity to spread public health messages about monkeypox and must not be cancelled, an expert has told a World Health Organization (WHO) briefing.Steve Taylor, board member at EuroPride, said the virus – which has been mainly concentrated in gay and bisexual men – must not be used as an excuse to shut down LGBTQ+ events.Mr Taylor told the briefing that this summer Europe will host around 750 Pride events.'We are reassured by the clear statement from WHO that major events including Pride should not be cancelled or curtailed because of the outbreak,' he said.'We have been working with WHO over recent weeks to develop our messages and we will encourage Pride organisations and event producers across Europe to use their events to raise awareness of the facts about monkeypox so that people can protect themselves.'Sadly, but entirely predictably, some of those who oppose Pride and who oppose equality and human rights have already been attempting to use monkeypox as a justification for calls for Pride to be banned.'We are pleased that the WHO guidance is clear that Pride and major events should not be affected and are, in fact, opportunities to share important public health messaging.'Dr Catherine Smallwood, senior emergency officer at the WHO Regional Office for Europe, was asked why cases have been predominantly in the men who have sex with men.She said: 'All outbreaks start somewhere… this virus doesn’t choose any one person against another, it’s opportunistic in its spread.'And how it will spread will really be defined by the opportunities it has.'It’s also a disease that has an incubation period of 21 days. We’re just over a month into this outbreak, understanding that outbreak, so it’s too early to conclude as to how it will be spreading amongst the general population.' The UKHSA advises Britons to contact their sexual health clinic if they have a rash with blisters and have been in close contact with a suspected or confirmed monkeypox case or have been in West or Central Africa in the last three weeks.As part of efforts to thwart the ever-growing outbreak, both confirmed cases and close contacts are offered the Imvanex jab, which is 85 per cent effective against the virus. The strategy, known as ring vaccination, has been used in the past and is proven to work. A large proportion of cases so far have been identified in the gay, bisexual and men who have sex with other men community. But anyone can get monkeypox if they have had close contact with an infected person.Monkeypox is not normally a sexually-transmitted infection, but it can be passed on by direct contact during sex. It can also be spread through touching clothing, bedding or towels used by someone with the monkeypox rash.The disease is usually mild but can cause severe illness in some cases.Symptoms include fever, headache, muscle aches, backache, swollen lymph nodes, chills and exhaustion.A rash can develop, often beginning on the face, which then spreads to other parts of the body including the genitals.The UKHSA this month declared the virus a notifiable disease. It means all medics must alert local health authorities to suspected cases.The tropical virus now carries the same legal status as the plague, rabies and measles.Britain's latest figures come as two more countries joined global tally of nations in reporting cases of the disease.Romania reported its first case, a 26-year-old man, on Monday, with patient's partner having recently travelled to several European countries with numerous confirmed cases. Uganda has also reported some suspected cases taking the total number non-endemic countries where the virus has now been spotted to 45. In other monkey pox news today, Steve Taylor, board member at LGBTQ+ event EuroPride, said monkeypox – which has been mainly concentrated in men who have sex with men – must not be used as an excuse to shut down + events.Mr Taylor told a WHO briefing that this summer Europe will host around 750 Pride events.'We are reassured by the clear statement from WHO that major events including Pride should not be cancelled or curtailed because of the outbreak,' he said.He added that such events could also be used to spread public health messaging about monkeypox so people can keep an eye out for possible symptoms and protect themselves. Mr Taylor also warned that people who hated the LGBTQ+ could use monkeypox fears as a weapon in an attempt to stop pride events from going ahead. 'Sadly, but entirely predictably, some of those who oppose Pride and who oppose equality and human rights have already been attempting to use monkeypox as a justification for calls for Pride to be banned.'We are pleased that the WHO guidance is clear that Pride and major events should not be affected and are, in fact, opportunities to share important public health messaging.'The latest UK monkeypox figures come as the WHO confirmed it is looking to rename the disease following calls for a new 'non-discriminatory and non-stigmatising' term for monkeypox.WHO chiefs promised a new name for the rash-causing virus, endemic to Africa, would be announced 'as soon as possible'.As well as renaming the actual pathogen itself, strains will likely be lettered, such as A or B, to remove any mention of the parts of Africa where they were first spotted.Over 30 researchers last week signed a position paper stating there was an 'urgent need' to change its name given the current outbreak, which has mainly struck gay and bisexual men. They wrote: 'Continued reference to, and nomenclature of this virus being African is not only inaccurate but is also discriminatory and stigmatizing.'Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, head of the WHO, confirmed the move.He said: '[The] WHO is working with partners and experts from around the world on changing the name of monkeypox virus, its clades, and the disease it causes. World Health Organization chief Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus confirmed they are in conversation with experts on changing the name for monkeypox Officials are urging gay and bisexual men to be aware of new lesions, rashes or scabs and get in contact with a sexual health clinic What could monkeypox be renamed to? A group of scientists from around the world have said the current naming of monkeypox and its clades (different types of the virus) is inaccurate, discriminatory and stigmatising.They say references to West African and Central African monkeypox do not accurately reflect the current monkeypox outbreak sweeping the world.Instead, they suggest ditching terms tied to geography, a move the World Health Organization (WHO) has broadly supported.The scientists have suggested monkeypox in general should now be renamed to MPXV.A number at the end of MPXV would indicate the particular clade of the virus.MPXV1 would indicate Central African monkeypox.MPXV2 for the West African version.And MPXV3 would be term for an offshoot of the West African responsible for pervious and current international outbreaks.But the the scientists add the current outbreak and its sustained human-to-human transmission deserves its own clade. This would be called hMPXV with letters indicating distinct genetic lineages.With pervious international human-to-human monkeypox outbreaks in 2017-2019 with their own distinct ancestry this would mean the current outbreak would be called hMPXVB.1.While the WHO has said it supports renaming monkeypox, the formal naming of viruses is the purview of the International Committee of Taxonomy of Viruses.This international committee of virologists would need to accept any new name for monkeypox for it to become official. 'We will make announcements about the new names as soon as possible.'Monkeypox's naming system currently divides it into two types, the West African version and Central African or Congo Basin version.But experts want them to be replaced with numbers, like MPXV1, MPXV2 and so forth.Naming viruses geographically goes against WHO guidelines because of concerns it may spark abusive backlash or potential racism.It is, for this reason, that SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes Covid) was not called the Wuhan coronavirus, despite originating in the Chinese city of the same name.Writing in a paper published last week, the coalition of infectious disease researchers from around the world also proposed creating a new 'clade' for the current outbreak.They argue the virus circulating at present has become a distinct 'human virus', compared to MPXV, which rarely transmitted between people. The new type, the experts claimed, should be called hMPXV and lineages should be referred to as A, A.1, A.1.1, B.1.They gave four examples because of data showing the West African strain has evolved slightly, based on samples collected in small human-to-human outbreaks over the past few years.The naming system would be similar system to that used for Covid variants like Omicron, with Britain hit by a wave of BA.2 and now experiencing an uptick in cases of BA.4 and BA.5.One benefit of ditching geographic terms would be encouraging countries to continue monitoring for and raising the alarm when spotting new diseases, rather than having their name negatively attached to it, the scientists said.The responsibility of renaming monkeypox actually lies with the International Committee of Taxonomy of Viruses, a committee tasked with formally labelling pathogens.It is not the first time concerns about monkeypox and racism have been raised.Last month the Foreign Press Association, Africa, a media body for journalists on the continent, urged Western media to stop using photos of black people alongside monkeypox stories describing the outbreak in Europe and North America.They accused such outlets of perpetuating 'negative stereotypes that assigns calamity to the African race and privilege of immunity to other races.' They instead urged reports on monkeypox to instead use images of hospitals in their own countries or of graphical representations of the virus itself.Calls to rename monkeypox echo those made regarding Covid after people, such as former US President Donald Trump, started referring to it as the China or Wuhan virus in 2020, shortly after the virus began spreading internationally. Calls to rename monkeypox because of concerns of racism and discrimination echo those regarding some people calling Covid the 'Chinese virus' such as former US President Donald Trump (pictured here at the National Rifle Association Annual Meeting last month) Mr Trump was widely condemned over statements referring to Covid as the 'Chinese violence' with some studies finding it increased anti-Asian comments on social media They instead urged reports on monkeypox to instead use images of hospitals in their own countries or of graphical representations of the virus itself.Calls to rename monkeypox echo those made regarding Covid after people, such as former US President Donald Trump, started referring to it as the China or Wuhan virus in 2020, shortly after the virus began spreading internationally. The current term monkeypox is already somewhat misleading as while the virus was first discovered in macaques, many cases are believed to be transmitted to humans by rodents.A large proportion of cases so far have been identified in the gay, bisexual and men who have sex with other men community. But anyone can get monkeypox if they have had close contact with an infected person.Monkeypox is not normally a sexually-transmitted infection, but it can be passed on by direct contact during sex. It can also be spread through touching clothing, bedding or towels used by someone with the monkeypox rash.The disease is usually mild but can cause severe illness in some cases.It kills up to 10 per cent of cases. But this high rate is thought to be in part due to a historic lack of testing meaning that a tenth of known cases have died rather than a tenth of all infections.With milder strains, the fatality rate is closer to one in 100 — similar to when Covid first hit.Symptoms include fever, headache, muscle aches, backache, swollen lymph nodes, chills and exhaustion. A rash can develop, often beginning on the face, which then spreads to other parts of the body including the genitals.Dr Ghebreyesus said that 1,600 confirmed monkeypox cases and 1,500 suspected cases have been reported to the WHO this year from 39 countries, 32 of which have been recently hit by the virus. But other experts tracking the outbreak say at least 40 nations have logged cases or suspected cases. While 72 deaths have been reported in countries where monkeypox was already endemic, none have been seen in the newly affected countries, Dr Tedros said.However, he added that the WHO is seeking to verify news reports from Brazil of a monkeypox-related death there.The UN agency will hold an emergency meeting next week to determine whether to classify the global outbreak as a public health emergency of international concern. Only six PHEICs have been declared in the past, with the most recent being Covid.Officials are scrambling to contain the tropical virus, amid fears it could become endemic in Europe too unless it is stamped out soon.How DO you catch monkeypox and what are the symptoms? EVERYTHING you need to know about tropical virusHow do you catch monkeypox?Until this worldwide outbreak, monkeypox was usually spread by infected rodents — including rats, mice and even squirrels — in west and central Africa.Humans can catch the illness — which comes from the same family as smallpox — if they're bitten by infected animals, touch their blood, bodily fluids, or scabs, or eat wild game or bush meat.The orthopoxvirus, which causes monkeypox, can enter the body through broken skin — even if it's not visible, as well as the eyes, nose and mouth.Despite being mainly spread by wild animals, it was known that monkeypox could be passed on between people. However, health chiefs insist it was very rare until the current outbreak.Human-to-human spread can occur if someone touches clothing or bedding used by an infected person, or through direct contact with the virus' tell-tale scabs. The virus can also spread through coughs and sneezes. In the ongoing surge in cases, experts think the virus is passing through skin-to-skin contact during sex — even though this exact mechanism has never been seen until now.How deadly is it?Monkeypox is usually mild, with most patients recovering within a few weeks without treatment. Yet, the disease kills up to 10 per cent of cases. But this high rate is thought to be in part due to a historic lack of testing meaning that a tenth of known cases have died rather than a tenth of all infections.However, with milder strains the fatality rate is closer to one in 100 — similar to when Covid first hit.The West African version of the virus, which is mild compared to the Central African strain, is behind the current spread. No deaths have been reported as part of the ongoing outbreak.How is it tested for? It can be difficult to diagnose monkeypox as it is often confused with other infections such as chickenpox.Monkeypox is confirmed by a clinical assessment by a health professional and a test in the UK's specialist lab — the UKHSA's Rare and Imported Pathogens Laboratory.The test involves taking samples from skin lesions, such as part of the scab, fluid from the lesions or pieces of dry crusts. What are the symptoms?It can take up to three weeks for monkeypox-infected patients to develop any of its tell-tale symptoms.Early signs of the virus include a fever, headache, muscle aches, backache, swollen lymph nodes, chills and exhaustion — meaning it could, theoretically, be mistaken for other common illnesses.But its most unusual feature is a rash that often begins on the face, then spreads to other parts of the body, commonly the hands and feet.The rash changes and goes through different stages before finally forming a scab, which later falls off.How long is someone contagious?An individual is contagious from the point their rash appears until all the scabs have fallen off and there is intact skin underneath.The scabs may also contain infectious virus material.The infectious period is thought to last for three weeks but may vary between individuals.What do I do if I have symptoms?The UK Health Security Agency advises Britons to contact their sexual health clinic if they have a rash with blisters and have been in close contact with a suspected or confirmed monkeypox case or have been in West or Central Africa in the last three weeks. Britons are asked to contact clinics ahead of their visit and avoid contact with others until they have been seen by a medic.Gay and bisexual men have been asked to be especially alert to the symptoms as most of the cases have been detected in men who have sex with men. What even is monkeypox?Monkeypox was first discovered when an outbreak of a pox-like disease occurred in monkeys kept for research in 1958.The first human case was recorded in 1970 in the Democratic Republic of Congo and the infection has been reported in a number of central and western African countries since then.Only a handful of cases have been reported outside of Africa and they were confined to people with travel links to the continent. The UK, US, Israel and Singapore are the only countries which had detected the virus before May 2022.Monkeypox is a rare viral infection which kills up to one in ten of those infected but does not spread easily between people. The tropical disease is endemic in parts of Africa and is known for its rare and unusual rashes, bumps and lesions (file photo) Nurses and doctors are being advised to stay 'alert' to patients who present with a new rash or scabby lesions (like above)Is it related to chickenpox?Despite causing a similar rash, chickenpox is not related to monkeypox.The infection, which usually strikes children, is caused by the varicella-zoster virus. For comparison, monkeypox — like smallpox — is an orthopoxvirus. Because of this link, smallpox vaccines also provide protection against monkeypox. Are young people more vulnerable?Britons aged under 50 may be more susceptible to monkeypox, according to the World Health Organization.This is because children in the UK were routinely offered the smallpox jab, which protects against monkeypox, until 1971.The WHO also warns that the fatality rate has been higher among young children. Does it spread as easily as Covid?Leading experts insist we won't be seeing Covid-style levels of transmission in the monkeypox outbreak.A World Health Organization report last year suggested the natural R rate of the virus – the number of people each patient would infect if they lived normally while sick – is two. This is lower than the original Wuhan variant of Covid and about a third of the R rate of the Indian 'Delta' strain. But the real rate is likely much lower because 'distinctive symptoms greatly aid in its early detection and containment,' the team said, meaning it's easy to spot cases and isolate them.Covid is mainly spread through droplets an infected person releases whenever they breathe, speak, cough or sneeze. How is the UK managing the outbreak?MailOnline revealed monkeypox patients and their close contacts, including NHS workers, are being offered the Imvanex smallpox vaccine. The strategy, known as ring vaccination, involves jabbing and monitoring anyone around an infected person to form a buffer of immune people to limit the spread of a disease.Additionally, close contacts of those with a confirmed monkeypox infection are being told to stay at home for 21 days and avoid contact under-12s, immunosuppressed people and pregnant women.The Government said unprotected direct contact or high risk environmental contact includes living in the same house as someone with monkeypox, having sexual contact with them or even just changing their bedding 'without appropriate PPE'. As with Covid, someone who has come within one metre of an infected person is classed as a monkeypox contact.This lower category of contact, which also includes sitting next to a person with monkeypox on a plane, means a tracer will call the person every day for three weeks and they will be advised to stay off work for 21 days if their job involves children or immuno-suppressed colleagues.The UK has stopped short of requiring people by law to quarantine if they develop monkeypox, but ministers are considering a public health campaign to alert gay and bisexual men, because of the number of cases in this group.What if it continues to spread? Experts told MailOnline they 'could see a role' for a targeted jab rollout to gay men in the UK 'if this isn't brought under control quickly'.Close contacts of the UK's known cases are already being offered the jab, which was originally designed for smallpox. The two rash-causing viruses are very similar.A health source told MailOnline 'there would be a number of strategies we'd look at' if cases continued to rise.Professor Kevin Fenton, London's public health regional director, said if the outbreak in the capital continues to grow then the rollout of vaccines and treatments could be broadened to more groups.He said there are 'plans in place' to have more antivirals if the outbreak keeps growing. What other countries have spotted cases?More than 40 countries — including the US, Spain and Italy — have detected cases of monkeypox.The most cases have been detected in the UK, Spain, Portugal, Canada and Germany. There are a handful of antivirals and therapies for smallpox that appear to work on monkeypox, including the drug tecovirimat, which was approved for monkeypox in the EU in JanuaryIs there a vaccine for it? The smallpox vaccine, called Imvanex in the UK and Jynneos in the US, can protect against monkeypox because the viruses behind the illnesses are closely related.Data shows it prevents around 85 per cent of cases, and has been used 'off-label' in the UK since 2018. The jab, thought to cost £20 per dose, contains a modified vaccinia virus, which is similar to both smallpox and monkeypox, but does not cause disease in people. Because of its similarity to the pox viruses, antibodies produced against this virus offer cross protection.Are there any drugs to treat it? There are a handful of antivirals and therapies for smallpox that appear to work on monkeypox.This includes the drug tecovirimat, which was approved for monkeypox in the EU in January.Tecovirimat prevents the virus from leaving an infected cell, hindering the spread of the virus within the body. An injectable antiviral used to treat AIDS called cidofovir can be used to manage the infection, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).It also works by stopping the growth of the virus. | United Kingdom Politics |
Former SNP MP Angus MacNeil has said too many members of the party “take a line without thinking it through”.
MacNeil quit the party earlier this year following a suspension from the Westminster group, with reports suggesting it was caused by a heated argument with its chief whip.
In a letter posted on social media in July following his suspension, MacNeil said he would not rejoin the SNP group unless it was clear they were “pursuing independence”.
The letter resulted in his expulsion from the party and the Na h-Eileanan an Iar MP now sits as an independent.
Even before leaving the SNP, MacNeil had been a frequent critic of both the leadership of Humza Yousaf and of his predecessor Nicola Sturgeon.
In a new interview with Holyrood Magazine, the MP said: “Too many people in the SNP now take a line without thinking it through.
“The SNP has become very unthinking.
“Sometimes the sheep I shepherd here at home [on Barra] show more of an independence of thought than the SNP.
“If more of my sheep were as compliant as some SNP politicians, being a shepherd would be a lot easier.”
Since his expulsion from the SNP, MacNeil has pledged to work with the Alex Salmond-led Alba Party at Westminster, which has two MPs in Neale Hanvey and Kenny MacAskill – both of whom defected from the SNP when Alba was created.
MacNeil has agreed to work alongside the pair as part of a Scotland United for Independence Group, but has not officially joined the party.
The issue with MacNeil is just one of the controversies withing the SNP this year, with the arrests of three of its key leaders – including Ms Sturgeon and her husband – in relation to a police probe into party finances, backbench unrest at Holyrood, and the defection of two other elected members.
All three arrested were later released without charge pending further investigation.
Lisa Cameron announced last month she would be moving to the Tories at Westminster, citing a “toxic” culture within the SNP’s MP group, and Ash Regan departing for Alba in a surprise appearance at the party’s conference just over two weeks ago.
MacNeil also took aim at the state of internal debate within the party under Sturgeon, claiming: “I saw her becoming more and more intolerant of anyone else’s view or not being inclusive, then I saw this had a detrimental effect on our movement.
“There was no testing out of arguments with Nicola, which is why I think she was caught short on a number of things latterly.”
The MP went on to tell the magazine he now feels in a “much better position, politically, not being in the SNP”.
STV News is now on WhatsApp
Get all the latest news from around the countryFollow STV News
Follow STV News on WhatsApp
Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country | United Kingdom Politics |
Rishi Sunak’s wife, Akshata Murty, is worth at least £750m. On the face of it, their family would stand to gain by £300m if inheritance tax was abolished. However Ms Murty likely is an accidental beneficiary of an obscure loophole, which means her wealth will always be exempt from inheritance tax.
Akshata Murty holds 1.05% of the shares in her father’s IT company, Infosys.1See Infosys’s most recent disclosures, page 3, about 2/3 of the way down The company’s current market capitalisation is $74bn which implies – ignoring Ms Murty’s other assets – that she is worth around £750m.
The position for UK domiciled individuals
If a UK domiciled individual held £750m of shares then, when they and their spouse died, their estate would usually have an inheritance tax bill of around £300m.
The position for non-doms
There was a fuss last year about Akshata Murty being a “non-dom” – meaning that she was born abroad and (broadly speaking) regards her permanent long-term home as being in India, not the UK. This enabled Ms Murty to historically claim the “remittance basis”, which means she wasn’t taxed in the UK on her Infosys dividends. However she agreed last year to stop claiming the remittance basis.
You have to actively claim the remittance basis by ticking a box on a tax return, but being a non-dom is not a choice – it’s a matter of law. So it’s likely Ms Murty remains a non-dom.2Domicile is often described as “sticky”. According to HMRC, a change of domicile requires a person to make “profound and extensive changes to his or her lifestyle, habits and intention”. So it would take a positive step for Ms Murty to cease to be a non-dom: for example if she decided the UK was now her permanent home and she was going to spend the rest of her life in the UK. That means Ms Murty’s estate wouldn’t be subject to inheritance tax on her Indian shares.
That is a very beneficial result for non-doms and their families but, since the 2017 reforms, it runs out after the non-dom has (broadly speaking) been living in the UK for 15 years. That probably gives Ms Murty around four more years before her estate becomes taxable.3You might think a relatively young couple like the Sunaks wouldn’t be thinking about inheritance tax; but in my experience the very wealthy absolutely do, and from an early age.
The loophole
However, there’s an obscure rule in a 1956 tax treaty between the UK and India4“Obscure” meaning many personal tax specialists aren’t aware of it (unless they have wealthy Indian clients), and I certainly wasn’t previously aware of it. which says this:
That means that someone domiciled in India, like Ms Murty, is never5The consensus view is that this probably overrides the deemed domicile rule, because the deeming is for tax purposes only; it doesn’t change the fact that, as a matter of general law, the person remains domiciled outside the UK. And the definition in the treaty looks to the general law definition, not the tax-specific position. Furthermore, the deemed domiciled rule expressly says that it’s subject to tax treaties. The point is not beyond doubt, but advisers in this area are reasonably confident subject to UK inheritance tax on their non-UK situs property (like Infosys shares), no matter how long they live in the UK.6Provided they do indeed remain a non-dom. If Mrs Murty remained in the UK for say thirty more years then it could be hard for her executors to demonstrate that this was the case – see e.g. the recent Shah case The 15-year rule that applies to everyone else doesn’t apply to Indian domiciled individuals. India is unusual in this respect.7There are similar treaties with a number of countries – but most (like Italy and France) impose their own estate taxes. The “loophole” exists when we have treaties with countries that used to have estate taxes, but now don’t, such as India, Pakistan, and Sweden
Hence Ms Murty’s estate probably won’t pay £300m of inheritance tax when she dies, no matter how long she stays in the UK,8Provided of course she remains domiciled in India and whether the tax is repealed is largely irrelevant to her.9“Largely” because she presumably has some non-Indian property which would be subject to inheritance tax when her 15 years are up, plus some UK property which is already within the scope of inheritance tax. There are other less tangible ways she might prefer abolition to the current position. First, it means she could become UK domiciled with less dramatic tax consequences. Second, because the Indian treaty exemption doesn’t apply to Mr Sunak, and so if Ms Murty dies first, she’d need her children to inherit (probably via a trust of some kind) rather than passing the £750m to Mr Sunak, and therefore (eventually) guaranteeing a big payday for HMRC. Thanks to Dan Davies for making the last two points.10Also note that, if Ms Murty chose, she could set up an “excluded property trust” before her 15 years are up which would in essence preserve much of the benefit of being a non-dom. That would, however, disqualify her from the 1954 treaty. So Indian non-doms face a difficult decision as they approach year 15. Do they solely rely on the treaty, which is straightforward and requires zero structuring and complication, but could be revoked or amended? Or do they put a trust in place, which would require much more care and cost, would survive revocation of the treaty – but of course trust law could change and make such trusts ineffective.
Why this weird result? Because, in the 1950s, India and the UK both had estate duties, and it was perfectly rational for UK-domiciled individuals to pay only UK estate duty, and Indian-domiciled individuals to pay only Indian estate duty. India abolished its estate duty in the 1970s, making the treaty entirely one-sided – but, combined with the UK deemed domiciled rules years, the result is this valuable loophole11Often the word “loophole” is used inappropriately, for example for something (like non-dom status) which reflects an intentional policy stance. However in this case it seems clear the outcome is both unintended and anomalous for UK resident Indian domiciled individuals.
It’s not up to Ms Murty whether to claim the treaty, and she’s not remotely to blame for being a non-dom or having a potential treaty claim. She’s also not the only one who benefits from the treaty – I gather it is commonly used by Indian ex-pats. But the result is inequitable. The handful of treaties that work this way should be amended or repealed12Or overridden for cases where the treaty creates double non-taxation, and the loophole closed.
Picture by Simon Walker / No 10 Downing Street, licensed under Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)
- 1See Infosys’s most recent disclosures, page 3, about 2/3 of the way down
- 2Domicile is often described as “sticky”. According to HMRC, a change of domicile requires a person to make “profound and extensive changes to his or her lifestyle, habits and intention”. So it would take a positive step for Ms Murty to cease to be a non-dom: for example if she decided the UK was now her permanent home and she was going to spend the rest of her life in the UK.
- 3You might think a relatively young couple like the Sunaks wouldn’t be thinking about inheritance tax; but in my experience the very wealthy absolutely do, and from an early age.
- 4“Obscure” meaning many personal tax specialists aren’t aware of it (unless they have wealthy Indian clients), and I certainly wasn’t previously aware of it.
- 5The consensus view is that this probably overrides the deemed domicile rule, because the deeming is for tax purposes only; it doesn’t change the fact that, as a matter of general law, the person remains domiciled outside the UK. And the definition in the treaty looks to the general law definition, not the tax-specific position. Furthermore, the deemed domiciled rule expressly says that it’s subject to tax treaties. The point is not beyond doubt, but advisers in this area are reasonably confident
- 6Provided they do indeed remain a non-dom. If Mrs Murty remained in the UK for say thirty more years then it could be hard for her executors to demonstrate that this was the case – see e.g. the recent Shah case
- 7
- 8Provided of course she remains domiciled in India
- 9“Largely” because she presumably has some non-Indian property which would be subject to inheritance tax when her 15 years are up, plus some UK property which is already within the scope of inheritance tax. There are other less tangible ways she might prefer abolition to the current position. First, it means she could become UK domiciled with less dramatic tax consequences. Second, because the Indian treaty exemption doesn’t apply to Mr Sunak, and so if Ms Murty dies first, she’d need her children to inherit (probably via a trust of some kind) rather than passing the £750m to Mr Sunak, and therefore (eventually) guaranteeing a big payday for HMRC. Thanks to Dan Davies for making the last two points.
- 10Also note that, if Ms Murty chose, she could set up an “excluded property trust” before her 15 years are up which would in essence preserve much of the benefit of being a non-dom. That would, however, disqualify her from the 1954 treaty. So Indian non-doms face a difficult decision as they approach year 15. Do they solely rely on the treaty, which is straightforward and requires zero structuring and complication, but could be revoked or amended? Or do they put a trust in place, which would require much more care and cost, would survive revocation of the treaty – but of course trust law could change and make such trusts ineffective.
- 11Often the word “loophole” is used inappropriately, for example for something (like non-dom status) which reflects an intentional policy stance. However in this case it seems clear the outcome is both unintended and anomalous
- 12Or overridden for cases where the treaty creates double non-taxation | United Kingdom Politics |
Topline
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stormed out of a meeting at Friday’s Group of 20 summit of foreign ministers in Bali, Indonesia, according to multiple reports, in a predictably dramatic move in the high-ranking Kremlin official’s first direct showdown with Western leaders since Russia invaded Ukraine. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov is pictured at the G20 Foreign Ministers Summit in Indonesia ... [+] on Friday. dpa/picture alliance via Getty Images Key Facts Lavrov left after other diplomats confronted him about Russia’s role in the ongoing food crisis partially caused by the Russian blockade of Ukrainian ports where much of the world’s grain supply travels through, according to the Guardian, an accusation the Kremlin has repeatedly denied despite mounting evidence of Russia’s role in the crisis. Present at the summit were noted Kremlin critics like U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, U.K. Foreign Secretary Liz Truss, top European Union diplomat Josep Borrell and Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba, who appeared virtually. AFP reports Lavrov also skipped sessions where Blinken and Kuleba spoke. Lavrov accused Western leaders of committing “blatant Russophobia” in their criticism of his country at the meeting and said during talks they “lost their train of thought once they started to criticize Russia amid the situation in Ukraine,” according to state-run Russian news outlet Sputnik. Noticeably absent from the summit was a posed group photo with the foreign ministers, an intentional move led by a boycott from Blinken, who did not want to be pictured with Lavrov, according to Japanese news agency Kyodo. Crucial Quote
“If the West doesn’t want talks to take place but wishes for Ukraine to defeat Russia on the battlefield – because both views have been expressed – then perhaps there is nothing to talk about with the West,” Lavrov said at the meeting, according to the Guardian.
What To Watch For
If Russian President Vladimir Putin attends the Group of 20 summit of heads of state in November. The Kremlin said last month Putin plans to participate in the summit but it’s still up in the air if that will be in-person or virtually. It would be the first face-to-face encounter between Putin and leaders like President Joe Biden since he ordered the invasion of Ukraine in February. Further Reading
Russia Says Putin Will Be Part Of G20 Summit—Setting Stage For Showdown With Western Leaders (Forbes)
Lavrov walks out of G20 talks after denying Russia is causing food crisis (Guardian) | Global Organizations |
Ukraine Latest: Zelenskiy Discusses Support With World Bank
China urged Europe to support its proposal aimed at ending the war in Ukraine, although the US has said Beijing’s plan would freeze the Kremlin’s territorial gains. President Xi Jinping is set to meet with more dignitaries, including the leaders of Brazil and Spain, in a bid to build momentum for the blueprint.
(Bloomberg) -- Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy discussed financing from donors for projects to rebuild the country with a World Bank delegation visiting Kyiv.
South Africa’s government is taking legal advice on how to handle an International Criminal Court arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin in the event he attends a BRICS summit in August.
China urged Europe to support its proposal for talks on Russia’s war in Ukraine, although the US has said Beijing’s outline would freeze the Kremlin’s territorial gains. President Xi Jinping is set to meet with more dignitaries, including the leaders of Brazil and Spain, in a bid to build momentum for the blueprint.
Key Developments
- Ukraine Official Creditors Extend Freeze to 2027 Amid IMF Loan
- Russia Seeks 400,000 More Recruits as Latest Ukraine Push Stalls
- Credit Suisse, UBS Among Banks in DOJ Russia-Sanctions Probe
- Xi’s Diplomatic Push Picks Up Following Moscow Visit: Next China
- Putin Arrest Warrant Prompts South Africa to Seek Legal Advice
- Denmark Salvaging Unknown Object in Nord Stream Blast Probe
(All times CET)
Ukraine Creditors Extend Freeze to 2027 (12:30 a.m.)
Ukraine’s group of official creditors have extended a debt repayment standstill until 2027, while the war-ravaged country receives an emergency aid program under the International Monetary Fund.
The agreement came among other financing assurances given Thursday by the group, a key step to unlocking billions of dollars the nation needs to weather Russia’s invasion, now in its second year.
The creditor plan follows an IMF staff-level agreement secured earlier this week for a $15.6 billion package, setting up the first loan to a nation at war in the institution’s 77-year history.
Ukraine Approves Program to Boost Drone Production (5:20 p.m.)
Having already adopted fast-track procedures for drone imports, the authorities now plan to simplify procedures on admitting locally made drones for military use, as well as to improve conditions for their producers, the government said on its website.
Ukrainian producers have already submitted applications for 75 different drone types, including for artillery fire adjustment, evacuation of injured people and fighter drones, according to the statement.
Zelenskiy Meets With World Bank Delegation (5:09 p.m.)
Zelenskiy met with a World Bank delegation headed by Vice President for Europe and Central Asia, Anna Bjerde, thanking the institution for its support during the invasion. This week the World Bank increased its estimate of how much Ukraine will need for its recovery and reconstruction to at least $411 billion.
According to a statement on the president’s website, the participants at today’s meeting discussed the provision of financing by donors under the coordination of the World Bank for projects to restore the country, primarily in the areas of transport infrastructure, electricity and healthcare.
Russia Seeks 400,000 More Recruits (4:45 p.m.)
The Kremlin has dialed back plans for a further offensive in Ukraine this spring after failing to gain much ground and will focus on blunting a new push by Kyiv’s forces expected to begin soon.
The Kremlin is seeking to sign up as many as 400,000 contract soldiers this year to replenish its ranks, according to people familiar with the planning who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss matters that aren’t public.
Read more: Russia Seeks 400,000 More Recruits as Latest Ukraine Push Stalls
Germany Delivers to Ukraine Engineering Vehicles, Machine Guns (3:55 p.m.)
Germany delivered three DACHS armored engineering vehicles, as well as dozens of MG3 machine guns, drone sensors, and spare parts for Leopard 2 tanks and Marder infantry vehicles, according to an updated list of supplies posted on the government’s website.
French Chain to Sell Russia Operations to Local Teams (1:42 pm.)
French home-improvement chain Leroy Merlin will sell its Russia operations to local management, subject to Russian regulatory approval, according to holding company Adeo.
Leroy Merlin, Auchan and Decathlon, all controlled by France’s Mulliez family, had around 77,500 workers in the country as of a year ago.
Read more: Leroy Merlin to Sell Russia Operations to Local Teams
Ukrainian Energy Plants Remain Damaged After Attacks (1:32 p.m.)
More than 20 thermal plant and eight hydroelectric plant units with 5 gigawatts of energy capacity remain damaged after Russian missile and drones attacks, Interfax-Ukraina reported, citing Ukrainian First Deputy Energy Minister Yuriy Vlasenko.
According to the official, most units have been hit many times since last October and others, including five thermal stations and the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, are under Russian occupation.
South Africa Seeks Legal Advice on Putin ICC Warrant (11:52 a.m.)
The ICC issued the warrant against Putin for war crimes related to the alleged abduction of children from Ukraine. South Africa is a signatory to the Rome Statute that established the ICC, and because of that may be obliged to execute the arrest order.
In 2015 South Africa refused to execute an ICC warrant for then-Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir while he was attending an African Union summit in the country.
Read more: Could Putin Really Be Prosecuted for War Crimes?: QuickTake
Denmark Salvaging Unknown Object in Nord Stream Blast Probe (11:26 a.m.)
Denmark is salvaging an unidentified object found next to the Nord Stream 2 undersea gas pipeline that was damaged in a blast in September, as investigators continue to seek who was behind the attack.
The operation comes two weeks after German authorities said they searched a vessel that may have transported explosives used in the attack on the Russian pipelines.
Spain Urges LNG Importers to Turn Away From Russia (11:18 a.m.)
Spain, the biggest European buyer of liquefied natural gas from Russia, urged importers not to sign new contracts with Moscow.
LNG importers received a letter from the government recommending that companies don’t sign up to new purchases from Russia, according to people with knowledge of the matter. The letter, seen by Bloomberg News, doesn’t explicitly mention spot contracts but makes a general plea to step up efforts to find non-Russian supplies of LNG.
More stories like this are available on bloomberg.com
©2023 Bloomberg L.P. | Europe Politics |
KEIR Starmer's determination to "steamroll over Scottish democracy" must be resisted by Labour members, governing voices in the party have warned.
Writing in the Scottish Left Review, Lauren Harper, a member of Labour's Scottish Executive Committee (SEC), questioned what the "point" of the party is under Starmer - and urged members to speak out against the leadership's approach to an array of policy issues.
Meanwhile a former chair of Scottish Labour warned that Starmer is offering "no change" from the current constitutional set-up of the UK, describing this as a "gift to the SNP".
Labour must also take devolved issues more seriously and create policy to stop Westminster being able to overrule the Scottish Parliament, they warned.
It comes after at least nine Scottish Labour officials quit their roles after the leadership allegedly ordered local branches not to debate the situation in Gaza at meetings.
Starmer's position on the Middle East crisis, including appearing to suggest Israel could withhold humanitarian aid from Gaza, have caused outrage among the Labour membership - leading to councillors resigning south of the Border.
He has since denied saying that food, fuel, water and medicines could be withheld - insisting he was simply arguing that Israel has the "right to self-defence".
Harper, a representative for Young Labour on the SEC, called on members to stand together to push for a change in direction from Starmer.
"At the top of the Labour Party, Keir Starmer wishes, once again, to steamroll over Scottish democracy, to overrule the Scottish leadership on trans rights, and to continue housing migrants on barges as a form of temporary accommodation," she wrote.
"Given Labour’s bleak positions despite the solidarity ... you would be entirely forgiven for asking: What exactly is the point of the party?"
She continued: “Starmer’s unease about the two-child cap has shown he is not static, and with enough pressure the wider socialist movement can still change the direction of the party.”
In the same magazine, the SEC's second Young Labour representative, Coll McCail, said Starmer’s policies mean that any victory will rest on the votes of a “disengaged, unenthused public”, and called on members to challenge Labour’s offer of “better-managed decline”.
Meanwhile, two Labour veterans suggested that Starmer’s ditching of “popular, radical policies agreed year-after year at conferences” has left members unenthusiastic about campaigning in the forthcoming General Election.
Former chair of Scottish Labour Bob Thomson and Stephen Smellie, deputy convenor of Unison Scotland, hit out at Starmer’s failure to promise anything for low-income workers, those on hospital waiting lists and young voters.
“If Starmer gets into Downing Street, he will be tied down by his own promises – to the market, to business, to the press – not to do anything that will cost any more money. Is getting him elected really worth getting up in the morning?” they asked.
In response to Westminster’s recent decision to overrule the Scottish Parliament on trans rights and drug rehabilitation, they insisted that Labour must “entrench the powers of the Scottish Parliament on devolved matters so that Westminster cannot block them as has happened too often recently".
Thomson and Smellie continued: “On constitutional reform and decentralisation of decision-making from Westminster, it needs to offer more than promises of reviews. Currently Labour is offering no change in the constitutional relationship between the UK and Scotland. This is a gift to the SNP.”
They added: “A political party needs vision and passion, and Labour must find it or face irrelevance and decline.”
Michael Russell, the SNP's president, said that Labour's own activists speaking out against the party's direction should show Scotland the clear difference between the two parties.
"If Labour’s own supporters and activists now agree that nothing will change for Scotland in the event of a Starmer victory, particularly with regard to the vital issues for our country that the Scottish Parliament has shown are best resolved here, then clearly choosing a better way with the SNP is a no brainer.
"Time and again when the Tories have been kicked out of power a timid Labour Party has then walked away from making real change happen. Now the sell out on everything from the cruel rape clause to the abolition of the House of Lords has started even before they have won an election."
The former constitution secretary continued: "There is broad agreement in Scotland about the fair, equal and supportive society we want to see but Labour’s own activists now freely admit that their own party doesn’t intend to deliver it.
"It isn’t hard to draw a conclusion and take the road independence, which means we never have to through the Westminster cycle of expectation followed by disappointment ever again."
Maggie Chapman, MSP for the Scottish Greens, added: "From embracing a disastrous Brexit that he once opposed to refusing to block the climate-wrecking Rosebank oil field and doubling down on the cruel two child cap that is plunging families across the UK into poverty, it's clear that Sir Keir Starmer is offering more of the same failed policies that have already done so much damage.
"You only have to turn on the news and look at the environmental chaos around us to see how urgent the situation is. We don't have time to waste waiting for the Leader of the Opposition to find the progressive principles that he once told us he stood for."
The issue is bigger than Starmer, Chapman said - it's about the "tired and broken Westminster system he represents".
"Scotland can do so much better," she told The National. "The only way to secure the change that is so vital is by breaking from the past and building a fairer, greener and independent country." | United Kingdom Politics |
US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Karen Donfried attends the donor conference for Moldova to assist the country with the influx of Ukrainian refugees, in Berlin, Germany, April 5, 2022. REUTERS/Hannibal HanschkeRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comWASHINGTON, June 22 (Reuters) - The United States is hopeful that there will soon be a positive resolution of the issues between Turkey, Finland and Sweden regarding the NATO accession bids of the two Nordic countries, the State Department's top diplomat for Europe said on Wednesday.Speaking at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee (SFRC) hearing, Karen Donfried, assistant secretary for Europe and Eurasian affairs, said Washington understood that the talks between the parties earlier this week had been constructive."We are confident that this will be resolved in a positive way. There is broad and deep support across the NATO alliance for Finnish and Swedish accession," she said.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comFinland and Sweden applied for NATO membership in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. But the bids have faced opposition from Turkey, which has been angered by what it says is Helsinki and Stockholm's support for Kurdish militants and arms embargoes on Ankara.NATO leaders will convene in Madrid on June 29-30. Any NATO membership requires approval of all 30 members of the alliance. Turkey has been a NATO ally for more than 70 years and has the alliance's second-largest army.Asked if Donfried believed whether all parties will be on the same page by the Madrid summit next week, she said: "I will say that we're certainly pushing for that."Speaking to reporters in Brussels earlier this week following their talks with top representatives from Sweden, Finland and NATO, Turkey's senior officials did not express the same sense of urgency as Donfried and said the NATO summit was not a deadline.Any progress on the Nordic membership bids "now depends on the direction and speed at which these countries will take steps," Turkish presidential spokesperson Ibrahim Kalin said. read more BIDEN-ERDOGAN MEETING?While the problem officially is between Sweden, Finland and Turkey, many analysts have speculated that a more direct involvement from Biden could facilitate a breakthrough.Some believe such an involvement could be a bilateral meeting between Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan and Biden.In a call with reporters, a senior administration official detailed Biden's next bilateral meetings with world leaders on the sidelines of the upcoming G7 and NATO summits but did not announce one with Erdogan."Although obviously the format of these meetings leaves ample opportunity for leaders to engage on the margins," said the official, speaking on the condition of anonymity.Ties between the United States and Turkey remain sour as the two NATO allies are at odds over a host of issues including Syria policy and Ankara's purchase of Russian defense systems.Biden and Erdogan last met in person in October 2021 on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Rome.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by Humeyra Pamuk; editing by Jonathan Oatis and Josie KaoOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Europe Politics |
The first thing to say about the idea of appointing a minister for men, as suggested last week by Tory MP Nick Fletcher and taken rather seriously by many, is that it is insulting.
Some people seem to have missed this, perhaps because sexism is less taboo than some other types of discrimination. So let’s make it clearer. Imagine appointing a minister for any other dominant group – a minister for white people, say, or heterosexuals, or the able-bodied.
Or how about a minister for the upper classes? You could after all argue that the upper classes suffer from problems specific to their group. Psychological scars from boarding school, hunting-related spinal injuries, receding chins, emotional reticence, an over-reliance on homeopathy, persistent mockery in sketch shows, spite from leftwing columnists and more difficulty, these days, getting an entry job at the BBC. Upper-class teens, some studies show, are more vulnerable to substance abuse. Some of these problems are genetic (or hereditary), some a consequence of their idiosyncratic culture, and some a result of modern attempts to redress class inequality.
So should we appoint a minister to sort these problems out? Of course not. The upper classes may be worse off in a few ways but they are better off in many others: they squat in top jobs and own more of the wealth. Helping them open up emotionally is not an unworthy aim (and might even help the rest of us), but they do not deserve special representation in parliament. After all, there are already lots of them in the cabinet. We would find it insulting.
Men have problems, of course – some specific to being men, some merely because they are humans in an imperfect world – but we should emphasise that they are still on top in most important respects; they retain power, wealth and status. The pendulum has not yet swung to the middle, let alone the other way. In the UK, men now enter the workplace with lower qualifications than women but on average earn more per hour. They are three times as likely to be in full-time jobs, far less likely to be burdened with unpaid work, and they save much more into their pensions. They dominate top positions in nearly every trade and profession, and are less likely to be killed by their partners or to suffer sexual violence. As a group, women have lower social status than men – they are more likely to be slut-shamed, dismissed and talked over. A minister for men? The very idea is offensive.
A second issue with a minister for men is that it is impractical. It is too blunt an instrument. You might as well appoint a minister for all social ills except female oppression. Men suffer from unique problems – but that is because as half the population they fall into all sorts of other discriminated-against categories, and gender interacts with these in complicated ways. However, the problems are not well captured by a focus on men in general, which after all includes the most privileged people in the population.
There is evidence, for example, that working-class men are particularly falling behind in terms of employment. But this is not a problem for middle-class men, who are still ahead. Champions of working-class men insist they don’t want to pit them directly against working-class women. But if so, the correct name for the social ailment we are looking at is ‘“class discrimination” or, perhaps, ‘economic inequality”.
Black men are discriminated against in unique ways. But pitting them against black women – who are also discriminated against, but in slightly different ways – is hardly helpful. After all, the problems black men face are best described as “racism”, not “gender discrimination” – white men are not affected. A minister for racial equality, well versed in intersectionality, would be a welcome idea. A minister for men is not. Men suffer specific mental health problems: the male suicide rate is some three times higher, potentially because men use more violent methods, and men are more likely to abuse alcohol. But women suffer specific mental health problems too: they are more likely to attempt suicide, and to be diagnosed with depression. Ethnic minorities have their own mental health profiles, as do disabled people.
The most practical way to represent these distinct problems in parliament is surely through the existing minister for care and mental health. (Male suicide is already a well-recognised problem, the focus of many high-profile campaigns.)
Another impracticality might be that a minister for men would sit uneasily in a cabinet that includes a minister for women and equalities – rather like appointing a minister for levelling up and a minister for levelling down.
Surprisingly, though, part of what Fletcher seems to have in mind for his minister for men makes the job sound more like a minister for women in disguise. In interviews, he spoke of encouraging men into jobs such as nursing and primary school teaching, echoing the work of author Richard Reeves, who has written persuasively about the need to get men into the caring professions – and tackling the spread of misogyny influenced by figures such as Andrew Tate.
This is, of course, exactly what feminists want and have campaigned for. They want men and boys to curb their misogyny. They want men to make room in “male” professions, which might mean men filling the gaps in traditionally “female” ones. They want men to adapt themselves to a more equal world.
If this is really the aim of a minister for men, his duties belong within the larger women and equalities brief, not in a separate role. Changing male behaviour is the other half of the feminist battle; it is not a bad idea to give it more focus. But let’s not call it minister for men.
Martha Gill is an Observer columnist | United Kingdom Politics |
The results from Tamworth and Mid-Bedfordshire represent one of the worst by-election nights that any government has had to endure.
In Tamworth, the 23.9% swing from Conservative to Labour was the second highest in post-war by-election history. No government has previously lost so safe a seat - the Conservatives had a 42% majority in 2019 - to the principal opposition party in a by-election contest.
In Mid-Bedfordshire it was a little lower, 20.5%. However, the Conservatives' own share of the vote fell by even more than in Tamworth. Indeed, the 28.7 point drop in Mid-Bedfordshire was the sixth biggest fall in Tory support in the post-war period.
The swing to Labour was lower than in Tamworth because the spoils were shared between Labour and the Liberal Democrats, both of whom - in contrast to previous by-elections in this parliament - campaigned vigorously in this contest.
However, the Liberal Democrats' hopes of winning the seat from third place were dashed.
Even so, both results were much closer to the 24-point swing in July in Selby and Ainstey than the more modest seven-point swing in Uxbridge. Tory MPs hoped that the result in the London seat in the summer pointed to a potential pathway back to electoral recovery. Now it looks rather more like a mirage.
Meanwhile, there are disturbing echoes for the Conservatives in the results of by-elections in the parliament of 1992 to 1997, at the end of which the party crashed to defeat.
In the last three years of that parliament, there were four by-elections in which there was a swing of more than 20% from Conservative to Labour. Now we have had three in just three months.
Moreover, one of those four by-elections in the 1992-1997 parliament was in Tamworth itself, albeit the seat was then called South East Staffordshire. In April 1996, Tony Blair's New Labour party captured the seat with a 22-point swing. History has repeated itself almost exactly.
The Tamworth result is also significant because the seat voted heavily for Leave in 2016, while Labour's vote in the constituency has been in long-term decline. Labour's success in the seat augurs particularly well for its ability to recapture the many Leave-voting, "Red Wall" seats the party lost in 2019.
The Conservatives' difficulties in Tamworth were probably also compounded by the relatively good performance of the pro-Brexit Reform Party, which saved its deposit by winning just over 5% of the vote.
Of course, swings against the government are often an exaggerated reflection of the current national mood. Indeed, the swing in both by-elections was rather less than the 14 or 15 point swing currently being registered by the national polls.
We certainly cannot presume that the Conservatives would do so badly as they did on Thursday if there were a general election anytime soon.
However, the fact Labour are now matching what the party achieved in by-elections 30 years ago strongly corroborates the message at the polls: that the Conservatives are in deep electoral trouble.
True, turnout fell heavily - by around 30 points - in both seats. That led Conservative spokespersons to argue the results were evidence of discontent with the Conservatives, whose supporters thus stayed at home, rather than enthusiasm for Labour. Consequently, they suggest, the party could still turn things around by the time of the next election.
However, turnout fell just as heavily in those by-elections in the 1992-1997 parliament that recorded high swings to Labour.
In short, it looks as though Rishi Sunak will have to achieve what John Major proved unable to deliver before 1997 - a dramatic reversal of a public mood that is inclined to turf the Conservatives out of office. He now knows that will not be easy.
John Curtice is Professor of Politics, Strathclyde University and Senior Research Fellow, Scottish Centre for Social Research and 'The UK in a Changing Europe'. He is also co-host of the 'Trendy' podcast. | United Kingdom Politics |
Head of delegates prepare for a meeting on the last day of the G20 finance ministers and central bank governors meeting in Jakarta, Indonesia, February 18, 2022. Mast Irham / Pool via REUTERSRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comJuly 10 (Reuters) - IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva is pushing China and other Group of 20 economies to speed up debt relief for a growing number of heavily indebted countries, warning that failure to do so could unleash a damaging "downward spiral."Georgieva told Reuters it was crucial to jumpstart the largely stalled Common Framework for debt treatments that was adopted by the G20 and the Paris Club of official creditors in October 2020 but has failed to deliver a single result thus far."This is a topic we cannot have complacency on," she said. "If trust is eroded to a point that there is a downward spiral, you don't know where it would end," the head of the International Monetary Fund said in an interview late last week ahead of this week's meeting of finance officials in Indonesia.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comGeorgieva said she spoke with Indonesian President Joko Widodo, who holds the rotating presidency of the G20 this year, during last month's Group of Seven meeting in Germany and urged him to push for greater unity on debt before the G20 leaders summit in November."G20 leaders don't want to be in a situation in which that issue dominates the conversation just because we are not making progress," Georgieva said.Western officials are stepping up criticism of the G20 Common Framework process after nearly two years of glacial progress blamed largely on foot-dragging by China, the world's largest sovereign creditor, and private sector creditors.Georgieva said almost a third of emerging market countries and twice that proportion of low-income countries were in debt distress, with the situation worsening as advanced economies raised interest rates.Capital outflows from emerging markets were continuing and almost one in three of these countries now had interest rates of 10% or higher, Georgieva said, noting more middle-income countries, including Sri Lanka and Malawi, were seeking help from the fund, with others likely to follow."The pressure on us to move is very high," she said, noting the war in Ukraine had exacerbated the crises emerging market and developing economies faced because of the pandemic.Georgieva said it was imperative to agree on debt relief for Zambia, Chad and Ethiopia, three African countries that have requested help under the Common Framework and whose creditor committees meet this month. read more She urged China to better coordinate among its multiple lenders, warning Beijing would be the "first to lose dramatically" if current debt problems tipped into a full-blown crisis.Georgieva said she was encouraged China had agreed to co-chair Zambia's creditor committee."My message to everybody is, let's stop the finger pointing," she said. "There's a job to be done."Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by Andrea Shalal; Editing by Sam HolmesOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Global Organizations |
ir Keir Starmer told Sadiq Khan on Friday to “reflect” on the expansion of Ulez to Outer London after it was blamed for handing the Tories a by-election victory in Uxbridge and South Ruislip.
The Labour leader’s blunt intervention threw the extension of the scheme to the capital’s suburbs into doubt.
After the Conservatives held onto Boris Johnson’s former constituency by less than 500 votes, Sir Keir said: “We didn’t take it in 1997 when we had a landslide Labour victory. And Ulez was the reason we didn’t win there yesterday.
“We know that. We heard that on the doors. And we’ve all got to reflect on that, including the mayor.”
He pressed home the point, adding: “We’ve got to look at the result. The mayor needs to reflect. And it’s too early to say what should happen next.”
The London Mayor said he was ready to listen to Londoners in the aftermath of the Uxbridge and South Ruislip by-election, after the Conservatives clung on to the seat by a couple of hundred votes by tapping in to anger over the scheme.
But on Friday he was still sticking to his plans despite the backlash which saw Tory Steve Tuckwell beat Labour's Danny Beales by just 495 votes.
However the Tories lost in Somerton and Frome in Somerset, with the Liberal Democrats overturning a massive majority.
Labour also stormed to victory in Selby and Ainsty in North Yorkshire, with Keir Mather beating the Conservatives by more than 4,100 votes.
Mr Tuckwell said his victory was down to London Mayor Mr Khan’s “damaging and costly” Ultra Low Emission Zone expansion to the Greater London boundary.
“The message from Uxbridge and South Ruislip is clear - Sadiq Khan has lost Labour this election, and it was his damaging and costly Ulez policy that did it,” he said.
Labour Deputy Labour leader Angela Rayner also blamed Ulez for the failure to snatch the seat.
She told BBC Breakfast: “I think one of the things we have to reflect on today is not only the mood against the Tories, but also the decision in Uxbridge was related to Ulez.
“The Uxbridge result shows that when you don’t listen to the voters, you don’t win elections."
But later on Friday, Mr Khan vowed to press ahead with his expansion of Ulez on August 29.
The mayor said he was “disappointed” by the result but that extending the clean air zone London-wide continued to be “really important”.
“We know every day that there are people dying prematurely,” said Mr Khan.
“There are children with stunted lungs because of air pollution, adults with a whole load of health issues.
“So we’re going to carry on doing what we can to support Londoners [with the expansion].
“But the reality is that actually 95 per cent of Londoners who drive a car in inner London have a compliant vehicle. In outer London, it’s around 90 per cent.
“Clearly, we need to make sure that more Londoners with non-compliant vehicles have the support they need.”
He said he would “carry on listening” to Londoners about the expansion.
Tory peer and pollster Lord Hayward stressed that the Uxbridge result had political implications beyond London.
He said that the swings in Selby and Somerton were “absolutely massive” but it was a “good/relieved result for the Tory Party in Uxbridge”.
He added: “One thing about Uxbridge which is interesting, is one thinks about it as Ulez and a London issue.
“But the Tories did less badly in local elections in May in places like Dartford and Thurrock.
“Ulez has implications for a string of marginals on the eastern side of London, Stevenage, Thurrock, Harlow, Dartford, Gravesend, so the Labour Party will be looking very carefully at the implications not only in Greater London but outside.”
Shortly before midday, David Williams, the leader of the local Labour party in Uxbridge announced he had quit, praising Jeremy Corbyn, which will be seen as a swipe at Sir Keir Starmer.
He tweeted: “ I have resigned as chair of Uxbridge and South Ruislip CLP.
“I am also resigning my membership of the Labour Party. Politics needs to have principles or we end up with people like Boris Johnson and Liz Truss running the country, Jeremy Corbyn gave a huge boost to the Labour Party.”
Just before 2am a recount had been called by the Labour party in Uxbridge as Mr Beales had narrowly failed to overturn the more than 7,000 majority the former prime minister won in 2019.
Turnout in the high profile seat was 46.23 per cent.
Selby and Ainsty
In Selby and Ainsty, new Labour MP Keir Mather joked he had "heard far worse" when asked how he felt about becoming "the Baby of the House".
The 25-year-old will become the youngest MP in the Commons after overturning a 20,137 majority in the North Yorkshire constituency.
In a speech after he was declared the winner of the by-election, Mr Mather said he "understood the enormity of what has just happened".
"We have rewritten the rules on where Labour can win. People have opened their doors to us and embraced our positive vision for the future," he said.
"The people of Selby & Ainsty have sent a clear message. For too long, Conservatives up here and in Westminster have failed us, and today that changes.”
Mr Mather said his first priority would be setting up financial support centres in the constituency, for people to get expert help with issues including mortgage payments and energy bills.
After Mr Mather's speech, defeated Conservative candidate Claire Holmes left the venue without talking to reporters.
Labour have said Mr Mather was born in Hull and grew up near Selby, before going to Oxford University.
The party said he has most recently worked as a senior public affairs adviser for the Confederation of British Industry and was formerly a parliamentary researcher for Wes Streeting from 2019 to 2020.
His candidacy was supported by the GMB and Unison unions.
Somerton and Frome
In Somerset the Liberal Democrats declared victory before counting had barely begun.
Sarah Dyke secured a double-digit swing and overturned a massive 19,000 majority.
Leader Ed Davey said: “This stunning victory shows the Liberal Democrats are firmly back in the West Country.
“Sarah Dyke will be an incredible local champion for the people of Somerset who have been neglected for far too long. She will fight for stronger local health services, better access to GPs and a fair deal for rural communities during this cost of living crisis.”
Labour hoped to bag Uxbridge and South Ruislip as well as Selby and Ainsty - vacated by Mr Johnson’s ally Nigel Adams’ resignation.
The Liberal Democrats were eyeing victory in the contest in Somerton and Frome that was triggered by David Warburton quitting following allegations of drug use and sexual harassment.
In a Cabinet meeting earlier this week party chairman Greg Hands briefed senior MPs that they should brace for losses.
Number 10 then published an unredacted photo of his notes on social media with warnings of a “challenging night” scrawled in red ink.
The North Yorkshire constituency of Selby and Ainsty was created at the 2010 general election and has always been held by the Conservatives. Its former MP Nigel Adams won just over 60 per cent of the vote in 2019.
Meanwhile Somerton & Frome has a long history of being a two-horse race between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. Tory David Warburton took nearly 56 per cent of the vote in 2019.
Register for free to continue reading
Sign up for exclusive newsletters, comment on stories, enter competitions and attend events. | United Kingdom Politics |
Fans of Coronation Street are mourning the death of fraudster Stephen Reid, who was by far the best thing in it. Yes, he murdered three people; but most of those kills were accidental and all the victims were irritating, and one always admired how – after nudging a business competitor off some scaffolding – he would convince himself things would somehow turn out okay.
As an optimist and a hard worker, Steve serves as a metaphor for a Tory government that refuses to acknowledge its time is up, and will probably finish, as Steve did, screaming “I still love you!” at his closest friends while holding them hostage outside the Rovers Return.
Which brings me to those half-term contests at Tamworth and Mid-Beds. The Tories say: governments always lose by-elections, they tell us nothing. Yet as recently as 2021, the Government was gaining seats from them, and its recent run of defeats isn’t normal (from 1974-79, by contrast, Labour defended 21 seats and lost only 7). By-elections don’t accurately predict the outcome of a general election, but they do illustrate trends – such as the middle-class tax revolt at Orpington in 1962 or the rise of Scottish nationalism at Hamilton in 1967 – and smart politicians take heed. Defeat at Eastbourne in 1990 persuaded the Tories to ditch Maggie, helping them to win a surprise majority in 1992.
So it’s a testament to what clever commentators call the “system failure” of 21st-century politics that Westminster now sees by-election results entirely through the yin-yang cliche of “Labour up, Tories down”, ignoring the wealth of information hidden within swings. We’ve forgotten how to read democracy.
It’s true that Rishi Sunak’s recent streak of bad luck most closely resembles John Major’s, which indicates that the Conservatives are on the way out, but this is not 1997. There is no comparative wave of hope; Labour is winning by default, not enthusiasm. Turnout in Tamworth was a paltry 36 per cent and Labour won after gaining less than 1,000 votes (in Mid-Beds its vote actually fell).
So the real story is that traditional Conservative voters are abandoning not just the party but the process. Why? Because the economy is bad and Boris and Truss poisoned the brand, no doubt; but also, because the Conservatives do not strike voters as particularly conservative. After 13 years, the state is bigger, your taxes are up and immigration – legal or illegal – is running at record levels, so what is the point in voting for the blues?
Last week, the Justice Secretary announced that prison sentences of less than a year will be largely scrapped. No wonder that in both by-elections, the right-wing Reform party drew enough votes to throw the seat to Labour.
The Tory leadership has been tangling with its grassroots for years: they were in constant revolt under David Cameron, particularly over gay marriage and “green crap”, and Euroscepticism was the expression of a malaise that went well beyond imperial weights and bendy bananas.
How did people register dissent? By-elections at Clacton and Rochester, and to Cameron’s credit he did listen, inserting an in-out referendum into the 2015 manifesto to blunt the Ukip revolt. Thereafter, the battle to leave the EU reconciled conservative voters to the Tories, until it became obvious that ministers had no idea what to do with Brexit – and that what cynics call the “uniparty” had reasserted control at Westminster.
The populist storm is now truly broken; we are back to the two parties as competing brands of the same consensus (economics by the Treasury and cultural policy by the BBC), delivering largely the same product at slightly different speeds. Each tells us that the worst thing that will happen if they lose the next election is that the other party will win, but with the quality of life falling so far so fast, it’s hard to imagine how this could be a threat to the meagre status quo, which is why Tory warnings about Labour do not hit home.
Sunak’s attempts to triangulate around Starmer, himself a triangulator extraordinaire, involves correcting the green or immigration policies of his own predecessors, and the abiding impression is that he uses Right-wing rhetoric to cover Left-wing outcomes – the precise opposite of what a smart Conservative Party would do. Oh for a government that speaks in Christian platitudes while quietly slashing the state, reducing immigration to the tens of tens, and building a royal yacht for every month of the year.
For nearly two decades, our politicians have been elected to office on party labels that don’t reflect their views, relying on the votes of people who don’t agree with them. What is often interpreted as a realignment among voters – the Red Wall switching to Tory, or now the Blue Wall going Lib Dem – is just as likely evidence of a mass dealignment, of people detaching from their historic allegiances and screaming at a computer that has stopped working. They might click on Labour here, Reform there, but really they’re just hitting every darn button on the keyboard in the hope that one of them will reboot this system and get it working again.
Alas, the connection between democracy and delivery is so obviously severed that it’s probably best to regard what we’re left with as pure theatre. The fun is seeing if this week’s villain lives to fight another day. | United Kingdom Politics |
London’s Ulez scheme has been expanded. A new network of cameras filming the traffic movements of millions of Londoners is now switched on. Old cars and vans, often used by sole traders, will be charged £12.50 a day if they pull out of their driveways. Keir Starmer had asked the London Mayor Sadiq Khan to ‘reflect’ on the policy after Labour lost the Uxbridge and South Ruislip by-election. Khan duly did, and concluded that he would stick to plan A. With 4,000 Londoners dying of air pollution every year, he said he had no option.
But if that figure is correct, why has air pollution been mentioned in only one death certificate in four years? Nationally, nitrogen dioxide (NO2) levels have fallen 75 per cent over the past three decades, thanks to cleaner car engines. Academic studies suggest London’s air was 20 times more polluted in the 17th century than it is now. The truth is that, far from the much-touted ‘emergency’, the air in the capital has not been purer since long before the industrial revolution. So what meaningful difference would be made by an expanded Ulez zone?
Khan has sought to answer this with a study his office published on the effects of the first six months of Ulez in central London. It claimed that NO2 levels had fallen 36 per cent since a similar period in 2017. Adjusting for the clean-air trend, Ulez could claim credit for reducing NO2 by 29 per cent. If these figures were true, they would indeed make a clear-cut case for expanding Ulez.
But dig deeper, and it becomes murkier. When challenged on the figures, the Mayor has said he is citing world-class academics. The study was actually conducted by his own office. A team at Imperial College has looked at the data (collected by hundreds of sensors all over the city) and reached dramatically different conclusions. Ulez, they said, had helped lower NO2 levels by just 3 per cent, with a negligible effect on ozone and particulate pollution.
This should have raised serious questions about the scheme. Could it be that the only independent academic study had exposed Ulez as a fraud? And might London’s Mayor be about to impose a highly regressive tax on low-income Londoners without first having made sure that the benefits of his policy would outweigh the costs? Might this clean-air wheeze be an idea that’s simply too fashionable or too lucrative to check?
Having written a book called Breathe, it would certainly be embarrassing for Khan to admit that his flagship policy may be based on error. The same goes for other local government figures who are similarly keen to pose as green crusaders by imposing clean-air zone taxes. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs should have commissioned studies – not just in London but elsewhere too – to stop councils levying new taxes on a false premise. Either such zones make a serious difference, or they do not.
When the real Imperial study was published, Khan should have been mortified at the thought that he was about to immiserate Londoners for no real environmental gain. He should have commissioned a full investigation to put the matter beyond all doubt. Instead, the Mayor’s office sought to discredit the inconvenient new findings. The deputy mayor for the environment and energy, Shirley Rodrigues, wrote to another group at Imperial College asking for help criticising the earlier study that had undermined Ulez. It also transpired that these academics have received £800,000 in funding from the Mayor’s office in the past two years.
So the real effect of low-emission zones remains a mystery that Khan has no interest in resolving. This is a classic example of noble-cause corruption, a trait in academic and public policy where dodgy data is not scrutinised if it is seen to support a virtuous cause. We saw that, too, in the Covid lockdowns. There are financial incentives in scientific academia to heavily support official bodies. The digital world has made scrutiny easier, but the rise of social media has created an environment in which academics who go against the grain risk being attacked and having their careers limited.
During Covid, a revolutionary data dashboard was created by entrepreneurial civil servants so all vital information was made public as soon as it was ready. This empowered outsiders to expose deep flaws in Sage data and avert a new lockdown. Such is the power of transparency.
Rishi Sunak ought to pass a law obliging all public bodies (including Sage) to publish the assumptions, data and calculations behind models and studies used in public policy. The likelihood of scrutiny should deter anyone from trying to cook the figures.
The issue here is far bigger than Ulez. It is about ensuring that the open data era makes for better government – and that the lessons of the Covid response are now learned. Doing so would be hugely beneficial. The Tory government may lack the ability to identify and expose dodgy studies, but it can easily pass laws that enable others to do so. There is still time for Sunak to act. | United Kingdom Politics |
They were hardly the presents Rishi Sunak would have wanted to celebrate his first anniversary as prime minister: two more crushing by-election defeats in hitherto safe Tory seats to add to those he lost in July.
Once again the Tories were on the wrong end of 20 per cent-plus swings, this time in Tamworth and Mid Bedfordshire, which both fell to Labour in the early hours of yesterday morning.
It was, opined the country's premier election guru, John Curtice, 'one of the worst by-election nights any government has had to endure'.
He's right. Of course, by-elections are a chance to protest, not choose a government. Turnouts are usually low, as they were on Thursday. Prime ministers have lost such elections heavily in the past and still gone on to victory in the subsequent general election. But the scale of these latest defeats is staggering, and Tory party managers cannot easily shrug them off.
In Mid Beds, Labour overturned the biggest Tory majority faced in a by-election since 1945. The seat had been a Conservative stronghold since 1931.
The Tories lost Tamworth to Labour even though it had voted for Brexit with a share of 67 per cent. Clearly, the dynamics that gave the Tories their big majority in 2019 no longer apply.
It all adds to the growing sense, already embedded in much of the Tory psyche, that the next election is all over bar the shouting.
Tory by-election defeats under Sunak are eerily on the same scale as those suffered by John Major's hapless Tory government between 1992 and 1997 — and we all know how that ended.
I don't yet sense that Labour is heading for a landslide. Keir Starmer, after all, is no Tony Blair. But the best the Tories can hope for — that, far from being 1997, the next election will be a repeat of 1992 when, against the odds, they held on by the skin of their teeth for another term — is starting to look like a fantasy.
Starmer may be no Blair. But he is no Neil Kinnock, either. By 1992 the country was truly scunnered by the Tories, but voters were still not prepared to entrust its fate to Kinnock, given his record of Left-wing posturing, especially on unilateral nuclear disarmament.
Today people don't fear Starmer in the same way.
They're not gagging for him to be PM. But they're not frightened by the prospect, as they were of Kinnock.
It is not clear what Sunak will do now, before the die is cast and Labour victory is universally regarded as inevitable (as it was by 1996 during the Major years).
Tories grow increasingly despondent at how little difference Sunak has made after 12 months. The polls remain dire for the Tories: Sunak was 27 points behind when he entered No 10 and, while he has clawed back some ground, Labour still leads by 17 per cent.
There has been no 'new leader' bounce the way there was when Major took over from Margaret Thatcher in 1990. The Tory conference in Manchester failed to move the dial.
Sunak has had his successes. But they have not amounted to enough to be the catalyst for a Tory fightback.
He has steadied the ship after the chaotic 45 days of the ClusterTruss interregnum a year ago, which almost brought the country to its knees.
But that was inflicted on the nation by his own party, which selected Liz Truss as PM even though she would obviously be out of her depth, so he was only cleaning up an unnecessary Tory mess.
Moreover, the high interest rates which her cack-handed stewardship of the economy produced have remained elevated, with mortgage rates and government borrowing costs rising everywhere.
Sunak's 'Windsor Framework', though far from perfect, has stabilised Northern Ireland's relationship with the rest of the United Kingdom and largely removed it as a cause of friction with the European Union.
But, again, that was cleaning up a problem created by the Tories (this time Boris Johnson). So voters are not inclined to accord Sunak much credit.
He has backtracked somewhat from the expensive folly that is net zero, though not by nearly enough. And, at a time of acute geopolitical unrest and danger, the PM has been a safe pair of hands and shown resolute support for Ukraine and Israel.
But he does not cut a distinctive figure on the world stage. His visit to Israel this week, welcome as it was, seemed almost like a footnote to President Biden's.
Nor are there many votes in foreign policy which, on the big issues, is now largely bipartisan. Starmer has been careful to echo government policy at every important turn. Neither Sunak nor Starmer brings any particular authority or expertise to these troubled times. Foreign policy does not differentiate them. Nor, as things stand, will it determine the next election.
Sunak's biggest problem is the economy. After a year in power, it is still mired in sclerotic growth, stubbornly strong inflation, a record-high tax burden, a fierce cost-of-living squeeze, rising national debt (which high interest rates are making ever more expensive to service) and stagnant productivity, which hinders increased prosperity.
It is a dismal catalogue of woe which has condemned the Sunak government to inaction. No radical supply-side reforms — such as a bonfire of red tape — to pep up the economy, a la Thatcher (the Treasury has convinced Sunak they don't work), no tax cuts to encourage enterprise and incentives (we 'can't afford them'), no strategy for growth, without which nothing is possible. Instead, the policy is simply to plough on regardless.
The consequences are enough to give any self-respecting Tory the heebie-jeebies. More than 6.5 million low-paid workers will start paying income tax again, reversing a decade of Tory efforts to take them out of tax.
More than 4.5 million folks on middling incomes are being dragged into higher tax brackets that were designed for big earners. Business faces higher tax on profits with a corporate tax regime that has plummeted down the global competitive league tables.
Together it amounts to a £52 billion tax grab in which families will pay considerably more tax for the privilege, when they fall ill, of joining the 7.75 million on NHS waiting lists.
If Sunak does go down to defeat at the next election it will not be because he's been too Tory. It will be because he has not been Tory enough — or even Tory at all.
Time is running out for him. He continues to brandish his five pledges for 2023 — halving inflation, growing the economy, cutting debt, reducing NHS waiting lists, stopping the small boats. Some he will succeed in delivering, just (such as inflation), others he will fail (debt, small boats, waiting lists, too little growth to notice). Even if he does better, it will not be an election-winning prospectus.
There is a last chance. The British people want to feel their own circumstances are improving again — that the worst of the cost-of-living crisis is behind them — and that they live in a country of which they can be proud (and in which the things that matter work).
Sunak needs to focus relentlessly on the policies that will deliver on both fronts and eschew all other diversions (his Manchester speech was full of diversions irrelevant to winning the election, such as a ten-year reform of A-levels or tougher anti-smoking laws).
It will not be easy. Global turmoil could yet bring more economic pain. There is less than a year to make a difference.
It will require vision, discipline, a willingness to say no to the myriad opportunists that lobby government for favours, distracting from the only two tasks that matter — getting living standards to rise and making sure Britain stands tall in the world again.
Chancellor Jeremy Hunt needs to make a start in his Autumn Statement next month, though I'm not holding my breath.
'Time for a change' is the most potent slogan in politics, and it is already a powerful rallying cry in today's Britain, as the by-elections show. Without the ruthless focus I'm talking about from Sunak and his ministers it will have swept this government out of power by this time next year. | United Kingdom Politics |
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, U.S. President Joe Biden, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Japan's Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, European Council President Charles Michel, Italy's Prime Minister Mario Draghi, Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and France's President Emmanuel Macron attend a round table for their first working session of G7 group at Bavaria's Schloss Elmau Castle, near Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany June 26, 2022. John MacDougall/Pool via REUTERSRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comSCHLOSS ELMAU, Germany, June 26 (Reuters) - G7 leaders will discuss the prospect of reviving the Iran nuclear talks after the European Union's foreign policy chief met senior officials in Tehran to try to unblock the stalled negotiations, a French presidency official said on Sunday.Iran's indirect talks with the United States on reviving the 2015 nuclear pact will resume soon, the Iranian foreign minister said on Saturday amid a push by the Josep Borrell to break a months-long impasse.The official said discussions would take place on Sunday at a dinner between the leaders of the Group of Seven rich nations with more detailed talks taking place on Tuesday morning between France, Britain, Germany and the United States.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comThe three European powers are parties to the nuclear deal, which then-U.S. President Donald Trump pulled out of in 2018. Under the accord Iran agreed to curbs on its nuclear programme in return for relief from economic sanctions.The pact appeared close to being revived in March when the EU - which is coordinating negotiations - invited foreign ministers representing the accord's parties to Vienna to finalise an agreement after 11 months of indirect talks between Tehran and President Joe Biden's administration.But the talks have since been bogged down, chiefly over Tehran's insistence that Washington remove the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), its elite security force, from the U.S. Foreign Terrorist Organization list."Talks have intensified between our teams," said the French official, adding that it was crucial to revive the pact for the nuclear non-proliferation benefits, regional security and also to see how it all fits into the question of high oil prices.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comEditing by Toby ChopraOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Global Organizations |
Discover more from The Global Prosperity Institute
The Economist’s Industrial Policy Split Personality
The newspaper is tying itself in knots on industrial policy, maligning the means but embracing the ends.
The Economist wants you to know that it thinks industrial policy is a bad idea. It wants you to know that it thinks industrial policy is a bad idea so much that it wrote a seven article long special report back in October, explaining all the ways in which industrial policy is a bad idea.
Overall, it is “a big mistake”. It won’t make supply chains resilient. It will make the world poorer. It will make the world more unequal. Using it for environmental protection is too risky. It will not achieve economic stability.
We get the picture. The Economist is anti-industrial policy. Case closed. Or is it? Not two months after it committed its cold-blooded assassination of industrial policy, the newspaper published an article celebrating France’s success in revitalising its lagging industrial sector by using er… industrial policy. The article informs readers that “France got serious about a new industrial policy after being spooked by Germany’s decision in 2022 to splurge on its own industrial transition.” And it is full of references to exactly what industrial policy looks like when it is done well.
There is this section, for example: “The French public investment bank, Bpifrance, has also turned out to be a linchpin for France’s entrepreneurs. When it was set up in 2013, sceptics feared it would grow into an unwieldy bureaucracy, under political orders to prop up ailing firms. Today it manages assets worth €50bn, and in 2022 made net profits of €1.5bn.”
France has certainly proven those sceptics wrong, whoever they were. So, why the cognitive dissonance? It may simply be a matter of definitions. The Economist’s idea of industrial policy is stuck in the 1970s. They are quick to contrast France’s success today with the failures of centralised control structures of dirigisme. They even quote the Industry Minister, Roland Lescure as insisting that this is in “no way a return to the dirigisme of the past. It’s not about doing it all ourselves in the ministry.” In their eyes, this can’t be industrial policy because it isn’t dirigisme.
We’re singling out the Economist here, but they are by no means the only culprits. The Times’ view on the Labour Party’s new economic plans for the UK, for example, is that it “recall[s] the errors of industrial strategy in the 1970s… assuming, without evidence, that governments know better than the market”. Industrial policy is reduced to government sitting in its ivory tower picking winners and failing miserably. It’s a tired trope that is easily dismantled in 2023.
As the Economist’s France article so helpfully shows, modern industrial policy is a huge departure from that 1970s stereotype. It can be the chic “La France Tech” marketing platform. Or the new France 2030 plan investing €54bn in future and green technologies. It can also be sitting a German vacuum pump maker next to Elon Musk at a dinner at the Château de Versailles. Even old-fashioned subsidies and cheap capital can be effective too, according to the Economist’s telling of how China became a world leader in electric vehicle manufacturing.
Dani Rodrik sums up the new industrial policy here, explaining his work with Réka Juhász and Nathan Lane applying natural language processing to generate classifications of industrial policies. It’s past time that influential organisations like the Economist and the Times stopped the industrial policy bashing and updated their definitions, and their priors. As the Brookings Institute notes, “effective industrial policy has been at the core of virtually every economic transformation success story around the world”. Even the IMF now thinks that industrial policy can sometimes maybe not be completely terrible.
Industrial policy is not a blank cheque, of course. Blank cheques in policymaking don’t exist. And the key word in the Brookings quote above is “effective”. Industrial policy doesn’t work everywhere all the time and there is certainly a long list of examples of where it has been ineffective, even damaging.
Ricardo Hausmann’s new article for Project Syndicate likens industrial policy to our immune system, “which protects against various invaders by using a highly decentralized detection network to identify threats and determine when it needs to act.” Sometimes our immune systems get it wrong. But it gets stronger as it is exposed to new challenges.
Our immune system learns, adapts and strengthens itself. Industrial policy is the same. In the half century since the 1970s we have learned from our mistakes, adapted our views and strengthened our policies. It’s about time the Economist caught up.
Thanks for reading The Global Prosperity Institute! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support our work. | Europe Politics |
Spain is ready to sign a deal on the post-Brexit status of Gibraltar as early as Wednesday, the country’s foreign minister, José Manuel Albares, has said before a meeting in Brussels with his British counterpart, David Cameron.
The deal will centre on trade, immigration and the movement of workers to and from Spain. According to Spain’s Efe news agency, it will include plans to turn the Campo de Gibraltar – the Spanish area around Gibraltar – into a “zone of shared prosperity” that would eliminate the border fence so as to allow the movement of people and goods between the territory and the EU.
Albares said he had spoken with Cameron by phone on Monday and they had agreed to meet in Brussels on Tuesday afternoon to further discuss the status of the territory at the southern tip of Spain, which has been under British rule since the 18th century.
“We put a generous and balanced deal on the table many months ago,” Albares said in an interview with the Spanish TV station Telecinco on Tuesday.
Speaking to reporters as he arrived at a meeting of Nato foreign ministers in Brussels, Albares added: “I think this deal – this ‘zone of ahead prosperity’ in the Campo de Gibraltar – is better for everyone than the application of European legislation after British citizens democratically decided to leave the European Union.
“There’s already been political will on the part of the Spanish government for many months. There’s nothing new for me to add. What’s needed now is that political will on the part of the United Kingdom to move forward decisively, which is what I’ve seen so far. But we won’t know until the end. Nothing will be agreed until it’s all agreed.”
Although Spain wants to sign the deal as soon as possible, Albares said he would discuss possible timeframes for finalising the agreement with Cameron.
Sources in Brussels were cautious, saying there “[was] a long way to go”, with a meeting between the EU and the UK expected in the coming weeks.
The status of Gibraltar – and how to police the border with Spain – has been a point of contention since Britain’s vote to leave the EU in 2016.
Trade and free movement were not part of the exit deal reached between the UK and the EU.
Although there are similarities between Gibraltar and Northern Ireland – which has a separate set of Brexit trade arrangements – officials caution that a trade deal between the EU and Gibraltar would centre on full alignment with EU standards.
Under the Windsor framework for Northern Ireland arrangements, certain goods, such as fresh farm produce, have to meet EU standards if they are to be sold onwards to the republic of Ireland.
In Gibraltar’s case, a deal would centre on goods crossing the border into the EU, hence the need for full alignment with EU rules and regulations.
As part of the Brexit negotiations, Spain, Britain and the EU agreed Gibraltar would remain part of EU agreements, such as the Schengen area, and Spain would police the port and the airport, pending a lasting solution.
Albares said the aim was to establish a new, post-Brexit legal framework to “lay the foundations for a stable relationship between Spain and the EU on the one hand and the territory of Gibraltar, through the UK, on the other”.
According to the Spanish foreign ministry, the deal would allow Spain to use the Schengen agreement to control Gibraltar’s external borders. It would also allow Spain to protect and improve the rights of cross-border workers and would facilitate the free movement of goods “without increasing the risks for the EU internal market”.
The agreement would include steps to combat money laundering and guarantee environmental protection and nuclear safety standards.
The primary aim, Albares said, was “the defence and protection of the interests and rights” of Spanish citizens, in particular, the 270,000 people who live in the Campo de Gibraltar.
The minister stressed that Spain’s position on Gibraltar’s sovereignty remained unchanged.
“Neither the future agreement, nor any option or measure taken in application or as a result thereof, imply or will imply any renouncing or modification of the legal position of Spain with respect to sovereignty and jurisdiction in relation to Gibraltar,” he said. | Europe Politics |
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky alleged on Monday that Russia had hit a crowded shopping mall in the Kremenchuk region and said the casualties were “impossible to imagine.” Sharing the video from the strike on his Telegram account, Zelensky said: “The mall is on fire, firefighters are trying to extinguish the fire, the number of victims is impossible to imagine.” He added that there was “no danger to the Russian army” and the shopping mall had posed “no strategic value” at all. According to Zelensky, people at the mall “only wanted to live a normal life, which is what angers the occupiers so much.” “Out of helplessness, Russia continues to hit ordinary people. It is vain to expect it to be reasonable or humane,” he added. The video shows a large structure engulfed in flames with a crowd running outside. The deputy head of the office of the president Kyrylo Tymoshenko confirmed that two people had died and 20 had been injured in the strike, the BBC reported. Officials say the numbers are likely to rise. “A rocket attack on Kremenchuk hit a very crowded area, which is 100% certain not to have any links to the armed forces. There are killed and injured people,” Kremenchuk Mayor Vitaliy Maletskiy said on Facebook. Zelensky is meeting with G7 leaders who are gathered in Germany via video link. NATO said Monday that it plans to significantly increase its quick-reaction force “to well over 300,000” soldiers. Russia’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine has entered its fourth month and has resulted in the deaths of thousands of people on both sides. More than 8 million Ukrainian citizens have been displaced by the war. Over the weekend, Zelensky shared an emotional note on the toll of the war on Ukrainians and said that “no Russian missiles, no strikes can break the morale of Ukrainians.” Tags Russia-Ukraine war ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky Volodymyr Zelensky | Europe Politics |
Boris Johnson has warned about the likelihood of “fatigue” among western nations over continued support for Ukraine, as he began talks at the G7 summit in Germany, where he hopes to push for renewed sanctions against Russia.Ahead of the first day of the annual gathering of political leaders, held amid ultra-tight security in the Bavarian countryside, Johnson also hailed a new international export ban on Russian gold.Speaking to reporters at the summit, Johnson, who has made support for Ukraine and its president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, one of the defining features of his premiership, warned that it would be hard to maintain a united front in the longer term.“Realistically there is going to be fatigue in populations and politicians,” he warned, saying it was possible the current near-unanimity of the response to Russia’s invasion could begin to fracture.“I think the pressure is there and the anxiety is there, we have got to be honest about that,” Johnson said.“But the most incredible thing about the way the west has responded to the invasion of Ukraine by Putin has been the unity – Nato has been solid, the G7 has been solid and we continue to be solid.“But in order to protect that unity, in order to make it work, we have got to have really, really honest discussions about the implications of what’s going on, the pressures that individual friends and partners are feeling, that populations are feeling – whether it’s on the costs of their energy or food or whatever.”Johnson arrived at the talks from Rwanda, where he had been taking part in a Commonwealth summit. He will then head from Germany to Madrid for a gathering of Nato leaders, which will also be dominated by Ukraine.Zelenskiy is scheduled to take part virtually in both summits, with Downing Street saying Johnson would push for moves towards new sanctions and, at the Nato gathering, more countries to increase their defence spending.In what could be seen as a pointed omission, asked just before a bilateral meeting with Emmanuel Macron about whether France and Germany ware doing enough over Ukraine, Johnson only mentioned the German response.“I never believed in my lifetime that I would see a German chancellor stepping up in the way that Olaf Scholz has and sending weaponry to help the Ukrainians to protect themselves,” he said.“He has made huge, huge strides. We have 4% of our gas comes from Russia; in Germany, it’s 40%. They are facing real, real pressures, they are having to source energy from elsewhere. But they are doing it. They are making the effort. They are making the sacrifice. That’s because they see that the price of freedom is worth paying.“This is something that it’s worth us standing up for together. And that is the principle that a free, independent sovereign country like Ukraine should not be violently invaded and should not have its boundaries changed by force.”Johnson, who will spend nine days overseas for the three summits, amid renewed discontent at his leadership among Tory MPs back in the UK, is scheduled to have a meeting with Scholz later on Sunday.In much-reported comments just before he left Rwanda, prime minister sought to dismiss speculation he could be replaced after two devastating byelection losses for his party on Thursday by saying he hoped to serve a third term as prime minister and stay in power into the 2030s.Ahead of the start of the G7, a joint announcement by the UK, Canada, the US and Japan said that new exports of Russian gold would no longer be allowed to enter the countries.A Downing Street statement said Johnson would use the G7 to urge other leaders to follow suit, and seek to isolate Russia from the international finance system. | Europe Politics |
A Russian state-run news agency says the Russian government has put on a wanted list an International Criminal Court judge from Japan who was involved in issuing an arrest warrant for President Vladimir Putin.
The news agency reported on Thursday that Akane Tomoko has been put on a list of people wanted by Russia's interior ministry. The agency did not say what charge she faces.
In March, the ICC issued arrest warrants on war crimes charges for Putin as well as Russia's commissioner for children's rights. The court said they were responsible for the unlawful deportation and transfer of children to Russia from occupied areas of Ukraine.
In response, Russia's Investigative Committee opened a criminal case against three ICC judges including Akane, as well as an ICC prosecutor.
The committee announced in May that it had charged the prosecutor, Karim Khan, and one of the judges, Rosario Salvatore Aitala, in absentia, calling their actions unlawful.
Last week, Russia's presidential office said that President Putin will not attend in person a BRICS summit in South Africa next month.
South Africa is a signatory of the ICC, and would have been required to arrest Putin if he had entered the country. | Europe Politics |
More than six in 10 Scots think the SNP’s health secretary should resign over the £11,000 roaming charges he racked up on holiday.
An Ipsos poll for STV News found 61 per cent of people thought Michael Matheson should quit over the scandal, with 31 per cent stating he should remain in post.
More SNP voters from the 2021 Holyrood election thought that Mr Matheson should resign (52 per cent) than believed he should continue in his role (44 per cent).
Douglas Ross, the Scottish Tory leader, said the poll showed “the Scottish public can see right through Michael Matheson’s tissue of lies and cover-ups” and that he had to stand down.
But Mr Matheson continued to refuse to resign, saying he was focused on supporting the NHS to help it cope with winter pressures.
He insisted he had repaid the taxpayer for the charges as soon as he became aware that his two teenage sons had been using his parliamentary iPad as an internet hotspot to watch football matches while on holiday.
However, Holyrood’s authorities handed Mr Matheson a breakdown of the £10,935.74 bill on Feb 7 – more than nine months before he repaid the money – showing the bill surged on the days of football fixtures.
He told the parliament at the time he had used the iPad solely for constituency matters and it allowed him to use his taxpayer-funded expenses to fund £3,000 of the bill. Holyrood funded the £7,935.74 balance from its own budget.
Mr Matheson only agreed to pay back the money from his own pocket on Nov 10, two days after the Telegraph disclosed the bill. His annual salary is £118,511.
In a statement to MSPs, he claimed he had only found out his sons had used the device to watch football on Nov 9 when he was informed by his wife.
However, he later falsely told the media on Nov 13 that nobody else had used the device and there was no personal use.
The Falkirk West MSP has not explained how he thought he had run up the bill on constituency business. The roaming charges on Jan 2, the day of the Old Firm match between Rangers and Celtic, were £7,345.69 but this was a public holiday.
Humza Yousaf told the media on Nov 15 that “I absolutely take Michael at his word” that the roaming charges were incurred entirely for constituency work.
Mr Matheson later admitted that he had informed Mr Yousaf on Nov 14 – the day before the First Minister made his comments – that the charges had been run up by his two teenage sons watching football.
Asked about the poll, Mr Matheson said: “I recognise some of the public concern around this issue.
“Of course, as soon as I became aware that the iPad had been used for personal purposes – unbeknown to me – I took immediate action in order to reimburse the parliament for those costs.
“But I’ve got an important job that I need to get on with. From my point of view, I’ve been very clear about getting on with my job as health secretary – you can see over the course of the last couple of weeks I’ve continued to focus on doing that job.”
‘Poll shows Yousaf’s arrogance’
But Mr Ross said: “By a huge majority they recognise the health secretary’s position is untenable and that he has to go. It beggars belief that Humza Yousaf and Michael Matheson refuse to recognise this, when even a majority of SNP supporters do.
“This poll demonstrates how arrogant and out of touch the First Minister was to not just stand by a totally discredited minister but aid and abet his efforts to mislead the public.”
Dame Jackie Baillie, Scottish Labour’s deputy leader, said: “The verdict of the Scottish Public is clear – they want a health minister that is focused on our NHS, not one focused on saving his job.
‘Matheson has misled the public’
“Michael Matheson has misled the public and taken the focus away from the ongoing and deadly crisis in our NHS. It is time for Michael Matheson to step aside.”
The survey also showed 40 per cent of Scots intend to vote SNP in next year’s general election, down one point on a similar poll conducted in May.
Backing for Labour was up one point to 30 per cent, while the Tories were down two points on 15 per cent.
Scots were slightly more likely to agree that Labour is ready to form the next UK Government (41 per cent) than to disagree (36 per cent).
However, more people disagreed (45 per cent) than agreed (32 per cent) that Labour was ready to form the next Scottish Government.
The SNP (39 per cent) had a 12 point lead over Labour (27 per cent) in Scottish Parliament constituency voting intention. Support for separation was put at 56 per cent, with opposition 44 per cent.
SNP ‘remain out in front’ among voters
Anas Sarwar (+3) was the only party leader in Scotland with a net positive popularity rating – the difference between the proportions of people who approved and disapproved of the Scottish Labour leader. Mr Yousaf had a -13 rating and Mr Ross -27.
Emily Gray, managing director of Ipsos in Scotland, said: “Although Humza Yousaf’s party have been having a difficult time of late, with controversy over Michael Matheson’s parliamentary iPad data roaming bill of almost £11,000, they remain out in front when it comes to voter preferences for both Westminster and Holyrood elections.” | United Kingdom Politics |
Russian Twitter users noticed something strange when they tried to access the service on March 4: They couldn’t. For the previous six days, anyone trying to access Twitter from within Russia saw their internet speed slow to a crawl, no matter how fast their connection. Then came the blackout.Twitter going offline showed how seriously the Russian state took social media’s role in amplifying dissent about the country’s invasion of Ukraine. And it demonstrated Russia’s progress in creating a “splinternet,” a move that would effectively detach the country from the rest of the world’s internet infrastructure. Such a move would allow Russia to control conversations more tightly and tamp down dissent—and it's getting closer by the day.The gold standard of digital walled gardens is China, which has managed to separate itself from the rest of the digital world with much success—although people still find their way around the Great Firewall. “I think they would aspire to [mimic China],” Doug Madory of Kentik, a San Francisco-based internet monitoring company, says of Russia. “But it wasn't easy for the Chinese.” China tasked huge numbers of tech experts to create its version of the internet, and it spent huge amounts of money. By 2001, the International Center for Human Rights and Democratic Development estimated, China spent $20 billion on censorious telecom equipment every year. The famed Great Firewall is just that: a firewall that inspects every bit of traffic entering Chinese cyberspace and checks it against a block list. Most internet traffic into China passes through three choke points, which block any untoward content. Copying the Chinese approach in Russia is something Madory believes may be beyond Russian president Vladimir Putin’s reach. “I don't think Russia has invested that kind of energy in engineering resources to replicate it,” Madory says. “There are quite a few countries that would love to have what China's got, but they just can't. They haven't got the people to do it. There’s a ways to go before Russia becomes like China.”Even if Russia did have the people, inserting barriers into relatively open internet infrastructure built over decades is far from straightforward. Controlling a country’s internet requires two major components: separating yourself from the rest of the world, and cutting access from within. “There are lots of things going on on either side of the ledger,” says Madory. But both are harder for Russia than China because it’s starting from a comparatively open internet, after years of engagement with the West. (China, by contrast, has been closed almost since the first people logged on to the internet, following a February 1996 order giving the state absolute control over its design and establishing a prohibition on “inciting to overthrow the government or the socialist system”—meaning it was insular by design.)Russia’s internet regulator, Roskomnadzor, can by law demand that Russia’s internet service providers (ISPs) block content or don’t complete traffic requests. They can reroute internet traffic away from sites that Roskomnadzor deems unsuitable for everyday Russians, essentially cutting any individual browser off from the rest of the world. However, Russia has more than 3,000 ISPs, which implement diktats at different speeds. “Everybody’s left to their own devices to figure out how to comply with the government order to block the BBC or something,” says Madory. Each ISP also uses different methods to try and block access to websites that the Russian media regulator says are forbidden, with varying levels of success. “Depending on the technique they adopt, circumventing the block can be easier or harder,” says Maria Xynou, with the internet censorship nonprofit the Open Observatory of Network Interference (OONI).Most commonly, Russian ISPs reset user connections as they try to access websites, leaving them trapped in a frustrating loop of unfulfilled requests. That happens by effectively hijacking a request from a web browser to access a website. “By resetting your connection, they’re preventing you from connecting to the intended website or service,” says Xynou. There are other blocking techniques used by Russia. One stops TLS connections, the cryptographic mechanism that governs most internet connections, which in turn blocks access to specific websites. Another method involves delivering block notices to users trying to access a website by manipulating the Domain Name System, or DNS, which is essentially the phonebook of the internet. If a browser can't access this phonebook, it can't load a website.The system can work, but has its flaws. “When censorship is so decentralized, it does mean that it ends up being way less effective than if it were implemented in a centralized way,” says Xynou. Russia has made some steps toward trying to rectify that, but in recent history it has struggled to implement nationwide blocks or bars on websites deemed unsavory. That’s because of the way Russian internet infrastructure works. “Russia’s internet ecosystem is badly embedded into the global one,” says Alena Epifanova, a research fellow at the German Council on Foreign Relations, a foreign policy nonprofit, who has studied Russia’s internet censorship and infrastructure. “We see a lot of foreign companies involved in running their infrastructure, from telecommunications to data delivery networks.” That includes Nokia, whose hardware reportedly powers SORM, Russia’s vast social media snooping operation.Seemingly aware of this, Russia has made some progress in untangling itself from the global internet infrastructure—an action that would enable it to exert more complete control over the flow of information. “The whole thing is about control of information,” says Epifanova. “They fear information.”To avoid the dissemination of damaging information, Russia has been trying to develop its own sovereign technology capabilities. In 2015, Russia’s national security strategy made provisions for what was deemed “rational import substitution”—or switching out foreign-made IT hardware for domestic alternatives. The move was designed to help mitigate the effect of sanctions, which led to an internet infrastructure provider, Cogent Communications, pulling out of Russia a month ago. The nationalistic policy also served another purpose: handing Russia more power over the companies that power and provide internet access within its borders. That hasn’t wholly worked: Russia is still reliant on international companies to power large parts of its internet, though it did cope relatively well with Cogent’s departure. It simply ported traffic onto other internet backbones, which handled the disruption.But 2015’s protectionist pivot isn’t the only step Russia made towards insulating its internet. In May 2019, Putin announced the RuNet, a sovereign internet disconnected from the rest of the world, as part of a domestic internet law that came into force in November 2019. The RuNet has three pillars: One involves installing packet-snooping hardware on company networks, enabling the Russian state to monitor what is being said online. Another gives authorities powers to centralize control of the internet, while the third creates a national DNS system that would mean Russia could ensure that no one within its borders can easily access banned websites. The national DNS system maintains a localized copy of the global internet within Russia, similar to the intranet-style system maintained by China and to a lesser extent Iran with its National Information Network. By December 24, 2019, Russia claimed it had successfully tested uncoupling itself from the global internet, without needing to be connected to the rest of the world through Russia’s 10 known public internet exchange points—though the effectiveness and legitimacy of the tests are both disputed. “The whole scope of the implementation is unknown,” says Epifanova—which is probably the way Russia likes it.But there are signs that Russia is making progress, even if for officials it remains frustratingly slow. Back in March 2021, Roskomnadzor announced that it was throttling access to Twitter in Russia because it claimed it hosted content that encouraged drug use, sexualization of children, and suicide. To many people’s surprise, it worked. Rather than ISPs implementing ad hoc measures to block Twitter, a new method, called TSPU (“technical solution for threat countermeasures”), was implemented. The TPSU method—as far as international watchers can tell—utilizes deep packet inspection boxes, which monitor internet traffic for relevant URLs that are on a block list, then halt all packets containing those requests so they aren’t fulfilled. In simple terms, if you want to visit a website Russia doesn’t want you to, you simply can’t connect to it.There was just one problem with the March 2021 throttling of Twitter: It wasn’t coded correctly. As well as collecting all requests to Twitter and its associated sites in its dragnet, it also stopped access to any site that contained “t.co” (a shortened URL used by Twitter) anywhere in the URL, meaning reddit.com and microsoft.com were also caught up by the ban. “They ended up messing up the rule and throttling all kinds of traffic,” says Madory. “Engineers around the world could empathize. It was kind of a funny story.”Things have evolved since then. The recent attempt to throttle access to Twitter, identified by OONI as taking place between February 26 and March 4, was more successful, and Twitter has been offline in Russia ever since. Such successes show that Russia might be careering toward its desired splinternet. “It’s definitely quite alarming,” says Xynou. “Generally, censorship has always been very decentralized, whereas centralized throttling of a service has only been observed over the last year in the country.” Such a move suggests Russia could be moving toward a centralized, Chinese-style approach to online censorship. “That would mean the implementation of censorship would be much more total and much more efficient,” says Xynou. Such a system, she adds, would make it much harder for Russians to circumvent any blocks. Adding a fourth country, beyond China, North Korea, and Iran to the list of those who tightly control the online world would also have a potentially pernicious knock-on effect—and embolden other nations to try similar crackdowns.More Great WIRED Stories📩 The latest on tech, science, and more: Get our newsletters!The infinite reach of Facebook's man in WashingtonOf course we're living in a simulationA big bet to kill the password for goodHow to block spam calls and text messagesThe end of infinite data storage can set you free👁️ Explore AI like never before with our new database✨ Optimize your home life with our Gear team’s best picks, from robot vacuums to affordable mattresses to smart speakers | Europe Politics |
Indonesia's Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi delivers her speech during the G20 Foreign Ministers' Meeting in Nusa Dua, Bali, Indonesia, July 8, 2022. Russian Foreign Ministry/Handout via REUTERSRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comNUSA DUA, Indonesia, July 8 (Reuters) - The Ukraine war was discussed at almost all bilateral meetings at this week's G20 event, where some participants condemned Russia's invasion and urged an immediate end to hostilities through diplomacy and talks, Indonesia's foreign minister said on Friday.Retno Marsudi, in remarks as chair of the gathering in Bali, praised G20 counterparts for attending in person amid global tensions over the impacts of the Ukraine war, decisions she said should not be taken lightly.She also said food and energy security and the reintegration of Ukraine and Russia's grain and fertilizer into supply chains was critical.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by Stanley Widianto; writing by Martin Petty; editing by Mark HeinrichOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Global Organizations |
It’s The G-7 Versus China And Russia In The Struggle For Global Influence
G-7 leaders meeting in Japan are set to make a priority of countering Beijing and Moscow with action plans tailored to key partner countries. But theirs is not the only offer in town.
(Bloomberg) -- The tussle for global influence is about to intensify, as China, Russia, the US and its allies step up efforts to win over governments in a deepening competition for hearts and minds in strategic third countries.
The advent of a multipolar world comprising rival factions, most clearly seen in attitudes to Russia’s war on Ukraine, will be on show in a series of high-profile summits in the coming months, starting with the annual Group of Seven meeting on May 19 in Japan. There, G-7 and European Union leaders are preparing to roll out plans to court a select group of nations in what they’re calling a global “battle of offers” with Beijing and Moscow, according to people familiar with the discussions and documents seen by Bloomberg News.
The strategy involves enhanced work with so-called middle ground countries, such as Brazil, Vietnam, South Africa and Kazakhstan. High-level engagements, better coordination between existing infrastructure projects, and bespoke action plans for each nation identified as a key partner are among the program’s objectives.
The move is tantamount to recognition that China’s granular diplomacy and provision of infrastructure investment, together with Russia’s supply of weapons, nuclear-energy technology and fertilizers, is winning out over Western appeals. At the core of the reinvigorated G-7 effort is somewhat of a tilt away from a primarily values-driven approach to one based on more tangible offerings in areas such as trade and security, the people said.
“It’s important that we give countries in our hemisphere and around the world options,” said Brian Nichols, US assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs. Washington needs to offer countries “a clear perspective and vision on what they can do to have successful economies,” while making clear “that some of the promises that countries like China make, they’re not delivering,” he said.
Read what was decided as regards Russia and China by G-7 finance ministers
But G-7 allies, all of whom have sanctioned Russia and broadly share their US colleague’s national security concerns over China, are far from the only offer in town. Even as President Joe Biden sits down with his fellow G-7 leaders in Hiroshima, President Xi Jinping will hold a China-Central Asia Summit over two days in the Chinese city of Xi’an.
In July, President Vladimir Putin hosts African leaders in his hometown of St. Petersburg, building on Moscow’s efforts to blame Western sanctions — without evidence — rather than Russia’s invasion of Ukraine for energy-price inflation and grain shortages that have hit poorer African nations hard.
Then in August, leaders of the BRICS group comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa will meet in Johannesburg, with expansion to include a potential 19 hopeful entrants and the feasibility of introducing a common currency on the agenda. Both topics are a boon to China, which first proposed adding to the club and favors an alternative to the US dollar in trade among BRICS nations.
Two government officials from separate middle-ground countries said that the world has dramatically changed in recent years and Western powers have lost the leverage they once had to pressure developing countries politically and economically. One official put it simply: Western powers need us more than the other way round.
Those sensitivities were on show last week, when the US ambassador to South Africa accused Pretoria of supplying weapons to Russia — sending the rand to a record low against the dollar — only for both sides to move quickly to tamp down the friction. While South Africa has been a regular guest at G-7 summits, this year Japan invited the African Union, currently chaired by Comoros, in its place.
“When President Biden at the beginning of his term spoke about his values approach, I think he had a lot of currency and was attracting a great deal of interest,” South African Minister of International Relations and Cooperation Naledi Pandor said in an interview last week before the US spat. “But I think the current situation in which they find themselves as a leading part of this conflict makes it more difficult to be convincing.”
G-7 allies have tried before to counter China’s influence and compete with its initiatives, with mixed results. But Russia’s war has instilled a renewed sense of purpose to those efforts, the people said, especially as Moscow has increasingly trained its disinformation and influence operations on exploiting anti-Western sentiment in Africa, Latin America and the wider “Global South.”
Hence the summit’s two core “perspectives” as cited on the Japanese government’s website are outreach to the Global South, and “upholding the international order based on the rule of law.”
“I think we spent about two-thirds of our time on issues of concern to the Global South,” US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said April 18 at a joint press conference with Japan’s Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, the G-7 host, who himself undertook a trip to Africa this month.
The scale of the challenge still appears daunting given a prevailing sentiment that is mistrustful, even resentful, and at odds with G-7 thinking.
India, which holds the G-20 presidency, wants to preserve its strategic autonomy and will have a transactional approach in its dealings with the US, according to people familiar with the government in New Delhi’s thinking. When it comes to choosing between the West and China, it will back Washington and the Quad security alliance with the US, Japan and Australia. But when choosing between the West and Russia, New Delhi will tilt toward Moscow while taking a neutral line in public to cover its tracks, the people said.
India relies on Russia for weapons, including along its border with China, and India’s security and foreign policy establishment is deeply suspicious of the US. Everything the West offers has a price tag, whether overt or covert, such as using human rights and media freedoms against India when required. Such apprehensions are absent in dealings with Moscow, the people said.
Vietnam, another middle-ground country in the G-7’s focus, illustrates a further hurdle to the outreach. While it’s a beneficiary of moves to diversify from China, with US companies like Apple Inc. building out manufacturing production in the country, the fact is Vietnam can’t afford to ignore the giant consumer base just over the border. As a result, China remains Vietnam’s top trading partner, with the US a distant second.
Read more on how Biden’s industrial strategy is reverberating around the world
Vietnamese officials have meanwhile been relatively quiet about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, as it’s had a durable security partnership with Russia dating back to the Vietnam War. That’s a consideration that also features in Africa, where Russia supplied weapons to liberation movements – “and the African continent knows that,” said South Africa’s Pandor.
One of the documents sets out EU action plans to boost relations with four pilot countries: Brazil, Nigeria, Kazakhstan and Chile. But it could prove an uphill task particularly in Latin America, where the US is losing some of its traditional heft as China builds its presence. For President Rodrigo Chaves of Costa Rica, a staunch US ally, Washington needs to “rebalance the level of attention” it’s paying to the region, where the alliance “seems more tenuous than ever before,” he said in an interview. “Very few countries remain strong allies of the United States,” he said.
Brazil has become something of a bellwether, all the more so as President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva strives to re-assert himself as a global statesman. As part of its plan, the EU will look to relaunch a strategic partnership with Brazil, conclude a trade deal with the Mercosur bloc, and enhance security and defense cooperation.
The US has announced plans to seek $500 million to bolster Brazil’s strategy to protect the Amazon, despite tensions over Lula’s approaches to China and prior comments suggesting Ukraine shared part of the blame for the war. Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the US ambassador to the United Nations, visited Brazil this month, stressing the investment and jobs yielded as part of the “strategic relationship” with Latin America’s biggest economy.
While invited to the G-7, Lula initially hesitated to go out of concern over which place at the table would be designated for him: He wasn’t prepared to travel only for a photo opportunity, said three people familiar with the matter. There is a prevailing opinion in Lula’s government that the G-7 represents the old and declining order, even if it still has symbolic importance, they said.
Olaf Scholz of Germany, who has made the concept of a multipolar world central to his chancellorship, visited Brasilia, Buenos Aires and Santiago earlier this year, and plans joint government consultations with Lula’s cabinet in Berlin later this year. He wants the EU to strike agreements that better reflect the idea that Europe won’t simply import raw materials like lithium, but will encourage steps in the value chain like processing to be located in the countries of origin, a senior aide said.
The G-7 and EU are also putting an increased focus on tackling sanctions circumvention, especially enhancing the monitoring of so-called dual-use goods that can serve either a civilian or military purpose. Russia has been working to get around restrictions on the banned technologies by importing them through third countries such as Kazakhstan, the United Arab Emirates and China.
Read how Russia is getting around sanctions to secure chips for Putin’s war
Ensuring there is no circumvention through Kazakhstan is one of the key interests identified by the EU in its action plan. US and EU officials undertook a joint trip to Kazakhstan in April, offering help to minimize any economic impact of averting sanctions evasion rather than wielding cudgels.
Biden administration officials say they are not asking countries to choose between the US and China, but are fostering an international environment in which governments are free from coercion by foreign powers. Still, Xi has accused Washington of pursuing “containment,” and even US allies have been compelled to comply with export controls aimed at denying Beijing access to advanced dual-use technologies.
China is forging ahead with its own diplomatic push, having laid the groundwork during the pandemic that allows it to now take “the big step,” in the words of one western diplomat in Beijing. That often takes the form of small-state diplomacy to complement meetings with global leaders, a key difference to the US that allows Beijing to line up votes at the UN and “take everybody by surprise,” said Eric Olander of the China Global South Project.
“While we’re all looking the other way, Xi is having a phone call with the prime minister of Dominica, a Caribbean island of 75,000 people,” he said.
--With assistance from Alberto Nardelli, Samy Adghirni, Sudhi Ranjan Sen, Paul Vecchiatto, Michael D McDonald, Rebecca Choong Wilkins, Colum Murphy, Eric Martin, Courtney McBride, Nariman Gizitdinov, Anthony Halpin, Anna Edgerton, Michael Nienaber, Michelle Jamrisko, Adrija Chatterjee, Alex Wickham and Stephen Wicary.
More stories like this are available on bloomberg.com
©2023 Bloomberg L.P. | Global Organizations |
Rishi Sunak says he is looking forward to giving evidence to the Covid inquiry — he shouldn’t be.
The PM was asked at the last prime minister’s questions before parliament’s prorogation by Labour MP Lilian Greenwood whether he agrees that all devices should be “handed over to experts” to retrieve the requisite information for the Covid inquiry to continue its investigations. It was noted that “despite being a self-described tech bro, the prime minister has been unable to locate and provide his WhatsApp messages to the inquiry”.
Sunak side-stepped the question, insisting “I have fully co-operated to provide tens of thousands of documents to the Covid inquiry”.
“I look forward to giving evidence later this year”, he closed.
The prime minister’s level of transparency with regard to the Covid inquiry is a debate in itself — given his government has sued, unsuccessfully, the body created to scrutinise the government’s pandemic performance. But after the High Court sided with the inquiry and reaffirmed its legal right to view Boris Johnson’s unredacted WhatsApp messages, notebooks and diaries (which the ex-PM was all too happy to send over), the government insisted it would “comply fully” with the judgement.
Confidentiality and secrecy are, of course, the default positions of whoever is in power, but as the inquiry began its investigations, there were questions about what the PM might be trying to hide. Today, with the witness sessions now well underway and the acquired written evidence — by way of a tranche of WhatsApps, diaries and notebooks — being drip-fed into the public domain via witness cross-examinations, we see that the inquiry has already prompted some uncomfortable news lines for the PM.
For instance, it has been revealed by the inquiry that the government’s recently-appointed chief scientific adviser described Rishi Sunak as “Dr Death, the Chancellor” in WhatsApps sent during a crucial pandemic meeting.
The moniker appears to have been the brainchild of Professor Angela McLean, then chief scientific adviser to the Ministry of Defence, who co-chaired the influential SPI-M modelling group during the pandemic. It is thought to have been born of Sunak’s enthusiastic championing of the government’s “Eat Out to Help Out” scheme, which was designed to usher Covid-shy Britons out of their bubbles and into restaurants, and had been running that summer.
According to a study carried out by Thiemo Fetzer, an economist at the University of Warwick, the scheme drove new Covid-19 infections up by between 8 and 17 per cent. And Catherine Noakes, who chaired Sage’s environmental modelling group, has separately told the inquiry that her body did not assess Sunak’s flagship scheme. “Had we been asked about Eat Out to Help Out, I think we would have had a concern”, Noakes explained earlier this month.
The video call during which the now-infamous “Dr Death” WhatsApp message was typed and sent included key figures from the pandemic such as Sunak, then-PM Boris Johnson, Dominic Cummings, Sir Patrick Vallance and Professor Chris Whitty.
Chris Whitty, the government’s chief medical adviser at the time, appears to have been another private critic of Sunak’s Eat Out To Help Out scheme. In fact, during the proceedings of the Covid Inquiry yesterday it was revealed Whitty referred to the “Eat out To Help Out” scheme as “Eat out to help out the virus”.
Also among the revelations yesterday, was the news that in March 2020, shortly before the full lockdown was announced, a meeting between Johnson and Sunak was held in which one of the participants asked what was the point of having an economy-destroying lockdown “for people who will die anyway soon”.
The man in the dock, Imran Shafi, Boris Johnson’s private secretary for public services at the time, told the inquiry he thought it was the ex-PM who made the comments. But one wonders, with Johnson and Sunak set to appear before the inquiry next month, whether the recollections of these now-sworn political enemies will differ.
Personalities aside, yesterday’s revelations confirm once more that Sunak was a central figure in the pandemic, including during the government’s most controversial moments. He was part of the government — the second most senior elected official in it, even — that WhatsApp messages show the cabinet secretary Simon Case called a “terrible, tragic joke”.
It is clear now that the PM, who has already been fined for an apparent lockdown-busting gathering on 19 June 2020 in the cabinet room, will be forced to firm further bad Covid news stories throughout 2024, an expected election year.
Moreover, Sunak is perhaps especially exposed for his role during the pandemic — not only because he is PM, meaning revelations will naturally exact a political toll — but, as the “Covid chancellor”, furlough and “Eat out To Help Out” were the schemes that introduced the public at large to the now-PM. Throughout the pandemic, Sunak’s perceived generosity and easy-going demeanour even garnered him the nickname “Dishy Rishi”.
In this way, when the Eat Out To Help Out scheme was launched in August 2020, 48 per cent of the public thought Rishi Sunak was doing a good job as chancellor, with only 15 per cent saying the opposite, according to YouGov polling.
Perhaps tellingly, the PM has since cited the furlough scheme as evidence of his “compassion” and record of delivery. In his first speech as prime minister outside No 10 in October last year, Sunak asserted: “You saw me during Covid, doing everything I could, to protect people and businesses, with schemes like furlough.
“There are always limits, more so now than ever, but I promise you this I will bring that same compassion to the challenges we face today”, he added.
The Covid Inquiry now threatens to pry beneath the glossy social media ads and catchy slogans. While conventional wisdom suggests the then-chancellor benefited immensely from the pandemic, we may be beginning to see the skeletons that lie in Sunak’s Covid closet.
Of course, we know that Eat Out To Help Out involved trade-offs (all government decisions do), but we are only beginning to piece together the details of Sunak’s decision-making, and how such trade-offs were weighed in the Treasury; or as Noakes testimony suggests, whether they were weighed at all.
In this way, it is also well-known that Rishi Sunak was the cabinet’s biggest and most influential lockdown sceptic throughout the pandemic. Even before we get to the inquiry’s revelations, in his pitch to be Conservative leader in the summer of 2022, Sunak told the Spectator that it had been a mistake to “empower” scientists during Covid and that the downsides of lockdowns had been suppressed.
He revealed he had been banned by officials in Johnson’s office from discussing the “trade-offs” of imposing coronavirus-related restrictions.
Dominic Cummings’ response was to say Sunak “seems to be suffering… from rewrite-history-syndrome”. For Cummings and others, Sunak appears to have been the de facto leader of what was termed the “let it rip brigade” — those ministers and advisers lobbying the government to soften its virus containment measures.
And there was no reason to believe Sunak was being insincere in his comments to the Spectator — or to suggest that he was leveraging his lockdown scepticism as part of a broader pitch aimed at the Conservative selectorate. Indeed, a Sunday Times investigation published in December 2020 suggested that the then-chancellor had persuaded the PM not to go for a quick lockdown in the September — which was backed by his then chief adviser, Dominic Cummings, health secretary Matt Hancock and chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Michael Gove.
Of course, right now, the covid inquiry seems to have become forum for the various excesses of “Long Boris” as the ex-PM’s former advisers slate the man they referred to at the time as a careering, out-of-control trolley.
But with Sunak set to appear in the dock next month there could be plenty more unwelcome surprises for the current PM. With this backdrop, Sunak’s decision to style himself as the “change” candidate seems even more politically maladroit.
Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Twitter here.
Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website, providing comprehensive coverage of UK politics. Subscribe to our daily newsletter here. | United Kingdom Politics |
Today, 5 September, is the first anniversary of Liz Truss becoming Tory leader (and tomorrow, prime minister). Yes, it really did happen.
The thunderclouds over Downing Street as the new prime minister returned from Balmoral proved to be an accurate portent. That her premiership collapsed in chaos came as little surprise; that it only took 44 days before she resigned surely exceeded even the worst expectations.
If I had had a vote in Conservative leadership election, I would have voted for Rishi Sunak but I was in a small minority that took some pleasure from her ascendancy. This was, in part, because I had known Truss for many years and always rather liked her (if not necessarily rated her judgement). But principally it was because I had predicted her ascendancy three months earlier, even before Boris Johnson had resigned, and felt smugly prescient. New Statesman subscribers had been the first to know what was going to happen!
At the time of my prediction, a former colleague texted me to say “you’re not funny you know” before going on to ask “dear god, can you imagine?” That did not stop them subsequently endorsing her for the leadership. That is politics, I suppose.
Truss’s victory was not initially inevitable but whoever emerged as the candidate of the right was always going to win. Sunak (hardly a Tory wet), was seen as a betrayer of Boris Johnson and a tax riser. A candidate who had not wielded the dagger and was enthusiastic about promising tax cuts, regardless of the fiscal situation, was unstoppable with the party membership. Of course, on both issues – Johnson and fiscal policy – Sunak was vindicated.
The subsequent inquiry by the Standards and Privileges Committee exposed Johnson’s dishonesty over Downing Street parties during lockdown and found him in contempt of parliament. Had Johnson somehow still been prime minister when this conclusion was reached, his premiership would have ended in even more humiliating circumstances than it actually did.
On economic policy, Sunak warned that unfunded tax cuts would cause market turbulence and drive up interest rates. This, of course, is precisely what happened.
Not that this has done Sunak any particular favours. Have the Johnson enthusiasts acknowledged that it was just as well that he was forced out last July? No, instead we have Nadine Dorries talking of undemocratic conspiracies. Have those who cheered the Kwasi Kwarteng mini-Budget accepted that it was extraordinarily reckless and ill-conceived? There were communication failures, it is conceded, but on the substance? Truss and Kwarteng were unlucky, they could not be blamed for what happened with pension funds, the establishment stitched them up, and – look! – the economy is not growing very much. In other words, Truss was right and it was all someone else’s fault anyway.
This lack of reflection from most of the right of the Conservative Party has a short-term and a medium-term consequence. In the short term, Sunak has trod carefully – too carefully – in avoiding conflict within his party. He could have presented himself as a figure of integrity who finally called time on Johnson’s dissolute regime. He could also claim to be the prime minister who, alongside Jeremy Hunt, cleared up the fiscal mess left by their predecessors. On both points, however, he has avoided antagonising his party. He missed the Commons vote on the Standards and Privileges Committee report on Johnson and has never properly articulated why the Truss approach to taxes was so flawed. As a consequence, he has not done enough to distance himself from some of the failures of the past.
In the medium term, the likelihood is that the Conservative Party will repeat the pattern seen in Truss’s victory in the next leadership election. A candidate of the right will be on the ballot paper sent to the party membership and that candidate will win. It does matter that the policies they espouse may be impractical and should have been discredited by the events of a year ago.
The Truss premiership was a disaster but at least it should have provided a salutary lesson to the Conservative Party. The sad fact is that all the evidence suggests it has not.
This piece first appeared in the Morning Call newsletter; subscribe to it on Substack here. | United Kingdom Politics |
Humza Yousaf has been elected to succeed Nicola Sturgeon as SNP leader and Scotland's next first minister. He was widely seen as being the preferred candidate of the SNP establishment - including Ms Sturgeon herself.
The health secretary was endorsed by far more MSPs and MPs than his two rivals, with Deputy First Minister John Swinney predicting that Mr Yousaf would "complete our journey to independence".
He is undoubtedly the most experienced of the three leadership contenders, having served in government since 2012 in roles including justice secretary and transport minister.
His supporters say he is a polished communicator who is best placed to unite the party and maintain the power-sharing agreement with the Scottish Greens after what has been a deeply fractious leadership contest.
Mr Yousaf is a close ally of Ms Sturgeon and is generally seen as the "continuity candidate" who would seek to continue the work of the outgoing first minister.
He is the only one of the three contenders to have said they would challenge the UK government's block on Ms Sturgeon's controversial gender recognition reforms in the courts, arguing that independence will only be won if the party continues to push "progressive values".
But he has stressed that he would only go to court if the legal advice suggested that a challenge could be successful.
Mr Yousaf has distanced himself from Ms Sturgeon's plan to use the next election as a de facto referendum, saying that he would instead seek to build a "consistent majority" in favour of independence and it "isn't good enough to have polls that put support for independence at 50% or 51%".
But he has attempted to reach out to more impatient independence supporters by saying he would consider calling a snap Holyrood election to test support for leaving the UK.
Mr Yousaf has also rejected claims that the party hierarchy is doing everything it can to ensure he wins the leadership contest following allegations that the shortened campaign was specifically designed to favour him.
And he has said he would be willing to listen to concerns over controversial policies such as proposals for a new national care service and the bottle return scheme.
Speaking to the BBC Scotland's Sunday Show earlier in the contest, Mr Yousaf insisted that he was his "own man and will do things my own way".
Mr Yousaf added: "I have a lot of admiration, as you would imagine, for the excellent work Nicola Sturgeon has done as first minister.
"But she had a certain leadership approach. Mine would be less inner circle and more big tent."
Critics claim that Mr Yousaf has "failed upwards" with few accomplishments to show for his time in government, with Labour's Jackie Baillie describing him as "the worst health secretary on record" who "now aspires to be the worst first minister on record".
But the most withering assessment has come from his fellow SNP leadership contender Kate Forbes, who told Mr Yousaf during a live STV debate that: "You were transport minister and the trains were never on time, when you were justice secretary the police were stretched to breaking point, and now as health minister we've got record high waiting times".
Mr Yousaf's clashes with Ms Forbes have been a key feature of the contest so far, with Mr Yousaf claiming his rival's views on social issues such as gay marriage, trans rights and abortion would see the party "lurch to the right".
But Mr Yousaf has also faced questions over his failure to take part in the final vote on gay marriage in 2014, which he said was due to having a vital meeting about a Scot who was being held on death row in Pakistan on blasphemy charges.
Alex Salmond, who was first minister at the time, told Sky News that Mr Yousaf had missed the vote because of religious pressure from a Glasgow mosque - an allegation Mr Yousaf has strongly denied.
If the 37-year-old does become Scotland's first minister, he will make history as the first ethnic minority leader of a devolved government and the first Muslim to lead a major UK party.
His father is originally from Pakistan and emigrated to Scotland with his family in the 1960s, while his mother was born into a South Asian family in Kenya, and Mr Yousaf has often spoken of the racist abuse he has received.
He was forced to call the police after allegedly receiving threats at the start of the leadership contest, with a 25-year-old man and 35-year-old woman being arrested and charged.
Mr Yousaf was educated at the Hutchesons' Grammar private school in Glasgow, where he was two years behind Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar.
After studying politics at Glasgow University, he briefly worked in a call centre before becoming a parliamentary assistant to SNP MSP Bashir Ahmad and later an aide to Alex Salmond.
Mr Yousaf was elected as a list MSP for the Glasgow region in 2011, with Mr Salmond promoting him to minister for Europe and international development just a year later.
He became transport minister in 2016 after winning Glasgow Pollok from Labour, which made him the first ethnic minority candidate to win a constituency seat in the Scottish Parliament.
Six months after taking on the transport portfolio, Mr Yousaf faced the embarrassment of being fined £300 and having six penalty points added to his licence after being stopped by the police while driving his friend's car without the proper insurance.
He also faced criticism for the performance of ScotRail after Abellio took over the contract to run the rail franchise, which ultimately led to it being nationalised.
Mr Yousaf was promoted again in 2018 when Ms Sturgeon named him as the new justice secretary as part of a reshuffle of her cabinet team.
But his flagship hate crime bill was mired in controversy over fears that the new offence of "stirring up hatred" could have a major impact on freedom of speech.
Critics said the legislation could lead to libraries and bookshops being prosecuted for having contentious books on their shelves, with the new law also potentially criminalising people for private conversations in their own home.
The bill was described by former SNP deputy leader Jim Sillars as being "one of the most pernicious and dangerous pieces of legislation ever produced by any government in modern times in any part of the United Kingdom".
It was eventually passed by MSPs in March 2021 after a series of changes were made, but has still not become law.
Mr Yousaf was also criticised for tweeting about his "disgust" over a video supposedly showing Rangers players using sectarian language that quickly turned out to be fake.
And he dismissed concerns about the state of Scotland's police buildings as "hyperbole" just hours before the ceiling collapsed at Broughty Ferry police station near Dundee. Mr Yousaf had recently moved to the town.
Within three weeks of becoming health secretary in May 2021, Mr Yousaf apologised for any "undue alarm" he had caused by wrongly claiming that 10 children had been hospitalised "because of Covid".
He also famously fell off a knee scooter that he was using in the Scottish Parliament while recovering from a ruptured Achilles tendon that he had suffered while playing badminton.
When video of his tumble was tweeted by BBC Scotland political editor Glenn Campbell, Mr Yousaf replied: "If anyone else had fallen over while on crutches, a knee scooter, or in a wheelchair would your first instinct be to film it & tweet out?"
His time as health secretary has been characterised by soaring hospital waiting times - although Mr Yousaf points out that these problems are not unique to Scotland, and that the country is the only part of the UK to have avoided strikes by NHS staff.
Mr Yousaf's supporters - who include the SNP's Westminster leader Stephen Flynn as well as Mr Swinney - point to his achievements, such as delivering the Queesferry Crossing on time and under budget while he had responsibility for transport and falling crime figures while he was justice secretary.
Mr Flynn said he believed Mr Yousaf was best placed to tackle the country's economic challenges and praised his plan to fast-track the expansion of childcare to one and two-year-olds as a "real gamechanger for both working families and the wider economy".
Mr Yousaf and his wife Nadia El-Nakla - an SNP councillor in Dundee - recently dropped a £30,000 legal claim against a nursery they had accused of discrimination.
The couple claimed to have been told there was no space for their daughter at the nursery in Broughty Ferry, but that applicants with "white Scottish-sounding names" were accepted.
The nursery had said any claim that it was not open and inclusive to all was "demonstrably false" and that it had been forced to spend tens of thousands of pounds "defending our small nursery against their false claims".
The Care Inspectorate had previously upheld a formal complaint made by Mr Yousaf and Ms El-Nakla about the nursery. | United Kingdom Politics |
The deputy prime minister wants to introduce a Bill of Rights to ignore European Court of Human Rights judgments blocking removal flights to Rwanda.Dominic Raab is introducing the proposed legislation, which would also increase deportations of foreign criminals, to parliament on Wednesday after the court in Strasbourg disputed the government's heavily-criticised policy of sending asylum seekers to the east African nation.
The deputy prime minister wants the successor to the Human Rights Act to assert that British courts do not always need to follow the European Court of Human Rights.Instead, the legislation states the Supreme Court in London is the ultimate decision-maker on human rights issues.PM has never recommended Carrie Johnson for a government job, says No 10 - live politics updates The bill would create a permission stage in court where claimants must show they have suffered significant damage before their case can go ahead, in order to reduce "trivial" cases.
It would also seek to restrict the circumstances in which foreign-born people convicted of criminal offences are able to argue their right to family life trumps public safety in a bid to prevent their removal from the UK. More on Rwanda Rwanda flight cancelled: Priti Patel criticises European Court of Human Rights as deportations challenged Rwanda: Two asylum seekers have deportation delayed hours before first flight scheduled to leave UK Rwanda migrant flights: Refugee evacuated by UN after trying to cross Mediterranean says he would be better going back to Libya than stay in central Africa They would have to prove their child would come to overwhelming and unavoidable harm if they were deported.Mr Raab, who is also justice secretary, said: "The Bill of Rights will strengthen our UK tradition of freedom whilst injecting a healthy dose of common sense into the system."These reforms will reinforce freedom of speech, enable us to deport more foreign offenders and better protect the public from dangerous criminals."He held back from the demands of some Conservative MPs to pull out of the European Convention on Human Rights. Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player Rwanda: What is the government scheme? The first flight of asylum seekers to Rwanda was due to take off last week, with ministers initially expecting around 130 forced removals, but legal challenges cut down the manifest until only around seven migrants or fewer were expected to be on board.The European court then granted an interim injunction barring the removal of an Iraqi asylum seeker until a decision on the legality of the government's policy is made in UK courts.Judges in Strasbourg removed two others from the plane, while the Supreme Court granted injunctions preventing the immediate removal of three more. Podcast Due to your consent preferences, you’re not able to view this. Open Privacy Options Follow the Daily podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, SpreakerMr Raab's legislation would confirm that interim measures from the court under so-called rule 39 are not binding on UK courts.The bill would also seek to bolster government plans to increase the use of separation centres for extremists from legal challenges based on the right to socialise.The Ministry of Justice said it would also boost press freedom by introducing a stronger test for courts to consider before ordering journalists to disclose their sources. | United Kingdom Politics |
Subsets and Splits