article_text
stringlengths 294
32.8k
⌀ | topic
stringlengths 3
42
|
|---|---|
This is why the Tories will struggle to keep the Red Wall
“How do you think Rishi is getting on? Rishi Sunak?” asked Greg Hands, the Conservative Party chairman, while out campaigning on the doorstep in Middlesbrough this week.
“I just was a little bit bored about the lady, I forget her name, that went in,” said Jeanette Boyes, who has not yet decided which party to support at next month’s local elections but was no fan of Liz Truss.
“I just lost all faith in all parties, not just the Conservatives. I think if Boris came up again, I would vote.”
“That won’t happen,” Mr Hands replied. “Rishi is doing a great job, I think. But I would say that. I’m the chairman of the party.”
All across the Red Wall, a blonde Etonian shadow looms large for the Conservatives.
Historic Labour-voting constituencies, including the Redcar seat now occupied by 30-year-old local Jacob Young, who joined Mr Hands on the doorstep, fell to the Tories in 2019 under the leadership of Boris Johnson and his promise to “Get Brexit Done”.
“He was a naughty boy. And I think we all got a bit bored about what was going on and dragging up the past and stuff like that,” said the nursing home worker from her front porch.
Three and a half years and two Conservative premiers later, Mr Johnson’s party’s popularity is being tested at the ballot box.
Despite regret on the doorstep that the former prime minister was defenestrated by his own Conservative MPs last year, Mr Hands says Rishi Sunak has the power to maintain Red Wall gains with his “five priorities” and plan to reinvigorate the economy.
“I don’t think being a fan of Boris prevents people from being a fan of Rishi,” said the Tory chairman, who has worked his way up through Conservative politics for 37 years to take control of its campaigning operation.
“The people that we met today who were enthusiastic about Boris also said that they thought Rishi was doing a good job and that Rishi would get their support.
“People think that Rishi is doing a good job and is delivering good, old fashioned, competent Conservative government.”
Even the most ardent believers in Mr Sunak’s administration admit that last year’s turmoil will damage the Tories this time around.
“We’ve got a lot of seats to lose,” Mr Hands said. “There’s a lot of seats up for grabs. We obviously had a very difficult year last year as a party, as a country, so the expectation is not good overall.”
His pessimism is understated. Experts predict that the Conservatives could lose 1,000 of the 8,000 seats up for election on May 4, with the majority falling to Sir Keir Starmer’s Labour and thousands of others taken by the Liberal Democrats.
In Redcar and other northern constituencies, the local elections will be a harbinger of the Tories’ fate to come at next year’s general election.
“The so-called Red Wall is incredibly important for us as a party,” Mr Hands said.
“It’s incredibly important for me as party chairman and also for Rishi Sunak as prime minister. It’s all very, very important for us to both hold on to those seats that we won in 2019.”
John Garbutt, 58, is a retired steelworker who recently converted to the Conservatives after a lifetime of voting Labour.
Like his neighbour, he voted for Mr Johnson in 2019 and believes he “got a bit of rough handling of the situation”.
But he has little support for Labour under Sir Keir either – believing the party has yet to move on from his socialist predecessor.
“I think Jeremy Corbyn was a nail in the coffin,” he said. “Keir Starmer has taken over from him, and he talks the talk, but I mean, as far as I’m concerned all these parties should be helping each other get out of the mess we’re in from an economic point of view.
“Talk’s cheap if you don’t follow it up, but the Conservative Party in the last 15 years have done a lot more than what Labour have done in probably the last 50 years in this area.”
Back in Westminster, MPs’ time has been consumed by the recent controversy over Labour’s social media attack adverts, which accused Mr Sunak of wanting child sex offenders to be spared jail.
Mr Hands said his party will not follow Labour in running inflammatory political attacks and that the row over Sir Keir’s strategy has not “cut through” on the doorstep.
“I think it shows that Labour know that Rishi Sunak is personally very popular, the fact that they’re personally targeting [him],” he said.
It is true that Mr Sunak’s personal popularity is higher than his party’s, but the latest voting intention polls show the Conservatives are still more than 15 points behind Labour.
The party’s prospects of winning a fourth election in a row depend largely on the timing of the vote.
Tory strategists are thought to be considering an autumn election next year, in the hope inflation and the number of illegal Channel crossings can be reduced before then.
Mr Hands, who will run next year’s campaign, is tight-lipped about when it might take place.
“It’s my job not to say necessarily what the best time is, but to be ready when the Prime Minister makes the decision,” he said.
“I need to be ready at any reasonable time next year for a general election.”
In the meantime, he hopes to spend as much time as possible diving headfirst - in some cases literally - into doorstep campaigning to convince Tory voters they can still trust his party.
The previous day, campaigning in Lancashire, he headbutted a voter’s front door after slipping on a wet pavement and fell to the floor, splitting his trousers in the process.
“The guy did come to the door - I’m not even sure if I knocked in the end,” he recalled.
“He said something like: ‘Well, that was a bit heavy going, wasn’t it?’
“I said, ‘I’m very sorry, sir, but anyway…I’m Greg Hands, chairman of the Conservative Party. I’ve come to ask your views about what’s going on in the area’.”
The voter, ignoring the minister’s plea for a vote, turned his attention to the state of the front door and began inspecting it with a torch.
“He was quite fixated on his door, but we are the supporters of property-owning democracy you know - hats off to him.”
Laughing, the local MP next to his chairman inquired: “What was the number on the door?”
“I don’t know,” said Mr Hands. “It wasn’t Number 10.”
More from The Telegraph
-
Manchester United's season rests on outcasts Harry Maguire and Victor LindelofThe Telegraph
-
Grand National 2023 sweepstake kit: Printable download for today's big raceThe Telegraph
-
Grand National 2023 tips: Latest odds, horses to watch plus expert and celebrity picksThe Telegraph | United Kingdom Politics |
One of the most important things to understand about British politics and how it’s conceived and covered is that the churn on the political side is much faster than in journalism. Look at any of the people either on the political stage or who assist in the wings; with very few exceptions you’ll find the cast has changed several times over as electoral cycles come and go. Their audience, or rather the critics in the media, tend to be more unchanging: in newspapers and broadcasting, careers are longer.
This is one of the reasons the framing of politics is often repetitive, even when events are not. Though history can be a guide, it does not provide an exhaustive list of how either politics or its practitioners can be understood. Often, those who read political skies use old constellations, impose outdated patterns on stars which have clearly moved or been replaced. As such, much of the analysis of Keir Starmer and his Labour leadership employs old, unwieldy narratives. The most hackneyed is that his leadership mirrors that of Tony Blair – that his politics is one of gradual movement from the soft left to the centre and beyond.
Though there may be glimmers of truth in such a reading, and Blair personally has become an influential figure, Starmer’s speech at the Labour Party conference this week and that of his shadow chancellor, Rachel Reeves, reminds us why that analysis is fundamentally flawed. His words and promises prove that he is a politician firmly of his own time, occupying a place in a political reality which has shifted far from the 1990s – even if some of those who comment on it have not. Listen to what was on offer in Liverpool this week and it was not an ersatz Blairism.
Starmer and Reeves are not thrilling politicians and it’s partly this which creates a misunderstanding. In their oratory and deeds they rarely set the pulse racing a little faster, nor wear any radicalism on their sleeves. This is under-appreciated; it’s precisely because they can appear boring that radicalism can be obscured. Often they’re more progressive than they sound. It’s the mirror image of the way much of Corbyn’s boiler-plate social democracy, certainly in domestic policy, was less radical than it seemed. In a political ecosystem such as Britain’s which remains fundamentally inimical to many left-of-centre ideas, this is an advantage. That is especially the case when, despite all of the talk being of the Labour leadership needing to “inspire” or attract, half the battle is to ensure they do not repel. A key part of any Starmer victory will be ensuring enough Conservative voters don’t “fear” him.
But get beyond the monotone cadences and muted tones, and you realise it is impossible to imagine Rishi Sunak or Jeremy Hunt, the delivering the sorts of speeches that Starmer and Reeves delivered this week. A publicly-owned energy company, nationalised railways, Reeves declaring that “globalisation, as we once knew it, is dead”, repeated talk of industrial strategy, a commitment to billions in green investment. Recent Conservative or late-era Blair, this is not. In its quiet communitarianism and louder corporatism, it is a spirit more redolent of the Wilson-Callaghan years.
There is another sense in which Starmerism represents something older than our collective memories allow: the ease with which he and his shadow cabinet ministers talk of class. Starmer’s speech was explicitly and implicitly aimed at working-class people. In its own subtle way, it framed Starmer, as close to an embodiment of the British state as it’s possible to get, as an outsider, someone looking in over “the walls of Westminster”. His shadow ministers, Wes Streeting, Bridget Phillipson, Angela Rayner, readily invoke their own working-class credentials, and why not? But it’s a register of politics we have not heard for a long time, let alone in the Blair years, when Labour was desperate to appear as bourgeois as possible. For all the talk of his north London credentials, in many ways Starmer is deeply, recognisably provincially English and proud of it, another way in which he’s more reassuring than some of his views might suggest.
In a way too few conceive, partly because it doesn’t much use the primary colours of what came before, Starmer’s leadership is born of an age where the ideas of the left have been reinvigorated. We are more comfortable with state intervention, more suspicious of markets. It runs through Starmer’s language and thinking. The public yearns for public services that are strong and for the government to make them so. It is perhaps here where Starmerism hits its most hollow and bittersweet note. For it comes at precisely the time when the state’s capacity to deliver strong public services is weakest. Starmer’s basic diagnosis is that the public realm is enfeebled, but that the state has no capacity to turn the spending taps on quickly; it is a diagnosis without a prescription. As I’ve written before for the New Statesman, Labour’s basic task since 2010 has been to work out a credible prospectus for how to do social democracy in an era of relative scarcity. In many regards, despite the more radical flexes Labour leadership makes, it still hasn’t done so. Starmer and Reeves’s basic approach is to head for supply side reform, try and get as much growth as possible and hope for the best.
It is probably, though not certainly, a forlorn strategy. Even if the UK economy were to return to trend or above-trend growth in the years to come, the increased demands on the state would mean there would still be less money to go around than needed. Unlike Blair, Starmer must govern at a time when the winds will almost never be at his back. The seas ahead are rough and it isn’t hard to imagine a Starmer government on the rocks, quickly. With growth likely to remain limp, a desperately poor inheritance, turbulent geopolitics, and a deepening culture war with an ever more radicalised Conservative Party in opposition, the task will be backbreaking. Those around Starmer know how difficult things might become, and how much more steel he might have to show.
The sun shone along the Mersey this week. Labour enjoyed its most successful conference in years – a canister of glitter aside, entirely disruption-free. All the more impressive given the shadows engulfing the Middle East, a darkness that so easily would have covered the conference centre only a few years ago. Labour and Starmer should enjoy their success. This is probably as good as it gets.
[See also: It’s Rachel Reeves’s party now] | United Kingdom Politics |
Rishi Sunak’s target of flying out asylum seekers to Rwanda by next spring is in doubt, with opposition parties and some Conservative peers having pledged to try to block emergency legislation intended to rescue the plan.
In another blow to the prime minister, Suella Braverman, the home secretary that Sunak sacked on Monday, dismissed his ideas as “magical thinking”, setting out her own rival plan to make sure removals begin swiftly.
Downing Street will introduce a bill to parliament a week on Monday, after next week’s autumn statement, which is expected to declare Rwanda a safe country for asylum processing, contradicting the supreme court ruling on Wednesday.
This Monday, Downing Street will publish a planned treaty with Rwanda intended to provide full guarantees that asylum seekers will be properly treated when sent there.
No 10 plans to fast-track the bill through the Commons and Lords. Nevertheless, rapid progress would depend on cooperation from opposition parties. Labour, the Liberal Democrats and SNP are all expected to push back against the proposal.
While the Conservatives have a working majority of 56 in the Commons, matters could be more tricky in the Lords where opposition peers are likely to be joined by some Conservative members who are alarmed by both the policy and the proposal to rush through a law overturning a supreme court decision.
“This will be blocked, or at least held up,” one Conservative peer said. “I don’t think many Conservatives will vote against it. But lots could stay away. The whips have already used up a lot of goodwill.”
Another Tory peer said: “This is going to be a wildly unpopular piece of legislation. It’s not just the subject, it’s also the idea there won’t be proper scrutiny. A lot of people will do everything they can to block it.”
Speaking on Thursday, Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor, declined to echo Sunak’s target of flights leaving by spring. “We can’t guarantee that. We have to pass legislation in the House of Commons and sign a new international treaty with Rwanda.”
Any delays to the bill would put Sunak under intense pressure from already restive rightwing Conservatives, who want the prime minister to take more drastic action.
A number of Tory MPs, estimated to be more than a dozen, are understood to have written jointly to Sunak demanding that the emergency legislation included a “notwithstanding clause”, which would allow the government to unilaterally ignore rulings based on the European convention on human rights (ECHR).
In an article for the Daily Telegraph, Braverman endorsed this idea, saying Sunak must be willing to ignore both the ECHR and UN refugee convention, calling for parliament to sit over Christmas to pass the necessary bill in time.
Such tactics, or the idea of the UK fully withdrawing from the ECHR, would be seen as unacceptable to Tories nearer the centre of the party, potentially including James Cleverly, the home secretary, and David Cameron, the new foreign secretary.
George Osborne, who was once Cameron’s chancellor and close political ally, said on Thursday that the return by Cameron to government made this even less likely. “The option of going in to the general election saying we’re going to pull out of the ECHR and throw the challenge to Labour … I think that’s basically now off the table because David Cameron is foreign secretary,” Osborne told the Political Currency podcast.
Sunak’s spokesperson said No 10 believed the legislation and the treaty were “the fastest route through to getting [asylum] flights in the air” – through trying to close down routes to a legal challenge. Downing Street said the legislation would close down “systemic” challenges such as a judicial review, but it remained unclear whether individuals facing deportation could launch a court case.
Sunak would, his spokesperson said, urge MPs and peers to back the law because it was what voters wanted. “We believe we are acting to fulfil the wishes of the public, and we are sure that parliament will want to respect that, but obviously they will be able to scrutinise the detail,” he said.
Asked what evidence the government could present to show that the public did want the flights to take off, he added: “My belief is that the Rwanda migration partnership remains something that the public wants us to deliver on.” | United Kingdom Politics |
Border Tensions Dominate India, China Foreign Ministers’ Meeting
Tensions along India and China’s disputed Himalayan border dominated a meeting of the foreign ministers of the Asian neighbors in the South Asian country’s western state of Goa.
(Bloomberg) -- Tensions along India and China’s disputed Himalayan border dominated a meeting of the foreign ministers of the Asian neighbors in the South Asian country’s western state of Goa.
The focus remains on resolving the border crisis, India’s Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar tweeted after meeting his counterpart, Qin Gang, on the sidelines of a gathering of top diplomats for the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation.
The two ministers also discussed the on going G-20, which India is hosting, and the BRICS grouping that has India, Brazil, South Africa, Russia and China as members, Jaishankar added in his tweet.
India and China share a 3,488 kilometer (2,167 mile) long unmarked border. Both sides have amassed thousands of troops, tanks, artillery guns, missiles and fighter jets on the western section of this frontier after the worst tensions in over four decades erupted in the summer of 2020.
More than 18 rounds of talks between diplomats and military commanders have failed to resolve the dispute.
Last week, at a similar meeting of SCO defense ministers, India’s Rajnath Singh told his Chinese counterpart that relations between the two countries could not be normal until the border issue was resolved.
India is the current host of the eight member Chinese-founded Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which also includes Russia and Pakistan, a group intended to counter the US-led global system.
China wants to keep the border issue separate from the overall relationship and concentrate on trade and economic links. India has put the dispute at the very center of bilateral relations.
India-Russia Talks
In a separate meeting between Jaishankar and Russia’s Sergei Lavrov, both sides agreed to strengthen and coordinate their positions at international forums such as the UN and the G20.
Despite pressure from the U.S. and its allies on New Delhi to take measures to punish President Vladimir Putin for invading Ukraine, India has stayed neutral and not voted against Russia at the UN. India has also continued to buy massive amounts of discounted Russian crude.
Russia remains India’s largest supplier of weapons and military hardware, though purchases have dropped over the last five years, according to a recent report of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, an independent think tank that tracks the global weapons trade.
Last week, the defense ministers of the two countries met in New Delhi and agreed to strengthen defense cooperation and military ties. However, India is unable to find a way to pay for weapons in dollars without violating sanctions by the US and its allies. That has forced Moscow to halt deliveries of military supplies.
Payments for weapons amounting to more than $2 billion have been stuck for about a year. Russia remains unwilling to accept Indian rupees due to exchange-rate volatility.
More stories like this are available on bloomberg.com
©2023 Bloomberg L.P. | Asia Politics |
Sergei Chirikov/AP
toggle caption
Russian President Vladimir Putin (left) speaks to South African President Cyril Ramaphosa during a plenary session at the Russia-Africa summit in the Black Sea resort of Sochi, Russia, on Oct. 24, 2019.
Sergei Chirikov/AP
Russian President Vladimir Putin (left) speaks to South African President Cyril Ramaphosa during a plenary session at the Russia-Africa summit in the Black Sea resort of Sochi, Russia, on Oct. 24, 2019.
Sergei Chirikov/AP
JOHANNESBURG, South Africa — Russian President Vladimir Putin will not be attending an economic summit in Johannesburg next month, South Africa's government said Wednesday. That lets the summit's host country breathe a sigh of relief from a critical legal dilemma of whether to act on an international arrest warrant issued for the Russian leader.
"By mutual agreement, President Vladimir Putin of the Russian Federation will not attend the Summit but the Russian Federation will be represented by Foreign Minister, Mr Sergey Lavrov," the office of South African President Cyril Ramaphosa said in a statement.
A Kremlin spokesman confirmed to Russian state media Ria Novosti that Lavrov will attend in person, and said Putin will have "full participation" in the conference remotely by video.
The summit in late August will bring together Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa — a group of economies known as BRICS — and most of them will send their top leaders.
The question of whether Putin would show up in person created a headache for South Africa. It is a signatory of the International Criminal Court, which issued the arrest warrant for Putin in March for alleged war crimes committed during Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
In South African court papers made public on Tuesday, Ramaphosa said that arresting Putin would "risk engaging in war with Russia."
Ramaphosa's governing party has close relations with Moscow and has taken an officially neutral stance on the war in Ukraine. His government has repeatedly abstained in United Nations votes to condemn Russia's invasion of Ukraine and to call for an end to the war.
South Africa infuriated many countries, including the United States, when it hosted and took part in naval exercises with Russia and China in February, coinciding with the first anniversary of the invasion of Ukraine.
In May, the U.S. ambassador to South Africa, Reuben Brigety, accused the country of "arming" Russia, calling it "fundamentally unacceptable."
The South Africa said it would investigate his allegations, with a foreign ministry spokesperson saying in a tweet that government weapons authorities had "no record of an approved arms sale by the state to Russia related to the period/incident in question."
In June, Ramaphosa led a delegation of African leaders to Ukraine and Russia, in an effort initiate peace talks.
Ramaphosa has argued that South Africa refuses to be drawn into taking sides in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, insisting on a position of nonalignment — with many, including the U.S questioning its neutrality. | Africa politics |
JOHANNESBURG, April 25 (Reuters) - South Africa's governing African National Congress will aim to repeal the country's membership of the International Criminal Court (ICC), President Cyril Ramaphosa said on Tuesday, the second time it has attempted to do so.
The party's decision at a weekend meeting of its national executive committee came after the ICC issued an arrest warrant on March 17 against Russian President Vladimir Putin, accusing him of the war crime of illegally deporting hundreds of children from Ukraine.
"The governing party, the African National Congress, has taken that decision that it is prudent that South Africa should pull out of the ICC, largely because of the manner in which the ICC has been seen to be dealing with (these) type of problems," Ramaphosa told reporters during a state visit by Finnish president Sauli Niinisto.
Only two days earlier, South Africa's parliament announced that it would abandon a seven-year-long legislative process to pull South Africa out of the ICC's Rome Statute.
The process was abandoned because the governing party in December decided that South Africa should rather remain in the ICC and try to effect changes from within, a decision that has now been reversed.
The international arrest warrant against Putin was issued after he had already received his invite from South Africa to the BRICS summit in August, and it would oblige South Africa to hand him over to the International Criminal Court in The Hague if he set foot in the country.
"He has been invited by President Ramaphosa and Russia has indicated attendance," South Africa's official in charge of the relationship with BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) countries, Anil Sooklal, told Reuters.
The Kremlin on Monday said Putin will decide whether to attend the summit in person nearer the time.
This could again set in motion the parliamentary process, where only a simple majority would be needed to effect withdrawal from the ICC.
But the process is a lengthy one and unlikely to be concluded by the time of the BRICS summit.
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Africa politics |
RMT general secretary Mick Lynch admits he can turn against supporting England at World Cups because he gets annoyed by some of the hype around them.
Lynch travels to watch Republic of Ireland matches and suggests he happily supports Scotland and Wales when they are at major tournaments.
But when it comes to England, he told an audience in Edinburgh that his backing depends on “how pompous the British press is”.
Lynch’s football allegiances, in stark contrast with many of the RMT’s 560,000 membership, were detailed in a talk with the broadcaster Iain Dale. The 61-year-old said his Irish heritage was “very important to me” and he had “never had a British passport ever”.
“I go to the Republic of Ireland games away,” he added. “I went to Greece away a couple of weeks ago. That’s my holiday, watching an Ireland game away.”
Dale raised the prospect of Ireland playing England and suggested Lynch “would not pass the Norman Tebbit test”. The phrase relates to an interview Tebbit gave to the Los Angeles Times in 1990, saying: “A large proportion of Britain’s Asian population fail to pass the cricket test. Which side do they cheer for? It’s an interesting test. Are you still harking back to where you came from or where you are?”
“I don’t pass the Norman Tebbit test,” Lynch responded but then added that he would also fail the criteria in other areas too.
“I don’t mind,” Lynch then clarified. “I’m not one of those people that goes around berating England. So if England are playing in the World Cup and Ireland are not involved, I don’t normally cheer the other team.”
But when Dale asked Lynch to clarify what “normally” meant, he added: “Well, it depends how pompous the British press is. And then they start, and when they’re playing Germany they go on about the Dambusters and all that, which I find annoying… When Wales are playing, no problem. When Scotland are playing, no problem. I’ll be cheering for the Home Nations, as the English call us. That always annoys people from other parts - that somehow Scotland is a home nation when you’re talking from London. That is really annoying.”
Lynch later took issue with the English not knowing their full history “because you’re fed a diet of kings and queens”.
“You’re never taught about Peterloo, you’re never taught about the Chartists,” he added. “You’re never taught about the rebellions against Henry VIII and that Henry was a butcher of working people.”
Tickets for the talk were £17 each. The session was held at Edinburgh’s International Conference Centre, in the Sidlaw Auditorium, which has a capacity of 300 and was about half full. | United Kingdom Politics |
JOHANNESBURG
Russian President Vladimir Putin will be arrested if he sets foot in South Africa’s Western Cape Province during an expected visit in August, according to the leader of the province.
“Putin has consistently and violently eroded the freedoms of the Ukrainian people and those in his own country who dare take a principled stand against his brutal actions.” Alan Winde, an opposition premier for the Democratic Alliance party (DA) which governs the province, said in a statement late Thursday.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant last month for Putin who is expected to attend the BRICS conference in Western Cape Province.
BRICS is a bloc of emerging economies that includes Russia, Brazil, India, China and South Africa.
President Cyril Ramaphosa said earlier this week his governing African National Congress party (ANC) had resolved to pull out of the ICC. But his office immediately retracted those comments saying it was an error of communication and South Africa would remain a signatory to the Rome Statute.
“Even in the face of this arrest warrant, the national government seemingly intends to push ahead and host President Putin at a BRICS summit in South Africa, scheduled for later this year. This is unacceptable and deplorable,” said Winde.
He said if Putin comes to the Western Cape, the provincial government will have him arrested by its own Western Cape government-funded Law Enforcement Advancement Plan (LEAP) officers.
“If the South African Police Service is not instructed to act, we will,” he said.
Winde said his province, which includes the tourist city of Cape Town, will not only fight for the fundamental rights and freedoms of South Africans but is also willing to show solidarity with Ukraine by taking a stand against the brute force unleashed on its civilians by Russia.
“I am highly disturbed by how the ANC national government is entirely focused on taking steps to ensure the freedom of Vladimir Putin, instead of focusing on securing freedoms for South Africans, many of whom are not free from fear, and have yet to achieve economic freedom, 29 years into our democracy,” he said.
Anadolu Agency website contains only a portion of the news stories offered to subscribers in the AA News Broadcasting System (HAS), and in summarized form. Please contact us for subscription options. | Africa politics |
Labour's newest and youngest MP is set to become the 'baby' of the House of Commons after winning a majority in the Selby and Ainsty by-election last night.
Keir Mather graduated from Oxford University only four years ago before landing his first job as a party researcher for Wes Streeting, who is now shadow health secretary.
But the 25-year-old, the first MP to have been born after Tony Blair became Prime Minister, was mocked by Tory minister Johnny Mercer last night as 'a repeat of The Inbetweeners'.
Mr Mercer said the history and politics graduate had 'been at Oxford University more than he's been in a job' and warned he should not expect a warm welcome from the Conservative benches at Westminster.
He also suggested the Hull-born politician, who had most recently worked as a public affairs adviser at the Confederation of British Industry, was 'inauthentic'. Mr Mercer claimed he 'just relays Labour lines' and has 'a Labour chip' in him.
Mr Mather, who shares the same name as current Labour leader Keir Starmer - named after the first Labour Party leader Keir Hardie - studied at Oxford between 2016 and 2019 before spending a year as a researcher for Mr Streeting.
Asked on Sky News whether he was looking forward to a fresh injection of youth into the Commons, Mr Mercer said: 'It's always good to get new people in politics.'
But, as he made reference to the cult TV series, he added: 'We mustn't become a repeat of The Inbetweeners. You've got to have people who have actually done stuff.
'This guy has been at Oxford University more than he's been in a job. You put a chip in him and he just relays Labour lines. The problem is people have had enough of that.
'They want people who are authentic, people who have worked in that constituency, who know what life is like, who understand what life is like to live, work and raise a family in communities like theirs.
'So, no, I'm afraid I don't agree with this style of politics. It's exactly why people like me didn't vote before the 2015 election.
'Because you've got people with nothing to do with the constituency just dropped in and, put a chip in them, and they'll start parroting Labour Party politics.'
Shortly after being declared the winner in Selby and Ainsty, in North Yorkshire, Mr Mather said he hoped to be 'a representative for the power that young people have to make a difference'.
Asked about whether he could fully understand voters' concerns at the age of 25, he said: 'Well, I'm a taxpayer too, I feel the pressures like anyone else.'
Sir Keir said Mr Mather's victory demonstrates the 'demand for change'. He tweeted: 'Congratulations Keir Mather, Labour's new MP for Selby and Ainsty!
'Last night, Selby and Ainsty made history. This incredible result shows how powerful the demand for change is. Only Labour can deliver that change, and build a better Britain.'
New Labour MP Keir Mather joked he had 'heard far worse' when asked how he felt about becoming 'the Baby of the House'.
He will become the youngest MP in the Commons after overturning the Tories' 20,137 majority in the Yorkshire seat.
In a speech after he was declared by-election winner, 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.
'Over the past few months, speaking to hundreds of people on the doorstep, I've encountered so much hardship. Hardship made worse by 13 years of negligence and complacency from the Conservatives.'
At the count at Selby Leisure Centre, Mr Mather told reporters: 'As a young person in politics, I really hope to be a representative for the power that young people have to make a difference.'
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.
He told journalists he supported Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer's policy of keeping the two-child benefit cap, saying: 'I think we're going to inherit an absolute economic mess from the Conservatives when we take power and we're going to have to make extremely difficult decisions once we do, and I support the Labour government in doing so.'
Mr Mather said the cost-of-living crisis was the number one issue on the doorstep throughout the campaign.
Asked if people were voting for Labour or against the Tories, he said: 'Well, I make no bones about it, I think local residents were extremely frustrated at the way the Conservative MP (Nigel Adams) stepped down, but they only voted Labour to the extent that they did because they knew we had a plan that would actually deliver on their concerns.'
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.
The party said he has most recently worked as a senior public affairs adviser for the CBI and was formerly a parliamentary researcher for Wes Streeting from 2019 to 2020. His candidacy was supported by the GMB and Unison unions. | United Kingdom Politics |
Putin will not attend Brics summit - South African presidency
- By Nomsa Maseko in Johannesburg & Kathryn Armstrong in London
- BBC News
Russia's president will not attend a summit in South Africa next month, according to the country's presidency.
The announcement comes after South Africa's leader said any attempt to arrest Vladimir Putin would be a declaration of war against Russia.
If Mr Putin had left Russian soil, he would have been subject to an International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrant.
South Africa is an ICC signatory and expected to help in Mr Putin's arrest.
Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov will represent the country at the two-day summit instead.
However, Mr Putin will take part in the Brics conference - an acronym for Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa - by video link, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said, according to Russian media.
The Brics grouping is seen by some as an alternative to the G7 group of advanced economies.
In a statement, South Africa's presidency described the agreement for Mr Putin not to attend as "mutual" and said it had come about following a "number of consultations" on the summit.
Supporters of Russia have criticised the decision, saying South Africa should have insisted and used its sovereignty to protect and defend its friend.
South Africa's invitation to Mr Putin, issued before the ICC accused him of war crimes in Ukraine, has caused controversy both nationally and internationally.
It came to be seen as a move by the government to stray from the middle ground it has sought to tread, alongside other African nations, in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.
But President Cyril Ramaphosa's government became frantic as pressure to arrest President Putin mounted.
The biggest opposition party, the Democratic Alliance, went to court to try to force the authorities to arrest Mr Putin, should he set foot in the country. Global human rights group Amnesty International was also part of the challenge.
Court documents reveal that Mr Ramaphosa was firmly against any such move, stating that national security was at stake.
"Russia has made it clear that arresting its sitting president would be a declaration of war. It would be inconsistent with our constitution to risk engaging in war with Russia," he said in an affidavit.
Mr Peskov denied Moscow had told South Africa that arresting its president would mean an act of war, but said it was "clear to everyone what [that kind of] infringement against the head of the Russian state would mean".
Russia has consistently described the ICC arrest warrant as outrageous and legally void, because the country is not a member of the organisation.
The African continent remains split over the war between Russia and Ukraine, with some countries showing reluctance to back United Nations' resolutions condemning Russia for its actions in Ukraine.
The reasons for this vary from country to country, but experts say one factor is the economic ties that some, including South Africa, have with Moscow.
A sanctioned Russian oligarch, Viktor Vekselberg, is said to be one of the biggest donors to South Africa's governing party, the African National Congress (ANC).
Top Stories
Features & Analysis
Most read
Content is not available | Global Organizations |
An Indian lunar rover has made the first ever foray on the south side of the moon.
The Chandrayan-3 Rover descended a ramp from India's spacecraft a few hours after the nation celebrated the historic landing on the moon's south pole, which is thought to contain deep craters with water ice.
The vehicle is set to study the moon's atmosphere and surface, including an analysis of its mineral composition, over two weeks, the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) said.
The ISRO proudly added that "India [had taken] a walk on the moon" with its chairman Sreedhara Somanath adding the rover was working "very well".
The craft touched down six weeks after launching on board a rocket from a spaceport in Andhra Pradesh to cheers and applause from mission control at Satish Dhawan Space Centre on Wednesday.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi joined a conference call at the space centre to watch the landing, waving a small Indian flag as the spacecraft touched down.
Making a triumphant speech to the ISRO, he said: "This is the heartbeat of 1.4 billion people. This is the new India, the new beginning, the new thinking of the new efforts."
Turning his attention to the wider world, he said: "India's successful moon mission is not just India's alone.
"We can all aspire for the moon and beyond."
Thousands of people across India crowded into offices, shops, homes and restaurants eagerly waiting to witness the outcome of the mission, and launched their own celebrations after the lander's touchdown.
Read more:
Mysterious dark spot on Neptune detected from Earth for first time
Iran and Saudi Arabia among six new countries invited to join BRICS bloc to rival G7
And Indian media indulged in the achievement with a headline in the Times of India reading "India Goes Where No Nation's Gone Before" and the Indian Express newspaper saying: "The moon is Indian."
India has now joined a select few in the US, China and the former Soviet Union to have conquered the moon.
Next on the cards for India is a manned lunar mission, Mr Somnath said.
Many have been eager to study the moon's south pole given the presence of water ice there, as it could be used for fuel, oxygen, and drinking water - with this mission laying the groundwork for a potential permanent base.
India's landing follows Russia's failed attempt, after their Luna-25 spacecraft crashed into the moon. | India Politics |
Servicemen work at the scene of a residential building following explosions, in Kyiv, Ukraine, Sunday, June 26, 2022. Several explosions rocked the west of the Ukrainian capital in the early hours of Sunday morning, with at least two residential buildings struck, according to Kyiv mayor Vitali Klitschko. (AP Photo/Nariman El-Mofty) The Biden administration is preparing to send an advanced air defense system to Ukraine as part of another tranche of military assistance to help Kyiv fight back against the Russian invasion. White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan told reporters on the sidelines of the Group of Seven (G7) summit Monday that the U.S. is in the process of finalizing a package that will include “advanced air defense capabilities,” though he declined to provide details on the specific system. “This week, as the President told his fellow G7 leaders — and as he told President Zelensky—- we do intend to finalize a package that includes advanced medium- and long-range air defense capabilities for the Ukrainians, along with some other items that are of urgent need, including ammunition for artillery and counterbattery radar systems,” Sullivan said. CNN reported that the Biden administration is preparing to send Ukraine a Norwegian Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System, a medium- to long-range air defense system that has a range of more than 100 miles. President Biden and other G7 leaders met virtually with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Monday, the second day of the summit in Germany. Sullivan said that during the closed-door meeting, Zelensky brought up recent Russian missile strikes on Kyiv and asked for more air defense capabilities “that could shoot Russian missiles out in the sky.” A senior defense official told Pentagon reporters that the U.S. is seeking ways to help Ukraine’s air defense. “That’s certainly something that we’re looking at — is the way to help the Ukrainians with additional air defense assets. I don’t have the particulars associated with the systems, but as soon as we know that and as soon as those are finalized, we will certainly work to provide you with those details and the particulars of the systems that we’re employing.” It’s unclear precisely when the U.S. will finalize the next military assistance for Ukraine. The Biden administration just last week announced another $450 million security assistance package including more advanced rocket systems, ammunition, and other weaponry. The Ukrainians have been pleading for more heavy weapons to push back against the Russian assault that has been focused on the eastern part of the country. Russia’s war in Ukraine has entered its fifth month with no end or resolution in sight. The G7 leaders are expected to impose new sanctions and tariffs on Russia and commit new assistance to Ukraine at the summit in order to demonstrate continued support for Kyiv. This story was updated at 11:28 a.m. Ellen Mitchell contributed to this story. Tags Biden Jake Sullivan Joe Biden Norway russia ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky Volodymyr Zelensky | Europe Politics |
By Adam DurbinBBC NewsImage source, PETER NICHOLLSForeign Secretary Liz Truss has become the 10th senior Conservative MP to launch a bid to succeed Boris Johnson as party leader and prime minister.The race widened significantly over the weekend, with many leadership hopefuls setting out competing tax plans as a core element of their pitches. But there are divisions over the timing and scale of the proposed reductions.The 1922 Committee of backbench Tory MPs will set out on Monday the timetable for the leadership election.A flurry of weekend announcements has seen most candidates promise lower rates for individuals, businesses, or both - with large cuts to corporation tax and to reverse an increase in National Insurance among the key pledges. So far the list of contenders for the leadership includes:former equalities minister Kemi BadenochAttorney General Suella Braverman former health secretary Jeremy Huntformer health secretary Sajid JavidTrade Minister Penny MordauntTransport Secretary Grant Shappsformer chancellor Rishi Sunakbackbencher Tom Tugendhat Chancellor Nadhim ZahawiMs Truss cut short a trip to the G20 summit of wealthy nations being held in Bali, Indonesia, last week to fly back to the UK following Mr Johnson's resignation as Tory leader.She has served under three Conservative prime ministers since being elected in 2010.She was environment secretary in David Cameron's government from July 2014 to June 2016 and justice secretary under Theresa May from July 2016 to June 2017. | United Kingdom Politics |
Disclaimer: This is not financial advice and should not be construed as such. If you require personalized financial advice, please seek the services of a relevant professional. Investing Pioneer – 6:55 PM EST – 11/17/2022 Major conflicts are an ultimate catalyst and contributor to the unpredictability of economies. At Investing Pioneer (www.investingpioneer.com), when potential conflicts hit the radar, due to their likelihood, imminence, and potential widespread impact, denoting and understanding the probabilities and range of possible outcomes are paramount to establishing a fair economic outlook to form a sound investment and business thesis. Black Swans are black swans, sure. This means some may postulate such exercises are a moot point, as in a sound portfolio, the confluence of potential outcomes is inherently accounted for, and historically, shouldn’t prove an issue. For entrepreneurs, businesspeople, or stakeholders in specific sectors with outsized exposure to China, Taiwan, related industries, and second+third order effects that would arise from a major conflict between the neighboring nations, the story is different. You’d probably want to keep a finger at the pulse of the evolution of the economic and geopolitical contributors fueling or de-escalating tensions (meaning, this article is especially for you). That said, for a major conflict, the impacts would be far-reaching, to almost every person on Earth, in some way or another. Either way, understanding to the best of our ability what could be to come based on present and past developments is a fair endeavor. Photo by Pok Rie on Pexels.com Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated monetary expansion while creating supply issues and widening the gap between the true productive capacity of the economy and the amount of available credit. Naturally, high inflation followed. Indeed the highest for the U.S. in ~40 years. Subsequently, Russia invaded Ukraine, a military maneuver with widespread and long-lasting effects. With this, the economy is being stress tested, exposing severe issues relating to energy, real estate, and the financial system at large. After the series of destabilizing events over the past several months and years, it can be hard to imagine worse to come. But the fact is, underlying economic and geo-political factors are coming to a head. That means more potential turmoil, especially for China and Taiwan. From an economic perspective, a Taiwan conflict may prove one of the most significant events over the next five years. But many have grown weary of China’s talk – is it all talk? Probably not. Taiwan’s sovereignty is at real risk. Only 130 km off the coast of mainland China, it represents an established and burgeoning capitalist entity with great infrastructural systems in place for the production of a key resource. Some call it the new oil (though of course, in literal terms, it doesn’t supplant oil in the context of energy). Semiconductors As certain well-positioned companies have moats, – proprietary technology, resources, techniques, infrastructure, etc. (which may not be replicated effectively or at all in due notice) – countries can as well. And Taiwan certainly does. TSMC, the company responsible for this outsized industry, comprises 55% of chip production globally, accounting for over $400 billion in revenue a year. Because of recent limited sanctions on semiconductors by the US, and the growing importance of the advancement and supply of computer chips in the context of growing military and technological rivalries (as the rift between China and the US widens), Taiwan appears at severe risk of a military invasion from China within the coming years. For decades, speculation surrounding the potential for an invasion of Taiwan has been prevalent. Its proximity, economy, and the CCP’s official narrative make it hard not to assume it’s possible. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine in February added fuel to this conversation. For some, the risk suddenly felt more tangible, and people were quick to draw parallels. That said, there are several key differences between the two scenarios. Though it’s certainly a matter of if (they ever do invade) – it’s more a question of – when. Are external or internal factors more integral for the initiation of such an invasion? How is the rapidly evolving global economy – leading to heightened turmoil – poised to affect contributing geopolitical variables? What developments would compel China to invade Taiwan, due to which they probabilistically perceive the risks and downsides of an invasion are lower than the potential benefits for the mainland nation? Maybe most importantly, What would such an invasion look like?… To what extent would the United States intervene?… What would the global effects be, both economically and geo-politically? Let’s dive in. Historical Background of China and Taiwan In 1911, China underwent a revolution, with the Chinese Nationalist party gaining control, beginning the age of republicanism for China, ending thousands of years of imperial rule (with a different dynasty every couple hundred years on average). In the decades following, China would experience a communist revolution, leading to the creation of the People’s Republic of China, formally established by Mao Zedong on October 1st, 1949. The opposition leader of China prior, Chiang Kai-Shek, with his government and army, retreated to Taiwan the same year. Over a million migrated to the Island Nation, with an army on the island consisting of approximately 500,000 troops, serving as a reason to prevent any easy invasion by mainland China to conquer the last major bastion of organized resistance to China’s communist movement. With the outbreak of the Korean war in 1950-53, the US arrived to intervene in the region to quell hostilities by dispatching a fleet in the Taiwan Strait. The United States signed a treaty in 1954 to pledge support for Taiwan in the context of an invasion by the PRC. However, in 1979, the Taiwan Relations Act established that the United States would support their ability to defend themselves, but would not directly participate in the conflict (in the form of troops, etc.). The act represented a major step towards appeasing mainland China. This stands in contrast to a recent statement by Joe Biden saying US forces would defend Taiwan in the context of an invasion, a step further than the intervention the United States is currently providing to Ukraine, in the face of the invasion by Russia, which includes the shipment of military supplies and designated government spending. “Biden says the U.S. would intervene to defend Taiwan if China staged an attack.”
NPR Since 1949, mainland China has consistently rebuked Taiwan’s claim of sovereignty. The US held the opposite view against mainland China with the global stage signaling the same. This started to change by 1971 under Nixon. The PRC received enough votes that year in the United Nations general assembly to establish the PRC as representative to China, in contrast to its island counterpart. The year following, Nixon would visit China, opening the country to the west in a historic way, sparking the major trade relations that continue to this day. That’s why “everything” says “made in China”. By now, only 13 of the 193 UN nations worldwide accept Taiwan’s sovereignty, an effect of foreign policy decisions by the US in the 70s, and a reflection of China’s growing dominance and influence on the world stage. 1995-96 In response to the concern that the United States and Taiwan were drifting away from the mindset of unification, in part triggered by Clinton’s move of granting the President of China a visa to visit the United States, and other events establishing a worrying pattern in mainland China’s eyes, tensions rose and a series of military tests as a means of posturing occurred. This would be known as the third Taiwan Strait Crisis, and involved a series of missile tests, air and naval-based exercises near Taiwan with commensurate verbal threats as well. At that time, China’s economy and military strength were meager relative to the US, to say the least. Predicated on that fact, an order by the Clinton Administration to position two aircraft carriers in the Taiwan Strait meant the crisis quickly came to a close. More than 25 years later, China’s economy and global importance have grown immensely, with a significant investment toward military spending having occurred during the same period. This begs the question of how a “fourth Taiwan strait” crisis would play out. Indeed, the risks associated with escalation have changed greatly since then. This coincides with the general theme of US dominance globally, and how it will evolve. Is the invasion of Ukraine and a potential invasion of Taiwan a reflection of rebellion against the US in the face of diminishing power? Putin said in a recent speech (translated to English): “America has nothing to offer the world except world domination”. Are these key movements by nations a reflection of a broader trend to establish a more “multi-polar” world? The creation and growth of BRICS indicate this could be the case. Effectively, what Putin is saying is that for too long has the United States taken advantage of other nations and that other nations should push back, creating a multi-polar world instead. Of course, political dogma is subject to distortion, inaccuracies, and strong biases, and any speech or statement from Putin should be treated accordingly. Nonetheless, it may provide some context for broader motives and trends that may grow, not just for Russia but others standing against U.S. hegemony. Whether this derives from a longer-term principled outlook, or is based on short-term self-interested purposes remains to be seen. In another statement by Putin, he said, “where once to see a country disagree with the United States was rare, today it has become common.” Though this is true in certain respects for certain timelines, there have been several instances in the past, to say the least, of countries disagreeing with the U.S. (as Putin puts it). Whether the rate has truly increased needs further investigation. As we enter a period of economic contraction, self-preservation and a reduction in the globalism of the economy may be seen. Such a period may mean a diminishment of the current hegemony, and instead more bilateral agreements, ousting the dollar and US from control or increased benefit. This does not mean the United States will not remain the leading superpower. BRICS, Multi and Bilateralism, Trust and Protectionism After the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the United States and several other nations and companies cut ties with and sanctioned Russia and Russian companies. Saudi Arabia instead strengthened investment and ties with the country. “Taken together, the moves represent a distinct Saudi tilt toward Moscow and away from the United States, which it has typically aligned itself with.” -NYT Clifford Krauss Further, “Obviously, Saudi-Russian ties are deepening” -NYT, Bill Richardson, a former U.S. energy secretary and ambassador to the United Nations. Saudi Arabian and OPEC defiance of the United States is nothing new, to be fair, though as shown above, it may represent a shift from long-standing behavior. Analyzing the general global trend for the last decade or so, a pattern emerges: BRICS Standing for Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, it originally was an acronym coined by the economist Jim O’Neil (then BRIC) in the early 2000s. Then, it turned into a more cohesive organization, in theory serving as a competitor to G7 nations. The first BRIC summit was held in 2009. Now BRICS, the 14th annual summit was held in Beijing on June 23rd, 2022. This year, it has been stated Argentina, Egypt, Turkey, Iran, and Saudi Arabia express a willingness to join the economic coalition. Whether these moves are significant in terms of progressing any formal and organizational power of BRICS remains to be seen. Since 2000, multiple marked economic and geo-political moves have been made, with several commentators saying it indicates the fall of the US dollar as a world reserve currency is underway. These catalysts referenced include the 2008 financial crisis, sparking the years of QE, adding to the base money supply. Shortly following 2008, many suggested high inflation or even hyperinflation would soon follow due to the monetary policy pursued by the Federal Reserve and other central banks in response to the great financial crisis. This has not proven true yet, of course. There is a very simple principle that explains this. If you create, as an example, 1 trillion dollars, but keep it in an account, does it cause inflation? No. This is why the average velocity of the total money supply has fallen. At the same time, the price of financial assets has risen greatly and consistently in this period. This includes the stock market. Indeed, Quantitive Easing has fostered the rise in prices of publicly traded securities. The sustainability thereof is called into question. The answer isn’t just a simple recession or moderate pull-back in prices. Monetary expansion was most marked in 2020-2021. Commensurately, this explosion in liquidity fostered speculative endeavors with a rise in the share price in stocks. Particularly, ETF Fund AARK fell victim to this speculative rally driven by the expansion in credit. Smaller stocks like GME, OCGN, and hundreds of other tickers garnered massive communities and saw unprecedented rises in share price as well. Of course, such speculative rallies are nothing new. Take the dot-com bubble of the late 90s and early 2000s. Continuing, China and Russia began using their respective currencies to settle bilateral trade in 2010, bypassing the US dollar. The Atlantic Council called them “partners in de-dollarization.” In 2011, the former President of China said “the current international currency system is the product of the past” (Washington Post, 2011). A question, of course, is whether this is merely political dogma with little connection to reality. Today, in 2022, the dollar, as indicated by the DXY (a basket of currencies measuring the strength of the dollar relative to those currencies), is at multi-year highs. A series of other bilateral agreements, including between China & Japan, India & Japan, Russia & Japan, and others happened in the last decade. Mike Maloney, a well-known economic and monetary commentator, who believes the US dollar is poised for a sharp decline in purchasing power (in effect, hyperinflation), calls these events “nails in the coffin” for the dollar and the current financial & monetary system as a whole. Speculating, in the context that such a collapse does occur and runs its course, the United States’ dominance would not necessarily be as reduced as some postulate. Indeed, such an event involves the entire financial system, meaning all countries will be affected. Some of this may be trust breaking down. A byproduct of this, as Maloney has discussed in several presentations, is several countries requesting the repatriation of their gold or even further, purchasing record amounts of gold. In a recent video, Maloney indicates how central banks are purchasing more gold since 1967 – when the monetary system was still based on gold (US dollars were backed by the gold reserves of the Fed). Against this economic backdrop, certain factors relating to the geopolitics surrounding the US, China, and Taiwan may be better evaluated. There can be no doubt that on a global scale, most or all countries will suffer as inflation and interest rates become a more unwieldy issue. Note, inflation has proven to be higher on average for all nations compared to the United States. As well, china alone is potentially facing a severe economic crisis. With this, we can begin to review specifics surrounding Taiwan. Recently, China’s communist party adopted the rejection of Taiwan’s independence itself into their constitution. Get new content delivered directly to your inbox Recently, sanctions by the U.S. regarding computer chip manufacturing and trade have left China in a vulnerable position, potentially increasing the incentive for an invasion of Taiwan to intervene or obtain TSMC’s infrastructure and technology. It is said in the context of an invasion, the factories would be destroyed by Taiwan itself. In theory, this should reduce the economic incentive of China. Of course, the political incentive remains. An important aspect to consider when discussing a proxy war between the US and China is rare earth metals. US military reliance on Chinese exports of rare earth metals is significant, as China accounts for about 80% of exports globally (according to a U.S. geological survey released in 2019). Due to this fact, in recent years, the US has planned to decrease reliance on China by allocating investment to US-located rare earth metal mines. If China caps exports of rare earth metals, previous production amounts (military and commercial means) will be difficult or infeasible. In January 2021, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology of China proposed controls on the export of rare earth metals. Presumably, this has military motives. A Financial Times article stated, “China targets rare earth export to hobble US defense industry.” A smaller, yet potentially important factor is the exportation of javelin missiles from the US to Ukraine which is said to be diminishing supply to the extent that if an invasion of Taiwan occurs soon, the ability to help could be diminished if capacities are not replenished. This seems less probable due to the timeline of an invasion of Taiwan, which realistically may begin at the soonest, in one to two years, if at all. Going back to recent U.S. sanctions on computer chips, this negatively affects China’s supply of computer chips, AKA: cutting off the supply of advanced chips. The Chinese Commerce Minister, in response to NVIDIA being told by the U.S. to halt top AI chips to China, made statements urging the U.S. to “stop wrongdoing immediately”. Kirian Van Hest (@desogames on Twitter) has said what the US just did is somewhat equivalent or similar to the oil embargo by the US to Japan before Pearl Harbor and the declaration of war (WW II) that followed. Indeed, this coincides with the popular statement in recent years that semiconductors are ‘the new oil’, or rather a new oil, as oil is not supplanted as they don’t serve the same basic purpose. The catchphrase comes from the importance of semiconductors, often called the ‘backbone’ of the modern economy. Of course, the hierarchy of importance favors energy. Conclusion and Outlook Considering any shortage in supply (for high-tech computer chips) for China, the increasing provocation of Taiwan in their narrative and military practices, and the proximity of Taiwan coupled with a progressively more unstable global economy (macro-economically) and the fact that the Mecca of semiconductor production is located only 100 miles off the coast of mainland China makes Taiwan at considerable risk of invasion in the coming years. Accordingly, as a direct impact, the price of semiconductors is expected to potentially rise significantly in coming years. It remains somewhat unclear what the United State’s role would be in the context of an attempted invasion (in terms of, to what extent they would intervene). The present situation could be resolved if in the coming several months it appears tensions fall, and factors associated with an increased chance of invasion are reduced. To do this, less protectionism and more cooperation would be necessary. Economic Outlook Inflation will continue to prove an issue, and the economy will get much worse before things get better. The unique alignment of macroeconomic variables may warrant an altered investment strategy for the foreseeable future, relative to the past several decades. Indeed, value investments that tend to perform well in most economic headwinds will never be, by and large, bad holdings on a long-term timeline. This said, a general shift in capital to non-productive assets is expected. Meaning, although cliché, gold, and silver are expected to outperform in the following 12-48 months. These expectations are notiscertain though. The above does not construe financial advice. The author, nor the website, are not, nor construe the role of financial advisors. The author or site are not responsible for investment or financial decisions based on the above article. The contents of this article is for informational and educational purposes only. This publication is for informational purposes only and is not intended to be a solicitation, offering or recommendation of any security or investment. Any representations made by Investing Pioneer & the author are Investing Pioneer & the authors opinions and not representations of past or existing fact and are not to be relied on by anyone for any purpose. Seek your own investment, tax, and financial advice before any decisions. Investing Pioneer and the authors representations may contain inadvertent errors. Investing Pioneer, nor the author are neither licensed nor qualified, nor do these articles and associated content types offer, investment, tax or financial advice. You should not base any purchasing decisions on any representation Investing Pioneer or the author may make. All decisions regarding investments and financial assets, including the decision of which to sell, buy, short, hold stocks, securities, currencies, commodities, etc., are your decisions alone. Investing Pioneer and the author cannot guarantee, and does not make any representation, that any investment will certainly appreciate at all or appreciate sufficiently to make a profit, and there is no certainty that any asset can be sold for a profit. The future value of the assets you purchase cannot be predicted. You could lose money. Don’t purchase products with money you can’t afford to lose or have tied up for several years. Prices may rise and fall over time or rapidly. Past performance of any asset, financial vehicle, etc. does not guarantee future results.
Like this:Like Loading... | Asia Politics |
Climate activists in South Africa are protesting a refueling stop by a Russian ship that they say is ignoring a ban on exploring oil and gas in Antarctica.
Protest organizers Greenpeace Africa and Extinction Rebellion say the seismic tests the Akademik Alexander Karpinsky has been conducting in Antarctica for the past 25 years are harmful to marine life like dolphins and whales.
They also say that fossil fuels should stay in the ground if the world is to prevent catastrophic global warming.
The ship’s operator, Polar Marine Geosurvey Expedition, a subsidiary of Russia’s state-owned mineral explorer RosGeo, insists it is not exploring for oil and gas in Antarctica but simply conducting research.
South African environmental lawyer Cormac Cullinan isn’t convinced and says it’s vital everyone sees the importance of fighting global warming.
“It’s incredibly Important from a climate change perspective because the oceans there absorb a lot of the Co2 from the atmosphere but it’s also part of regulating the world’s climate and, also the currents and the weather system. But it’s also very much affected by climate change because the ice is melting,” he said.
Cormac says it’s problematic that there isn’t a government for Antarctica but instead an agreement signed in the 1950s, called the Antarctic Treaty System, where 29 countries have decision-making powers.
“Decisions are made by consensus and over the last years, when they tried to declare more marine protected areas, countries like Russia and China block them so it’s not really going anywhere,” he said.
He says terms of the treaty are only binding on the people who’ve signed up to them. And he says policing compliance is almost impossible because there’s no international police force dedicated to this task.
“If there is a big enough dispute, it could be referred to the International Court of Justice. But you know in a situation like this, often countries won’t take on another country like Russia because they think Russia may retaliate in other ways,” he said.
Cullinan is working on a Declaration for the Rights of Antarctica which environmentalists hope will be launched towards the end of this year or early in 2024. He says among other things, they hope it will make it possible for lawyers to represent Antarctica in courts of law.
“Certainly, if you think how important human rights are in the world. Even though you know governments violate rights all the time, just the fact that we’ve got agreed standards of behavior.”
He says a similar rights-of-nature declaration is being worked out for the Amazon rain forest which spreads across several countries.
Meanwhile, in Cape Town, Greenpeace Africa volunteer Elaine Mills says her organization is working on a letter of demand to send to the government.
“The one is that Alexander Karpinsky and other vessels like it are not allowed into South Africa. The second is that the Alexander Karpinsky and vessels like it have to prove that they are engaged in genuine scientific research before they are allowed entry into our ports. The third one is that we want the parties to adopt a treaty that no hydrocarbon extraction will ever be allowed within the Antarctic region,” said Mills.
Contacted by VOA, the South African Ministry and Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment did not provide comment.
South Africa announced Tuesday that it will host representatives of its partners in the BRICS bloc, namely Russia, China, India and Brazil, in Limpopo province on Wednesday and Thursday.
Naval exercises with Russia and China are also planned in February, a few days before the one-year anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. | Africa politics |
Janet Yellen, U.S. Secretary of Treasury speaks with South Africa's Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana before their bilateral meeting on the sidelines of the G20 Finance Ministers Meeting in Nusa Dua, Bali, Indonesia July 16, 2022. Sonny Tumbelaka/Pool via REUTERSRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comNUSA DUA, Indonesia, July 16 (Reuters) - U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said on Saturday she had productive meetings about a proposed price cap on Russian oil with a host of countries on the sidelines of a meeting of the finance chiefs of the Group of 20 major economies.Yellen said her bilateral meetings and the overall G20 sessions in Indonesia focused on the human and economic cost of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, with the United States and other countries "unequivocal in condemning their (Russia's) shameful actions."Russia says it is engaged in a "special military operation" in Ukraine.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comThe U.S. Treasury Department said Yellen met finance leaders from Saudi Arabia, Australia, South Africa, Turkey, and Singapore. She also had dinner with Canadian Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland, a Treasury official said."On energy costs, I had productive bilateral meetings with over a half-dozen of my counterparts where we discussed the merits of a price cap and how it can help us achieve our goals of denying (Russian President Vladimir) Putin revenue for his war machine, while dampening energy costs," Yellen told reporters outside the meeting venue.She said a price cap was one of "our most powerful tools to address the high prices people are facing in America and around the world."Yellen said she also underscored the importance of taking action at the G20 to address the global food security crisis. read more Yellen met Saudi Finance Minister Mohammed Al-Jadaan, Australian Treasurer Jim Chalmers, South African Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana, Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong of Singapore and Turkish Finance Minister Nureddin Nebati, the Treasury said.Russia's says its action in Ukraine are intended to root out what it regards as dangerous nationalists and demilitarise its neighbour. Ukraine and its Western allies say that is a baseless pretext for an unprovoked war of aggression. read more Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by Andrea Shalal, Editing by Jane Merriman, Mark Potter and Timothy HeritageOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Global Organizations |
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles! The White House announced Tuesday that President Biden will embark on a Middle East trip in July that will see him visit Israel, the West Bank and Saudi Arabia.The trip, scheduled for July 13-16, will include meetings with a number of world leaders for discussions on a host of issues including security, energy, climate issues, human rights and the growing threat of Iran."President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. will visit the Middle East region from July 13-16 to reinforce the United States’ iron-clad commitment to Israel’s security and prosperity and attend a Summit of the Gulf Cooperation Council plus Egypt, Iraq, and Jordan (known as the GCC+3)," White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement. "He will also meet with counterparts from across the region, to advance U.S. security, economic, and diplomatic interests."A senior administration official said that the first stop will be Israel, where Biden is planning to visit an area that utilizes defense systems like the Iron Dome, which intercepts rockets fired from Palestinian territories. The official noted that the Biden administration is working with Congress to provide $1 billion for the Iron Dome.BIDEN ADMINISTRATION OVERRULES TRUMP POLICY ON PALESTINIANS FILE - Israeli Iron Dome air defense system launches to intercept rockets fired from Gaza Strip, near Sderot, Israel, Thursday, May 13, 2021. (AP Photo/Ariel Schalit)One point of discussion in Israel will be the Jewish state's integration into the region that has included the landmark Abraham Accords with Bahrain, Morocco, and the United Arab Emirates. Improved relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia have included the opening of Saudi airspace in 2021, which makes it possible for flights from Israel to land in the Arab country, including Biden's when he travels directly from Israel to the Saudi city of Jeddah during this trip.The senior administration official said Biden will also be meeting with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and other Palestinian leaders in the West Bank, and he will reiterate the American commitment to a two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.WHITE HOUSE SAYS OIL PRODUCTION 'NOT THE FOCUS' OF CONVERSATIONS WITH SAUDI ARABIAWhen in Saudi Arabia, the official said, Biden will attend a summit of the Gulf Cooperation Council, where leaders from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, the UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Iraq, Jordan, and Egypt will be present. Biden is also expected to meet with Saudi King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. While Biden has been critical of Saudi Arabia due to human rights concerns, and even vowed to make the country a global "pariah" when he was campaigning in 2019, the senior administration official noted the strategic importance of maintaining ties with them.CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP"While we recalibrate relations, we're not seeking to rupture relations because Saudi Arabia has been a strategic partner of the United States for eight decades, and we share a host of interests with Saudi Arabia, from containing Iran to counterterrorism to helping protect its territory, where, importantly, 70,000 Americans live and work," the official said. "And I just think that's an important fact. I mean, Saudi Arabia has faced hundreds of missiles and UAVs over the last 18 months, many of them targeting areas where Americans live and work. And so we have been engaged very deeply and very constructively with the Saudis to help defeat those threats. And that's something, obviously, that is going to continue." | Middle East Politics |
G20 Finance Ministers, Central Bank Governors and head of delegates attend the G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors Meeting in Nusa Dua, Bali, Indonesia. Made Nagi/Pool via REUTERS Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comJAKARTA, July 30 (Reuters) - Zambia's creditors have committed to negotiate terms of a restructuring of their claims, which will be finalised in a memorandum of understanding, G20 chair Indonesia said on Saturday, adding it welcomes the debt relief progress.Indonesia also said the creditor committee, co-chaired by China and France, had supported an envisaged IMF upper credit tranche programme and its swift adoption by the IMF executive board.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by Gayatri Suroyo; Editing by Stephen CoatesOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Global Organizations |
(Reuters) - Former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, Japan's longest-serving leader, died on Friday after being shot while campaigning for a parliamentary election.Abe, who sought to lift the economy out of chronic deflation with his bold "Abenomics" policies, beef up the military and counter China's growing clout, died at 67.Here are some reactions so far:UNITED STATESU.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken called the assassination of Abe "shocking" and "profoundly disturbing", and described him as a leader of great vision.CHINASpokesperson for Chinese embassy in Japan: "Former Prime Minister Abe made contributions towards improving China-Japan relations during his term. We express our condolences on his death and send our sympathies to his family."FRENCH PRESIDENT EMMANUEL MACRON"Japan has lost a great prime minister, who dedicated his life to his country and worked to ensure order in the world."UK PRIME MINISTER BORIS JOHNSON"Incredibly sad news about Shinzo Abe," Johnson said on Twitter. "His global leadership through unchartered times will be remembered by many. My thoughts are with his family, friends and the Japanese people.""The UK stands with you at this dark and sad time."GERMAN CHANCELLOR OLAF SCHOLZScholz said he was "stunned and deeply saddened"."We stand closely by Japan's side even in these difficult hours," Scholz tweeted, expressing his deepest sympathy to Abe's family.ITALIAN PRIME MINISTER MARIO DRAGHI"Italy is shocked by this terrible attack, which hits Japan and free democratic debate. Abe was a great protagonist of Japanese and international political life in recent decades, thanks to his innovative spirit and his reforming vision. Italy sends its condolences to his family, to the government and to the entire Japanese people."TAIWAN PRESIDENT TSAI ING-WEN"Not only has the international community lost an important leader, but Taiwan has also lost an important and close friend. Taiwan and Japan are both democratic countries with the rule of law, and our government severely condemns violent and illegal acts," Tsai said in a statement released by her office.SOUTH KOREA PRESIDENT YOON SUK-YEOL"I send my condolences to the bereaved families and Japanese people who have lost the longest-serving prime minister and respected politician in Japan's constitutional history," Yoon was quoted as saying in a statement delivered by the presidential office.Yoon added that the shooting was "an unforgivable act of crime."POLISH PRIME MINISTER MATEUSZ MORAWIECKI"I am deeply shocked by the news of the assassination of @AbeShinzo," he wrote on Twitter. "My thoughts are with the family of our Japanese friend who was always very kind to Poland. May he Rest In Peace."INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY CHIEF RAFAEL GROSSI ON TWITTER"Deeply saddened by the tragic death of Japanese Former Prime Minister @AbeShinzo. I was honoured to meet him and work with him on important issues for Japan. My condolences to his family, may he rest in peace."AUSTRALIA'S PRIME MINISTER ANTHONY ALBANESE"The tragic death of former Japanese Prime Minister Abe Shinzo is devastating news...Mr Abe was one of Australia’s closest friends on the world stage... Under his leadership Japan emerged as one of Australia’s most like-minded partners in Asia – a legacy that endures today."Mr Abe was a leader in the Indo-Pacific, championing a vision of a free and open region. The Quad and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership are in many ways the results of his diplomatic leadership."Mr Abe was also a giant on the world stage – a leader in the G7, the G20 and the United Nations. His legacy was one of global impact, and a profound and positive one for Australia."(Compiled by Reuters Global News Desk) | Asia Politics |
The Labour leader is even apparently bidding to secure his own “Hayman Island moment” – a reference to Tony Blair’s controversial flight to Australia to secure the media mogul’s backing in 1995, according to one insider.
Reaching The Sun’s audience of working-class, swing voters in “red wall” seats has become a central feature of Sir Keir’s media strategy, other sources told i.
With the polls pointing strongly to a Labour majority at the next election, high-level engagement between Sir Keir and News UK, the publisher of The Sun, The Times and The Sunday Times, has increased.
He accepted an invitation to Mr Murdoch’s summer party in London in June, where he was ushered by News UK executives to a private audience with the 92-year-old.
Sir Keir’s team ensure that The Sun is “looked after” with advance briefings, according to one source.
Thursday’s edition trumpeted an “exclusive op-ed” in which the Labour leader trailed his new “small boats” policy, including a commitment to “order British spooks from GCHQ to work with Europol to monitor gang plans”.
Sir Keir also gave an interview to The Times about Labour’s plans to “smash” Channel people-smugglers.
Labour frontbenchers are being told to appear on News UK’s TalkTV, as well as the right-wing GB News channel, by media managers to “get our voice out to the people you’re trying to persuade”, one shadow minister said.
“Keir is closing in on his Hayman Island moment,” said Atul Hatwal, a former Labour adviser and editor of Labour Uncut, the “Starmerite” insider blog.
Sir Tony travelled to News Corporation’s annual conference in Australia to assure Mr Murdoch he was a Labour leader with whom he could do business. Party members were furious, but the visit paid off, with The Sun ditching the Tories and endorsing “new Labour” at the 1997 election.
“The experience of Blair in the 1990s shows how important it is for a Labour election victory that there aren’t any no-go areas for Starmer in Britain’s media,” Mr Hatwal said.
A positive editorial in last weekend’s Sunday Times – which stated “thanks to Starmer, Labour has won the right to a hearing” – further encouraged the leader’s team, which includes several veterans of Sir Tony’s 1997 landslide victory.
However, News UK figures said that while Sir Keir would be accorded the respect of a putative prime minister and offered a platform, he should continue to expect critical coverage over Labour’s immigration and workers’ rights policies.
“Rupert always wants the inside track with any prospective new PM for business reasons,” one figure said. “But Labour reversing trade union laws is a big no-no.”
Sir Keir has angered News UK by refusing to back the repeal of legislation forcing newspapers that do not sign up to a Leveson-compliant regulator, such as Impress, to pay the legal fees of both sides of a privacy or libel case no matter its result.
With newspaper endorsements carrying less weight in today’s fragmented media landscape, the prize for Sir Keir is to be able to present himself as a prime minister-in-waiting to Sun readers.
Sir Keir’s team have become adept at crafting articles designed to appeal to the tabloid’s audience – an op-ed piece in July promised that, as prime minister, he would be “straight with Sun readers”, ditching “narrow and niche subjects” such as cutting tuition fees for middle-class children.
Mr Hatwal added: “Any Corbynite grumbling at Labour cosying up to the right-wing media is just a bonus, another opportunity to underline to the British public how Labour has changed since the last election.”
Next month’s Labour Party conference is a chance for Sir Keir to further his agenda.
“There will be lots of shmoozing and private dinners with Murdoch’s top brass,” an ally of the leader said. “The conference should have the feel of a party ready for Government – and newspapers like to back winners.”
A senior executive at News UK’s parent company News Corp told i: “We back winners and, at the moment, you have to say Labour look the likely winners of the next general election.”
“The Tories are looking tired, out of ideas and almost as if their trying to become the opposition. But we all need to see some substantial policies from Labour and preferably policies that voters like.”
“We should also be honest in that the front page of a newspaper like The Sun will not win an election for a party like it could in the 1990s. Times have changed and social media has a big role to play, as do channels like TalkTV.”
The executive referred to The Sun‘s campaign against Labour and its famous 1992 election day front page that read: “If Kinnock wins today will the last person to leave Britain please turn out the lights.”
The figure said: “It’s not like the old days when you could stick a lightbulb in Neil Kinnock’s head on a front page and influence an election. On the other hand, the lights are on in Downing Street, but it’s questionable as to whether anyone is home.
“But News UK editors still have a great deal of influence in moulding people’s views, and if they believe Keir Starmer will make a better prime minister than Rishi Sunak, then I’m sure they will make those views clear.”
The Sun and representatives of Sir Keir were approached for comment. | United Kingdom Politics |
Indonesian President Joko Widodo attends a joint news briefing with Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, as Russia's attack on Ukraine continues, in Kyiv, Ukraine June 29, 2022. Ukrainian Presidential Press Service/Handout via REUTERS Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comBEIJING, July 21 (Reuters) - Indonesian President Joko Widodo will visit China from July 25-26, a Chinese ministry spokesman said on Thursday, becoming the first foreign leader in two years to be received individually by Beijing aside from February's Winter Olympics.Widodo has received an invitation from Chinese President Xi Jinping for the trip, Wang Wenbin said at a regular media briefing.Wang said Widodo would hold meetings with Xi and with Premier Li Keqiang for an exchange of in-depth views.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comIndonesia currently holds the G20 presidency and will host this year's summit of G20 leaders in Bali on November 15-16."When the Indonesian President visits China, he can communicate face-to-face with the Chinese leadership," Wang said.Aside from the Winter Olympics, Beijing has not hosted any foreign leaders individually since strict border measures were put in place in 2020 following the outbreak of COVID-19.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by Martin Quin Pollard and Yew Lun Tian; Writing by Liz Lee; Editing by Jacqueline Wong and Edmund KlamannOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Asia Politics |
Subscribe to Here’s the Deal, our politics
newsletter for analysis you won’t find anywhere else.
Thank you. Please check your inbox to confirm.
Gerald Imray, Associated Press
Gerald Imray, Associated Press
Leave your feedback
CAPE TOWN, South Africa (AP) — Vladimir Putin has agreed not to attend an economic summit in Johannesburg next month that will include China’s premier and other world leaders because of an arrest warrant by the International Criminal Court for the Russian president, South African authorities said Wednesday.
Russia and summit host South Africa reached a “mutual agreement” that Putin would not attend the Aug. 22-24 gathering, which brings together a bloc of developing economies known as BRICS, though he was initially invited, the office of South African President Cyril Ramaphosa said.
The development could be viewed as embarrassing for Putin, who is now expected to be the only leader of a country in the bloc not to attend.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Wednesday that Putin “has decided to take part” in the summit via video link, without confirming if he had intended to attend the summit.
It ended months of speculation over whether Putin would travel to South Africa, which is a signatory to the Rome treaty that formed the International Criminal Court and therefore has the obligation to arrest the Russian leader if he sets foot on South African territory.
WATCH: Russia ends grain export deal with Ukraine, raising fears about global food security
South Africa had given strong hints that it would not arrest Putin if he attended but had also been lobbying for him not to come to avoid the problem.
South Africa said as recently as last week that the Russian leader had been determined to attend, perhaps as a way to challenge the ICC warrant, which Moscow has dismissed.
Moscow has showcased the BRICS alliance as an alternative to the West’s global dominance, but this year’s meeting has proved awkward for Putin following the ICC’s move in March to indict him for war crimes relating to the abduction of children from Ukraine.
Although Moscow dismissed the warrant, Putin has not traveled to a country that is a signatory to the ICC treaty since his indictment. Analysts have said that the public debate about whether the Russian leader would or would not travel to South Africa was in itself an unwelcome development for the Kremlin.
The South African government has strong political ties with Russia, but Putin’s attendance would have exposed it to possible diplomatic and legal repercussions.
South Africa’s main opposition party has recently taken the government to court in an attempt to compel it to arrest Putin should he travel to the country. The ICC treaty has also became part of South African domestic law, meaning the government could be taken to court in South Africa if it failed to honor its commitment to the international court.
READ MORE: Putin says Russia is ‘united as never before’ during Shanghai multilateral summit
Ramaphosa spoke with Putin by telephone this weekend and held more “consultations” with BRICS officials on Tuesday, Ramapohosa’s office said in a statement. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov would attend the BRICS summit in person to represent Russia, Ramaphosa’s office said.
Meanwhile, the leaders of all the other BRICS nations, including China’s Xi Jinping, would attend the summit, Ramaphosa’s office said.
Wednesday’s announcement comes a day after a court document was made public in which Ramaphosa said that any attempt by South Africa to arrest Putin would be viewed as a “declaration of war” by Russia. The affidavit made by Ramaphosa was part of the government’s response to the court challenge brought by the country’s main opposition party to compel it to arrest Putin.
“I must highlight, for the sake of transparency, that South Africa has obvious problems with executing a request to arrest and surrender President Putin,” Ramaphosa said in the affidavit. “Russia has made it clear that arresting its sitting president would be a declaration of war.”
However, Kremlin spokesman Peskov denied that.
“No one has indicated anything to anyone,” Peskov said. “In this world, it is absolutely clear to everyone what an attempt to encroach on the head of the Russian state means. So there is no need to explain anything to anyone here.”
AP writers Dasha Litvinova in Tallinn, Estonia, and Mogomotsi Magome in Johannesburg contributed to this story.
Support Provided By:
Learn more
World
Jul 18 | Global Organizations |
Britain must be ready to 'fight and win' against Russia rather than repeating the mistakes of appeasement that let Hitler run riot, the new head of the Army warned today.In a dramatic intervention, General Sir Patrick Sanders said the country faces a '1937 moment' over Vladimir Putin's 'brutal aggression' - a reference to the notorious policy of giving ground to the German dictator before the Second World War.He said the will to 'act rapidly' was the only way to prevent Russia's expansionism ending in all-out war in Europe.'I will have an answer to my grandchildren should they ever ask what I did in 2022,' General Sanders said, adding that Beijing will be 'watching carefully' to see how the West responds. Underlining the stark message, Defence Secretary Ben Wallace is expected to call for a major boost to military spending at the same Royal United Services Institute conference later. The calls for armament came after NATO - which is holding a crunch summit in the coming days - declared it is surging the number of troops on high alert from 40,000 to 300,000 troops, and sending more heavy weaponry to its eastern flank.The alliance's Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg called it 'the biggest overhaul of our collective defence and deterrence since the Cold War'.General Sanders' warning came after he wrote to all the troops under his command telling them they must prepare 'to fight in Europe once again'. 'If we fail to deter there are no good choices,' he said. 'We must therefore meet strength with strength and be unequivocally prepared to fight.' In a dramatic intervention, General Sir Patrick Sanders said the country faces a '1937 moment' over Vladimir Putin's 'brutal aggression' - a reference to the notorious policy of giving ground to the German dictator before the Second World WarIn his first public engagement since taking up his post, Gen Sanders will say his focus is on mobilising the Army to help prevent the spread of war in Europe by being 'ready to fight and win alongside our Nato allies and partners'.'In all my years in uniform, I haven't known such a clear threat to the principles of sovereignty and democracy, and the freedom to live without fear of violence, as the brutal aggression of president Putin and his expansionist ambitions,' he said.'I believe we are living through a period of history as profound as our forebears did... This is our 1937 moment. We are not at war – but must act rapidly so that we aren't drawn into one through a failure to contain territorial expansion...'I will do everything in my power to ensure that the British Army plays its part in averting war.'I will have an answer to my grandchildren should they ever ask what I did in 2022.' General Sanders cautioned that Russia had a track record of starting wars 'badly' but could 'still ultimately prevail'. 'Historically Russia often starts wars badly. Because Russia wages war at the strategic and not the tactical level its depth and resilience means it can suffer any number of campaigns, battles and engagements lost and yet regenerate and still ultimately prevail,' he said.'While Russia's conventional capability will be reduced for a time at least, Putin's declared intent to restore the lands of historic Russia makes any respite temporary and the threat will become even more acute.'We don't know how the war in Ukraine will end but in most scenarios Russia will be an even greater threat to European security after Ukraine than it was before.'The Russian invasion has reminded us of that time-honoured maxim that if you want to avert conflict you had better be prepared to fight.'Despite the recent emphasis on new capabilities, such as drones and cyber warfare, he will say that land forces will remain crucial in any conflict, adding: 'You can't cyber your way across a river.'In a reference to the start of the First War World, Gen Sanders said that 'this is not the rush to war at the speed of the railway timetables of 1914'.Instead he said deterring Russia means 'more of the Army ready more of the time' from 'the general in (Ministry of Defence) Main Building, to the young lance corporal in the barrack room, from the reservist on a weekend exercise, to the civil servant in Army headquarters'. In a speech on Tuesday, General Sir Patrick Sanders, the Chief of the General Staff, will say he had never seen such a clear threat to peace and democracy as the 'brutal aggression' of Russian president Vladimir Putin The calls for armament came as NATO said Monday it would boost its high readiness force from 40,000 to 300,000 troops Wallace calls for 20% hike in defence spending Defence Secretary Ben Wallace has reportedly asked Boris Johnson to hike UK defence spending to 2.5% of GDP – an additional 20% a year – by 2028 in the face of Russian aggression.In his letter, Mr Wallace also urged the Prime Minister to call on Nato leaders at the upcoming Madrid summit to raise the spend per country from the current minimum target of 2% to 2.5% of national income, according to Talk TV's The News Desk programme.A defence source did not deny the reports, saying: 'We do not comment on alleged leaks.'The Defence Secretary and the Prime Minister have always said that the Government will respond to any changes in threat which is why in 2020 the Ministry of Defence received a record defence settlement.'Meanwhile, the Conservative chairman of the Defence Committee called for an even higher defence spending increase.Tobias Ellwood tweeted: 'Increasing NATO's Rapid Reaction Force from 40k to 300k is the right call.'But if the UK's to play it's part (as Europe's security declines) we must finally: increase defence spend to 3%, reverse troop number cuts, purchase all 138 F35's, upgrade our land warfare assets'.Mr Wallace reportedly highlighted deficiencies in the UK's military capabilities which have been laid bare by the war in Ukraine in his letter to No 10 and subsequent conversations.They include shortfalls of deep-strike weapons, artillery stocks and in the UK's anti-air and anti-drone capabilities, too few pilots to fly new F35 strike jets and too few crew for ships and submarines, The News Desk reported.Asked at a defence conference in May if he thought more spending on defence was justified as the cost-of-living crisis hit households, Mr Wallace said an extra £24 billion announced for the Ministry of Defence in 2020 had been 'very important' to 'make sure that we modernise the Army'.'I mean, the Army's land fleet is woefully behind its peers'.The Defence Secretary wrote to the Chancellor in March warning that Britain risked missing the Nato commitment to spend 2% of national income on security by 2025.The letter highlighted the cost of arming Ukraine and rising inflation as the primary reasons Britain was facing a real-terms cut in defence spending.The former Commander Joint Forces Command General Sir Richard Barrons said he supported Mr Wallace's latest demands.'I back him 100%, as will all the service chiefs and every serving officer that understands the current state of defence programme, the defence industry that supports the military and our allies that know we have to raise our game, within the envelope of collective defence, this is a very important moment at a very difficult time,' he told The News Desk.'We need to understand that for the last 30 years or so since the end of the Cold War, the UK defence forces have not had to deal with existential peril, the sorts of threats that a power like Russia can pose to the UK's homeland and security abroad.'We're now back in an era that will feel like the Cold War, where we need our armed forces to be nearly all ready, nearly all the time.' Boris Johnson is preparing to join other Nato leaders in Madrid for a summit at which they are expected to agree the biggest overhaul of the Western military alliance since the end of the Cold War.Mr Wallace is understood to have asked Mr Johnson in a letter to lift the annual military budget from the current Nato minimum target of 2 per cent of GDP to 2.5 per cent by 2028.'The Defence Secretary and the Prime Minister have always said that the Government will respond to any changes in threat which is why in 2020 the Ministry of Defence received a record defence settlement,' they said.Liz Truss said Nato should focus on increasing flexibility in resource deployment, the use of modern techniques such as 'hybrid warfare, the weaponisation of migration, the use of cyber attack', and spending more on defence.'Two percent needs to be a floor, not a ceiling for defence spending', the Foreign Secretary said in an interview with Die Welt, La Repubblica and El Pais.In his speech, Mr Wallace will reiterate his call for increased investment in defence to meet the changing international environment.In March the Defence Secretary wrote to Chancellor Rishi Sunak ahead of his spring statement warning UK defence spending was set to drop below the Nato minimum of 2 per cent of GDP by the middle of the decade unless the Treasury committed more resources.A defence source said: 'The Defence Secretary is expected to emphasise that now that the threat has changed, governments must be prepared to invest to keep us safe.'As well as Britain's commitments, Washington has announced it plans to send Ukraine sophisticated anti-aircraft missiles.The summit of the G7 - which comprises Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United States - wraps up today and will be immediately followed by a NATO meeting in Spain.In Brussels, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg announced plans to expand the alliance's rapid-reaction forces as part of its response to an 'era of strategic competition'. The NATO response force currently has about 40,000 soldiers. NATO will agree to deliver further military support to Ukraine - including secure communication and anti-drone systems - when its leaders convene in Spain for a summit later this week, Stoltenberg said.The Ministry of Defence said Putin is likely to rely increasingly on reserve forces in the coming weeks. Analysts have said a call-up of reservists by Russia could vastly alter the balance in the war but could also come with negative political consequences for Putin's government.It comes after Russia attacked a shopping centre – leaving at least 13 dead - in apparent provocation to coincide with the G7 summit in Bavaria.Scores of civilians were feared killed or wounded in a Russian missile strike Monday on a crowded shopping mall in Ukraine's central city of Kremenchuk, Ukrainian officials said.At least 13 people were dead and more than 40 wounded by two long-range X-22 missiles fired from Tu-22M3 bombers that flew from Shaykovka airfield in Russia's Kaluga region, said Ukraine's air force command. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said in a Telegram post that the number of victims was 'unimaginable,' citing reports that more than 1,000 civilians were inside at the time of the attack.'The Russian strike today on the shopping centre in Kremenchuk is one of the most brazen terrorist acts in European history,' he said in his evening broadcast posted on Telegram. Images from the scene showed giant plumes of black smoke from a shopping center engulfed in flames, as emergency crews rushed in and onlookers watched in distress.Zelensky said the target presented 'no threat to the Russian army' and had 'no strategic value.' He accused of Russia of sabotaging 'people's attempts to live a normal life, which make the occupiers so angry.' Boris Johnson condemned Vladimir Putin's 'cruelty and barbarism', speaking on the day Zelensky addressed the G7 summit The crowded mall in Kremenchuk had around 1,000 shoppers inside when missiles rained down on the building this afternoon A rescue operation is under way and at least nine of the wounded are in a serious condition after emergency services rushed to the scene Russia has carried out a deadly missile strike on a busy shopping centre in Ukraine in Putin's latest barbaric attack against civiliansA man is seen running from the burning building after the strike was carried out by Kremlin forces this afternoon, causing a huge fire Panicked survivors desperately tried to flee for safety as the complex erupted in fire, with plumes of black smoke billowing into the sky Putin's propagandist-in-chief Vladimir Solovyov has already predictably dismissed the brutal assault as a 'fake' operation carried out by KyivMr Johnson condemned Vladimir Putin's 'cruelty and barbarism', speaking on the day Zelensky addressed the G7 summit to urge G7 leaders to supply missile defence systems, and said it would strengthen the resolve of allies to resist Putin.The PM said: 'This appalling attack has shown once again the depths of cruelty and barbarism to which the Russian leader will sink.'Once again our thoughts are with the families of innocent victims in Ukraine.'Putin must realise that his behaviour will do nothing but strengthen the resolve of the Ukraine and every other G7 country to stand by the Ukraine for as long as it takes.'Earlier, Mr Johnson said the 'price of freedom is worth paying' and the UK must be prepared to support Ukraine's fight against Russia for as long as it takes despite the cost. | United Kingdom Politics |
Senior doctors have drawn up a major dossier refuting Sajid Javid’s claim that the pressures on the NHS were created by the Covid pandemic, amid continued warnings over patient safety, scarce beds and staff morale.The health secretary has repeatedly suggested that the problems around record waiting lists and ambulance waiting times have been prompted by the pandemic. Last week in parliament, he accused shadow health secretary Wes Streeting of having his “head under a rock for two years” for not seeing that the pressures stemmed from Covid.However, in a major review of evidence shared with the Observer, doctors pointed to issues around funding, bed capacity, staffing and recruitment that pre-dated the arrival of Covid. The dossier, drawn up by the British Medical Association as it gathers for its annual conference this week, finds that the UK’s health services were ill-prepared for the pandemic as a result of “historical underfunding and under-resourcing in the decade preceding the virus”.In 2019, the UK was spending around 10.2% of GDP on healthcare compared with 11.7% by Germany and 11.1% by France.While the latest data for 2020 suggests this has changed, the report finds that this was largely down to increased spending during the pandemic and the impact of Covid on the overall economy, as the UK had the largest drop in GDP of all G7 countries. It states that waiting lists had already hit 4.43 million in February 2020. Meanwhile, its analysis found that the average daily total of available beds contracted by 8.3% in England between 2010-11 and 2019-20 and 14.9% in Wales. In Scotland, the daily average available staffed beds for acute services also fell by 8.3% between 2010-11 and 2019-20.The UK has half the number of hospital beds per head of the population than the OECD average. Photograph: Victoria Jones/PAThe average number of beds per 1,000 people in OECD EU nations is 4.6, but the UK has just 2.4. It also identified a major issue with GPs. “The equivalent of 1,348 fewer fully qualified full-time GPs were working in the NHS when the pandemic hit in March 2020 than there were in 2015,” it found.Denise Langhor, an emergency medicine consultant in the north-west of England, said that the pandemic had “laid bare” the health service’s problems, but did not create them. “Those problems and those holes already existed,” she said. “It is entirely disingenuous of this government to claim the waiting lists and the difficulties people are experiencing with NHS care at the moment are due to Covid. They have been building for a decade.“Every day, I have patients that I wish I could have treated sooner. It’s an awful thing as a doctor to be trying to look after patients on a corridor, and knowing they are not getting the standard of care that you want to give them.“Frequently it feels like we’re operating by choosing the least worst option rather than the best option.”Lisa Rampersad, a junior doctor on the south coast, said she had been seeing issues with waits for surgery before the pandemic. “Before Covid, we have waiting lists over a year for patients to get surgeries on things like gallbladders,” she said. “The longer you wait to get that out, the more complications you have. And we’re currently at a two-year plus waitlist. Covid has added to it, but it was happening way before. We don’t have enough staff or theatres, we don’t have enough doctors to operate. Patients get bumped.”A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: “It’s evident the pandemic placed unprecedented pressure on the NHS and had a huge knock-on effect on our health services. “We estimate that around 11 million people didn’t come forward for treatment during the pandemic who otherwise would have. We’re doing everything we can to bust the Covid backlogs, grow our workforce, reduce waiting times and expand health infrastructure, backed by record investment.” | United Kingdom Politics |
Readers like you keep news free for everyone.
More than 5,000 readers have already pitched in to keep free access to The Journal.
For the price of one cup of coffee each week you can help keep paywalls away.
Readers like you keep news free for everyone.
More than 5,000 readers have already pitched in to keep free access to The Journal.
For the price of one cup of coffee each week you can help keep paywalls away.
AUSTRALIA’S LABOUR PARTY, the country’s ruling political party, has passed a motion at its national conference supporting the reunification of Ireland.
The motion was carried at the conference this weekend and has been welcomed by Sinn Féin.
Sinn Féin TD and party spokesperson on Foreign Affairs Matt Carthy said the move reflects the “deep bonds” between Ireland and Australia.
He described it as a “very positive step” which reflects the “growing interest both nationally and internationally in the benefits that Irish unity will bring to people across the island”.
Carthy and fellow Sinn Féin TD Pearse Doherty have recently returned from a visit to Australia where they met with different Irish-Australian business and political groups.
“Just as international support was crucial in delivering the peace process so too will be be crucial in making Irish Unity a success for everyone on this island,” Carthy said in a statement.
He added that it is “undeniable” that there is a growing conversation around the idea of Irish reunification and called on the Irish government to act now to begin planning for constitutional change.
“Failure to plan or engage in these discussions helps no-one,” he added.
The Australian Labour party has had a majority Government since May 2022 after a decisive win in the country’s federal election.
Labour party leader, Anthony Albanese, who is the son of an Italian father and an Irish/Australian mother, was elected prime minister in May 2022.
Back in June of this year, Taoiseach Leo Varadkar said that a border poll would “probably be defeated” if one were held now and that this would present a problem for those in favour of unification.
Varadkar said he wanted to preface his remarks by stating that his desire to see a United Ireland “should not be seen as radical” because the Irish Constitution also contains an aspiration for unity.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site | Australia Politics |
If you ever wanted more evidence that Westminster is dangerously disconnected from the rest of the country, look no further than the events of last week.
First came the sacking of Home Secretary Suella Braverman, swiftly followed by her resignation letter – read by 37 million people on social media – which blasted Prime Minister Rishi Sunak for having failed to deliver on his promise to the British people to lower immigration and stop the cross-Channel boats.
His flagship policy to that end – to fly asylum-seekers and illegal migrants to Rwanda to have their claims processed – was then torn down by the Supreme Court.
More Britons support than oppose the Rwanda plan.
And despite most of them now being absolutely convinced that our borders are ‘out of control’, an assortment of activist lawyers, pressure groups and unelected judges, cheered on by the radical woke Left, blocked the only thing that might deter people against entering the country illegally.
But more worrying is what the Supreme Court judgment and the Home Secretary’s sacking says about the state of the country.
With Braverman gone, no frontline politician is left to voice the concerns of the vast majority of voters on issues such as immigration, multiculturalism and the breakdown of our borders.
Nor is there anyone who will take on the two big threats that are rapidly undermining our shared identity, history, values and culture. And what are these threats to Britain, exactly?
The first was on show again yesterday in the hundred or so rallies held across the country as part of the ‘Palestinian Day of Action’.
The recent ugly expressions of anti-Semitism and support for Hamas at these marches represents the creeping and insidious spread of radical Islamism.
Its hardcore adherents who are taking to the streets every weekend spout their hatred not only of Jews and Israel but of Western values and our way of life.
There have been calls for ‘jihad’ on British streets. Radical preachers have been recorded describing Jews as ‘filth’ and ‘usurpers’, and urging their followers to ‘tear them apart’.
The constituency offices of some Labour MPs have been vandalised with red paint by groups chanting ‘shame on you’.
The ‘crime’ of these individual politicians, some of whom understandably now fear for their families’ safety, is to have not voted for the Scottish National Party’s motion last Wednesday that called for a ceasefire in Gaza.
Is this what our ancestors, whose memory we solemnly observed last weekend, fought for?
To see elected representatives and British Jews, much like their ancestors in Nazi Germany, scared to leave their homes, go to school or show their faith?
How has it come to this?
The rise of radical Islamism, I believe, has been facilitated by what Suella Braverman warned about – decades of mass, uncontrolled and unassimilated immigration that has led to the importation of tribal grievances from abroad into British communities.
The Government has not only failed to deport foreign nationals who openly glorify Islamist terror, but at least one senior Hamas militant has been granted British citizenship, as well as social housing and welfare support.
Much of this is being enabled by the second big threat, which has also been apparent in recent weeks: the rise of a radical woke Left, whose supporters have joined marches in the full knowledge that elements within them are endorsing terrorism and anti-Semitism.
This was best symbolised, last week, by former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn refusing more than a dozen times during a TV interview to call Hamas what it is – a terrorist group.
As in America, the woke Left is reshaping society around an utterly divisive and unBritish worldview which contends that the country comprises only two competing groups: the morally inferior ‘oppressors’, including the white majority, Jews and basically all Western nations, and the morally superior ‘oppressed’ minorities, such as Muslims and other chosen minority groups.
The woke Left argues that our history, identity and culture are ‘institutionally racist’, and a source of shame and embarrassment.
They say that it should all be revised, if not fully ‘deconstructed’, or, in other words, overthrown.
The woke Left also promotes a fundamentally flawed model of multiculturalism that fails to integrate racial groups into wider British society – it champions the differences among them instead of the shared values that bind us all.
Over the last two decades, this warped worldview has captured some of the most important and influential institutions in our society – the universities, the BBC, much of the media, the creative industries, big corporations and cultural institutions.
Even our primary and secondary schools are now infected with the woke Left’s divisive creeds, such as radical gender and ‘critical race’ theories which promote the idea that racism is entrenched in society and white people still have the whip hand.
The woke Left and radical Islamism are not just feeding off one another but are, together, undermining British values that have prevailed for centuries.
Their common cause comes from them sharing many worrying things in common.
They routinely impose religious, gender or sexual agendas regardless of the rights that individual citizens have.
Both are dismissive of the values that lie at the heart of democracy, such as tolerance, pluralism and free speech.
Both shun serious debate, preferring to indoctrinate the young through faith schools or woke curriculums, while attacking or ‘cancelling’ those who oppose them, variously using charges of ‘Islamophobia’ or ‘racism’ to silence those who criticise them.
Both are iconoclastic, united in wanting to tear down British institutions, and both are revolutionary, in wanting to fundamentally transform society.
And both, as we’ve seen recently, are either openly anti-Semitic or willing to march alongside those who are.
The result is that we now face a toxic erosion of the sense of shared identity, values, culture and history we have in Britain.
Whether on the Right or Left, none of our leaders appears capable, or even willing, to defend us from the radical wokeism or extreme Islamism that we are currently experiencing.
Meanwhile, those who dare challenge the consensus in Westminster – from Boris Johnson and Liz Truss to, as we saw last week, Suella Braverman – have promptly been pushed out of frontline politics.
The return of David Cameron to the Cabinet, a centrist who hasn’t the stomach to take on these twin ideological threats, confirms that the towel has been thrown in.
So let me end by asking a different question.
The servicemen and women whose sacrifice we remembered last weekend fought for a Britain that is free, tolerant and democratic – one that defends our shared values and traditions.
Do today’s leaders have the will to do the same? | United Kingdom Politics |
For the duration of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour party the British press worked themselves up into a frenzy with rumours of “entryists” to the Labour party. These people were an anathema to the Party’s values and who the party existed to represent. In electing Jeremy Corbyn they had made the Labour Party unelectable and the party lurched to the left in a bid to resurrect a long-dead opposition to the policies of former leader Neil Kinnock. So the story goes anyway. Entryism is only a subject worthy of scrutiny by lobby journalists when it’s ordinary people paying £25 to vote in a leadership election won by a landslide in all membership categories. When it’s done via the corporate capture of the party, it’s not news. The gambling industry’s capture of the Labour party is very old news.
The country currently finds itself with high levels of gambling addiction and increased instances of problem gambling across the population. This is due to a combination of historic policy decisions, regulatory indifference, neglect, and the most well-oiled lobbying machine currently operating in British politics. It’s a costly blight but it wasn’t inevitable. The owners of betting companies, having profited to the point of being two of the top five tax contributors in the entire country, are desperate to maintain their position.
Problem gambling is now endemic within British society. This is in no small part because of the industry’s significant advertising spending. Behind this figure is also the fact that sixty percent of profits generated by gambling come from just five percent of customers. These customers are either problem gamblers or perceived as being ‘at risk’. The strategy of gambling firms is to get as many people through the door as possible and then to convert them into ‘whales’ (people who consistently bet vast sums of money).
If you spend an afternoon at or watching football at any level this ‘catch and grow’ strategy is evident. You will be bombarded by advertisements (the Football League is sponsored by Skybet) urging you to gamble as an essential part of the fan experience. At half time would-be punters are occasionally reminded by Ray Winstone or a similar sort of geezer (often a pundit or ex-player) to bet responsibly, but these are a drop in the ocean when compared to the sheer volume of the rest of the advertising spend. The reach and influence of the gambling industry on football extends so far that ex-footballer Steven Caulker was dropped as a pundit on a Bet365-sponsored series because of his previous “positive work” on gambling addiction.
The industry claims sponsorships have no impact on customer conversions or problem gambling, but if that were the case it’s hard to fathom why quite so much money is pumped into ensuring thirty-five percent of Premier League teams have a betting logo on their shirts.
This didn’t happen overnight of course, and much of the blame should be laid at the door of Tony Blair after his liberalisation of gambling laws in 2005. The Gambling Act did little to curtail the tax-dodging abilities of firms, and poorly equipped Parliament to be able to deal with consumer habits of the future. Subsequent administrations have had ample opportunity to update the legislation to reflect the fact that the Act predates the first iPhone. None have, instead preferring to deepen their relationships with these parasitic firms. For reference, in 2012 the CEO of Bet365 Denise Coates, one of the world’s best-paid executives, was awarded a CBE for “services to community and business”.
This relationship goes beyond the Government itself, with the Betting and Gaming Council (BGC) investing significant time, money and energy in the lobbying of MPs of all parties to oppose stricter regulation via donations, shilling initiatives and corporate hospitality. Earlier this year Tory MP and bonehead Scott Benton was caught in a sting offering to undertake paid lobbying on behalf of fictitious gambling industry investors, which underscored the ease of access outlets like the BGC have to unscrupulous MPs.
Away from the Conservative Party and the cartoonish scandals of its MPs, the BGC itself is frequently the employer of last resort for disaffected former Labour MPs and staffers. With its CEO Michael Dugher returning to the world of corporate lobbying after his stints at UK Music and as Shadow Secretary of State for the Department of Culture, Media and Sport, which responsibility for the regulation of the gambling industry partly falls under. Dugher’s role is in essence to do the dirty work of the gambling industry. When he’s not spending his time lobbying on behalf of firms, he spends his days taunting recovering addicts or coming under fire for his comments on the suicide of a gambling addict.
But the BGC’s closeness to the Labour Party goes beyond personnel. The lobbying that it and other firms undertake is often geared specifically towards a Labour audience. In 2021, backbench Labour MP for South Shields Emma Lewell-Buck came under fire for advocating for casinos like Admiral as she was pictured beaming while sat at a betting machine touting the ‘cuppas and socialising’ that the casino offered to their regulars. Lewell-Buck, after responding to someone criticising her for failing to show the reality of casinos like Admiral said “Hi, I see you live down South…”, Buck then commented that “MPs can help gambling addiction by engaging with places like Admiral”.
Meanwhile in April of this year, Shadow DCMS Minister Alex Davies-Jones MP, faced criticism after she took up the BGC’s offer for a £50 charity bet on the Grand National. Her winnings from this year’s particularly gore-filled race were promptly donated to a food bank in her Pontypridd constituency. The grim irony of course, should not need to be spelled out.
In addition to this, the BGC paid for an ‘advertorial’ in the New Statesman. It was penned by former MP, and current Labour candidate for Redcar, Anna Turley, ahead of the 2021 Hartlepool by-election in her capacity as a “sports consultant” for the BGC and apparent red-wall-understander. In it she argues, according to research (handily commissioned by the BGC) “focus groups found that betting is an integral part of British culture and society. People bet for fun and enjoyment, and working-class audiences see it as a cultural pursuit”. Turley also warned MPs against the necessity of affordability checks proposed by the Gambling Commission due to the supposed low prevalence of problem gambling. Not only is Turley and the BGC’s argument patronising nonsense of the highest order and eerily reminiscent of the sort of lines the tobacco industry deployed in response to the first wave of regulation in the 1950s, but it is also instructive as part of the reason why Labour is so susceptible to corporate capture on this issue.
Since the 2019 General Election, Labour has been hyper-focused and terrified of the opinions of the so-called “hero voters” in the red wall, with the Leader of the Opposition’s Office viewing them as the keystone demographic to win the next election. The narratives and importance of this group are problematic and often overstated for a number of reasons, but in this instance the caricature essentially provides those like Michael Dugher a custom-made angle to push the BGC’s agenda by playing on the insecurities of MPs.
That’s before even considering that aside from the gambling industry’s role as a post-Parliament pay packet, organisations like the BGC and other firms commit significant financial resources to buying corporate hospitality spots for MPs at various sporting events up and down the country. Freebies that MPs of all levels of seniority, including Keir Starmer are known to take up. Where from the view of a private box an MP, typically easily flattered, untrained and often clueless, finds themselves a captive audience ready to be miraculously won over to the view of the person that paid for their ticket. And that’s only counting the events that meet the declaration threshold, as many companies have been known to specifically tailor their various gifts, events and dinners to be just inexpensive enough to not require entry into the public register of Member’s interests.
It is worth noting however that this is not an entirely uncontested issue within the Labour Party, and many have been clear-eyed enough to recognise the scale of the rot that the prevalence of problem gambling is causing. Gordon Brown’s 2007 scrapping of super-casinos, labelled as “the worst form of puritanism” by Tony Blair in his memoir due to the loss of potential jobs created by it, probably represents the last major defeat the industry as a whole has encountered since liberalisation. A decision that has undoubtedly only aged better as the current crisis deepens.
While Carolyn Harris’ campaign to neuter Fixed-Odds Betting Terminals, machines that allowed users to lose £100 every twenty seconds, has surely saved hundreds, if not many thousands of people from immediate gambling-related harm. The eventual cull of FOBTs and the accompanying job losses were described as “devastating” by former Labour MP and Community Union Operations Director Tom Blenkinsop.
In each instance, Blair and other Labour MPs cannot not see the moral and practical hazard of a giant industry that produces nothing whose every pound in profit is drawn from the losses of its customers. Appeals to the nostalgia of dog tracks and a hackneyed vision of the flat-capped working class have meant that parasitic gambling firms can continue to have unfettered exploitation rights to plunder the pockets of the very people the Labour party claim to exist to serve.
The likely-incoming Labour majority government will be as much of a friend to the gambling industry as the Conservatives and New Labour before them. The corporate capture of the party seems an insurmountable hurdle for those few MPs who genuinely want Labour to change. The real exploitation of working class people is no match for the grievances of imaginary working class people whose views coincidentally align with the billionaire vulture capitalists of the gambling industry.
As was often repeated by many of the self-styled moderates worried about entryism during the Corbyn years, the British Labour Party does actually owe more to Methodism than it does to Marxism. Disdain for gambling and the harm it causes should become a core principle of the Labour party again.
John Fitzgerald is a pseudonym. | United Kingdom Politics |
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 REUTERSRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comTOKYO/BRUSSELS, June 27 (Reuters) - Japan is pushing to remove a target for zero-emission vehicles from a G7 communique expected this week, according to a proposed draft seen by Reuters, a move that would water down language on climate change from the leaders' summit in Germany.The pressure from Tokyo, an influential member of the Group of Seven rich nations, comes as the Japanese auto industry has faced scrutiny from green investors who say it has been slow to embrace zero-emission vehicles and lobbied against regulations that would encourage quicker transition to the technology.Reuters reported last week that Toyota Motor Corp's (7203.T) head lobbied the Japanese government to make clear it supported hybrid vehicles as much as zero-emission battery electrics. G7 leaders are meeting in the Bavarian Alps for a summit where climate change figures on the agenda. read more Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comJapan has proposed removing a reference to a "collective goal of at least 50% zero-emission vehicles by 2030", according to a draft of the communique reviewed by Reuters.In its place it has proposed a less concrete target of "significantly increasing the sale, share and uptake of zero-emission light duty vehicles recognising the range of pathways that members are adopting to approach these goals", according to the draft.A person familiar with the matter confirmed that Japan had proposed the changes, declining to be identified because of the sensitivity of the issue. It was not clear whether the proposed changes would be in the final version of the communique, which is due to be released at the end of the summit on Tuesday.Japan's foreign ministry said it was not immediately able to comment.AUTO INDUSTRY WANTS RANGE OF OPTIONSSeparately, Japan had pushed to remove a goal for all new car and van sales in G7 countries to be "zero emission vehicles" by 2035, in the G7 climate ministers' communique in late May, according to sources familiar with the discussions and a draft communique seen by Reuters.Ultimately the 2035 target was not included in the final statement, which pledged instead to achieve a "highly decarbonised road sector by 2030" by "significantly increasing" zero-emission vehicle sales.Reuters reported last week that Toyota Motor Corp's (7203.T) head lobbied the Japanese government to make clear it supported hybrid vehicles, which burn fossil fuels, as much as zero-emission battery electrics. read more Both Japan's auto industry lobby and leading automaker Toyota say automakers should not be limited to specific technologies and needed to keep a range of options towards reaching a goal of carbon neutrality by 2050.Toyota, the world's biggest automaker by sales, has said fossil fuels, not internal combustion engines, are the problem. As well as the hybrids it popularised more than two decades ago with the Prius, it also champions hydrogen technology, although that has so far not caught on the way battery-electric cars have.Energy and climate think-tank InfluenceMap has rated Toyota the worst among major automakers for its lobbying record on climate policy, which includes public statements and interaction with governments.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by Makiko Yamazaki in Tokyo and Kate Abnett in Brussels; Additional reporting by Kiyoshi Takenaka; Editing by David Dolan and Alex RichardsonOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Global Organizations |
Buyer’s Regret
Figures show massive numbers of buyer’s regret for those who backed Brexit. Grimsby, once Europe’s biggest fishing port, voted 70% for Brexit, but now voters say Brexit was based on ‘rhetoric and broken promises’ (How Brexit Failed England’s Premier Fishing Town). A poll this week showed 62% wanting to rejoin the EU. That figure might be familiar to some of you.
Those Sunlit Uplands remain obscured and the giant economic revival of a renewed Global Britain has in fact been replaced by a catastrophic cost of living crisis. Adjacent to this phenomenon, and less obvious, is the regret of those who voted No in 2014. The promise then was of a multicultural Britain, a source of stability and generosity, a bountiful and warm Union. ‘Lead don’t leave’ we were told.
For many who voted No the last nine years have been a time of increasing regret as the political hellscape of the government’s of Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Liz Truss (briefly) and Rishi Sunak have unfolded. Incredibly, back in 2014. the idea of ‘Britain’ was put forward as a sort of haven of progressiveness, openness and internationalism. Poor Scotland was pictured as a sort of backwater, independence meant parochialism and a retreat from the world. In post-Brexit Britain, characterised by extraordinary economic failure and a reactionary cultural hegemony its difficult to even imagine those arguments making sense.
This week the former Scottish Labour leader, Kezia Dugdale came out to say her position on independence had ‘moved’, she said: “If you are presented with a binary choice between an independent Scotland in a progressive Europe or little Boris Brexit Britain, I know where my cards would fall down.”
It was interesting that the piece was by ‘Caroline Davies and Agency’ – and not by either of the Guardian’s Scotland correspondents.
Dugdale, who is the director of the John Smith Centre at the University of Glasgow was speaking during an event at the Edinburgh Book Festival. She said: “I know I couldn’t argue with the same strength for the union that I did in 2014 now.”
“That doesn’t mean I’m ready to vote yes; there are big, big questions we need to debate as a country and resolve.”
“So I have moved … we have to keep talking about some of these big issues in the country, but not just purely through that yes/no lens.”
The story was muted – in stark contrast to the recent utterances of Robin Harper, the former Scottish Green party leader, whose announcement that he’d vote Labour provoked days of media coverage. This despite the fact that Harper had been out of politics for many years and Kezia Dugdale had been a significant figure in the Better Together campaign. As someone on Twitter put it: “Kezia Dugdale was once leader of the Scottish Labour Party, and was a staunch defender of The Union. Her Damascene conversion would be headline news and receive wall to wall coverage in countries which had a balanced, open, impartial media.”
Never the less such conversions are welcome as people realise what they voted for didn’t materialise. It’s an honest and difficult thing to publicly say ‘I got things wrong’.
She backed calls made by the SNP for the Scottish Parliament to be given powers over immigration and employment legislation. She told the audience at the book festival: “I want to see a Scottish Parliament with greatly more powers than it has just now. I was arguing back in 2012 for the Scottish Parliament to have powers over things like employment legislation. I lost that argument then.
“For me it is an absolute no-brainer that the Scottish Parliament should have employment and immigration powers now, immediately.”
What is interesting about this public conversion is not how it is conveniently buried but how it flourishes despite the apparent failure of the independence movement to make strategic gains. Late or terminal Britain is such a wasteland and such a gulf appears between the vision of the Union sold in 2014 and the reality of today that even those who were the Sales Men and Women for it are in despair at what they see. But what’s also interesting is not Dugdale’s regrets it’s also the rarity of her support for devolution.
I used to dismiss those in the independence movement wo argued ‘they will come for Holyrood’ and close down devolution. That argument, I thought was paranoia. I was wrong. The assault on the devolution settlement has been vicious and determined and even those parties that helped create devolution have – at best stood by – and at worst contributed to devolution being completely undermined. In this context it’s rare to hear a Scottish Labour politician arguing for more powers for Holyrood. Most of the things she expressed support for have, only this week, been explicitly ruled out by Keir Starmer and Anas Sarwar.
Afterwards Dugdale expressed regret about how her words were taken saying: “Memo to self, you can’t have a nuanced debate about the constitution…And for as long as that’s the case, Scotland will be stuck in a reductive holding loop, to the serious detriment of people who really need change.”
You can have some sympathy for that position. It is true it’s difficult sometimes to have nuanced public debate. The algorithm loves a binary and social media thrives on conflict. It’s fair enough – and probably a majority view to say “I’d support independence but I have some issues that need resolved”. That’s not very controversial. The problem for Dugdale and the No voters that may be expressing regrets is that the situation we find ourselves in is one that they helped to create. Every single thing that has happened – the economic breakdown, the constitutional repression, the reactionary politics – was carefully predicted, and Dugdale wasn’t some neutral player in this battle, so it’s a bit rich to say ‘Ho hum I’m kind of not sure anymore but can we have some more powers please?’ It’s more muddled than nuanced. | United Kingdom Politics |
India, Russia trade hit record high in 2022, settled in INR, ruble
President of Russian Chamber of Commerce and Industry Serget Katyrin said India and Russia have been working in various options & are close to resolve the issue of payments between eachother
New Delhi: Trade between India and Russia touched a record high of $35.3 billion at the end of 2022, about 2.5 times more than that in 2021, President of Russian Chamber of Commerce and Industry Serget Katyrin said. He further said most of bilateral trade was settled in Indian rupee and ruble.
“Such a rapid development of economic relations is largely facilitated by changes in the global foreign economic environment,” Katyrin, who is in India as the head of a large business delegation from Russia, said.
“On the other hand, India has traditionally been one of Russia’s key strategic trading partners. Business contacts are also developing in multilateral formats such as BRICS and SCO,” he added.
‘Rupee-ruble trade very much on table’
Katyrin informed that India and Russia have been working in various options and are close to resolving the issue of payments between each other
He further said the possibility of rupee-rouble trade is very much on the table.
“We (Russia) have traded with many countries in national currencies. In our Eurasian Economic Union (which includes five countries), nearly 75 per cent of the mutual settlements are in national currencies. With many partners, these relationships are being built on a mutual basis which includes China and India,” Katyrin was quoted as saying by The New Indian Express.
Don’t want Indian banks to attract sanctions from the West
However, not all trade between India and Russia will be settled in the INR, Katyrin said.
“There is a segment which does not allow us settlement [trade] in rupees. At the same time, we would not want Indian banks to attract sanctions from the West. Of course, we are looking for other options, there are complications, but there are many options too,” he added.
Russia and India have decided to give away dollar for cross-border trade and settle payments in INR and ruble. Last year, Western countries including the US and European Union, had imposed sanctions on Russia after it began full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Several countries are gradually aiming to de-dollarize global trade and are making overseas payment in local currencies. India too has started trading in INR with 18 countries including UK, Russia, Malaysia, Singapore.
India imports large amount of crude oil from Russia.
‘Businesses with the West not viable’
Katyrin also said that Russian companies are looking for partners in India. “Many companies that were earlier working in the West are also looking at partnering with India since their businesses are not viable there any longer,” he added.
Spokeswoman Oana Lungescu said the western allies had not yet "seen any changes in Russia's nuclear posture that would lead us to adjust our own"
Russia has denied targeting residential areas even though artillery and rocket strikes hit apartment buildings and civilian infrastructure daily
Russian lawmakers passed sweeping legislation introducing jail terms of up to 15 years for acts days ahead of Putin’s announcement of a “partial” mobilization in September last year. | India Politics |
Rishi Sunak's new cabinet meets for the first time this morning, as his new look government takes shape.
At 23:00, the announcements were still coming, and it's not just David Cameron doing a less senior job than their previous role.
Dame Andrea Leadsom used to be a cabinet minister as business secretary - she once ran for Conservative leader and prime minister - now she's back as a junior health minister.
Damian Hinds used to be education secretary. Now he's number two in the department as minister of state.
But let's take a step back. What is this reshuffle all about?
From Rishi Sunak's perspective, it is about building a team more in his own image, and shaking off at least some of the folk he inherited from Liz Truss.
It is also about trying to change the political dial.
I'm told Rishi Sunak and David Cameron have spoken every now and again since Mr Sunak became prime minister.
It was about a week ago when Lord Cameron, as he now is, was asked if he would become foreign secretary.
This suggests - given the sideways move for James Cleverly from foreign secretary to home secretary - that Suella Braverman may have been done for even without the drama of late last week.
But Mrs Braverman's remarks did, it appears, shuffle forward the reshuffle.
David Cameron's return has prompted genuine delight from some Conservatives.
I've seen texts flying around talking excitedly about 'DC' - his initials were often used as shorthand when he was prime minister.
But others in the party see him as a Conservative from a different era: the Remain-loving author of what some see as as the austerity years. For some Conservative MPs they are two things they would run a mile from.
Governments will often appoint blasts from the past to senior roles, via the House of Lords, when they've either run out of better ideas or really do need to give the impression they're patching up very public differences.
Think Lord Mandelson as the unlikely number two to Gordon Brown in the final years of Labour's last stint in government.
As for Suella Braverman, No10 got rid of her because they were tired of her.
On plenty of policy issues she and the prime minister agreed. But her language and the attention it attracted irritated them, as did that newspaper article that wasn't properly signed off by No10.
A former minister, Dame Andrea Jenkyns, has published her letter of no confidence in Rishi Sunak.
Some of Suella Braverman's supporters claim - without evidence - a dozen or so letters have been sent in private. Who knows.
The numbers of the disillusioned tempted by political insurrection don't seem big, at least yet.
But make mistake, No10 is aware of them.
Mrs Braverman hasn't yet properly had her say after her early morning sacking by phone.
Some think she may wait until after the decision on Wednesday from the Supreme Court about the Rwanda migrant plan.
If the government loses, Suella Braverman isn't likely to stay quiet for long.
And senior folk in government think losing on Rwanda in court is more likely than winning.
But a qualified loss (or indeed qualified win) is possible, where some elements of the scheme are approved and others aren't.
The question is how much attention can Suella Braverman attract, how much appetite does the Tory party still have for stirring things up before an election - as opposed to making a case for its priorities afterwards? Let's see.
What is noticeable - and the return of David Cameron personifies - is what seems like a tilt away from the right.
The re-appointment of Esther McVey is a nod to those who might be concerned about this, charged as she is with keeping a sceptical eye on what some label political correctness or "wokery".
But the broader shift looks unmistakable to some in the party, and they don't like it.
Others hope it can sure up Conservative support in the south of England, where the electoral threat to the Tories by the Liberal Democrats is at its keenest.
Others, not least in the Labour Party, ask whether all this amounts to a coherent strategy at all, given its only weeks ago that Rishi Sunak was seeking to define himself against recent governments and prime ministers.
And now he's appointed one as his foreign secretary.
Oh and one final thought, which in the end is all that really matters with all this.
Will it change how we are governed, and the popularity, or lack of it, of the government?
There is a chance given its scale, and the eye catching return of David Cameron, that people might notice it.
Internal Conservative critics reckoned the prime minister's conference speech and last week's King's Speech didn't change the political dial.
It is far from certain this personnel reboot will either, but it might.
If you are Rishi Sunak and you are staring at what looks right now like likely general election defeat, it is worth a try. | United Kingdom Politics |
Discover more from Politics with a lean
Emerald Unity
A Potential Celtic Power Play
The Call for a Celtic Alliance
With the writing on the wall for what is fast being realized, at least across Scotland and Wales, as a failed union, the opportunity for the unwilling participants of the union to band together politically is ever more enticing. Wales, Scotland, and Ireland(NI) share a cultural bond that has lasted through the ages, a bond steeped in history and coloured with legend. It is in times of political upheaval, such as we are experiencing today, that I would like to propose a new Celtic Alliance of the three fledgling nations. Westminster has made it known that they will not let go of their dying union willingly, and seeking permission is a fruitless endeavour. To truly break these chains, I believe we need to unite as one.
Political Alliances in a Global Context
Despite this rarely being seen in British politics, the idea of an alliance or coalition of parties within politics is far from an unusual one. Democracies across Europe and indeed the world have been utilizing this method to strengthen their representation in government for decades. Most recently in the 2022 French legislative election — ‘Ensemble’ managed to maintain the highest amount of seats despite the member parties losing a considerable number, purely due to them banding together here. Likewise in the 2022 Italian general election — ‘coalizione di centro-destra’ surged to victory in much the same way, though an argument could be made that the outcome of this particular election was very much a defeat for democracy. That aside, something like this is not uncommon at all.
Building Strong Ties through Political Cooperation
Another very interesting thing about political alliances like this, I think, is their ability to foster closer ties between the member parties within them. Often, the cooperation present between parties in alliances like this tends to carry over to their ability to govern post election. What I mean here is, building and maintaining these bridges between parties and the members within them pays dividends for cross-party cooperation in the future, as familiarity provides a much stronger basis for cooperative ruling of a government. I think it is worth noting that within the UK the idea of a coalition government has been muddied in recent years, but the evidence supporting this kind of cooperation, in my opinion, is incredibly clear.
Strategic Collaboration for Effective Governance
Something else worth noting is this — For those of us that are looking to affect change for our nations from within an established system like Westminster, the ability to cooperate with sympathetic parties isn’t just a good idea, but in most cases, a necessity. For example in Wales, if Plaid Cymru were to rally the support of the majority of Wales and win all 32 seats in Wales, their ability to act on their mandate and provide the people something such as their right to Independence, they would have just as much ability to do so as they would with only a single seat. That is to say, they would still have no ability to do so. This exact situation exists in Scotland with the SNP, and we have already seen something very similar to this happen there.
Global Models of Collaborative Success: The Nordic Example
Let’s look then at an example of a collection of nations working together towards the betterment of them all. To do, all we have to do is look towards the Nordic countries — Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Iceland. These countries, whilst not all in the EU, work closely together economically and also defensively, with their militaries routinely training together. They are even in a defensive organization together called the Nordic Defence Cooperation (Nordefco) with the aim being to strengthen the member countries' defence capabilities by identifying areas for cooperation and to promote effective solutions.
Unlocking Political Power through Unity
Each of these individual nations, taken alone, would never be able to effect real change through influence at Westminster. An alliance of these nations, though, would be in for a better shot. Indulge me for a moment here, if Plaid Cymru, the SNP, and even Sinn Féin were to carry all of the seats in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland respectively, and I know this is a pipe dream for many reasons, then this political alliance would command the power of 107 seats in Westminster. 107 seats in Westminster is over and above king-maker territory in a parliament. This, of course, would require these parties to win these seats, as well as Sinn Féin to actually take up their seats in Westminster and abandon their abstentionism, unlikely, granted. Though I would argue that if what they want is reunification, doing so alongside a Celtic Alliance such as this from within the apparatus, would greatly increase their chances of success. There are, of course, many pieces of the puzzle that would need to fall into place for an eventuality such as this to unfold, but I would be lying if I said it wasn’t tangible.
Addressing Common Criticisms: Power Sharing and Effectiveness
Common arguments against electoral alliances like this are often to do with power-sharing, opponents claim that voters' wishes would be ignored as the parties within the alliance would have to compromise with each other to push through legislation, but this argument is flawed. The people that argue this seem to forget that the wishes of these voters would absolutely be being ignored if the party they voted for, be it Plaid, SNP, or Sinn Féin in this case, were not the majority party in Westminster — something that will never happen, regardless of how much support these parties gain from the voters in their nation. Another concern typically levied is the claim that “Nothing would get done.” Used mostly as a baton with which the larger parties in Westminster can beat the smaller parties in the press, though evidence throughout Europe and beyond actually shows that coalition governments and political/electoral alliances more often than not manage to be more effective at governing alongside bringing the legislative change that voters actually wanted.
The Celtic Alliance Vision: Shared Values and Objectives
With the world around us lurching to the right electorally, and the failed union crumbling alongside them, it stands to the people of these nations to fight for our future sovereignty and the very future of our nations. With the people of Wales, Northern Ireland & Scotland waking up to the fact that the UK government has never, and will never, prioritize the needs and the aspirations of those outside of England — The time for us to strike out for ourselves has arrived. I believe we can, and should, work together to achieve what we believe we are owed, but ultimately it falls to the people and their votes to deliver this particular powerful message.
Shared Governance: The People's Role in the Celtic Alliance
The proposed Celtic Alliance rests on a foundation of shared values and objectives, deeply rooted in the cultural fabric of these nations. The commitment to self-determination stands as a unifying principle, echoing the desires of the people in Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales to shape their destinies independently. Cultural preservation becomes paramount, acknowledging the historical legacies and linguistic identities that bind these Celtic nations. Furthermore, a resounding desire for greater autonomy serves as the driving force, compelling these parties to forge a collective path toward a future unencumbered by Westminster's grasp.
Leveraging Political Power: An Alliance for Influence
An alliance among Sinn Féin, the SNP, and Plaid Cymru presents a unique opportunity to amplify their collective political influence within Westminster. By standing united, these parties can create a formidable force capable of advocating for not only self-determination, but for a future that has long since been held ransom by the chains of a union hell-bent on extracting everything and returning nothing to the people of these storied lands. | United Kingdom Politics |
U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen speaks during a news conference, ahead of the G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors Meeting, in Nusa Dua, Bali, Indonesia, July 14, 2022. Made Nagi/Pool via REUTERSRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comSEOUL, July 19 (Reuters) - The United States will impose harsh consequences on countries that break the international economic order, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said on Tuesday."Economic integration has been weaponised by Russia," she said, calling for all responsible countries to unite in opposition to Russia's war in Ukraine.The United States is pushing for increased trade ties with South Korea and other trusted allies to improve the resilience of supply chains, and avert possible manipulation by geopolitical rivals, Yellen told Reuters on Monday. read more Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comYellen said in remarks prepared for the event she was heartened by conversations with Korean counterparts on a proposed cap on the price of Russian oil.Yellen has said she will discuss the oil price cap proposal with top officials in Seoul.On Tuesday morning, Yellen was hosted by LG Chem (051910.KS) CEO Hak Cheol Shin in a tour of LG facilities in Seoul.Yellen, an avid collector of rocks, listened attentively as Shin explained the process of building electric vehicles, including the need for lithium.LG Chem, besides being the parent company of electric vehicle battery maker LG Energy Solution (373220.KS), also has battery materials and petrochemical businesses.LG Chem, besides being the parent company of electric vehicle battery maker LG Energy Solution (373220.KS), also has battery materials, petrochemical and pharmaceutical businesses.Yellen is in South Korea on the final leg of her 11-day visit to the Indo-Pacific region. read more Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by Andrea Shalal; Writing by Joyce Lee; Editing by Himani Sarkar and Stephen CoatesOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Asia Politics |
It has become one of the great truisms of British politics – Sir Keir Starmer needs to reshuffle Labour’s Shadow Cabinet and get his “A-team” in place ahead of the next election.
But after much hype, and gossip, with many certain it would happen after the local elections two months ago, May came and went without any changes.
Now the general consensus among Labour party insiders is that it has to be “sometime between now and autumn conference”. So for Shadow Cabinet members the wait goes on, as rumours build about which ones will eventually get the chop.
There have been reports that the delay is also leading to internal tetchiness and tensions as some complain about the latitude given to tall poppies, such as the shadow Health Secretary Wes Streeting.
But other sources say that what stands out, in the circumstances, is the lack of division. And they attribute this, in different ways, to the Labour leader.
Some suggest a refusal to engage in the ebb and flow of the usual party politics is a sign of the strength of union between Sir Keir and his shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves – who are considered all-powerful among party insiders.
Since Ms Reeves was promoted in May 2021, she has become Sir Keir’s right-hand woman, to the apparent detriment of Deputy Leader Angela Rayner. Ms Rayner’s allies deny she has been squeezed out of the inner circle, despite continual rumours that she faces a demotion in the reshuffle. But others are clear about who is calling the shots.
“Keir and Rachel are so powerful so factions don’t matter, so they haven’t been formed,” one said. Another insider said: “This is the most collegiate team at the top that it has ever been whilst I have been here. I think it is because Rachel and Keir get on that makes a massive difference. Animosity at the top filters down.”
Others agree that Starmer has brought an end to sniping and division but are less complimentary about why. One source said the lack of competing factions in the Shadow Cabinet was down to the lack of politics altogether.
“Part of the reason there is no factions is because there is no vision,” they said. “Many would argue this is a huge benefit, without this no one has anything to support or oppose. But you can’t win an election without politics.”
However, Sir Keir must still risk upsetting this internal peace with a wave of sackings and promotions at some time in the near future.
Currently, the most opportune moment seems to be the days after Labour’s National Policy Forum, on 21 July, when the party and its affiliates gather together to thrash out its policy platform.
Rejigging before then would get in the way of by-election campaigns, and leaving it too long afterwards drags it into the depth of summer holidays.
“You can’t let this rumble on until August, we all know what silly season is like,” one Labour source said, referring to the period over the summer, where a lack of hard stories means gossip can dominate the news agenda.
“The party is already a little frustrated so throw in a genuine, credible reshuffle gossip and then you have a fractious team.”
There has been some unhappiness within Labour about Sir Keir’s hesitancy over a reshuffle, particularly among those shadowing Government departments rejigged by Rishi Sunak earlier in the year. And there are some mutterings that his refusal to act is the latest example of him being indecisive and not politically astute.
Others, more sympathetic to the leader, argue the lack of action does not imply poor political instinct but merely that Sir Keir is not interested in this side of things. He does not engage in the political chess-playing, they say, but concentrates on his policy agenda.
Shadow Cabinet politics
Starmer loyalists
Sir Keir’s ultimate ally is shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves. He is said to consult her on all policy decisions, with economic discipline underlying every party pledge. Shabana Mahmood, the national campaigns co-ordinator, is also very loyal to the party leader – having been appointed by him to improve Labour’s election fortunes in 2021. And the leader is said to be personally close with his north London neighbour and shadow Foreign Secretary, David Lammy.
Ardent Blairites
Shadow Health Secretary Wes Streeting, Northern Ireland spokesman Peter Kyle and shadow Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson are among those on the right of the party – in favour of a 2020s version of Blair-style politics.
Brownite leftovers
It is often commented on that the current Labour Party is lacking in real Government experience. But there are a handful in the top team who have actually been in Government before, having served under Gordon Brown. These include shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, Ed Miliband who covers the net zero brief, and shadow Attorney General Emily Thornberry.
Mr Lammy, shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury Pat Mcfadden, and Work and Pensions spokesman Jonathan Ashworth – who was Gordon Brown’s adviser – are also from that last spell of Labour power. Mr Miliband, Ms Cooper and Ms Thornberry are all figures who the current Labour leader is said to not always see eye-to-eye with. The argument for keeping them, however, is that they would bring their much-needed experience to the table if Labour ends up in government next year.
The left-wingers
The shadow Cabinet doesn’t really contain any real committed Corbynites under Sir Keir. But those on the left of the party include shadow Transport Secretary Louise Haigh and her ally Lisa Nandy, who holds the levelling-up brief , as well as – of course – deputy party leader Angela Rayner. Mr Miliband is also considered more on the left of the top team.
Who is at risk?
It has been well reported that Sir Keir wants to reshuffle some of Ms Rayner’s jobs – although he cannot demote her as his deputy – and has been considering moving her to into the levelling-up role. Ms Nandy is believed to be on notice for a possible move – but it is not clear where she would go. Jim McMahon, who covers the shadow environment brief, and Nick Thomas-Symonds at international trade, are also said to be at risk of a demotion.
And who is on the up?
Darren Jones, the outspoken chair of the Business and Trade Select Committee, has been talked up for a possible frontbench position. Liz Kendall – the shadow social care minister – and Jonathan Reynolds – who covers business – are being talked up for possible promotions by colleagues. James Murray (shadow Financial Secretary to the Treasury) and Steph Peacock (shadow veterans’ affairs minister) are also rumoured to have made a good impression.
This narrative of a political opposition leader who is uninterested in the politicking is something repeated by several Labour insiders. One source said it felt that the party was being “run by staffers, not politicians”, which create a strange atmosphere. “Decisions on policy are not made in Shadow Cabinet, but around the edges of it,” another said.
But if people are unhappy about that state of affairs there may be a reluctance to show it. Insiders say that 13 years of opposition have focused minds. With power a very real prospect few want to risk infighting or negative briefing.
“There is nothing like a poll lead and quite a good chance of victory at the next election to make everyone think,” said one insider. “No one wants to be the one that f**ks it up. No one wants to be the reason for a defeat.” | United Kingdom Politics |
Theresa May has delivered a stinging rebuke to Boris Johnson's plan to override parts of the Northern Ireland Protocol ahead of a Commons vote.The former prime minister told fellow MPs that she could not support the controversial legislation - which she said would be illegal, fail to achieve its aims, and diminish Britain's standing in the world.
In an excoriating take-down of the plans, she even drew on her own experience as an embattled PM to suggest that European leaders may now be doubtful about her successor Mr Johnson's future in Downing Street.Politics Hub: Cabinet ministers urged to oust PMHer criticism added to the concerns expressed by fellow Tory Andrew Mitchell, a former international development secretary, who said the plan threatened to wreck Britain's global reputation and prompt a trade war. The protocol, which governs Northern Ireland's post-Brexit trading arrangements, was designed to prevent the return of a hard border with the Republic of Ireland.
But it means some goods being exported from mainland Britain to Northern Ireland are subject to customs checks, creating problems for some businesses and upsetting unionists - resulting in political deadlock as the DUP refuses to re-enter power-sharing. More on Boris Johnson Boris Johnson says plans to override parts of the Northern Ireland Protocol could become law 'fairly rapidly' as MPs to vote on controversial bill Boris Johnson says he is not worried by reports Tory MPs could be plotting to oust him and insists questions over his leadership have been 'settled' G7 summit: Zelenskyy to urge leaders to do more to help war effort as Johnson to demand action on Ukrainian grain The UK government says it wants to renegotiate the deal, but accuses Brussels of intransigence and claims that it has no choice but to introduce legislation.It contains measures to remove checks on goods and animal and plant products exported from Great Britain to Northern Ireland.Read more: What is the Northern Ireland Protocol, and why does it matter? Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player What is the Northern Ireland Protocol? 'Is it worth negotiating with these people?'Foreign Secretary Liz Truss told MPs preparing to vote on the legislation on Monday that the political situation cannot be allowed to drift and that the plan was "both legal and necessary".But Mrs May set out a series of objections, including regarding the claim that the UK was legally able to override the protocol because of "necessity".That was wrong, the former PM said, because other legal options such as continuing to negotiate and to invoke Article 16 - unilaterally suspending parts of the protocol temporarily - remain available.She added that key aims of the legislation - bringing the DUP back into government and encouraging Brussels to negotiate - were also doubtful.Mrs May said that there was no commitment from the DUP to returning to the executive as a result of the billShe added that when she, as prime minister, had faced a bruising confidence vote just like Mr Johnson, EU negotiators started to ask themselves: "Well, is it really worth negotiating with these people in government because will they actually be there in any period of time?"She added: "Also, actually, I suspect they are saying to themselves why should they negotiate in detail with a government that shows itself willing to sign an agreement, claim it is a victory, and then try to tear part of it up in less than three years' time."Read more: What is power-sharing, and why is it used in Northern Ireland? Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player Who is opposing the NI Protocol bill? Truss and May clash over 'patriot' statusMs Truss said she was supporting the measures as she was a "patriot", but Mrs May said: "As a patriot, I would not want to do anything that would diminish this country in the eyes of the world."I have to say to the government, this bill is not, in my view, legal in international law, it will not achieve its aims, and it will diminish the standing of the United Kingdom in the eyes of the world, and I cannot support it." 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, or SpreakerEarlier, Mr Mitchell said he had an "immense amount of sympathy" with the government, with the EU "not being particularly constructive".But he added: "Many of us are extremely concerned that the bill brazenly breaks a solemn international treaty, it trashes our international reputation, it threatens a trade war at a time when our economy is flat, and it puts us at odds with our most important ally."The last point was a reference to disquiet in the US about the government's move. Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player EU: Protocol bill 'politically driven' PM defends government's planMeanwhile, the prime minister has said the legislation could be enacted "very fast" if backed in parliament.He told reporters at the G7 summit in Germany: "You have got one tradition, one community, that feels that things really aren't working in a way that they like or understand, you've got unnecessary barriers to trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland."All we are saying is you can get rid of those whilst not in any way endangering the EU single market."Brussels has launched legal action against the UK in retaliation to the proposed legislation, which would effectively ditch key parts of the deal signed by Mr Johnson and the EU in 2019.European Commission vice president Maros Sefcovic has indicated further measures could follow if the UK pressed ahead with the bill. | United Kingdom Politics |
An aerial view shows oil tanks of Transneft oil pipeline operator at the crude oil terminal Kozmino on the shore of Nakhodka Bay near the port city of Nakhodka, Russia June 13, 2022. REUTERS/Tatiana MeelRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comSCHLOSS ELMAU, Germany, June 25 (Reuters) - Leaders of the Group of Seven rich democracies are having "very constructive" discussions on a possible cap on Russian oil imports, a German government official said on Saturday shortly before the start of the annual three-day G7 summit.The proposal is part of broader G7 discussions on how to further crank up the pressure on the Kremlin over its invasion of Ukraine without stoking global inflationary pressures.The Ukraine war, energy and food shortages and the darkening global economic outlook are expected to dominate the agenda of the summit that is taking place this year in Schloss Elmau, an alpine castle resort in southern Germany.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comThe United States, Canada and Britain have already banned imports of Russian oil while European Union leaders have agreed an embargo that will take full effect by end-2022 as part of sanctions on the Kremlin over its invasion of Ukraine.With energy prices soaring though, the West fears such embargoes will not actually put a dent in Russia's war chest as the country earns more from exports even as volumes fall.A price cap could solve that dilemma, while also avoiding further restricting oil supply and fueling inflation, officials say, but for it to work, it requires buy-in from heavy importers like India and China."We are on a good path to reach an agreement," the official said.The official said the G7 was also discussing the need to combine ambitious climate goals with the need for some countries to explore new gas fields as Europe rushed to wean itself off Russian gas imports.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by Sarah Marsh and Andreas Rinke; Editing by Sandra MalerOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Europe Politics |
The Kremlin claimed Wednesday that Ukraine tried to strike the Kremlin with drones overnight but said the attack on the heart of the Russian government was "successfully repulsed."
Russian President Vladimir Putin was not injured in the purported attack, which was reported by Russian state media agency TASS on Wednesday. The Kremlin provided no evidence to back up the claim of an attempted attack, however. Ukraine's government has not publicly commented on the claim.
In other news, Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy made a surprise trip to Finland where he is meeting the country's president as well as other Nordic leaders for a summit on Wednesday.
Ukraine denies any involvement in alleged Kremlin drone attack
Ukraine denied any involvement in an alleged drone attack on the Kremlin that Moscow has blamed on Kyiv.
A senior Ukrainian presidential official, Mykhailo Podolyak, said Ukraine had nothing to do with the drone strike, stating on Twitter that "Ukraine wages an exclusively defensive war and does not attack targets on the territory of the Russian Federation."
Rather, he said the allegations suggest Russia was planning a large-scale "terrorist" attack against Ukraine in the coming days.
Serhii Nikiforov, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's spokesman, also told the Ukrainian Pravda news outlet that Kyiv was not involved in the incident.
"We have no information about the so-called night attacks on the Kremlin, but as President Zelenskyy has repeatedly stated, Ukraine directs all available forces and means to liberate its own territories, not to attack foreign ones," he told the news outlet in comments translated by NBC News.
Nikiforov said Russia's description of the incident as a "terrorist" attack was interesting given Russia's repeated attacks against Ukrainian territory over the course of the war.
"A terrorist attack is the destroyed houses in Dnipro and Uman, or a rocket fired at the train station in Kramatorsk and many other tragedies. And what happened in Moscow was obviously an escalation of the situation in light of May 9," alluding to Russia's upcoming Victory Day parade commemorating the Soviet victory over Nazi Germany in World War II.
The comments come after the Kremlin claimed Wednesday that Ukraine tried to strike the Kremlin with drones overnight, but said the purported attack on the heart of the Russian government was "successfully repulsed."
Russian President Vladimir Putin was not injured in the incident, the Kremlin said. It provided no evidence to back up the claim of an attempted attack.
— Holly Ellyatt
Russia claims Ukraine tried to strike the Kremlin with drones
The Kremlin claimed Wednesday that Ukraine tried to strike the Kremlin with drones overnight but said the attack on the heart of the Russian government was "successfully repulsed."
Russian President Vladimir Putin was not injured in the purported attack, which was reported by the Kremlin, which provided no evidence to back up the claim of an attempted attack, however.
"Last night, the Kyiv regime attempted to strike the Kremlin residence of the President of the Russian Federation with unmanned aerial vehicles," the Kremlin stated, with the claim detailing that "two unmanned aerial vehicles were aimed at the Kremlin."
"As a result of timely actions taken by the military and special services with the use of radar warfare systems, the devices were disabled," the Kremlin said.
"As a result of their fall and the scattering of fragments on the territory of the Kremlin, there are no casualties and material damage."
Putin was not injured and continues to work as usual after the Kyiv attack, it said.
The Kremlin's statement suggested that it viewed the attempted attack as a "planned terrorist action" and an attempt on the life of the president ahead of Victory Day on May 9.
Russia was already believed to be slimming down its Victory Day parade, which commemorates the Soviet Union's victory over Nazi Germany in WW2, amid fears of Ukrainian strikes.
Russia reserves the right to respond to an attempt to strike at the Kremlin where and when it sees fit, the Kremlin added, without giving details on how it planned to respond.
Footage began circulating on social media channels purportedly showing what could be an unmanned aerial vehicle appearing to explode above a domed roof of one of the Kremlin's buildings. CNBC wasn't able to immediately verify the authenticity of the footage, however.
Ukraine has not publicly commented on the claims. NBC News has reached out to the Ukrainian government for comment but hasn't yet received a response.
— Holly Ellyatt
Huge fires caused at Ukrainian and Russian oil depots after drone attacks
Oil facilities in Ukraine and Russia have been targeted in separate incidents reportedly involving drones.
Ukrainian officials said a Russian drone strike on an oil depot in the city of Kropyvnytskyi, in the central Kirovohrad region of Ukraine, had caused a major fire. Andriy Raykovych, the head of the Kirovohrad regional military administration, said Russia had used drones to attack the facility during the night.
"Around three in the morning, 3 Geran-2 [Iranian-made Shahed-136 drones] bombers attacked an oil depot in the regional center at once. There were no casualties," he said on Telegram, adding that emergency services were on the scene. Ukraine's prosecutor general said that as a result of the drone attack, a "large-scale fire started."
Meanwhile, it's believed that a major fire that broke out Wednesday at a fuel depot in a village in the southwestern Russian region of Krasnodar, near the Crimean bridge linking the Russian mainland to the Crimean peninsula annexed by Russia in 2014, was also caused by a drone.
"The fire of a tank with oil products on the territory of the JSC Tamanneftegaz enterprise occurred as a result of the fall of a drone," TASS reported, citing the emergency services which said a fire had broken out covering almost 1.25 thousand square meters. "Extinguishing is currently ongoing. There are no casualties," the representative of the emergency services said.
Reuters reported that rail deliveries to Russia's nearby Black Sea port of Taman would be restricted until further notice.
The news agency reported that videos from Taman posted on Russian social media showed flames and black smoke billowing over large tanks emblazoned with red lettering reading "flammable." Reuters could not independently verify either the fire reports or the videos, however.
The latest incident comes after Moscow accused Ukraine of setting fire to an oil depot in Sevastopol in Crimea last weekend.
Ukraine's military command did not take direct responsibility for the attack but an official noted that the undermining of Russia's logistics were part of "preparatory" work ahead of its anticipated counteroffensive.
— Holly Ellyatt
Suspect in killing of Russian war blogger says she was set up
A woman accused of assassinating a prominent Russian military blogger has said she is "insanely sorry" for delivering the bomb that killed him, but that she did not know the true content of the parcel she handed him in a St Petersburg cafe a month ago.
Darya Trepova is now in detention in Moscow on terrorism charges, accused of cooperating with Ukrainian special services to kill Maxim Fomin, who wrote a popular pro-war blog under the name Vladlen Tatarsky.
"Most of all I want to die," the 26-year-old told the St Petersburg online news channel Rotonda, which posted extracts of its interview online.
"I replay the events over and over in my head ... Why did I simply believe that there was nothing dangerous in the package that I was asked to deliver?" she was quoted as saying.
"The most unbearable thing is that they killed a man with my hands, and maimed dozens. I have always been against violence."
Trepova did not say who had asked her to present the package — a bust of Tatarsky, with explosives concealed inside — to the blogger as he was meeting other supporters of the war.
Having survived the blast, she said she had written herself a letter in prison to convince herself that she should not take her own life.
"I'm insanely sorry for what happened," Trepova said. "I pray for the health of the victims and will try to organise a collection of funds to help the victims of the tragedy recover."
Now in the Lefortovo prison, often used for those suspected of spying and other grave crimes, Trepova said she had been visited three or four times by investigators, but had not yet been allowed to see a lawyer. Rotonda did not say when the interview had been given.
— Reuters
Zelenskyy makes surprise trip to Finland
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is in Finland on Wednesday, marking the latest in a series of rare trips outside Ukraine for the president.
Zelenskyy will meet Finnish President Sauli Niinisto and other Nordic leaders gathered at the presidential palace for talks, according to Finnish news agency STT.
Finland is holding the Nordic-Ukraine summit today and Niinisto and Zelenskyy will be joined by Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson, Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Icelandic Prime Minister Katrín Jakobsdottir.
The war, Nordic support for Ukraine and the country's relationship with the EU and NATO will be on the agenda for talks. At the end of the discussions, a joint press conference will be held, the news agency said.
— Holly Ellyatt
Russia's FSB says 7 Ukrainian agents arrested in Crimea
Russia's Federal Security Service (FSB) said on Wednesday it had arrested seven people connected with Ukrainian intelligence and accused them of planning "a series of high-profile sabotage and terrorist acts" in Russian-annexed Crimea.
In a statement, the FSB said the group had planned attacks against Russian-installed officials including local governor Sergei Aksyonov. It said it had seized explosives identical to those used to attack railways in the peninsula in February.
In a statement, Aksyonov said the same group was behind both alleged incidents. He said, without providing evidence, that there was no doubt that the Ukrainian government was behind them.
Russia seized Crimea from Ukraine in 2014 and used it as one of the launchpads for its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
Separately on Wednesday, Russian emergency services blamed a large fire at a fuel depot on the Taman peninsula, which adjoins Crimea across the Kerch strait, on a drone falling on the facility.
— Reuters
Russian forces could be shifting focus away from Ukraine's power network
Russian forces could be shifting their attacks away from Ukraine's energy network, Britain's Ministry of Defense said Wednesday.
Remarking on recent air-launched cruise missile (ALCM) attacks carried out by Russia on April 28 and May 1, the ministry noted that the observed types of facilities damaged by the Russian strikes indicated "a possible shift away from targeting Ukraine's electrical power network" and instead a focus on the country's military, industrial and logistical infrastructure.
The strikes were the first such strikes for 50 days, with the last prior strikes occurring on March 9.
"The latest strikes were conducted by Russian Long Range Aviation strategic bombers, both Tu-95 and Tu-160 aircraft, likely using Kh-101 and Kh-555 ALCMs," the ministry said.
"Both strikes used smaller numbers of missiles than seen in previous attacks, which is likely due to Russian attempts to rebuild its ALCM stockpiles," it added.
— Holly Ellyatt
Meeting on grain export deal arranged for May 5, minister says
The deputy defense ministers of Russia, Ukraine and Turkey are due to meet in Istanbul on May 5 to discuss the extension of the Black Sea Grain Initiative, according to Turkey's Defense Minister Hulusi Akar.
"It is planned that the deputy ministers of defense of Turkey, Ukraine and Russia will meet in Istanbul on Friday, May 5," Akar said, according to Turkish news agency Anadolu.
As it stands, the grain deal, which has enabled millions of tons of Ukrainian agri-food products to leave the country via several ports, expires on May 18. Russia has said there are no guarantees it will agree to extend the deal.
Akar said Turkey hoped the grain deal would continue without any disruption.
"This agreement is very important for the countries in need as well as for regional peace and stability. In this context, we can say that the parties look forward to the extension of the [deal]. Our wish is to extend this initiative without any problems," he said, according to a Google translation of the comments.
— Holly Ellyatt
Ukraine's capital Kyiv targeted by Russian drones overnight
Kyiv was targeted by Russian forces again last night, marking the third time in six days that the capital has been targeted.
An air raid alert went off in the capital and a number of regions overnight Wednesday because of a Russian drone attack, according to Serhiy Popko, head of the Kyiv city military administration.
Posting on Telegram, Popko said Kyiv was being attacked with Iranian "Shahed" drones, a weapon that has become a staple for Russian forces in the war.
"The capital of Ukraine suffered another air attack from the enemy. The third time in the past 6 days! This time Kyiv was attacked by drones only," Popko said on Telegram.
"The tactics of the enemy remain usual and unchanged - with the onset of darkness, the terrorist country launched its barrage of ammunition from various directions," Popko said.
According to preliminary information, the drones were shot down in the airspace above the capital with no reports of injuries or damage.
Ukraine's Air Force Command said on Facebook that its defense forces had destroyed 21 of 26 Russian Shahed-136/131 type one-way attack drones overnight. The drones had been launched from both the north, from the Bryansk region in Russia and to the north of Ukraine, and the south, from the eastern coast of the Sea of Azov.
— Holly Ellyatt
No ships leave Ukrainian ports as expiry of Black Sea Grain Initiative looms
No ships carrying agricultural products left Ukrainian ports under the Black Sea Grain Initiative as the deal faces expiry. Ukraine's Navy has previously said Russia suspends vessels from moving to and from Ukraine's ports.
Three ships carrying 119,925 metric tons of agricultural products left Ukraine's ports of Chornomorsk and Odesa on Monday. The ships are destined for China, Morroco and The Netherlands.
Under the Black Sea Grain Initiative, a humanitarian sea corridor, more than 900 ships carrying nearly 29 million metric tons of agricultural products have departed from Ukraine's war-weary ports. Russia has previously said that it would not recognize an extension of the deal, which could expire in mid-May.
— Amanda Macias
Ukraine and allies working to block Russian efforts to circumvent sanctions, Zelenskyy says
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said that his country, along with its allies, is preparing "a large sanctions package" in a nightly address.
"We are closely monitoring how the terrorist state is trying to circumvent sanctions, recording each such direction, and working together with our partners to block it," Zelenskyy said referencing Russia.
"We are preparing a large sanctions package. The decision will be made soon," he said, without adding additional details.
Since Russia's invasion of its ex-Soviet neighbor, Washington and allied countries have imposed rounds of coordinated sanctions vaulting Russia past Iran and North Korea as the world's most-sanctioned country.
— Amanda Macias
China needs to be more 'tough-minded' on Russia, says U.S. ambassador
U.S. Ambassador to China Nicholas Burns said on Tuesday that China needs to push Russia to withdraw its troops from Ukraine.
Burns, speaking by video link with the Stimson Center think tank in Washington, D.C., added that a recent phone call from China's Xi Jinping to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was "a good first step," but he doesn't know if China has offered to be a meditator between the two countries.
"China has a very close relationship with Russia, a supportive relationship with Russia," he noted. "Certainly, we'd like to see China be much more tough-minded in its advice to the Russians, and we'd like to see action to end the war as quickly as possible in terms, of course, that the Ukrainian government can accept."
He also said that the U.S. has been warning China not to provide lethal military assistance to Russia, and officials have seen no evidence that the Chinese are doing so.
— Michele Luhn
Kremlin rejects U.S.' Russian casualty claims
The Kremlin rebuffed U.S. intelligence suggesting Russia had suffered around 100,000 casualties in the past five months of fighting in Ukraine, mostly in the east of the country.
Kremlin Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov told reporters Tuesday that the data was "taken from nowhere."
"Washington simply does not have the possibility to name any correct figures, they do not have such data. And that is how it should be treated. You should rely only on the data published by the Ministry of Defense of Russia," he said.
Peskov's comments come after White House national security spokesperson John Kirby told reporters Sunday that U.S. intelligence estimated that Russia had seen 100,000 casualties in recent months and that the figure included 20,000 dead, half of them from the Wagner mercenary group.
— Holly Ellyatt
Putin warned he could be arrested if he attends BRICS summit
Russian President Vladimir Putin was warned he could be arrested if he attends a BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) summit in South Africa in August.
Authorities in the country warned that they would be compelled to detain the president after a warrant for his arrest issued in March by the International Criminal Court in The Hague.
South Africa's Sunday Times newspaper, citing sources in the country's government, said that a special government commission established by South African President Cyril Ramaphosa to look into the international arrest warrant concluded that the country would have no choice but to arrest Putin if he traveled to South Africa for the summit.
"We have no option not to arrest Putin," a government official told The Sunday Times. "If he comes here, we will be forced to detain him."
Putin was expected to travel to the summit, although the Kremlin had not confirmed his attendance, to meet with the leaders of BRICs.
The newspaper reported that officials were trying to find a way around the diplomatic dilemma, with Putin's "virtual" attendance via videolink being mooted as a possible workaround.
The paper's sources said that "the only option we have is for [Putin] to participate in the summit via Teams or Zoom from Moscow."
— Holly Ellyatt | Europe Politics |
French PM once again sidesteps parliamentary debate to pass budget
French Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne has invoked article 49.3 of the Constitution to pass the first part of the government’s 2024 budget. The move skips debate in the National Assembly, where lawmakers had introduced hundreds of amendments. This is the first time she has used 49.3 since it was used to pass the controversial pension reform in March, and the 13th time she has used it in her tenure as prime minister.
Issued on: Modified:
Borne said she was taking responsibility for getting a budget passed in the face of a parliament where the government does not have a majority.
“Today the assessment is clear: no opposition group is ready to vote for this budget. And yet, our country needs this first part of the bill,” Borne argued in favour of the legislation that she says includes 16 billion euros in savings and investments in the ecological transition.
Opposition parties had introduced some 5,000 amendments, which will now not be considered.
- France's article 49.3 a handy constitutional tool to bypass parliament
- France's Macron forces pension reform through parliament by decree
By using article 49.3, she will face no confidence motions from the far right National Rally and the hard left France Unbowed parties that have both denounced the lack of debate.
“This budget does not address the purchasing power crisis that has affected our fellow citizens for months, it does not propose any structural savings,” wrote the National Rally in its motion, also highlighting the lack of reform in migration policy. “It does not at all address the challenges of our country.”
But it is unlikely for the motions to succeed without support from the conservative Republicains, which have not backed them.
Last year, Borne had allowed parliament to debate a week on the budget before resorting to article 49.3.
The National Assembly’s finance committee, which rejected the first part of the budget after hours of debate, will now examine the spending part of the budget starting on 24 October, which will be then be put to a vote to the whole parliament.
(with AFP and Reuters)
Daily newsletterReceive essential international news every morningSubscribe | Europe Politics |
The Conservatives have suffered two by-election defeats in what had been seen as safe seats.
Labour won in the constituency of Selby and Ainsty, while the Liberal Democrats triumphed in Somerton and Frome.
The opposition parties both overturned Tory majorities of about 20,000 - as polling experts said the results meant "deep electoral trouble" for the Conservatives.
Politics latest: Minister a 'twit' for Inbetweeners remark about new MP, says Labour frontbencher
Rishi Sunak said the next general election was not a "done deal" as his party was able to narrowly hold on to Boris Johnson's old Uxbridge and South Ruislip seat. Despite predictions of a Labour victory in west London, Mayor Sadiq Khan's plan to expand the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) to the capital's outer borough angered people on the doorstep.
So is Labour on course to win power and how much are Mr Sunak's predecessors Liz Truss and Mr Johnson to blame for the PM's woes? Chief political correspondent Jon Craig and political correspondents Tamara Cohen and Rob Powell have been answering readers' questions on the by-election results.
:: Is Labour set to win the next election?
Tamara Cohen: Well, the short answer is it's looking encouraging for Labour, but it's difficult to predict general election results from by-elections, especially when the general election could be more than a year away.
But the clear swing is away from the Tories in three very different parts of the country. Labour needs a 12% swing nationally for a majority; and even if what we saw in Uxbridge and South Ruislip is replicated nationally they could be the largest party in a hung parliament.
But there is a long way to go and the extent of Labour's recovery in Scotland - still untested - will be crucial.
Rob Powell: Boris Johnson and Liz Truss have inflicted a lot of damage to the Tory brand and that is undoubtedly harming the current government.
Polling shows voters blaming the Tories for spiralling mortgage costs and not looking fondly on the chaos of the last few years.
So far, Rishi Sunak has spent a lot of time steadying the ship and putting out fires.
But he'll need to start offering more of a vision for what he wants to do for the country if he wants to avoid a thumping defeat next year. No 10 is suggesting that phase of his premiership will start after the summer.
Labour is also facing a similar problem, though.
Sir Keir Starmer spent the first half of his time in office trying to restore Labour as a credible party of government in the eyes of many voters. While that's worked to an extent, pollsters say many complain that they still don't know what he believes in or stands for.
Some Labour MPs and trade unions want him to lay out a more solid plan as well and not just stand back and hope the Tories lose the next election.
:: Will there be an imminent reshuffle, with the PM changing his top team?
Tamara Cohen: From what I'm hearing, no.
The thing about reshuffles is you never really know when they are going to happen, but while both the Conservatives and Labour will want to refresh their top teams before the election, doing so after a night that both are trying to spin as a victory looks like panic.
:: Will constituency changes affect the next general election?
Jon Craig: Oh yes! Most certainly. And ironically, two of the biggest casualties are seats contested in this week's by-elections: Somerton and Frome, and Selby and Ainsty.
The aim of boundary changes is to reflect changes in population as, traditionally, inner city constituencies lose voters and the suburbs and towns with new housing gain them.
The idea is that each constituency should have between roughly 70,000 and 77,000 voters. That means some rural seats are vast, with claims that they have more sheep than voters.
This time there's been a big shake-up because the boundaries haven't changed since 2010 and only 65 of the 650 Westminster seats will be unchanged.
Somerton and Frome is being carved in two new constituencies, Glastonbury and Somerton, and Frome and East Somerset.
Selby and Ainsty is being split four ways, though most of its electorate will stay in a new Selby constituency. Uxbridge and South Ruislip, on the other hand, is affected by only minor changes.
Reflecting population moves, the East Midlands, east of England, London, the South East and South West get more seats. The North West, North East and West Midlands will have fewer, and Yorkshire keeps the same.
Normally, governments make sure their party benefits from boundary changes.
This time is no different. It's estimated that the Tories will benefit by five or 10 seats as a result of the changes.
:: Does the Liberal Democrats' victory in Somerton and Frome show they are set for a big comeback?
Rob Powell: Before being decimated after the coalition years with the Tories, the South West was a heartland for the Lib Dems.
This win - combined with similar victories in local elections in the area - suggests the bad taste left by the coalition has faded and voters here are prepared to give them a go again.
That doesn't mean all four of the Lib Dem MPs who won their seats in by-elections in the last two years or so will retain them at the general election.
But the results do suggest the Lib Dems can expect to bank some wins in the broader region next year.
So expect the Lib Dems to frame themselves as the main challenger to kick the Tories out in target constituencies.
They'll pick out local policies to campaign on, as well as continuing to focus on national issues such as the NHS and cost of living.
:: How likely is a snap general election?
Jon Craig: The next election has to be called within five years of the last.
That means it could, in theory, be as late as January 2025, since the last one was in December 2019.
What normally triggers an early general election is when a government starts losing votes in the Commons, culminating in losing a vote of no confidence in the government, as happened to James Callaghan's government in 1979.
But in spite of all Rishi Sunak's current difficulties, his government isn't losing any Commons votes, partly because every time he faces a big Tory rebellion he caves in and ducks a clash with his backbenchers.
So with inflation now beginning to fall, Mr Sunak obviously feels perfectly entitled to say, as he did last month: "We've got to hold our nerve, stick to the plan and we will get through this."
Opposition leaders always demand a general election immediately and Sir Keir Starmer is no exception. But it ain't going to happen while Mr Sunak has a hefty majority in parliament.
:: Is there going to be a deal between Labour and the Liberal Democrats?
Rob Powell: If you're talking about tactical voting, then both leaders insist they aren't stepping aside to allow other parties through.
On the chances of the two parties forming a coalition after the next election, I'm not convinced anything solid has been reached behind the scenes, but be in no doubt it will be on the minds of both leaders, because the chances of Labour ending up as the largest party but without a majority are high.
Lib Dem success is already bringing questions about whether they would support a Labour government into power.
Sir Ed Davey isn't keen to talk about that, but notably didn't rule it out today when I asked him about it several times.
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer is also very woolly on the subject as while he's explicitly said no deal with the SNP, the possibility of teaming up with the Lib Dems is more vague.
So both sides are leaving the options open. Expect questions to get more pointed as polling day nears.
Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts
:: Will parties struggle to implement green policies after the impact of ULEZ in Uxbridge?
Tamara Cohen: That's a really good question, and one Labour are grappling with.
Angela Rayner said low emission zones remained the right idea, but her party needed to reflect on how to help people "do the right thing" without penalising those who can't afford a new car.
Whether it's Tory battles over wind farms, traffic schemes or the move to electric cars, these contests are a warning to both parties that they'll need to take voters with them on environmental policies.
:: Does Labour have the power to overrule London Mayor Sadiq Khan's ULEZ scheme?
Tamara Cohen: The ULEZ scheme is already in place in central London and its expansion to the outer boroughs, which is due to happen at the end of August, is subject to a High Court challenge by five London councils including Hillingdon - where the Uxbridge by-election took place.
We may hear the result later in the summer.
Labour's candidate in Uxbridge called for a delay in the implementation and a more extensive scrappage scheme, not ditching it altogether. | United Kingdom Politics |
Referendum row must be 'resolved democratically' with UK government, says Sturgeon Scottish first minister Nicola Sturgeon says she is "ready and willing" to negotiate with the Westminster government on the terms of holding a second independence referendum. Revealing she is writing to Boris Johnson today, she says: "What I will never do is allow Scottish democracy to be a prisoner of Boris Johnson or any British prime minister."She says Scottish democracy "cannot be suppressed" and the issue must be "resolved democratically". The two sides should be "sitting down together" and "responsibly agreeing a process" to "put the legal basis of a referendum beyond any doubt", she says. Scotland has 'paid a price for not being independent', says Sturgeon The Scottish first minister is setting out her argument for how and why a second independence referendum should go ahead.Speaking from the Scottish parliament, she says Scotland has "paid a price for not being independent" and has suffered under Westminster policies. She accuses the Conservative government of having "ripped us out of the EU against our will" and creating the "worst cost of living crisis in the G7". Meanwhile, she says she has seen "compelling evidence" of how a range of independent countries across Europe that are comparable to Scotland have stronger economic and social performance. She argues the Scottish government currently does not have the power to do all it can to tackle the cost of living crisis and "lacks the full range of levers". It is also "powerless to stop our budget being cut", Ms Sturgeon says."While we invest billions in measures to help with the cost of living, tens of thousands of children can be pushed deeper into poverty at the merest stroke of the chancellor's pen," she says. Civil servants put in 'an incredible difficult situation' over partygate investigation - Case Simon Case is asked how appropriate it is for civil servants to be asked to conduct investigations into the prime minister."Very difficult - and to be avoided wherever possible," the cabinet secretary replies.Mr Case says "I agree" when asked if he believes it is inappropriate to be investigating someone who is in charge of their career prospects."Asking civil servants to do these investigations put these civil servants in an incredibly difficult situation," he adds.Mr Case states that he is "not going to go into detail" about the advice given to the prime minister. Wallace: Defence spending must 'continue to grow' in face of global threats Defence secretary Ben Wallance has said the UK must continue to increase investment in defence.Speaking at the Royal United Services Institute he said: "I've always said as the threat changes, so must thefunding."He went on to say the increased threat came from several different sources:"Russia is not are only problem: An assertive China ready to challenge the rules-based system and democracy, terrorism on the march right across Africa, Iranian nuclear ambitions to date still unresolved, the threat is growing... and investment needs to continue to grow."Speaking at a New Statesman conference earlier Mr Wallace denied he had asked for a 20% increase in spending but admitted he always "battles other colleagues for budgets." Propriety and ethics 'definitely' the most difficult part of being cabinet secretary - Case Answering the first question put to him, Simon Case admits that propriety and ethics are "definitely" the most difficult part of his job.The cabinet secretary says there can be a "juxtaposition" between supporting the government and upholding ethical values "which can create challenges"."The government of the day is one that is not remotely afraid of controversial policies, it believes it has a mandate to test established boundaries, takes a robust view of the national interest," he adds.Chair of the PACAC committee William Wragg later asks Mr Case what proportion of his time he finds he spends on issues of propriety or ethics."To guess, 10 or 30% of my time" he replies. Cabinet Secretary Simon Case to be probed by MPs on partygate Cabinet Secretary Simon Case and Darren Tierney, Director of General, Propriety and Ethics at the Cabinet Office, are up in front of the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee.We'll be listening out for any interesting comments on the Downing Street partygate scandal.Mr Case was initially responsible for the investigation into the partygate events, but was forced to recluse himself after admitting an event had taken place outside his own office in December 2020.While Mr Johnson and Mr Sunak were fined for attending the event, Mr Case escaped being fined in the Metropolitan Police investigation. Small boat pilots crossing Channel with migrants to face life in prison, says Home Office People caught piloting small boats that carry migrants across the Channel could face life in prison under new laws.The Nationality and Borders Act came into force today, introducing tougher penalties for those who smuggle migrants into the UK.The legislation also increases the maximum penalty for illegally entering the UK or overstaying a visa, rising from six months in prison to four years.And it will enable the government to deport foreign national offenders up to 12 months before the end of their prison sentences.Home Secretary Priti Patel said it was "one of the most crucial milestones in delivering on our promise to the British public to take back control of our borders".Read more here: What’s the point of the G7? G7 leaders have been meeting in Germany to discuss a range of issues from inflation to securing energy supplies amid the war in Ukraine – and to display a sense of unity.But, with a resurfaced international division between East and West, has the G7 lost its power? On the Sky News Daily with Niall Paterson, senior diplomat and national security adviser to David Cameron, Sir Peter Ricketts shares some behind-the-scenes insight in why there is no real replacement for face-to-face diplomacy.Plus, our international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn, in Bavaria, explains the issues leaders at this week’s summit are discussing. 'We'll see what she has to say': Boris Johnson holds back from saying he would block indyref2 Speaking to reporters at the end of the G7 summit, Boris Johnson was also asked about the speech being made by Nicola Sturgeon later on the issue of a second independence referendum.The prime minister was notably reticent to saying he would definitely block a bid for a second referendum, saying he would "see what she has to say."However, he added: "We think the number one priority for the country are the economic pressures and the spikes in the cost of energy. Our plan for a stronger economy certainly means that we think we are stronger working together, but we have good relations with the Scottish government and we'll see what she has to say."See our post at 12.30 pm for an explanation of what Nicola Sturgeon is expected to argue in her speech later. PM says Tory defection rumours are a matter for political commentators Boris Johnson has called questions over his leadership "political commentary" as rumours mount that a few of his own MPs are considering defecting to the Labour Party.Asked about the reports, the prime minister told reporters that "these are matters for commentators".Mr Johnson added that his job is to "get on with the agenda" his government has put in place."I think this probably falls into the category of, you know, political commentary which I need to distinguish from journalism," the PM told broadcasters.Pressed further on his reference to "political commentary", Mr Johnson continued: "I think it is my job to talk about our policies, what we are doing for the country, what has been going on at the G7."Over the weekend The Sunday Times reported that the PM was facing three new threats to his leadership with MPs discussing defections, fresh letters of no confidence being sent and mutinous cabinet ministers considering whether to move against him.Speaking to broadcasters yesterday from Germany, the prime minister said doubts over his premiership are now "settled" after he survived a confidence vote "a couple of weeks ago". Due to your consent preferences, you’re not able to view this. Open Privacy Options | United Kingdom Politics |
“We’re going to have to coarsen our language somewhat”, said Hugo Keith KC, lead counsel to the Covid inquiry, as he began his interrogation of Dominic Cummings, yesterday; it would soon become clear why such a warning was necessary — and the same advice stands for this article.
“A bomb site”, “useless”, “feral” “a dumpster fire”, “[a] horrific meltdown”, “terrifyingly s***”, “dysfunctional”, “useless f***pigs, morons and c***s”. That was how Cummings described the various arms of the state he interacted with during the pandemic in private messages revealed yesterday. Boris Johnson’s former chief advisor denied his language contributed to any failings, but apologised for it regardless. Still, he insisted, his language reflected “a widespread view amongst competent people at the centre of power at the time”.
Cue a string of articles outlining the “[insert number here] bombshell revelations” from the Cummings’ appearance before the Covid inquiry. Of course, there can be no doubt, Cummings‘ testimony yesterday was equal parts coruscating and captivating — as he launched into stinging broadsides directed at the culture of Whitehall governance as well as a litany of old foes.
And, as Boris Johnson’s de-facto chief of staff during the pandemic years, we know Cummings was heavily involved in the decisions made at Downing Street during this period. His testimony confirmed as much; in fact, commentators might have hitherto been understating his influence.
One document drawn upon by Keith and brandished before Cummings was an email which appeared to show Johnson’s former chief adviser attempting to control correspondence heading to the prime minister on Covid. The newly-disclosed email, justified by Cummings’ suggestion that No 10 officials were spending “too much time in crap meetings”, read: “Any Chair brief on anything related to [Covid 19] including [the Cabinet Office] and [Treasury] must be cleared by [Tom] Shinner or me — NOBODY ELSE.
“Without radical changes further disasters are guaranteed”, Cummings’ email closed.
Yesterday, Johnson’s former confidant-turned-nemesis further justified this decision by describing the Cabinet Office as a “bomb site” during the pandemic. “This [was] causing chaos, there [had] to be some — a formalised system to actually grip this, because the Cabinet Office was a dumpster fire, and Shinner was extremely able”, he added.
He also described the move as “one of the single, probably handful, of best decisions I made in the whole nightmare”.
Step back and, what the British public was made privy to yesterday, including newly-disclosed damning WhatsApps and Cummings and co’s oral testimony, was undoubtedly gripping. But, after the Covid inquiry adjourned one more yesterday afternoon, what had we really learnt about Johnson’s mode of governance in No 10 — and the real process of Downing Street decision-making, perhaps masked by Cummings expletive-laden WhatsApp musings?
One insight into Cummings’ own approach to government, which the ex-adviser was keen to stress early on in his testimony, was that he had told Johnson that he should conduct a reshuffle to “shrink the size of the cabinet back to where it was 100 years ago”. But Boris Johnson was not interested, and Cummings implied such a change would have streamlined decision-making in Whitehall. Keith quickly moved on.
The episode, for Cummings’ cause, was a staging post in a narrative he sought to construct before the inquiry — a rather more serious soap box than his Substack blog — that he and a few other enlightened individuals were singularly responsible for holding back a tide of Whitehall and ministerial incompetence, created by both agent and structural faults.
Cummings painted a picture of complete chaos in No 10, as advisers, ministers and civil servants battled for the prime minister’s attention with a series of novel tactics: there was, perhaps first and foremost, what Cummings described as the “Pop-in”.
“Pop-ins”, Cummings explained, “are what people in the private office referred to when the prime minister would make a decision about something, [and] some element of the system, often in the Cabinet Office, would not like what had been agreed, and in the best Sir Humphrey ‘Yes, Minister’-style, they would wait for me and other people to not be around the prime minister and they would pop in to see the prime minister and say, “Dear prime minister, I think that this decision really wasn’t the best idea, very brave, prime minister, perhaps you should trolley on it”.
In this way, at the heart of government, Cummings and co had conjured their own vernacular to make sense of Johnson’s apparent personal failings. The verb “to trolley”, for instance, was deployed to describe the PM’s tendency to career and change direction when confronted with a particular dilemma.
Later, Cummings was asked what, if anything, worked well during the pandemic, he responded, wryly: “Erm … well, in summer 2020 I spent quite a lot of time talking to British Special Forces and I found that they were exceptional”. (The “Erm …” is how Cummings’ response is recorded in the official inquiry transcript).
Pressed further, Cummings explained: “I would say overall widespread failure, but pockets
of excellent people and pockets of excellent teams doing excellent work within an overall dysfunctional system”.
The response sums up that if any future government is interested in learning how to handle a novel infectious disease, they would probably be best served looking somewhere other than Cummings’ inquiry testimony.
On Tuesday, in the end — and in spite of all of the headlines — the most revealing exchange did not come during Cummings’ testimony, but in the evidence provided by his cooler colleague, Lee Cain.
Cain, Johnson’s former communications chief, was asked about a section of his written statement to the inquiry, in which he described the central tension in Whitehall between those advisers, officials and ministers who wanted to take a cautious approach to ending Covid containment measures, and those who wanted to unlock more quickly.
In the statement, Cain outlined how unlocking quickly was the approach favoured by the right wing of the Conservative party as well as in some sections of the printed media; he named The Telegraph newspaper as a key driving force.
Asked whether such influences played a role in the PM’s decision-making around September/October, when officials considered whether or not to have a circuit break lockdown, Cain responded, simply: “Yes”.
He added: “I think the prime minister was torn in this issue. If he would have been in his previous role as a journalist, he would probably have been writing articles saying we should open up the beaches and how we should get ahead with getting back.
And I think he felt torn where the evidence on one side and public opinion, and scientific evidence was very much ‘Caution, slow, we’re almost certainly going to have to do another suppression measure’
But Cain disclosed how the “rump of the Tory party was pushing him hard in the other direction”. He went on to criticise the “Eat Out to Help Out” policy, which now-PM Rishi Sunak patronised and championed.
On this point, there was another important revelation yesterday which showed how extra-Whitehall factors were influencing key decisions. During Cain’s testimony, an extract from former Chief Scientific Adviser Sir Patrick Vallance’s diaries from December 2020 was quoted. It read: “Chief whip says ‘I think we should let the old people get it and protect others’. PM says ‘a lot of my backbenchers think that and I must say I agree with them!”.
Ultimately, these points of evidence show that the debate over Covid policy was rather broader than Cummings described in his testimony — with his dual focuses on the PM’s failings and the Whitehall “system”.
Beyond concocting headlines for parliament-deprived journalists, it is the Covid inquiry’s job to unpick and historicise pandemic-era decision-making; and this is a story best told, not only through the prism of the actions of Dominic Cummings or Boris Johnson — or of squandered opportunities to see the cabinet shrunk — but by taking into account a myriad of factors and influences, even those which originate far beyond Cummings’ much-loathed “system”.
As Professor Tim Bale has noted, there may be a tendency after the testimony yesterday to retreat into a “great man theory” view of Covid governance, where Johnson’s own failings are viewed as the crucial, even sole, determinant of pandemic policy.
But, as the Covid inquiry is piecing together, the truth is far messier. Any comprehensive view of pandemic-era decision-making will need to include factors far beyond Johnson’s personal failings or the fact, as Cain described, that a novel coronavirus “was the wrong crisis for the prime minister’s skill set”. That, after all, was surely news to nobody.
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 |
European judges have tonight thwarted the Home Office's plans to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda just minutes before the jet was due to take off and appearing to leave Priti Patel's flagship policy in tatters. The number of UK asylum seekers removed on tonight's first plane to Kigali is now understood to be down to zero, meaning the flight is not expected to depart.An out-of-hours judge is understood to have been reviewing the remaining cases, sparking suggestions that the flight may not depart at all.A group of protesters gathered this afternoon outside Colnbrook Detention Centre in Heathrow and lay on the ground in an effort to halt the flight, which is anticipated at around 10.30pm. The plane expected to make the journey has already appeared at MoD Boscombe Down - with defiant ministers vowing the flight will go ahead even if there is only one person on board. Crew were spotted boarding the plane with lights on as if preparing for take-off even as legal wrangling continued tonight.Two asylum seekers are understood to still be at Colnbrook. The exits outside of the centre were blocked as campaigners bound themselves together with metal pipes. A number of arrests are reported to have been made.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 making tonight's flight 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 10.30pm tonight, according to Civil Aviation Authority records. Crew members board the Rwanda deportation flight Boeing 767 at Boscombe Down Air Base. Legal wrangling has continued throughout this evening ahead of the first transferral of UK asylum seekers to Kigali 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 Police officers try to remove an activist blocking a road leading away from the Colnbrook Immigration Removal Centre The protest near Heathrow Airport was against the British Government's plans to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda A number of arrests were made during this afternoon's protest according to campaign group 'Stop Deportations!' The campaign group 'Stop Deportations!' issued an urgent call summoning activists to the detention centre at Heathrow Police officers stand near activists blocking a road leading away from the Colnbrook Immigration Removal Centre The coach with outriders leaves Colnbrook, Heathrow Immigration Removal Centre this afternoon on the day a flight to Rwanda is due to leave Six people are due to be transferred on tonight's first flight to Rwanda, after one asylum seeker's removal was called off by the European Court of Human Rights Police are seen guarding the entrance of the MoD Boscombe Down, where a Boeing 767 aircraft was spotted today A police van accompanied by motorised police personnel arrives at MoD Boscombe Down 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 RwandaThe 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 six of the original 130 people originally told they would be deported to Rwanda are expected to be on the aircraft. The ECHR made its ruling in the case of a 54-year-old Iraqi man understood to have travelled to the UK by boat in May and who may also have been tortured in the past.The ECHR ruling stated: 'In the interests of the parties and the proper conduct of the proceedings before it... the applicant should not be removed until the expiry of a period of three weeks following the delivery of the final domestic decision in the ongoing judicial review proceedings.'The High Court is due to hold a judicial review in July to decide on the legality of the Rwanda scheme.A charity said the ECHR ruling could also mean the others earmarked to go to Rwanda would not now be deported.'This means it is now possible for the other six to make similar claims. We are so relieved,' Clare Moseley of the charity Care4Calais.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 mean the flight is expected to be leaving the UK for the east African nation tonight with six people on board. Demonstrators gathered in George Square, Glasgow, earlier today against the government plans to send migrants to Rwanda The controversial plans are due to undergo a Judicial Review in July and have attracted criticism from church leaders, lawyers and left-wing politicians (Pictured: today's protest in Glasgow)Baroness Chakrabarti, former director of Liberty and former Labour shadow attorney general, said that a 'substantive judicial review' of the Government's Rwanda policy is set to be considered in July.She accused the Government of going ahead with the plan before the Court of Appeal's final verdict on the lawfulness of offshore processing, because of an ongoing 'culture war'.She said: 'Would it not have been open to the Home Office to hold off removals until then or is it a confected culture war so that other ministers make these remarks about 'leftie lawyers' thwarting the will of the people, and that these souls, these seven or so souls, are collateral damage in that culture war.' Lord Coaker, shadow spokesman for home affairs and defence, branded the Government's Rwanda policy 'unethical, unworkable and expensive, and flies in the face of British values'.He argued, during a House of Lords debate on the policy, that it is not only 'shameful' in a moral capacity, but that the Government putting an RAF base on standby just to facilitate the flight of around seven people would be costly for the taxpayer.He asked: 'What will the cost to the taxpayer be of each person?'Home Office minister Baroness Williams of Trafford replied that she did not believe it was moral to 'stand by and allow people to drown' or to 'line the pockets of criminal gangs who seek to exploit people trying to cross in small boats'.She added: 'In terms of the cost, I don't think we can put a cost on the price of human lives. I think we need to do all we can to deter these perilous journeys.' The Hallmark Residences Hotel in Kigali, Rwanda where it is believed migrants from the UK are expected to be taken when they arrive 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 Rwanda A police van accompanied by motorised police personnel arrives at the British MoD Boscombe Down A 'privileged style' aircraft stands on the runway at MoD Boscombe ready to take the first migrants to the east African country tonight.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. 'We're expecting to send the flight later today,' Truss told Sky News but said she was unable to confirm the numbers due to be on board.'There will be people on the flights and if they're not on this flight, they will be on the next flight,' she added.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; The £20k-an-hour package holiday jet Priti Patel wants to use to send asylum seekers to Rwanda Priti Patel's £20,000-an-hour deportation jet being used to send people to Kigali, Rwanda Age 27 years Passengers 18 business class with 229 economy class Engines 2 Fuel capacity 91.380kg Max take-off weight 185,069kg Max landing weight 145,152kg Galleys 3 Lavatories 5 Charter cost £20,000-an-hour Maximum range 7,260 miles Top speed 567mph Maximum ceiling 43,000ft Take off distance 8,002ft Landing distance 5,052ft Priti Patel's deportation jet in figures Age 27 years Passengers 18 business class with 229 economy class Engines 2 Fuel capacity 91.380kg Max take-off weight 185,069kg Max landing weight 145,152kg Galleys 3 Lavatories 5 Charter cost £20,000-an-hour Maximum range 7,260 miles Top speed 567mph Maximum ceiling 43,000ft Take off distance 8,002ft Landing distance 5,052ft The government has hired Privilege Style Airlines to fly the first asylum seekers to their off-shore processing facility in Kigali, Rwanda. The Home Office chartered a Boeing 767-300ER with a maximum capacity of 18 passengers in Business Class with a further 246 in the back. The 27-year-old aircraft costs approximately £20,000-an-hour to charter and has a range of 7,260 miles, so it can travel the 4,100 miles to the Rwandan capital Kigali without needed to refuel en-route. The flight time from London to Kigali is approximately nine hours, meaning the trip down to will cost in the region of £180,000. The jet will be used to return Home Office officials on the flight to the UK, meaning a further £180,000 will be spent. Also, the jet flew empty from Dusseldorf to RAF Boscombe Down in Amebury, Wiltshire which would have cost the government at least £20,000 for the hour-long flight. Normally a charter aircraft will wait for up to two hours for its passengers before it starts charging extra, as it will have to turn down other clients. On June 13, the day before the jet arrived in the UK, it flew from Dusseldorf to Palma de Mallorca return before heading off to Tenerife and returning to Dusseldorf, where it took off this morning for the RAF base. The airline boasts that the aircraft has carried almost 500,000 passengers since it joined their fleet in 2013.Passengers on the jet are normally offered wifi, according to the airline and can follow the route of the aircraft on a moving screen. The aircraft offers 18 passengers business class seats, with two seats per row, rather than the two-three-two layout in the back which has space for a further 229 passengers This seating map shows the business class seats behind the aircraft's cockpit. The bulk of the passengers are seated in three rows across the aircraft in a two-three-two configuration The leather seats on board the aircraft are normally packed with holiday makers at this time of year travelling to sunshine destinations Passengers on the jet are normally offered wifi for in-flight entertainment. Those in business class have space to plug in their laptops 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 c | United Kingdom Politics |
A few weeks ago, Elon Musk was begging Taylor Swift to release some concert videos on his X platform, but she weirdly seems to have gone ahead with her plan to release the film of her Eras tour directly into movie theatres, foolishly making it by far and away the highest grossing concert film ever, with opening numbers similar to the last Marvel movie. Sad, really, when you think it could have been a tweet. Still, I tell you who Elon Musk can get to release exclusive footage directly on to his platform: UK prime minister Rishi Sunak. Who is, famously, a Taylor Swift fan, so … next best thing.
Sunak’s interview of Musk was trailed by the PM with a post in which the famous 10 on the Downing Street front door morphed into the X logo, a somewhat excruciating stunt that unintentionally answered one of the key questions of the AI conference: just because you can do something, does it mean you should?
The event itself actually took place at Lancaster House, which I always think of as a cursed space of self-sabotage, given that it was where Theresa May made the January 2017 speech about her Brexit red lines, which did so very much to hamstring her next two and a half years of failed negotiations and torment. Anyway, I expect they’ve had an exorcist in since then, and the current PM went with a black backdrop reading RISHI SUNAK X ELON MUSK – ooh, hot new collab just dropped! – in which it felt quite sweet that Rishi had given himself first billing.
After all, the run-up to this interview had seen much of the coverage prejudge it as the most humiliating outing for a UK party leader since Ed Miliband ascended the stairs to Russell Brand’s flat during the 2015 election to participate in something called The Trews. I’m not sure that was fair – for all his obvious drawbacks and twattishness, Musk is a significant player in AI, and someone who knows rather more about what he is talking about on the subject than pretty much all of the international politicians attending the AI conference. I suppose the one drawback is that unlike them, he isn’t democratically accountable, but hey – nor are China, and they got the call-up.
AI will eradicate jobs, explained Musk, which Sunak seemed fairly accepting of, perhaps because he is scheduled for professional eradication next year. Not that he can’t be rebooted and refitted for Silicon Valley in his post-prime-ministerial life, just as former deputy PM Nick Clegg has been. Clegg now spends his days PR-ing Meta, and will definitely be the guy in a crew-necked sweater left doing comms for the apocalypse, while Mark Zuckerberg’s jet leaves for the gun-turreted disaster compound in New Zealand. The last face you’ll see on your phone before it goes black is Clegg’s, as he solemnly promises the world: “We will learn from this.”
I can’t help feeling Sunak comes across as the sort of guy who would probably believe him. Given the softball nature of his Thursday night encounter with Musk, who only said things he had said before, the event felt chiefly most useful in what it revealed about Sunak, rather than the man in charge of some of Earth’s most significant companies and resources.
One of Tony Blair’s great weaknesses was that he was pathetically impressed by rich people – almost any rich person would do – and Sunak’s analogous vulnerability would be his starry-eyed tech fandom. From long before he became prime minister, Rishi has seemed not so much unperturbed by a future where tech firms run the world, but actively encouraging of it, despite the vast and blatant encroachments on his own power and those of his political successors that it would mean. (“Companies over countries”, as Zuckerberg once said.) Sunak has always seemed intensely relaxed about a world in which national leaders gravitate to a more front-of-house role – glad-handing it in public, prancing about on the world stage, and generally looking like leaders even though they’d really only be the butlers to the true supranational overlords.
Perhaps that’s why the prime minister seems most in his element in situations like this Musk interview – they represent a future which doesn’t trouble him, let alone frighten him. Watching him giggle along to Musk’s wry but clear warnings about humanoid robots was a reminder that Sunak is an odd man, who doesn’t really get a lot of things. For me, the definitive Sunak post on Musk’s platform will always be the one from the pandemic, where he says “I can’t wait to get back to the pub … and I don’t even drink,” accompanied by a picture of him doing a thumbs-up through the window of a luxury kettle shop. After Thursday night’s encounter, I slightly got the impression he could have watched the Terminator series rooting for Skynet.
Speaking of franchises, someone once said that Brett Ratner didn’t direct movies – he hosted them. And maybe that’s the UK now, with the power to host things but not to direct them. Sunak might have taken comfort from Musk’s assertion that San Francisco and London are the “two leading locations on Earth” for AI. Yet as a few decades of the London dirty money laundromat should have taught us by bitter experience, there’s quite a big gap between host and host organism – and I wouldn’t necessarily trust the UK to be on the right side of it.
Marina Hyde is a Guardian columnist | United Kingdom Politics |
Executive Director of the Global Fund to Fight Aids, Tuberculosis and Malaria, Peter Sands, warned of the devastating effects a food crisis exacerbated by the war in Ukraine could have on the world. In an interview with AFP, Sands talked about the increased risks of diseases when individuals are malnourished, a side effect that could lead to millions of deaths. “I think we’ve probably already begun our next health crisis. It’s not a new pathogen but it means people who are poorly nourished will be more vulnerable to the existing diseases,” Sands told the outlet while at a G20 health minister meeting. “I think the combined impact of infectious diseases and the food shortages and the energy crisis… we can be talking about millions of extra deaths because of this,” he added. The concern of a food crisis comes as Russia has set up a blockade at Ukraine’s Black Sea ports. This is preventing any grain from leaving the country. Ukraine is known as the “breadbasket of Europe” for how much grain it produces and exports, with the blockade capable of causing massive food shortages around the world. Russia’s invasion has already directly impacted the ability of thousands of Ukrainians civilians to obtain food. Tackling the food crisis is imperative to combating tuberculosis, Sands said, with undernutrition the leading risk factor for the disease. Sands said the illness does not get as much attention because it is a “poor person pandemic.” “It is the poor person pandemic and because of that, it hasn’t attracted the same amount of investment in research and development,” Sands said. “This is a tragedy because this is a disease we know how to prevent, how to cure, we know how to get rid of.” Tags Food crisis Russia-Ukraine war tuberculosis | Global Organizations |
‘IT MUST COME FASTER’: On the eve of today’s meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group at NATO headquarters, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky issued another urgent plea for more weapons to retake eastern territory lost to Russia and to defend against Russian missile attacks that are taking a toll on civilians in the western parts of the country, including Lviv and Ternopil. “We keep telling our partners that Ukraine needs modern anti-missile weapons. Our country does not have it at a sufficient level yet, but it is our country in Europe that needs such weapons most right now,” Zelensky said in his nightly video address. At a press conference for Danish media, Zelensky said if the flow of weapons from the west doesn’t increase sharply, the war risks devolving into a stalemate in which little ground changes hands. “Everyone will stand still. There will be a move of one or another side one to five kilometers forward, and then one to five kilometers back. If we get more weapons requested from our partners, we will start moving forward." “It must come faster if we all live by the same goal,” he told reporters. “We have shown our strength, and now it is very important that our Western partners show this strength together with us.” PENTAGON BELIEVES PUTIN HAS THE SAME GOALS AS WHEN HE FIRST INVADED UKRAINE STOLTENBERG: ‘NATO LEADERS REALIZE THE URGENCY’: Briefing reporters this morning in Brussels ahead of the meeting of NATO defense ministers, Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said the point of today’s meeting is to hear from Ukraine's Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov and determine the best way to get more weapons to the front lines. “I fully understand that being in Ukraine, seeing all the death, all the destruction, seeing the brutal war taking place, not least in the Donbas, there is urgent need for even more, and that's exactly what we're going to address today with the Ukrainians — how can we provide more support, and how can we ensure that that support reaches them as soon as possible.” “All allies have already started to significantly provide Western weapons, NATO-standard weapons, including very advanced air defense systems, multiple rocket systems, and also other types of advanced western artillery. We are also providing different types of armored vehicles and a wide range of different systems,” he said. “I cannot tell you exactly what kind of announcements that would be made today, but there are now really a wide range of different systems, including heavy systems, armored systems, and weapons.” ‘HOW THEY USE THESE SYSTEMS IS UP TO THEM’: When the Biden administration agreed to send long-range HIMARS multiple-launch rocket systems to Ukraine, it was with the firm understanding the weapons would not be used to attack Russian soil. But in an interview on the Fox News Channel yesterday, John Kirby, the new NSC coordinator for strategic communications, seemed to crack the door open to the use of longer-range missiles to target Russian missile launchers that are located just over the border and firing into Ukraine. “How they use these systems is up to them. This is their war, their fight. And we're doing everything we can to get them the kinds of capabilities that they need in the moment,” Kirby told Fox’s Martha MacCallum. “We don't dictate to them geographic limits on the kinds of capabilities that they have. They're in a fight for their lives, literally, and a fight for their territorial integrity.” “In other words, they have the latitude to use the weapons that we have sent them to take out those missile launchers in Russia, if that's what they feel they need to do with those weapons?” asked MacCallum. “We have talked to them about use. We have talked to them about our concerns over escalation management,” Kirby replied. “Clearly, I think they understand where our concerns are.” ZELENSKY INDICATES UKRAINE WOULDN'T HIT TARGETS IN RUSSIA WITH LONG-RANGE WEAPONS Good Wednesday morning and welcome to Jamie McIntyre’s Daily on Defense, written and compiled by Washington Examiner National Security Senior Writer Jamie McIntyre (@jamiejmcintyre) and edited by Victor I. Nava. Email here with tips, suggestions, calendar items, and anything else. Sign up or read current and back issues at DailyonDefense.com. If signing up doesn’t work, shoot us an email and we’ll add you to our list. And be sure to follow us on Twitter: @dailyondefense. CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP OR READ BACK ISSUES OF DAILY ON DEFENSE Subscribe today to the Washington Examiner magazine and get Washington Briefing: politics and policy stories that will keep you up to date with what's going on in Washington. SUBSCRIBE NOW: Just $1.00 an issue! HAPPENING TODAY: Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin delivers opening remarks at today’s meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group at NATO headquarters, which begins at 3 p.m. Brussels time, 9 a.m in Washington. Then, after the meeting, Austin and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Mark Milley will brief reporters on the decisions made by the more than 40 nations who have pledged to support Ukraine. That is expected to take place at 12:45 p.m. Washington time. Both events will be streamed live on the NATO and DOD websites. WHITE HOUSE: BIDEN SEEKS TO ‘RECALIBRATE, NOT RUPTURE’ SAUDI RELATIONS: The White House confirmed yesterday that President Joe Biden will travel to Saudi Arabia next month and meet with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, but not in a one-on-one meeting. During his presidential campaign, Biden vowed to make Saudi Arabia a “pariah” state over the brutal murder and dismemberment of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018. “We were going to, in fact, make them pay the price and make them, in fact, the pariah that they are,” Biden said during a presidential debate in 2019. “There's very little social redeeming value in the present government in Saudi Arabia.” Now with gas prices averaging more than $5 a gallon in the U.S., the White House says it’s time to recognize that Saudi Arabia can remain a valued partner in other areas, even as the U.S. decries its human rights record. “While we recalibrate relations, we're not seeking to rupture relations, because Saudi Arabia has been a strategic partner of the United States for eight decades,” a senior administration official told reporters on a conference call yesterday. “We share a host of interests with Saudi Arabia, from containing Iran, to counterterrorism, to helping protect its territory where, importantly, 70,000 Americans live and work.” Technically, Biden is attending a meeting of the Gulf Cooperation Council plus 3, and he will be in sessions with his counterpart, King Salman, who is ailing. But the crown prince, who goes by MBS, is part of Salman’s team. “I would just say he'll see over a dozen leaders on this trip, and so that includes King Salman and the leadership from our Saudi hosts for the GCC+3 Summit. So, yes, we can expect the president to see the crown prince,” the official said. DEMOCRATS UPSET: Biden is getting some pushback from members of his own party over the decision to make nice with MBS after all the tough talk about holding him accountable for Khashoggi’s murder. “I believe President Biden was right when he was candidate Biden about this relationship and holding to account the individual who was complicit in, and ordered the brutal murder and dismemberment of my constituent Jamal Khashoggi and that is the crown prince,” said Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA). “I'm looking forward to getting briefed by the administration on what they are going to get in terms of human rights concessions from the Saudi regime,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) on CNN. “I, of course, have led the fight here in the United States Senate to recast and recalibrate our relationship with Saudi Arabia,” he said. “But if the president is going to sit down and talk to this regime, then I hope that what comes with it are some real concessions about what's happening in Yemen and on the Saudis' human rights record.” “I respect President Biden. I know he has a tough job dealing with gasoline prices, trying to find ways to find new sources and supplies to bring down inflation and the energy sector. And Saudi Arabia is a major player, full stop,” said Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), the second ranking Democrat in the Senate. “Next point I want to make is that the Saudi Arabia record, particularly when it comes to Khashoggi, is an outrage. It is the type of thing that clearly it was a designed murder, and effort to dispose of the corpse in a way that it could never be discovered,” Dubin said on CNN. “So I have mixed feelings on this, and if the president called me, I'd say, Mr. President, you can't trust these people.” Asked if he would advise Biden not to go, Durbin replied, “I would give them that counsel.” CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER The Rundown Washington Examiner: Zelensky indicates Ukraine wouldn't hit targets in Russia with long-range weapons Washington Examiner: Pentagon believes Putin has the same goals as when he first invaded Ukraine Washington Examiner: Trevor Reed files UN petition to hold Russia responsible for wrongful detention Washington Examiner: European regulator says Western-made planes flying in Russia are 'very unsafe' Washington Examiner: Air Force crew cleared of wrongdoing in chaotic C-17 flight from Kabul Washington Examiner: Jan. 6 committee updates hearing schedule after postponement Washington Examiner: Border Patrol agents to be disciplined for horseback 'whipping' incident Washington Examiner: Opinion: Armies need, you know, soldiers Washington Examiner: Opinion: Send an international maritime flotilla through the Taiwan Strait Air Force Magazine: House Panel Releases Draft Defense Bill, Cutting F-15EX Buy, Blocking Changes to Pass-Through Funds USNI News: House Appropriators Want Navy To Save 5 Littoral Combat Ships From Decommissioning Defense News: House Democrats Rebuke Calls To Raise Spending In Defense Bill Military Times: 4.6% Pay Raise For Troops Gets Support Across Capitol Hill Reuters: U.S. Rebuffs China By Calling Taiwan Strait An International Waterway The Drive: New Chinese Aircraft Carrier’s Dry Dock Is Flooded, Launch Imminent Wall Street Journal: Trains Help Drive Russia’s Latest Gains In Ukraine Washington Post: For Ukrainian Troops, A Need Arises: Javelin Customer Service Reuters: U.S. Awaits 'Constructive' Response From Tehran On Nuclear Deal AP: Ex-WVa councilman gets 45-day sentence in Capitol riot case Bloomberg: US Navy’s Giant Underwater ‘Orca’ Drone Is Running Years Late Breaking Defense: As Tyndall tries to rebound, A-10 fight prompts F-35 maintainer shortfall, ‘significant risk’ Air Force Magazine: Raytheon’s Pratt & Whitney Gets $4.4 Billion F-35 Engine Deal Air Force Magazine: How Sanctions Are Affecting Russia’s Defense Industrial Base Breaking Defense: Analyzing The Biggest Changes In The Marine Corps Force Design 2030 Update 19fortyfive.com: Yes, There Is a Chance Russia Could Use Nuclear Weapons Over Ukraine 19fortyfive.com: Meet Germany's Newest Tank, the KF51 Panther. Russia Will Hate It. 19fortyfive.com: Russia Could Increase Defense Spending 20% Due to Ukraine War Losses 19fortyfive.com: Russia's MiG-35 Fighter Is On the Brink 19fortyfive.com: NATO Has a Problem: Turkey and Greece Could Be Headed for a Showdown Calendar WEDNESDAY | JUNE 15 All Day Brussels, Belgium — Two day meeting of NATO defense ministers begins with a working dinner in which partners Finland, Georgia, Sweden, Ukraine and the European Union. U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin attends in person. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg is scheduled to brief reporters both days. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news 9 a.m. — Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin delivers opening remarks at the Ukraine Defense Contact Group meeting at the NATO Headquarters in Brussels. https://www.defense.gov/News/Live-Events 9 a.m. — Henry Stimson Center virtual discussion: "Lethal and Effective: Marine Corps Force Design 2030 and U.S Japan Defense Cooperation," with Gen. Eric Smith, assistant commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps; and Yuki Tatsumi, senior fellow and co-director of the Stimson Center's East Asia Program https://www.stimson.org/event/lethal-and-effective-marine-corps 10 a.m. 390 Cannon — House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol hearing on "the January 6th Investigation,” with testimony from Jeffrey Rosen, former acting attorney general, his deputy Richard Donoghue and Justice Department official Steve Engel. https://january6th.house.gov 10 a.m. — Center for a New American Security virtual 2022 National Security Conference on "Security in the Balance," with retired Air Force Gen. Mike Holmes; Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., chairman, House Armed Services Committee; and others. Full agenda at https://conference.cnas.org 10 a.m. — Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments virtual discussion: "Deterrence and Defense in the Baltic Region: New Realities," with Estonian Ambassador to the U.S. Kristjan Prikk; Kusti Salm, permanent secretary of the Estonian Ministry of Defense; Thomas Mahnken, CSBA president and CEO; Jan van Tol, CSBA senior fellow; Chris Bassler, CSBA senior fellow; Katherine Kjellstrom, CSBA fellow; and Tyler Hacker, CSBA analyst https://csbaonline.org/about/events/deterrence-and-defense 12:00 p.m. — Hudson Institute virtual event: “The Ambassadors Series: A Conversation with Swedish Ambassador,” with Karin Olofsdotter, Ambassador of Sweden to the U.S.; and Michael Doran, senior fellow and director, Center for Peace and Security in the Middle East, Hudson Institute https://www.eventbrite.com/e/virtual-event-a-conversation 12:45 p.m. — Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Mark Milley hold a news conference, after a Ukraine Defense Contact Group meeting at the NATO Headquarters in Brussels. https://www.defense.gov/News/Live-Events 1 p.m. — Government Executive Media Group Defense One Tech Summit discussion: "Emerging Technologies for Tomorrow's U.S. Military" https://d1techsummit.com 1 p.m. 2359 Rayburn — House Appropriations Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Subcommittee markup of the FY2023 appropriations bill for the agencies under its jurisdiction. http://appropriations.house.gov 7 p.m. — Politics and Prose bookstore book discussion on "Degrade and Destroy: The Inside Story of the War Against the Islamic State, from Barack Obama to Donald Trump," with author Michael Gordon, national security correspondent at the Wall Street Journal https://www.politics-prose.com/event THURSDAY | JUNE 16 TBA Brussels, Belgium — Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin press conference at the conclusion of the NATO defense ministerial at NATO Headquarters https://www.defense.gov/News/Live-Events/ 8 a.m. 3351 Fairfax Dr. — National Defense Industrial Association 2022 Human Systems Conference at the George Mason University Arlington Campus, focusing on Joint Cognitive Systems, June 15-16, with Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering David Honey delivers keynote address https://www.ndia.org/events/2022/6/15/2022-human-systems-conference 9 a.m. — Center for Strategic and International Studies virtual discussion with Ukrainian Ambassador to the U.S. Oksana Markarova https://www.csis.org/events/armchair-conversation 9:45 a.m. — Center for Strategic and International Studies virtual discussion: "Korea-Japan Relations and Trilateral Cooperation," with former National Security Council Director for East Asia Christopher Johnstone, CSIS Japan chair; and Sue Mi Terry, director of the Wilson Center's Asia Program https://www.csis.org/events/capital-cable 10 a.m. 390 Cannon — House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol hearing on "the January 6th Investigation,” with testimony from Greg Jacob, former chief counsel to the vice president https://january6th.house.gov 10 a.m. — Center for Strategic and International Studies webcast discussion: "Assessing Russia's War in Ukraine," with former Defense Undersecretary for Intelligence Michael Vickers; Eliot Cohen, Arleigh Burke Chair in Strategy, CSIS; Emily Harding, deputy director and senior fellow, International Security Program, CSIS; and Seth Jones, senior vice president and director, International Security Program, CSIS https://www.csis.org/events/assessing-russias-war-ukraine 12 p.m. — Hudson Institute virtual discussion: beginning at noon, on "Regaining Decision Advantage: Overhauling Joint All-Domain Command and Control to Bolster U.S. Deterrence," with retired Air Force Gen. Herbert Carlisle, former commander at Air Force Air Combat Command and chair of the Stimson Center's Board of Directors; retired Navy Adm. Scott Swift, former commander U.S. Pacific Fleet and founder of the Swift Group LLC; and retired Army Lt. Gen. Eric Wesley, former deputy commander at Army Futures Command and executive vice president of strategic planning at Flyer Defense LLC https://www.hudson.org/events/2120-virtual-event MONDAY | JUNE 20 TBA — House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., will release the text of his “Chairman’s Mark” of the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act. https://armedservices.house.gov/press-releases TUESDAY | JUNE 21 8 a.m. 2401 M St., N.W. — George Washington University Project for Media and National Security iDefense Writers Group conversation with Meredith Berger, acting Undersecretary of the Navy/assistant secretary of the Navy for energy, installations, and the environment Email Thom Shanker at [email protected] WEDNESDAY | JUNE 22 10 a.m. 2118 Rayburn — House Armed Services Committee full committee markup of H.R.7900, the FY2023 NDAA http://www.armedservices.house.gov QUOTE OF THE DAY “The fiercest fighting is in Severodonetsk and in all cities and communities nearby, as before. The losses, unfortunately, are painful. But we have to hold on. This is our state. It is vital to hold on there, in Donbas. The more losses the enemy suffers there, the less power they will have to continue.” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, on the pivotal battle for control of eastern Ukraine. | Europe Politics |
India has opted to offer its Indian Rupee (INR) as a trade currency alternative to the US dollar after it unveiled its latest "dynamic and responsive" foreign trade policy in a bid for de-dollarization.
According to the Indian Commerce Secretary Sunil Barthwal, Indian Rupee will be used in trade countries that are facing a shortage of dollar or currency failure. He said trade between India and Malaysia can now be settled in INR.
“Trade between India and Malaysia can now be settled in Indian Rupee (INR) in addition to the current modes of settlement in other currencies. This follows the decision by the Reserve Bank of India in July 2022 to allow the settlement of international trade in the Indian Rupee (INR),” the Ministry of External Affairs announced.
“This initiative by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) is aimed at facilitating the growth of global trade and to support the interests of the global trading community in Indian rupees, “ it further said.
In the unveiling of the new foreign trade policy for 2023-28, one of the main goals of the new trade strategy, according to Barthwal, is to "encourage" the internationalization of the rupee, and according to commerce and industry minister Piyush Goyal, to increase the Indian exports of goods and services to $2 trillion by 2030.
In addition, Bangladesh is also eyeing to start trading with India using INR, after the ministry of commerce placed a written recommendation at the last cabinet meeting regarding the possibility and opportunity of using rupee instead of dollar.
"The use of rupee will start with Bangladesh’s $2 billion trade with India. Bangladesh Bank has almost finished all kinds of trials in this regard. Trading in rupee will be introduced in both countries only after bilateral decision on some issues," an executive director of Bangladesh Bank said.
For Russia, Rupee trade was made as the centerpiece of the new plan as New Delhi aims for wider policy to secure a global status for the currency and allow it to be used for international trade settlement.
Currently India is trading in rupees with Russia, Mauritius, Iran and Sri Lanka.
The announcement came in amid official efforts to secure and safeguard the Indian international trade from the impact of the Ukrainian crisis.
Ever since the Russian economy was sanctioned by the West over the Ukraine crisis, trading with the US dollar as a means has become immensely difficult, hence countries have started opting for alternative currencies to break US hegemony over international trade.
Likewise, Iran had ditched the US dollar last year, and had started trading with Russia in their respective national currencies, the Iranian Rial and the Ruble, which further enabled Iran to bypass the US-dominant global financial system.
The BRICS countries, including Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, and of which Iran and Saudi Arabia would soon be a part of, are working on creating a new form of currency to kill the US hegemony.
The countries are set to present ideas on its development at the forthcoming summit of the organization in South Africa, as announced by deputy chairman of the Russian state Duma Alexander Babakov on Thursday. | India Politics |
Monday
It’s the season for self-forgiveness. At least it appears to be in the Tory party. You’d have thought that Liz Truss would have wanted to keep quiet for a while longer. If not for a lifetime. After all, being known as the shortest-serving prime minister is hardly something to boast about. But far from it, just a year after she crashed the economy with the mini-budget that cost the country £45bn and sent interest rates rising, Truss was out and about at the Institute for Government giving a speech aimed at rehabilitating her reputation. And guess what? Liz reckons she’s got absolutely nothing to apologise for.
Her plan to grow the economy with unfunded tax cuts for the most well-off would have worked a treat if only the Office for Budgetary Responsibility, the Treasury, the media and the Tory party hadn’t all been taken over by a leftwing cabal who never invited her to their dinner parties. Or something. That’s right, the Tory party who imposed austerity and have driven the economy into the ground are all secret socialists. And yes, she would do it all again in a heartbeat. In fact, she thinks she would be doing us all a favour if she were given the chance.
Joining her on the redemption trail is Theresa May, whose new book also rewrites history to her advantage. First we get to hear that when she was negotiating the Brexit deal she was always mindful of the feelings of the 48% who voted to remain. Could have fooled me. The way I remember it, she just repeated “Brexit means Brexit” and never once explicitly suggested a deal that would see the UK remaining part of the customs union and the single market.
The Maybot also tries to claim herself as an advocate for the benefits of immigration. I guess she must have missed the hostile environment advertising vans she sent round as home secretary. Then we have George Osborne’s latest spell in rehab. No longer the David Cameron’s chancellor, but the non-resigning chair of the British Museum and friendly podcast host. Austerity was all a bit of a laugh. Honestly. I think I’ll pass.
Tuesday
O me of little faith. I’d only been to one Spurs game this season before last Saturday’s home match against Sheffield United. It had been the away game at Fulham in the Carabao Cup. For reasons best known to himself, our new manager Ange Postecoglou had chosen to rest most of the first team squad who had been playing so well. Resting from what exactly, I had thought. It wasn’t as if Tottenham had qualified for any of the three European competitions and the Carabao Cup represented Spurs best chance of actually winning something this season. Something we haven’t done for 15 years. Needless to say Spurs put in a mediocre performance and were knocked out on penalties. Still only in August, we were left to concentrate on the league for the next nine months.
So fair to say I was one of the few “Ange Ball” sceptics at White Hart Lane last weekend. Especially when Sheffield went ahead with about 15 minutes to go. Up till then Spurs had dominated possession without actually creating any memorable chances. It all felt horribly reminiscent of countless games I had been to in seasons past. A team that had promised so much failing yet again to deliver. “Ange Ball” just an early season mirage that couldn’t survive contact with prolonged reality. But as the clock ticked round to 90 minutes, I realised something had changed. Normally when Spurs are in this situation you can feel the frustration and tension in the crowd. But now there was only a determined positivity. Everyone – apart from me – still had hope. And that transmitted itself to the players. Spurs went on to score twice in the 98th and 100th minutes to win the game. Back from the dead. The crowd and the players went wild. As if we’d won a trophy, not just beaten a team near the bottom of the Premier League. Almost like a communion in the power of belief. Together we had found a way to win against the odds. “Ange Ball” was a reality. At least I think so. I’ve seen so many false dawns at Spurs, I find it hard to believe. But I’m trying.
Wednesday
A few weeks ago, I wrote about our dog, Herbie, tearing his cruciate knee ligament and needing orthopaedic surgery. Many of you wrote in to me sharing your own experience of this with your dog. Unfortunately the advice was nearly split down the middle. Half went ahead with the operation and the long period of rehab and reported their dog was its own self. Though one dog found a way to tear his other ligament once the torn one was fixed.
The other half said they had chosen not to go down the surgery route and had let their dog just adapt to the condition. In a few cases the tear had appeared to heal itself while in most the mutt was perfectly happy, wandering round with a limp. All this gave me and my wife plenty to think about, so we went back to the vet for a further consultation. He said that as Herbie was 12 years old, it was likely his tear was degenerative. As such it was quite possible that his other rear leg could also go at some time.
Not wanting Herbie to end up on rear wheels like Colin from Accounts, we decided to go ahead with surgery. Only two days before his operation, we then got a phone call from the pet hospital to say the surgeon was ill and wouldn’t be able to do the op. And no, they couldn’t yet say when an alternative date could be found. That after my wife had drawn up a complicated day chart so that we could make sure Herbie had round-the-clock supervision for six weeks post-op to make sure he didn’t jump on the sofa. So, the upshot – as the rest of the year is a bit frantic – we have put off the operation till January as the vet said we’d have to be very unlucky for Herbie to do his other ligament before Xmas. Herbie, it has to be said, looks thrilled. Almost as if he knows he’s had a reprieve.
Thursday
The neediest man in Britain is back. Last year we had to endure Matt Hancock on I’m a Celebrity … Get Me Out of Here! where he was repeatedly picked on by viewers at home to do the bushtucker trials. Just for being Matt. He then published his Pandemic Diaries – ghostwritten after the events – which were primarily notable for him turning out to have been right about everything and slightly peeved that the country wasn’t more grateful for everything he had done. Next week Door Matt takes part in Channel 4’s Celebrity SAS: Who Dares Wins, in Vietnam. The one place he hasn’t turned up that often is, of course, the one place where he’s paid to be: the House of Commons.
The makers of reality TV – and the participants themselves – always like to portray their shows as some kind of emotional and spiritual journey for the contestants. As if there is a meaning to what’s going on beyond a career-in-decline narcissist trousering a wad of cash. But having watched the first episode of Celebrity SAS and not giving too many spoilers away, if Door Matt has been on a journey it’s an entirely circular one. For he appears to have learned nothing from his time on I’m a Celeb and is just as dislikeable at the start of the new show as he was on ITV. He’s arrogant, entitled and acts as if others should defer to him. No wonder he gets picked on.
He also remains under the delusion that the reason he was forced to resign as health secretary was that he just happened to fall in love. The Greatest Love Story ever. He’s still in denial about all the times he broke the rules and ended up a YouTube sensation with the CCTV groping video. When he is made to do his first trial of walking across two poles high in the air, it’s not just the viewers who want him to fail. It’s the other celebs and the SAS crew. Matt takes himself resolutely seriously: everyone else thinks he’s a joke. Anyway, if you want more of Matt – I’m not sure if that makes you a sadist or masochist – tune into Channel 4 next Tuesday. Most of you, I suspect, have already seen more than enough.
Friday
Just over two weeks after the House of Commons returned after a six-week summer recess, it has now gone into another long recess. One that effectively started on Thursday last week when all MPs were put on a one-line whip, effectively begging them to stay away. Hardly the best of looks when the government is desperate to get more people back to work and in the office. Not that the opposition parties can be blamed. It is the government that decides the length of recess. This break is nominally for the party conference season but Rishi Sunak sent everyone home at least four days before the Lib Dems begin their bash in Bournemouth this weekend.
When the prime minister took office last year he promised to govern with honesty, integrity and accountability and only this week when he was announcing plans to water down his climate commitments, he insisted he was doing a new type of politics. One based on transparency and consent. Only there are growing suspicions in the Labour party that the consent does not extend to parliamentary democracy. Even Tory MPs now think the reason for the Commons – the Lords was still sitting – going on recess so early was that Rishi Sunak was anxious to avoid another mauling at prime minister’s questions on Wednesday. Nor did he want his climate announcement scrutinised in the Commons. This isn’t the end to MPs’ holidays this year. Next month the Commons is due to go on recess yet again, before the king’s speech in early November. Labour think the thin-skinned Sunak may extend the recess to another two weeks. Nice work if you can get it. | United Kingdom Politics |
Imagine a situation in which most companies on the London Stock Exchange had failed to file their report and accounts on time, with several behind on their paperwork by multiple years. Then further imagine that one explanation for the delays was that the UK doesn’t have enough auditors with the right skills, and that the body that used to do most of the work was abolished in 2015. Then assume that a handful of these companies were simultaneously confessing to hundreds of millions of pounds of writedowns on property speculation. There would be uproar.
The above parallel, however, roughly describes the state of affairs in local government in England. Only 12% of audits for 2022 were completed on time and, even with a subsequent push to catch up, the tally stood at only 27% at the last count. Overall, 520 audits, from a population of about 400 local authorities, are delayed, Lee Rowley, the local government minister, told MPs last month. Stating the bleedin’ obvious, he called the position “clearly unacceptable”.
Meanwhile, fears about the financial horrors that may emerge grow with every fresh study. A report by the credit rating agency Moody’s last week took a cold look at local government finances after the string of section 114 notices (in effect, declarations of bankruptcy) from Birmingham, Croydon, Slough, Thurrock and Woking and concluded that more authorities will fail “as weak governance amplifies the impact of rate cycles”. It sounds a safe prediction.
Rishi Sunak, instead of trying to make political capital out of the woes of Labour-led Birmingham, should recognise, first, that some of the worst blow-ups happened under Tory regimes; and second, that central government is hardly blameless.
The backdrop to this crisis is well-known: local authorities’ central funding was squeezed in post-2010 to the degree that spending power fell by 17.5% in real terms in a decade. In response, many councils took the hint-cum-encouragement to go forth and speculate, which usually meant borrowing to invest in commercial property (Thurrock scorched itself in solar farms). But, critically, local authorities were assisted in the borrowing binge by oodles of easy loans from the Treasury-backed Public Works Loans Board.
Some of the activity now looks absurdly reckless: Woking council’s total borrowing was 127 times its core spending power in 2021, an almost laughable ratio. But a compounding factor is surely the absence of what Moody’s means by “governance”. Where was the scrutiny? Local authorities were advised to “have regard to” to a prudential framework from 2013 that emphasised sensible things like security and liquidity when borrowing, but “they were not legally obliged to do so”, says the report.
That situation existed until November 2020 when borrowing rules were tightening, probably because the Treasury was alarmed by the hit to commercial property values in the pandemic and the concentration of lending. Forty-nine local authorities, or 14% of the sector, have accounted for 80% of the £7.6bn spent on commercial investments by councils since 2016.
But it should have been common sense, at the very outset, to realise that stiffer financial safeguards and scrutiny would be needed. Commercial property development is not like inspecting planning applications. Councillors should have worked that out for themselves. Instead of trimming finance departments, as many did under budget pressures, they should have been adding to them to deal with the new complexities. Yet the scrapping in 2015 of the Audit Commission, the body that used to oversee local authorities’ audits, also looks in retrospect to have been a key moment in the emerging financial disaster.
The commission’s auditors were moved into the private sector, a move that Eric Pickles, the local government secretary at the time, claimed would “pass power down to people, replace bureaucratic accountability with democratic accountability and save the taxpayer £50m a year”. That statement now reads as a grade A example of a false economy. Bureaucratic accountability, it turns out, is no bad thing if it ensures that audits happen promptly and external scrutiny takes place.
The UK is not alone is suffering from a lack of auditors in the specialised and low-fee field of local government, but the private sector has notably failed to fill the gaps. A public accounts committee report in June said there were now fewer than 100 key audit partners in the UK registered to perform local audit. That dire situation, almost everybody agrees, has developed partly because responsibilities were fragmented across about half a dozen bodies.
The government’s belated attempt to clear the auditing backlog at least recognises the problem. The Financial Reporting Council (FRC) will be given the role of “shadow system leader”. Why shadow? Because the job is earmarked for the intended new overarching Audit, Reporting and Governance Authority, the constantly delayed successor to the FRC. The “system leader” model sounds a sensible to house oversight, standards and enforcement in one place, but it also had merit in 2020 when recommended in an independent review by Sir Tony Redmond. Even now, the FRC is still waiting for its official remit letter from ministers.
For the costs of slow auditing and insufficient oversight, go back to the Moody’s report. “Financial mismanagement and governance failings have been widespread in most of the local authorities that have issued section 114 notices,” it said.
“In Woking, Croydon and Thurrock, external auditors and government-appointed commissioners have noted failures in financial controls, very limited scrutiny of investment decisions and a lack of in-house commercial investment expertise.” At Slough, it said, auditors are completing a 2019 audit in 2023, which “demonstrates the weakness in its audit evidence”.
To repeat, this long-running story has multiple causes. Appalling decision-making by individual councils and naive councillors undoubtedly lies at the heart of the worst failures. And the pandemic cranked up existing pressures. But those local residents facing cuts to sports facilities and public toilets (Woking), or a 15% increase in council tax (Croydon), should reserve a portion of their fury for central government. It oversaw loose borrowing rules and tolerated for too long an under-resourced auditing setup. The combination usually spells trouble. | United Kingdom Politics |
President Biden will visit Saudi Arabia in July on a trip that will include a meeting with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, a senior administration official told reporters Monday night. The announcement that the president would meet Mohammed had been expected for weeks and has drawn scrutiny from human rights advocates and tacit approval from Democratic allies in Congress. The meeting is part of a wider trip to the Middle East, from July 13 to 16, where the president will also travel to Israel and the West Bank before flying to Jeddah for a meeting of the Gulf Cooperation Council. The senior official said that Biden’s meeting with the crown prince will take place as part of engagement with “over a dozen leaders,” to include Saudi King Salman, the official leader of the Kingdom. The president’s face-to-face with Mohammed marks a stark reversal from Biden’s promise on the campaign trail to make the kingdom a “pariah” and to make them “pay the price” over the gruesome killing of the dissident Saudi writer and Washington Post contributor Jamal Khashoggi in 2018. Biden approved the release of a U.S. intelligence report concluding that Mohammed had approved a plot to “capture or kill” Khashoggi — who was lured to the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul, where he was killed and dismembered. The president imposed bans on dozens of Saudi officials for the writer’s death. The senior official on Monday night said that while the administration sought accountability for Khashoggi’s death, it did not seek to “rupture” relations with the kingdom completely. The official called the crown prince “critical” to extending a cease-fire agreement until at least August in Yemen’s catastrophic seven-year civil war. “While we recalibrate relations, we’re not seeking to rupture relations, because Saudi Arabia has been a strategic partner of the United States for eight decades,” the official said, adding that the administration’s strategy is to raise human rights issues “behind closed doors.” “Human rights is always a part of the conversation. … A lot of these conversations, we do hold them behind closed doors, and we think engagement — and that is the best way to get results,” the official said. The administration is also intent on working with Saudi Arabia to push back on Iran, which has accelerated activity necessary to build a nuclear weapon while supporting proxy forces that have hit Gulf countries and U.S. military bases in the region with missiles. Biden’s meeting with Gulf leaders in Jeddah and his trip to Israel comes in the wake of a resolution passed by member states of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the international nuclear watchdog, last week criticizing Iran for its nuclear activities. “While there’s a great deal of work to do, this historic visit to the Middle East comes against that larger backdrop, both globally and in the Middle East region itself,” the official said, referring to the IAEA vote itself. Biden’s trip to Israel will be his first visit to the country as president. The official said the president will reaffirm America’s “ironclad” commitment to Israel’s security. The president will also seek to build on rapprochement between Jerusalem and its Arab and Gulf neighbors through the Abraham Accords, the Trump-era agreement that established ties between Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. Biden will also travel to the West Bank to visit with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and other Palestinian leaders, the official said, and reaffirm the U.S. commitment to a two-state solution between the Israelis and Palestinians. They will also “discuss the ways in which we might rekindle a new political horizon that can ensure equal measures of freedom, security, prosperity, and dignity to Israelis and Palestinians alike,” the official said. | Middle East Politics |
Boris Johnson has accused lawyers representing migrants of “abetting” criminal gangs as he defended the government’s plans to send migrants to Rwanda.Speaking at the start of a cabinet meeting in No 10, he said that criticism had come from “slightly unexpected quarters”, a reference to the Prince of Wales who believes the policy is “appalling” and the Church of England.There are only seven migrants left on the first flight to Rwanda tonight after more than 120 successfully lodged appeals against deportation, claiming it breached their human rights or that they had been victims of modern slavery. The Home Office believes that by the time the flight is due to leave this evening there may be no migrants on board because of appeals.Today | United Kingdom Politics |
Government plans allowing ministers powers to override parts of the post-Brexit deal on Northern Ireland could become law "fairly rapidly", Boris Johnson has suggested.MPs are set to vote on the controversial new legislation - which contains measures to remove checks on goods and animal and plant products travelling from Great Britain to Northern Ireland - on Monday.
Speaking ahead of the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill's second reading in the Commons, the prime minister told broadcasters that, parliament willing, the legislation could be enacted "very fast"."What we are trying to do is fix something that I think is very important to our country, which is the balance of the Belfast Good Friday Agreement," he told reporters at the G7 Summit in Germany.Red wall Tory MP insists 'I'm not bloody defecting' - Politics latest "You have got one tradition, one community, that feels that things really aren't working in a way that they like or understand, you've got unnecessary barriers to trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
"All we are saying is you can get rid of those whilst not in any way endangering the EU single market." More on Boris Johnson Boris Johnson says he is not worried by reports Tory MPs could be plotting to oust him and insists questions over his leadership have been 'settled' G7 summit: Zelenskyy to urge leaders to do more to help war effort as Johnson to demand action on Ukrainian grain Boris Johnson 'right person' to lead Tories into next general election, says cabinet minister Brandon Lewis Asked if the measures could be in place this year, Mr Johnson replied: "Yes, I think we could do it very fast, parliament willing."The prime minister noted that it would be "even better" if the European Commission vice-president Maros Sefcovic could show some "flexibility", adding: "We remain optimistic."Earlier on Monday, Foreign Secretary Liz Truss also defended the government's plans on social media.She tweeted: "It will fix problems the protocol has created in Northern Ireland and uphold the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement."Our preference remains a negotiated outcome, but EU continues to rule out change to protocol."Unionist opposition to the imposition of checks has seen the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) refuse to return to the power sharing executive in Northern Ireland, leaving the region without a functioning government.The UK has insisted that its unilateral approach is the only option left to resolve the issues, but the move has been heavily criticised by the European Union.The European Union's ambassador to the UK warned the government on Sunday that the plans were "illegal and unrealistic". Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player The EU ambassador to the UK told Sky News that the government's approach to the Northern Ireland protocol constitutes 'a road to nowhere' Speaking to Sky News' Sophy Ridge On Sunday programme, Joao Vale de Almeida argued steps being taken by Boris Johnson's administration over the Northern Ireland Protocol were "a road to nowhere".But Northern Ireland Secretary Brandon Lewis told the show that action was needed to fix the "substantial problems" caused by the implementation of the agreement.Environment Secretary George Eustice added that the plans to override parts of the post-Brexit treaty related to the protocol will see the single market protected."We are not breaking an agreement, we are bringing clarity to how it should be interpreted," Mr Eustice told Sky News, rejecting the assertion that the UK's proposed action is illegal."What is legal is what Parliament deems legal through the legislation it passes," he said.Read more:What is the Northern Ireland Protocol and why does it matter?How long will the UK survive?Tearing up NI trade deal is 'economic vandalism' - Irish PMBrussels has launched legal action against the UK in retaliation to the proposed legislation, which would effectively ditch key parts of the deal signed by Mr Johnson and the EU in 2019.Mr Sefcovic has indicated further measures could follow if the UK pressed ahead with the bill. Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player The vice president of the European Commission says the UK would be acting illegally if it carried out the plans He previously declined to rule out a trade war, saying: "We have to keep all options on the table."But he emphasised the EU's preference to find a negotiated solution to the problems caused by the protocol, lamenting the "radio silence from London since February".The environment secretary told Sky News that it would be "foolish" of the bloc to launch a trade war over the controversial changes.The UK is planning unilateral action to introduce separate "green" and "red" lanes for goods travelling between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, drawing a line between those destined to stay within the UK and those heading to the Republic of Ireland and beyond.Alongside the second reading, the government is launching a series of "structured engagements" with the business community to discuss and gather views on the bill's implementation.The Foreign Office is hosting the first roundtable event on Monday, bringing together more than a dozen major UK businesses and representative groups including the Northern Ireland Chamber of Commerce, Asda, John Lewis and the Dairy Council NI.Sir Keir Starmer has said Labour would axe the proposed laws if it was in power, and confirmed his party will vote against the legislation at Westminster.Meanwhile, Stormont DUP minister Edwin Poots told BBC Radio Ulster it will be a "significant step" if the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill gets through its second reading in the House of Commons on Monday, but that the future looks "bleak" if it does not. | United Kingdom Politics |
Suella Braverman, who was sacked as home secretary by Rishi Sunak after she defied No 10 over an article accusing the Metropolitan Police of bias in the policing of protests, has sent a scathing open letter to her old boss.
Here it is in full:
Dear Prime Minister
Thank you for your phone call yesterday morning in which you asked me to leave government. While disappointing, this is for the best.
It has been my privilege to serve as home secretary and deliver on what the British people have sent us to Westminster to do.
I want to thank all of those civil servants, police, Border Force officers and security professionals with whom I have worked and whose dedication to public safety is exemplary.
I am proud of what we achieved together: delivering on our manifesto pledge to recruit 20,000 new police officers and enacting new laws such as the Public Order Act 2023 and the National Security Act 2023.
I also led a programme of reform: on anti-social behaviour, police dismissals and standards, reasonable lines of enquiry, grooming gangs, knife crime, non-crime hate incidents and rape and serious sexual offences.
And I am proud of the strategic changes that I was delivering to Prevent, Contest, serious organised crime and fraud. I am sure that this work will continue with the new ministerial team.
As you know, I accepted your offer to serve as home secretary in October 2022 on certain conditions.
Despite you having been rejected by a majority of party members during the summer leadership contest and thus having no personal mandate to be prime minister, I agreed to support you because of the firm assurances you gave me on key policy priorities. These were, among other things:
- Reduce overall legal migration as set out in the 2019 manifesto through, inter alia, reforming the international students route and increasing salary thresholds on work visas
- Include specific "notwithstanding clauses" into new legislation to stop the boats, ie exclude the operation of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), Human Rights Act (HRA) and other international law that had thus far obstructed progress on this issue
- Deliver the Northern Ireland Protocol and Retained EU Law Bills in their then existing form and timetable
- Issue unequivocal statutory guidance to schools that protects biological sex, safeguards single sex spaces, and empowers parents to know what is being taught to their children.
This was a document with clear terms to which you agreed in October 2022 during your second leadership campaign. I trusted you. It is generally agreed that my support was a pivotal factor in winning the leadership contest and thus enabling you to become prime minister.
For a year, as home secretary I have sent numerous letters to you on the key subjects contained in our agreement, made requests to discuss them with you and your team, and put forward proposals on how we might deliver these goals.
I worked up the legal advice, policy detail and action to take on these issues. This was often met with equivocation, disregard and a lack of interest.
You have manifestly and repeatedly failed to deliver on every single one of these key policies. Either your distinctive style of government means you are incapable of doing so. Or, as I must surely conclude now, you never had any intention of keeping your promises.
These are not just pet interests of mine. They are what we promised the British people in our 2019 manifesto which led to a landslide victory. They are what people voted for in the 2016 Brexit Referendum.
Our deal was no mere promise over dinner, to be discarded when convenient and denied when challenged.
I was clear from day one that if you did not wish to leave the ECHR, the way to securely and swiftly deliver our Rwanda partnership would be to block off the ECHR, the HRA and any other obligations which inhibit our ability to remove those with no right to be in the UK. Our deal expressly referenced "notwithstanding clauses" to that effect.
Your rejection of this path was not merely a betrayal of our agreement, but a betrayal of your promise to the nation that you would do "whatever it takes" to stop the boats.
At every stage of litigation I cautioned you and your team against assuming we would win. I repeatedly urged you to take legislative measures that would better secure us against the possibility of defeat. You ignored these arguments. You opted instead for wishful thinking as a comfort blanket to avoid having to make hard choices. This irresponsibility has wasted time and left the country in an impossible position.
If we lose in the Supreme Court, an outcome that I have consistently argued we must he prepared for, you will have wasted a year and an Act of Parliament, only to arrive back at square one.
Worse than this, your magical thinking - believing that you can will your way through this without upsetting polite opinion - has meant you have failed to prepare any sort of credible Plan B.
I wrote to you on multiple occasions setting out what a credible Plan B would entail, and making clear that unless you pursue these proposals, in the event of defeat, there is no hope of flights this side of an election. I received no reply from you.
I can only surmise that this is because you have no appetite for doing what is necessary, and therefore no real intention of fulfilling your pledge to the British people.
If, on the other hand, we win in the Supreme Court, because of the compromises that you insisted on in the Illegal Migration Act, the government will struggle to deliver our Rwanda partnership in the way that the public expects.
The Act is far from secure against legal challenge. People will not be removed as swiftly as I originally proposed. The average claimant will be entitled to months of process, challenge, and appeal. Your insistence that Rule 39 indications are binding in international law - against the views of leading lawyers, as set out in the House of Lords - will leave us vulnerable to being thwarted yet again by the Strasbourg Court.
Another cause for disappointment - and the context for my recent article in The Times - has been your failure to rise to the challenge posed by the increasingly vicious antisemitism and extremism displayed on our streets since Hamas's terrorist atrocities of 7 October.
I have become hoarse urging you to consider legislation to ban the hate marches and help stem the rising tide of racism, intimidation and terrorist glorification threatening community cohesion.
Britain is at a turning point in our history and faces a threat of radicalisation and extremism in a way not seen for 20 years.
I regret to say that your response has been uncertain, weak, and lacking in the qualities of leadership that this country needs. Rather than fully acknowledge the severity of this threat, your team disagreed with me for weeks that the law needed changing.
As on so many other issues, you sought to put off tough decisions in order to minimise political risk to yourself. In doing so, you have increased the very real risk these marches present to everyone else.
In October of last year you were given an opportunity to lead our country. It is a privilege to serve and one we should not take for granted. Service requires bravery and thinking of the common good.
It is not about occupying the office as an end in itself.
Someone needs to be honest: your plan is not working, we have endured record election defeats, your resets have failed and we are running out of time. You need to change course urgently.
I may not have always found the right words, but I have always striven to give voice to the quiet majority that supported us in 2019. I have endeavoured to be honest and true to the people who put us in these privileged positions.
I will, of course, continue to support the government in pursuit of policies which align with an authentic conservative agenda.
Sincerely
Suella Braverman | United Kingdom Politics |
It is a good time to be a Liberal Democrat. Seemingly free from the shackles of the coalition legacy, the party is on an upward trajectory. By-election victories aplenty and an on-going rebuild of its local base have reinvigorated the party faithful after a decade or more of despair.
Leader Ed Davey has also made very few wrong calls. His safety-first, technocrat leadership style may not have wowed the public but Davey’s policy expertise, professionalism and general competence have proved to be valuable assets for a party in rehabilitation.
Yet scratch beneath the surface and the deep lying problems that have bedevilled the party’s electoral growth persist. Solving the credibility conundrum remains a long way off despite the recent electoral uptick while, in an era where the leader is crucial to electoral fortunes, Davey struggles to cut through with voters, hamstrung by a lack of parliamentary representation and crucially airtime which inhibits his attempts to build a national media profile.
In our book, the ‘Liberal Democrats: From hope to despair to where?’, we lay out how this interplay between structure and agency is vital for political and electoral viability and how previous attempts to overcome these deficiencies through quick fix policy solutions only exposed a vacuum in the political identity of the Liberal Democrats.
Consequently, the party remains locked into place by their positioning in relation to other parties and is not the master of its own destiny. Yet, as the general election nears and one of the Liberal Democrats’ main rivals falters, political opportunities exist for the party to capitalise and re-establish itself as a key player in British politics once more.
The Liberal Democrats’ autumn conference therefore takes on even greater significance than usual. It serves not only as an event that secures column inches in newspapers, slots on national news outlets and social media attention but as forum through which distinctive, headline policy positions are proposed and articulated into the wider political discourse.
It is an opportunity for the party to counter the claim ‘no-one knows what they stand for’ and forge a dialogue with the electorate. And with the ‘political winds’ in a turbulent state on a number of pivotal issues, now seemingly is the time for the Liberal Democrats to set out their stall. As we note in our book, the policy arena has to be carefully chosen, reflective of where reputational capital has been built and ideally where one of the main parties has either vacated the arena or has become reluctant to reassert its issue ownership.
Prime minister Rishi Sunak’s recent unravelling of the Conservatives’ environmental policies in pursuit of the 2050 net zero target and Labour’s watering down of its own initial Climate Change proposals provides an opening for the Liberal Democrats to set out a bold long term ‘green vision’.
Given the party’s longstanding environmental credentials, Davey’s expertise garnered from serving as Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change from 2012 to 2015 and the party’s national and local campaigns against raw sewage being pumped into rivers and seas, it would not be a ‘stretch’ for the party to occupy the political space vacated by its rivals.
With the issue likely to be a salient, major fault line between the two main parties at the next election, Labour will be reluctant to expose itself to accusations of burdening hardworking families to the costs of ‘going green’. Strategically it also makes sense, simultaneously neutering any shifts to the Greens and broadening its appeal to young professionals, an increasingly key demographic in the so-called ‘Blue Wall’ seats located in the hinterland of London.
Elsewhere a radical childcare policy would ‘steal a march’ on Labour who, based on a recent policy document promise reforms to increase flexibility and elevate standards but within the restrictions of existing expenditure. Taking Labour on over childcare represents a gamble given the party’s perceived ownership of the issue but one worth taking on given Labour’s excessive cautiousness on funding promises and the possible electoral payoffs among certain demographics in key contests against the Conservatives.
Social care remains a ‘political hot potato’ which both main parties despite manifesto promises seem reluctant to grapple head-on. Much has been made of Davey’s own personal experiences which despite having a media airing are unlikely to have seeped into the wider electorate’s psyche. A radical vision for social care would not only differentiate the Liberal Democrats from its rivals but allow Davey to connect on a personal level with key sections of the electorate.
Put together, bolder proposals in these three policy areas – alongside measures for people to see a GP in a week and a ‘Skills Wallet’ where every adult can spend £10,000 on education and training throughout their lives – would represent a ‘social liberal’ vision and decisively shift the party to the left of Labour where the party enjoyed so much success during the mid-2000s.
With Labour now vacating this space, it strategically makes sense not to compete with its rivals in a crowded arena but pursue a distinctive agenda which stands out in the novelty of its appeal. With the political mood seemingly embracing ‘time for a change’ but Labour under Starmer struggling to install the hope and ‘good feel factor’ which embodied Tony Blair’s landslide victory in 1997, the Liberal Democrats could fill this void through a positive, distinctive, bold agenda which could in the long term go some way to solve their identity crisis.
The conference needs to be the start of this process but it remains to be seen whether the Liberal Democrats will grab this opportunity with both hands.
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 |
The government will pay businesses up to £50m to help with the cost of new food labels required by the Windsor Framework.
The framework is the post-Brexit trade deal, which amended the original Northern Ireland Protocol.
Part of it involves 'Not for EU' labelling on some NI products.
The government will offer retrospective grants at a flat rate, adjusted by business size, for firms who can show additional labelling costs.
It will be open to businesses which have signed up to the framework's trusted trader scheme, the Northern Ireland Retail Movement Scheme (NIRMS).
It will be open to applications between January and March next year with the government saying "we will publish instructions setting out how businesses should apply in the coming months".
The Secretary of State Chris Heaton Harris says that an additional 1600 businesses have signed up to the new trusted trader scheme, compared to the number who were on the protocol's trusted trader scheme.
Writing in the Belfast News Letter he said: "Some major UK food retailers which were excluded from the old grace periods faced burdensome red tape moving food into NI under the old system.
"But they can now move products through the green lane."
He added that "honest feedback" proposals put forward by the DUP "have put us in a better place" with the systems.
The new labelling rules come into effect on Sunday although some retailers have begun to implement them in advance.
The protocol kept Northern Ireland inside the EU single market for goods, which allowed a free flow of goods across the Irish border.
However, it made trading from Great Britain to Northern Ireland more difficult and expensive.
Checks and controls on GB food products entering NI have been some of the biggest practical difficulties. It had to be shown that those products met EU standards.
Under the Windsor Framework, UK public health and safety standards, rather than EU standards, will apply for all retail food and drink.
That means GB trusted traders who are sending food for sale in Northern Ireland should face few routine checks and minimal paperwork.
The flipside of this is the introduction of the "Not for EU" labels on GB food products, to give a level of assurance to the EU that products will not wrongly be sold in its single market.
Shoppers from the Republic of Ireland can still take goods home from Northern Ireland but cannot resell them.
Meanwhile, the government has also confirmed the extension of the Movement Assistance Scheme which helps businesses with the costs of certifications for moving food products to Northern Ireland.
These certificates will still be required in some circumstances, such as when NI wholesalers are bringing in food products which could be sold in either part of Ireland.
The government said: "The Movement Assistance Scheme (MAS), which was due to close in December 2023, has now been extended until 30 June 2025.
"These funding packages underline our ongoing support to the food industry and consumers in Northern Ireland." | United Kingdom Politics |
'G7 must respond with more sanctions on Russia', Ukraine's foreign minister says Ukraine's foreign minister Dmytro Kuleba has urged G7 countries to impose further sanctions on Russia after missiles struck a
residential building and the compound of a kindergarten in
central Kyiv.Mr Kuleba shared an image of a seven-year-old girl who was pulled from alive from the rubble after residential buildings in the region were targeted.He wrote: "This seven-year-old Ukrainian kid was sleeping peacefully in Kyiv until a Russian cruise missile blasted her home. "Many more around Ukraine are under strikes. G7 summit must respond with more sanctions on Russia and more heavy arms for Ukraine." UK and France agree to give more support for Ukraine Boris Johnson and French President Emmanuel Macron have agreed to provide more support for Ukraine as Russia's invasion continues.During a meeting at the G7 summit in Germany, both leaders stressed the need to support Ukraine to strengthen their hand in both the war and any future negotiations.A Downing Street spokesperson said: "They agreed this is a critical moment for the course of the conflict, and there is an opportunity to turn the tide in the war."Mr Macron also praised the prime minister's ongoing military support to Ukraine and the leaders agreed to step up this work, the spokesperson added.It comes as Mr Johnson urged Western allies to stand firm over Ukraine as he sought to put his domestic political difficulties to one side.Amid speculation about the appetite of Western leaders to continue to support Ukraine during a prolonged conflict, Mr Johnson said Vladimir Putin must not be allowed to "hack" Russia's neighbour apart with impunity. In pictures: Scenes from Kyiv after Russian strike Images are emerging of damaged buildings and rubble strewn across the ground after Russia attacked the Ukrainian capital Kyiv for the first time in weeks.Before the attack, Kyiv had not faced any Russian air strikes since 5 June.Kyiv mayor Vitali Klitschko said he believes it may have been "a symbolic attack" by Russia ahead of this week's NATO summit in Madrid. Strike on Kyiv was 'murderous cowardice', UK ambassador to Ukraine says We have been reporting on the Russian strikes that hit the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv overnight.Journalists in the city reported seeing rescue services battling flames and rescuing civilians in the early hours, and Kyiv mayor Vitali Klitschko said four people were taken to hospital and a seven-year-old girl was pulled alive from the rubble.Ukrainian MP Oleksiy Goncharenko wrote on the Telegram messaging app that "according to preliminary data, 14 missiles were launched against Kyiv region and Kyiv".This morning, the UK's ambassador to Ukraine, Melinda Simmons, wrote on Twitter: "Kyiv was shelled overnight by Russia."A residential district was targeted. Nothing military there. What murderous cowardice." Putin hopes West will 'splinter' amid war, Biden warns Russian President Vladimir Putin hopes the West will "splinter" as his invasion of Ukraine wages on, US President Joe Biden has warned.Speaking at the G7 summit in Germany, Mr Biden praised the allies who had stuck together and stood up to the Kremlin over the past four months.However, he warned: "We have to stay together, because Putin has been counting on from the beginning that somehow NATO and the G7 would splinter."But we haven't and we're not going to."We can't let this aggression take the form it has and get away with it."The US leader also praised German Chancellor Olaf Scholz for helping to sustain pressure on Russia and urged him to keep at it.Mr Scholz, hosting the annual Group of Seven summit in the Bavarian alps, greeted the US president on a balcony overlooking what the US president called a "magnificent" view of lush greenery and towering peaks.Mr Biden credited Mr Scholz for helping to lead Europe in standing up to Russia, saying his tough response "had a great impact on the rest of Europe to move". Johnson and Macron meet at G7 summit in Germany Boris Johnson and French President Emmanuel Macron had a bilateral meeting as fellow G7 leaders also gathered in the Bavarian resort of Elmau for a summit, where Ukraine and rising energy costs were two of the topics set to dominate. Explosions heard in central Ukrainian city of Cherkasy - governor Explosions have been heard in the
central Ukrainian city of Cherkasy, the regional governor
Oleksandr Skichko said on the Telegram app.He did not give further details.Cherkasy has been largely
untouched by bombardment since Russia invaded Ukraine in
February. Johnson praises Germany's response over Russian invasion Before he met French President Emmanuel Macron at the G7 summit in Germany, Boris Johnson was asked whether France and Germany were doing enough over Ukraine.In his response, the prime minister focused on the German response without mentioning France."Just look at what the Germans alone have done," he said.Mr Johnson said Chancellor Olaf Scholz has sent weapons to the Ukrainians and he has "made huge, huge strides (on energy imports). We have 4% of our gas comes from Russia, in Germany, it's 40%"."They're facing real, real pressures, they're having to source energy from elsewhere. But they're doing it. They're making the effort. They're making the sacrifice."That's because they see that the price of freedom is worth paying."The prime minister added: "And the consequences of what's happening for the world are tough, but the price of backing down, the price of allowing Putin to succeed , to hack off huge parts of Ukraine, to continue with his programme of conquest, that price will be far, far higher and everybody here understands that." More explosions heard in Kyiv Two explosions have been heard in the southern outskirts of the Ukrainian capital, according to a Reuters reporter.Earlier it was announced by police that five people had been wounded in a missile strike against an apartment building in central Kyiv.Andriy Yermak, head of the president's administration, said a kindergarten was also hit.And Ukrainian MP Oleksiy Goncharenko wrote on the Telegram messaging app that "according to prelim data, 14 missiles were launched against Kyiv region and Kyiv".The nine-storey residential block was partially damaged in the attack in the central Shevchenkivskiy district.It was the first time in weeks that Russian forces had targeted the capital.Journalists in the city reported seeing rescue teams battling fires and rescuing civilians in the early hours.Kyiv mayor Vitali Klitschko said two people were injured and a seven-year-old girl was pulled alive from the rubble.Before the attack, Kyiv had not faced any Russian airstrikes since 5 June. Russian defence minister inspects troops involved in Ukraine operation Russia's defence minister Sergei Shoigu has inspected some of the country's troop units involved in the Ukraine operation.In a statement, the defence
ministry said: "At the command posts of Russian units, Army General Sergei
Shoigu heard reports from the commanders on the current
situation and actions of the Russian armed forces in the main
operational areas."It was not immediately clear when the visit took place or if Mr Shoigu had visited Ukraine itself. Earlier today, there were reports that he has been in Ukraine.President Vladimir Putin's forces invaded Ukraine on 24 February, calling it a "special military operation" to ensure Russian security and denazify Ukraine.Kyiv and the West say the invasion was nothing more than a land grab by Mr Putin. Due to your consent preferences, you’re not able to view this. Open Privacy Options | Europe Politics |
Suella Braverman Made A Grave Miscalculation This Week
The UK home secretary deflected attention from Labour divisions over Gaza by igniting a row about political interference in police operations.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Don’t look to Suella Braverman, the populist UK Home Secretary responsible for law and order, for nuance. Braverman enjoys outraging liberal sentiment and this week she has been working overtime to cause maximum offense.
On Tuesday, the darling of the Conservative party’s right-wing said that some homeless people living on the streets were indulging “a lifestyle choice.” Two days later, she published an article in the that accused the Metropolitan Police of “playing favourites” with protesters after Commissioner Mark Rowley decided to let Saturday’s pro-Palestine march go ahead on Armistice Day, what many consider a time for quiet reflection.
Braverman’s article wasn’t cleared in full by Downing Street, a potential breach of the Ministerial Code. Her excuse is that the Code covers policy not opinion, however inflammatory. But if the home secretary refused to make the changes he demanded, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has cause to sack her, if only to uphold his authority over the Cabinet. Braverman’s political misjudgment was to deflect attention from Labour’s divisions over Gaza by igniting an incendiary row about political interference in police operations.
Loyalists argue that the boss is biding his time before giving her the push. The outcome of Saturday’s march will be carefully watched. On Wednesday, the UK’s Supreme Court will rule on the legality of Braverman’s flagship policy to process asylum claims in faraway Rwanda. An adverse decision might provide the excuse to remove her.
The PM is supposed to be preparing his last Cabinet reshuffle to fight the next general election. Sunak needs to plan his changes before ridding himself of his turbulent home secretary, but No. 10 will also be calculating whether Braverman will cause more trouble on the backbenches than inside the government. Up to 60 right-wing MPs share her views and Sunak originally gave her a top job as part of his strategy to reconcile his party’s factions. He fears another round of debilitating Tory civil war might follow her departure.
The home secretary may even welcome being sacked. A YouGov poll on Thursday gave Labour a 24-point lead over the ruling Conservatives. Braverman could stand in the next Tory leadership contest untainted by general election defeat. Devastating losses may reduce the parliamentary party to a radical rump sympathetic to her views.
Besides, liberal commentators forget that Sunak agrees with the home secretary on much of the substance of what she says. Rather, it’s her harsh tone, lack of collegiality and poor record as an administrator that offend the PM’s technocratic soul. Sunak likes his populism skinny latte-style, but Braverman goes for the jolting double-shot espresso version every time.
While her blunt language causes dismay across the political spectrum, left-wing anger at Braverman betrays racial stereotyping. Her ideological opponents believe a non-white child of immigrant parents from Kenya and Mauritius shouldn’t spout socially conservative views and take a “right-wing” position on restricting immigration. She must be faking her opinions in order to rise up in the Conservative party, they insinuate.
True, Braverman is hugely ambitious, but this is a gross misunderstanding. Many ethnic-minority voters are socially conservative, and it is only natural that Tory MPs from small-business backgrounds should lean to the right on economics and law and order. Braverman and Sunak supported Brexit out of conviction. It was Boris Johnson who was a late convert to the cause of leaving the European Union, knowing that win or lose in the referendum, he stood to become the next Conservative leader — the party’s membership and its MPs were becoming increasingly hostile to Brussels.
Right-wingers from ethnic minorities now ring the Cabinet table. Ironically, many of them owe their promotion to the modernizing leadership of former prime minister David Cameron, who prodded Tory constituency associations into selecting candidates who weren’t the usual stale, pale males.
Like their leader, many fellow Conservative MPs agree with Braverman in principle, but would prefer that she spoke more softly and carried a bigger stick. Most Tories do indeed think that the timing of the pro-Palestine march on the day that commemorates the country’s war dead is provocative. Sunak himself has called the demo “disrespectful” and says he will hold Met Commissioner Rowley “accountable” if the march disrupts Remembrance ceremonies.
Braverman’s claim that the police take a softer approach with left-wing demonstrators than they do with right-wing protest also chimes with her colleagues. Last week, it was revealed in the that senior officers had (unwittingly) invited two Hamas supporters to advise them on defusing tensions during the marches. Echoing the language of liberal critics who condemn the Met for “institutional racism,” Braverman detects institutional obeisance to fashionable liberal causes. Under Rowley’s predecessor, Black Lives Matter supporters who breached lockdown restrictions during the pandemic were given an easy ride — some officers publicly took the knee before their superiors called a halt. Anti-lockdown protestors and feminists who attended the vigil of a woman raped and murdered by a police officer, however, were arrested on the spot. Just as likely, this was institutional stupidity.
British Jews are also alarmed by an upsurge in antisemitic hate crimes. Calls by some demonstrators for “jihad” and chants to “liberate” Palestine “from the river to the sea” amount to a threat to wipe out Israel. Police have arrested suspects but not until the marchers have dispersed.
Yet Braverman went for overkill in her article. She repeated her charge that the demos are “hate marches,” and compared them to the sectarian marches of Northern Ireland that commemorate historic battles between Protestants and Catholics. It was this passage that she refused to remove.
Braverman’s opinions make for lively reading in any newspaper column, but the home secretary is the woman ultimately in charge. If all she can do is rail against the police like an angry bystander, say her critics, what is the point of her? Time for Sunak to back her or sack her.
More From Bloomberg Opinion:
- Poppies and Flags Lay Britain's Divisions Bare: Matthew Brooker
- M&S Shouldn't Get Too Cozy in This Weather: Andrea Felsted
- The King's Lame Speech Should Really Be Celebrated: Adrian Wooldridge
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
Martin Ivens is the editor of the Times Literary Supplement. Previously, he was editor of the Sunday Times of London and its chief political commentator.
©2023 Bloomberg L.P. | United Kingdom Politics |
Scottish ministers will be able to spend hundreds of millions more on public services each year after striking a deal with the UK Treasury to lift restrictions on its budgets.
The agreement will allow ministers in Edinburgh to double their annual borrowing to protect day-to-day spending to £600m, as well as increase the amount they can borrow for major projects by inflation and also keep underspends in later years, without any limits.
The deal also preserves a longstanding agreement where the Treasury heavily subsidises Holyrood’s spending under the so-called Barnett formula which redistributes spending around the UK, subsidising less wealthy areas.
The Treasury said that element of the updated fiscal agreement meant Scottish ministers had £8bn more to spend last year than they would have had if Scottish spending was set at the same per capita rate of spending for the UK as a whole.
The new £600m figure for day-to-day borrowing ensures that Scotland can fill any holes in its day to day spending if its income tax receipts fall below forecasts.
If there are shortfalls in tax receipts, Scottish ministers can borrow money to cover the gap but that money must be repaid to the Treasury. That shortfall has grown to £390m, which breached the previous £300m borrowing limit. The Treasury has agreed to double that to £600m.
Scotland’s other borrowing limits will also be permanently pegged to inflation using a method known as index per capita, which ensures Scotland does not lose out financially because its population is growing more slowly than the UK’s.
Ministers in Edinburgh have been pushing for that reform for some time.
“This is a fair and responsible deal that has been arrived at following a serious and proactive offer from the UK government,” said John Glen, chief secretary to the Treasury.
“We have kept what works and listened to the Scottish government’s calls for greater certainty and flexibility to deliver for Scotland. [These] are the clear benefits of a United Kingdom that is stronger as a union.”
The deal was welcomed by Shona Robison, the Scottish finance secretary, but she warned that her government still faced substantial financial challenges coping with soaring inflation and slow economic growth.
“This is a finely balanced agreement that gives us some extra flexibility to deal with unexpected shocks, against a background of continuing widespread concern about the sustainability of UK public finances and while it is a narrower review than we would have liked, I am grateful to the chief secretary to the Treasury for reaching this deal,” she said.
“We still face a profoundly challenging situation and will need to make tough choices in the context of a poorly performing UK economy and the constraints of devolution, to ensure finances remain sustainable.”
David Phillips, of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, an independent thinktank in London, and a co-author of an independent review of the fiscal framework commissioned by the Treasury, said the deal was more generous but could have been better.
He said borrowing increases should be linked to national income not inflation. The agreement also meant that Scotland continued to receive money raised from England’s income tax and stamp duty revenues.
That violated the “taxpayer fairness” test set out by the Smith Commission, the body set up to review Scotland’s lawmaking and spending powers after the 2014 independence referendum, because it meant English taxpayers did not benefit from that spending.
The deal does, however, honour the “no detriment” test set out by Smith, which ensured Scotland does not lose out. It was impossible, Phillips said, for both tests to be met at the same time.
“This helps reduce the risk of the Scottish government losing out as a result of tax devolution but means that it’s likely that a growing amount of income tax and stamp duty revenue will go on being redistributed from the rest of the UK to Scotland over time,” he said. | United Kingdom Politics |
With an aching inevitability, Boris Johnson is to become a GB News presenter. We shouldn’t be surprised. His peripatetic career has always been symbolic of the political-media nexus that sits at the heart of British life – where does one begin? Where does one end? Is Johnson a journalist or a politician? He is both – with all the inherent problems therein.
It isn’t hard to see why Johnson’s appointment is an objective editorial problem. How are he and his fellow GB News presenters, Jacob Rees-Mogg and the deputy Tory chairman Lee Anderson, supposed to be impartial when discussing the government’s record? Had Johnson’s show aired last week, how could he possibly have covered impartially the serious allegations made about his conduct in the Covid inquiry? How long before he repeats the lie that he was driven from parliament by a “witch hunt”, with no challenge from a doughty presenter because he is the presenter. Why should he ever subject himself to TV scrutiny in the future? He will have no need to do so. Not for the first time, the arc of the British media bends towards Johnson.
He joins a string of other Conservative MPs to have been given their own shows on the channel (Rees-Mogg, Anderson, the husband-and-wife team Esther McVey and Philip Davies). If the Church of England was once the Tory party at prayer, GB News is the Tory party on TV. Its output is anchored around various strands of conservatism, including the radical right. It has Reform’s two figureheads – Nigel Farage and Richard Tice – as part of its presenting line-up. It is inconceivable that it should offer such a space to Green or Liberal Democrat equivalents. It constantly seeks and stokes culture wars and assumes the British public wants the same.
[See also: Bluesky is a real alternative to Twitter]
Defenders of GB News, from whom I heard a great deal when I tweeted rather disapprovingly about the Johnson appointment, riposte that it is better to watch news they know is biased than to rely on traditional broadcasters who pretend they’re not (and are dominated by the cultural left).
In conservative circles, the notion of an anti-Tory broadcast bias has become orthodox. At a time when conservatism rails against groupthink, how curious that those critical faculties are not deployed against this trope. Though TV channels may be in danger of being mushily centrist, they are certainly not left wing, nor in my experience do individual broadcasters’ politics make much difference to output. Broadcast journalists, of course, have views; the difference between GB News and its rivals is that the latter try and filter them out. They have processes to mitigate bias and get as close to due impartiality and balance as possible, even if they sometimes fail. GB News does not. Indeed, its guiding belief is that it shouldn’t try; that it exists in a broadcast landscape dominated by the left and needs to offer something different, something that isn’t duly impartial but truly impartial. GB News views itself as the embodiment of the “real” or “authentic” public, hence its “people’s channel” moniker. It is, more or less, the Daily Mail at the end of a remote control.
This isn’t to say GB News offers nothing of value. Watch it and you find a channel with some daring, if occasionally surreal, production. John Cleese’s new show involved an interview with the former Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? host Chris Tarrant, discussing the evils of the tabloid press in the hall of a castle. “Farage at Large”, in which the former Brexit Party leader goes to parts of the country rarely graced by TV cameras, is an arresting watch, not least because he is a very skilful broadcaster. GB News has hired some excellent reporters, including the former Sky News home affairs correspondent Mark White and the former Daily Telegraph associate editor Christopher Hope.
What it isn’t is a news channel, in the sense that we have traditionally understood the term. The stream of Conservative politicians presenting on it poses big questions for the political and media class. More and more Labour MPs wonder whether an incoming Starmer government should ask Ofcom to intervene over the insurgent network. Perhaps Rishi Sunak should get ahead of them – the best thing he could do for the future of his party is neutralise a TV news channel that will only intensify the Tory party’s radicalisation in opposition.
There’s something to be said for GB News’s pushing of the boundaries. TV news can be a solid place. But to paraphrase Hugh Gaitskell, if we’re going to end 50 years of TV news, my goodness, it is a decision that needs a little care and thought. If Johnson being given his own show isn’t enough to start a serious conversation about the channel’s future, then I’m not sure what will.
[See also: The confessions of Robbie Williams] | United Kingdom Politics |
An asylum seeker has lost his legal bid to avoid being sent to Rwanda on a government deportation flight later today.This morning it was understood that seven asylum seekers were due to be on the first flight from the UK to the east African country, due to take off this evening.
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 three appeals against removal orders to Rwanda being heard at the High Court today. Truss challenges critics of Rwanda deportations to come up with an alternative - Politics news live
The flights are part of a government strategy to deter illegal immigration into the UK. 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 It has been described by critics as "unworkable and expensive".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".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 told Sky News: "We are expecting to send the flight later today."I can't say exactly how many people will be on the flight."But the really important thing is that we establish the principle and we start to break the business model of these appalling people traffickers who are trading in misery."There will be people on the flight and if they are not on this flight they will be on the next flight."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?The Archbishop of Wales and the Catholic Archbishop of Westminster have also criticised the policy - as have charities, human rights groups and the UN High Commission for Refugees.Three further legal challenges are expected to be heard at the High Court on Tuesday. These are being brought by people who face being removed on the first flight.'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.A government spokesman said: "We welcome the court's decision in our favour, and we will now continue to deliver on progressing our world-leading migration partnership which will help prevent loss of life and break the business model of vile people smugglers."Rwanda is a safe country and has previously been recognised for providing a safe haven for refugees - we will not be deterred in delivering our plans to fix the broken asylum system which will ultimately save lives." 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 |
Japan's outgoing Prime Minister Shinzo Abe wave to staff members as they applaud to bid him goodbye at his official residence in Tokyo, Japan September 16, 2020. REUTERS/Issei Kato/FilesRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comJuly 8 (Reuters) - Japanese former prime minister Shinzo Abe was shot on Friday while campaigning in the city of Nara, a government spokesman said. read more Here are reactions:JAPANESE PRIME MINISTER FUMIO KISHIDA BRIEFING REPORTERS"Former prime minister Shinzo Abe was shot in Nara, before noon, and is currently in a grave condition. As far as I've heard, everything that can be done is being done to revive him. I am praying from the depths of my heart that his life will be saved. I am not aware of the motives and background behind this attack, but this attack is an act of brutality that happened during the elections - the very foundation of our democracy - and is absolutely unforgivable."Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comU.S. SECRETARY OF STATE ANTHONY BLINKEN BEFORE MEETING WITH INDONESIAN FOREIGN MINISTER"I do have to say before we meet how deeply saddened and deeply concerned we are by the news coming from Japan about the attempt on the life of Prime Minister Abe. We don't know his condition, we do know he's been shot and our thoughts and prayers are with him and his family, with the people of Japan. This is a very, very sad moment and we're waiting news from Japan."WHITE HOUSE SPOKESPERSON"We are shocked and saddened to hear about the violent attack against former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. We are closely monitoring the reports and keeping our thoughts with his family and the people of Japan.U.S. AMBASSADOR TO JAPAN RAHM EMANUEL IN A STATEMENT"Abe-san has been an outstanding leader of Japan and unwavering ally of the United States.""The U.S. government and American people are praying for the well-being of Abe-san, his family, and the people of Japan."FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMPEx-President Donald Trump on social media called the shooting of former Prime Minister Abe "absolutely devastating" and said he was praying for him.RUSSIAN FOREIGN MINISTER SERGEI LAVROV BRIEFING REPORTERS AT G20 MEET"I don't know what is behind this assassination attempt. I found out about it during the meeting. I was the first to start the speech by expressing my condolences to my Japanese colleague for what happened. There will probably be an investigation. I have nothing more to add."RUSSIAN AMBASSADOR TO JAPAN MIKHAIL GALUZINThe Russian Embassy in Japan in a post on its Twitter account quoted Russian Ambassador to Japan Mikhail Galuzin:"We pray for the health of former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. We strongly condemn the barbaric attempt on his life."BRITISH PRIME MINISTER BORIS JOHNSON ON TWITTER"Utterly appalled and saddened to hear about the despicable attack on Shinzo Abe."My thoughts are with his family and loved ones."AUSTRALIAN PRIME MINISTER ANTHONY ALBANESE ON TWITTER"Shocking news from Japan that former PM Shinzo Abe has been shot - our thoughts are with his family and the people of Japan at this time."INDONESIAN FOREIGN MINISTER RETNO MARSUDI"My part as the presidency of the G20 on behalf of G20 foreign ministers during the meeting also convey our deepest sympathy and our prayers all to the speedy recovery of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe."PHILIPPINE FOREIGN SECRETARY ENRIQUE MANALO ON TWITTER"It is with great shock and dismay that I learned of the shooting of former Prime Minister Abe Shinzo on 08 July 2022 in Nara. I extend my deep sympathy and pray for his early recovery."THAI DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER DON PRAMUDWINAI IN A STATEMENT"The prime minister is aware of the incident and is shocked by it. Japan has been a close friend of Thailand and former Prime Minister Abe and the prime minister are good friends."NEW ZEALAND PRIME MINISTER JACINDA ARDERN IN A STATEMENT"I was deeply shocked to hear the news about the past Prime Minister to Japan, Shinzo Abe. He was one of the first leaders I formally met when I became Prime Minister. He was deeply committed to his role, and also generous and kind. I recall him asking after the recent loss of our pet when I met him, a small gesture but one that speaks to the kind of person he is. My thoughts are with his wife and the people of Japan. Events like this shake us all to the core."TAIWANESE PRESIDENT TSAI ING-WEN ON FACEBOOK"I believe everyone is as surprised and sad as I am. Taiwan and Japan are both democratic countries with rule of law. On behalf of my government, I would like to severely condemn violent and illegal acts."Former Prime Minister Abe is not only a good friend of mine, but also a staunch friend of Taiwan's. He has supported Taiwan for many years and spared no effort to promote the progress of Taiwan-Japan relations."Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comEditing by Christopher CushingOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Asia Politics |
Rishi Sunak slammed in postcard campaign for taking holiday instead of passing conversion therapy ban
Stonewall has launched a new postcard campaign, lambasting prime minister Rishi Sunak over the UK government’s continued delay in banning conversion therapy.
While Sunak continues his family holiday in California, the LGBTQ+ charity’s campaign is calling on the PM to take action and ban conversion therapy, with countless LGBTQ+ people “enduring abuse and suffering”.
A draft bill that would’ve moved forward the long-waited ban has been sitting on Sunak’s desk for weeks, awaiting his sign-off.
It’s understood the bill contains a loophole for “consenting adults”, despite experts and advocates warning the government that such a clause could render the legislation useless.
The term conversion therapy refers to efforts to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity in a bid to “cure” them.
Stonewall’s campaign encourages supporters to add a message to one of four postcards designed with holiday themes, which the charity will send to Downing Street in a bid to finally end the five-year wait to “ban the horrific practice”.
The postcard designs highlight the perils of conversion therapy, with one saying, “Abuse doesn’t take a summer break”. Another reads: “Hope you’re having a nice summer holiday, Rishi… but we are still waiting for action”.
The Conservative government first promised a ban in 2018 under Theresa May’s leadership, but despite her insistence on trans-inclusive legislation, Boris Johnson later opted to push forward with a law that only protected gay, lesbian and bisexual people from the barbaric practice.
The government has vowed that draft legislation – including protection for trans people – will be published this year.
Of the more more than 1.5 million people in England and Wales who identified as LGBTQ+ in the 2021 sensus, around seven per cent have undergone, or been offered, conversion therapy.
Robbie de Santos, the director of communications and external affairs at Stonewall, urged the government to take “decisive action” to protect the LGBTQ+ community from the practice, which he said has already “scarred generations”.
He added: “California, where the prime minister is currently on holiday, has already taken action to ban conversion therapy, as have countries such as New Zealand, Canada and Ireland – countries that the UK would like to consider its peers on human rights issues.
“The 1.5 million LGBTQ+ people in England and Wales should not be left looking at these places and thinking ‘I wish I was there’.”
Sunak was also criticised last month for sharing support for same-sex marriage, despite the fact he has never voted for it.
And, in June, a group of cross-bench MPs criticised him for comments in a video shared with PinkNews where he was heard to mock trans women.
How did this story make you feel?
MyPinkNews members are invited to comment on articles to discuss the content we publish, or debate issues more generally. Please familiarise yourself with our community guidelines to ensure that our community remains a safe and inclusive space for all. | United Kingdom Politics |
Seven in ten Britons support a closer relationship with the EU than we have now
As we approach the fourth anniversary of Brexit, 52% of Britons now believe that the UK leaving the EU was the wrong decision. The Labour party – likely to form the next government – have so far resisted calls to move towards rejoining the single market, despite pressure from some businesses who say this could improve the situation.
Joining the single market would allow for the free movement of goods and services between the UK, the EU and other non-EU countries who are member of the single market, like Norway and Lichtenstein. However, this would also likely mean agreeing to the free movement of people between the UK and the EU – a frightening prospect for Keir Starmer’s Labour given the role of immigration in driving the Leave vote. But is this fear justified?
Perhaps not. New YouGov data indicates that more Britons are in fact supportive of joining the single market, even under this condition, than in opposition. Just short of six in ten Britons (57%) would support the UK joining the single market, even if this meant a return to free movement, with only around one in five (22%) opposed.
Leave voters backing Labour are keener on joining the single market
As could be expected, Remain voters are more likely to be supportive of joining the single market than Leave voters. More than eight in ten Remain voters (83%) would support doing so, compared to around a third (35%) of Leave voters, who tend to be opposed (45%).
YouGov’s latest Westminster voting intention poll has about 18% of Leave voters backing Labour if there were an election tomorrow, with 29% supporting the Conservatives and 13% Reform UK.
Our data shows that Labour committing to a return to the single market might not prove as alienating as Starmer may fear. Of Leavers who would back Labour in an election tomorrow, 53% would support the UK joining the single market, even if this meant allowing the free movement of people, with three in ten opposed (31%).
By contrast, Leave voters intending to back the Conservatives generally oppose a return to the single market (54%), although a minority of 29% support doing so.
Britons want closer ties with the EU
Whilst Labour has so far ruled out rejoining the single market, Starmer has asserted his intention to build closer ties with the EU, pledging to try and establish closer trading ties with if Labour win at the next election.
In general, Britons favour building closer ties with the EU. Seven in ten Britons (72%) want to see the UK have closer ties with the EU in some form or another, including a majority of both Remain (90%) and Leave (64%) voters. By contrast, one in five (19%) favour the UK maintaining the status quo or further reducing ties with the EU.
The most popular proposals for the UK’s future relationship with the EU are rejoining the European Union (31%) and increasing the trading relationship with the EU without joining the single market (30%). A further one in nine (11%) want to join the single market, but not the EU.
Of the options offered, most Remain voters favour joining the EU (56%), while those who voted Leave are instead generally in favour of increasing the amount of trade we do with the EU without joining the single market (46%).
Photo: Getty | United Kingdom Politics |
The United States is working to finalize the purchase of an advanced air defense system bound for Ukraine, national security adviser Jake Sullivan said at the G-7 summit in Germany Monday.Developed in Norway, the NASAMS is an anti-aircraft medium-to-long-range surface-to-air missile that can reportedly strike targets 100 miles away.Sullivan confirmed to reporters that the U.S. is finalizing the purchase but has yet to sign a contract making the purchase official.It is unclear how much the anti-aircraft system costs.Biden told his global counterparts at the G-7 and Ukraine's President Zelensky about U.S. intentions, Sullivan said.From left, Britain's Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Japan's Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, President Joe Biden, European Council President Charles Michel before a round table as Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy appears on screen to address the G7 leaders via video link during their working session at Castle Elmau in Kruen, Germany, June 27, 2022.Kenny Holston/APThe impending purchase of the NASAMS system is part of a package that will also include artillery ammunition and counter-battery radars, according to Sullivan. The Ukrainian military made specific requests for the ammunition and radars, he said.The NASAMS system is reported to protect restricted airspace around the White House.Monday's announcement from the G-7 summit comes four days after the White House announced it is sending $450 million in aid to Ukraine. HIMARS missile systems are part of that package.Hours after the announcement, initial counts are that 10 died and more than 40 were wounded following a Monday missile strike in Kremenchuk in Ukraine's Poltava region.Residents say the strike hit a shopping mall, setting it ablaze.The administration and President Zelensky hope the NASAMS system and other recent aid from the U.S. will better equip Ukraine to continue its pushback against Russia in the war, which recently entered its fifth month.Debris litters the area after a projectile and subsequent fire destroyed a warehouse building the previous evening on June 21, 2022 in Druzhkivka, Ukraine.Scott Olson/Getty ImagesSome G-7 members also announced Sunday they will further tighten their grip on Russia by banning the imports of Russian gold.The United States, United Kingdom, Canada, and Japan joined together to ban Russia's second-largest import but fellow G-7 members Germany, France, and Italy held out.The move codifies a ban that many refiners, shippers, and banks already voluntarily implemented themselves, and it highlights how even some of the world's global powers -- those geographically closest to the Russia-Ukrainian conflict -- disagree with how to approach the matter.The U.S. Treasury will release an official notice of the ban as it concerns U.S.-based businesses Tuesday.President Zelenskyy met virtually with G-7 leaders Monday as the group moves closer to reaching an agreement that will cap the price of Russian oil, further starving Russia of funds to fuel its war.ABC News' Fidel Pavlenko contributed to this report. | Global Organizations |
Kyiv was hit by four Russian missile strikes early on Sunday morning for the first time in three weeks, during which life had been slowly returning to the Ukrainian capital in the relative calm.Columns of smoke rose over the central Shevchenkivskyi district, home to a cluster of universities, restaurants and art galleries at 6.22am. Kyiv’s mayor, Vitali Klitschko, said two residential buildings had been hit in what he called an attempt to “intimidate Ukrainians” before a Nato summit in Madrid beginning on Tuesday.Around 11am, there were at least several unconfirmed reports of two more explosions in Kyiv. Two people, one a woman from Russia, were taken to hospital and a seven-year-old girl was rescued from rubble, Klitcho said. “She is alive,” he said on Telegram, adding that rescue workers were trying to “save her mother”. He said more residents could be trapped under rubble.“We heard four explosions, they were very loud,” Marina, 33, a resident of an apartment building close to the missile strike. “An entire building was shaking. Luckily, our apartment is fine. Originally we are from Chernihiv, we’ve lived through all this and now again … I don’t know if I want to move out, I need to calm down and then decide.”The area was previously hit almost two months ago on 28 April in a menacing display of defiance while the UN secretary general was visiting the city and a few hours after Joe Biden had announced a doubling of US military and economic aid to Ukraine.Vira Hyrych, a Ukrainian journalist from Radio Liberty who also worked for Voice of America, was killed in her apartment by the attack.The Ukrainian MP Oleksiy Goncharenko wrote on Telegram that “according to prelim data 14 missiles were launched against Kyiv region and Kyiv”.The capital has not come under Russian bombardment since 5 June, when Russian forces hit the city with cruise missiles fired from the Caspian Sea, striking a rail repair facility.Meanwhile in eastern Ukraine, Russian forces were trying to cut off Lysychansk, having reduced its twin city Sievierodonetsk to rubble.Lysychansk is set to become the next main focus of fighting, as Moscow has launched massive artillery bombardments and airstrikes on areas far from the heart of the eastern battles.Russia’s Interfax news agency said Russian troops had entered Lysychansk, the last city held by Kyiv in Luhansk province, on Saturday after Ukrainian forces were ordered to withdraw from Sievierodonetsk.If Lysychansk falls, the entire region of Luhansk, which along with Donetsk makes up the eastern Donbas region, could fall under Russian control, marking another strategic breakthrough for the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, since the beginning of the invasion.Police and firefighters at a damaged residential building in the Shevchenkivskyi district of Kyiv. Photograph: Roman Pilipey/EPA“The people’s militia of the Luhansk people’s republic and the Russian army have entered the city of Lysychansk,” Andrei Marochko, a representative for pro-Russian separatists, said on Telegram. “Street fighting is currently taking place,” he added.The claim could not be independently verified and there was no immediate comment from the Ukrainian side.Serhiy Haidai, the governor of Luhansk province, said on Facebook that Russian and separatist fighters were trying to blockade Lysychansk from the south.Haidai said the Azot chemical plant in Sievierodonetsk and the villages of Synetsky and Pavlograd, and others, were shelled, but made no mention of casualties.In a separate development on Saturday, 20 rockets “fired from the territory of Belarus and from the air” targeted the village of Desna in the northern Chernihiv region, Ukraine’s northern military command said.It added that infrastructures were hit, but no casualties had been reported.Although it is officially not involved in the conflict, Belarus has provided logistic support to Moscow since the beginning of the invasion.“Today’s strike is directly linked to Kremlin efforts to pull Belarus as a co-belligerent into the war in Ukraine,” the Ukrainian intelligence service said.The attack came before a planned meeting between Putin and his Belarussian counterpart and close ally, Alexander Lukashenko, in St Petersburg on Saturday.During the meeting, Putin said he would deliver missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads to Belarus in the coming months.Sign up to First Edition, our free daily newsletter – every weekday morning at 7am“In the coming months, we will transfer to Belarus Iskander-M tactical missile systems, which can use ballistic or cruise missiles, in their conventional and nuclear versions,” Putin said in a broadcast on Russian television.The development came on the eve of a meeting of G7 leaders in the Bavarian Alps on Sunday, to be hosted by the German chancellor, Olaf Scholz, which is set to be dominated by Ukraine and its far-reaching consequences, from energy shortages to a food crisis.Additional reporting by Artem Mazhulin | Europe Politics |
Canada's Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland looks on during a news conference before delivering the 2022-23 budget, in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, April 7, 2022. REUTERS/Blair Gable/FilesRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comNUSA DUA, Indonesia, July 15 (Reuters) - Canadian Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland on Friday told Russian officials at a meeting of G20 finance officials that she held them personally responsible for "war crimes" committed during Russia's war in Ukraine, a Western official told Reuters.Freeland directly addressed the Russian delegation taking part in the meeting of the Group of 20 major economies, telling them: "It is not only generals who commit war crimes, it is the economic technocrats who allow the war to happen and to continue," the official said.Freeland, whose maternal grandparents were born in Ukraine, told the opening G20 session that the war was the "single biggest threat to the global economy right now," the official said.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by Andrea Shalal; Editing by Jacqueline WongOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Global Organizations |
It’s a looking-glass world. Up is down. Black is white. War is peace. Just a few months ago we were told the UK economy was in a desperate state: no room for tax cuts. Just more of the same. Suck it up. But in the last few weeks we’ve been getting noises off. Anonymous briefings from Treasury ministers. All is well. Things have never been better. Thanks to the diligence of the Tories, we can all expect some more pocket money in the autumn statement.
If you’re confused by this, then spare a thought for Jeremy Hunt. The chancellor who was never meant to be chancellor. The chancellor who knows next to nothing about macroeconomics. Just think. A man of almost limitless ambition – he twice thought he would make a good prime minister – but who never once aspired to be chancellor. Because even he knew he would be hopeless at it. A glimpse of self-awareness. The entrepreneur who knows how to create a small business. Start with a big one.
But greatness was thrust upon him. Or at least, necessity was thrust upon him. This time last year the Tories were in shit street. Kwasi Kwarteng had crashed the economy with his mini-budget and the Tory brand was on its knees. A new chancellor was needed. Someone who could be the grownup.
And that person was Jezza. Not because of any ability. But because of his plausibility. He looked like the sort of Tory chancellor to which the country had grown accustomed. And now we’re rather lumbered with him. At least for another year. An eighth chancellor in 13 years would begin to look a lot worse than carelessness. More like catatonia. A death wish.
Long before Hunt stood up to give his autumn statement, his wife and children had filed into the back seats of the MPs’ visitors’ gallery. You got the feeling they all knew this would be his last but one big set-piece event in the Commons. Jezza certainly did. This wasn’t the kind of budget you would give if you had any intention of being around for the next five years to oversee its delivery. This was a budget designed to destroy a future chancellor. So Hunt was just there to soak up the vibes. To enjoy it while he still could.
The kindest interpretation is that Jezza was just too dim to know what he was doing. That he was just the useful idiot for Rishi Sunak. You certainly can’t blame his ministerial colleagues in the Treasury. They are even more half-witted than Hunt. That’s why they were chosen. Not that there is anyone better lurking on the backbenches.
Hunt began by insisting he was putting the economy back on track. An odd admission. It rather acknowledged that the Tories had done untold damage over the last 13 years and were only now getting round to trying to fix the problem. Thanks for that. “We’ve got inflation cracked,” he boasted. “Just as the prime minister promised.” It was now only two and a half times the Bank of England’s target – and its fall nothing to do with government intervention – so could we please have a two-minute love-in for Rish!? The Great Gratitude. Thank you, Supreme Leader.
This was going to be an autumn statement for growth, he continued. Yup. Talk us through this one, Jezza. He did, slowly and with few signs of understanding what someone else had written for him. His eyes started to revolve anticlockwise in terror. As if every sentence was dynamite. Sweat formed on his brow. He could sense the danger. But he didn’t know what direction it was coming from. No choice but to press ahead. The Office for Budget Responsibility had revised its forecasts. Down was up. It was fantastic news. Growth would more or less stagnate for the next five years. He was a man who was going places. Perdition.
“We are taking decisions for the long term,” he announced. Long term as in sheer desperation. Every government reset had failed – now there were at least two a week – and this was more or less the last throw of the dice. Thanks to his brilliance, he had managed to create extra fiscal headroom. Largely thanks to inflation and capped departmental budgets – hooray for inflation! – he had extra money to spend. So he was going to squander almost all of it on tax cuts and let public services die. Austerity 2.0.
Here the speech rather meandered. Jezza isn’t the best of readers and even the faithful Tory backbenchers could see this budget was a pig’s ear. Many began to doze off. It would get a few half-hearted cheers in the Tory press for a day or so, but the electorate would soon see through it. There was nothing there to make you want to live. Though there was some gratuitous sadism. Or “compassionate” cuts to the disabled. Work, you losers. Stop scrounging. Always scrounging. Most of you have deliberately chosen to have mental health problems.
Finally, after some business tax cuts that even Hunt had to admit were well above his pay grade, we got to the 2p cut in national insurance. A cut to a tax that Rishi Sunak had raised. Go, Tories! And just in case everyone hadn’t realised how screwed the government was, he was going to introduce the cut from January rather than March. Just so that everyone would feel better off before the election. Only, because of fiscal drag, the tax burden would be reaching its highest ever level in five years’ time. The tax cut that wasn’t a tax cut. The chancellor who isn’t a chancellor. The sweat-stain of sheer panic.
Rachel Reeves could barely contain her contempt in her reply. Where to start? She was all for tax cuts – what aspiring chancellor wouldn’t be? – but this was just economic vandalism. And she would be the one left to pick up the pieces. She wasn’t going to say no, obviously. But really? Did they have any more giveaways for the spring budget? There was a few billion left unspent. How about something for the most well-off? Like inheritance tax?
Over on the government benches, Sunak and Jezza giggled and bounced up and down like children. A sure tell. They knew they were busted. If they had honour – a sense of grace – they might have given up there and then. But they mean to take us all down with them. They’re so pretty, oh so pretty. They’re vacant.
Depraved New World by John Crace is published by Guardian Faber, price £16.99. To support the Guardian and Observer, order your copy and save 18% at guardianbookshop.com. Delivery charges may apply. | United Kingdom Politics |
By Beth TimminsBusiness reporter, BBC NewsImage source, Getty ImagesImage caption, The jump in the number of people paying higher rates of income tax comes as the cost of living soarsThere are almost two million more higher and additional rate taxpayers in the UK, according to HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC). The number of people paying 40% or 45% tax has risen from 4.25m to more than 6.1m workers since 2019, figures show.It comes as prices rise at the fastest rate for 40 years and workers and unions push for pay rises to cope.The Treasury has been urged to re-examine tax brackets, but it said most tax payers still paid the basic rate.The amount a worker can earn before paying income tax, known as personal allowance, was frozen in the April 2021 Budget until 2026, along with all tax thresholds. Usually, governments increase personal allowances each year, so that someone can get a pay rise that matches the rising cost of living without getting dragged into the next tax bracket.But right now, inflation is at 9.1% and expected to rise further. This means pay rises are expected to lead to many more people paying higher tax rates, and generating more money for the Treasury. At the time of March's Spring Statement, the government's independent watchdog, The Office for Budget Responsibility, estimated that by 2026 the government's tax take in relation to the size of theeconomy would rise to its highest since the 1940s.The Treasury said it had taken "tough but responsible decisions" to "avoid saddling future generations with more debt" after record levels of borrowing during the pandemic."Maintaining income tax thresholds is a progressive approach. The vast majority of taxpayers will still pay the basic rate and the UK still has the highest personal allowance in the G20," the spokesperson added. Countering this approach, former Liberal Democrat pensions minister Sir Steve Webb said that paying higher rate tax "used to be reserved for the very wealthiest".But this has changed "very dramatically" in recent years, added the partner at consultants LCP."People who would not think of themselves as being particularly rich can now easily face an income tax rate of 40% and around 1 in 5 of all taxpayers will soon be in the higher rate bracket," he said.Image caption, More people will be paying more in taxes after the Spring StatementHigher rate taxpayers paying 40% earn £43,663 or over in Scotland and £50,271 in England, Northern Ireland and Wales. They do not pay tax on the first £12,570 of earnings covered by the personal allowance.They represent a projected 16.2% of the overall income tax-paying population in 2022-2023, according to the HMRC.Meanwhile, additional rate taxpayers who earn over £150,000 and pay at 45% tax make up around 1.9%, it said.'Responsible'Clive Gawthorpe, partner at accountancy firm UHY Hacker Young said the government needs to "urgently" examine these tax brackets."Due to inflation, taxpayers sucked into the higher band were already having to make their monthly pay checks stretch further - without the additional burden of higher tax," he added. But Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Thursday defended the government's taxation policy, pointing to plans to raise the threshold for paying National Insurance in July."Next month, we've got a tax cut worth £330 on average...for all payers of National Insurance contributions coming in, a very substantial tax cut in addition to what we've done on fuel duty and on council tax."Of course, we always want to try to reduce burdens, but we have to do it in a sensible and a responsible way," he said. | United Kingdom Politics |
Today marks one year since Rishi Sunak replaced Liz Truss as Prime Minister.
Anniversaries, generally, are junctures for those marking an occasion to collectively reminisce — as well as to consider the possible paths that lay ahead. Politically, therefore, depending on the context into which a special date is received, they can be moments of particular merriment or outright acrimony. As for Rishi Sunak, his official spokesperson said yesterday the the PM is “more focused on the continual delivery for the public than marking an anniversary”.
No change there, is what Sunak’s strategists want you to think. But as No 10 draws attention to Sunak’s purported professionalism, there is no avoiding the fact that a period of reflection — from all of the public, journalists and MPs — is really the last thing the prime minister needs. For the former, certainly, the more they seem to consider Rishi Sunak’s premiership, the less they appear to like it.
One key theme of Rishi Sunak’s premiership a year in has been the transformational impact his time in Downing Street has had on his personal poll ratings. Once elevated some way above his party’s, over the course of the last 12 months they have slowly sunk to those of the Conservatives at large. Sunak had a net favourability of -9 when he took office last October, it is now around -40 — eerily similar to the Conservative Party as a whole at -46, which has remained pretty constant over the past 12 months.
It wasn’t meant to be this way. Back in October last year, it was hoped that the prime minister’s strong poll ratings relative to his party would slowly lever up the Conservatives’ lagging numbers. This analysis informed a highly personalised mode of governance as the PM pledged to fix the problems his party had both overseen and, on other matters, outright caused. A string of “PM Connect” events followed as Sunak was sent to address the hoi polloi whose “trust” he now so coveted.
Thus, from the wreckage of Liz Truss’ premiership, Sunak emerged with a pointed focus on “fixing things”. Out with the new and in with the orthodoxy, was the throughline of everything Sunak said in his first months as PM: through stability and delivery, No 10 calculated, the public would learn to love the Conservatives again.
But, as Sunak’s premiership has developed, it has become apparent his immediate success in calming a financier class shaken by Trussonomics was the easy bit. After a year of Sunak, the public still views the Conservatives, and more and more so their prime minister, dimly indeed.
Cue a coruscating article on the PM’s fortunes, published last week, with the innocuous title “How has Rishi Sunak’s reputation changed after one year as PM?”. Even more reassuring for readers on Downing Street is that it was penned by some sober wonk at YouGov — that neutral interlocutor between protean public opinion and interested politicos. But don’t let Matthew Smith’s ostensibly harmless “Head of Data Journalism” job title fool you — his conclusions, informed by data collated over the course of a year and sans caveats, are devastating. Brace yourself for a sample:
On the eve of his accession to 10 Downing Street, public expectations for Rishi Sunak were mixed: 25% expected him to be “good” or “great” as prime minister, 29% “average”, and 29% “poor” or “terrible”.
A year into the job, Sunak has not lived up to these limited expectations. Half of Britons say he has been a poor or terrible PM (50%), while just 11% think he has been good or great. A third consider him average (33%), which is the prevailing opinion among Conservative voters, at 48%. Three in ten Tory voters (29%) rate Sunak’s first year in office badly, while 20% think his performance has been positive.
There are a number of pertinent data points raised by Smith; but, as he notes, perhaps the most interesting is Sunak’s ratings on the economy. Over the course of the past 12 months, the PM’s reputation for managing the economy has declined starkly — that is despite semi-consistent falls in inflation and the UK’s technical avoidance of recession.
At the time Sunak took office, YouGov’s data found Sunak’s management of the economy was the only major issue of an outlined 12 where a clear margin of Britons expressed confidence in the PM. Then 50 per cent of Britons had confidence in Sunak’s economic skillset, compared to a more sceptical 31 per cent.
Now, only 31 per cent trust the PM to effectively manage the economy, with 62 per cent having little to no confidence in him. Meanwhile, 75 per cent of the public now distrust the PM on immigration, 72 per cent distrust him on the NHS, and 71 per cent on the cost of living.
What is also significant is the new data on Sunak’s handling of what YouGov refers to as the Israel-Palestine conflict. This shows Sunak is distrusted on dealing with the matter with a net -30 score. This is a new issue — but the public instinctively assume the prime minister will handle it poorly.
There will be other factors at play here, of course; but the PM prides himself on his performance on the international stage. His diplomatic efforts have been a core theme of his premiership, including on the Isreal-Hamas conflict with Sunak having delivered a series of statements to the House of Commons on the subject and visited the Middle East last week in a trip aimed at avoiding escalation.
And what of the PM’s prized reputation for competence? The public now see him as incompetent by 46 per cent to 34 per cent. As Smith notes, “this represents a 40 point net drop, from + 28 to -12”.
So the public thinks your rubbish
Step back and YouGov’s polling data both justifies and problematises Sunak’s recent relaunch at Conservative Party conference.
First, it is clear from YouGov’s polling that the public at large is not happy with Sunak’s record as prime minister. A No 10 strategist might calculate, therefore, that new rhetorical emphasises are needed to broaden the discourse beyond their man’s problem areas. Focussing on clear diving lines and amping up pressure on Starmer over HS2 and net zero, the theory runs, could ease the pressure on the government and force voters to consider their enthusiasm for Labour.
But, conversely, the figures also show that Sunak’s overriding problem is not messaging or style — but policy delivery. The public has taken to judging Sunak, perhaps unsurprisingly, on his own terms: and on the economy, the NHS and more, they do not like what they see. Sunak has deep-seated political problems, and they will not be fixed by tampering with net zero targets or ditching the HS2 line to Manchester.
A consistent criticism of Sunak’s relaunch holds that there is no glue to cement his new pitch against “30 years of vested interests standing in the way of change”. In hindsight, “delivery” was supposed to be the core theme of Sunak’s premiership, the glue that held his government together and cohered his pitch to the public. But the view of the electorate, as expressed in the YouGov data is stark: Sunak isn’t working.
So, with the PM once again facing calls to reset his government amid perennial criticism over being too managerial, too nice and not political enough — one wonders where he turns. The big risk for Sunak is that as YouGov’s line graphs continue to express a downward trajectory in his personal ratings, he will be forced into more and more difficult conversations with his party. Further intra-party strife will then deepen public discontent directed at the Conservatives and, if the trend holds, the party will drag Sunak’s ratings down with it.
The question strategists in No 10 will now be grappling with is: how do you change public perceptions that have taken such a strong hold over the preceding 12 months, with only around 12 months left? There are upcoming events where the Conservative Party could display a change in approach — such as at the King’s Speech, the Autumn Statement or in a reshuffle — but there is no escaping the fact that something needs to change drastically if Sunak is to shift the dial before an election.
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 |
The Conservative Party Conference took place in Manchester this month, whilst the Labour Party Conference will take place in Liverpool. It might sound unlikely that these locations could ever be swapped — but is it so absurd?
If we exclude Prime Ministers, then since 2010 there have been more people from Liverpool (Esther McVey, Nadine Dorries, Therese Coffey, Kit Malthouse, Gillian Keegan) in the Cabinet than Old Etonians (Kwasi Kwarteng, Oliver Letwin, Jacob Rees-Mogg and Rory Stewart). Another Scouser, Jake Berry, has served as Chair of the Conservative party and held various other frontbench roles.
If it is surprising that one UK city has provided so many Tory ministers in recent years, it is even more surprising that it is Liverpool, where the Conservative party doesn’t have a single councillor. It finished in lowly sixth-place in this year’s local elections and hasn’t had an MP since 1983.
Not only that, but the five safest Labour seats in the country (Liverpool Walton, Knowsley, Bootle, Liverpool Riverside and Liverpool West Derby) are all on Merseyside.
Nonetheless, this enthusiasm for Labour is a recent creation of the past few decades: the city only elected its first Labour MP, Jack Hayes, in a by-election in 1923; roughly two decades after other “Labour heartland” areas such as Manchester, Leeds, Glasgow, South Wales and East London had their first Labour MPs.
As late as the 1959 local elections, six of Liverpool’s nine council wards were controlled by the Conservatives. Three of those were solidly working-class areas, including Toxteth and Walton.
The Tories continued to win elections in the city until well into the second half of the 20th century. Conservative MPs were elected for the constituencies of Walton and West Derby until 1964 and for Wavertree and Garston until 1983.
The party was still able to win local elections in Liverpool as late as the 1970s, when control of the council swung between the Tories and the Liberals. When the Militant-dominated Labour Party took over Liverpool city council in 1983, it succeeded a Conservative–Liberal coalition.
Some further their careers by stressing their working-class roots
The headline figures from elections can only tell us so much, especially under first past the post: there are tens of thousands of people in Liverpool who consistently vote for the Conservatives, and even more who support “conservative” policies.
It is estimated that three Merseyside seats (Walton, Knowsley and Bootle) voted Leave in the 2016 referendum, whilst UKIP came in third place in the 2014 local elections — fewer than a thousand votes off the Greens.
This should not be surprising given the demographics of Liverpool constituencies. In terms of immigration levels, the number of graduates and home ownership, they are usually very different from the other safest Labour seats.
Sefton Central, for example, has a relatively small population of under 34-year-olds, a black and minority ethnic population of less than two per cent, and one of the highest home ownership rates in the country. Yet it has been Labour since 2010 with an increasing majority.
There are lots of small-c conservatives on Merseyside — even amongst those who vote Labour — and this milieu has been the source of one type of the Liverpool Conservative frontbenchers since 2010s. This type — let’s call them “overtly working-class Tory” — use their city’s reputation to further their careers by stressing their working-class roots or using humour to deflect criticism.
Think Nadine Dorries, who endlessly described David Cameron, George Osbourne and Rishi Sunak as “posh boys who don’t know the price of milk” (although for some reason she never made these accusations about Boris Johnson). Gillian Keegan, when challenged in the Commons over her hot mic rant earlier this month, claimed “as a Scouser I have a bit of a higher bar” for swearing.
There are a smaller but still not insignificant number of economic, big-C Conservatives in Liverpool, but they tend to leave the city early to pursue careers elsewhere.
These people provide the other type of Scouse Conservative MP, who take a different approach to Dorries and Keegan. They instead tend to play down or repudiate their heritage.
My wife briefly worked with Kit Malthouse’s wife on a project to help Palestinian journalists. After she noted that both of their husbands were Scousers, Mrs Malthouse was quick to insist that her husband, who was a wealthy financier when they married in 2005, “doesn’t have an accent”.
If the coming general election brings the expected electoral wipeout for the Conservatives, there will be a lot of soul searching as to the future direction of the party. They may choose to double-down on the May–Johnsonian move to the left on economics and right on culture, as supported by Dorries; or they may return to Trussite libertarianism, as advocated for by close Truss allies Jake Berry and Therese Coffey.
Either way, given the relative safety of their seats (only Berry with 9,522 and McVey with 17,387 have majorities under 20,000), and the political utility of having prominent Conservatives from such an archetypical Labour city, we can expect to see and hear from many more Scouse Tories in the years to come.
Enjoying The Critic online? It's even better in print
Try five issues of Britain’s newest magazine for £10Subscribe | United Kingdom Politics |
Russia’s aggression against Ukraine has not only excluded it from Europe’s security agenda. It has also triggered a fundamental reorientation of Russian international policy priorities. Africa, Asia and Latin America have become the primary foci of its attention so that it can continue to assert itself globally as a great power, aggravate regional conflict situations in these continents and thereby ultimately force the West to deal with Russia on Moscow’s terms. In this context, the exploitation of long-running unresolved border and conflict issues has emerged as a heaven-sent opportunity for Russia to intervene in those issues so that it can achieve these objectives. At the same time, states caught in these conflicts or that seek a greater status for themselves in the less-developed world eagerly solicit and welcome Russian arms, mercenaries, economic deals and diplomatic support. Algeria, which clearly craves this enhanced status and has long been in conflict with Morocco over the Western Sahara, therefore has become an emerging Russian partner. Algeria has taken advantage of the war in Ukraine to sign energy deals with Italy and Greece and is being sought after by many other European governments. But it has also made many gestures to Moscow that have been reciprocated. Algeria has agreed to finance the operations of Moscow’s private military forces, PMC Wagner, in Mali. In addition, Algeria abstained on a United Nations resolution condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Algeria also opposed subsequent UN resolutions suspending Russia’s membership in the UN Human Rights Council and on Russia’s illegal annexation of Ukrainian territory. Since then, Algeria and Russia have maintained high-level foreign policy and military contacts. Last May, Algeria’s ambassador to Russia announced that Russia and Algeria were preparing a new strategic partnership document to strengthen cooperation in areas not mentioned in their earlier 2001 document. In addition, Algeria has now formally applied to join the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China) economic-political organization, much to Russia’s delight. In the military sphere, in November the two countries held talks on military cooperation and began joint counterterrorism exercises near Algeria’s border with Morocco. That choice of location was no coincidence given Algeria’s rivalry with Morocco. In October, the countries’ navies conducted joint exercises in the Mediterranean Sea, and in September, Algeria took part in the Vostok-2022 strategic command and staff military exercises. Both sides’ objectives are clear. Algeria seeks Russian support to oust Morocco from the Western Sahara and to enhance its standing throughout the Middle East and Africa. Russia seeks permanent leverage as a great power in Africa, some form of leverage over key economic assets, including oil and gas, and a naval and/or air base on the Mediterranean. Indeed, Russia’s defense minister acknowledged this in 2014, and there is no reason to believe Russia has recanted on this point. Therefore, it is no surprise that this axis, along with other Russian interventions in Africa, has increasingly angered Western governments. French President Emmanuel Macron has publicly denounced Russia’s “predatory” African policies. Several European members of the European Parliament are now demanding a review of the EU agreement with Algeria due to its links with Russia. In the U.S., Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) has called for sanctions on Algeria under U.S. law due to its 2021 $7 billion arms deal with Russia. In the House, Rep. Linda McClain (R-Mich.) is leading several of her colleagues to demand sanctions on Algeria for the same reason. Thus, throughout the West, Algeria has begun to reap the harvest of its ill-considered effort to invite Russia to help it destabilize Morocco and North Africa generally. There is also no doubt that Moscow is simultaneously seeking to circumvent the Western sanctions regime through North Africa, among other places. Algeria is a willing partner in such schemes and in Moscow’s overall African gambit. It should be held accountable for its policies by both Europe and the U.S. More importantly, such Western actions should provide an impetus for the West to pay more attention to and invest more resources in Africa. Doing so would checkmate Russian strategy and strengthen Western interests and African resilience. Stephen Blank, Ph.D., is a senior fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI). He is a former professor of Russian national security studies and national security affairs at the Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College and a former MacArthur fellow at the U.S. Army War College. Blank is an independent consultant focused on the geopolitics and geostrategy of the former Soviet Union, Russia and Eurasia. | Africa politics |
Wikimedia Foundation, the owner of Wikipedia, has filed an appeal against a Russian court order that demanded the site remove information related to the invasion of Ukraine, stating that the removal would be a “violation of people’s rights to free expression and access to knowledge.” The nonprofit organization filed an appeal last week to challenge a Moscow court calling for the removal of several Wikipedia articles, mostly related to the invasion, fining them 5 million rubles, or about $65,000. The foundation challenged the appeal, saying that the information should be protected by freedom of expression. “The information at issue is fact-based and verified by volunteers who continuously edit and improve articles on the site; its removal would therefore constitute a violation of people’s rights to free expression and access to knowledge,” the organization said in a press release. The Lower court’s decision states that the articles on the site are disinformation, “which poses risk of mass public disorder in Russia.” The articles include Russian Invasions of Ukraine (2022), Battle for Kyiv, War Crimes during the Russian Invasion of Ukraine, Shelling of Hospital in Mariupol and others. “This decision implies that well-sourced, verified knowledge on Wikipedia that is inconsistent with Russian government accounts constitutes disinformation,” said Stephen LaPorte, Associate General Counsel, said in the statement. “The government is targeting information that is vital to people’s lives in a time of crisis. We urge the court to reconsider in favor of everyone’s rights to knowledge access and free expression.” The court also found that the foundation operates inside Russian territory, which would require it to comply. However, Wikimedia asserts that the country does not have jurisdiction over the organization. The foundation also argues that the requests for the removal of information “constitutes a violation of human rights.” “Russian-language Wikipedia is a crucial second draft of history, written by and for Russian speakers around the world who volunteer their time to make reliable, fact-checked information available to all,” the organization said. “Blocking access to Wikipedia in Russia would deny more than 145 million people access to this vital information resource.” “The Wikimedia Foundation remains committed to defending the right of everyone to freely access and share knowledge,” it added. The Russian government will have the opportunity to respond to the appeal in the coming weeks. Wikimedia has previously faced scrutiny from the Russian government when Russian leaders demanded it remove the content surrounding the Ukrainian invasion for months, which the foundation said was “censorship.” Most recently, in April, Russian mass media regulator Roskomnadzor warned the organization to take down an article that it said was disinformation, which Wikimedia also refused. | Human Rights |
Russian roll-on/roll-off container carrier 'Lady R' docks at Simon's Town Naval Base, reportedly carrying ammunition for the South African military, in Cape Town, South Africa, December 7, 2022.ESA ALEXANDER/ReutersLate next month, two Russian warships will sail into South African waters, near the cities of Durban and Richards Bay, to practise their gunnery, force protection and air defence skills.The naval deployment on the southern coast of Africa will be a vivid reminder of Moscow’s expanding influence on a continent that is increasingly crucial to its global strategy. This is a big year for the Russian charm offensive in Africa, with political summits, diplomatic visits and military exercises on the agenda.The naval drills in late February are just one element of the plan, in which South Africa is emerging as one of Moscow’s most loyal partners.The Russian warships are scheduled to join South African and Chinese ships in a joint military exercise, codenamed Mosi (“smoke”), from Feb. 17 to 26. Hundreds of military personnel will participate.South Africa’s biggest opposition party, the Democratic Alliance, described the exercise as a government attempt to curry favour with the Kremlin. Its defence critic, Kobus Marais, said it “confirms without doubt the South African government’s support to Russia for their illegal invasion of Ukraine.”The government, however, has repeatedly made clear that it will not be influenced by Western sanctions on Russia, including those on Russian oligarchs and ships.In October, it announced it would allow Russian steel magnate Alexey Mordashov to sail his US$500-million superyacht into Cape Town’s harbour, even though Mr. Mordashov is under sanctions imposed by the United States, Britain and the European Union. The 142-metre yacht was reportedly heading for Cape Town at the time, although it later changed course.Last month, Pretoria allowed a Russian cargo ship, the Lady R, to dock at a naval base near Cape Town and unload a shipment of goods – reportedly ammunition for the South African military – even though the vessel was under U.S. sanctions for its role in supplying the Russian military after the invasion of Ukraine.The U.S. embassy had alerted South Africa to the likely arrival of the sanctioned vessel but received no response. The ship docked at the naval base late at night on Dec. 6, with its automatic identification system switched off, reportedly citing an emergency situation. Within 48 hours it had unloaded its cargo onto heavily guarded South African trucks under the cover of darkness. The ship also loaded new cargo before leaving the naval base, according to media reports, but the contents of the containers are unknown.For the next two weeks, the government refused to answer questions about the Russian ship. Critics said the episode was suspicious. “If this was all above board and the SA government is happy to defend it, why the secrecy and lies?” asked Darren Olivier, a South African defence analyst, in a tweet last month.Defence Minister Thandi Modise, talking to journalists later, complained that the United States “threatens” Africa for “anything that is even smelling of Russia.”In addition to hosting the Russian warships, South Africa will also welcome a high-level Russian delegation in August at the annual BRICS summit – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. President Vladimir Putin will be invited, although he rarely travels outside his homeland these days.South Africa holds the presidency of the BRICS group this year, a post it will use to expand its relations with Russia and other member states. President Cyril Ramaphosa said he will invite other African leaders to attend the summit.In July, many of Africa’s top leaders will travel to Russia’s second city, St. Petersburg, for a Russia-Africa summit – the first since 2019. It will be another opportunity for Mr. Putin to cultivate his connections with the continent’s presidents and prime ministers.Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, meanwhile, is planning to visit eight African countries over the next two months to boost relations and prepare for the Africa-Russia summit.Moscow is also expanding its network of “Russia Houses” across Africa. The Russian language and culture centres were opened last year in Sudan, Mali, Egypt and Algeria, with Angola expected to be next. Russia recently announced that it is doubling the number of spaces in Russian universities for African students.The connections go beyond diplomacy and military exercises. On the ground, in African countries such as Mali and the Central African Republic, Russian mercenaries from the Kremlin-linked Wagner Group are taking an increasingly dominant role in fighting rebels and boosting the firepower of national armies. And there are reports that the Wagner Group may be close to securing a new client: the military regime in Burkina Faso, which took power in a coup last year.In October, a senior U.S. diplomat said the newly installed military junta had assured her that it had no intention of recruiting the Wagner Group. But in recent weeks there have been signs that the regime will abandon that pledge.Ghana’s President, Nana Akufo-Addo, alleged last month that Burkina Faso’s regime had reached an agreement with the Wagner Group to deploy its troops in the country. Burkina Faso denied this, but many analysts say an agreement is likely.Burkina Faso’s Prime Minister, Apollinaire Joachim Kyelem de Tambela, visited Moscow last month and, according to Russia, agreed that the two countries should “consolidate” their efforts against terrorism. His delegation included several senior military officers.Shortly after that, the junta asked France – which has sharply criticized the Wagner Group – to withdraw its ambassador from Burkina Faso. | Africa politics |
SENIOR SNP politicians have set out an alternative path to independence for debate at the party’s conference which includes withdrawing MPs from Westminster if a mandate is won but the UK Government refuses to take part in negotiations.
The provisional agenda for the meeting, which will take place in Aberdeen in October, includes a motion which states that a mandate for Scotland to become independent “with immediate effect” will be secured if the SNP and other pro-independence parties secure 50% plus one of votes in a national election.
But if the UK Government does not “meaningfully engage” with the Scottish Government over negotiations within 90 days, it says MPs will be withdrawn from Westminster and a National Assembly will take forward the establishment of Scotland as an independent nation.
However, if enough votes are not secured, it also proposes that opinions on Scottish independence will be “sought at the next national election”.
The plan has been backed by MPs including Douglas Chapman, Peter Wishart (below) and Joanna Cherry along with MSPs Colin Beattie and James Dornan.
It was also backed by the Almond and Earn, Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath branches.
The strategy set out by First Minister Humza Yousaf at a special conference in June this year suggested negotiations for independence would take place if the SNP won the most seats, rather than votes, in Scotland at the next general election.
Writing in the introduction to the draft agenda, Yousaf said he “fully intended” for his proposition to be debated at conference.
But he said had not yet put forward a motion on the issue as he was waiting to hear feedback from members on the idea.
He wrote: “I have also made it clear that we all need to reflect and respect the views of members which are being gathered by means of regional assemblies happening right across the country.
“I will therefore wait until those events have concluded before submitting a resolution for conference in my name so that feedback from all of these events, plus dialogue with members and branches and input from resolutions already submitted on the topic of independence, can inform the resolution I bring forward.”
Speaking at the regional assembly in Dumfries on yesterday, Yousaf said he was “not set” on what his motion would be.
He told the Sunday National: “If I was, I would have just submitted the motion and the whole purpose was to listen to the regional assemblies.
“I’ve been to a couple and no doubt will get feedback from every single one of them that is still to go.
“It will absolutely feed into the thoughts that I’ve got here today, and this was the same when I was in mid-Scotland and Fife, that actually in terms of the strategy people are weighing in behind it.”
He added: “I will publish a resolution – and that can be amended and people can come up with even further suggestions if they wish.
“I was really serious about being a leader who empowers the democratic voice of our party.”
Other motions on independence strategy in the draft agenda include from Inverness city branch which suggests contesting all future parliamentary elections – whether for Holyrood or Westminster – as a de facto referendum.
It suggests a majority would be based on combined votes for the SNP and any other parties it has reached a pro-independence agreement with.
A motion submitted by the East Kilbride branch calls for the party’s manifesto to outline that the SNP securing a majority of Scottish seats in the General Election will enable the Scottish Government to draw up a withdrawal agreement with the UK Government to prepare for Scottish Independence.
SNP policy development convener Toni Giugliano said the debate on independence at conference is expected to “surpass” the discussion over an independent Scotland joining Nato which has taken place in the party and will be a defining moment for the SNP.
“For the second year running we have a grassroots-led agenda – with almost every motion coming forward from a branch or an affiliate,” he said.
He added: “The independence resolutions in the provisional agenda reflect the breadth of opinion that exists among our membership.
“It will then be up to delegates to choose which of these will progress and of course all resolutions will be subject to amendments.” | United Kingdom Politics |
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles! Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has called a Russian airstrike on a shopping mall that left at least 18 dead "one of the most daring terrorist attacks in European history." Rescuers were still searching for survivors Tuesday amongst the rubble in the city of Kremenchuk, where the building – which Zelenskyy said had "more than a thousand civilians" inside – was hit Monday afternoon. In his nightly address, the Ukraininan president said that Russian forces intentionally targeted the shopping center in "one of the most daring terrorist attacks in European history," and denounced Russia as "the largest terrorist organization in the world." Casualty figures continue to rise as rescuers sift through the smoldering debris. Regional Governor Dmytro Lunin said at least 18 people were killed, and 59 others sought medical assistance. The region declared a day of mourning Tuesday for the victims of the attack. NATO SUMMIT WILL TEST BIDEN’S RESOLVE TO DEFEAT PUTIN AND PRESSURE ERDOGAN Ukrainian State Emergency Service firefighters work to take away debris at a shopping center burned after a rocket attack in Kremenchuk, Ukraine, on Tuesday, June 28. "We are working to dismantle the construction so that it is possible to get machinery in there since the metal elements are very heavy and big, and disassembling them by hand is impossible," emergency services official Volodymyr Hychkan said. Ukraine’s Prosecutor General, Iryna Venediktova — who is leading investigations into possible war crimes — said the missile attack was one of Russia’s "crimes against humanity," and noted that the Russian military has been "systematically shelling civilian infrastructure with the aim to scare people, to kill people, to bring terror to our cities and villages." Ukrainian State Emergency Service firefighters are seen on Tuesday, June 28, working in the rubble of the mall. Venediktova emphasized the need for Ukrainians across the entire country to remain alert, adding that they should expect a similar strike "every minute." At Ukraine’s request, the U.N. Security Council scheduled an emergency meeting in New York on Tuesday to discuss the attack. Russian airstrikes hit a shopping mall in Kremenchuk on Monday, according to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. (Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy Telegram)G7 leaders also condemned the violence, and issued a joint statement calling the airstrike "abominable" and noting that "indiscriminate attacks on innocent civilians constitute a war crime." CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP "Russian President Putin and those responsible will be held to account," the statement added. Russia’s Defense Ministry, meanwhile, has claimed its forces launched missiles at a storage depot for Western weapons in Kremenchuk and stated that the ensuing detonation of ammunition there sparked the massive fire and destruction at the mall, Reuters has reported, citing state media. The Associated Press contributed to this report. | Europe Politics |
The shadow foreign secretary, David Lammy, has proposed regular meetings between UK and European Union ministers, as part of a major reset of British foreign policy under a Labour government.
Lammy, who was attending a gathering of centre-left leaders in Montreal, Canada, with the Labour leader Keir Starmer, told the Observer it was high time the UK took up its place again, after Brexit, as a lead player in world affairs. “A UK that is isolated and missing is felt across the world. It is definitely the case that the international community want Britain back,” he said.
“There have always been two visions of Britain. Great Britain, outward looking, internationalist, connected. And Little England, which is unfortunately what is being pursued by Rishi Sunak.”
Last night, as Starmer used a speech at the meeting hosted by the Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau to say Labour would rebuild “the smouldering cinders of the bridges the Tories have burnt” in relations with other countries, Lammy said closer links with the EU were the number one goal.
“We think it is bizarre that the UK does not currently under this government have structured dialogue with the European Union in a constructive way. We want to approach the review of our trade arrangements in a very constructive manner, and we want to build on the partnership that we have seen on Ukraine. That is why we are proposing a new [UK/EU] security pact.”
Lammy stressed that a Labour government would not attempt to take Britain back into the EU single market or customs union but added that “we do think there is a lot we can do in rebuilding our relationships if we are in power. We don’t currently meet with the European Union to discuss mutual issues of concern, whether on a biannual basis or on a quarterly basis. At the moment there is nothing. It is all ad hoc. We have got to get back to structured dialogue. What it means [without it] is that we are not in the room.”
The EU currently has regular bilateral summits with other countries, including the US, China, Canada, Australia and Japan. It is understood that initial talks about creating regular UK/EU meetings have taken place, with Brussels reacting positively.
The comments by both Starmer and Lammy reflect a greater confidence at the top of the party to talk about relations between the UK and the EU than has been the case under Starmer’s leadership to date. Until now, there has been a fear that pro-Brexit Labour voters and the right-wing media would accuse Starmer of wanting to overturn the result of the 2016 referendum.
The shift of gear by Starmer and raising of his profile on the international stage has echoes of the efforts made by New Labour before it came to power in 1997 to court both Washington and the EU, as it sought to act as bridge between them. Tony Blair famously courted the Democrats, and in April 1996, more than a year before his first general election victory, was invited by President Bill Clinton to take part in a joint press conference at the White House.
Lammy and the shadow chancellor, Rachel Reeves, will join Starmer on Tuesday on a visit to Paris where the Labour leader will hold talks with Emmanuel Macron, including about his plans to tackle the problem of small boats crossing the channel.
Starmer indicated last week during a visit to Europol in The Hague that he could strike a deal with Brussels that would involve taking a quota of asylum seekers who arrive in the EU in exchange for the ability to return people who cross the Channel.
Then Lammy will travel to Washington with the shadow defence secretary, John Healey, later next week for meetings with US Democrat and Republican politicians and officials. Lammy said they would be stressing the UK’s solidarity with Ukraine amid signs of waning public support in the US for the war against Russia.
Lammy said it was “unbelievable” that Sunak had decided to become the first British prime minister in a decade not to attend the UN general assembly in New York this week. The shadow international development secretary, Lisa Nandy, will be representing the Labour party.
In his speech in Montreal last night, Starmer challenged Sunak to face down those Conservative MPs who want Britain to pull out of the European convention on human rights, saying Sunak’s “equivocation” was damaging Britain’s global influence and preventing the country from leading on the world stage.
“Their drum beat of threats to pull out of the ECHR is nothing more than a desperate attempt by a failing government to whip up division in order to cling to power, with the consequences for Britain’s security and prosperity an afterthought,” he said.
Lammy said Sunak had been isolated at the G20 last weekend when the United States, the EU and India joined in signing an agreement on an India-Middle East economic corridor at the G20, with the UK prime minister not present. | United Kingdom Politics |
The president of the New Development Bank (NDB) of BRICS, former Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff, has announced that Argentina will be accepted as a member in the coming months, a move that could open the door to fresh financial backing.
Rousseff informed Economy Minister Sergio Massa on Thursday that Argentina will become part of the NDB once a plenary BRICS meeting in August approves its entry. Brazil will make the proposal but it already has the approval of the institution’s board of directors.
The surprise announcement opens up a new window of opportunity enabling the country to obtain direct financing to sort out the problems of the Central Bank’s foreign currency restrictions. It arrived during Massa’s much-anticipated visit to China, on which he is seeking financial support.
"Sergio, I have good news for you, I’ve found the way out. The board of directors agrees with Argentina joining the bank. It will be announced at the August assembly in South Africa,” Rousseff said as she greeted Massa at the NBD’s headquarters in Pudon, the high-rise business district of Shanghai which is considered to be the financial capital of China.
The board of directors will also include the incorporation of Egypt, Zimbabwe and Saudi Arabia into the multilateral financial institution, sources close to Massa revealed.
The entrance fee will be a capital injection of US$1 billion between the four nations or US$250 million each. Argentina will reportedly pay its share with sovereign bonds now in the hands of the Sustainability Guarantee Fund of the ANSES social security administration, the Treasury and the Central Bank. The Economy Ministry assures that these dollar bonds total some US$40 billion.
The NDB has a loan capacity of US$50 billion, which will shortly be doubled to US$100 million. That technical availability will enable Massa to have financial bridging with Brazil to finance foreign trade between both countries and thus deflate the demand for dollars from the import of goods and inputs from Argentina’s leading trade partner.
According to Rousseff’s analysis, this alternative is the most efficient way of providing the financial aid agreed between Presidents Alberto Fernández and Luiz Inácio Lula Da Silva.
The BRICS group of emerging economies is made up of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.
Massa in China
The announcement emerged from a meeting in which Roussef received Massa, Central Bank governor Miguel Pesce and deputy Máximo Kirchner. This meeting was Massa’s last activity in Shanghai before heading to Beijing for talks with Chinese government authorities.
In the Chinese capital, Argentina’s economy minister will be negotiating the renewal of currency swaps to the tune of US$18 billion of which US$5 billion to US$8 billion may be used to intervene on money markets.
Facing inflation over 100 percent, Argentina’s central bank has no liquid cash reserves left, according to local economists’ estimates.
Massa arrived in Shanghai on May 30 and travelled to Beijing on Friday, June 2. The economy minister was due to meet with Yi Gang, governor of the People’s Bank of China, to discuss a “renewal and expansion” of Argentina’s existing currency swap line with the Asian giant worth 130 billion yuan (US$18.4 billion) swap line. Although the money sits in Argentina’s central bank reserves, only a portion, about US$5 billion, is actually allowed to be used as of now to pay for imports or pay down debts. The government is seeking access to a greater portion of the swap.
Talks with China come as Massa is also renegotiating Argentina’s US$44-billion programme with the International Monetary Fund, aiming to get more cash up front from the Washington lender after a record drought exacerbated the country’s economic crisis.
As for the BRICS bank, the financing for Argentina will come from an expansion of capital supplied by Brazil, local outlets reported. The bank has already authorised similar operations between South Africa and several African countries as well as to India to thus help Bangladesh.
The alternative of Brazil expanding its capital arises from the bank’s statutes not contemplating the authorisation of credits to confront crises in the reserves of countries who are not members, which will now be solved by this announcement of the incorporation of Argentina into the bank.
– TIMES/NA/BLOOMBERG | Global Organizations |
Rwanda hits back at British left-wingers 'insulting' criticism of plan to fly asylum seekers to the country - and posts clip of US talk show host Trevor Noah mocking 'narrative that living in Africa is a punishment'Government spokesperson said criticism of Rwanda's asylum plan was 'insulting'Called on people to 'come and see' Rwanda's progress before passing judgementShe tweeted the comments with a clip of comedian Trevor Noah criticising planHe warned people not to judge Rwanda by standards from movie 'Hotel Rwanda' Published: 05:29 EDT, 17 June 2022 | Updated: 05:33 EDT, 17 June 2022 Rwanda has hit back at British left-wingers 'insulting' criticism of a plan to fly asylum seekers to the country. Government spokesperson Yolande Makolo warned people should 'come and see' the progress Rwanda has made before passing judgement on the asylum plan. She tweeted: 'The narrative that living in Africa is a punishment is insulting for those who live here and are working hard to build our countries. 'We want Africa to succeed. Rwanda has made tremendous progress. People should come and see.'Makolo made the comments alongside a clip of South African comedian Trevor Noah criticising the backlash to the asylum plan. Government spokesperson Yolande Makolo warned people should 'come and see' the progress Rwanda has made before passing judgement on the asylum plan Makolo made the comments alongside a clip of South African comedian Trevor Noah criticising the backlash to the asylum plan A security guard stands in the reception area of the Hope Hostel, which is one of the locations expected to house some of the asylum-seekers due to be sent from Britain to RwandaAsante @Trevornoah - when real Africans say real things! The narrative that living in Africa is a punishment is insulting for those who live here & are working hard to build our countries. We want Africa to succeed. Rwanda has made tremendous progress. People should come & see. pic.twitter.com/oRNN8Plwfu— Yolande Makolo 🇷🇼 (@YolandeMakolo) June 16, 2022 Noah said: 'I know some parts of Africa have it tough, but we've also have cities, we've have Wifi, you know, we've also got racist white people. You guys left them behind! Acting like we don't got sh*t. 'Some of these Europeans think the only hotel in Rwanda is the Hotel Rwanda. Actually, they've got a Radisson, a Radisson Blu, by the way. There's a waffle bar and everything.'This is the problem. This is the problem when only one well known movie takes place in your country. It's all the people go on. It's like judging France based on Ratatouille. Not all the restaurants are run by rats! 'Because here Rwanda was trying to do something nice. And then, now they have to hear everyone talk sh*t about them? 'Imagine if you offered to donate a kidney to someone and then the person was like "Uh, no thank you, I'm going to see if there's a more developed kidney." I'd be like "Man, go pee blood then, b*tch".' It comes after the first flight that was scheduled to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda from the UK was cancelled late on Tuesday after the European Court of Human Rights intervened, saying the plan carried 'a real risk of irreversible harm.'The decision to scrap the flight capped three days of frantic court challenges from immigrant rights lawyers who launched a flurry of case-by-case appeals seeking to block the deportation of everyone on the government's list.British government officials had said earlier in the day that the plane would take off no matter how many people were on board. But after the appeals, no one remained. British media reported that the number of potential deportees had been more than 30 on Friday.After the flight was canceled, Home Secretary Priti Patel said she was disappointed but would not be 'deterred from doing the right thing.' She added: 'Our legal team are reviewing every decision made on this flight and preparation for the next flight begins now.'Prime Minister Boris Johnson had emphatically defended Britain's plan, arguing that it is a legitimate way to protect lives and thwart the criminal gangs that smuggle migrants across the English Channel in small boats. Britain in recent years has seen an illegal influx of migrants from such places as Syria, Afghanistan, Iran, Sudan, Iraq and Yemen. Johnson announced an agreement with Rwanda in April in which people who enter Britain illegally will be deported to the East African country. In exchange for accepting them, Rwanda will receive millions of pounds in development aid. The deportees will be allowed to apply for asylum in Rwanda, not Britain. A convoy believed to be carrying asylum seekers leaves MOD Boscombe Down after a private charter jet was grounded just before it was due for take-off to Rwanda tonight Crew members board the Rwanda deportation flight Boeing 767 at Boscombe Down Air Base. Legal wrangling continued throughout Tuesday evening before the first flight due to take UK asylum seekers to Kigali was dramatically grounded A tracker for the Rwanda deportation flight shows the aircraft's journey after it departed the UK without carrying any of the seven asylum seekers who were due to board Home Secretary Priti Patel issued a strongly-worded rebuttal of the Strasbourg judge's ruling, saying she was disappointed the flight to Rwanda was not able to leave but would not be 'deterred from doing the right thing' 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 RwandaOpponents have argued that it is illegal and inhumane to send people thousands of miles to a country they don't want to live in. The leaders of the Church of England joined the opposition, calling the government's policy 'immoral.' Prince Charles was among those opposed, according to British news reports.Activists have denounced the policy as an attack on the rights of refugees that most countries have recognized since the end of World War II.The UN refugee agency condemned the plan out of concern that other countries will follow suit as war, repression and natural disasters force a growing number of people from their homes.Politicians in Denmark and Austria are considering similar proposals. Australia has operated an asylum-processing center in the Pacific island nation of Nauru since 2012. Advertisement | Africa politics |
NEW YORK (AP) — Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov defended Moscow’s war in Ukraine at the U.N. General Assembly in New York on Saturday.
Watch Lavrov’s remarks in the player above.
The tide of international opinion appears to be decisively shifting against Russia, as a number of non-aligned countries are joining the United States and its allies in condemning Moscow’s war in Ukraine and its threats to the principles of the international rules-based order.
Western officials have repeatedly said that Russia has become isolated since invading Ukraine in February. Until recently, though, that was largely wishful thinking. But on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, much of the international community spoke out against the conflict in a rare display of unity at the often fractured United Nations.
The tide had already appeared to be turning against Russian President Vladimir Putin even before Thursday’s U.N. speeches. Chinese and Indian leaders had been critical of the war at a high-level summit last week in Uzbekistan. And then the U.N. General Assembly disregarded Russia’s objections and voted overwhelmingly to allow Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to be the only leader to address the body remotely, instead of requiring him to appear in person.
That shift against Russia accelerated after Putin on Wednesday announced the mobilization of some additional 300,000 troops to Ukraine, signaling the unlikelihood of a quick end to the war. Putin also suggested that nuclear weapons may be an option. That followed an announcement of Russia’s intention to hold referendums in several occupied Ukrainian regions on whether they will become part of Russia.
WATCH: Russia stages sham referenda in Ukraine as U.N. says it finds new evidence of war crimes
Those announcements came at the very moment that the General Assembly, considered the premier event in the global diplomatic calendar, was taking place in New York.
Numerous world leaders used their speeches on Tuesday and Wednesday to denounce Russia’s war. That trend continued Thursday both in the assembly hall and at the usually deeply divided U.N. Security Council, where, one-by-one, virtually all of the 15 council members served up harsh criticism of Russia – a council member — for aggravating several already severe global crises and imperiling the foundations of the world body.
The apparent shift in opinion offers some hope to Ukraine and its Western allies that increasing isolation will add pressure on Putin to negotiate a peace. But few are unduly optimistic. Putin has staked his legacy on the Ukraine war and few expect him to back down. And, Russia is hardly isolated. Many of its allies depend on it for energy, food and military assistance and are likely to stand by Putin regardless of what happens in Ukraine.
Still, it was striking to hear Russia’s nominal friends like China and India, following up on last week’s remarks, speak of grave concerns they have about the conflict and its impact on global food and energy shortages as well as threats to the concepts of sovereignty and territorial integrity that are enshrined in the U.N. Charter.
Brazil registered similar concerns. Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa make up the so-called BRICS bloc of countries, which has often shunned or outright opposed Western initiatives and views on international relations.
Only one country, Belarus, a non-council member and Russia ally that was invited to participate, spoke in support of Russia, but also called for a quick end to the fighting, which it called a “tragedy.”
“We hear a lot about the divisions among countries at the United Nations,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken said. “But recently, what’s striking is the remarkable unity among member states when it comes to Russia’s war on Ukraine. Leaders from countries developing and developed, big and small, North and South have spoken in the General Assembly about the consequences of the war and the need to end it.”
“Even a number of nations that maintain close ties with Moscow have said publicly that they have serious questions and concerns about President Putin’s ongoing invasion,” Blinken said. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi was careful not to condemn the war but said that China’s firm stance is that “the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries should be respected. The purposes of the principles of the U.N. Charter should be observed.”
Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar said “the trajectory of the Ukraine conflict is a matter of a profound concern for the international community.” He called for accountability for atrocities and abuses committed in Ukraine. “If egregious attacks committed in broad daylight are left unpunished, this council must reflect on the signals we are sending on impunity. There must be consistency if we are to ensure credibility,” he said.
And Brazilian Foreign Minister Carlos Alberto Franca said immediate efforts to end the war are critical. “The continuation of the hostilities endangers the lives of innocent civilians and jeopardizes the food and energy security of millions of families in other regions, especially in developing countries,” he said. “The risks of escalation arising for the current dynamics of the conflict are simply too great, and its consequences for the world order unpredictable.”
Foreign ministers and top officials from Albania, Britain, France, Ireland, Gabon, Germany, Ghana, Kenya, Mexico and Norway delivered similar rebukes.
“Russia’s actions are blatant violation of the Charter of the United Nations,” said Albanian Foreign Minister Olta Xhacka. “We all tried to prevent this conflict. We could not, but we must not fail to hold Russia accountable.”
Mexican Foreign Secretary Marcelo Ebrard called the invasion a “flagrant breach of international law” and Irish foreign minister Simon Coveney said: “If we fail to hold Russia accountable we send a message to large countries that they can prey on their neighbors with impunity.”
Unsurprisingly, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov was unapologetic and defensive at the same time and specifically targeted Zelenskyy. Citing a phrase often attributed to President Franklin Roosevelt, Lavrov called Zelenskyy “a bastard,” but said Western leaders regarded him as “our bastard.”
WATCH: Ukrainian President Zelenskyy addresses the 2022 United Nations General Assembly
He repeated a long list of Russia’s complaints about Ukraine and accused Western countries of using Ukraine for anti-Russia activities and policies.
“Everything I’ve said today simply confirms that the decision to conduct the special military operation was inevitable,” Lavrov said, following Russian practice of not calling the invasion a war.
Russia has denied being isolated and the foreign ministry used social media to publicize a number of apparently cordial meetings that Lavrov has held with foreign minister colleagues at the UN in recent days.
Still, Blinken and his colleagues from other NATO nations seized on what they believe to be growing opposition to and impatience with Putin.
And, several speakers, including Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba and British Foreign Secretary James Cleverly, pointed out that Lavrov skipped the meeting except for his speaking slot.
“I notice that Russian diplomats flee almost as quickly as Russian soldiers,” Kuleba said, referring to Lavrov’s hasty exit along with recent Russian troop retreats in Ukraine. | Global Organizations |
The US National Security Agency (NSA) tried to persuade its British counterpart to stop the Guardian publishing revelations about secret mass data collection from the NSA contractor, Edward Snowden, according to a new book.Sir Iain Lobban, the head of Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) was reportedly called with the request in the early hours of 6 June 2013 but rebuffed the suggestion that his agency should act as a censor on behalf of its US partner in electronic spying.The late-night call and the British refusal to shut down publication of the leaks was the first of several episodes in which the Snowden affair caused rifts within the Five Eyes signals intelligence coalition, recounted in a new book to be published on Thursday, The Secret History of Five Eyes, by film-maker and investigative journalist Richard Kerbaj.According to Kerbaj, Lobban was aware of the importance of the particularly special relationship between the US and UK intelligence agencies but thought “the proposition of urging a newspaper to spike the article for the sake of the NSA seemed a step too far”.“It was neither the purpose of his agency nor his own to deal with the NSA’s public relations,” Kerbaj writes.In October 2013, the then prime minister, David Cameron, later threatened the use of injunctions or other “tougher measures” to stop further publication of Snowden’s leaks about the mass collection of phone and internet communications by the NSA and GCHQ. However, the DA-Notice committee, the body which alerts the UK media to the potential damage a story might cause to national security, told the Guardian at the time that nothing it had published had put British lives at risk.In the new book, Kerbaj reports that the US-UK intelligence relationship was further strained when the head of the NSA, Gen Keith Alexander, failed to inform Lobban that the Americans had identified Snowden, a Hawaii-based government contractor, as the source of the stories, leaving the British agency investigating its own ranks in the search for the leaker. GCHQ did not discover Snowden’s identity until he went public in a Guardian interview.‘It was a chilling reminder of how important you are, or how important you’re not,” a senior British intelligence insider is quoted as saying in the book.The material leaked by Snowden also included secret documents from the Canadian, Australian and New Zealand signals intelligence agencies, the other Five Eyes members. They all shared information with the NSA through a shared database. Their embarrassment was heightened by revelations that they had spied on allies and partners in the G20.The Five Eyes allies were outraged that a contractor like Snowden, working as a computer systems administrator, could get access to their secrets, and that because of US government outsourcing, there were 1.5 million Americans with top security clearance like Snowden.However, when Five Eyes officials met in Australia in the summer of 2013, only the British representatives openly questioned US practices. The other allies were not prepared to challenge the Americans out of anxiety that they could be cut off from the flow of intelligence.British officials also decided to bite their tongues when it came to frustration with their US counterparts, because of the value of the intelligence and funding provided by the NSA. Sir Kim Darroch, the former UK national security adviser, is quoted in the book as saying “the US give us more than we give them so we just have to basically get on with it.”Darroch and Lobban were approached for comment. | United Kingdom Politics |
India has made history as its Moon mission becomes the first to land in the lunar south pole region.
With this, India joins an elite club of countries to achieve a soft landing on the Moon, after the US, the former Soviet Union and China.
The Vikram lander from Chandrayaan-3 successfully touched down as planned at 18:04 local time (12:34 GMT).
Celebrations have broken out across the country, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi saying "India is now on the Moon".
"We have reached where no other country could. It's a joyous occasion," he added. Mr Modi was watching the event live from South Africa where he is attending the Brics summit.
Indian Space Research Organisation (Isro) chief Sreedhara Panicker Somanath said the successful landing "is not our work alone, this is the work of a generation of Isro scientists".
Tense moments preceded the touchdown as the lander - called Vikram after Isro founder Vikram Sarabhai - began its precarious descent, carrying within its belly the 26kg rover named Pragyaan (the Sanskrit word for wisdom).
The lander's speed was gradually reduced from 1.68km per second to almost zero, enabling it to make a soft landing on the lunar surface.
In a few hours - scientists say once the dust has settled - the six-wheeled rover will crawl out of the lander's belly and roam around the rocks and craters on the Moon's surface, gathering crucial data and images to be sent to Earth. | India Politics |
The Scoop
JOHANNESBURG â South Africa is considering hosting the headline meeting of leaders from BRICS nations entirely online to avoid Russian President Vladimir Putin participating in person, people familiar with the matter told Semafor Africa.
The International Criminal Court issued a warrant for Putin's arrest in March for alleged war crimes in Ukraine which South Africa, as a member of the ICC, is officially obliged to enforce. Itâs hosting the 2023 annual summit of the BRICS nations â Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa â in late August, to which Putin is invited. But Pretoria would rather he not show up, to prevent a diplomatic headache.
The virtual summit approach has been discussed by a committee of ministers appointed by President Cyril Ramaphosa to resolve issues connected with Putinâs arrest warrant, three people with direct knowledge of the proposal â a senior civil servant and two business leaders â told Semafor Africa. Under the plan, most summit events would still take place in South Africa, such as the high profile BRICS Business Forum and the meeting of foreign ministers. The meeting of heads of state would be the only part held online.
The cabinet may make a decision on the proposal as early as this week, the people said.
South Africaâs foreign ministry did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Know More
South Africa is a signatory of the Rome Statute and a member of the ICC. That means the country would be theoretically obligated to arrest the Russian president if he entered the country.
The committee, appointed by Ramaphosa on April 28 and headed by Deputy President Paul Mashatile, includes Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana and Justice Minister Ronald Lamola. It is considering three other scenarios in addition to the virtual meeting: one in which Putin attends but it not arrested, another in which he is arrested and a third in which South Africa changes its laws to make it possible to ignore an arrest warrant that does not come through the United Nations Security Council, as is the case with Putin. However, it could take several months to change the laws.
Sam's view
An online gathering would neatly solve South Africa's Putin problem.
The government initially hoped it could dissuade Putin from attending. But if he agreed, it might convey weakness, undermining his carefully crafted image as a strong leader. South Africa also granted immunity to all the BRICS heads of state last month, but the government stated this was a technical procedure that did not guarantee Putin protection from arrest.
Still, South Africa would have to persuade its BRICS partners that an event with an online element is the best way to host a successful annual gathering.
Pretoria is mindful of alienating its partners in BRICS, as it tiptoes around various national interests. A no-show from Putin could spook other BRICS leaders, who may then opt to stay away. Beijing has apparently indicated to Pretoria that President Xi Jinping would not physically attend a summit if Putin was not physically present. Delhi has similar concerns, two of the people familiar with the matter said. In informal discussions between South African diplomats and their BRICS counterparts, it emerged that China did not like the idea of a virtual leadersâ meeting or a situation where Putin stayed away and others traveled to Johannesburg, according to two of my sources.
A BRICS gathering without Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping would not command the same status. Indian diplomats have said in informal talks that the gathering would be incomplete without the two, all three of my sources told me.
The other option would be for South Africa to give up the chance to host the annual conference for which hosting rights rotate, allowing a partner like China to host it â but Pretoria is keen to avoid losing the opportunity to organize the event. Foregoing hosting the gathering is not a popular option in South Africa as it comes with tourism, trade and deal-making opportunities on its sidelines.
Brazil would not be an option as an alternative host because it would likely face the same ICC problems as South Africa since it is also a signatory to the Rome Statute, unlike China and India.
Paradoxically, a virtual summit might yet serve the interests of Putin, especially if the Ukrainian summer offensive gains significant traction on the battlefield. Leaving Russia under such circumstances might not be an option.
Room for Disagreement
"A virtual meeting will not help much as South Africa's Brics partner will see it as a country with no backbone,â said David Monyae, Director of the Centre for Africa â China Studies at the University of Johannesburg. âOnly if Putin willingly did not come will South Africa manage to host a decent conference."
The View From Pretoria
Sanusha Naidu, a senior research fellow at the Institute for Global Dialogue think-tank in Pretoria, said South Africa's options are limited. "It cannot deviate from its obligation to arrest Putin. Persuading Putin to stay away was South Africa's best option. It can try and convince Putin that perhaps being online is better than physical in attendance," she said.
Notable
- The war in Ukraine has turned the BRICS summit into an "alliance against the West," according to Britain's Daily Telegraph. âItâs been driven by Russia and China and specifically by the need to try and find these alternative spaces for commerce that are outside of Western norms and particularly Western sanctions,â an analyst told the paper. | Global Organizations |
Discover more from Notes from the Underground with David Aaronovitch
Nadine Dorries and the Plot Against Britain
Part One: Wide Throat
The historian of conspiracism in me was delighted when it was announced that the shady powers who really run Britain had failed to prevent the publication of former culture secretary Nadine Dorries’ new book The Plot: the Political Assassination of Boris Johnson. Naturally I was disappointed not be asked to review it by any major publication, but then I remembered that I now had my own - Notes from the Underground. And that here I could review the 334 page unindexed, un-footnoted tome in any way I chose. So I’ve opted to review it as I read it and share the suspense of discovering the plot against Britain over several posts. Starting today.
Here goes:
Nadine Dorries and The Plot Against Britain: part one - Wide Throat
The Prologue
The book’s blurb declares it to be a “seismic, fly-on-the-wall account” of how Boris Johnson went from hero to zero in just three years (though how many flies stay on the wall during a seismic event is more than just a pedantic question, as we will see).
Inside however, in her Foreword and in her Prologue (she apparently needs both) Nadine Dorries makes a much bigger claim.
When I started to write this book, I thought that I would be telling the story of how Boris Johnson had been ousted from power. Instead, what I began to uncover were tales of a small group of men, most of them unelected and some totally unknown outside of a tight Westminster bubble, operating at the heart of the Conservative party… For 25 years or more they have set out to control the destiny of the conservative party… It is a story that has never been told. So not only is this book a shocking tale of corruption and unaccountable power, it is also a counter history of British political life in the 21st century.
A counter history, available across the counter of a good bookshop near you. And written, as Dorries reminds the reader twice in the first 14 pages, by someone “born in one of the poorest areas of Liverpool”, where she “had been raised in a house with an outside lavvie on Breck Road.” And now, here she was, friends with Jacob Rees Mogg who as a boy probably had an inside lavvie in his treehouse. Anyway, 34 pages in I wonder how many more “born in the lap of poverty” references there are going to be.
Onwards. In researching her book Dorris has “talked to well over 50 people” (ie less than 60) “from prime ministers and party leaders, through cabinet ministers, to civil servants and backbenchers. From party grandees to special advisers. All of them had the same tale to tell and yet it is a tale you're entirely unaware of. Why is that?”
Um, because there is a secret establishment plot and the media are in on it? Am I getting warm? We will see. But:
What each and everyone of us was unaware of at the time was that behind the scenes, deep in the heart of the conservative party; A plot was afoot to remove him long before the polls had closed on that joyous election night and he first placed his foot across the number 10 threshold as Prime Minister with a mandate in his own right. If a killer virus hadn't hit our shores in March 2024 months after he was elected, his time in office would have been far shorter than it was…
Shorter? Wow. They only kept him in power to lead us through the pandemic? You have my attention Nadine.
Nadine has my attention and I hope I have yours. Some posts like this one are free and you can subscribe to read them. Some are paywalled. Whichever you choose, welcome!
The Quest is initiated
Prologued and foreworded the reader is now propelled into the hunt for the truth which begins with how our heroine - initially naive and trusting - becomes aware that there are hidden, never previously divulged reasons why Boris Johnson fell from power.
The story starts in July 2022 at Boris’s (he is never Johnson to Dorries) last pre-resignation cabinet meeting. Which:
Began as always on the second that the vintage Dutton wooden clock on the mantelpiece reached 9:30, watched over by the portrait of Walpole above.
You could almost be there, drinking the bad coffee and eating the soggy bacon sandwiches (Dorries - scarred by early poverty - constantly complains about whatever she is given to eat or drink. The champagne, for example, is always too warm). Nadine looks round the table at her colleagues: poor inadequate about-to-resign Sajid Javid, funny Scottish secretary Allister Jack, witty Jacob Rees Mogg and - bad sign this - shifty, note-taking Michael Gove and shifty non-note taking Rishi Sunak.
Shortly afterwards Boris resigns and the leadership campaign to replace him ends with the election of Liz Truss. Dorries finds herself in a classic heroic quandary. Should she continue selflessly to serve her country as a cabinet minister - a role that as someone who used to have to pee out-of-doors, she values more than most? Or should she use her other formidable talents to tell the story of the Boris years and of his downfall and how very unfair it all is? And it is just as she is considering this question her phone pings with a message from a veteran “aide” in No 10:
“You're a writer, you should write the truth about this.”
A timely intervention. And who in any thriller could resist such a challenge? So Nadine texts this aide and asks to meet her. The tryst is set. Tonight. At 7.30. At the Two Chairmen pub, a megaphone shout away from the Houses of Parliament and therefore about as discreet a place for a covert meet as the centre circle at Wembley. Sure enough the outside pavement is packed with special advisors (“spads”), MPs’ researchers and journalists. So Nadine walks briskly inside the pub where it is largely empty. Noone is around Wtf? But then that phone pings again:
A notification dropped on to the home screen. “Keep on walking to the back, bottom right.”
At a table in the corner sits the mystery woman.
She looked immaculate. Manicured, fresh French polish on her nails, her skin tanned. “Have you been away?” I asked her. She folded her arms onto the table and leant forward. “Yeah, South of France, but I kept connecting to the shit show back here while I was away, I had to… Champers? It might be warm by now and it's not the best here.”
Nadine confirms that it really isn’t.
She looked over my shoulder. “No ones looking now. You know what used to happen when Dominic Cummings arranged to meet the journalist Simon Walters, formerly at the Daily Mail?” I frowned. “No, why would I and why would he be doing that? Cummings had nothing to do with the media, did he?”
Ah, Dominic Cummings! And the-journalist-Simon-Walters-formerly-at-the-Daily-Mail? Doing what everyone in the entire media and political world apart from Nadine Dorries knew they were doing? The mystery woman continues with advice to help Dorries on her quest:
“You need to speak to people. Most of this stuff no one talks about- and if I were you, I'd make sure you meet with Iain Duncan Smith. I think he would be a good place to begin. Iain will give you context and help you identify their pattern of behaviour. It's almost a rulebook they operate now. They repeat the same act of treachery over and over.”
But who are “they”? Wide Throat turns gnomic.
“I can't be the one to tell you that. You just need to start following the threads, start with Cummings, he'll lead you to the rest, I promise.”
As indirect as Wide Throat is about identities she is hot on prophecy.
She looked up at me, her eyes earnest. “There are people who have a great deal to hide. And I can also tell you this: they won't be happy with Liz. They will panic her, they will get her out, she will make wrong moves, they will get Rishi in, and they won't be happy with him either…”
But now Wide Throat has to go. She has a meeting she just can’t miss (though it must be after 8pm by now), but before leaving she has two parting thoughts. The first is to impress upon Dorries the historical and patriotic necessity of her uncovering the Great Plot to serially replace Conservative leaders; something the Plotters are doing for some purpose we have yet to learn. The second is to suggest to Dorries that from now on she use code names derived from James Bond books, when talking to and about both her sources and the nefarious plotters. Wide Throat wishes to be known as “diver girl”.
Dorries sits and stares at the champagne glasses and makes up her mind. She WILL go boldly where no-one has gone before.
They would call me mad, say the book was a work of fiction, a conspiracy.
But:
I texted “I'll do it diver girl, after all you only live twice.
And we’re off.
The rest is Quest
So now you want to know what I make of the story so far? And the obvious question is whether Wide Throat exists at all. As a plot device she is both obvious and ubiquitous. A MacGuffin, she is Gandalf arriving at Bag End to send a reluctant hobbit on a dangerous but world-saving adventure and then pissing off. She is also used as an exposition-agent. It is entirely incredible that the real Dorries is unaware that Dominic Cummings was briefing journalists while at No 10. Even I knew that. But the reader needs to be told this and to understand that such briefing was illicit. So journeying Dorries needs to have it (and the journalist formerly known as Simon Walters) explained to her and be surprised by the information.
Wide Throat is a motivator, but only gives sufficient information to start the intrepid Liverpudlian on her perilous journey. She apparently knows it all but is only prepared to divulge a little. The rest is Quest.
And her advice about code names could be very useful, especially when it comes to having the book - which claims to be factual - legalled. One chapter in and I’m presuming that the Plot will be uncovered and the Plotters unmasked. But can they actually be identified without Dorries and Harper Collins (acquired by Rupert Murdoch in 1987) being liable to legal action? Possibly not. But if they are safely monikered with James Bond names and sufficiently disguised as not to be subject to “jigsaw identification” then the problem - at least from the publishers’ perspective - will be solved.
In short, with her tanned skin and French polished nails, Wide Throat is simply a recognisable plot device. She is an invented Dorries alter ego, created for story purposes. If that’s right (and I’be bet a years earnings it is) there was no woman, no meeting, no receiving of texts, no motivating exchange. Which means we are in the land of faction, in both senses. But a faction that could tell us a lot about how we have been governed these last 14 years.
Coming soon
In part 2 of Nadine Dorries and the Plot Against Britain we meet noble Boris, evil Dominic and Michaeliavelli.
See you then. But like Nadine Dorries, I do not work for free and the next instalment will be paywalled. | United Kingdom Politics |
BRICS Expansion Wins Backing From South Africa’s Ramaphosa
South African President Cyril Ramaphosa expressed support for an expansion of the BRICS group of emerging market powers, which will gather for its annual summit in Johannesburg this week.
(Bloomberg) -- South African President Cyril Ramaphosa expressed support for an expansion of the BRICS group of emerging market powers, which will gather for its annual summit in Johannesburg this week.
“An expanded BRICS will represent a diverse group of nations which share a common desire to have a more balanced world order,” Ramaphosa said in a televised address to the nation on Sunday. The summit will be attended by United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and more than 30 African heads of state, as well as others from the Global South.
The leaders of BRICS — Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa — are due to hold three days of talks starting Aug. 22, with a possible expansion high on the agenda. More than 20 nations have formally applied to join, Ramaphosa said.
Chinese President Xi Jinping, in an op-ed published in several South African media outlets on Monday, said his country and South Africa, as “natural members” of the Global South, should push for developing countries to have more sway in international affairs. India, however, wants the process to be gradual, and is concerned the group would become a mouthpiece for China — with which the country is opposed on a number of major issues.
Read More: The Emerging Market Bloc That Wants to Shake Up the World Order
“We will urge the international community to refocus on development issues, promote a greater role by the BRICS cooperation mechanism in global governance, and make the voice of BRICS stronger,” Xi said.
Formed officially in 2009-10, BRICS has struggled to have the kind of geopolitical influence that matches its collective economic reach. The bloc’s current members represent more than 42% of the world’s population and account for 23% of global gross domestic product and 18% of trade.
Read More: How BRICS Became a Club That Others Want to Join: QuickTake
Ramaphosa reiterated that South Africa’s foreign policy will be driven by its national interest and that it favors a negotiated settlement to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and other conflicts.
“While some of our detractors prefer overt support for their political and ideological choices, we will not be drawn into a contest between global powers,” he said. “Our country strives to work with all countries for global peace and development.”
Other speech highlights:
- The BRICS summit will be preceded by a state visit to South Africa by Chinese Premier Xi Jinping, during which several agreements will be signed.
- South Africa wants to build a partnership between BRICS and Africa to to bolster trade and investment.
- A European Union-South Africa summit will be held in South Africa later this year.
- South Africa will assume the presidency of the Group of 20 nations in 2025.
- South Africa has invited more than 30 African trade ministers and senior US administration and congressional representatives to the the African Growth and Opportunity Act forum scheduled for November
--With assistance from Arijit Ghosh.
(Updates with other highlights from speech in bullet points)
More stories like this are available on bloomberg.com
©2023 Bloomberg L.P. | Global Organizations |
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov walks after a bilateral meeting at the G20 Foreign Ministers' Meeting in Nusa Dua, Bali, Indonesia, July 8, 2022. REUTERS/Willy Kurniawan/Pool
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comLONDON, July 20 (Reuters) - Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Wednesday that the geographical objectives of Moscow's "special military operation" in Ukraine are no longer limited to the eastern Donbas region but include a number of other territories, Russian state news agency RIA Novosti reported.Lavrov added that Russia's objectives will expand still further if the West delivers long-range weapons to Kyiv, the agency said.When Russia invaded Ukraine on Feb. 24, President Vladimir Putin denied any intention of occupying Ukrainian territories, saying his aim was to demilitarise and "denazify" the country - a statement dismissed by Kyiv and the West as a pretext for an imperial-style war of expansion.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comAfter being beaten back in an initial attempt to take the capital Kyiv, Russia's defence ministry said on March 25 that the first phase of the special operation was complete and it would now focus on "achieving the main goal, the liberation of Donbas".Nearly four months later, it has taken Luhansk, one of two regions that make up the Donbas, but remains far from capturing all of the other, Donetsk.However, its forces have already seized territory way beyond Donbas, especially in the southern Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions, and continue to launch missile strikes on cities across Ukraine.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by ReutersOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Europe Politics |
Scores of children have been killed in Myanmar since last year’s coup, not just in the crossfire of conflict but as deliberate targets of a military willing to inflict immense suffering, a United Nations expert said on Tuesday.Minors had been beaten and stabbed and had fingernails or teeth removed during interrogation, while some were made to endure mock executions, according to a report from UN special rapporteur on human rights in Myanmar, Tom Andrews.The junta has repeatedly scolded the UN and western countries for interference and rejected allegations it is carrying out atrocities. A military spokesman could not be reached for comment on Tuesday.Based on contributions from UN agencies, humanitarian and human rights groups and civil society organisations, the report said 250,000 children were displaced by fighting, and at the least 382 killed or maimed, including by air strikes or heavy artillery.“The junta’s relentless attacks on children underscore the generals’ depravity and willingness to inflict immense suffering on innocent victims in its attempt to subjugate the people,” Andrews said in a statement.“The junta’s attacks on children constitute crimes against humanity and war crimes.”Myanmar has been in turmoil since the military seized power early last year and launched a fierce crackdown on its opponents, prompting a backlash by newly formed resistance groups.The UN had received information of 142 children being tortured by soldiers, police and pro-army militias, the report by Andrews said, while there were anecdotal reports of an increase in child labour recruitment, including by anti-junta fighters.Andrews said the world should take coordinated action to isolate the junta financially and commit to a “dramatic increase” in humanitarian assistance.He said UN members “must respond to the crisis in Myanmar with the same urgency they have responded to the crisis in Ukraine”. | Asia Politics |
NATO to urge Turkey to allow Sweden and Finland into alliance NATO leaders will urge Turkish
President Tayyip Erdogan to lift his veto over Finland and
Sweden's bid to join the military alliance.They will meet for a
three-day summit in Madrid on Tuesday.Leaders also aim to agree on more military aid for Ukraine, increased joint defence
spending, a new resolve to tackle China's military rise
and more troops being placed on standby to defend the Baltics in case of a Russian offensive. Russia likely to rely on more volunteer reserve forces - MoD The UK Ministry of Defence has released its latest intelligence update."Over the coming weeks, Russia's campaign will highly likely increasingly rely on echelons of reserve forces," the MoD said.This includes Russia's Combat Army Reserve, which is made up part-time volunteers that are deployed as whole units typically for rear area security tasks. Another pool of reservists - the Human Mobilisation Resource - is made up of veterans who have served in the military in the last five years."Russian authorities are likely using volunteers from this category to fill out the third battalions within regular brigades," the MoD said."Despite a continued shortfall in the number of deployable reservists for Ukraine, the Russian leadership likely remains reluctant to order a general mobilisation." Johnson and Macron to hold their own summit - report Boris Johnson and Emmanuel Macron have agreed to hold an Anglo-French summit to strengthen relations after vowing to help Ukraine defeat Russia, according to The Times.At the G7 summit yesterday the British prime minister reportedly referred to it as "le bromance" and said they were "100% aligned".The pair were spotted with arms around each other drinking Bavarian whisky after formal talks ended.In talks with the French president, Mr Johnson "stressed any attempt to settle the conflict now will only cause enduring instability and give Putin licence to manipulate both sovereign countries and international markets in perpetuity".
Earlier this month, Mr Macron said it would be for Ukraine to decide the terms of any peace negotiation with Russian President Vladimir Putin.Mr Johnson was also asked whether France and Germany are doing enough over Ukraine. He praised Germans without mentioning France.
"Just look at what the Germans alone have done," he said."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's made huge, huge strides. We have 4% of our gas from Russia, in Germany it's 40%."They're facing real, real pressures, they're having to source energy from elsewhere. But they're doing it. They're making the effort. They're making the sacrifice." US to give Ukraine advanced missile defence system President Joe Biden is set to announce that the US is giving Ukraine an advanced surface-to-air missile system in its latest military aid package.The US is purchasing NASAMS, a Norwegian-developed anti-aircraft system, to provide medium- to long-range defence, according to a source familiar with the matter.The same system is used to protect the airspace around the White House and US Capitol in Washington. The purchase is expected this week. Washington is also set to announce other security
assistance for Ukraine, including additional artillery
ammunition and counter-battery radars. Russia defaults on foreign debt for first time since 1918 For the first time in over a century, Russia has defaulted on its foreign-currency sovereign debt, a culmination of Western sanctions that have shut down payment routes to overseas creditors. At the end of the day on Sunday, the grace period on about $100m of interest payment due on 27 May expired, meaning Russia defaulted on the debt. Since March, that country's Eurobonds were trading at distressed levels, with its central bank's foreign reserves frozen and its biggest bank cut from the global financial system. Moscow says that while it has the money to cover any bills, it has been forced into non-payment. A formal declaration would usually come from rating firms but sanctions have meant firms withdrew ratings on Russian entities. Russia's finance minister dismissed the situation on Thursday as a "farce", adding: “Anyone can declare whatever they like. “But anyone who understands what’s going on knows that this is in no way a default.”Anton Siluanov's comments were prompted by the grace period that ended on Sunday. The 30-day window was triggered when investors failed to receive coupon payments due on dollar and euro-denominated bonds on 27 May. With billions of dollars a week still pouring into state coffers from energy exports, despite the grinding conflict in east Ukraine, Mr Siluanov reiterated that the country has the means, and the will, to pay. Russian citizen, 7, hurt in Kyiv missile strike, says Zelenskyy Earlier, it was reported that Ukraine's capital, Kyiv, was hit by missile strikes, reportedly leaving one dead and five wounded.In his daily address, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said that the man who died was 37 and his seven-year-old daughter, Zhenya, is receiving treatment at a children's hospital in Kyiv. "Her mother was also wounded. By the way, she is a citizen of Russia. That's that. 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, apartment buildings, hospitals, railways," he said. "Missiles also hit the Mykolaiv region, the Chernihiv region, Odesa, Cherkasy. Artillery and mortar shelling did not stop in the Kharkiv region, in the Sumy region, in Donbas, in the south of our state." Mr Zelenskyy also addressed people in Belarus, saying they are "being pulled into the war". "You are not slaves or cannon fodder. You do not have to die and prevent anyone from deciding what awaits you next. I know that the people of Belarus support Ukraine," he added. "They support us, surely us and not the war. And that is why the Russian authorities want to pull you, all Belarusians, into war, it wants to sow hatred between us." Watch: Search for missile strike survivors in Kyiv Emergency crews have been searching for survivors inside a building in Ukraine's capital after it was struck by Russian missiles. The nine-storey apartment block came under attack along with the compound of a nursery. A Ukrainian air force spokesperson said between four to six long-range missiles were fired on the region from Russian bombers. G7 leaders under pressure to stand together and not buckle in face of Putin's aggression We've got to show them our pecs, the prime minister told his fellow G7 leaders after suggesting their take their clothes off."We all have to show we're tougher than Putin," Boris Johnson joked.Canadian leader Justin Trudeau agreed: "We've got to get the bare-chested horseback riding."They may have been mocking the Russian leader known for his penchant for appearing bare-chested in publicity stunts.But Vladimir Putin had sent his message earlier to the G7, sending 14 cruise missiles to hit residential buildings and other targets in the capital of Ukraine, Kyiv."More and more barbarism," said US President Joe Biden when asked about the attacks.As the war grinds into the fifth month, G7 leaders know they must project unity against that barbarism."The message is we are standing united," said the German Chancellor Olaf Scholz to Mr Biden as they met.And Mr Johnson and Emmanuel Macron were at pains to show they get on despite their differences.Two months ago the war had seemed to be moving in Ukraine's favour, possibly over by the end of the year.The war looks set to go for some considerable time to come.That means the West must gird itself for a protracted conflict and show enduring unity.You can read more of Dominic Waghorn's analysis below... Ukraine accuses Russian soldiers of breaking 70-year-old woman's spine Ukraine has accused Russian soldiers of breaking a 70-year-old woman's spine after she refused to hand over her Ukrainian passport. In a tweet, the country's foreign ministry said Russians stopped the car Tetiana Antoniuk was travelling in as she tried to leave Kherson. The key port city is currently under Russian occupation. The first medical association of Lviv wrote on Facebook that Ms Antoniuk is a retired journalist and had been volunteering in the region. "Half-conscious, with a fractured spine, 70-year-old Tatiana Antonyuk could barely climb into the car and escape from the enemy checkpoint," it said. Putin to make first foreign trips since launching Ukraine war Vladimir Putin will visit two
small former Soviet states in central Asia this week, according to Russian
state television. It will be the Russian leader's first known trip abroad since ordering the invasion of Ukraine. Pavel Zarubin, the Kremlin correspondent of the Rossiya 1
state television station, said Putin would visit Tajikistan and
Turkmenistan and then meet Indonesian President Joko Widodo for
talks in Moscow.In Dushanbe, Putin will meet Tajik President Imomali
Rakhmon, a close Russian ally and the longest-serving ruler of a
former Soviet state.In Ashgabat, he will attend a summit of
Caspian nations including the leaders of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan,
Iran and Turkmenistan, Mr Zarubin said. Putin also plans to visit the Belarus city of Grodno to take part in a forum with Belarusian President
Alexander Lukashenko, RIA news agency reported. Putin's last known trip outside Russia was a visit to Beijing in early February. During the visit, he and Chinese President Xi
Jinping unveiled a "no limits" friendship treaty hours before
both attended the opening ceremony of the Olympic Winter Games. | Europe Politics |
Independence could bring "considerable" economic and business benefits to Scotland if it rejoined the EU as a top priority, Angus Robertson has said.
A majority of Scots backed the UK staying in Europe at the 2016 Brexit referendum and the SNP has campaigned to rejoin since.
Robertson, the Constitution Secretary, claimed today independence could mean Scotland would "not just be regaining what we lost through Brexit" but also gaining "direct representation at the top table of European decision-making".
The SNP minister said this would mean Scotland could seek to influence EU regulations and standards "in ways that reflect the interests of Scottish businesses"
Robertson made the claim in an article for The Scotsman in which he sought to highlight the “economic and business benefits” of being part of the EU rather than the UK.
It comes as the Scottish Government prepares to launch its later paper on independence tomorrow.
Robertson insisted leaving the UK and joining the EU would give businesses in Scotland “open access to the world’s largest single market, which now accounts for almost 450 million consumers and 16.2% of global trade”.
He said: “The EU single market is seven times the size of the UK, so EU membership would mean companies here could trade freely with more businesses and sell to more customers.”
Being part of the EU would also provide “more and better opportunities for training and employment for people in Scotland”, he claimed.
Robertson said: “Put simply, rejoining the EU would provide opportunities for our economy to grow.
“It would mean quicker and cheaper trading, with no tariffs or duties for goods, and significantly lower levels of non-tariff barriers in comparison to the current EU trade deal negotiated by the UK Government.
“The Scottish Government’s view is that the damage of Brexit to our economy is not as good as it gets for our businesses.
“The fact remains that the only way to meaningfully reverse this damage and restore the benefits we previously enjoyed is for an independent Scotland to rejoin the EU, giving Scottish businesses a level playing field.”
A UK Government spokesperson said: “People in Scotland want both their governments to be concentrating on the issues that matter most to them, like growing our economy, halving inflation and improving public services.
“We want to work constructively with the Scottish Government to tackle our shared challenges because that is what families and businesses in Scotland expect.
“This is not the time to be talking about distracting constitutional change.”
To sign up to the Daily Record Politics newsletter, click here. | United Kingdom Politics |
Russia's president will not attend a summit in South Africa next month, according to the country's presidency.
The announcement comes after South Africa's leader said any attempt to arrest Vladimir Putin would be a declaration of war against Russia.
If Mr Putin had left Russian soil, he would have been subject to an International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrant.
South Africa is an ICC signatory and expected to help in Mr Putin's arrest.
Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov will represent the country at the two-day summit instead.
However, Mr Putin will take part in the Brics conference - an acronym for Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa - by video link, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said, according to Russian media.
The Brics grouping is seen by some as an alternative to the G7 group of advanced economies.
In a statement, South Africa's presidency described the agreement for Mr Putin not to attend as "mutual" and said it had come about following a "number of consultations" on the summit.
Supporters of Russia have criticised the decision, saying South Africa should have insisted and used its sovereignty to protect and defend its friend.
South Africa's invitation to Mr Putin, issued before the ICC accused him of war crimes in Ukraine, has caused controversy both nationally and internationally.
It came to be seen as a move by the government to stray from the middle ground it has sought to tread, alongside other African nations, in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.
But President Cyril Ramaphosa's government became frantic as pressure to arrest President Putin mounted.
The biggest opposition party, the Democratic Alliance, went to court to try to force the authorities to arrest Mr Putin, should he set foot in the country. Global human rights group Amnesty International was also part of the challenge.
Court documents reveal that Mr Ramaphosa was firmly against any such move, stating that national security was at stake.
"Russia has made it clear that arresting its sitting president would be a declaration of war. It would be inconsistent with our constitution to risk engaging in war with Russia," he said in an affidavit.
Mr Peskov denied Moscow had told South Africa that arresting its president would mean an act of war, but said it was "clear to everyone what [that kind of] infringement against the head of the Russian state would mean".
Russia has consistently described the ICC arrest warrant as outrageous and legally void, because the country is not a member of the organisation.
The African continent remains split over the war between Russia and Ukraine, with some countries showing reluctance to back United Nations' resolutions condemning Russia for its actions in Ukraine.
The reasons for this vary from country to country, but experts say one factor is the economic ties that some, including South Africa, have with Moscow.
A sanctioned Russian oligarch, Viktor Vekselberg, is said to be one of the biggest donors to South Africa's governing party, the African National Congress (ANC). | Africa politics |
Julian Assange could now be just weeks away from being extradited to the United States after Priti Patel today signed an order agreeing to send him to Virginia to face espionage charges and potentially a 175-year jail sentence.The Home Secretary has rubber stamped the order issued by a judge at Westminster Magistrates' Court to fly the WikiLeaks founder to America where he will be handed over to federal agents and put on trial.Assange, who is currently held in the maximum security Belmarsh Prison in south-east London, has 14 days to appeal. WikiLeaks today declared it is 'not the end' and pledged to go back to court to try to keep him in Britain, claiming today is a 'dark day for press freedom and British democracy' and accusing Ms Patel of choosing not to 'do the right thing'.If any appeal is rejected in the coming weeks - or doesn't make it to court - then there will be no more obstacles preventing him from being flown to America, potentially in July.His wife Stella Moris, who had two children with the fugitive while he was hiding in the Ecuadorian Embassy and married him in Belmarsh in March, said today: 'The Home Secretary has approved sending Julian to the country that planned to murder him. We will use every avenue to appeal this decision. I will dedicate every waking hour to fight for justice until he is free'. Julian Assange's (pictured in 2020) extradition to the United States moved one step closer today after Priti Patel signed an order agreeing he could be sent to the US Assange's wife, Stella Moris, who married the imprisoned WikiLeaks founder in April, said: 'Anyone in this country who cares about freedom of expression should be deeply ashamed that the Home Secretary has approved the extradition of Julian Assange to the United States, the country that plotted his assassination' Stella Moris, the partner of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, is photographed with their sons Max, 3, and Gabriel, 4, in her Vivienne Westwood designed wedding dress on their prison wedding day Assange has been in Belmarsh for three years - having spend seven years hiding in the Ecuadorian embassyA Home Office spokesman said: 'Under the Extradition Act 2003, the Secretary of State must sign an extradition order if there are no grounds to prohibit the order being made. Extradition requests are only sent to the Home Secretary once a judge decides it can proceed after considering various aspects of the case. What routes are left for Julian Assange to fight against his extradition to the US? High Court appealAssange's legal team have previously said there are other parts of his appeal that had not yet been heard by the High Court.Last month Assange was denied permission to appeal his extradition to the US. He had asked the Supreme Court to allow him to challenge a December 2021 decision by the High Court, which ruled he could be extradited to America. The Supreme Court, the UK's highest court, denied his request to challenge the ruling as his application did not raise 'an arguable point of law'.However, responding to the judgment, Assange's legal team said: 'No appeal to the High Court has yet been filed by him in respect of the other important issues he raised previously in Westminster Magistrates' Court.'What do experts say? Commenting on the hearing, Thomas Garner, Extradition Partner at Fladgate, said: 'Assange is notionally a step closer to extradition to the US, however there could still be additional traction in this case. Assange's lawyers have already indicated that they intend to launch a further challenge at the High Court.'He may have another opportunity to avoid extradition as the line of challenge terminated by the Supreme Court ultimately followed a victory at first instance by Assange. In that decision, Assange won on a single point but lost on several others. 'The Magistrate's decision to block his extradition was appealed by the US, but Assange did not himself make a cross appeal on the other matters. It is here that his team will focus their fire now. 'If the High Court were to refuse permission to appeal then he would reach the end of the line domestically, but if he succeeds in securing permission to appeal then his challenge could last for many months yet.''On June 17, following consideration by both the Magistrates Court and High Court, the extradition of Mr Julian Assange to the US was ordered. Mr Assange retains the normal 14-day right to appeal.'In this case, the UK courts have not found that it would be oppressive, unjust or an abuse of process to extradite Mr Assange.'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 US he will be treated appropriately, including in relation to his health.'WikiLeaks say they will appeal.Anyone in this country who cares about freedom of expression should be deeply ashamed that the Home Secretary has approved the extradition of Julian Assange to the United States, the country that plotted his assassination,' the organisation said in a statement posted to Twitter.'Julian did nothing wrong. He has committed no crime and is not a criminal. He is a journalist and a publisher, and he is being punished for doing his job.'It was in Priti Patel's power to do the right thing. Instead she will forever be remembered as an accomplice of the United States in its agenda to turn investigative journalism into a criminal enterprise.'WikiLeaks said the decision is 'not the end of the fight' and it will launch an appeal via the High Court.It said Mr Assange is facing a 'political case' in which there is an attempt to 'disappear him into the darkest recesses of their prison system for the rest of his life to deter others from holding governments to account'.'We will not let that happen,' the statement adds. 'Julian's freedom is coupled to all our freedoms. We will fight to return Julian to his family and to regain freedom of expression for us all.'Assange's supporters, including former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and members of Amnesty International, held a protest outside the court in the build up to the last extradition hearing in April.Supporters held banners with slogans including 'Free Assange' and 'Don't Extradite Assange'.Assange's wife, Stella Moris, who married the imprisoned WikiLeaks founder last month, was also at the hearing and sat in the public gallery.But they lost the case.Agnes Callamard, Amnesty International secretary general said of the extradition order: 'Allowing Julian Assange to be extradited to the US would put him at great risk and sends a chilling message to journalists the world over.'If the extradition proceeds, Amnesty International is extremely concerned that Assange faces a high risk of prolonged solitary confinement, which would violate the prohibition on torture or other ill treatment.'Diplomatic assurances provided by the US that Assange will not be kept in solitary confinement cannot be taken on face value given previous history.'We call on the UK to refrain from extraditing Julian Assange, for the US to drop the charges, and for Assange to be freed.' Assange's supporters, including former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and members of Amnesty International, held a protest outside the court in the build up to the hearing Stella Moris, 38, married 50-year-old Julian Assange (left) in Belmarsh Prison, south east London on March 23, just weeks before the third anniversary of his dramatic arrest when he was dragged out of the Ecuadorian embassy in the capital in April 2019 Julian Assange will NOT be held in a supermax jail if he's extradited, US assures UK Wikileaks founder Julian Assange will not be held in supermax prison conditions if he is allowed to be extradited to the United States, American officials have assured British authorities.American officials have made the compromise in the hopes of finally ending the lengthy battle to put Assange, 50, on trial for espionage charges in the United States, the Wall Street Journal reported last month.If Assange is convicted in an American court, U.S. officials have also said the Australian would be allowed to serve jail time in his home country, the outlet reported.The revelations were made in a court ruling provided by the U.K. Crown Prosecution Service obtained by the outlet. Assange has been in London's high-security Belmarsh Prison since he was arrested in April 2019 for skipping bail seven years earlier during a separate legal battle.He had spent seven years holed up inside Ecuador's London embassy, where he fled in 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden to face allegations of rape and sexual assault. Sweden dropped the sex crimes investigations in November 2019 because so much time had elapsed.U.S. prosecutors have indicted Assange on 17 espionage charges and one charge of computer misuse over WikiLeaks´ publication of thousands of leaked military and diplomatic documents. The charges carry a maximum sentence of 175 years in prison.The prosecutors say Assange unlawfully helped U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning steal classified diplomatic cables and military files that WikiLeaks later published. Assange is wanted in America over an alleged conspiracy to obtain and disclose national defence information following WikiLeaks' publication of hundreds of thousands of leaked documents relating to the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. He has always denied wrongdoing.Assange has been held in Belmarsh prison for three years since being dragged out of the Ecuadorian embassy in London. In March he was denied permission to appeal his extradition to the US. He asked the Supreme Court to allow him to challenge a December 2021 decision by the High Court, which ruled he could be extradited to America.However, in March the Supreme Court confirmed it had rejected Assange's appeal request. The Supreme Court, the UK's highest court, denied his request to challenge the ruling as his application did not raise 'an arguable point of law'. After the hearing, lawyers for Assange issued a statement and raised concerns about the reliance of the court on the US's guarantee regarding the prison conditions Mr Assange would be kept in, should he be extradited.Assange is wanted in America over an alleged conspiracy to obtain and disclose national defence information. If convicted in the US, Assange faces a possible penalty of up to 175 years in jail, his lawyers have said.However the US government said the sentence was more likely to be between four and six years. It followed WikiLeaks' publication of hundreds of thousands of leaked documents relating to the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.He says the information exposed abuses by the US military, but the US say the leaks of classified material endangered lives, and so the US sought his extradition from the UK.US authorities brought a successful High Court challenge against a January ruling by then-district judge Vanessa Baraitser that Assange should not be sent to the US, in which she cited a real and 'oppressive' risk of suicide. Assange wed partner, Ms Moris, at Belmarsh prison last month.Moris left the high security jail linked arm in arm with her father-in-law wearing a dress designed by Vivienne Westwood. Fighting back tears and wearing her wedding dress, she said: 'I'm very happy but I'm very sad... I wish he were here... What we're going through is inhuman.'She added: 'He's the most amazing person in the world and he should be free.'But our love will carry us through.'.Mr Assange married Ms Moris, 38, in front of four guests and two witnesses this afternoon. Two prison officers attended the ceremony, one of whom acted as official photographer. Assange and his new wife, Ms Moris announced their engagement in November last year.The couple, who have two children together - Max, two, and Gabriel, four - were wed by registrar inside the prison shortly after midday. Timeline: WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange's long legal battle 2006Assange creates Wikileaks with a group of like-minded activists and IT experts to provide a secure way for whistleblowers to leak information. He quickly becomes its figurehead and a lightning rod for criticism.2010March: U.S. authorities allege Assange engaged in a conspiracy to hack a classified U.S. government computer with former Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning. July: Wikileaks starts releasing tens of thousands of top secrets documents, including a video of U.S. helicopter pilots gunning down 12 civilians in Baghdad in 2007. What followed was the release of more than 90,000 classified US military files from the Afghan war and 400,000 from Iraq that included the names of informants. August: Two Swedish women claim that they each had consensual sex with Assange in separate instances when he was on a 10-day trip to Stockholm. They allege the sex became non-consensual when Assange refused to wear a condom.First woman claims Assange was staying at her apartment in Stockholm when he ripped off her clothes. She told police that when she realized Assange was trying to have unprotected sex with her, she demanded he use a condom. She claims he ripped the condom before having sex.Second Swedish woman claims she had sex with Assange at her apartment in Stockholm and she made him wear a condom. She alleges that she later woke up to find Assange having unprotected sex with her.He was questioned by police in Stockholm and denied the allegations. Assange was granted permission by Swedish authorities to fly back to the U.K. November: A Swedish court ruled that the investigation should be reopened and Assange should be detained for questioning on suspicion of rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion. An international arrest warrant is issued by Swedish police through Interpol.Wikileaks releases its cache of more than 250,000 U.S. diplomatic cables. December: Assange presents himself to London police and appears at an extradition hearing where he is remanded in custody. Assange is granted conditional bail at the High Court in London after his supporters pay £240,000 in cash and sureties.2011February: A British judge rules Assange should be extradited to Sweden but Wikileaks found vows to fight the decision.April: A cache of classified U.S. military documents is released by Wikileaks, including intelligence assessments on nearly all of the 779 people who are detained at the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba.November: Assange loses High Court appeal against the decision to extradite him.2012June: Assange enters the Ecuadorian embassy in London requesting political asylum. August: Assange is granted political asylum by Ecuador.2013June: Assange tells a group of journalists he will not leave the embassy even if sex charges against him are dropped out of fear he will be extradited to the U.S.2015August: Swedish prosecutors drop investigation into some of the sex allegations against Assange due to time restrictions. The investigation into suspected rape remains active.2016July: Wikileaks begins leaking emails U.S. Democratic Party officials favoring Hillary Clinton.November: Assange is questioned over the sex allegation at the Ecuadorian Embassy in the presence of Sweden's assistant prosecutor Ingrid Isgren and police inspector Cecilia Redell. The interview spans two days. 2017January: Barack Obama agrees to free whistleblower Chelsea Manning from prison. Her pending release prompts speculation Assange will end his self-imposed exile after Wikileaks tweeted he would agree to U.S. extradition.April: Lenin Moreno becomes the new president of Ecuador who was known to want to improve diplomatic relations between his country and the U.S. May: An investigation into a sex allegation against Assange is suddenly dropped by Swedish prosecutors. 2018January: Ecuador confirms it has granted citizenship to Assange following his request. February: Assange is visited by Pamela Anderson and Nobel Peace Prize winner Adolfo Perez Esquivel.March: The Ecuadorian Embassy suspends Assange's internet access because he wasn't complying with a promise he made the previous year to 'not send messages which entailed interference in relation to other states'.August: U.S. Senate committee asks to interview Assange as part of their investigation into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election.September: Assange steps down as editor of WikiLeaks.October: Assange reveals he will launch legal action against the government of Ecuador, accusing it of violating his 'fundamental rights and freedoms'.November: U.S. Justice Department inadvertently names Assange in a court document that says he has been charged in secret. 2019January: Assange's lawyers say they are taking action to make President Trump's administration reveal charges 'secretly filed' against him.April 6: WikiLeaks tweets that a high level Ecuadorian source has told them Assange will be expelled from the embassy within 'hours or days'. But a senior Ecuadorian official says no decision has been made to remove him from the London building. April 11: Assange has his diplomatic asylum revoked by Ecuador and he is arrested by the Metropolitan Police; he is remanded in custody by a judge at Westminster Magistrates Court.April 12: He is found guilty of breaching his bail terms.May 1: Sentenced to 11 months in jail.May 2: Court hearing takes place over Assange's proposed extradition to the U.S. He tells a court he does not consent to the extradition and the case is adjourned until May 30.May 13: Swedish prosecutors reopen rape case saying they still want to question Assange. June 3: Swedish court rules against detaining him in absentia, setting back the extradition case.June 12 Home Secretary Sajid Javid signs an extradition request from the US.June 13 A hearing sets out the date for Assange's full extradition hearing - February next year.November Swedish prosecutors stop investigation into an allegation of rape against Mr Assange November 25 - Medics say without correct medical care Assange 'could die' in Belmarsh December 13 - Hearing in London hears he is being blocked from seeing key evidence in caseDecember 19 - Appears at Westminster Magistrates Court via video-link where his lawyer claims US bid to extradite him is 'political'. 2020 February 24 -Assange faces an extradition hearing at Woolwich Crown Court.Assange's representatives argue he cannot legally be handed to the US for 'political offences' because of a 2003 extradition treaty.March 2 - Assange appears by video link at Westminster Magistrates Court, where he is refused bail amid the coronavirus crisis.April 11 - Stella Moris, Assange's partner, who gave birth to his two children while he was living inside the Ecuadorian embassy, issues a plea for his release amid fears for his health.June 24 - The US Department of Justice issues an updated 18-count indictment, over Assange's alleged role in 'one of the largest compromises of classified information in the history of the United States'.August 25 - Ms Moris visits her partner in Belmarsh prison for the first time in almost six months.September 7 - Assange's extradition hearings resume at the Old Bailey. They are expected to go on for up to four weeks.October 1 - Judge Vanessa Baraitser adjourned the case at the Old Bailey until January 4. January 4 - Judge Baraitser strikes down US extradition bid. 2021October - Lord Chief Justice Lord Burnett, sitting with Lord Justice Holroyde, hears two-day appeal from US. December 10 - They rule in favour of the US and overturn decision not to extradite Assange. 2022 January - High Court gives Assange permission to ask the Supreme Court to consider his case. April - After years of legal toing and froing, Westminster Magistrates' Court formally issued an order to extradite the WikiLeaks founderJune - Priti Patel signs an order to extradite Julian Assange to the US to face espionage charge | United Kingdom Politics |
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. PM asked to intervene for retired geologist facing 15 years in Iraqi jail Neale Hanvey raises the case of Jim Fitton, a retired geologist who has been jailed for 15 years in Iraq.Mr Fitton, originally from Bath, was arrested in Baghdad at the end of March after collecting stones and shards during a visit to an ancient site in Eridu.Mr Hanvey, his local MP, says: "The judge passing sentence does not believe Mr Fitton had any criminal intent."He asks the PM will meet with him and other MPs.Boris Johnson replies he has a "great deal of sympathy" and says he will get Mr Hanvey a meeting with the relevant minister as soon as possible. Due to your consent preferences, you’re not able to view this. Open Privacy Options | United Kingdom Politics |
S Jaishankar met world leaders and held several bilateral meetings on his New York visitNew York: India really matters more in the current polarised world and the country is perceived very widely as the voice of the global South, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar said.Mr Jaishankar wrapped up the New York leg of his visit to the US as he addressed the high-level UN General Assembly session Saturday, concluding a hectic week of whirlwind diplomatic engagements during which he met over 100 of his counterparts from around the world and held several bilateral and multilateral meetings."There's no question this UNGA reflects the state of the world, which is particularly polarised at this moment. What the state of the world actually reveals in a way is that India matters more. We are a bridge, we are a voice, we are a viewpoint, a channel," Mr Jaishankar told a group of Indian reporters here as he highlighted some of the big takeaways of his week-long visit to the UN and the city. He will head to Washington DC Sunday for the second leg of his US visit.Mr Jaishankar said that at a time when normal diplomacy is not working that well, India has so many relationships, such an ability to communicate and find touch points with different countries and regions.India is today "perceived very widely" as the voice of the global South, Mr Jaishankar said, adding that there is a huge crisis right now in the world economy where the cost of food and fuel, worry about fertilisers, the debt situation have created very deep anxieties for a lot of countries."There is great frustration that these issues are not being heard. They are not being voiced. They are not going up the chain in the global councils," he said, adding that if there is anybody at all who is speaking up and voicing these sentiments, it is India and that New Delhi speaks for many of the developing nations."I am concluding this week with the sense that India really matters more in this polarised world and much of that is also due to the Prime Minister's leadership, his image, what he has done on the global stage," he said.Mr Jaishankar said that several people spoke to him about Prime Minister Narendra Modi's role in the UN climate conference COP26 held in Glasgow last year, and some of the recent regional gatherings. Mr Jaishankar underlined that it is both the landscape as well as the leadership, which has created that sense of India mattering more.Mr Jaishankar met his global counterparts in bilateral as well as multilateral settings on the margins of the high-level session. He participated in group meetings, which included the Quad, BRICS, IBSA, CELAC, CARICOM, NAM countries and the L69 group. He also participated in trilaterals with France, Australia, Indonesia and UAE.Another takeaway was the impact of many of India's initiatives, the Vaccine Maitri in particular, development programmes and projects, including those in Ukraine.Noting that this year has been particularly challenging in terms of climate events and emergencies right from South Asia to Europe, Mr Jaishankar said the leadership that India has shown on climate issues was mentioned positively, with nations and partners expressing interest in working with India because it has not just been about speeches but delivery on the ground as well.Underlining that "delivery is Prime Minister Modi's forte not just at home but also his image abroad", Mr Jaishankar said the International Solar Alliance has over 100 members, Coalition for Disaster Resilient infrastructure is taking off, there is interest in the One Sun One World One Grid idea. In this regard, a takeaway from the week is the belief that India today is a very major player, contributor and shaper in the climate debates.With India assuming the G20 presidency in December, the issue came up for discussion with many leaders, including Secretary General Antonio Guterres.Jaishankar said he conveyed "very clearly" to all of them that "our endeavour would be to ensure that the G20 remains cohesive, remains focused." Given that G20 historically has an agenda that is primarily financial, economic, development and social, he said it was conveyed that "we would like it to keep to that." This was a subject which came up with many other foreign ministers of G20 and "there was appreciation of that as well."(This story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.) | India Politics |
Xi Spent Two Days Outside China In 2023 As Problems Mount
Two days is all President Xi Jinping has spent outside his country this year, as mounting domestic problems from a faltering economy to rare political scandals demand the Chinese leader’s attention at home.
(Bloomberg) -- Two days is all President Xi Jinping has spent outside his country this year, as mounting domestic problems from a faltering economy to rare political scandals demand the Chinese leader’s attention at home.
Xi’s border hop to visit Russian President Vladimir Putin in March has been his sole trip abroad, representing the shortest amount of time he’s spent overseas in the first half of a year since taking power, excluding the pandemic.
That’s a major shift from his pre-Covid schedule, when Xi traveled more often and for longer than his US counterpart. The Chinese leader made an average of 14 overseas trips annually between 2013 and 2019, according to a Bloomberg News analysis of government readouts of Xi’s diplomatic meetings.
By comparison, US President Donald Trump averaged 12 during his time in office, according to data compiled by the Eurasia Group.
Now, Xi is making foreign dignitaries come to him. He’s met representatives from 36 nations including France, Eritrea and the US in Beijing so far this year. Before the pandemic, Xi hosted an average of 48 dignitaries annually in the same period, meaning his overall in-person dialogue is in decline.
And, unlike in the pandemic, he’s not supplementing meetings with video calls: The Chinese leader has had just one this year with the Czech Republic.
His reduction in face-time with global leaders could handicap Beijing’s ability to compete with Washington for global influence. That comes at a time when international perceptions of China are souring over its foreign policy, according to a survey released last month by the Pew Research Center.
Wen-Ti Sung, non-resident fellow at the Washington-based Atlantic Council’s Global China Hub, said it could be that Xi has more pressing priorities right now than diplomacy. China’s economy is fending off deflation, his protege Foreign Minister Qin Gang has been removed and he’s ousted top leaders of the nation’s nuclear missile force amid rumors of a corruption probe.
“China simply has more urgent domestic priorities,” said Sung, noting that Xi’s centralization of power means his presence is increasingly required to deal with such problems. “As the opportunity cost of his absence rises, Xi will naturally become even more selective about going on extended visits abroad and he will go abroad less frequently.”
Xi was expected to resume a busy global schedule once pandemic controls that kept him inside China for nearly 1,000 days — the longest Covid isolation of any Group of Twenty leader — were lifted at the beginning of this year.
By the end of 2022, he’d already started traveling to countries including Uzbekistan, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia, even though China’s borders remained closed. Since then, however, he’s barely set foot outside his nation.
Scheduling could be partly to blame. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi hosted a two-day Shanghai Cooperation Organization meeting by video in July, whereas last year’s summit saw Xi travel to Kazakhstan — his first trip outside China since January 2020.
Other major international summits, such as the G-20 and Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, fall in the second half of this year.
The Chinese leader is expected to attend a summit of emerging economy leaders in Johannesburg this month. While Putin will participate in that event virtually, to excuse South Africa from having to execute an International Criminal Court arrest warrant for him, Modi has confirmed his in-person presence.
The White House’s reported plan to blacklist Hong Kong’s John Lee from the APEC leaders’ summit in San Francisco this November, however, could deter Xi from attending. Lee is sanctioned for his role in diminishing Hong Kong’s autonomy under a security law imposed by Xi. The Chinese leader’s absence would remove an opportunity for his first state visit to the US since Joe Biden became president in 2021.
China’s worsening global image has made it harder for democratic leaders to host Xi, according to Neil Thomas, a fellow for Chinese politics at Asia Society Policy Institute’s Center for China Analysis. Xi’s handling of the pandemic, alleged human rights abuses in Xinjiang and refusal to condemn Putin’s war in Ukraine have all damaged ties with the West.
“Elected leaders in the West are more likely to attract criticism than win praise for meeting with Xi,” he added. “It’s bad politically to meet with Xi.”
Before the pandemic, European guests accounted for at least 14% of Xi’s annual visiting delegations, hitting 20% in 2019. This year, that figure is at just 8%.
British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is highly unlikely to travel to China before the UK’s next general election, Bloomberg News reported in June, as he faces increasingly skeptical views of China at home.
Xi’s next major opportunity to host a group of world leaders will come in October at the Belt and Road Initiative summit. That event attracted nearly 39 heads of states in 2019, 10 more than the first summit in 2017.
But it’s still unclear who will attend. European nations including France, Germany, Greece and the Czech Republic plan to the forum, the Wall Street Journal reported last week. Italy, the only Group of Seven nation to have signed on to the pact, is planning to exit the controversial agreement.
While Xi called for “meticulous efforts” to prepare for the forum last month, he’s unlikely to pay too much attention to the guest list.
“The priority of his third term is security and securing his ruling internally,” said Alfred Wu, an associate professor at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy in Singapore. “Xi’s probably quite confident about his status as world No. 2, so he’d expect others to come to China to visit him.”
--With assistance from Jill Disis.
(Updates with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance of BRICS summit in 13th paragraph.)
More stories like this are available on bloomberg.com
©2023 Bloomberg L.P. | Asia Politics |
U.S. President Joe Biden speaks virtually with Chinese leader Xi Jinping from the White House in Washington, U.S. November 15, 2021. REUTERS/Jonathan ErnstRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comSCHLOSS ELMAU, Germany, June 27 (Reuters) - U.S. President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping are expected to speak in the next few weeks, U.S. national security adviser Jake Sullivan said on Monday, citing growing convergence among NATO and G7 members about the challenge China poses.The Group of Seven rich democracies will address China's non-market economic practices, its approach to debt and its human rights actions in a communique on Tuesday, while a NATO strategic concept to be released later this week would address China in "ways that are unprecedented," he said. read more "We do think that there is increasing convergence, both at the G7 and at NATO, around the challenge China poses," Sullivan told reporters at the G7 summit in southern Germany.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comG7 leaders saw an "urgent need" for consultation and alignment on issues such as China's non-market economic practices, its practices with regard to developing countries' debt, and its approach to human rights, Sullivan said.But he said the increased attention to China's actions on both the economic and security front did not mean the West was looking to launch a new Cold War."We're not looking to divide the world into rival blocs and make every country choose" he said. "We want to stand for a set of principles that are fair to everybody. And we want to ensure that we're working with like-minded partners to hold China accountable to adhere to those rules."G7 leaders on Sunday pledged to raise $600 billion in private and public funds over five years to finance needed infrastructure in developing countries and counter China's older, multitrillion-dollar Belt and Road project. read more Biden and other G7 leaders launched the newly renamed "Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment" to support projects in low- and middle-income countries that help tackle climate change as well as improve global health, gender equity and digital infrastructure.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by Andrea Shalal in Schloss Elmau, Germany
Editing by Matthew LewisOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Global Organizations |
SummaryRussian missiles strike Kyiv, killing 1 and wounding 6Missiles also hit strategic bridge in central Ukraine'It's more of their barbarism', says BidenUkraine loses key city to pro-Russian forcesG7 countries meet in Germany, move to ban Russian goldKYIV/POKROVSK, Ukraine, June 26 (Reuters) - Russian missiles hit an apartment block and kindergarten in the Ukrainian capital Kyiv on Sunday, in strikes U.S. President Joe Biden condemned as "barbarism" as world leaders gathered in Europe to discuss further sanctions against Moscow.Up to four explosions shook central Kyiv in the early hours, in the first such attack on the city in weeks. read more "The Russians hit Kyiv again. Missiles damaged an apartment building and a kindergarten," said Andriy Yermak, head of the president's administration.Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comA Reuters photographer saw a large blast crater by a playground in a kindergarten that had smashed windows.Deputy Mayor Mykola Povoroznyk said one person was killed and six wounded. He said explosions heard later in other parts if Kyiv were air defences destroying further incoming missiles.Russia has stepped up air strikes on Ukraine this weekend, which has also seen the fall of a strategic eastern city to pro-Russian forces."It's more of their barbarism," said Biden, referring to the missile strikes on Kyiv, as leaders from the Group of Seven (G7) rich democracies gathered for a summit in Germany.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.As Europe's biggest land conflict since World War Two entered its fifth month, the Western alliance supporting Kyiv was starting to show signs of strain as leaders fret about the growing economic cost.British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said the West needed to maintain a united front against Russian President Vladimir Putin."The price of backing down, the price of allowing Putin to succeed, to hack off huge parts of Ukraine, to continue with his programme of conquest, that price will be far, far higher," he told reporters.MISSILES HIT CENTRAL CITYLife had been returning to normal in Kyiv after fierce resistance held off Russian advances in the early phase of the war, although air raid sirens regularly sound across the city.There had been no major strikes on Kyiv since early June.The city's mayor, Vitali Klitschko, said on the Telegram messaging app that some people were trapped in the rubble of a nine-storey apartment block after Sunday's strike."They have pulled out a seven-year-old girl," Klitschko said. "She is alive. Now they're trying to rescue her mother."A Ukrainian air force spokesperson said the strike was carried out with 4-6 long-range missiles fired from Russian bombers more than 1,000 kilometres away in the southern Russian region of Astrakhan.Smoke rises after a missile strike, as Russia's attack on Ukraine continues, in Kyiv, Ukraine June 26, 2022. REUTERS/Anna VoitenkoRussian missiles also struck the central city of Cherkasy, which until now had been largely untouched by bombardment, according to regional authorities, who said one person had been killed and five others wounded. read more Ukrainian presidential adviser Oleksiy Arestovych said the attack also hit a strategic bridge linking western Ukraine and the eastern battlefields. "They are trying to limit the transfer of our reserves and Western weapons to the east," he said in a message to Reuters.Russia's defence ministry said it had used high-precision weapons to strike Ukrainian army training centres in the regions of Chernihiv, Zhytomyr and Lviv, an apparent reference to strikes reported by Ukraine on Saturday. There was no immediate comment about Sunday's strikes on Kyiv or Cherkasy.Russia denies targeting civilians, but Ukraine and the West accuse Russian forces of war crimes in a war that has killed thousands, sent millions fleeing Ukraine and destroyed cities.EASTERN BATTLEFIELDThe eastern battlefield city of Sievierodonetsk fell to pro-Russian forces on Saturday after Ukrainian troops retreated, saying there was no longer anything to defend in the ruined city after months of fierce fighting.It was a major defeat for Kyiv as it seeks to keep control of two eastern provinces, Luhansk and Donetsk, that form the Donbas region, which Moscow demands Kyiv cede to separatists.The RIA agency quoted a pro-Russian separatist official as saying separatist forces had evacuated more than 250 people, including children, on Sunday from Sievierodonetsk's Azot chemical plant. The plant's surrounding industrial area was the last part of Sievierodonetsk held by Ukrainian forces.Russia's TASS news agency quoted the same official as saying forces were now advancing on Lysychansk across the river from Sievierodonetsk. Lysychansk is now the last major city held by Ukraine in Luhansk.In the Ukrainian-held Donbas town of Pokrovsk, Elena, an elderly woman from Lysychansk in a wheelchair, was among dozens of evacuees who arrived 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."GLOBAL FOOD SUPPLIESRussia invaded Ukraine on Feb. 24 in what the Kremlin called a "special military operation" it said was needed to rid the country of dangerous nationalists and ensure Russian security. Kyiv and the West dismiss that as a pretext for a land grab.The war has had a huge impact on the global economy and European security, driving up gas, oil and food prices, pushing the European Union to reduce reliance on Russian energy and prompting Finland and Sweden to seek NATO membership.Indonesian President Joko Widodo, who plans to visit Russia and Ukraine this week, said he would urge his counterparts to start a dialogue and would ask Putin to order a ceasefire."War has to be stopped and global food supply chains need to be reactivated," he said before leaving to attend the G7 summit.The United Nations has warned that a protracted war in Ukraine, one of the world's major grain exporters, threatens to cause a global hunger crisis.At Sunday's G7 meeting, Britain, Canada, Japan and the United States proposed a ban in imports of gold from Russia. read more Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comReporting by Reuters bureaux; Writing by Michael Perry and Alex Richardson; Editing by Edmund Klamann, David Clarke, Raissa Kasolowsky and Peter GraffOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | Europe Politics |
U.S. June 14, 2022 / 3:02 PM / CBS/AP Happy the elephant may be intelligent and deserving of compassion, but she cannot be considered a person being illegally confined to the Bronx Zoo, New York's top court ruled Tuesday. The 5-2 decision by the state Court of Appeals comes in a closely watched case that tested the boundaries of applying human rights to animals.The zoo and its supporters warned that a win for advocates at the Nonhuman Rights Project could open the door to more legal actions on behalf of animals, including pets, farm animals and other species in zoos. FILE - Bronx Zoo elephant "Happy" strolls inside the zoo's Asia Habitat in New York on Oct. 2, 2018. New York's top court on Tuesday, June 14, 2022, rejected an effort to free Happy the elephant from the Bronx Zoo, ruling that she does not meet the definition of "person" who is being illegally confined. Bebeto Matthews / AP The court's majority echoed that point. The decision written by Chief Judge Janet DiFiore said that "while no one disputes that elephants are intelligent beings deserving of proper care and compassion," a writ of habeas corpus is intended to protect the liberty of human beings, and does not apply to a nonhuman animal like Happy.The decision affirms a lower court decision, meaning Happy will not be released through a habeas corpus proceeding, which is a way for people to challenge illegal confinement. Granting that right to Happy to challenge her confinement at a zoo "would have an enormous destabilizing impact on modern society," read the majority decision. "Indeed, followed to its logical conclusion, such a determination would call into question the very premises underlying pet ownership, the use of service animals, and the enlistment of animals in other forms of work," read the decision. The Bronx Zoo argued Happy is neither illegally imprisoned nor a person, but a well-cared-for elephant "respected as the magnificent creature she is."The advocates at the Nonhuman Rights Project argued that Happy is an autonomous, cognitively complex elephant worthy of the right reserved in law for "a person." An online petition created by the Nonhuman Rights Project to get Happy transferred to a larger sanctuary has received more than 1.4 million signatures. Two judges, Rowan Wilson and Jenny Rivera, wrote separate, sharply worded dissents saying the fact that Happy is an animal does not prevent her from having legal rights. Rivera wrote that Happy is being held in "an environment that is unnatural to her and that does not allow her to live her life.""Her captivity is inherently unjust and inhumane. It is an affront to a civilized society, and every day she remains a captive — a spectacle for humans — we, too, are diminished," Rivera wrote.The ruling from New York's highest court cannot be appealed. The Nonhuman Rights Project has failed to prevail in similar cases, including those involving a chimpanzee in upstate New York named Tommy, CBS New York reported.Steven Wise, the group's founder, said he was pleased it managed to persuade some of the judges. He noted that the group has a similar case underway in California and more planned in other states and other countries."We will take a really close look at why we lost and we'll try to make sure that that doesn't happen again to the extent that we can," he said.Happy was born in the wild in Asia in the early 1970s, captured, and brought as a 1-year-old to the United States. Happy arrived at the Bronx Zoo in 1977 with fellow elephant Grumpy, who was fatally injured in a 2002 confrontation with two other elephants.Last year, a similar case was heard in a federal court, but had a different outcome. Federal magistrate Judge Karen Litkovitz in Cincinnati ruled the offspring of hippos once owned by Colombian drug kingpin Pablo Escobar could be recognized as people or "interested persons" with legal rights. The Animal Legal Defense Fund said at the time it believed it was the first time that animals were declared legal persons in the U.S. In: Lawsuit Bronx Bronx Zoo civil rights New York City New York Thanks for reading CBS NEWS. Create your free account or log in for more features. Please enter email address to continue Please enter valid email address to continue | Human Rights |
Nothing is certain in life, except death and politicians playing games with taxes.
As chancellor, just 18 months ago, Rishi Sunak was steering through a big hike in National Insurance. When this was attacked, he—together with Boris Johnson—doubled down, the pair penning an article stating: “Now is the time to stick to that plan… It is the right plan.”
Then, after Liz Truss’s ruinous month in the sun, he decided to junk almost all her tax cuts, but stuck with her reversal of this one rise. Now he is going beyond her policy, and actually reducing the very tax rate that he was so recently trying to raise.
Does anyone think the original rationale for the rise—to get a grip on rising NHS waiting lists and fix social care—has become less urgent? Of course not.
Sunak’s see-sawing attitude towards the appropriate National Insurance rate betrays an abject lack of seriousness. To be fair, he is anything but unique in this: the maddening complexity of Britain’s tax system is the direct result of an absence of real tax strategy that goes back at least a generation.
Chancellor Jeremy Hunt previously ran not one but two leadership campaigns centred on cutting corporation tax rates, based on the Reaganite fantasy that this would boost growth so much that it would more than pay for itself. The moment that he got into No 11, one of his first acts was, instead, to restore a steep increase in the same levy.
There is no party monopoly on fiscal body-swerves. Early in his time at the Treasury, Gordon Brown loudly trumpeted his new “10p starting rate” to ease the burden on low earners; towards the end, he decided it would play better to ditch it, and use the savings to cut the basic rate.
Tony Blair’s greatest achievement as prime minister was finding the funds for decent pensions and healthcare, in the latter case by explicitly raising tax for the purpose. But in his strange corporate afterlife, surely knowing full well that cost pressures on pensions and health continue to dominate the outlook for the public finances, he trolls today’s politicians by pretending there is some easy way to tax less and spend less.
If all politicians dissemble on tax, you might think Sunak would get away with doing the same. But there are a couple of reasons why, I suspect, he may pay a heavy price for playing the ordinary games.
First, the character thing.
After the Truss interlude, the whole purpose of Sunak was meant to be—as numerous newspaper headlines put it—having a “grown-up” back in charge. Under pressure of events, this flattering image is rapidly unravelling: he is being steadily exposed as a man without a plan.
In the last few months alone, he has veered from ship-steadying centrist to the feisty insurgent on the party conference stage who vowed to break with 30 years of failed consensus, and on to the re-shuffler who brings a former prime minister from the height of that supposed consensus back to his top table.
His Machiavellian move to secure the backing of Suella Braverman for his run at the top job—apparently by promising to reinstate her as home secretary a matter of days after she was sacked for misconduct—has backfired in spectacular fashion, after he ended up with no alternative but to sack her a second time.
While it might be only lawyers and anguished liberals like me who despair at the lack of cogent purpose in the Rwanda policy, after the Supreme Court ruled it unlawful, the wider public must be starting to suspect that all the noise about it is a distraction from nothing getting done.
Sunak’s star first rose because of the energetic pragmatism he showed in responding to the first Covid wave at the Treasury. But within months, he was peddling his signature Eat Out to Help Out scheme, which always risked becoming Eat Out to Wipe Out. Even from the narrow point of view of the public finances, the “grown-up” option would have been paying pubs and restaurants to stay shut, rather than inflaming the need for the hugely costly furlough extension. Two years on, the inquiry is providing a public reckoning.
The PM also seems incapable of pulling off a smooth announcement, instead getting excited and pulling away at the wrapping before the big day, like a child wanting to open presents on Christmas Eve. Before the cancellation of HS2 in October there was endless speculation, not only about the substance of the decision but whether Sunak would have the brass neck to announce it in Manchester. Before this autumn statement, all manner of kites were flown about under-indexing benefits and cutting inheritance tax, needlessly worrying some, creating false hope for others, and eventually creating a sense of drift on all sides.
And Sunak’s second big problem is an economic context in which clear direction is especially important.
Large, specific and early tax cuts are being funded by large, hazy and delayed cuts to public services
Some of the dark clouds were dispelled by Chancellor Hunt, who has a good feel for both business and Middle England. He set out a few useful measures to boost private investment while closing down some of the wilder ideas in the air. He also proved an extremely deft editor of the bundle of forecasts. In the House, he highlighted a run of positive headlines: inflation down, recession avoided, and, in another few years, debt to start edging down.
But even before Hunt had sat down, the experts were exposing how none of the news was as reassuring as he’d made it sound. And the official bean counters at the Office for Budget Responsibility revealed that his plans relied on deep-to-the-point-of-implausible cuts to many public services after the election. Large, specific and early tax cuts are being funded by large, hazy and delayed cuts to public services. To grab and twist Sunak’s conference slogan: short-term decisions for a squalid future.
Now, in the right circumstances, this might nonetheless be a clever trap to set for a nervous Labour party which vows to match Tory spending plans. But manoeuvring the other side into pledging the impossible won’t do much for Sunak. The country is less interested in the opposition than in the day-to-day reality bluntly highlighted by the OBR: namely, “the largest reduction in living standards since records began in the 1950s.”
Inflation is still more than double the Bank of England target, and—even as the PM pats himself on the back for fixing that problem and making tax cuts affordable—the governor warns further interest rate rises may be required. Millions are already set to see mortgage repayments shoot up as deals are renewed, and will weigh that cost, plus continuing price rises, against the bump in pay packets now in train for January.
All this creates, to an unusual degree, a real hankering for steadiness of purpose. Any sense of being governed by gimmickry is unusually dangerous. One last example of why that suspicion is rising concerns the heavily trailed crackdown on supposed unemployed layabouts, by cutting their benefits off. Tony Wilson of the Institute for Employment Studies immediately spotted that, on the government’s own numbers, enforcing the new sanctions will actually cost the Exchequer money.
In other words, “hardworking taxpayers” will have to work harder for a show of hard-heartedness towards the hard-up. Whatever else that may be, it isn’t hard-headed. And it feels like we’re slipping beyond the point where such stunts can be mistaken for “grown-up” policy. | United Kingdom Politics |
I was on the train to the Labour conference in Liverpool, and an email arrived. Just to be clear: there is no way I’m voting anything other than Labour, I am definitely a member of this party, there is nothing on God’s green earth that would make me leave. Nothing.
The guy behind me was working methodically through his contacts, calling everyone to tell them he had a meeting with Peter Mandelson; a woman was listening to BBC Sounds without headphones; a man across the aisle was eating pickled onion Monster Munch wrong; and the two guys opposite were figuring out whether they were allowed to expense a taxi between two points whose distance I happened to know was about 200 metres. Is there anything louder than a journalist’s indoor voice? It’s like we all went on an outdoor broadcasting course, learned how to be heard above a hurricane, and then got stuck like that.
All these situations required my urgent intervention, yet I was somehow managing to remain unperturbed. Then I got this email. “Dear Zoe,” it began. “I wanted to reach out and keep you in the loop.” What is this drivel? Did someone put a prompt into ChatGPT saying: “I want to start an email with multiple banal phrases meaning ‘I am sending you an email’. Don’t ask why – I just do.” It was from the general secretary of the Labour party, which I am never leaving, informing me of changes to my membership card. I now have to carry something with a union flag on it that says “putting country first” on the flip side.
Frankly, in the era that I joined this party, the late 80s, this would have marked you out pretty unambiguously as a member of the BNP. Am I being a grandma? Do all the other Labour members look at red, white and blue, and hear the language of formless but weirdly pugnacious patriotism and get a lovely, warm, modern vibe? Well, no: we’re all the exact same age. Good luck trying to modernise us, dude, as I for one am never leaving.
The new card will also proudly feature clause IV of the party’s constitution: “Through the strength of our common endeavour, we achieve more than we achieve alone.” There’s some graffiti on my way to my nearest Yodel pickup, “If you want to go fast, go alone; if you want to go far, go together”, that’s cleaner and less turgid, but this isn’t a hill I’d die on.
Except I know that this is a provocation. They’re not trying to smoke out a membership hardcore of individualists who think they can achieve more alone. Nobody who thought that would join any party at all, not even the Conservatives: they’d spend their leisure time at the gym or, I don’t know, archery practice. This is merely to draw our attention to that time, you remember that time, when some guy (What was he called again? Blair?) removed the socialist bit of the constitution and replaced it with a platitude. Blair won and everybody else lost, and didn’t that make you feel great, and work out brilliantly? Wouldn’t you love to walk around carrying its slogan in your pocket?
In 2005, there was a delegate in the hall at Labour conference called Walter Wolfgang. It was the first time I’d been, and I was struggling to wrap my head around its conventions, the disconnect between boring, managerial speeches and the obedient exaltation of the audience. Everyone seemed to just play their part, accepting that none of the words were really communicative in the regular sense. They were a call-and-response performance to the outside world, to show a party united, or purposeful, or strong, or … whatever. I was the wrong person to ask.
Everyone, that is, except Walter Wolfgang, who expressed his discontent with the war in Iraq by shouting “Nonsense!” during Jack Straw’s speech, and got manhandled out of the hall. The optics were terrible – he was 82! – and John Reid, the defence secretary, ended up apologising to him. Would I ever heckle anyone, at this conference of a party I’ll never leave? Absolutely no way.
Wolfgang died in 2019, but continues to embody as well as anybody else I can think of the spirit of the membership – ornery old socialists and peaceniks who would probably put bluetits and nuclear disarmament ahead of their country, and are propelled by some restless life force to disagree constantly with their own party. And this, fair play, is a common endeavour that definitely could not be achieved alone.
Zoe Williams is a Guardian columnist | United Kingdom Politics |
'The Home Secretary has no one to blame but herself' Labour's 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 promises 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". 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. PM asked to intervene for retired geologist facing 15 years in Iraqi jail Neale Hanvey raises the case of Jim Fitton, a retired geologist who has been jailed for 15 years in Iraq.Mr Fitton, originally from Bath, was arrested in Baghdad at the end of March after collecting stones and shards during a visit to an ancient site in Eridu.Mr Hanvey, his local MP, says: "The judge passing sentence does not believe Mr Fitton had any criminal intent."He asks the PM will meet with him and other MPs.Boris Johnson replies he has a "great deal of sympathy" and says he will get Mr Hanvey a meeting with the relevant minister as soon as possible. Analysis: Theatrical Starmer seems to be enjoying himself By Amanda Akass, political correspondentSir Keir Starmer seems to be enjoying himself as he reads out a list of negative quotes about the prime minister made by his own MPs - only last week of course, four in ten of them voted to kick him out. In a much more theatrical style than we normally see from the Labour leader - to resounding cheers from his own side and shaking heads from the Tory benches - he urges the Conservative MPs to own up to quotes like "dragging everyone down", "authority is destroyed" and "can't win back trust". Needless to say, none of the Tories respond to his request to put their hands up. In a line which nods to critics in his own party, he says his personal favourite criticism of the prime minister is circulating in a document calling him "the Conservative Corbyn" - adding "I don't think they meant that as a compliment".It's a rather extraordinary to hear a party leader attempting to insult his opposite number by comparing him to his own predecessor, but it's a line which Sir Keir is using to highlight the changes he has sought to make in his own party in drawing a very clear division between himself and Jeremy Corbyn. Due to your consent preferences, you’re not able to view this. Open Privacy Options | United Kingdom Politics |
Hong Kong government ordered to recognise same-sex partnerships
Hong Kong’s top court has ordered the country’s government to legally recognise same-sex relationships, but stopped short of demands for full marriage equality.
Five judges on the Court of Final Appeal ruled on Tuesday (5 September) that Hong Kong’s government was failing to fulfil its constitutional duty to provide an alternative system for legal recognition of same-sex partnerships.
This is the first time the court has directly addressed same-sex marriage.
In its judgement, the court ruled that LGBTQ+ couples needed to have a “sense of legitimacy which dispels any sense of them belonging to an inferior class of person whose committed and stable relationships are undeserving of recognition”.
The government, which has shown little appetite for championing LGBTQ+ rights, was given two years to enact a scheme. However, the court unanimously dismissed an appeal in relation to bringing forward full marriage equality and recognition of same-sex marriages performed abroad.
Homosexuality was decriminalised in Hong Kong in 1991, and legal challenges have pushed the government to make improvements in terms of rights for LGBTQ+ people in general, and for same-sex couples.
Jimmy Sham Tsz-kit’s five-year legal battle
Jimmy Sham Tsz-kit has been in custody awaiting trial since March 2020 under a Beijing-imposed national security law, following anti-government protests in the former British colony. The law has been used to arrest and silence many pro-democracy activists as part of a crackdown on dissent.
Sham, who married his husband in New York a decade ago, first asked for a judicial review in 2018, to force the “special administrative region of China” to recognise overseas same-sex marriage. He argued that the city’s current ban violated his right to equality and is therefore unconstitutional.
Lower courts dismissed previous challenges in September 2020 and August 2022 before Sham was granted permission to take his case to the top court in November.
At a hearing in June, the Court of Appeal heard that the absence of same-sex marriage in Hong Kong sends a message that it’s “less worthy” than marriages between cis, heterosexual couples.
‘A victory for the community likely to result in real change’
Barrister Azan Marwah, who is the legal advisor of Hong Kong Marriage Equality, told the Hong Kong Free Press that the court’s ruling wasn’t a “full victory”, but represents a “significant step forward” for the LGBTQ+ community.
“It is not a victory for the appellant, but it is a victory for the community and it is one that is likely to result in real change,” he said.
Marwah added that the easiest path forward for the government was to “provide same-sex marriage in substance” by amending existing laws to mirror legislation in other countries such as England, which he described as “comprehensive and sensible”.
Esther Leung, the campaign manager of Hong Kong Marriage Equality, said: “It is a significant victory which makes clear that Hong Kong law must afford due respect and protections to same-sex couples. This will help families while hurting no one.”
However, she added that the ruling “falls short of what is really at stake in this case: full inclusion in marriage”.
Lawmakers in South Korea recently introduced legislation that would recognise same-sex marriages after the country faced legal challenges on the rights of queer couples.
Human rights lawyer Wong Hiu-chong told AFP that the Hong Kong court’s decision was an “important move towards the protection of LGBT rights” but felt the two-year timeline for change to take place was a bit long.
“We hope the administration will adhere to such a generous time frame and not procrastinate,” she said.
How did this story make you feel?
MyPinkNews members are invited to comment on articles to discuss the content we publish, or debate issues more generally. Please familiarise yourself with our community guidelines to ensure that our community remains a safe and inclusive space for all. | Human Rights |
London-listed stocks fell sharply on Thursday as the Bank of England raised interest rates to 1.25 per cent in efforts to tackle surging inflation.Faced with mixed signals from the UK, the Bank's top brass has had to weigh a tight labour market, the cost-of-living crisis and surging energy prices against Government intervention with fiscal stimulus. Figures suggest the UK will have the highest inflation in the G7 into 2024, hitting more than 11 per cent by October, amid persistently high energy prices. CPI is already at 9 per cent. This afternoon, the FTSE 100 was down 2.99 per cent or 217.66 points to 7,055.75, and the FTSE 250 index was down 2.9 per cent or 561.11 points to 18,754.87. 'The UK economy is shrinking faster than expected and is at serious risk of going into reverse. This latest decision shows the Monetary Policy Committee is very mindful of applying too much pressure on the brakes', Rachel Winter, a partner at Killik & Co, said.In the US, the Dow Jones opened lower, and was down 2.34 per cent to 29,951.47, while the S&P 500 was down 2.89 per cent to 3,680.56. The Nasdaq was down 3.57 per cent to 11,180.15. US markets were expected to open lower as the initial favorable reaction to the US Federal Reserve’s 75 basis point interest rate hike on Wednesday gave way to lingering concerns over the state of the country's economy. Michael Hewson, chief market analyst at CMC Markets UK, said: 'After breaking a six-day run of declines yesterday, European markets have resumed normal service to the downside, after the Swiss National Bank unexpectedly hiked rates by 50bps, following on from last night’s 75bps rate rise by the Federal Reserve, with the Bank of England following up with another 25bps.'Today’s declines have seen big falls across the board, below the lows this week, with all the major European markets falling to three-month lows, with the DAX and FTSE 100 on course to head towards the levels we saw at the beginning of March in the aftermath of the initial Russian invasion of Ukraine.'The London stock market has been weighed down by a profit warning from Asos today, prompting its shares to nose-dive over 20 per cent. Rival Boohoo also revealed that its sales have fallen in the last few months, prompting its shares to dive around 15 per cent. Shares in British American Tobacco and Shell have also fallen by around 2 per cent. Homebuilder Persimmon and asset manager Intermediate Capital slumped 8 per cent and 6.4 per cent, respectively, to the bottom of the FTSE 100 index as their shares traded ex-dividend.Looking at the London-listed retailers today, their stocks have shed nearly 5 per cent. Ian Williams, an economist and strategist at Peel Hunt, said: 'This probably throws more potential on the consumer outlook. But analysts earnings forecasts maybe haven't quite adjusted to the more challenging macro outlook... added to that central banks are in tightening mood pretty much everywhere, which is an unhelpful combination for equity markets.'Among other stock moves, Informa gained 3.5 per cent after the events organiser more than doubled its share buyback programme and forecast upbeat annual sales and profit outlook. Concerns: Fears of a recession mount as the economy unexpectedly shrank in AprilCommenting on the rate hike, Freetrade analyst Gemma Boothroyd, said: 'The market saw this one coming. Even before the rate rise, UK banks had a skip in their step earlier in the week.'After all, they’re the ones primed to benefit here but selectivity is the name of the game now more than ever. UK banks were not created equal and those with huge mortgage books will start to look very different from trading-heavy firms.'She added: 'We’ve been here before. And if you have a long-term investment horizon, this is a storm a diversified portfolio should be able to weather. 'Lower-priced shares for good companies might be a good buying opportunity. That’s especially the case in the UK, where shares are trading at valuations well below those across the pond.'So it’s not all bad news. There’s an opportunity to take advantage of a drop in the market if you have a long-term outlook for your investments. That’s not to say every share price fall should be seen as a deal, but it’s worth keeping a keen eye out for the companies seemingly being unfairly punished.'In currency markets, sterling is at $1.23 against the US dollar and €1.16 against the euro. It is in fact now up 2 per cent against the euro, following months of falls. Lower-priced shares for good companies might be a good buying opportunity - Gemma Boothroyd, Freetrade Thanim Islam, Market Strategis, a market strategist at Equals Money, told This is Money: 'Sterling climbed following the Bank of England meeting this afternoon. The Bank raised rates by 0.25 per cent with six members voting for a 0.25 per cent rate hike and the other three members electing for a 0.5 per cent rate hike, which was in line with consensus. 'But what caused sterling to climb higher was the change in guidance with the Bank of England opening the door for 0.50 per cent rate hikes in forthcoming meetings by stating.'Money markets are now pricing in a 0.5 per cent hike in August and September, with a year end interest rate of 3 per cent. Whilst the Bank of England are perhaps not as hawkish as other central banks, the change in guidance suggests the Bank are turning more hawkish and that for now should support sterling.'Matthew Ryan, a senior market analyst at Ebury, said: 'The pretty swift rebound in the pound is a reflection of the market’s growing confidence that a more aggressive pace of policy normalisation is likely to be on the way in H2. 'At the time of writing, swap markets are now pricing in more than 100 basis points of hikes from the BoE in the next two meetings through September, up from around 73 bps before today’s meeting.'We continue to expect the MPC to raise interest rates at every meeting during the remainder of the year, although it will likely need to join the ‘50 club’ in order to satisfy investors. Expectations for central bank policy tightening globally are so high that standard 25 basis point moves are becoming increasingly insufficient in order to trigger currency appreciation.'Chris Beauchamp, chief market analyst at IG Group, said: 'Once again the Bank of England looks like the timid cat next to the Fed’s roar against inflation, with just a 25bps hike. 'Accompanying comments about being prepared to act "forcefully" on inflation will do little when the actual evidence shows the committee remains broadly cautious. A 6-3 vote on 25bps means that the sterling bulls will have little to back up any attempt to push the pound higher against the dollar, and $1.20 will likely be tested once more.' Meanwhile, Jason Hollands, managing director of Bestinvest, said: 'For investors, the central scenario of recent months remains unchanged. High inflation is going to linger for some time yet and borrowing costs are only going in one direction: up.“In this environment, and with the current weakness in sterling, UK large cap stocks should continue to be relatively well positioned given around three quarters of the FTSE 100’s earnings are made outside of the UK.'Thanim Islam, a market strategist at Equals Money, said: 'Since April, the belief of a hawkish Bank of England has been eroded after the bank signalled they need to balance tackling inflation and impact on economic growth. As a result, the performance of the pound has suffered as other central banks upped their hawkish rhetoric. The problem with a weak currency is that it imports in inflation.'Following on from the recent willingness for the government to support Brits during the cost-of-living crisis, there is an argument to suggest that perhaps the Bank of England do have more freedom to hike rates in larger tranches and even be more hawkish in their guidance and perhaps drop the impact on growth rhetoric, i.e. purely focus on their only mandate, which is to control inflation. 'Should they do so in future then we would expect support for the pound which in turn would also help ease off the inflationary pressures of a weak currency.'Earlier this week, the pound and London stock markets fell after gloomy figures suggested the UK was edging closer to a recession, after the economy unexpectedly fell 0.3 per cent in April.Some links in this article may be affiliate links. If you click on them we may earn a small commission. That helps us fund This Is Money, and keep it free to use. We do not write articles to promote products. We do not allow any commercial relationship to affect our editorial independence. | United Kingdom Politics |
Subsets and Splits